There is a good chance of that...Barfly wrote:My guess is a depressurization training event, in some kind of pressurized straight wing aircraft, civilian, possible one of the new, single engine light jets. Really too slow for any kind of military aircraft.
Yes, but I had a PC-12 or PC-24 in mind. ☺clarkejw wrote:A PC6, 9, or 21 would.
Very unlikely. The amount of work involved in developing the necessary avionics (e.g. Perspective Touch by Garmin) is way too high and previous statements show that avionics are not really a priority to them. I'm certain this project will not have a glass panel, possibly apart from third party GPS units.Barfly wrote:My guess is a depressurization training event, in some kind of pressurized straight wing aircraft, civilian, possible one of the new, single engine light jets. Really too slow for any kind of military aircraft.
Wasn't their last release a piston-liner?RichardFS wrote:Come on guys, a U2? Be real. I honestly don't care about the secret project now that I know it won't be a COTS. The Bonanza will be exciting and may even be my first GA purchase, but in my personal opinion A2A is overdue for another piston-liner.
Not sure if serious.RichardFS wrote:Come on guys, a U2? Be real.
The test Bonanza (in the development video) appears to be a 1961 N35, which came stock with the Continental IO-470. I'm guessing the other two options will be the IO-520 and the IO-550.Piper_EEWL wrote:Is it already confirmed that there won’t be a turbo-normalized engine option for the Bonanza? If so I must have missed it. What will the three engine options be then if one of them won’t be turbo normalized?AKar wrote: I was actually expecting a turbo-normalized engine option for Bonanza since the type was effectively confirmed - or at least when a single-engine release before the eventual twin effectively was. It appears that it won't be the case, but we will carry on with tried and tested natural aspirated engine simulation. I don't mind at all another great single, but if speaking in terms of differentiating the products, that would have been an obvious way to study deeper into the piston engine tech before going into the twin world.
Happy flying
Are you sure it’s a N35? The N35 seems to have the window on the pilot side framed like thisClipperLuna wrote: The test Bonanza (in the development video) appears to be a 1961 N35, which came stock with the Continental IO-470. I'm guessing the other two options will be the IO-520 and the IO-550.
The plane they have dash shots of in the video at about 1:47 and again at 2:36 is an N35 (registry.faa.gov). Then again, as you say N40G is a V35. Maybe that's the variant Scott is sitting in @ 3:00 where he's talking about the yoke? The mystery continues,Piper_EEWL wrote:Are you sure it’s a N35? The N35 seems to have the window on the pilot side framed like thisClipperLuna wrote: The test Bonanza (in the development video) appears to be a 1961 N35, which came stock with the Continental IO-470. I'm guessing the other two options will be the IO-520 and the IO-550.
https://goo.gl/images/EddAA9
The model shown in the development video doesn’t have that frame. So for me it looks more like we’re getting a S35 or a V35 but I’m not sure. I was trying to find the reggrom the development video but I was unable to so.
Happy flying
PS: I checked again and N40G which is shown in the video as the A2A modell appears to be a 1972 V35 according to “airport-data.comâ€Â. So we’ll have to see j guess...
A2A's specialty is GA and pistons. Why would they suddenly jump to a high altitude jet powered military aircraft?mattgn wrote:Not sure if serious.RichardFS wrote:Come on guys, a U2? Be real.
Yes you're right. I wached the video again and the plane in testing seems to be N544T which is a N35. Mhh that's interesting. Maybe those where the two planes most accessible. And yes the third window definetly looks like a S35 or V35.ClipperLuna wrote: The plane they have dash shots of in the video at about 1:47 and again at 2:36 is an N35 (registry.faa.gov). Then again, as you say N40G is a V35. Maybe that's the variant Scott is sitting in @ 3:00 where he's talking about the yoke? The mystery continues,
EDIT: I gather the N35 and P35 had the "teardrop" shaped rear windows, while the one in the development video has the more squared-off ones of the S35 and V35. So it's probably an S35 or V35. But the Bonanza came stock with the IO-520 starting with the S35. So two of our engines are probably the IO-520 and the IO-550. What could the third possibly be?
Yep, interesting indeed, it appears that at least two airplanes were used for testing. Perhaps to record the figures for at least two of the engines that are included if no STC configuration was available. Those would be IO-470 and IO-520. And I think Scott confirmed the IO-550 as well, so that would be our hand of cards. (I'd need to check through the available conversions, though, before "committing"!)Piper_EEWL wrote:Yes you're right. I wached the video again and the plane in testing seems to be N544T which is a N35. Mhh that's interesting. Maybe those where the two planes most accessible.ClipperLuna wrote:The plane they have dash shots of in the video at about 1:47 and again at 2:36 is an N35 (registry.faa.gov). Then again, as you say N40G is a V35. Maybe that's the variant Scott is sitting in @ 3:00 where he's talking about the yoke? The mystery continues,
EDIT: I gather the N35 and P35 had the "teardrop" shaped rear windows, while the one in the development video has the more squared-off ones of the S35 and V35. So it's probably an S35 or V35. But the Bonanza came stock with the IO-520 starting with the S35. So two of our engines are probably the IO-520 and the IO-550. What could the third possibly be?
Maybe the third engine is still the turbo-normalized version. Even though Scott has said that there won't be a turbocharged one. Im not sure though. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Happy flying
Perhaps you didn't quite follow that U-2 was subtly humorous suggestion to play with the jet idea.RichardFS wrote:A2A's specialty is GA and pistons. Why would they suddenly jump to a high altitude jet powered military aircraft?mattgn wrote:Not sure if serious.RichardFS wrote:Come on guys, a U2? Be real.
But it fits the "data" we think we have..... or that we make up from bits. 
As does the, er, Supermarine Walrus Esa. No, it really does... One that's going flat out anyway.AKar wrote:But it fits the "data" we think we have..... or that we make up from bits.
Surely, but it doesn't play with the jet idea.Nick - A2A wrote:As does the, er, Supermarine Walrus Esa. No, it really does... One that's going flat out anyway.AKar wrote:But it fits the "data" we think we have..... or that we make up from bits.
Nick
Interesting name choice for an airplane anyway! 
Supermarine Walrus?AKar wrote:Surely, but it doesn't play with the jet idea.Nick - A2A wrote:As does the, er, Supermarine Walrus Esa. No, it really does... One that's going flat out anyway.AKar wrote:But it fits the "data" we think we have..... or that we make up from bits.
Nick
-Esa
Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot] and 89 guests
