The Aeronca 12AC Chum was a two-seat cabin monoplane designed and produced by Aeronca in the United States in 1946, a licence-built version of the ERCO Ercoupe. Aeronca obtained the licence in 1946 and built two prototypes: the first, registered NX39637, kept the Ercoupe's twin tail, while the second, NX83772, had a larger single tail, knee-action main landing gear and all-metal wings. The 12AC is listed as powered by a 75 or 85 horsepower Continental engine and was approved on the Ercoupe's type certificate.
Facts
Engine Class Top Speed (km/h) Maximum Mass (kg) Comparison
Body StyleAircraft (no road body style) 1 Connections
Exemplifies
Source Aeronca 12 Chum (Wikipedia)
Of Make
Source Aeronca 12 Chum (Wikipedia)
In the Other Atlases
Manufactured By
Also in Business Atlas: the manufacturer of this subject.
Source Aeronca 12 Chum (Wikipedia)Lead, manufacturerQuote, Lead, manufacturer
The Aeronca 12AC Chum was a 2-seat cabin monoplane designed and produced by Aeronca in the United States in 1946.
Originated In
Also in Geography Atlas: where this subject originated.
Source Aeronca 12 Chum (Wikipedia)Lead, manufacturerQuote, Lead, manufacturer
The Aeronca 12AC Chum was a 2-seat cabin monoplane designed and produced by Aeronca in the United States in 1946.
Sources
1. Aeronca 12 Chum (Wikipedia)
Lead
designed and produced by Aeronca in the United States in 1946
Lead, body style
The Aeronca 12AC Chum was a 2-seat cabin monoplane
Specifications
Continental C85J 4-cyl. horizontally-opposed air-cooled piston engine, 85 hp (63 kW)
Lead, status
Aeronca obtained a licence to build the ERCO Ercoupe in 1946 and built two prototypes as the 12AC Chum.
Specifications, mass
Empty weight: 860 lb (390 kg)
Specifications, maximum mass
Gross weight: 1,400 lb (635 kg)
Specifications, power
85 hp (63 kW)
Specifications, top speed
Maximum speed: 118 mph (190 km/h, 103 kn)
Lead, manufacturer
The Aeronca 12AC Chum was a 2-seat cabin monoplane designed and produced by Aeronca in the United States in 1946.
View the SourceReader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.