winsor68 Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 It is so UGLY it's shadow ducks when it is landing! ( might explain the reported landing problems) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest avi8tr Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Fuel 65kg's. Total Payload including pax and fuel is 222kg's. 80+80 + almost full fuel = perfectly legal. Not fantastic but about average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael Coates Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Its not fantastic..... a typical Pipistrel is 305 empty giving 295 payload, a Sting is the same the Sirius is about 285-290 kgs payload, those extra 70 kgs make a big difference when you are my weight ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 When I saw the C162 at Avalon I asked to see the flight manual to get the actual empty weight - that demonstrator had extra equipment which reduced the useful load to where it wasn't going to be very useful. I had a look at the Sportscruiser and asked the same question - the answer was that the empty weight was on a placard in the cabin and the flight manual was not available - my response was that I wanted to see where some-one had signed his name against the actual empty weight. I note that many people quote empty weight without unusable fuel and engine oil etc. A useful load of that 222 kg is just about what I have available in the two seat aeroplanes that I usually fly and, unfortunately, I can't go flying with one of my good friends (another subject is how much weight an aircraft seat is designed to take). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnewbery Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Anyone want to come and get me from Canberra? I'm looking at riding a small motorcycle to Temora and back otherwise. Bah! Its 'only' three hours each way. Last time I arrived in a C182. What a difference that made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bas Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I came up with the moniker after they crashed two prototypes. There are two very simple reasons for its weight problem: the O-200, which weighs 25 kg more than a Rotax, and the standard BRS, adding another 15. That is the 40 extra kg it needs to compete with the Flight Designs, Pipistrels and SportStars of this world. But even with those changes, the finishing would still be as spartan as it is now to save weight. It's not pretty on the inside. And for a laugh, push a finger onto the rear window! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest avi8tr Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 BRS? Didn't see a handle for that feature. Not saying I don't believe you, I just didn't see it and wasn't told about it if it is standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael Coates Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I came up with the moniker after they crashed two prototypes.There are two very simple reasons for its weight problem: the O-200, which weighs 25 kg more than a Rotax, and the standard BRS, adding another 15. That is the 40 extra kg it needs to compete with the Flight Designs, Pipistrels and SportStars of this world. But even with those changes, the finishing would still be as spartan as it is now to save weight. It's not pretty on the inside. And for a laugh, push a finger onto the rear window! Sorry BAS the weights i quoted on our planes were WITH the Ballistic Chute! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bas Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 The Cessna website list figures for "typically equipped" giving useful load as 218 and full-fuel payload as 153. Wow, just wow. For a $150K aircraft too. Even schools will often have to make sure not to completely fill the tanks as it will not fly two actual, real world, average 2012 males. Who are 85 KG each. It doesn't say if that is with or without BRS. (Which isn't standard) If it is without, it is even more mind boggling why it is so heavy, though changing the engine to a Rotax would solve much of the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 It is reasonable to partially fill tanks when all seats are full - allows more flexibility in the operation. The tank could be made smaller so that it can always be filled when used in a training role but that would not allow a higher fuel load for a solo ferry flight - some-one made that decision - fine in my opinion, others may prefer a simple decision to fill the tanks. I recall the fuel trucks at Moorabbin carrying dipsticks for the Cessna 150/152s as they were always partially filled. My Decathlon is only ever loaded with 1/2 fuel unless I am going cross-country solo. My recollection is that the spec empty weight for the 162 does not include the optional BRS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bas Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I do agree with that; in an environment like that, you can do that. But remember it only has 91 Litres to begin with, so planning a 2.5 hour nav with 45 minute reserve allows you to leave out 20 KGs at most. And that is if you get it precisely right and don't err on the side of caution. I predict that many of these will be flying over weight a lot. (Same as those training 152s, to be honest, even at half fuel.) But my main beef is with it being used as a private aircraft. It just doesn't stack up to the competition where you can get the endurance of (even bigger) full tanks (very handy in a country like our with lots of airfields but not a lot of them with fuel) with greater speed at lower fuel burn and still have more than 200 KG usable for people, bags, safety and survival equipment, etc. If I ran a Cessna GA school, I would certainly consider the 162 for circuit and training area operations. But as an RA aircraft, I'd pass on it, both for school and private use. Especially at $150K! (So more like $180K when you get it here and pay shipping and GST?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalman Posted March 20, 2012 Author Share Posted March 20, 2012 apart from getting a bit pricey I can't see a better aircraft than the Tecnams for schools, the Cessnas seem to be in a similar price range but with some operational constraints, which if you were shopping for a trainer I doubt I'd even consider them. Having said that ,if money wasn't the primary concern what are the opinions on which aircraft would make the best all rounder, circuits ,navex, private hire,cruise speed, range, longevity ,operational cost ,parts supply, there's alot out there and it would be interesting to hear peoples thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael Coates Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Sorry for the add but look what $72,000 AUD plus shipping and GST will get you !! (Approx $87,000 delivered ready to fly) http://www.pipistrel-usa.com/models/alpha-trainer.html Pipistrel introduces a fully equipped training aircraft for under $85,000 US In keeping with Pipistrel’s tradition of continuing evolution, quality, high tech manufacturing and now most importantly a fantastic price, Pipistrel is proud to announce the release of our new aircraft, the Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER. The name “Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER” describes the exact purpose of this exciting new aircraft designed for Light Sport Aircraft Flying Schools in markets and countries which have the FAA-LSA (or adaptation of ASTM rules) categories. The aircraft has been designed with the "essence of training" as its primary design goal; training has to start somewhere, just like the modern alphabet starts with the letter “A” this new aircraft bears the name ALPHA, the ALPHA TRAINER to be exact. Times have been changing; we have noticed over the last several years that customers have evolved from basic entry level aircraft to more sophisticated glass everything with autopilot and every other conceivable addition. Great if you can afford it but with the economy the way it is most aircraft have been priced from the marketplace for the average person or flight school. In cooperation with Pipistrel we have developed an entirely new aircraft, a completely new approach to flight training and at a cost nearly half that of our competitors. Before we get into the amazingly affordable price let's talk about some of the exciting features. The new ALPHA TRAINER is an aircraft which is affordable to acquire, it is economical to maintain and we believe no other LSA training aircraft is as cheap to run as the new Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER with its frugal operating costs. Let's list what Pipistrel believe an LSA training aircraft should be: It must be strong and easy to fly for beginner students It must have benign stall characteristics for the training market with no flying surprises It must be affordable and easy to operate, maintain and repair It must be capable of doing circuits all day long in all conditions including excessive heat well above 100°F It must have good ventilation and heating when required It must have approved strobes and lighting It must have a quiet cockpit It must have guaranteed access to reliable spare parts supply to keep the aircraft on the flight line It must have reasonable range for cross-country flight training It must be easy to service daily and refuel It must have a ballistic parachute system It must have a durable finish for outdoor storage It must have good brakes for the odd ‘urgent occasion’ It must have dual flight controls, easy and quickly adjustable for different sized people It must have an expected long operating life It must be tricycle configuration with steerable nose wheel It must have easy cockpit access even for elderly students And did I say affordable to operate ? Extensive market research and evaluation has given Pipistrel this wish list for the perfect training aircraft and we have really delivered, providing a fully optioned and approved training aircraft at a very reasonable cost with the lowest running costs in the industry. Who is Pipistrel some of you may be asking ? Pipistrel is the leading light aircraft manufacturer established in Europe for over 25 years, winner of the world air games, and winner of the NASA CAFÉ challenge 3 times in a row (including winner of $1.375 Million – the largest prize ever awarded for efficiency in flight) and you may even have heard about our aircraft flying around the globe without assistance. Pipistrel is not only the perfect choice for adventurers and advanced pilots but it is now the choice for the training market as well. Let’s look at the changes Pipistrel has made to the new ALPHA TRAINER model and the philosophy behind their changes. Undercarriage, the main undercarriage which is made of composite material is beefed up for a MTOW which yields a full fuel payload of nearly 500 pounds, it is strong and durable and capable of accepting the bad the landings made by new students. The new nose leg is 2 inches shorter lowering the nose and improving the visibility during taxi. Propeller clearance is not sacrificed because the Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER uses a smaller 63” diameter fixed pitch propeller. The Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER aircraft has a new 15 gallon fuel tank. 15 gallons does not sound like much when you are talking about conventional aircraft, but Pipistrel is not a conventional aircraft. In reality 15 gallons is more than enough for the ALPHA TRAINER. The fuel tank now has a large opening which means it can be filled directly from fast flow avgas pumps which are at the large majority of our airfields. (It is still however our recommendation to run ethanol-free auto fuel as per Rotax recommendations for the maximum engine life and the obvious cost savings.) The 15 gallons capacity will give the Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER aircraft at least 400 miles range with reserves at normal cruise speeds of just under 110 knots. In the training role doing circuits the aircraft will be using less than 2.5 gallons per hour, effectively giving you 5 hours endurance from just 15 gallons of fuel. The Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER is fitted with the ever reliable Rotax 80 hp engine. While some may question whether 80 hp is enough, those familiar with Pipistrel know that our designs maximize performance on minimum power. In fact until recently Pipistrel aircraft were only supplied with the Rotax 80 hp engine, this was enough for well over 1000 fpm climb rate at maximum weight and cruise speeds of 125 in the ALPHA’S sister aircraft the Pipistrel Virus. The Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER has a slower cruise of 108 knots because it’s designed to fit in the LSA category but it will still achieve the same exciting climb rates. The Rotax 80 hp engine is an ideal choice for a training aircraft, it is smooth and reliable, it is frugal with the fuel and the 2000 hour/15 year TBO is easily achievable. The Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER is manufactured from state-of-the-art composites and has an empty weight 100 poundsless than most competitors’ aircraft. This is one of the reasons why the Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER can offer such good performance and economy. Durability in the training market requires careful planning, for this reason Pipistrel have chosen to supply the Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER with extra heavy-duty seat fabric, the wheel spats are also removed from this aircraft meaning it’s impossible for a student to break them getting in and out and in the unlikely event of a puncture the wheel can be replaced in around 2 minutes, again design features helping to keep the Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER in the air and earning you money rather than being in the repair shop. The Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER has a new wing design based on the already successful and proven Pipistrel Virus SW aircraft. With the redesigned wing the aircraft does not require airbrakes to land, further simplifying the cockpit controls for students. The new wings feature redesigned flaperons which now have 25° of flap travel making short field landings a breeze. The new propeller for the Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER is Pipistrel's own design, CNC machined in house it’s manufactured from wood and is then protected in a composite covering including leading edge protection which is then painted. Being a wooden propeller there is very little vibration which contributes towards the smooth running of the aircraft, a composite covering makes a propeller very durable offering years of use in a normal training environment. The Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER has a luggage rack for storage of tie downs and ropes, water bottles, first aid kit and other accessories; access to the storage area is through the cockpit seats which fold forward to offer easy and unrestricted access. There are also two large pockets on the sides of the instrument panel, ideal for storing maps and water bottles during flight. The brakes have been redesigned and simplified for the Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER offering exceptional braking performance on even short airfields. The directly steerable nose wheel can easily turn the aircraft on a dime and the brake shoes can be replaced in less than 15 minutes keeping your maintenance cost down. The price may be inexpensive but we have not spared any of the Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER options. Features… Yes there are plenty. Firstly, the EFIS instrument panel is gone, replaced by conventional aircraft instruments all clearly labelled with the correct colour coded speeds and temperatures in a traditional and familiar training format The aircraft is supplied in nosewheel only configuration for lower insurance costs and easier student training The new 15 gallon fuel tank has a bigger tank opening to accept the larger aviation fuel pumps Large instrument panel for fitting additional instruments if required Solid luggage rack behind the seats Wingtip NAV, strobe lights and landing light (LED) 2.5 times brighter than FAA standards Ballistic rescue system GRS 6/473 SD Oil check door on top engine cover 2 blade fixed pitch propeller, 63’’ diameter wood with composite protection and spinner Air speed indicator diameter 3 1/8" 0-180 Kts Altimeter diameter 3 1/8" 0-20.000 ft Vertical Speed Indicator diameter 3 1/8" ± 1000 fpm Engine instruments (tacho, engine hour counter, oil press & temp, CHT, EGT, fuel quantity) GPS Garmin Aera 500 + AirGizmo Radio ICOM IC A210 with intercom, aerial and, 2 headsets Transponder Garmin GTX 327 with altitude encoder and antenna 34' 6" wing-span fits most T hangers Outside surfaces painted in white UV-resistant acrylic, cabin interior composite surfaces in grey Cabin upholstery in hard wearing blue fabric with padded spar cover Ergonomic seats with adjustable head rests 3 point "schroth" seat belts Sliding photo window on the right door Cabin ventilation with adjustable intake on left door Noise reducing firewall Dual control sticks and dual rudder pedals 2 stage positive flaperons up to 25° deflection Elevator trim In-flight adjustable pedals for both pilot & co-pilot UV protected, scratch resistant Lexan windshield Three point door locking Fixed composite landing gear, heavy-duty training main wheels and brakes Hydraulic disk brakes on the main wheels Steerable nose wheel Tie-down points on wings and tail Fuel tank 15 Gallons (60 Litres) with bigger filler neck Fuel gasculator with drain sump Cabin heating system ELT Kannad 406 AF – Compact (406 MHz) Rotax 912 UL2 80 hp, 4 cylinder 4 stroke engine with 2 carburettors, integrated gearbox etc Electric starter High capacity, easy to replace dry-type 12V battery Modular electric panel system with fuses on primary and secondary circuits Rotax regulator-rectifier All throttle control cables in Teflon 12V accessory plug Large instrument panel with master switch, avionics switch, switches with automatic fuses and warning lights, magneto switches, starter button and battery quick disconnect switch Basic Rotax toolkit Basic aircraft spare parts kit Now the exciting part… The cost At €61,500 this would be amazing value but as a special offer to flying schools and release customers we are going to make this aircraft available at an introductory special of just €58,000 plus shipping from the factory. First deliveries will start arriving in April 2012 and your order can be secured with just a $15,000 USD deposit. Based on today's exchange rates (11/11/11) €58,000 roughly converts to $78,900 USD. Adding delivery, FAA registration and inspection fees we believe the aircraft will run at around $83,000 USD ! Looking at the features, quality, performance, and economy, the new Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER represents the best value in a composite LSA for the training market. Working widely with several finance companies and business planers we have developed a complete turnkey solution for a start-up training school business, or for an existing training school looking to modernize the fleet while cutting current operating costs in half. Are you looking to improve the return on investment for your flight school? The Pipistrel ALPHA TRAINER may be the perfect solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest avi8tr Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 But all that doesn't matter because it's a CESSNA. Never underestimate the effect of a household name! You can certainly do a whole lot worse than the 162. If spare parts and support are readily available at a resaonable price then it's already streets ahead of the equivalent Tecnam. Agree with Bas... a great trainer like the 152, but not a brilliant private cross-country maching. That being said though, if I can fly from Melboune to Temora on a tank of fuel with reserves, then it ticks my boxes as a cross-country machine - I wouldn't need much more than that. I recently heard of two that are due into the country. Purchased sight-unseen by two gents probably because they are Cessna's and people expect a certain type of product from Cessna. (insert China comments here) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 "Purchased sight-unseen by two gents probably because they are Cessna's and people expect a certain type of product from Cessna. (insert China comments here)" Ok... lol I don't know if it is typical but I have seen the "Older gentlemen pilot"... raised on a diet of Cessna, Piper et al who has sold the GA tincan and bought a whizz bang modern Ra-Aus GA registerable type... Mostly I think they realize pretty quickly that comparing a proper Ra-Aus high performance aircraft to a GA machine is not really fair. MC has posted before about the typical characteristics of many of the 110knot plus cruise machines... the old "get it on step" cruise characteristic, the lighter but still durable construction, the ultralight weight and thus energy management and rough air performance... It seems to take a while to adjust but really they leave the old tin cans behind in real performance if flown correctly... Treated with finesse they are miles ahead. IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 P.S. Lets face it... Typical GA operations have faced these sort of weight restrictions for years... I guess what Cessna has done is tried to appeal to this "older" market... Time will tell but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael Coates Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 You are bringing back memories of my time in the Cessna 152 which I did my PPL with in Mudgee. With myself and the instructor we could only just carry enough fuel to get to Bankstown which was great doing those cross-country navs but I also needed to fly into Canberra controlled airspace which could not be done on the legal amount of fuel we could carry taking off from Mudgee. It always meant a stop in Bathurst or Orange just to add another 20 litres of fuel to make sure we would get to Canberra or back home again.... it was a great little plane, it had less shoulder room than a coffin, sometimes the VSI would show more than 500 feet on takeoff with the assistance of a little thermal and it would sit at a solid 85 to 90 knots, even faster downhill ! I remember it peaking at about 105 knots on one occasion doing a quick descent. The heater would not work, every time you open to fresh air vent the cabin would be filled with dead bugs which had smashed into the leading edge in the previous flights.... Wouldn't trade those memories for anything ! We have come a long way but we have also gone backwards at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael Coates Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 P.S. Lets face it... Typical GA operations have faced these sort of weight restrictions for years... I guess what Cessna has done is tried to appeal to this "older" market... Time will tell but... The problem in the US is a lot of these older G! pilots who used to fly 172 and 182 aircraft and have medical issues are now getting into the light 162 aircraft and having difficulties. It is only because they have not been trained how to fly light aircraft correctly and they are getting themselves into issue especially with over correcting on landing. There are a few of these reports on the NTSB website (from memory it all starts with porpoising on landing, then a lack of directional control and an excursion off into the boonies) These aircraft require some degree of energy management which a lot of the older pilots were never trained in because of their aircraft weighing so much more and the fact they are now 20 years past their best use by date their reactions are a lot slower. In my opinion a lot of these older pilots could do well to get five or 10 hours in gliders or more basic ultralight type aircraft before being let loose in a 162 and their transition times would be reduced and aircraft survival rates would increase substantially. Having said all of this I am still confident that Cessna will be pulling out of this end of the market, there is just no money in it for a large company like them, all of the head honchos are leaving as the company changes direction but it would be good to see the aircraft design picked up by somebody else and modified in some way to make it a more suitable "LSA" aircraft rather than the equivalent of a lightweight 152. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalman Posted March 20, 2012 Author Share Posted March 20, 2012 It must be strong and easy to fly for beginner students It must have benign stall characteristics for the training market with no flying surprises It must be affordable and easy to operate, maintain and repair It must be capable of doing circuits all day long in all conditions including excessive heat well above 100°F It must have good ventilation and heating when required It must have approved strobes and lighting It must have a quiet cockpit It must have guaranteed access to reliable spare parts supply to keep the aircraft on the flight line It must have reasonable range for cross-country flight training It must be easy to service daily and refuel It must have a ballistic parachute system It must have a durable finish for outdoor storage It must have good brakes for the odd ‘urgent occasion’ It must have dual flight controls, easy and quickly adjustable for different sized people It must have an expected long operating life It must be tricycle configuration with steerable nose wheel It must have easy cockpit access even for elderly students And did I say affordable to operate ? they sound real nice Micheal, just going trough the list and having a chuckle ,probably the most prolific trainer in history (maybe the second place?) is the J3 cub,,,,, 1/ yes and not really,with that tailwheel 2 /not really, it would spin quite readily 3/ yep 4/yep 5/ lotsa ventilation,,,,and ,,,,well 6/nope 7/no way! 8/yep 9/yep 10/yep 11/ a what! 12/eh well kinda 13/mmmm brakes??? 14/well there is two of everything, and if your a big bugger,,,,just don't breathe in! 15/ so far so good 16/mmmm you put the third wheel where???? 17/well ,it depends on your definition! 18/ big yes! I guess we've come a long way ,but also lost a few things along the way and I reckon the pilots that came out of these were more in tune with the aircraft than a lot of guys are today, the C172 must have been total luxury when it hit the schools. The Tecnams tick all the boxes except the buy price, Jabirus do alright as long a your TBO expectations are the same as a two stroke, the Pipestrel is certainly cheap enough, are there a lot of schools using them? Then there's all the odd ones ,Foxbats look nicely done, Eurofox is an old design but really nice to fly, and you get to experience adverse yaw (and learn what your feet are for), savannah ,I flew one a couple of weeks back and found it to be a bit longitudinaly unstable ,would be tiring on a navex for a student, Flight design CT, flew one a while back ,wouldn't walk past a eurofox to fly one again, haven't been up in a 162, but now I know of one locally I'll be going for a look/fly, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalman Posted March 20, 2012 Author Share Posted March 20, 2012 Does anyone know what the max airframe weight of the C162 is, maybe they're counting on an increase in the LSA upper limit??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalman Posted March 20, 2012 Author Share Posted March 20, 2012 Micheal, are you going to be at natfly with any of these aircraft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael Coates Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Yes we are there, no alphas in AU yet but one coming in June... Fuse is same as other Pipistrel models so it makes for an easy comparison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalman Posted March 20, 2012 Author Share Posted March 20, 2012 Yes we are there, no alphas in AU yet but one coming in June... Fuse is same as other Pipistrel models so it makes for an easy comparison cool I'll have to drop in and say hi, I'd be keen to have a look at the Pipestrals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest avi8tr Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Does anyone know what the max airframe weight of the C162 is, maybe they're counting on an increase in the LSA upper limit??? That is a very good question. Stall is at 41 knots, so there is definitely room to move on max weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalman Posted March 20, 2012 Author Share Posted March 20, 2012 That is a very good question. Stall is at 41 knots, so there is definitely room to move on max weight. What's the rate$$ on the 162, I'd like to take one for a fly, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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