Companion vs Patrol
- Thread starter Lee S
- Start date
Bcone1381
Finished Patrol
Don't trust guys like me on the internet.......I'd contact Bob, or consult your plans for a valid answer. If I recall correctly from a past conversation with Mark G. the wing has the same airfoil, and basic design, but the Companion has a slight different cap strip layout. I suspect it supports a slighty higher max gross weight limit.
With that being said, I'd wager that it fits dimensionally at the spar and strut.
With that being said, I'd wager that it fits dimensionally at the spar and strut.
David Swartzendruber
LSA QB
When the Companion was introduced, they said it used the Patrol wing, but as Brooks said, you shouldn't trust us. Call Bob for confirmation.
SpruceForest
Scratch-Built Patrol SP
Seems like OP has the Patrol plans he's currently building from, but needs someone with Companion plans to provide the same main spar cap strip layout so that a comparison can be done.
SpruceForest
Scratch-Built Patrol SP
32" cabin width on the Patrol; 43" cabin width on the Companion. Pre-Virgil website listed Patrol as 33' wingspan, while new site claims both Patrol and Companion have 34' spans (error, unless Virgil has changed the wing design or put the Companion fuse on Ozempic). Given identical wings (same spar, same spacing, etc.,
I suspect the MGW difference in Utility Cat is that extra 11" of wingspan, which engineers treat as, well, extra wingspan, despite it being buried in the fuselage. There will be some extra tubing and covering weight on the Companion, courtesy of the longer gear/seat carry through and main spar structures, and there may be some schedule changes on tubing diameter/wall thickness/plate thickness for the Companion. Anyone got a shot of the gear layout and the fore and aft gear mount construction on the Companion? That should tell the tale as the spar and cap schedule does for the wing.
We got to see Bob's Companion fly at the birthday fly-in back on the 18th, and it seems to me to be the ideal 2-place Bearhawk - tons of baggage room, awesome useful load, and comfortable cabin width where the extra pair of shoulders are mounted on a 5'4" wasp-waisted fuselage. The extra panel space is handy as well for those going to glass, but want two full sized displays plus the usual backups for IFR (helpful hint... yes - don't forget an alternate static source that does not involve breaking the glass on a non-existent VSI).
I suspect the MGW difference in Utility Cat is that extra 11" of wingspan, which engineers treat as, well, extra wingspan, despite it being buried in the fuselage. There will be some extra tubing and covering weight on the Companion, courtesy of the longer gear/seat carry through and main spar structures, and there may be some schedule changes on tubing diameter/wall thickness/plate thickness for the Companion. Anyone got a shot of the gear layout and the fore and aft gear mount construction on the Companion? That should tell the tale as the spar and cap schedule does for the wing.
We got to see Bob's Companion fly at the birthday fly-in back on the 18th, and it seems to me to be the ideal 2-place Bearhawk - tons of baggage room, awesome useful load, and comfortable cabin width where the extra pair of shoulders are mounted on a 5'4" wasp-waisted fuselage. The extra panel space is handy as well for those going to glass, but want two full sized displays plus the usual backups for IFR (helpful hint... yes - don't forget an alternate static source that does not involve breaking the glass on a non-existent VSI).
Last edited:
Hey guys, the Companion and Patrol wing structure is essentially the same, the aileron cross member will be different as well as the bell cranks. The cables in the LSA and Patrol travel opposite direction of those in the Four, Five, Companion. If you have built your cross members, and bell cranks those would need to be remade. The gross weight of the Companion compared to the Patrol has to do with several factors, among which are wing span and landing gear, the geometry of the Patrol gear leads to a softer gear with more leverage on the shock struts. This gear would be very soft at 2200 lbs, were as the gear on the companion is not overly soft at those weights. CG wise the airplanes very drastically the Patrol is best suited to a IO360M1A parallel valve and the Companion needs a heavier motor and is better suited for the IO390 or angle valve 360. this heavier motor allows the baggage weight to increase enough to actually put some weight in the airplane.
Is the landing gear the limiting factor for the Patrol at 2200lbs or is the fuselage and attach structure a factor too? Looking for the most useful load between a Patrol and a Companion for an amphib set up.
The Companion carries its weight closer to the CG, so I suspect that in most real-world cases it will be able to carry more than the Patrol before getting too aft.
SpruceForest
Scratch-Built Patrol SP
Companion has about 100 lbs greater useful load at 2200 MGW and 1250 empty versus Patrol at 2000 MGW and 1150 empty, (per BH website) so whatever the exchange weight, the final useful load for Companion is going to be 100 lbs greater than the Patrol if published MGW limits are observed. Exchange weight is the aircraft empty weight change as a result of the weight removed with MLG and tailwheel and weight added by float installation.
Amphib float weight ~ 380 lb minus removed main and tail LG ~ 100 lbs = 280 lbs exchange weigh
Straight float weight of ~ 260 lbs minus removed main and tail LG ~ 100 lbs = 160 lb exchange weight
So when observing the published MGW for the airplanes, useful load would be decreased by 280 lbs and 160 lbs, respectively for amphibious and straight floats. Obviously, you should weigh the actual MLG and tail wheel components removed to get the correct number, as well as determine actual weight added by the floats and change in empty CG.
Assuming the 10% increase in MGW rule of thumb with floats can be applied, the Patrol would see a useful load of 720 lbs and the Companion 840 lbs based on the current published empty weights and gross weight numbers on the BH Aircraft site and the exchange weight example above. Yes - CG and all that applies as well - if you cannot use the added capability safely, it is just fodder for ad copy, which is to say as useless as fuel left back in pump, runway behind, etc.
Bob (or for the current kit variants, whatever engineer the factory has elected to use) would be the final authority I would listen to as to any adjustment WRT MGW on floats.
Amphib float weight ~ 380 lb minus removed main and tail LG ~ 100 lbs = 280 lbs exchange weigh
Straight float weight of ~ 260 lbs minus removed main and tail LG ~ 100 lbs = 160 lb exchange weight
So when observing the published MGW for the airplanes, useful load would be decreased by 280 lbs and 160 lbs, respectively for amphibious and straight floats. Obviously, you should weigh the actual MLG and tail wheel components removed to get the correct number, as well as determine actual weight added by the floats and change in empty CG.
Assuming the 10% increase in MGW rule of thumb with floats can be applied, the Patrol would see a useful load of 720 lbs and the Companion 840 lbs based on the current published empty weights and gross weight numbers on the BH Aircraft site and the exchange weight example above. Yes - CG and all that applies as well - if you cannot use the added capability safely, it is just fodder for ad copy, which is to say as useless as fuel left back in pump, runway behind, etc.
Bob (or for the current kit variants, whatever engineer the factory has elected to use) would be the final authority I would listen to as to any adjustment WRT MGW on floats.
Last edited:
Utah-Jay
BH Companion
Because I am bored I will chime in about the two being I have a Companion and have flown the Patrol
The biggest pro for the Patrol is the tandem seating, the biggest con for the Patrol is tandem seating
The Tandem seating is awesome if flying alone, it is great for visibility on both sides. But I like the more social aspect of side by side seating.
As stated above the Companion has more useful cargo load, and the way I designed my doors I have damn good visibility out of both sides though not as good as a Patrol.
A Patrol will likely land a bit slower as it is going to be a bit lighter, but according to the data from my Dynon HDX I upload to FlySto.net I am touching down at an average of 39 mph IAS.
Note: That is every landing I have made, which includes some very fast ones early on when I was learning the nuances of my new plane.
Biggest Pro for the Patrol by far is the ability to install a Rotax 916… I love the idea and IF I was going to build another plane it would be a 916 Patrol.
Can’t beat a BH, there are no bad choices, just choose what fits your mission
The biggest pro for the Patrol is the tandem seating, the biggest con for the Patrol is tandem seating
The Tandem seating is awesome if flying alone, it is great for visibility on both sides. But I like the more social aspect of side by side seating.
As stated above the Companion has more useful cargo load, and the way I designed my doors I have damn good visibility out of both sides though not as good as a Patrol.
A Patrol will likely land a bit slower as it is going to be a bit lighter, but according to the data from my Dynon HDX I upload to FlySto.net I am touching down at an average of 39 mph IAS.
Note: That is every landing I have made, which includes some very fast ones early on when I was learning the nuances of my new plane.
Biggest Pro for the Patrol by far is the ability to install a Rotax 916… I love the idea and IF I was going to build another plane it would be a 916 Patrol.
Can’t beat a BH, there are no bad choices, just choose what fits your mission
Bcone1381
Finished Patrol
Choose your mission. There is no comparison on Baggage space. Companion is winner.
Our Riblet Airfoil has a huge cord. So the CG envelope is very wide and generous.
I declare with 95% confidence, that my Patrol (with a typical IO-360 with a Trailblazer prop) has no weight & balance limits. It can takeoff with 1000 pounds of stuff (gas, people and or cargo.) I suspect It would have some limitations with floats.
I think I will be flying alone most of the time so this is a perfect airplane. The Model B four place and the Model Five, and the Companion were not options when I decided to build my Patrol in 2017, .
Edit: Here are some data points on utility claims of my Patrol.
-I increases the TOGW 200 pounds with Bob's approval. LGW did not change.
-I have very good engine efficiency with mechical FI engine and Surefly Mags. Data says I can fly 1000 miles w/o fueling.
-I can takeoff, no problem, from 1000' runway at any weight.
So the utility is 1000 pounds, from 1000', and go 1000 miles. This is not bragging, rather utility that anyone can achieve similar choices. We can only dream without Utility.
N62588 Weight and balance.pdf
Our Riblet Airfoil has a huge cord. So the CG envelope is very wide and generous.
I declare with 95% confidence, that my Patrol (with a typical IO-360 with a Trailblazer prop) has no weight & balance limits. It can takeoff with 1000 pounds of stuff (gas, people and or cargo.) I suspect It would have some limitations with floats.
I think I will be flying alone most of the time so this is a perfect airplane. The Model B four place and the Model Five, and the Companion were not options when I decided to build my Patrol in 2017, .
Edit: Here are some data points on utility claims of my Patrol.
-I increases the TOGW 200 pounds with Bob's approval. LGW did not change.
-I have very good engine efficiency with mechical FI engine and Surefly Mags. Data says I can fly 1000 miles w/o fueling.
-I can takeoff, no problem, from 1000' runway at any weight.
So the utility is 1000 pounds, from 1000', and go 1000 miles. This is not bragging, rather utility that anyone can achieve similar choices. We can only dream without Utility.
N62588 Weight and balance.pdf
Last edited: