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  
APenNameAndThatA

How Slippery are the A22LS and A32?

Recommended Posts

I am wondering how slippery the A22LS and A32 are, please? I remember reading years ago that if someone wants to be safe in a GA aircraft, it should not be too slippery, otherwise it can build up too much speed too quickly in an unusual attitude. In other words, if you are a low time instrument pilot, go with the C206 and not the C210, or go with the C182 and not the C182 RG.

 

From what I have read, the A22 is easier to fly than the A32 because it slows down better. So, if you are a few knots too fast on final, you can slow down a bit and won't float too far. However, LSA aircraft slow down better than GA aircraft anyway. So, does an A32 slow down about the same as a Cessna 172, or more like a Cirrus SR20? The A32 is as fast as a 172 with almost as much payload and a lot less power, but it is also much lighter.

 

How much safer would the A22 be than an A32? If all you have to do is go round if you mess up a landing, why not get the A32 and 20 extra knots for $20 000? The Kelpie seems an ideal plane to me ('cept it does not fold), so why not make a A32 Kelpie? Very preliminary enquiries, you see.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have you flown either of these? a good way to get a handle on these questions might be to go up in each, with an instructor.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting comment.

Well, they are light, so if they are draggier, then they will slow down better. Like a Zenith 750. If they are one of those slippery things like that that thing that used to be a Piper, then maybe not. Hence the question.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, they are light, so if they are draggier, then they will slow down better. Like a Zenith 750. If they are one of those slippery things like that that thing that used to be a Piper, then maybe not. Hence the question.

Some of them are dragged, but many of them are more slippery. If you train for each different aircraft this is a non issue. On some aircraft based on your theory you would be giving up range and adding cost per mm just because you didn't want slippery. In any case you can vary the slipperyness with throttle, attitude, flaps, side slipping etc - it's all in the training.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't define by such a term. It's confusing things. Low wing loading planes fly slow(er) and are susceptible to gusts, more. They approach slow (just prior to landing) or they will float. DRAG and weight determine how quickly it slows down if power is off or the plane is not descending (using potential energy in lieu of power)

 

Best is to fly in them with a good instructor who isn't trying to sell fair bit more attention than you are used to. Lighter smaller planes are more responsive to all things. Give yourself a bit if time to get used to it. Nev

 

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am wondering how slippery the A22LS and A32 are, please? I remember reading years ago that if someone wants to be safe in a GA aircraft, it should not be too slippery, otherwise it can build up too much speed too quickly in an unusual attitude. In other words, if you are a low time instrument pilot, go with the C206 and not the C210, or go with the C182 and not the C182 RG.

From what I have read, the A22 is easier to fly than the A32 because it slows down better. So, if you are a few knots too fast on final, you can slow down a bit and won't float too far. However, LSA aircraft slow down better than GA aircraft anyway. So, does an A32 slow down about the same as a Cessna 172, or more like a Cirrus SR20? The A32 is as fast as a 172 with almost as much payload and a lot less power, but it is also much lighter.

 

How much safer would the A22 be than an A32? If all you have to do is go round if you mess up a landing, why not get the A32 and 20 extra knots for $20 000? The Kelpie seems an ideal plane to me ('cept it does not fold), so why not make a A32 Kelpie? Very preliminary enquiries, you see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Foxbat stalls at 27kt. Approach at 47kt.

 

C172 stalls at 47kt. Approach at 62kt.

 

Even doused in grease the foxbat wouldn't be slippery enough to exceed the c172 ground roll. Foxbat isn't advertised as STOL for no reason.

 

 

  • Agree 4
  • Winner 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps reading about these planes in a theoretical sort of way isn't too productive beyond a cert basic appreciation.. The planes you have flown are very conventional with no particular quirks. They are easy to fly and have adequate flaps to fly slower and increase drag. Fowler flap is one of the best around for normal planes.

 

A true STOL plane may not be for everybody either. It' a bit specialised and built for short fields. You have to get good at flying it slow, especially at the short final point or it will float excessively and undo the short strip capabilities. They are responsive to wind gusts, like all low wing loading high lift planes. If you are flying at 30 knots a 10 km gust will have much more effect than the same gust on a different plane doing 55 knots. This applies to when you are actually still on the ground also where you have to be more aware of the wind, wherever it's coming from. Nev

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

400 hundred plus, A22LS hrs.

 

One thing the the foxbat is not, is slippery. Quite the opposite.

 

The thing that makes it so easy ( too easy some may say), is that you pull the thtottle back and it just slows.

 

Some aircraft you have to fly "by the numbers" and 5 kts over on down wind almost means a go-around.

 

Had a good look over a A32 but not flown in one.

 

It has a magnificent fuse. Clean, roomy and uncluttered. Full flying tail ( not sure about rudder)

 

I think it is a great shame they never put proper "cruise" wings on it. I'm sure 125 kts would be possible and provide some competition for the higher priced composite exotics.

 

They already have the Foxbat for stol, so I can't understand the sense in the thick wings on the A32.

 

A great opportunity lost.....

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of Foxbats in my hangar, A22ls's and draggy they are as Downunder has said, when you chop the power they slow down rather well, bang out full flap with those full span flaperons and they are as solid as a rock just like throwing a couple of parachutes out

 

Heard an interesting comment today about people always wanting to go faster but also wanting as many hours logged in the book

 

The faster you go the quicker you get there and the less hours go in to the book

 

Valid point

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a late reply but better late than never - did you ever get around to having a flight in a 32? they have one on line at the Recreational Flying Coy in Gympie (they are a Foxbat dealer) so easy for you to arrange

 

my information on the 32 compared to the 22 is that the 32 is a lot slipperier than the 22, they apparently have worked very hard on the aero for the new model

 

cannot name my source (can't remember, that is) but he told me that the 32 had to be managed quite carefully from the end of the downwind leg if you are aiming for the piano keys

 

I'll be doing my BFR at Gympie in a couple of weeks, might splash out on an hour in the A32 (one of my favourite aircraft) just for the fun of it - if I do I'll post again here

 

ya's reckon it'll glide any different to my wire braced Drifter ?????

 

cheers

 

BP

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a late reply but better late than never - did you ever get around to having a flight in a 32? they have one on line at the Recreational Flying Coy in Gympie (they are a Foxbat dealer) so easy for you to arrangemy information on the 32 compared to the 22 is that the 32 is a lot slipperier than the 22, they apparently have worked very hard on the aero for the new model

 

cannot name my source (can't remember, that is) but he told me that the 32 had to be managed quite carefully from the end of the downwind leg if you are aiming for the piano keys

 

I'll be doing my BFR at Gympie in a couple of weeks, might splash out on an hour in the A32 (one of my favourite aircraft) just for the fun of it - if I do I'll post again here

 

ya's reckon it'll glide any different to my wire braced Drifter ?????

 

cheers

 

BP

I did not have a fly in the Vixxen. I put a deposit on a Foxbat. If you put tundra tyres on a Vixxen, it becomes experimental, and you become a test pilot. Also, such tyres wipe off all the aerodynamic gains, apparently.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am wondering how slippery the A22LS and A32 are, please? I remember reading years ago that if someone wants to be safe in a GA aircraft, it should not be too slippery, otherwise it can build up too much speed too quickly in an unusual attitude. In other words, if you are a low time instrument pilot, go with the C206 and not the C210, or go with the C182 and not the C182 RG.From what I have read, the A22 is easier to fly than the A32 because it slows down better. So, if you are a few knots too fast on final, you can slow down a bit and won't float too far. However, LSA aircraft slow down better than GA aircraft anyway. So, does an A32 slow down about the same as a Cessna 172, or more like a Cirrus SR20? The A32 is as fast as a 172 with almost as much payload and a lot less power, but it is also much lighter.

 

How much safer would the A22 be than an A32? If all you have to do is go round if you mess up a landing, why not get the A32 and 20 extra knots for $20 000? The Kelpie seems an ideal plane to me ('cept it does not fold), so why not make a A32 Kelpie? Very preliminary enquiries, you see.

In GA it applies to the more slippery aircraft “getting ahead” of the pilot in the landing phase and some difficult transit situations. In other words you have to be flying subconsciously and know what you’re going to next further in advance. If you can slow the aircraft down, within the POH figures to the other aircraft speed, you are back to your normal reaction times. If you are a fumbler, slower aircraft will suit you better. I’d say the Jab J160 is as hot around the circuit as a 172.

I wouldn’t worry too much about this, just try out each aircraft, flying it to the POH and you’ll find your comfort zone.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will get it in a week or two. It is second hand. It is still advertised on the Australian Foxbat site.

 

As for the colour, it is yellow. It is very, very, very yellow.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, they are light, so if they are draggier, then they will slow down better. Like a Zenith 750. If they are one of those slippery things like that that thing that used to be a Piper, then maybe not. Hence the question.

I think it's the lower inertia, especially in the older RA aircraft, that slows them down quickly.

 

I trained for my certificate in a Texan and they are definitely "slippery" and can kill you, but their inertia is low and they lose flying speed quickly if the noise stops.

 

Kaz

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suggest that all RAA/LSA aircraft are low inertia, purely because of thier light weight and relatively low speed. What does vary is their aerodynamic efficiency and the effect of drag when the engine power is reduced.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah they do stand out don't they - is that a name for the colour - VVV yellow? I'll be doing a TIF in the Gympie A22 on Tuesday 1st May - looking forward to it...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey birdseye, I remember what my instructor told me about pulling the throttle to idle at the end of downwind - on my first solo...

 

first surprise was the acceleration on takeoff without an instructor in the back seat - Wow, big difference and you had to be on the ball with those pedals

 

then I pulled the throttle at the end of downwind and I saw straight away why he said "get that stick forward FAST" - it felt like it hit a brick wall !!!

 

how interesting is that - to have an aircraft that behaves so differently for the student on his first solo - makes you really think about the "high drag low inertia" aspect of the WB Drifter

 

people say if you can fly a Drifter you can fly anything - not so sure about that but for sure it is a real classic little beasty - mine will be back in the air - soon......

 

BP

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have approximately 60 hrs in a very yellow Foxbat. People tell me that it’s easy to see. They fly very well that’s why the flying schools use them. For some reason that I don’t know they don’t like the Vixen 32. Probably to hard for low hour pilots. Wish I had the money to buy a Foxbat-a22.

 

 

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...