LSAs Like them, hate them what's the deal?

ozone said:
My beef with the LSA's is the high cost of ownership and the lack of creativity on the part of (commercial) builders.

Where's my LSA motorglider-wanna-be with a diesel engine that sips 2gph for $50/hour rental?

Instead of that fantasy, all I get is more 100LL at 4-6 gph and $100+/hour to rent. I might as well as fly an old POS cessna 150 for that (and at $90/hour). I dont care if it's new or old. I just want something to fly that doesn't cost an arm and a leg to rent.
Click to expand...

There was an article in the Jan EAA magazine about a club in Toledo that's an offshoot of the EAA chapter at Metcalf. They're doing shared ownership of a Pietenpol with an A-65 for I think $150/yr and 10/hr dry (burns I think 4gph). Food for thought.... Find a group of like-minded people nearby, pick your airplane, set up a partnership, and go for it.
I'm plotting to build one as a family project, partly just to do, partly because they're 1930s-open-cockpit-tailwheel cool, and partly as a means to just go fly whenever I want.
 
cefiro said:
Correct....Limitations on a sport pilot certificate include, but are not limited to: No night flight, cannot go above 10,000ft MSL, and must maintain ground contact at all times.
Click to expand...

Didn't they just change it so its 10,000MSL or 2,000 AGL, whichever is higher?
 
I fly the Remos GX here. It works well as a trainer, but some people would rather fly the Cessna.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Didn't they just change it so its 10,000MSL or 2,000 AGL, whichever is higher?
Click to expand...

It's been a while since I've seen a GA performance book, but it used to be a little asterisk on takeoffs above 8k that said "*You know you're gonna have to push this bitch up into the air because you didn't wanna buy a turbocharger, right? Hope you had your Wheaties®."
 
Maurus said:
I don't like them because most are butt ugly.
Click to expand...

yeah, the Remos and Sting Sport are two of the ugliest... but check out the Gobosh 800:

vl-3-g800_v.jpg


yeah yeah, its a total ripoff of a Lancair, but it looks great!
 
I've flown 3 of the Tecnam LSA's, both of the high wings and the low wing, they were very good for their "mission" and built in a conventional aluminum manner, same as a Cessna, so to speak. The all flew "hands (and feet) off" and were very easy to control, very stable.

I also flew the CTSW, it is a little more sensative to power changes and requires a little more skill to fly it smoothly, as it's so narrow aft of the cockpit, the tail wants to dance when you change the power setting and it requires a lot more rudder control to keep it smooth. It's also got drooping ailerons when you put down the flaps, but that can cause a new guy trouble in a blowing crosswind, unless someone tells him to leave the flaps up in that situation. The "up" side of their flap system is, you can go negative with the flaps (-6) for a faster cruise speed.

The CTSW is a "glass" built airplane, ie. fiberglass, and they've had some issues with hanger rash and gear damage when someone drops it in too hard. It's a much cleaner look to the skin, no rivets, and the cockpit has a little more elbow room than the Tecnams, but you've got to be more careful both flying it and moving it around in the hanger.

If a pilot has lots of time (thousands of hours, not hundreds) he'd have no trouble figuring out the CTSW, but if he's a newbie, the Tecnam is much more forgiving and a more stable learning platform.

Both have sticks instead of yokes, which I like. If you've got money, you can load up either one with all the latest EFIS, Garmin, Dynon, a balistic chute, what ever you want, and they have the same Rotax motor in both, you can burn auto fuel in them to try to save a few bucks there.

Now, I prefer a tailwheel, but that's what I learned in so that's what I want to -go home- to on my days off. But I'm not trying to go anywhere in it, just around town. If you want to fly long cross country trips fast, and not burn much fuel, the CTSW is the way to go.

Here's the Tecnam website with their LSA's, they've got other airplanes too, here's their new twin.

http://www.tecnam.com/index_en.html

Click on "aircraft" and then later, LSA's.

And here's a You Tube vid. on the CTSW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ8q3Wm-vRc
 
Timbo said:
The CTSW is a "glass" built airplane, ie. fiberglass, and they've had some issues with hanger rash and gear damage when someone drops it in too hard. It's a much cleaner look to the skin, no rivets, and the cockpit has a little more elbow room than the Tecnams, but you've got to be more careful both flying it and moving it around in the hanger.
Click to expand...

Yup. I know a CTSW that had a nose gear collapse, due to a messed up landing. But, the good part about the Rotax engine is, the slipper clutch. In the event of a prop strike, all you have to do is replace the prop, check the clutch, and fire it up. I've heard stories of prop strikes on the Rotax, where the engine keeps running after the prop is stopped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top