Savannah S

[eightyknots]

Vimanas do not look to be anywhere near as popular as Savannahs. I wonder why?

 

 

[rankamateur]

Vimanas do not look to be anywhere near as popular as Savannahs. I wonder why?

Could be the other $40,000 is some deterant, extended baggage might be non-existant, long range tanks might be a problem.

 

 

[Cosmick]

Checked out the specs on the Aerokits site

 

Cruise on the Sav S 100hp @ 75% 179kph ( 96.6knts)

 

Cruise on the Sav XL 100hp 90knts ( 167 kph)

 

- both show consumption of 18.5lph @ 75%

 

The flyer for the "S" model shows Max and VNE up to 10% higher than the XL/VG

 

Is the "S" a better performer or is there another reason for the difference.

 

 

[dazza 38]

I realy like the rugged look of the Savs, make a great trainer, i think.I would have the twin stick option.Just a personal preference.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Dazza, your correct, they will make great trainers, I could see that the first time I landed one. You really don't need twin sticks in the Savvy, the single center stick with the Y yoke should work just fine for training. They already have twin everything else. The ease at which they handle the final approach in any wind condition, will make most instructors jump for joy !!....and super safe....................................Maj...

 

 

[dazza 38]

I agree MAJ, i flew the Jab single centre stick.I was thinking out side the square.LOL.Been flying tecnams for to long.LOL

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Hi Dazza

 

I sat in the first factory built one that is up near Gympie when it arrived and the twin stick version isnt that nice. Even the owner is a bit dissapointed with it but he lives with it. He thinks he should have got the single stick one. The twin sticks are really close into you crotch and they are very low down as well and seem to require a lot more force due to the lower mechanical advantage

 

Mark

 

 

[dazza 38]

Hi DazzaI sat in the first factory built one that is up near Gympie when it arrived and the twin stick version isnt that nice. Even the owner is a bit dissapointed with it but he lives with it. He thinks he should have got the single stick one. The twin sticks are really close into you crotch and they are very low down as well and seem to require a lot more force due to the lower mechanical advantage

 

Mark

Thanks Mark, for the infomation.:)

 

 

[eightyknots]

Checked out the specs on the Aerokits siteCruise on the Sav S 100hp @ 75% 179kph ( 96.6knts)

 

Cruise on the Sav XL 100hp 90knts ( 167 kph)

 

- both show consumption of 18.5lph @ 75%

 

The flyer for the "S" model shows Max and VNE up to 10% higher than the XL/VG

 

Is the "S" a better performer or is there another reason for the difference.

It's hard to imagine that the 'S' would be any more slippery through the air than a Savannah XL. After all, the only thing that has changed is the fuselage from the cabin backwards. The pointy end is the same for both models.

 

Surely, the rounded corners along the fuselage's length couldn't enhance the aerodynamic shape through the air that much compared the four 90 degree angles on the XL? i_dunno

 

A similar question was asked about the difference between the Savannah VG and XL. Suddenly, ICP was able to increase the length and width for only 4 kg extra weight but the stall speed lowered and the cruise speed went up! Some of these improvements may have been explained by the more aerodynamic front end. http://www.recreationalflying.com/forum/savannah/98508-savannah-vg-versus-xl-how-possible.html

 

However, I cannot comprehend why there would be another 12 km/h (nearly 7 knots) in it for the same power used between the XL and the S. I hope this isn't a "marketing ploy" to justify the $thousands extra one has to pay for the Savannah S.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

I just looked at all these specs today between the VG XL and the S version and I would also like to know how they can change the specs so dramatically by just rounding the 4 corners on the rear fuselage. They even state that is the only difference...wings are not any stronger neither are the wing mounts one is led to believe

 

All specs below are in knots

 

Just found on the ICP site new specs for the XL I have included them as well as the older specs previously advertised

 

original specs latest website specs

 

VG\XL "S" XL

 

Stall flaps 26 26.46 26.45

 

Stall no flaps 30 30.7 30.77

 

Cruise 75% 90 96.65 95.57

 

Max speed 95 106.9 106.9

 

VNE 108 118.8 107.99

 

4 rounded corners can not make this much difference I think there are a couple factory built ones out here now ( scratch the one in Gladstone now) does anyone know how true these specs are as they are substantially different at VNE

 

bugger the formatting changed when I posted the specs

 

The first number is original XL specs posted the next number is the "S" from the icp site and also the last number is the updated specs for the XL from the icp site

 

Mark

 

 

[eightyknots]

I just looked at all these specs today between the VG XL and the S version and I would also like to know how they can change the specs so dramatically by just rounding the 4 corners on the rear fuselage. They even state that is the only difference...wings are not any stronger neither are the wing mounts one is led to believeAll specs below are in knots

Just found on the ICP site new specs for the XL I have included them as well as the older specs previously advertised

 

original specs latest website specs:

 

VG\XL "S" XL

 

Stall flaps 26 26.46 26.45

 

Stall no flaps 30 30.7 30.77

 

Cruise 75% 90 96.65 95.57

 

Max speed 95 106.9 106.9

 

VNE 108 118.8 107.99

 

4 rounded corners can not make this much difference I think there are a couple factory built ones out here now ( scratch the one in Gladstone now) does anyone know how true these specs are as they are substantially different at VNE

 

The first number is original XL specs posted the next number is the "S" from the icp site and also the last number is the updated specs for the XL from the icp site

 

Mark

Hi Mark,

 

I managed to re-format it and added colour to highlight the 'magic' differences. The VNE increase for the Savannah S is interesting when there appears to be no other structural changes apart from rounding the corners on the S.

 

Similarly the maximum speed on the S is around the same as the VNE on the XL. What gives?

 

Surely VNE for the XL should be about the same?

 

I'll try formatting it outside your quote bubble~

 

original specs latest website specs:

 

VG\XL "S" XL

 

Stall flaps 26 26.46 26.45

 

Stall no flaps 30 30.7 30.77

 

Cruise 75% 90 96.65 95.57

 

Max speed 95 106.9 106.9

 

VNE 108 118.8 107.99

 

 

[Cosmick]

Surprisingly my email notification of Marks post was formatted perfectly but when I visited the forum it was as we all have witnessed.

 

Regards Mike

 

 

[Guest Walter Buschor]

Having the VG and having flown in company with other Savvy's I can say say that there is little if any speed difference from one to the next regardless of VG / VG XL. ( the slatted version is slower though ).

 

Blair's Factory Sav XL is ever so slightly faster than mine but having said that mine seems to climb better. IMO it does come down to prop pitch which has a lot to do with the cruise speed - up to a point were aerodinamic drag is reached . In the sav that's at approx 90 knots . Faster than that and the engine will have to be worked very hard and past 95 knots "true" the nose will start to point at the dirt too. I cannot imagine that the "S" is any faster at all since the wing / sqare front Fuse section is the deciding factor in drag.The S is a little cleaner from the cabin back but that won't make any difference.

 

Another thing to remember is the rough air penetration speed of 75 knots. This surely applies to all of them. The S might be prettier but faster - surely not.

 

fly safe

 

Walter

 

 

[eightyknots]

I had a quick look at the ICP website and it implies that the 'S' variant of the Savannah is a cosmetic upgrade (or, "aesthetical improvement") only by paying attention to the plane's "backside". ICP uses words and phrases that state that they were aiming at elegance, restyling, etc and then add these words "without taking away the well known features of solidity and safety":

 

The Savannah™ S is I.C.P.’s 2010 innovation. It was born from the wish to make the Savannah™ more refined and elegant and complete the aesthetical improvement process already started last year with the Savannah™ XL, whose front part fuselage was completely modified.

 

This year we have paid attention to the back side of the aircraft. We have left the wings unchanged, because they have always proved to be the key force of the Savannah™, above all in VG (vortex generators) version, thanks to the combination of the wide wing surface with the high lift profile.

 

The object of restyling 2010 has been the tail trunk; we have removed the corners, so the typical squared shape has been replaced by a sinuous bending that gives harmony and completeness to the whole aircraft, without taking away the well known features of solidity and safety.

 

If nothing has been subtracted from solidity and safety, have they added something to the 'S' which allows a 20 km/h increase in VNE? Or, was the VG XL's VNE under-rated in the first place?

 

 

[eightyknots]

Addtionially, this is an interesting statement: "the typical square shape has been replaced by sinuous (??) bending that gives harmony and completeness" I think that beauty is clearly in the eye of the beholder and the 'S' is not necessarily a nicer looking plane for what is essentially a STOL bush aircraft.

 

 

[winsor68]

I can confirm from my schools new aircraft that the Savanah S does not cruise any faster than the speeds quoted for the XL.. 80 knots at 5000rpm. With a change in prop pitch estimate is it should be able to go 85-90 knots but why bother... One thing I have noticed is that regardless of whether one up or two climb is still an easy 1000fpm or at least hardly noticable perhaps due to the big fat efficient wing... I noticed with the Texan Lsa that I flew before the Savanah S that removing the instructor made a 300fpm difference.

 

I found that the transition to the Sav S was completely painless... but perhaps I was lucky in that the first day I flew it we had perfect conditions and had probably the best flight so far. The other students at the school have been heard to grumble a bit about not having the Texan to fly anymore but for me... give me a Savanah any day. Its just feels so damn capable and flys like its on rails with a nice solid (yet not heavy) control feel... and the centre Y stick is far, far superior in my opinion. I also like the manual 2 position flaps much more than the electric of previous aircraft. I find the landing particularly nice.

 

 

[eightyknots]

I would still love to see a comprehensive comparison done between the Savannah XL and Savannah S, including the flight characteristics, structural differences and construction technique differences (if any), etc.

 

Where could you find this information?

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Kyle, Did he mention if he is going to paint this one pink !!!!!???????......................................Maj...

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

hahaha no I didnt ask him what colour this time

 

 

[eightyknots]

Pink? Is this to emphasise the 'feminine' shape of the Savannah S compared to the more 'masculine' shape of the XL?

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Toms original savannah is a 80hp one of the first built here I think but he has also done a few mods on it. I took these at Monto flyin last year. Hence the question from Maj

 

 

 

 

[eightyknots]

Toms original savannah is a 80hp one of the first built here I think but he has also done a few mods on it. I took these at Monto flyin last year. Hence the question from Maj

Ahhh that was a Savannah VG, there goes my "pink colour for the 'feminine' S" theory. The top of this Savvy looks a bit different from normal?

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

He has done some mods to make it fly faster and more efficient with the 80hp engine. I am sure he has a 100hp for the new one.

 

 

[Ballpoint 246niner]

He has done some mods to make it fly faster and more efficient with the 80hp engine. I am sure he has a 100hp for the new one.

Nice to meet you briefly yesterday, now I know where I knew the name from! Good luck with your project, look fwd to seeing it next to my soon to be S in the near future. Bill is a great ambassador for the product.

 

Neil.