Choice of aircraft - straw poll

[ave8rr]

What A/C have 16 thou skins? Perhaps the Eropean LSAs to get into their lower weight category. Maybe an elevator, rudder or ailerons but not the wings or fuselage I'd have thought. Mine is 25 thou & thinest bits 20 thou & it feels solid.

Zenair 601 (HD)(HDS) / 701.

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

Hmmm. Now You ask about the compute lightning with a jabiru engine ... so at least two of your must not haves are really no so must not.

 

How about specifying the performance minimum limits and then ask for any suggestions that can meet that?

Hi @kasper

I did that, and the materials. Now we broaden the search and throw in other options. Otherwise from the get go it would have been an open slather free for all. (and J's would have been the default option, we know enough about them)

 

cheers

R

[rrogerramjet]

I think you should look at all those Jabiru's treated like a work tool and always out and about. Lots have spent a lot of their 15-20 years out in the beautiful Sunshine's rays. Are frosted on, shat on by birds, peed on by work dogs, and hailed on sometimes.

And a clean of the screen, plus washing off of large bird or flying fox poo, preflight is all that's needed.

 

They are one tough bird and always weapon of choice for crash ability. You have to really try to kill yourself in one. And that is proven worldwide.

 

With the exception of the wonderful locally built Ferris wheel fighter, A tin plane is far less forgiving of crashes unless really special, like another Aussie the Hornet.

 

A metal aircraft can be a write off from just a hail storm, and it sure hates bird poo.

Thanks @Litespeed

Fair points.

Im avtually very interested in the 'Ferris wheel fighter' though ongoing spares in 10 or more years might be an issue.

8542? is for sale now. Looks nice.

Yes the J motor argument is completely thrown out the window, but I hear good longevity and reliability stories about the 3300 with the hydraulic lifters. As others have pointed out, in longitudinal statistical measures (for these motors especially) it is not an issue.

 

cheers

R

[skippydiesel]

Sounds like a nice plane, however the tin spec comes from mine, and I assume everyones, lifelong experiences with glass is that it weathers, crumbles and eventually comes apart.A tin plane with appropriate maintenance and repainting will, in theory, last forever.

The Australian climate will crumble a glass plane to flaky pieces in about 10-15 yrs, if my experience is accurate.

 

Just my estimations of course and I'd be most interested to hear from glass plane owners who can honestly say they've left their plane out in Aus weather and have no issues many years later.

 

cheers

 

R

Wherever did you get that bit of "Fake News" - I fly an 18 year old composite, with 850 Hobb hrs, correctly painted with UV protective paint and hangared. Its in near perfect condition - barring an accident it will outlive its current/origional engine and probably your fatigue & corrosion prone aluminium job.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Wherever did you get that bit of "Fake News" - I fly an 18 year old composite,

Depends what you have seen I guess, I have in the past gotten 1960s/1970s race cars, specials and Manx type beach buggys, often left outside for many years to find stuffed gelcoat and swelling, crumbling or powdering.

 

Not saying any plane looked after will end up the same, just explaining where the mindset comes from for me in regards to old fiberglass.

 

.Im actually very interested in the 'Ferris wheel fighter' though ongoing spares in 10 or more years might be an issue.

Absolutely not, there is nothing that can't mostly be replicated on a flat bench at home using stock aluminium sizes, including the wings, some minor steel parts from any local light engineering shop, and about the hardest bit would be getting a new canopy blown.

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

Wherever did you get that bit of "Fake News" - I fly an 18 year old composite, with 850 Hobb hrs, correctly painted with UV protective paint and hangared. Its in near perfect condition - barring an accident it will outlive its current/origional engine and probably your fatigue & corrosion prone aluminium job.

'hangared' - what about outside.?

Not fake news, gelcoat has a finite lifespan and is very prone to UV breakdown, which you implicitly admit in your post.

 

cheers

 

R

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

Absolutely not, there is nothing that can't mostly be replicated on a flat bench at home using stock aluminium sizes, including the wings, some minor steel parts from any local light engineering shop, and about the hardest bit would be getting a new canopy blown.

Thats encouraging to know. Im not a machine shop kind of guy, but if anyone can do it then I might have half a chance too!

 

If Im blowing a new canopy, I think I might have bigger issues :-)

 

cheers

 

Ramjet

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

Thanks @Litespeed

Fair points.

Im avtually very interested in the 'Ferris wheel fighter' though ongoing spares in 10 or more years might be an issue.

8542? is for sale now. Looks nice.

Yes the J motor argument is completely thrown out the window, but I hear good longevity and reliability stories about the 3300 with the hydraulic lifters. As others have pointed out, in longitudinal statistical measures (for these motors especially) it is not an issue.

 

cheers

R

I think I meant the solid lifters..

Friday night beers and forum posts dont mix..

[skippydiesel]

"Depends what you have seen I guess, I have in the past gotten 1960s/1970s race cars, specials and Manx type beach buggys, often left outside for many years to find stuffed gelcoat and swelling, crumbling or powdering."

 

Well there you go 1960-70's - we now know a fair bit more now about preserving composite structures. My local flying establishment favours Jabarus (????) many of which spend most of their working lives outside. The gloss may have gone off their "paint" but I have yet to see any deterioration in the airframes

 

"'hangared' - what about outside.?"

 

All aircraft suffer, no matter the structural composition, from being left out in the weather.

 

"Not fake news, gelcoat has a finite lifespan and is very prone to UV breakdown, which you implicitly admit in your post."

 

Can't comment on your gelcoat observation/statement, other than to refer you to my comment above and to say my composit is painted with certified aircraft paints including a substantial UV protection undercoat.

 

 

[Yenn]

Gelcoat fails it seems, but do aircraft have gelcoat finishes. I thought that the fibreglass was laid and finishing involved sanding and painting. That is what happened with the glass parts of my planes and the Corby is over 15 years old, but always hangared.

 

 

[revgazza]

Mate.

 

I reckon you want a Morgan Cougar.

 

Ticks all your boxes and is a strong and fun aircraft to fly. Not as twitchy as an RV. Easy I reckon for both novice pilots and crusty old bush pilots like me cause it does what its told. Mine is VH registered. Garry Morgan designed mine 4" wider than normal (for comfort over long trips), so I lost a bit in parasitic drag, but they will do as advertised.

 

Morgan Aeroworks - Single Seat Aircraft

 

 

[Harry.smithard]

Why? These engines had a bad rap from a few vocal people mainly due to overheating and poor maintenance routines. Unfortunately they had allies within CASA and the limitations debacle ensued. The whole thing was a crock. Their 46 engine failures ended up as 6 & in that year Jab engines had fewer failures than Rotax. There have been problems but also resolutions. All engines fail because they are man made & therefore not perfect. Your choice but base it on fact not emotion. Head over heart.

I totally agree i have owned 9 different aircraft and i have had no more engine issues in my jab than anything else ive owned in fact i have had no issues at all. Follow the maintenance schedule use recommended fuel (avgas) and ru n within limits and the jabiru engine will not let you down

 

 

[planesmaker]

I'm very happy with my J aircraft with a R engine:) 115kts @ 17lt/hr 700kg MTOW

 

Ps my fibreglass boat is nearly 50 yrs old and definitely is not crumbling!

 

 

[BirdDog]

Havent read the entire thread, but have you considered one of the new Evektors? The Harmony or the like?

 

 

[skippydiesel]

Just remember - the aircraft sales industry is full of "pigs ears" and those who have bought the same, are often convinced they have a "silk purse".

 

The only real performance figures, are those you can verify for yourself or that have been determined by a disinterested third part (the latter usually being the most reliable).

 

As a rough guide:

 

Check if the fuel consumption at a given airspeed makes sense.

 

Are the stall figures at max permissible take of weight (same for take off role, take off distance to 50 ft, max climb and max level cruise speed).

 

Indicated air speeds should also include engine rpm (& if IFA prop, manifold pressure)

 

Be very careful of claims where a range of engines & hp are permissible (which engine was used for each performance claim).

 

Health scepticism will serve you well, when judging/comparing the claimed merits of each aircraft.

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

Mate.I reckon you want a Morgan Cougar.

Ticks all your boxes and is a strong and fun aircraft to fly. Not as twitchy as an RV. Easy I reckon for both novice pilots and crusty old bush pilots like me cause it does what its told. Mine is VH registered. Garry Morgan designed mine 4" wider than normal (for comfort over long trips), so I lost a bit in parasitic drag, but they will do as advertised.

 

Morgan Aeroworks - Single Seat Aircraft

I am partial, partly because a friend has a Cheetah and absolutely raves about its performance. Bit concerned/confused about specs that have a cruise 130kts but Va90.

You're an awful long way North for me to have a look. I might have to take a trip to Camden.

 

So I've got steel options:

 

Vans Rv9

 

Carbon Cub (pretty sure can't afford one)

 

Morgan Cougar/Sierra

 

Alpi Pioneer 300 and 330 Hawk series. Really stable, fast and great to fly.

Nice, but I probably can't afford one of them either. :-(

Tecnam always an option, they seem to be pricey even as 2nd hand. And most models not so fast, close to 120kt is good enough though.

 

And someone mentioned the Evektor Harmony/Sportstar. I've not ever seen one 2nd hand in Oz.

 

Zenith 750Cruzer just fits the bill, have to check on the woofing luggage capability.

 

So, if $$ were absolutely no issue, I'd probably be up the road next weekend looking at someone's brand new Cub EX in Jindabyne.

 

Definitely going to have a chat to Jaytol and see if a Cougar fits. Might even buy one fresh off the blocks if the final price can be made to fit. (Probably, sans motor, wings and panel! LOL!)

 

Thanks for all the views on fibreglass, I'll agree things have moved on technically since we used to layup our own canoes.

 

Still, I've seen some seriously failed glass that's barely 15-20yrs old, one of them being my Hilux canopy and others in the marine realm. Again I'm basing my views my personal experience, - that I have seen with my own eyes.

 

Still need to finish those sums on TCO, I might depressingly find that a 60k 1975 C172 is my best option averaging 150-200hrs/annum. How do I undo that logical boredom to the miss when I'm showing sexy pictures of a beautiful, go anywhere Cub !

 

So much still to consider, could take me a few more months yet. Which I find amusing when people spend 1mill on a house after a 30min walk through and, if lucky, a building and pest inspection. Crazy I say, as they say the same thing straight back about us in our planes!

 

Fly safe,

 

Cheers

 

Ramjet

 

 

[skippydiesel]

I am partial, partly because a friend has a Cheetah and absolutely raves about its performance. Bit concerned/confused about specs that have a cruise 130kts but Va90.You're an awful long way North for me to have a look. I might have to take a trip to Camden.

So I've got steel options:

 

Vans Rv9

 

Carbon Cub (pretty sure can't afford one)

 

Morgan Cougar/Sierra

 

Nice, but I probably can't afford one of them either. :-(

 

Tecnam always an option, they seem to be pricey even as 2nd hand. And most models not so fast, close to 120kt is good enough though.

 

And someone mentioned the Evektor Harmony/Sportstar. I've not ever seen one 2nd hand in Oz.

 

Zenith 750Cruzer just fits the bill, have to check on the woofing luggage capability.

 

So, if $$ were absolutely no issue, I'd probably be up the road next weekend looking at someone's brand new Cub EX in Jindabyne.

 

Definitely going to have a chat to Jaytol and see if a Cougar fits. Might even buy one fresh off the blocks if the final price can be made to fit. (Probably, sans motor, wings and panel! LOL!)

 

Thanks for all the views on fibreglass, I'll agree things have moved on technically since we used to layup our own canoes.

 

Still, I've seen some seriously failed glass that's barely 15-20yrs old, one of them being my Hilux canopy and others in the marine realm. Again I'm basing my views my personal experience, - that I have seen with my own eyes.

 

Still need to finish those sums on TCO, I might depressingly find that a 60k 1975 C172 is my best option averaging 150-200hrs/annum. How do I undo that logical boredom to the miss when I'm showing sexy pictures of a beautiful, go anywhere Cub !

 

So much still to consider, could take me a few more months yet. Which I find amusing when people spend 1mill on a house after a 30min walk through and, if lucky, a building and pest inspection. Crazy I say, as they say the same thing straight back about us in our planes!

 

Fly safe,

 

Cheers

 

Ramjet

No offence intended Ramjet but the aircraft you have mentioned (on your shortlist) make performance claims which a very much in the "pig's ear"category - not suggesting for a moment that they are not good aircraft just that the marketing of them is somewhat "creative".

 

I doubt that I will change your entrenched view regarding composites but find I must comment on your choice of examples, on which you base that opinion - comparing a correctly made and UV protected composite aircraft fuselage with a Hilux canopy (probably made in some dodgy facility in Indonesia) just seems totaly illogical. Vague references to the "marine realm" are just as bad without knowing how the structure was manufactured, what protective treatments it received and what other damaging substances it may have been exposed to.

 

Good luck with your "spam cans" - I hope you have deep pockets for the ongoing maintenance costs that are likely to come with your slow noisy hungry baby.

 

Nothing wrong with metal aircraft. Times & technology change. Better materials are developed making aircraft much more efficient. There will always be those who hanker after a bygone era - I love the look of an early 1950's diesel mercedes car or a Vincent Black Shadow - strange I know but I would never suggest for a moment that they are better than a current diesel mercedes or current Honda.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

No offence intended Ramjet but the aircraft you have mentioned (on your shortlist) make performance claims which a very much in the "pig's ear"category - not suggesting for a moment that they are not good aircraft just that the marketing of them is somewhat "creative"..

The Morgan is of reasonable weight, has a small efficient tapered wing with large flaps, flat bottom, there's plenty of them out there, they are based on the KR2 also with proven history/flight characteristics, and Morgan owners seem more than happy.

 

What's your experience exactly? Can you support your disputing claim to the manufacturer's with some facts?

 

Everyone should always be on their toes with manufacturer's claims, but when you call them out you need to back up your claims also.

 

Nothing wrong with metal aircraft. Times & technology change. Better materials are developed making aircraft much more efficient.

Carbon Fiber is certainly the most efficient, at a large cost though, but fiberglass isn't.

 

Wood is still 2nd only to CF (and even then balsa wood is still the strongest laminate for composites), and aluminium is still a better weight to strength offering than fiberglass, as is rag/tube.

 

There's good reason the big 3 kit planes, Vans, Zenith and Sonex, choose aluminium. Lets not even mention Cessna.

 

 

[turboplanner]

The Australian climate will crumble a glass plane to flaky pieces in about 10-15 yrs, if my experience is accurate.

Depends on the resin used. That’s common for most boats but there are plenty of fibreglass refrigerated van bodies around that are over 50 years old and they’ve been subjected to fluctuating temperatures, flexing and constant vibration. A lot of monococque.aluminium and steel tube/ aluminium aircraft have corroded in that time.

 

 

[facthunter]

Aluminium alloy sheet is subject to corrosion in the laps and fatigue. That type of construction isn't everlasting. No plane should be left out all the time.

 

If there's an easier flying object to look after than a Jabiru airframe I don't know of it.. I'd like better feel in the controls., perhaps but it wouldn't be bad enough to stop me enjoying the good side of it's durability and toughness. Nev.

 

 

[skippydiesel]

The Morgan is of reasonable weight, has a small efficient tapered wing with large flaps, flat bottom, there's plenty of them out there, they are based on the KR2 also with proven history/flight characteristics, and Morgan owners seem more than happy.What's your experience exactly? Can you support your disputing claim to the manufacturer's with some facts?

 

Everyone should always be on their toes with manufacturer's claims, but when you call them out you need to back up your claims also.

 

Its called healthy scepticism backed by logical observation -

 

I fly behind a Rotax 912 ULS, its fuel consumption at a given power/rpm setting is well documented.

 

My aircraft weighs in at 300 kg empty and has a max TO weight of 540 kg.

 

I have a repeatabe take off role of 100m on short dry grass (including a small uphill component) at max TO weight.

 

She can cruise at 50 - 120 knots indicated, between 500 - 9500 ft. Normal econo cruise 4800-5000 rpm gives 100 - 105 + knots for a fuel burn of sub 13L/hr (98 RON). Ground adjustable prop, pitched for climb advantage due to marginal home paddock.

 

Max climb out at 5200 pm is an easy 1000 ft/min plus.

 

I also take on board the third party verified performance figures of aircraft that have won or hold titles in their class for outstanding performance eg Robin Austin's Soneri VH-SGS

 

 

I compare my real world figures and those of the above, with the performance claims of the, granted, very sexy alternatives out there - more often than not they just dont make sense/add up.

 

Carbon Fiber is certainly the most efficient, at a large cost though, but fiberglass isn't.

 

I agree with the general thrust of this statement but not with "at a large cost" Just because some of the well known/high end composites are very expensive does not mean that less well known offerings with comparable (often better) performance can not be had at many thousands of dollars less.

 

Wood is still 2nd only to CF (and even then balsa wood is still the strongest laminate for composites), and aluminium is still a better weight to strength offering than fiberglass, as is rag/tube.

 

Agreed - wood is still used in many airframes - now often epoxy impregnated - Hard to beat. Check out some of the composit offerings they may just have a wood main spare.

 

There's good reason the big 3 kit planes, Vans, Zenith and Sonex, choose aluminium. Lets not even mention Cessna.

There is definitely a reason or two it's called AMERICAN CONSERVATISM.

 

PLUS

 

It's much easier to offer a kit in prepunched/shaped/formed metal than in most other materials.

 

 

 

Cessna has a full composite model, as does Mooney (x2) Let's not forget Boing - now increasingly moving to composites

 

 

 

Europe seems less wedded to aluminium, when was the last time you saw a competitive aluminium glider??

 

 

 

It's not that I am against aluminium alloys as such. They have their place (increasingly smaller) It's more that I get twitchy when people "dump" on composite without real facts to back their legitimate gut feelings.

 

 

[Litespeed]

Lets not also forget the Jabiru has over 3000 aircraft flying and many were kit built.

 

Besides the conservative thing, the metal kits suit the flat pack cargo cult of America. No comparison to Cessna is relevant at all, inferiors products at huge expense and are only GA.

 

 

[skippydiesel]

Lets not also forget the Jabiru has over 3000 aircraft flying and many were kit built.Besides the conservative thing, the metal kits suit the flat pack cargo cult of America. No comparison to Cessna is relevant at all, inferiors products at huge expense and are only GA.

A man after my own heart!

 

I really dont know how a Jabiru is built from a kit. I suspect it comes as an "advanced" kit - big bits you finish and fit/plug together. Completely different to the Ikea type you alluded to.

 

I trained in Cessnas, so have a deep abiding fondness for them (particularly the older straight tail versions) but nostalgia aside I think they have "had their day". Don't know about the current 172's but the ones I trained in used about 32L/hr Avgas and may just have made it to 120 knots on a nice cool day with one up. That they are still making/selling them is a testament to conservatism, liability/certification cost concerns and shear US market dominance of the small aircraft industry.

 

 

[Litespeed]

The Jabbawocky is a kit, just a extremely advanced one that requires little time and also a lot cheaper than many others. But yes it requires a big box.

 

I will find a pic

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

No offence intended Ramjet but the aircraft you have mentioned (on your shortlist) make performance claims which a very much in the "pig's ear"category - not suggesting for a moment that they are not good aircraft just that the marketing of them is somewhat "creative".I doubt that I will change your entrenched view regarding composites but find I must comment on your choice of examples, on which you base that opinion - comparing a correctly made and UV protected composite aircraft fuselage with a Hilux canopy (probably made in some dodgy facility in Indonesia) just seems totaly illogical. Vague references to the "marine realm" are just as bad without knowing how the structure was manufactured, what protective treatments it received and what other damaging substances it may have been exposed to.

 

Good luck with your "spam cans" - I hope you have deep pockets for the ongoing maintenance costs that are likely to come with your slow noisy hungry baby.

 

Nothing wrong with metal aircraft. Times & technology change. Better materials are developed making aircraft much more efficient. There will always be those who hanker after a bygone era - I love the look of an early 1950's diesel mercedes car or a Vincent Black Shadow - strange I know but I would never suggest for a moment that they are better than a current diesel mercedes or current Honda.

Who can say no to the opportunity of reply to someone who opens up with 'no offence intended'....

So, with all due respect....

 

Performance claims are a general measuring stick, are you going to tell Rv9 owners their 140+ knots are simply a result of poorly calibrated instruments?

 

That numerous Morgan owners are just liars?

 

I don't have an entrenched view on composites, only my own experience, as I freely admitted.

 

Nor do I think they've been making 'dodgy' Hilux canopies in Indo since the early 90's. Indeed the makers badge on the side is in the shape of Australia. Lets talk about those 'entrenched views' sometime, shall we.

 

For those far too obtuse to see my challenge, it was to draw, real, evidenced comments which attest to the durability of composite craft, rather than biased and unvalidated vox-pop along the lines of "I have one therefore I am smarter than most and all the other materials are a bit crap"....

 

To suggest that metal fabricated craft are from a bygone era is encouragingly forward looking and I applaud your grasp of the future of aircraft. When Boeing launch a full fibreglass passenger jet, I'm right behind them.

 

So other than bag the aircraft options, challenge decades of solid fabrication, and throw 'vague' challenges to my reasoning by claiming them as illogical in return, what is it exactly you bring to advance this conversation in a meaningful way?

 

Best Regards,

 

Ramjet