Does your aircraft fit your flying style?

[Methusala]

I have been flying ultralights for over 35 years. I began flying with a gliding club while building a very early, US hang glider based rag & tube Pteradactyl. I moved through with Thrusters, Jeeps and Javelins while a member of Holbrook Ultralight club. I bought an Evans VP2 in the 90's and flew it for 11 years. During this time I modified it structurally, adding a full turtle deck to improve airflow over the tail. I experimented, with fair success, with EFI to an Aeropower 2070cc VW. I have flown in some exotic types eg. Lancair 320, and had a hankering for perhaps a Sonex or a Corby Starlet. Now I fly a Kitfox or ThrusterT300 around my patch. But it was when I started flying RC models that I found that some aircraft didn't suit my flying style. While my mate could fly a tea tray with an engine bolted on, I quickly got out of my depth with the sports models and found myself very, "behind the aeroplane". Do others feel content with 60kt aircraft and resist the urge to go faster and sportier? Don

 

 

[rgmwa]

Everyone will have a different answer to that question. For me 60 kts is too slow but on the other hand 180 kts would be too fast. What I have is a good compromise, so I'm happy.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[Yenn]

I am happy with what I have got. The Corby is in my opinion the ultimate pilots machine, so nice to fly and low costs as well. The RV4 allows me to carry camping gear, or a passenger and it is still a pilots aeroplane. All I am missing is that slow flight with a clear view below. Maybe I need to add the Thruster to my fleet.

 

 

[Soleair]

Good to 'meet' another 'Dactyl' builder/pilot, Methusala. I built mine in 1979, & replaced the Sachs 25hp direct drive with a Robin 50hp with reduction drive & prop of my own. Later added a canard. I loved that plane, & did a lot of flying, including some quite ambitious X country & even a night flight.

 

I did most of my GA flying in the ARV Super2, which was a great little plane. Much higher speeds, but something of the true ultralight feel to it. Did a lot of long distance X country in that, to the extent that flying a Cessna 152 round the patch to keep my licence valid became boring.

 

Now I fly my MiniMax. Max speed is 70 knots, & so far I'm only flying it within 25nm of my home airfield. But I love it, and the difference is just that it's such a fun aeroplane to fly. Very light & responsive, excellent manners, and every flight feels like an adventure!

 

I fly a Jab occasionally, & although I quite enjoy it it doesn't have the same 'concentrated spirit of flying' as the Max (sorry, can't really describe it).

 

So I'm very happy with cruising around my local area at 60 knots - but only in the right plane.

 

Bruce

 

 

[facthunter]

Make your plane the one YOU want. (Not what will impress others). It's not easy to work that out for yourself so wait and experience more before you commit yourself if you are going to make the plunge to aircraft ownership which is a serious disease that is hard to treat, and financially challenging. It's a seriously efficient way of divesting yourself of cash rapidly. But

 

I like a plane with a lot of control authority and some real character and a useful range with a strong structure. I enjoy flying just about anything but if it's a real dog I don't want to fly it just because I've bought the thing, and have to justify it.. It's easy to buy and hard to sell a plane. The Citabria I owned gave me a lot of pleasure and more or less satisfied the requirements I listed above very well. I've been very fortunate to fly a wide range of aircraft including U/Ls which have taught me a lot. Teaching pilots is a great career with a lot of responsibility and challenges and you learn a lot about planes (and people) doing it. Far more than if you just fly yourself in a familiar plane and stick within your own boundaries. Horses for courses though. Not everyone has the patience and motivation or wish to do it. and that's fair enough too. Nev

 

 

[Nightmare]

I'm happy with my LSA55. She is my first aircraft. She cruises at 95-100kts with fuel burning at 12-15L/hr, 65L tank. Maintenance costs are not bad. She handles and lands well and looks great. I like to take passengers up so I struggle a bit in that department, with a usable weight of only 181kg. My passengers have to weigh 55kg or less or I have to start going with less fuel. But 3.5hrs of endurance at 100kts, I can do some serious touring with that, single seater with 55kg of baggage . I only just purchased it a few months ago, so many of my adventures are still in the future, but so far, so good.

 

Prior to purchasing my plane, I was a bit dubious about the Jab engines, but I have grown to love and respect it. Like with any engine, you have to look after it and treat it how it is supposed to be treated, and it will repay the favour.

 

Tony

 

 

[M61A1]

I love my Drifter, and never want to let it go, but, after a short stint in an Extra 300, I would love something similar. The Drifter is a hell of a lot of fun, but despite feeling sick in the Extra after about 15 minutes, I walked away with a huge smile and wanting something that powerful and crisp to fly. Probably not going to happen on my budget.

 

A friend mine once said, it wouldn't matter what sort of aircraft you had, you'd have to have a Drifter.

 

 

[cscotthendry]

Anyone who has been on these forums for more than a week, would know what I think of my Legend.

 

 

Here's why I love it: (not in order of preference)

 

1) Composite structure means no corrosion and a glassy smooth appearance. Strong carbon fibre, with KEVLAR lined cabin.

 

2) The cabin is wider than a 182.

 

3) I can carry a pax, full fuel (120L) and ample luggage (depending on pax weight) BEW 313Kg, MTOW 600Kg, Plenty of luggage room

 

4) Cruises at genuine 110Kt at 17-18 L/Hr.

 

5) Looks like what I think a private airplane should look like (Cessna 100 series)

 

6) High wing is great for sightseeing and photography.

 

7) Predictable, stable, no vices flying characteristics (I'm a not-so-great pilot)

 

8) Very comfortable seats for long distance flying. Seats are quickly adjustable (like car seats) and as quickly removable for access to the luggage space. Also nice creature comforts like armrests in the doors and a center console storage box, and side pockets in the doors with drink bottle holders.

 

9) Rotax powered reliability.

 

We purchased this plane for touring and we have done a few long(ish) trips in it. It ticks all my boxes.

 

 

[Yenn]

It's funny that nobody so far has come up with a cessna or Piper being the preferred aircraft. I wonder why, there must be a large number of pilots including me who started on them. Would it be because they feel as if they are not responding to the pilots inputs?

 

Never flown a drifter, now that is an admission of omission.

 

 

[rgmwa]

It's funny that nobody so far has come up with a cessna or Piper being the preferred aircraft. I wonder why, there must be a large number of pilots including me who started on them. Would it be because they feel as if they are not responding to the pilots inputs?

I learned to fly on Cessna's. Nothing wrong with them, but the RV12 is far more responsive and a bit faster than the typical hire Cessna, plus much cheaper to operate.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[SDQDI]

This photo shows why I love my hornet. A proper utility aircraft that doesn't need treating like a prim and proper lady, one that can handle being dirty and getting 'used'. It suits my flying style perfectly allowing me to do what I want to do (fly in and out of paddocks).

 

I agree with what capt Wally said earlier though that we need a few planes to cover a few different performance envelopes, there are times I would love a 4 seat faster aircraft to take the whole family for a weekend away but truth be told 90% of my flying would still be in the hornet.

 

 

 

[ClintonB]

That's not a plane that's a farm ute!!

But what a beaut ute it is.

 

 

[cooperplace]

very happy with the LSA/55 jab

 

 

[pmccarthy]

My Piper Archer ticks the boxes for me at present. The navigator likes to take lots of luggage and bring home boxes of wine. Sometimes we take a friend or two. The 180 burns 37 lph at 110-115 knots. Easy to handle and land. Has a Mogas STC so fuel cost is ok. The difference in price between selling my LSA and buying the Archer will keep it flying for 8-10 years at 50 hours per year. But then it is due for a new engine and prop, so that will be decision time, assuming my Class 2 survives that long.

 

In the last year it has taken us from near Melbourne to central and northern NSW four times, and to Flinders Island as well as lots of local day trips. The main reason for choosing an Archer is that the wing is in the right place and that most of my flying has been done in them.

 

I did enjoy the Drifter but the navigator refused to go up a second time, 25 years ago. She flies to go somewhere, not to look around!

 

 

[alf jessup]

Yep sure does

 

P2002 Tecnam Sierra

 

100kts cruise on 14lph, 6 hrs range & good payload

 

People used to say after I finished trike flying that 100kts won't be enough and I'd be looking for more

 

Well after 8 years triking at 60 kts and the last 4 1/2 years at 100, 100 is plenty enough for me as I'm 40 minutes ahead every hour in front of the trike

 

 

[Geoff13]

60 knots compared to 100 knots, how do you get 40 minutes per hour? That is amazing?

 

 

[Nightmare]

How do you get 14 lph at a 100kts? That's amazing!

I'm getting 13-14L/hr at 100kt with my LSA55

[alf jessup]

How do you get 14 lph at a 100kts? That's amazing!

At 4800 rpm it averages 13.3lph between 95 & 100kts and that is not from the fuel flow meter reading either, that is from full back to full over a sortie af a couple of hrs which includes taxi, climb, cruise ect

The Sierra is a little bit more slippery and faster than some of the high wing Tecnams

 

 

[alf jessup]

60 knots compared to 100 knots, how do you get 40 minutes per hour? That is amazing?

Geoff

 

Probably not worded from me quite right

 

Trike did one knot a minute so 60nm in1 hour

 

Sierra does 100nm in one hour so it would take me 40 minutes longer in the trike to achieve the same distance

 

But I'm guessing you knew what I meant

 

It's not rocket science

 

 

[SDQDI]

Gee I didn't realise they where so slippery! Cheap to run that's for sure!

You should check out a bristel.

One of our locals gets better than 120knots at 13-14lph

 

 

[alf jessup]

Yeah I read a bit about them, these machines are getting very flash indeed, flash price too -:)

Capt Wally

Bristell is cheaper to buy than a new Sierra

 

They are good value for money that is for sure as is the Sling 2 seater

 

 

[facthunter]

Just over 110 knots is a good speed. Going faster you hit bumps harder, and they get a bit slippery to drop in on a grass paddock somewhere. At 80 knots, or less, some days you just don't go if the headwind is too great. Nev

 

 

[rhtrudder]

At this cruise ,sabre is burning 23lts, don't think it ever drops much below 20lts , still cheap way of getting around, intercooled 914

[rhtrudder]

Had some work done on the wings by a lame before I bought it , first owner apparently over stressed the skins doing aeros , smooth air flying at these speeds ,

 

 

[Yenn]

There is a Bristel at Old Station, looks nice, but I didn't get a chance to talk to the owner. Are the related to the Piper Sport?

 

Alf. 1 knots per minute is not 60 Knots it is just a mares nest of notted up rope. A knot is either something you make with rope or string or 1 nautical mile per hour. I suppose 1 knot per minute could be an acceleration rate also.