Jump to content
  • Welcome to Recreational Flying!
    A compelling community experience for all aviators
    Intuitive, Social, Engaging...Registration is FREE.
    Register Log in
Sign in to follow this  
Tomo

Cessna SkyCatcher

Recommended Posts

Guest basscheffers

It's an LSA, so if you order it, it will make it here. :)

 

I don't find it impressive at all; 157KG full-fuel payload!? That's just makes it useless for me... Next!

 

Still, they somehow managed over 1000 orders. I wonder how many will be operated above MTOW regularly.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going to be interesting to see how operating costs stack up against the Rotax powered opposition, particularly for school aircraft. The US price of AUD+-130K doesn't look too bad compared to the opposition from Tecnam etc either.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest basscheffers
I think they have built it with a weight increase in mind.

Is there even talk about that in the US?

 

I would be very surprised if they airframe really is strong enough only for 600kgs. But I have heard no reports of a plan to market a higher MTOW GA version.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a push in the US to lift the LSA rate to 650kg which I am willing to bet was started by Cessna because of their Skycatcher.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is a push in the US to lift the LSA rate to 650kg which I am willing to bet was started by Cessna because of their Skycatcher.

I wouldnt be surprised either IAN, i reckon they would be able to have a big influence.:big_grin:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read Cessna claims it saves $71,000.00 PER aircraft by building them in China?

 

"On 27 November 2007, Cessna announced the new Cessna 162 would be made in the People's Republic of China by Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, which is a subsidiary of China Aviation Industry Corporation I (AVIC I), a Chinese government-owned consortium of aircraft manufacturers.[10] By manufacturing the aircraft in China, Cessna reports it saved USD$71,000 in production costs per aircraft, or about 40% of the cost."

 

I wonder if they have 'Workchoices' in China?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest basscheffers
There is a push in the US to lift the LSA rate to 650kg which I am willing to bet was started by Cessna because of their Skycatcher.

But would CASA immediately allow 650KG LSAs if the US goes to that standard?

 

With a 200+KG full-fuel load, this would be a great aircraft at a good price.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I reckon you are right, as Nev suggested.

Note the C150 is not on their single engine comparison list. I reckon the Skycatcher is designed to replace the C150 and at that price it will. I reckon we will know soon enough.

 

David

Cessna 150 production ceased in 1977 and the 152 in 1985.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What can i say, a great american aircraft made in china.(airframe wise)Apparently their pretty good with a/c manufacture.Time will tell i guess.ALot of things are built to a cost though. Workchoices, yes they have that, it just depends on how many bowls of rice you can eat in a week HA HA.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest basscheffers

Everything else is manufactured there these days, so why not aircraft?

 

A friend who visited Australia wondered why we have "Manchester" departments. Well, because all linen is made in Manchester of course! His response? "Should't all departments be renamed "China" then?"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be honest but not a great sales pitch to put in the detailed description that the doors fall off!!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Detailed Description

 

I took possion of this airplane in October and we have put 80 hours on it. We have had two door open incidents and the last one the door departed the aircraft and landed in a school yard near some kids playing basket ball. A new door is ordered and I beleive that Cessna will provide an improvement on how the door is attached to the airframe so this will not happen again. I have attached a few photos of the door after it was recorvered. My wife insisted that we upgrade to a reliable late model 172, 2006 or newer

 

Oh that is strange... So much for made in China lol

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got hold of the flight manual and checked the actual empty weight (inc engine oil etc) of a 162 recently - significantly higher than the brochure empty weight so nowhere near brochure useful load. Of course, anytime some-one buys a new airplane and orders options the final weight should always be confirmed - it is not just Cessna where the marketing department massages the numbers. i.e. I don't doubt that a 162 could be had at the brochure weight - don't order any options (not sure if paint is an option).

 

Later that day I stopped to look at one of its competitors - my request to look at the flight manual to check the empty weight was declined.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately CASA cancelled my medical last week so ruined all my plans for this weekend - I had the Pitts lined up to go there for a bit. Misunderstanding hope to be certified again shortly. Hope to catch up with you at a future event. Watts Bridge in June is the next opportunity if a RAA type event up near that way.

 

As for the other aeroplane - he pointed me to the placard on the panel for empty weight but I wanted to see the bit of signed paper. Speaking to some-one else some time later - the flight manual also not prominent to say the least. Unfortunately it is common for people to laod aeroplanes up with options so much heavier than the brochure - apart from some manufacturers with optimistic brochures.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to be common that CASA don't let people fly due to medical problems, when their reasoning is doubtful.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They take a cautious approach. There would be no point in sticking their neck out for one person. Having said that, If you think you are OK put up a good case if you are sure of your grounds. Doctors have no interest in a good outcome for you also, but really they only have to say that you meet the standard. Nev

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rearly gets me mad that real figures do not often appear regarding weights, range, fuel usage and all the other things people should know prior to considering aircraft. As a dealer I have noted real as against design numbers in my web site's technical data whenever I find it out.

 

Will not name them but two Rotax 912 ULS aircraft claim

 

1. Range at 4000rpm...for a LSA! (?would it stay in the air?)

 

2. Cruise at 110kt for strut braced high wing with wire braced tail! (?in a dive?)...and I think the standard engine is a 912UL (80hp)!

 

Probably costs me sales as the number of times "lookers" have been informed of other aircraft's better speed etc and want more than what mine will give...pity the only time it's obtained with a number of other aircraft is in the sales brochure!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later for your post to be seen If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...