200 MPH sounds faster than 160 KTS.
Also, many people don't know what knots are, and are not interested in hearing that unit.
YMMV
The irony in this statement is that 200 mph is about 170 kts, not 160
The irony in this statement is that 200 mph is about 170 kts, not 160
yeah, no....I feel like it's not yet into the folly territory at all.
MPH indication in vintage aircraft...sure. I've got many hours flying those. That used to be common of course....but those aircraft were firmly already vintage when I learned to fly back in the 1990's!!!
I always HATED flying those aircraft only for that reason. Otherwise they were great!
Other than situation where the operating limitations are all published in MPH (such as those vintage aircraft)...but even this seems like a weak reason to me...
or when the instrumentation is calibrated that way so your hand is forced
I can't imagine why anyone in modern aviation would choose to fly in statute miles
winds and pretty much all navigation are based on nautical. ATC works in nautical
oh, looking again I now see that they publish mph for all their aircraft. I was thinking before it was just the 12, for some reason and thought it might have something to do with the LSA regulations. Now I'm even more perplexed!
Why Vans? just why?
This is the real answer. But also, given the majority of the market is in the US, and most of those people understand what mph are because they drive their cars around in it.200 MPH sounds faster...
The irony of THIS statement is it is actually (rounded off) 174 kts. not 170...
hey, I said "about"
I fly from the left side and have everything set up in knots. My Wife flies from the right seat and has her side set up in MPH.
She goes faster than I do but has farther to go, so we both get there about the same time!
It has to do with the type of primer used...
-Marc
Back in the day all planes were in MPH before 1969. After 1969 they progressively transitioned to knots/hr for airspeed and knots for distance.
.
Partially correct.
I think this is totally correct.... in the context of the lighter side of general aviation anyway.
The POH for a 1975 C-150 was still in MPH.
It wasn't until a year or two later that Cessna had switch all of the new production aircraft over to Kts.
You can find examples of both way earlier than this. Doesn’t matter though.
I think Van stuck with it and the factory just kept the convention going. If he was a Navy guy, they would most certainly have been in Knots
My understanding is that it had nothing to do with Airforce vs Navy.
It was what has always been mentioned, that it looks like a higher speed.
It wasn't that many years ago that even a lot of the pilot population wasn't used to Kts and didn't have a good feel for what the relationship between Kts and MPH was (a lot of them still don't).
I think most of us in the Van's world use knots. Like Rat said, MPH was tried.. but never caught on. I think because MPH is only really used in certain countries anyway.. everyone but us use metric.
Airspeed indicators should be scaled from 0-100.
0 = Vso
100 = Vne
fight me.
(kidding, if you can't tell)
Airspeed indicators should be scaled from 0-100.
0 = Vso
100 = Vne
fight me.
(kidding, if you can't tell)
If you're going that way, you might as well go all in and just do a 5 star scale.
5 Stars = Vne (awesome, great experience!)
0 Stars = Vso (would not recommend)
Airspeed indicators should be scaled from 0-100.
0 = Vso
100 = Vne
fight me.
(kidding, if you can't tell)