Nearly done. Which aircraft ?

[Guest zoom7469]

Hi All. Nearly completed my training. Couple more lessons, test and should be ready for Nav's. Currently learning in a Texan and thoroughly enjoying the aircraft. Next step is to purchase an aircraft and the choice is a difficult one. Need some advice.

 

My flying will be predominantly cross country (approx. 300 km's one way), reasonable strips at both ends. There is plenty of nice aircraft to choose from. One thing I have learnt in the hot weather, it does get toasty in those bubble canopies taxiing / pre flight checks etc. but do enjoy the visibility once airborne. So if anyone has some sound advice from experience, appreciate the feedback to help make an informed decision.

 

 

[cscotthendry]

Zoom:

 

If you've done all your flying in low wing aircraft, try doing some time in a high wing aircraft before you make your choice. If most of your flying is going to be cross country, are you looking to cover that in the minimum time, or are you interested in sighteeing along the way? What I'm saying is to really think out your requirements...and be realistic about them. For example, I have a friend who owns a 4 seat aircraft. He's had the airplane for about 15 years and says that he's only ever had 4 people in the plane twice in that time. At the moment, you're interest in the plane seems to be the cross country stuff only, but I suspect that you'll want to do a lot more with it once you get it (ie this isn't just a transport arrangement).

 

A few people I've talked to who are just starting flying seem to be interested in the fastest plane they can afford. But there's a price to pay for the speed and it's not just the purchase price of the "hot ship" or the fuel required to go that fast. Another cost is that the performance of the aircraft demands a higher concentration on the flying and landings as faster planes generally have higher wing loadings and narrower margins of pilot error in the flight envelope.

 

When you've narrowed down your choice to a few different aircraft, start to do some serious research on opinions of their flyability, reliability and history of accidents and airworthiness directives. The internet is a very valuable tool for that and when you've exhausted that, try talking to people who've known people who owned these airplanes. Ask them what their friends REALLY thought of the aircraft. Take the comments of those who are selling the type of planes you're interested in with a very large grain of salt.

 

When I was researching the kit that I ended up purchasing, I could hardly find any negative comments about it online. That made me VERY suspicious and the fact that there weren't many in Australia made it hard to cross check. I took a lot of comfort from the fact that there were thousands of these airplanes flying in Europe, the UK and the US and that they were using them in flying schools. As I don't consider myself to be a very skillful pilot, I wanted an airplane that was very forgiving. It's every bit of that. Also, I wanted to fly to go sightseeing with maybe some cross country every now and then. So I went for a high wing with large clear doors and big windows.

 

Obviously you'll have a budget to work to and this will determine your range of aircraft. Also consider building as it can save money, but what you save in the first instance you lose at resale time. If you decide to build, that's a whole new ballgame with a LOT of other considerations. The biggest consideration with building is that if you go down the path of building "when and as the money is available" it will take you a long time to build and the odds are that you won't finish it. You should have enough money right up front to buy everything you need at the start, but hold off buying things like the engine until you're ready to bolt it in.

 

HTH

 

 

[facthunter]

Ive flown a fair bit of both and provided you clear your turns prior to commencing them, the high wing has some advantages . you can get through gates shelter under it from the sun and rain. Strutted hi wing is a strong concept and you can have the wing very low to counteract crosswinds and it doesn't get caught in grass or run over gable/cone markers etc

 

If you travel a fair bit 95 knots is a good min speed for cruise and try to have about 5 hours endurence. Nev

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

Hey Zoom,

 

When I was looking at RAA aircraft the biggest shortfall I found was lack of "luggage" space. If you are going 300km it is probably to stay overnight, or for work - that is needing to take clothes, books, laptop etc? Some aircraft I looked at had a big area, but it was severely limited by weight.

 

MTOW is another issue. This didn't concern me until I married and discovered my flying plans had to include an extra 105kg + 20kg boots & bags. Now can't fly full fuel and have to do an enroute fuel stop. He is tall and finds the leg room uncomfortable for long flights. So consider comfort too, and if you can alter to suit. And if there is a "significant other" you may have to compromise on the expectations.

 

Speed isn't everything. The difference between a 90kt and 100kt cruise over 300km is 10 mins. Think of it like this - take off 5 mins earlier, and get in 5 mins later - hardly makes any difference. I like slow, you get to look at things and appreciate flying. Speed is variable - but there is an economical cruise speed which may not be the speed quoted.

 

Go any time - consider your need to fly - if for a set timetable, then you need to consider a plane that can handle weather better, so you don't have to stay on the ground if it is a little bumpy, windy or wet.

 

Try flying a few - great fun & educational.

 

Sue

 

 

[Guest zoom7469]

Zoom:If you've done all your flying in low wing aircraft, try doing some time in a high wing aircraft before you make your choice. If most of your flying is going to be cross country, are you looking to cover that in the minimum time, or are you interested in sighteeing along the way? What I'm saying is to really think out your requirements...and be realistic about them. For example, I have a friend who owns a 4 seat aircraft. He's had the airplane for about 15 years and says that he's only ever had 4 people in the plane twice in that time. At the moment, you're interest in the plane seems to be the cross country stuff only, but I suspect that you'll want to do a lot more with it once you get it (ie this isn't just a transport arrangement).

 

A few people I've talked to who are just starting flying seem to be interested in the fastest plane they can afford. But there's a price to pay for the speed and it's not just the purchase price of the "hot ship" or the fuel required to go that fast. Another cost is that the performance of the aircraft demands a higher concentration on the flying and landings as faster planes generally have higher wing loadings and narrower margins of pilot error in the flight envelope.

 

When you've narrowed down your choice to a few different aircraft, start to do some serious research on opinions of their flyability, reliability and history of accidents and airworthiness directives. The internet is a very valuable tool for that and when you've exhausted that, try talking to people who've known people who owned these airplanes. Ask them what their friends REALLY thought of the aircraft. Take the comments of those who are selling the type of planes you're interested in with a very large grain of salt.

 

When I was researching the kit that I ended up purchasing, I could hardly find any negative comments about it online. That made me VERY suspicious and the fact that there weren't many in Australia made it hard to cross check. I took a lot of comfort from the fact that there were thousands of these airplanes flying in Europe, the UK and the US and that they were using them in flying schools. As I don't consider myself to be a very skillful pilot, I wanted an airplane that was very forgiving. It's every bit of that. Also, I wanted to fly to go sightseeing with maybe some cross country every now and then. So I went for a high wing with large clear doors and big windows.

 

Obviously you'll have a budget to work to and this will determine your range of aircraft. Also consider building as it can save money, but what you save in the first instance you lose at resale time. If you decide to build, that's a whole new ballgame with a LOT of other considerations. The biggest consideration with building is that if you go down the path of building "when and as the money is available" it will take you a long time to build and the odds are that you won't finish it. You should have enough money right up front to buy everything you need at the start, but hold off buying things like the engine until you're ready to bolt it in.

 

HTH

Thanks Scott for the insight. I wont be doing a kit as I just dont have time with 2 little one's and a busy job/life. I will only be looking at a LSA. The internet is a great source of information but as you indicate, most reviews are positive and sometimes I question how subjective they are. Probably will need to pursue test flights on the short list...this in itself looks difficult given the many great LSA's around. Can you give me an indication what the cost of a 100 hourly is on a rotax 912 equipped LSA ? Thanks Z

 

 

[Guest zoom7469]

Thanks Sue for the advice. I too will be travelling with others so 600kg MTOW is a must. Heading to a holiday house so shouldnt need to take too much gear. The significant other wont get in the plane with me...not just anyway. Your comment about being able to cope with chop is a real consideration as in my limited experience, smooth air is limited to early mornings when flying in the warmer months. Z.

 

 

[cscotthendry]

Zoom:

 

If you do the 100 hourly yourself, it's just the cost of oil, filter and possibly plugs. Other items are replaced on an "as needed" basis or when they reach a certain age. For example, I think they reccommend changing rubber fuel lines at 5 years or so.

 

If you get an L2 to do it then their time will add to that and I don't know what they charge. But it's easy enough to ask a few L2's what they charge to do the 100 hrly. Also, the Rotax manuals for installation, and maintenance are available on line.

 

When I mentioned research on the internet, I wasn't thinking about aircraft reviews as such (which I agree come out positive almost without exception) but other resources such as these forums and other aircraft specific user groups etc. Some time spent trawling through the postings can usually turn up some pretty interesting stuff.I spent a fair amount of time scouring the Skyranger Yahoo group (which seems to be the main user group internationally) before I bought my kit. I did searches of the postings for keywords like "problem" "crash" "fault" "issue" "complaint" etc to see what turned up. But that wasn't the only place I looked.

 

As you imply, professional aircraft reviews are (IMHO) a complete waste of time, other than to tell you the specs and features which you can get from the sales brochure anyway. I don't think uncritical reviews are restricted to airplanes either. Reviews of new cars and product reviews in general seem much the same.

 

 

[BoxFat]

Hello Zoom,

 

Just been through this myself and the process is almost as interesting as the outcome. I took a year to decide and talked, read, looked, researched quite a bit. Ultimately, it's a very personal choice and one should not entirely discount factors like "how good does it look eh ?" It's great to make a rational decision but a lot of my pleasure is just looking at my pride and joy (analogies with choice of a partner not intended but it has to be said there are strong similarities !). A few things that entered my mind along the way:

 

1. Every aeroplane is a compromise in some respect - if you want to go fast you also land fast, with all that that means (and keep in mind that one landing that may not have been exactly planned). One aeroplane that is unusual in that it does tick both boxes is the wonderful carbon cub - but it costs $200 grand new..out of my range. Over typical bladder-range distance there is not much impact of going 90 kts vs. 100 kts in STILL air. It does make a difference if you are pushing against a 30 kt headwind. I chose an aeroplane that lands and takes-off in nothing but still goes 80 - 9o kts and a little faster if pushed when the wind is strong.
    
    
   
2. Personally I prefer the visibility from a low wing aircraft because you are going where you are turning. However - hot hot hot and not so easy to get in and out of them for an old bloke with an old back...and definitely not so easy for one's partner when they dressed for the evening soiree you are flying to attend. I chose high wing but one with better than average visibility in all directions (even up)
    
    
   
3. What's it made of ? Placcy like the Jabs is real easy to maintain and fix. Pity about the engine eh ? Durability of metal and deconite fabric seems very good if looked after. I chose a fabric and metal (and a little bit of composite) aeroplane after checking durability with owners and finding that they still looked very good even after mega-hours in flying school use. Also found several in use on stations where people are used to treating the plane like the truck. It looks well built and finished too..something you don't pick up in pictures.
    
    
   
4. Engine: Did my RA training in Jabs and flew 5 different ones at different places over that time. I like them a lot but 4 out of those 5 Jabs had engine failures during or after my training period (fortunately none while I was in them...you were thinking it was something I did eh ?). Don't want to get into the arguments about that engine and I'm sure people have good experiences. The problem is that I may want to sell my baby one day and it won't be just my opinion that matters then - currently people are much happier with the Rotax than the Jab engine for sure. So better resale value and the lower probability of having to buy a new engine within 2-300 hrs wiped off any differential in price between the Jab and what I eventually bought (which has a Rotax 912 ULS). It uses 95 Mogas too... a lot cheaper than Avgas if not always so easy to get at airfields.
    
    
   
5. Carrying capacity: Like you, I wanted to be able to carry full fuel (5 hours min) plus two adults plus minimum 20 kg baggage and preferably without having to worry too much about the C.G. The aircraft I chose does that no problem and has the MTOW of 600kg.
    
    
   
6. Handling characteristics: Although I have a PPL I only have about 200 hours total and most of that many moons ago. Ultralights require slightly different skills too. What I'm saying is I am realistic about my skill level and how it will be for a while. So I wanted something easy to fly (but still fun) and especially with good and safe low speed handling for circumstance that might arise in a precautionary landing due to weather. Something we often forget too is handling on the ground - the Jabs don't turn all that tightly on the ground (especially the J230). High wing, as someone else has mentioned, means being able to taxi through farm gates (a big advantage if you have to put down in a paddock !) and better clearance of tree stumps, bushes, the odd sheep/kangaroo etc.
    
    
   
7. Who I'm buying it from: I wanted new, not second hand, and factory built. This is partly for that warm fuzzy feeling one gets from knowing that the plane and you have shared the same experiences and partly because of re-sale value again. Factory built means it can be used in a school, so a bigger range of potential buyers and people familiar with the aeroplane already. For a new aeroplane, if you don't choose one of the locally built ones (and local in Oz may not be that local..I am in WA) that means imported. That in turn means you better have a local agent that has done it a lot before and people have spoken well of. Even better if there is a sales and maintenance facility for that particular aircraft in your home state. There is a mountain of paperwork and regs to be thought of so it's not a game for yer mate Bob in his back yard. Problems with imported aircraft not meeting regs has arisen lately with RA-Aus and has burnt some people. So ..for me it needed to be fairly mainstream and an aeroplane which is well represented in the local fleet..not too rare. So I bought an aeroplane of which there are 100+ on the Oz register, can be registered RA and VH and which is used by several flying schools.
    
    
   
8. What about the hangar ? I share mine with another aircraft which is low wing..OK for a big wingspan high wing but wouldn't have worked if they were high wing too. My wingspan is 9.5 metres which is pretty big. It's OK but certainly something to think about.
    
    
   
9. Cabin roominess: Coming from GA the first thing you notice when climbing into a J160 (for e.g.) is that you become quite friendly with the person in the other seat and often find yourself playing elbow tango. Some low wing aircraft with bubble canopies are also a bit squeezy and some don't have much in the way of roll over protection either. I chose an aircraft with a roomier than typical cockpit...just makes everything easier.
    
    
   
10. Price. I had a budget (really I did..no really). For factory built and new it's roughly $80K up..and up...and up some more. I baulked at three figures (plus the three of the "K" of course). It turned out to be JUST possible to meet all of the above criteria within that limit.
     
     
    

 

 

So enough suspense: I am the proud owner of an Aeroprakt A22LS Foxbat. I only have 12 hours on it so far but am very happy at this point. Negatives ? Well apart from the compromise aspects mentioned above (it doesn't go as fast as is sometimes suggested it does, although mine has the fat tundra tires to slow it down a bit), the only concern I had from the research was some reports of tearing in the undercarriage attachment skin and rear empennage stabiliser attachment fittings. I looked into those and found that they had been addressed by ADs with strengthening in the new models and also that the explanation of the cause appeared sensible. The numbers affected appear small and I have not heard of any problems with newer A22LS models (if anybody has ...please tell me !). So...there you go. The well known "buyer confirmation bias" probably still has me in it's grip - I'm sure a poll of people who just bought an aeroplane would find a high level of satisfaction, whatever beast it is. The Savannah has many of the characteristics of the FB at a lower price, but not quite as good visibility or range/performance (and they don't look nice to me but that's just my personal aesthetic filter).

 

Have fun !

 

 

[Guest zoom7469]

Hi Boxfat, Thanks for taking the time to run through your decision process when considering your purchase of the Foxbat. You make alot of sense and will take into your considerations once I finally get to the pointy end of my shortlist. I am to probably looking at high wing because of the hot hot part, but do like the low wing turning visibility. One thing you didnt mention was whether you test flew aircraft in your consideration journey. I think this will be important for me to ensure the aircraft and I gel and it feels right. I will let you know which way I am looking to jump and no doubt will seek your advice. Thanks again.

 

 

[BoxFat]

Ok so we are agreed we need to choose a plane where the wings can be quickly moved from under to over ? Wouldn't that be good !

 

I didn't test fly many aircraft - it gets too expensive - but certainly did so with the Foxbat. It's harder than one thinks to get a good impression from a short test flight I reckon. It felt odd in the FB at first because of the cut away dash leading to an off-centre appearance to the point of reference, throttle down by the rest position of the left arm etc. All that kind of thing goes away once you are familiar with it and if I had let it bother me I may not have bought the FB. Now both things feel natural and I love flying it. I had a short flight in an Alpi Pioneer (now called a "Hawk" I believe) and loved that too...high performance, handles beautifully, great visibility etc but it didn't meet some of my other criteria. It's that compromise thing...the Alpi would be great for touring and maybe, one day, when tired of the FB I may get one (hence the importance of resale value). By the way, the FB is genuine STOL like the Savannah etc..check out the YouTube video and search for Foxbat Short Take Off or something like that.

 

 

[boingk]

My process was basically listing 5 criteria with a price. Here were mine for my choice:

 

• 70kt or greater cruise
   
   
  
• 15L or less per hour
   
   
  
• Preferably two seater
   
   
  
• 3 hour endurance
   
   
  
• Under $20,000
   
   
  

 

 

I ended up with my Minicab, which embodies all of that. It needed minor work but overall I've been happy owning it... past terms of course because I'm arranging sale of it at the moment!

 

Like BoxFat above I found a huge array of compromises, more so because of my limited expenditure. One aircraft I particularly like the specs of is the Sonex with a Jab 3300 in it. People are reporting 130kt+ cruise figures on 17~18L/hr burn, with space and weight for two people and baggage. Being more realistic I do like the Jabirus - good cruise, plenty of support and never mind the engine just maintain it well. I get the feeling some are literally 'set and forget' type jobs that don't get the level of service they really need.

 

On high vs low wings, I did all m training in highwing craft (Gazelle and C150) and now own the lowwing Minicab. I find that while I do like visibility in turns, I miss the view while flying level more - and you spend more time level than turning. The practicalities of a high wing are pretty good, and the sun factor is a big one. I remember going up one day in the Minicab and forgetting a hat - I had to put my aircraft checksheet under my headset to stay cool!

 

Also decide whether you want taildragger or not - I tend to favour taildragger/conventional undercarriage now I have flown it. It is stronger, more aerodynamic and handles rough field better. Downsides are groundloops and nose-overs, but if you play the flying game properly (calm, capable and prepared) then its a non event.

 

Cheers - boingk

 

 

[Jabiru Phil]

Zoom,

 

You are on the money by trying to match up your flying needs with the plane

 

600 kg means a factory built

 

High wing leaves a few less possibilities

 

Speed V fuel burn is really a red herring. MPG is the way to make a decision

 

Luggage space, endurance, comfort and spare parts with good service also play a part in the selection.

 

I have got 400 hours up now and was toying recently about changing to a low wing similar to a Pioneer but none have the performance or criteria that I have now.

 

I mostly fly 3 to 4 hour legs apart from the local stuff. I just can't find anything better for what I want to do.

 

Re an above post. It is necessary to have a LAME at 100 hours or 12 months to do a service on a LSA aircraft I believe.

 

To sum up. Make sure you tick all the above boxes for your needs.

 

Of course it goes without saying that the bank balance will tend to make the final decision.

 

Good luck in your selection.

 

Phil

 

 

[TT-MR]

Zoom,

 

My position is the same, I want to purchase an aircraft to have the room and MTOW that can carry the gear required to stay over and provide recreation. High wing has to be the more comfortable choice and the Jabiru 230 ticks the boxes for me if you are prepared to compromise on fuel consumption. I would welcome comment and comparisons on the J160, J170, J230 from owners.

 

John

 

 

[Jabiru Phil]

Zoom,

 

We have the three jab types here. the 230's are by far the better Xcountry planes. 24 registration allows extra baggage.

 

160 is underpowered for climb. 170 larger wing great plane, endurance, fuel burn and climb but very little luggage space.

 

I would choose the 170 if you dont need to carry luggage. The 230 if you do. which has room for swags, even golf bag, camping gear tent etc.

 

 

[Cooda]

The Brumby 610 looks interesting. Ditto the Flight Design range. But cost becomes an issue.

 

I've enjoyed the Jabiru 230D's but you can get a numb bum after a while. 600kms is about the longest trip I've managed.

 

 

[Jabiru Phil]

Lost my post just then, probably uncontrollable fingers!

 

Seats are the same, just the padding. I have lambs wool covers from a mob in Vic at a quarter of the Jab advertised price. I think due to buying direct. I have done many 3plus hour trips in comfort

 

Yes I did have the Brumby as a next possibility but the idea of having various nooks for luggage didn't suit my needs.

 

 

[jakej]

Lost my post just then, probably uncontrollable fingers!Seats are the same, just the padding. I have lambs wool covers from a mob in Vic at a quarter of the Jab advertised price. I think due to buying direct. I have done many 3plus hour trips in comfort

Yes I did have the Brumby as a next possibility but the idea of having various nooks for luggage didn't suit my needs.

Phil

 

You're spot on with the mpg - I did a comparison some time ago and the Jabby engine usses the same amount of fuel for a trip as an RV or Glasair (160hp) would use, however the Jabby just takes longer

 

Re seats - are you guys using the Tempur (conformal foam - sort of like the foam in earplugs) for your seat cushions ? I've been using that stuff for 20 years & longest flight was 5 1/4 hrs - no numb bum

 

See you at Lox in April or sooner.

 

Jake J

 

 

[Guest zoom7469]

Thanks all for the comments. Getting a good appreciation of what is important. There are plenty of good aircraft to pick from. Cheers

 

 

[eightyknots]

Hi All. Nearly completed my training. Couple more lessons, test and should be ready for Nav's. Currently learning in a Texan and thoroughly enjoying the aircraft. Next step is to purchase an aircraft and the choice is a difficult one. Need some advice.My flying will be predominantly cross country (approx. 300 km's one way), reasonable strips at both ends. There is plenty of nice aircraft to choose from. One thing I have learnt in the hot weather, it does get toasty in those bubble canopies taxiing / pre flight checks etc. but do enjoy the visibility once airborne. So if anyone has some sound advice from experience, appreciate the feedback to help make an informed decision.

Perhaps you may wish to consider X Air "H" or a Savannah (already mentioned above but well worth your consideration). Both of these planes have docile flying characteristics, land on a short strip and fly at a decent cruise speed. Both have been sold in the hundreds.

 

 

[skyfox99]

PhilYou're spot on with the mpg - I did a comparison some time ago and the Jabby engine usses the same amount of fuel for a trip as an RV or Glasair (160hp) would use, however the Jabby just takes longer

 

Re seats - are you guys using the Tempur (conformal foam - sort of like the foam in earplugs) for your seat cushions ? I've been using that stuff for 20 years & longest flight was 5 1/4 hrs - no numb bum

 

See you at Lox in April or sooner.

 

Jake J

Hi JakeJ,

 

Reading your post about Tempur, can you tell me what Tempur product you use?

 

Always looking for something to make the seat in a Jabiru more comfortable, this may be the answer?

 

Thank you....

 

 

[jakej]

Hi JakeJ,Reading your post about Tempur, can you tell me what Tempur product you use?

Always looking for something to make the seat in a Jabiru more comfortable, this may be the answer?

 

Thank you....

Sure - AircraftSpruce have it as Confor Foam Seat Cushion p/n 01-09300 @ $us74.95 - a bit of info, when it's cold it initially feels hard but as you warm it up it conforms beautifully. Except for the price, you will love it - I don't recommend products I wouldn't or haven't used myself .

Jake J