Some guy near me has one and wants like $30k for it. It seems to be the most airplane i can get for the money. Would it make a good gunship?
>>23223560Fill the cabin with jet fuel buckets, and try to replicated the steel beam melt experience
>>23223568Airplanes are made of aluminum, it melts at 1200 degrees and does burn
Watch the german doku-soap "Steel Buddies". Their boss flies an AN-2 a lit, he even crossed the atlantic with one. Pic related.
>>23223560>cheap>slow, like really slow>short distance for taking off/ landing>can literally land on a field>parts are difficult to get, especially outside of eastern europe.>everything is in russian
>>23223560For meme points they're real cool. For a actual private plane ownership experience, unless you have a lot of time or money no. In the US they they have flight restrictions, they're huge and a use a lot of gas, and have fun getting parts if you don't know a guy in a Soviet state.
>>23224530I dont plan on using it for work or something, just flying for fun. It would drastically shorten the trip from huntsville alabama to miami when i go on vacation
why would you not buy a Cherokee or literally anything that doesn't burn its price in fuel per flight
>>23224943You can only fly them on experimental certificates in the US. And they use 50 gallons per hour to move more slowly than a car. Quit larping.
>>23224996Bi planes do get worse mileage right? Never compared
>>23224943Kek, it would probably take longer than a car, and $$$$$ in fuel.>>23225011Every bi-plane is old as fuck, so yes. An aircraft that doesn’t have a stall speed likely isn’t too fuel efficient.
>>23224943even worseplanes hate it when they don't fly
>>23223560>bi-wing>remarkable durability>high lifting power>ability to take off and land from poor runways>enough cabin space that you could literally live inside itDo it OP it sounds based
>>23225070No because i can fly across the ocean instead of driving around and down
>>23225151>flying 90mph over open ocean in your antique gas guzzling soviet biwingI can't see an issue, enjoy OP!
>>23223560Operational costs are going to make it such a money pit. I mean fuel costs per hour are insane for this. You would be better off getting a Cessna 206 with a jump door to shoot out of.
>>23224943If you are getting a plane to shorten trips then get something fast, think Mooney M20J
>>23226054I dont have enough mooney
>>23226198You don’t have enough money to fuel the AN-2
>>23223560If you even have to ask this question you are 100% not a pilot. 30,000 is the scrap value of that airframe. You'll be lucky to make that back making weird polished furniture out of various parts.
>>23226990It flies, ive gone up in it
Don't these things burn like 50 gallons of fuel per hour?
>>23223560buy it if you have money left over for maintenance and fuel.
>>23223560I have never felt closer to death than riding in a Lada Cossack at 100km/h, I can't imagine being a 1000 feet up in something built by a ruskie
>>23227036that is why they stuck to byplanes until the 90's, you get 2 chances. these are pretty good you can crash the hell out of them and usually come out ok.
>>2322701043 I think.
>>23227174>to go 80 miles>2mpg>$6/gal AvgasGod forbid you have a headwind.
>>23227190He takes off on a windy day and he'll be going backwards at 43 gallons per hour.
Why do airplane engines use so much fuel? I think even a cesna uses like 8 gallons an hour and it only makes like 160hp. What makes them so ineffecient?
>>23227513Rolling ≠ flying. Mo powah babey
>>23223560I know absolutely nothing about planes but yeah I think you should buy it and put sick machine guns on it
>>23227534>>23227536Must be. Im just surprised the slecs on the lower end of aircraft dont seem to be much better than they were 100 years ago. A model T made like 20ho and got 20 miles to the gallon. I dont know what that would be in gallons per hour but my get tells me its better than 8. I cant think of a modern car with an engine with similiar specs but it seems like a lot of the entry level planes have similiar specs to stuff built in the 1920s as far as power and fuel consumption go. Just seems wack.
>>23227577A lot of smaller aircraft use rotax engines which are still pretty oldschool in design but considerably smaller and more fuel efficient. Some are EFI too (although they tend to give shit)
>>23227577Safety is the #1 thing for aircraft, ie they'll have magnetos which dont require power in order to create sparkAlso theres a limit to how fast a propeller can turn and still be effective; therefore theres a limit to how fast the engine should spin (otherwise you need a reduction gearbox which is just more weight and complexity). 2400rpm or thereabouts is generally as fast as a little piston engine goes, if you want to make useful power at that RPM you need big torks, hence the big, inefficient motors
>>23227577Well, airplanes have undergone a ton of development but they're super duper expensive, so everyone except the super rich are flying old ass airplanes. For instance, Cessna makes the TTX, it's insane. 1200 miles on a tank of gas, 270 mph. But it also costs a million dollars. You can get a plane from the 1960s that's well maintained and gucci as FUCK for 100k.
>>23227685>>23227666I figured they wouldve started using efi was before it became common in cars. I did not consider the safety or redundency aspect or the max propeller speeds either.Im still pretty ignorant about aircraft. >>23227762Ive got no idea about prices but i also feel like aircrafts are way more expensive than they ought to be. Cars were super expensive at one point too but the price eventually came down. I feel like relatively airplanes never became more affordable. That is a pretty cool looking plane. Another stupid question, why do most airplanes still use leaded gasoline? I dont think octane is solely the reason. I think 91 should be good for the engine to not knock, and if not race gas is an option. Do they use the lead as lubricant in the fuel still?
>>23227791>why do most airplanes still use leaded gasolineBecause of shitty regulations which means that new engines using new technology need to be certified which costs millions of dollars, and so people just stick with using old shitty engines with super low compression ratios and low power outpu that still somehow require super high octane leaded fuel.
>>23227836I see. I was sure i could blame the government but wasng sure exactly how. I dont mean to sound like a little kid and ask why after everything but could you explain a bit about the certifying process? Car companies can simulate hundreds of thousands of miles on emgines, im sure theres a way to simulate the average lifetime stress on an airplane engine in a factory.
>>23227846Typical "aerospace" bullshit like a single bolt costing $50.Also, when anything goes wrong in an aircraft people will sue the manufacturer for WAY more than the equivalent accident in a car, so they spend lots of time and money testing and certifying and making sure everything is 100% perfect (hence the $50 nut and bolt) to avoid being sued for millions of dollars.
>>23227513An airplane runs at 75% power in cruise usually while the car only uses an average of maybe 30% power at most.
>>23227513They’re filled with quite old engine tech, but it’s also because it’s proven and it works. If they had newer engines, they would probably need a lot of the sensors and crap doubled up because a CEL light in an airplane doesn’t mean “drive for another 6mos and then ask the mechanic with the next oil change”. But that’s not the real reason.>>23227534>>23228194No >>23227536This mostly. When you need to move a car, you need to fight wind resistance and rolling resistance. In an airplane, you have to fight this plus gravity
>>23227513Less air at high altitudeHigher rpmshigher resistance(power is used to lift entire plane up, ground/tyres do that job for a car)
>>23227513how much does your car burn at 120 knots? yeah, exactly
>>23224996Yeah, but they don't have a stall speed. Cut the engine, pitch up, and it'll just drop down like a parachute.
>>23226054Mooneys are cool but your mechanics will hate you
>>23223560The 30k purchase price will be the cheapest thing you buy for it. Good plane, though.
>>23227513Shape of the wings and fuselage. Big round donut up front instead of a streamlined front end. Old inefficient radial.
>>23223560The engine frame is the weak point of the whole fuselage and it has to hold one of the crudest radials from the post-WW1 era. Let the buyer beware
>>23225151>flying across a body of water wider than your sightline is long in a single-engine piston aircraft
>>23223560If you can cop the plane for $30k then expect to need about $70k for maintainence in the first two years
>>23227036That thing's gearbox doesn't even support those speeds, the gearing limit physically won't let you go over 80mph as long as the rev limiter is functional. But Lada as a brand actually races cars>>23227051The freefall speed of the An-2 at "stall" (it can never freefall and not exit the stall) is low enough for the landing gear to absorb. You will literally survive stalling the aircraft at the service ceiling
>>2323033180mph is 128 km/h stupid burger mutt.. Learn to read.>>23230312Lel just replace the engine with something better and hope the feds don't notice. Maybe put a tercel engine in a plane. How much horsepowers does it need?
>>23230331>"stall"exactly why I love AN-2. The official procedure for dealing with dead engine is literally pull back to keep it level. Prepare for touchdown. Would pay to experience it - knowing how surprisingly chill and safe autorotation in a helo is... this is something else altogether. Just keep it level and we will be a'right if we don't touch down on a tree... Automatic leading edge slats, gear absorbing the freefall speed... all done with a fuckin slide ruler by some drunk russian engineer.Also, for something that size, it is amazing seeing it "fly backwards". I am not surprised when some bush pilot can do that in his cub but damn, fuckin behemoth like this
>>23230359>How much horsepowers does it need?1000hp at sea level, give or take. No, your LS swap won't do it. Yes, it eats 2.5liters of fuel every MINUTE. Deal with it.
>>23230359>Lel just replace the engine with something better and hope the feds don't notice.Good luck finding an A&P to do that for you.However, a good place for another LS swap ;-)
>>23230427most two seat airplanes have about 80 to 120 horsepower. LS engines are actually extremely popular for putting in experimental license planes. there's a lot of support for the gearbox and stuff to put an LS in a plane.
>>23230535The antonov is also an experimental plane