Talk:Champion Lancer: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 21:23, 20 November 2018

Aviation: Aircraft C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

FAA rating claim

I've begun to doubt the veracity of the author's claim in Airport-Data.com that the FAA "quickly limited a multi-engine rating obtained on [the 402 Lancer] to operation of this type model aircraft only." I cannot find any verification of this assertion in other sources or in FAA records. The author similarly claims that a multiengine rating in the Cessna 336 is good "to these models only," which is not exactly true—according to "FAA Order 8900.2C" (PDF)., taking a practical test in a Skymaster merely results in a multiengine rating that is "limited to center thrust," and it's incidental that the 336/337 are the only commonplace civil aircraft types with this layout. In that vein, Order 8900.2C also states that the applicant for a multiengine rating must demonstrate feathering a propeller, which would be impossible in a Lancer with its fixed-pitch props. I speculate that the author may have jumped to conclusions; perhaps the institution of the propeller-feathering requirement was the actual reason that the Champion 402 fell out of favor with flight schools. Hangar talk that the 402 was the impetus for this rule isn't encyclopedic. Anyone have any enlightening information? Carguychris (talk) 19:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{WPAVIATION|class=C|b1=y|b2=n|b3=y|b4=n|b5=y|Aircraft-project=yes}}
 ==FAA rating claim==
-I've begun to doubt the veracity of the author's claim in Airport-Data.com that the FAA "quickly limited a multi-engine rating obtained on [the 402 Lancer] to operation of this type model aircraft only." I cannot find any verification of this assertion in other sources or in FAA records. The author similarly claims that a multiengine rating in the [[Cessna 336]] is good "to these models only," which is not exactly true—according to {{cite web | url=https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/FAA_Order_8900.2C.pdf |title=FAA Order 8900.2C}}, taking a practical test in a Skymaster merely results in a multiengine rating that is "limited to center thrust," and it's incidental that the 336/337 are the only commonplace civil aircraft types with this layout. In that vein, Order 8900.2C also states that the applicant for a multiengine rating must demonstrate feathering a propeller and safely controlling the aircraft this way, which would be impossible in a Lancer with its fixed-pitch props. I speculate that the author may have jumped to conclusions; perhaps the institution of the propeller-feathering requirement was the actual reason that the Champion 402 fell out of favor with flight schools. Hangar talk that the 402 was the impetus for this regulation isn't encyclopedic without actual proof. Anyone have any enlightening information? [[User:Carguychris|Carguychris]] ([[User talk:Carguychris|talk]]) 19:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
+I've begun to doubt the veracity of the author's claim in Airport-Data.com that the FAA "quickly limited a multi-engine rating obtained on [the 402 Lancer] to operation of this type model aircraft only." I cannot find any verification of this assertion in other sources or in FAA records. The author similarly claims that a multiengine rating in the [[Cessna 336]] is good "to these models only," which is not exactly true—according to {{cite web | url=https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/FAA_Order_8900.2C.pdf |title=FAA Order 8900.2C}}, taking a practical test in a Skymaster merely results in a multiengine rating that is "limited to center thrust," and it's incidental that the 336/337 are the only commonplace civil aircraft types with this layout. In that vein, Order 8900.2C also states that the applicant for a multiengine rating must demonstrate feathering a propeller, which would be impossible in a Lancer with its fixed-pitch props. I speculate that the author may have jumped to conclusions; perhaps the institution of the propeller-feathering requirement was the actual reason that the Champion 402 fell out of favor with flight schools. Hangar talk that the 402 was the impetus for this rule isn't encyclopedic. Anyone have any enlightening information? [[User:Carguychris|Carguychris]] ([[User talk:Carguychris|talk]]) 19:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)