Lucky to own a Columbia, and what an incredible cross country machine it is. Fast, fun to fly, and beautiful. The precision of the side stick is so much fun.
Nice flight! Really enjoyed the narration about the capabilities of the Garmin 1000 and autopilot, leaning 50 degrees lean of peak at cruise, etc. Very informative!
In my day it was Pilotage Time. Speed & Distance. Then in the early 90's purchased a Garmin Pilot III @ OSH for $750. VFR only but what a situational awareness confidence booster. Never got in a plane without it. Even hid it from the stewardesses on commercial flights. FL 390/615 MPH.
TBH this was really a video on the Garmin G-1000 system, not really the plane itself. It was still interesting and a good video on this system but I think the title ought to reflect that as they really didn't talk about the Columbia at all. Still a worthwhile addition to the library of videos on the channel though.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 Yeah I guess I was trying to say that I think I would have presented it more as a video on the Nav system rather than the plane. Still a worthwhile video and all but it's just not really a look at the Columbia 400 as much as the Garmin G1000.
Could you try and get your hands on a commander single engine series. I think there's plenty to talk about with model year changes, ownership changes and the eventual restart of production in the 90s. Would make an interesting video about a lesser known plane
G,day Skywagon University from Sydney Australia. Thank you for the ride along film in the Columbia 400. The panel with two G1000 and auto pilot- amazing LCD instrumentation. The lesson for me is: "know the function and capabilities of the avionics to a high standard; * makes for less human factor error * more enjoyable flying * safer skies Engine identification I still have trouble with model numbers for four (4) and six (6) cylinders. Thanks Skywagon University 🌏🇭🇲
The speed brakes that come up from the wings really do work when you are given a altitude for a high speed decent so you would not shock cool the Continental IO-550-C and overall it’s a fast high cruiser
That's a dream plane right there. There are a few 2007 models on the market that are very tempting, but the overall cost of ownership -- especially insurance -- is still just too much to take on at this point. In another 2 or 3 years...
35" of MAP and 2550 RPM in the climb may be a bit high for this engine. You may get a bit more life span from this engine with 32" and 2400 RPM in the climb. I would agree with the cruise setting though...
We have to wait for planes to arrive. Maybe a Citabria owner interview and test flight and then a Cardinal fixed gear and RG Comparison and model year changes.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 "The Columbia is one tough Utility Category airframe, with a positive limit load factor of 4.4 Gs and a maneuvering speed of 158 knots, so even in the bumps while descending I had the FLC on 158 and there it stayed as the vertical speed ranged from barely down to 1,500 feet per minute down" - a much stronger plane too
The Cirrus has the whole parachute deal, so if you fly over mountains or do a lot of IFR in IMC or at night, there's an argument for that. Then there's the argument that it costs $10-15k every 10 years for a mandatory repack. It isn't optional. Ironically you can run your engine past TBO for Part 91 ops, but to keep a Cirrus "airworthy" that repack is a hard requirement. I'd much rather have a Columbia 400 or a TTx. I fell in love with the Lancair's performance, but hearing Air Force test pilots talk about its nasty stall characteristics and the chain of accidents keeps me away from those. This is literally a well-refined, certificated plane based upon that early work Lancair did. I know of one crash (pilot error) where the plane landed into trees and other than a broken prop and some landing gear damage it looked like it could take off again. These things are built sturdy, with an incredibly rigid carbon-fiber rollcage around the cabin and dual carbon fiber wing spars. I've heard that just one of the wing spars would've been more than adequate for certification, but they went the extra mile. The fuel-cells are situated inbetween those two spars, which provides a lot of protection in the event of an off-field landing. Given the surprisingly low stall speed and strong structure I think it has a good chance of surviving an off-field landing over reasonable terrain. Not 100%, and certainly going down in mountains at night would be a death sentence, but smashing into the remote wilderness at 1800FPM with zero control over the plane (i.e. Cirrus Parachute) isn't 100% either.
If you make decent money, there are huge tax writeoffs for planes. Combine that with 15 or 20 year financing and consider the amazing resell value planes hold and they're not always the money pits people think they are, unlike boats. I've heard of Pilatus owners MAKING money thanks to the tax benefits. Also consider that the leg room, at least in the front seats, is basically first-class. If you're flying your family, 3 or 4 people, do the math on that many first class tickets. Throw in the fact that you gain access to thousands of airports instead of around 400 primary airports with regular commercial service, and that you don't have to: clear security, wait in lines, get there 2 hours early, deal with checking bags and rolling carry ons around, or deal with other people's crotch goblins. Also, you can drive right into your hangar and leave your car there safe-and-sound and have a rental waiting on the ramp when you land; no more walking for what seems like an eternity at massive airports. Perhaps one of these is out of your price range, but even something like a Sling with it's tiny little Rotax can cruise at 140ktas (160mph) and only burns around 5 gallons per hour. Even lower in price is something like the venerable Vans RV series of kit planes. They're tedious to build, with what seems like an endless number of rivets, but they're not complicated. Kit planes are registered as experimental, so you can do your own annual, your own maintenance, and amazing avionics like the Garmin G3X are surprisingly affordable.
FLC is the single greatest button Garmin has ever added
Plus "Smart Glide".
Lucky to own a Columbia, and what an incredible cross country machine it is. Fast, fun to fly, and beautiful. The precision of the side stick is so much fun.
could you share your performance numbers at cruise for 75%, 65% and econ power settings?
That panel😍
Hi RatherBeFishing! We looked at the new addendums for the G1000 and learned it can bait a hook and cast a line now. Right up your alley!
Nice flight! Really enjoyed the narration about the capabilities of the Garmin 1000 and autopilot, leaning 50 degrees lean of peak at cruise, etc. Very informative!
The G1000 has amazing capabilities! Glad you enjoyed the video.
Nice ride guys , thanks for sharing the G1000
Panel
Thank you, Jim. Coming from a guy with an exceptional Beech 18, we consider that high praise!
Great video! A lot of good explanation how to fly a Col4. I love mine too!
Thank you.
That’s quite an airplane, wow!
In my day it was Pilotage Time. Speed & Distance. Then in the early 90's purchased a Garmin Pilot III @ OSH for $750. VFR only but what a situational awareness confidence booster. Never got in a plane without it. Even hid it from the stewardesses on commercial flights.
FL 390/615 MPH.
The Garmin 1000's need a five hour check out on the electronics alone.
The panel on this airplane is really nice!
That was an excellent ride.
Love the side sticks! T-handle throttle quadrant option, would be great.
Over-all an awesome a/c, regardless.
Agreed!
Very nice!
TBH this was really a video on the Garmin G-1000 system, not really the plane itself. It was still interesting and a good video on this system but I think the title ought to reflect that as they really didn't talk about the Columbia at all. Still a worthwhile addition to the library of videos on the channel though.
It was a free ride home so I videoed it from the inside in flight.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 Yeah I guess I was trying to say that I think I would have presented it more as a video on the Nav system rather than the plane. Still a worthwhile video and all but it's just not really a look at the Columbia 400 as much as the Garmin G1000.
great video - wish they were still in production
You and me both!
Cessna screwed up moving production and lost a great opportunity to compete with the Cirrus with the 400 and 350
Very true.
Could you try and get your hands on a commander single engine series. I think there's plenty to talk about with model year changes, ownership changes and the eventual restart of production in the 90s. Would make an interesting video about a lesser known plane
There haven't been too many Commander's coming through, but if we can get our hands on one? Absolutely!
Mark I’ve. Flown one and love it
That was a first for me. The plane seemed simple enough, but the avionics would be a lengthy check out.
G,day Skywagon University from Sydney Australia.
Thank you for the ride along film in the Columbia 400. The panel with two G1000 and auto pilot- amazing LCD instrumentation.
The lesson for me is: "know the function and capabilities of the avionics to a high standard;
* makes for less human factor error
* more enjoyable flying
* safer skies
Engine identification
I still have trouble with model numbers for four (4) and six (6) cylinders.
Thanks Skywagon University
🌏🇭🇲
Yes, very true. the check-out in the plane is almost secondary to the checkout on the panel.
That's a bit fancier than you're used to seeing on this channel
Yes, My norm is more the everyday run of the mill GA aircraft types. This was exceptional.
The speed brakes that come up from the wings really do work when you are given a altitude for a high speed decent so you would not shock cool the Continental IO-550-C and overall it’s a fast high cruiser
It's always good to not cool those big bore hard working engines too fast.
I must of missed it, is this a 400 or a 350? What auto pilot is in this airplane?
Edit; just saw it’s a 400. 😉
That's a dream plane right there. There are a few 2007 models on the market that are very tempting, but the overall cost of ownership -- especially insurance -- is still just too much to take on at this point. In another 2 or 3 years...
Great planes
How much is the insurance approx a year ?
35" of MAP and 2550 RPM in the climb may be a bit high for this engine. You may get a bit more life span from this engine with 32" and 2400 RPM in the climb. I would agree with the cruise setting though...
I was under the assumption this plane cruises at plus 200 knots ?
Fixed gear is always a drag.
What will be your next aircraft demo?
We have to wait for planes to arrive. Maybe a Citabria owner interview and test flight and then a Cardinal fixed gear and RG Comparison and model year changes.
so....SR22T or Columbia 400 (or TTX)?????
Both are great, but if I had to choose, I'd probably choose the Columbia. Better stick feel.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 "The Columbia is one tough Utility Category airframe, with a positive limit load factor of 4.4 Gs and a maneuvering speed of 158 knots, so even in the bumps while descending I had the FLC on 158 and there it stayed as the vertical speed ranged from barely down to 1,500 feet per minute down" - a much stronger plane too
@@caca121112 Good to know. Thank you.
The Cirrus has the whole parachute deal, so if you fly over mountains or do a lot of IFR in IMC or at night, there's an argument for that. Then there's the argument that it costs $10-15k every 10 years for a mandatory repack. It isn't optional. Ironically you can run your engine past TBO for Part 91 ops, but to keep a Cirrus "airworthy" that repack is a hard requirement.
I'd much rather have a Columbia 400 or a TTx. I fell in love with the Lancair's performance, but hearing Air Force test pilots talk about its nasty stall characteristics and the chain of accidents keeps me away from those. This is literally a well-refined, certificated plane based upon that early work Lancair did. I know of one crash (pilot error) where the plane landed into trees and other than a broken prop and some landing gear damage it looked like it could take off again. These things are built sturdy, with an incredibly rigid carbon-fiber rollcage around the cabin and dual carbon fiber wing spars. I've heard that just one of the wing spars would've been more than adequate for certification, but they went the extra mile. The fuel-cells are situated inbetween those two spars, which provides a lot of protection in the event of an off-field landing. Given the surprisingly low stall speed and strong structure I think it has a good chance of surviving an off-field landing over reasonable terrain. Not 100%, and certainly going down in mountains at night would be a death sentence, but smashing into the remote wilderness at 1800FPM with zero control over the plane (i.e. Cirrus Parachute) isn't 100% either.
@@ParadigmUnkn0wn agreed
It's nice to have money in life... :-\
If you make decent money, there are huge tax writeoffs for planes. Combine that with 15 or 20 year financing and consider the amazing resell value planes hold and they're not always the money pits people think they are, unlike boats. I've heard of Pilatus owners MAKING money thanks to the tax benefits. Also consider that the leg room, at least in the front seats, is basically first-class. If you're flying your family, 3 or 4 people, do the math on that many first class tickets. Throw in the fact that you gain access to thousands of airports instead of around 400 primary airports with regular commercial service, and that you don't have to: clear security, wait in lines, get there 2 hours early, deal with checking bags and rolling carry ons around, or deal with other people's crotch goblins. Also, you can drive right into your hangar and leave your car there safe-and-sound and have a rental waiting on the ramp when you land; no more walking for what seems like an eternity at massive airports.
Perhaps one of these is out of your price range, but even something like a Sling with it's tiny little Rotax can cruise at 140ktas (160mph) and only burns around 5 gallons per hour. Even lower in price is something like the venerable Vans RV series of kit planes. They're tedious to build, with what seems like an endless number of rivets, but they're not complicated. Kit planes are registered as experimental, so you can do your own annual, your own maintenance, and amazing avionics like the Garmin G3X are surprisingly affordable.
@@ParadigmUnkn0wn holy book bat man lol