Fun Factor Thread ...tell us about your aircraft... *Scale = 1-10*

[eightyknots]

Every time one looks at the specifications of a recreational aircraft all the expected things are recorded. We can read about stall speed, VNE, maximum take-off weight and many other facets of the aircraft we are researching.

 

 

 

No manufacturer -or importer- has ever attempted quantifying the Fun Factor ...because the Fun Factor is so subjective.

 

 

 

*Here is your chance to:

 

Give a Fun Factor score (1 to 10) to the aircraft you have flown and/or own.

 

Following that, you have to justify why you gave that score.

 

 

[eightyknots]

I will start off by my most recent experience:

 

The Piper Super Cub PA-18-100.

 

This has a Rolls Royce 100 hp engine and was manufactured in the mid-1950s. The plane is nice to fly the knees touch both sides of the fuselage and there is good downward vision from both side windows. Being a tailwheel aircraft makes the landing somewhat tricky but this aircraft has survived almost sixty years of flying so it can't be too bad. The Super Cub started off life with a 90 hp motor until it was upgraded to the 100 hp Rolls Royce engine. It still requires about 400 metres of landing roll and take off roll. A far more experienced pilot may shave 50 metres off that possibly.

 

Fun Factor: 5

 

 

[Ultralights]

ICP Savannah VG, fun factor 10, very easy to fly, handles great at all speeds, and great to challenge yourself with short field landing, and perfecting a nice short field take off, not to mention great visibility.

 

 

[facthunter]

10 means there is none better. Nev

 

 

[pylon500]

Bit hard to quantify 'fun'...

 

Most of the things I call fun, have to be done when no-one is looking

 

Most people that fly (and can land) a Pitts would give it an 11!, but until you are capable of this type of flying ability/experience, most average pilots are concentrating too hard to give a Pitts a high fun factor.

 

From a sales point of view, maybe people could rate an ease of flying, or most relaxing to fly, rating on their plane.

 

Of course then you have to avoid getting into the 'too easy' category, whereupon the aircraft just becomes boring.

 

Not sure how to set up charts, but will try from things I've flown;

 

Aircraft____Fun___Relax/Easy__Boring___Frustrating

 

Lightwing____8_______5_______3_______1

 

Gazelle______7_______9_______9_______3

 

Foxbat ______9_______9_______4_______1

 

J230 _______6_______7_______5_______8

 

Drifter ______8_______6_______3_______1

 

GT400/500___7_______8_______6_______2

 

Piper Cub ____8_______7_______5_______6

 

Savanah______7_______8_______7______3

 

I'm not going to comment on all 90 odd types I've flown, just the more common ones.

 

Edit; site wont support multiple spaces...

 

 

[eightyknots]

Bit hard to quantify 'fun'...Most of the things I call fun, have to be done when no-one is looking

Most people that fly (and can land) a Pitts would give it an 11!, but until you are capable of this type of flying ability/experience, most average pilots are concentrating too hard to give a Pitts a high fun factor.

 

From a sales point of view, maybe people could rate an ease of flying, or most relaxing to fly, rating on their plane.

 

Of course then you have to avoid getting into the 'too easy' category, whereupon the aircraft just becomes boring.

 

Not sure how to set up charts, but will try from things I've flown;

 

Aircraft____Fun___Relax/Easy__Boring___Frustrating

 

Lightwing____8_______5_______3_______1

 

Gazelle______7_______9_______9_______3

 

Foxbat ______9_______9_______4_______1

 

J230 _______6_______7_______5_______8

 

Drifter ______8_______6_______3_______1

 

GT400/500___7_______8_______6_______2

 

Piper Cub ____8_______7_______5_______6

 

Savanah______7_______8_______7______3

 

I'm not going to comment on all 90 odd types I've flown, just the more common ones.

 

Edit; site wont support multiple spaces...

Thanks for that pylon500. I can see that you are a good problem solver as your quasi-table worked really well . The information is valuable also.

 

 

[rgmwa]

Aircraft____Fun___Relax/Easy__Boring___Frustrating

 

C152/C172___7_______8_______4_______3

 

RV-12______9_______8_______2_______1

 

RV-7A______9_______7_______2_______2

 

Just noticed the request in the original post to explain the score, so for what it's worth (probably not much, being so subjective):

 

a) the C152 is lighter on the controls and feels more agile in the air than the C172, which is more like flying a bus - well a mini-bus anyway. On the other hand the C152 is not very powerful, and you really notice that taking off on a hot day with a passenger and full fuel. By contrast a later model 180hp C172 is a clean aircraft and performs pretty well. Both are quite easy to fly, predictable and stable, so maybe a bit boring on that score - not that I think flying any aircraft is boring. Both scored low on frustration because they are easy to fly, although I seem to have more trouble doing consistent landings in the C172, but that's probably just me.

 

b) 100hp in an LSA aircraft like the RV-12 is plenty of power, but you're not going to take-off like a rocket or climb at 3000 ft/min (although I have managed 1600 fpm, so not too bad!). It scores high on fun because it's very responsive, the controls are well harmonised, and the visibility is great due to the slightly forward seating position. It glides really well and is easy to land provided you get the speed down early because it just wants to keep flying. That and the fact that's it's so much more responsive than the Cessnas means it's neither boring nor frustrating.

 

c) the RV7A is heavier and has a noticeably more `solid' feel that the RV-12 and with 180hp is a good deal more powerful. Other than that it handles much the same as the RV-12. It's a bit quicker in roll, about the same in pitch, but the rudder feels heavier. It's easy to fly, but you need to be precise to fly it well. Consequently it's probably a little less relaxing to fly than the others, which can make it more frustrating at the same time, but it's definitely more fun than the Cessnas.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[BoxFat]

Not sure how to set up charts, but will try from things I've flown;

Aircraft____Fun___Relax/Easy__Boring___Frustrating

 

Lightwing____8_______5_______3_______1

 

Gazelle______7_______9_______9_______3

 

Foxbat ______9_______9_______4_______1

 

J230 _______6_______7_______5_______8

 

Drifter ______8_______6_______3_______1

 

GT400/500___7_______8_______6_______2

 

Piper Cub ____8_______7_______5_______6

 

Savanah______7_______8_______7______3

 

I'm not going to comment on all 90 odd types I've flown, just the more common ones.

 

Edit; site wont support multiple spaces...

Wow - 90 types flown. Now that's what I call a statistically significant sample ! On the other hand, if one had flown only one type and it was fun I guess that's an automatic ten :)

 

It's tempting to go all reductionist and start analysing the components of a fun as opposed to a not-fun flying experience. For, example, it certainly helps if one is confident enough about engine and airframe to not be flying in a perpetual state of angst (as opposed to a healthy alertness). Also, control harmony, responsiveness - a feeling of integration with a well designed machine, good visibility etc etc. Overall, I feel the best description of a fun aeroplane is one that is easy to fly - but hard to fly really well.

 

Whoops there I go slipping into reductionism again whereas it's really more interesting to know which aircraft people find "fun" whatever the individual and diverse reasons may be. I don't have enough types to make a meaningful table so will just contribute a few thoughts:

 

1. My Foxbat was a happy choice as it ticks an awful lot of the boxes - 8s and up all round I figure.

 

2. I loved the fighter feel of the Alpi Pioneer

 

3. From all reports (not been in one yet but it's coming) any well tuned RV 6 -12 is a silly grin generator.

 

4. Every LSA I have been in beats the low end Cessnas and Pipers I learnt in by a country mile. RA has been a revelation to me.

 

5. One exception to the above: For a little while I had access to a beaten up C206 which I flew mostly on my own - what joy to feel the kick in the back and hear the growl on opening that up and the, for reasons I can't explain, I got an enormous kick out in turning around in the climb out and looking at that great empty space following me up into the air !