Jump to content
rrogerramjet

Choice of aircraft - straw poll

Recommended Posts

rrogerramjet

Hi,

 

Leaving capex limitations out of the equation, for now, if these requirements were given which LSA registerable aircraft would you choose? Can be 24 or 19, with VH option a realistic outcome.

 

1. Tin skin a must have, some use of other materials ok, but definitely no fabrics or mainly/all fibreglass constructions. (perhaps unfairly sidelining Jab 230/430 here, but there's enough info around on them)

2. MTOW >600kg. (possible RA weight increase in the pipeline or VH reg)

3. 75% cruise speed near 120kts, or any number above. (Note: 105kts is not 'near' 120)

3a. Fuel use must be >30L/hr, prefer low 20's

4. Option for VH reg and potential for IFR rating.

5. No RG or turbo to meet above cruise speeds.

 

For my thoughts I'm tossing in RV9, that meets all the above requirements.

 

Others come to mind?

 

Thanks

Ramjet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kasper

Well if you set a definition of an rv you’re going to get rv as the answer aren’t you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onetrack

One of these would be very nice, if I won 1st Division Lotto. But doesn't quite meet your RV9-style, speed requirement. But 104-111kts isn't too shabby for a classic design from the 1930's. And just look at that seating and upholstery!

 

Luscombe Silvaire Aircraft Company

 

Luscombe Silvaire Aircraft Company

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cooperplace

I've flown a tecnam P2002 all of once. Low wing, Rotax engine. Lovely aircraft, IMO. Others here will know much more about them. Pricey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spacesailor

Still!.

The poor old "HUMMELBIRD" meets almost all of your requirements. Pity it takes a few years to build one.

" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSRbA0RwvsA "

 

spacesailor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kgwilson

You should modify your opening sentence from which LSA registerable" to "which RA registerable". LSA is a specific category and that restricts the choice.

 

Personally I'd choose the aircraft I built (see my Avatar). All aluminium with fibreglass bits like cowl, spats & wing tips, 75% cruise 125-130 knots, stall 32 knots with full flap, 37knots clean, approx 24-26 lph @120knots, MTOW 600kg in RA category of if built under SAAA & VH registered I think 800kg. IFR just depends upon equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris SS

Once you fly an RV you will be spoilt for anything else.

 

An RV-9 will be good for 150kts on a 160hp motor with a fixed pitch prop, burning 32l/h. You can bring the fuel burn down further if you have fuel injection and run lean of peak on long trips, but the saving in fuel is often not worth the complexity.

 

For my money the RV7 is WAY more fun. It has a lower aspect ratio wing (3 ft narrower span) and when powered by a 180hp motor, will happily spend the day at 160kts, with gentleman’s aeros in between.

 

The only way you’ll get the fuel burn down to early 20s is with a Rotax. There are HUNDREDS of aeroplanes in this playground but I’m not sure that any of them (other than the plastic fantastics - and these have their own issues) will give you much more than 120 kts.

 

If fuel burn is important to you - have a look at the Sling 2 - arguably one of the best light sport aircraft in the world. If you want to have a barrel of fun in an almost limitless aeroplane - RV7!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rrogerramjet
Well if you set a definition of an rv you’re going to get rv as the answer aren’t you?

Yes, but what model? That was the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rrogerramjet
You should modify your opening sentence from which LSA registerable" to "which RA registerable". LSA is a specific category and that restricts the choice.

 

Personally I'd choose the aircraft I built (see my Avatar). All aluminium with fibreglass bits like cowl, spats & wing tips, 75% cruise 125-130 knots, stall 32 knots with full flap, 37knots clean, approx 24-26 lph @120knots, MTOW 600kg in RA category of if built under SAAA & VH registered I think 800kg. IFR just depends upon equipment.

@kgwilson you are absolutely correct, my bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rrogerramjet
You should modify your opening sentence from which LSA registerable" to "which RA registerable". LSA is a specific category and that restricts the choice.

 

Personally I'd choose the aircraft I built (see my Avatar). All aluminium with fibreglass bits like cowl, spats & wing tips, 75% cruise 125-130 knots, stall 32 knots with full flap, 37knots clean, approx 24-26 lph @120knots, MTOW 600kg in RA category of if built under SAAA & VH registered I think 800kg. IFR just depends upon equipment.

I have a workmate who swears by same, he might be looking at selling but I'd want to take the 'J' brand motor out....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rrogerramjet
Still!.

The poor old "HUMMELBIRD" meets almost all of your requirements. Pity it takes a few years to build one.

" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSRbA0RwvsA "

 

spacesailor

I will drop the 'old, bold pilot' saying right on top of this clip. I swear I saw a 95degree bankover in there....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bexrbetter

Thing with the Morgan now is Raytol looks like an improved service and support as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rrogerramjet
One of these would be very nice, if I won 1st Division Lotto. But doesn't quite meet your RV9-style, speed requirement. But 104-111kts isn't too shabby for a classic design from the 1930's. And just look at that seating and upholstery!

 

Luscombe Silvaire Aircraft Company

 

Luscombe Silvaire Aircraft Company

Nice, but fails Q3, even with prior notification!

Upholstery wasn't a criteria, but it is blingy. My 2 dogs I have to transit may well pee on it regardless of quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kasper
Yes, but what model? That was the question.

If you’re limiting it to LSA and vans then you are limited to the rv12 as an E-LSA.

If you’re after RAAus registerable airframes then you’ve got more options

 

But as you’ve got the less than sign wrong in two of your limits I doubt you means anything other than asking

“What’s better than a vans that’s pretty much the same as a vans”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kasper

But if you want an rv I’d say rv3. 500kg of 45knt stall fun. You never said two seats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rgmwa

If you want an RV that is LSA compliant, then an RV-12 is probably your best choice. Register it as ELSA or experimental, whichever you prefer. You can shoehorn an RV-9 (or even a 7 I believe) onto the RAAus register with a 600kg weight limit, but not easily (and maybe not anymore these days either?), and certainly not without some compromise in speed and/or payload. The current RV-12 kits give you a choice of ULS or iS engines. Vans say the iS is significantly more fuel-efficient than the ULS (30% or more).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ivan4ilse
Hi,

 

Leaving capex limitations out of the equation, for now, if these requirements were given which LSA registerable aircraft would you choose? Can be 24 or 19, with VH option a realistic outcome.

 

1. Tin skin a must have, some use of other materials ok, but definitely no fabrics or mainly/all fibreglass constructions. (perhaps unfairly sidelining Jab 230/430 here, but there's enough info around on them)

2. MTOW >600kg. (possible RA weight increase in the pipeline or VH reg)

3. 75% cruise speed near 120kts, or any number above. (Note: 105kts is not 'near' 120)

3a. Fuel use must be >30L/hr, prefer low 20's

4. Option for VH reg and potential for IFR rating.

5. No RG or turbo to meet above cruise speeds.

 

For my thoughts I'm tossing in RV9, that meets all the above requirements.

 

Others come to mind?

 

Thanks

Ramjet

 

Rans S-21 Outbound, Still in development but has flown.Looks like it could be close to meeting your criteria with the larger engine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kgwilson
I'd want to take the 'J' brand motor out....

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kasper
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.

Well I would have said a J3300 in an rv3 ... get your 500kg and have more load available BUT he excluded the jab engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onetrack
My 2 dogs I have to transit may well pee on it regardless of quality
Well, if you just wanted a bare-bones, high-speed dog-carrier - you could have specified that! :cheezy grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kasper
Well, if you just wanted a bare-bones, high-speed dog-carrier - you could have specified that! :cheezy grin:

And if they are messy pups and you have two then Velcro one to each wing (balanced) and I can assure you they’ll be sh1tless when you arrive ... win-win

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
facthunter

Really thin riveted. 16 thou, aluminium skins don't do it for me. . What's with the need to do 150 knots.? You need C/S prop and retracts to do that and you are going to get belted around in turbulence, and the plane design must be quite clean or you are just dragging it along with excess power . No mention of Tailwheel. For a utility plane it's almost a must have. Think you wrote the specs with the answer in mind. You can't get a low wing through a farm gate and you are limited in crosswind with what wing down you can safely use, especially on grass with a bit of growth. Just my contribution. Carbon Cub or Eurofox.. I like a plane with a genuine 8 G+ strength. , so I can chuck it around without the wings coming off (if possible). The Eurofox wouldn't have that but.. It's nice.. Nev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kgwilson

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Methusala

You're all missing the point about recreational a/c. I know a bloke who has had a load of RV's. All 150kt and look like MM in the shower. He is now considering selling the RV because he has fallen in love with the RECREATIONAL thing and flies a Hornet. Back to the love of flying. If you want to go somewhere the airlines are cheap and you can have a beer! Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bexrbetter
What A/C have 16 thou skins? .

 

Only the World's 3rd most popular (I think, behind Cessna and Vans) light aircraft in modern times, and number one in sub 600kgs, the Zenith range.

 

Speaking of Vans, has the OP looked at the Vans range, maybe there's something there suitable? :whistling:

 

 

 

All 150kt and look like MM in the shower.

 

Marilyn Manson? Ewww....

 

0050c017f6c5b5e363ce70b9d7180cc3.500x500x1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×