Guest milton56 Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 I'm considering buying a Savannah and was wondering if I could get some feedback from members on this type of aircraft
Guest travis Posted January 27, 2010 Posted January 27, 2010 savannah :thumb_up: I'm considering buying a Savannah and was wondering if I could get some feedback from members on this type of aircraft hi milton , i have red a lot off great things about the savannahs and have also flown one and i think they are a easy to fly and very stable in every way ,a vey strong air craft and would say the strongest nose wheel i have seen . i was seriesly thincing off bying one but chose not to only because a bit slow in the cruise but other than that they get a big tick from me
David F Posted January 28, 2010 Posted January 28, 2010 Savannah Hi Milton I have a Savannah a 100 hp vg model I have done around 150 hours in it and am very happy with my choice.They are easy to fly cruise is not fast at 85 kt but if you get the long range tanks you can go all day and then some.You can get in and out of any strip They have one of the best payloads around with an empty weight of around 275 kg that gives 269 kg . You can fit a decent amount of camping gear on the back shelf.And they have proper wheel bearings decent tyres etc and a Rotax motor !!! To conclude a nice capable aircraft at a reasonable price plus good spare parts back up from Cam in Brisbane. Dave
Yenn Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 Travis must have put in a good plug. Milton has built a Savannah and I think he will be learning to fly in it soon.
gregrobertson Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 Hi Milton. Do yourself a favour and have a look at a Skyranger Swift. Similar in many ways to the Savannah in that they are high wing with a useful load of about 270 KGs with a Rotax 912 engine. A very easy aircraft to fly, very good short field performance and a little faster than the Savannah in the cruise. Mine cruises at just over 90 kts at 5000 rpm and at 97 kts at 5250 rpm. In Europe they have won the world ultralight championship something like 6 times in the last 10 years and there are good reasons why. Regards Greg
GraemeK Posted January 29, 2010 Posted January 29, 2010 Given Milton's post was from 2007, and he now lists his ride as a Savannah, I reckon all this discussion is pretty academic now
Guest travis Posted February 11, 2010 Posted February 11, 2010 lol hope we observe our aircrafts better than we do the dates on these posts . well done graemek
Johno rv8 Posted November 3, 2010 Posted November 3, 2010 Hi Milton.Do yourself a favour and have a look at a Skyranger Swift. Similar in many ways to the Savannah in that they are high wing with a useful load of about 270 KGs with a Rotax 912 engine. A very easy aircraft to fly, very good short field performance and a little faster than the Savannah in the cruise. Mine cruises at just over 90 kts at 5000 rpm and at 97 kts at 5250 rpm. In Europe they have won the world ultralight championship something like 6 times in the last 10 years and there are good reasons why. Regards Greg The Skyranger I flew had a great deal of adverse yaw not nice. The
gregrobertson Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 Hi Johno. All light aircraft are effected to some degree with adverse yaw, most GA light aircraft have an inter conection between the ailerons and rudder to reduce this. However a Skyranger with lots of adverse yaw will have the ailerons set too low, if they are raised a little it makes a marked difference. Regards Greg
Yenn Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 Sad news. While I was away interstate last month I got an email about Milton's funeral, no other info until I got home. He died of a heart attack while driving, managed to park but died on the spot. He was just getting into his flying training. Another good bloke gone and a bit too young, I think the 56 in his avatar would have been his berth year.
Johno rv8 Posted November 5, 2010 Posted November 5, 2010 Greg. Thanks for the info on the ailerons, I will pass it on to the two guy's on the field with Skyrangers.
Guest Crezzi Posted November 5, 2010 Posted November 5, 2010 In Europe they have won the world ultralight championship something like 6 times in the last 10 years and there are good reasons why. I'm not knocking the Skyranger but I reckon the biggest reason is called Paul Dewhurst Cheers John
gregrobertson Posted November 5, 2010 Posted November 5, 2010 I wouldn't disagree with you John, Paul is an exceptional pilot but he chose the Skyranger to compete in. There are over 1200 flying all over the world, they are the most numerous ultra light on the British register by far. Very sad news about Milton that's way too young. Regards Greg
Johno rv8 Posted November 5, 2010 Posted November 5, 2010 Paul Dewhurst did the flight testing on the Skyranger I flew, so I guess the aileron set up is correct. In that case he must be EXCEPTIONAL to win the world championships as the Savannah is a much nicer aircraft to fly in my opinion. That said the Savannah had to have several modifications to its flight controls to be certified in the UK. Regards Johno.
David F Posted November 5, 2010 Posted November 5, 2010 UK Flying Flying anything in the UK is a different deal to here.For a start the weight limit is 450 kg This explains the abundance of trikes and somewhat limits the potential of three axis aircraft (if you want to fly two up that is) and no doubt there would be some little Hitler in a peaked cap waiting to pounce on anyone who strayed over the limit.Add to that prolonged periods of crap weather airspace everywhere and you realise how well off we are here. Dave
eightyknots Posted November 6, 2010 Posted November 6, 2010 That said the Savannah had to have several modifications to its flight controls to be certified in the UK.Regards Johno. What sorts of flight control modifications do the Brits insist upon, I wonder?
Guest Crezzi Posted November 6, 2010 Posted November 6, 2010 Flying anything in the UK is a different deal to here.For a start the weight limit is 450 kg Very true - not many types have been big sellers in both countries. Thrusters are an exception - having been manufactured in both countries helps. Two of the most numerous type on the UK register are the Shadow (not many made it to Aus) and, more recently, the Ikarus C-42 (only ever seen one in Aus & that was foreign registered & dismantled in a hangar. no doubt there would be some little Hitler in a peaked cap waiting to pounce on anyone who strayed over the limit. Surprisingly not - the internet & the equivalent to the RAAus mag still seem to have stories of two blokes and all the camping gear touring around on flights that would have been most unlikely with legal fuel loads ! Cheers John
Johno rv8 Posted December 7, 2010 Posted December 7, 2010 What sorts of flight control modifications do the Brits insist upon, I wonder? This is part of a flight test article in the BMAA magazine. At the core of the problem was longitudinal stability. Broadly speaking, it’s regarded as a good thing if the more you pull (or push) the stick from the trim position, (a) the faster (or slower) the aircraft goes, and (b) the larger the forces are. The Savannah was fine at doing the first, but there weren’t enough centring forces, and a low-hours pilot could accidentally apply lots of up or down stick without realising it. BMAA test pilot Tim Cripps spent a long time getting the figures for all this, and helping to devise a simple get-around that didn’t involve too much modification. The simple fix may not look too elegant, but it works and, since it involves a length of bungee and a jamming cleat, Thruster owners will feel right at home! Anyway, finally the modifications were sorted out, so now we can go and fly
eightyknots Posted December 8, 2010 Posted December 8, 2010 Are SAV Mods solely mandated in the UK or OZ too? This is part of a flight test article in the BMAA magazine.At the core of the problem was longitudinal stability. Broadly speaking, it’s regarded as a good thing if the more you pull (or push) the stick from the trim position, (a) the faster (or slower) the aircraft goes, and (b) the larger the forces are. The Savannah was fine at doing the first, but there weren’t enough centring forces, and a low-hours pilot could accidentally apply lots of up or down stick without realising it. BMAA test pilot Tim Cripps spent a long time getting the figures for all this, and helping to devise a simple get-around that didn’t involve too much modification. The simple fix may not look too elegant, but it works and, since it involves a length of bungee and a jamming cleat, Thruster owners will feel right at home! Anyway, finally the modifications were sorted out, so now we can go and fly I wonder if these modifications are imposed just by the British Civil Aviation authorities only or if they are mandated by Civil Aviation "departments" world - wide? Does anyone know the position of these Sav mods in Australia?
Guest Crezzi Posted December 8, 2010 Posted December 8, 2010 I wonder if these modifications are imposed just bythe British Civil Aviation authorities only or if they are mandated by Civil Aviation "departments" world - wide? Does anyone know the position of these Sav mods in Australia? If the Savannah was accepted here on the basis of it meeting Section-S design standard then I imagine the mods would be required. If it was accepted here on the basis of meeting a different design standard (which is more likely) than the mods wouldn't necessarily be required. Doubtless Steve Bell will be able to give you the answer. BCAR Section-S is pretty strict on things like control forces & stability - a number of types have required modifications to be approved (including Jabiru IIRC) Cheers John
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now