Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Changing horses..

I am not in any way experienced to comment in this market segment, ULM.MICRO/LSA etc, however, I operate my Super Cub from an airfield that is home to many different types in this category. Some even look like aircraft!!!!

My take, and I admit perception, is that the vast majority of owners appear to spend a lot of time tinkering with their machines, fixing things that seem to have broken, or no longer work, and require the local LAA inspector to come and have a look. Total generalisation I appreciate, but I pitch up, go flying, put it back into the hanger, where all the other guys are up to their knees in poor electrics, badly fitting canopies, spluttering Jabirus, and broken ply.

They also would appear to have an inordinate amount of mishaps. I only mention this because @Aart will be coming from a DA42, with its nice and shiny exterior, its
CofA, and life in the other lane unless you really know what you are doing, appears somewhat difficult.

The choice therefore in what seems a burgeoning market will be vital and critical to future enjoyment, and not raging disappointment.

Fly safe. I want this thing to land l...
EGPF Glasgow

Although I wasn’t called upon to offer any comment, I’ll do so anyway.
We have a Flight Design CTSW on our field that I’ve flown a couple hours/trips with. It’s reasonably fast 110-130kt, has huge windows for sightseeing, high wing, wide cabin etc. You’re rather tall so one issue you may find with a few of these designs is a lack of space, but the CT appears to be rather comfortable also in that regard.

It does have some quirks… but then so do I. I wouldn’t call it an aviators dream with regards to flying qualities but damn the thing is impossible to stall… so pretty safe to operate.
Another benefit of the CT, as with the Dynamic, is that it was designed for a 600kg MTOM. Perhaps most of them are.

I’ve actually thought about buying one myself, the CT that is, it sure is an economical option to just about anything else.
A friend of mine has a Pipistrel Virus. It’s fast and all that, but I much prefer the CTs cabin although the fit and finish of his Virus eclipses the CT.
I think newer examples may be better, ours is an original CT2K converted to SW so over 10 years now.

Good luck with the hunt!

ESSB, Stockholm Bromma

Based on what I have seen, Beechbaby’s post above (#43) is a huge understatement!

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

A lot of insects on that type of wing have the same effect as rain, which is I suppose why (certified) sailplane pilots are so careful to remove insects from the wing leading edges before flight.

Indeed. In fact, they do so in flight with bugwiper systems.

Another benefit of the CT, as with the Dynamic, is that it was designed for a 600kg MTOM. Perhaps most of them are.

That would be an extremely dangerous and uninformed assumption. I have yet to meet an ULM that doesn’t need some sort of structural modification whan transitioning from nationel half-certified ULM to certified LSA/VLA.

mh
Aufwind GmbH
EKPB, Germany

Aart, if you’re dead set on a ULM, why not a Helisport CH7? Faster cruise and climb than an R22, with livelier handling and lower operating cost. Or perhaps a CH77 with side-by-side seating, though I haven’t flown that one. No light helicopter is really a travelling machine, but you can keep it at home and if you need to go far you can always borrow an aeroclub Robin, or C172, or whatever.

Glenswinton, SW Scotland, United Kingdom

That would be an extremely dangerous and uninformed assumption.

Quite a few of the ones I’ve looked at are/were designed with LSA or in some cases VLA limitations in mind, ergo 600kg or thereabouts.
Of course, one should not assume that anything is designed beyond the specs of whatever the limitations are.

ESSB, Stockholm Bromma

E. g. Pipistrel states

“In Europe (EASA member states) it is possible to register the Virus SW 100 under the EASA-LSA Permit-to-Fly with a MTOW of 600 kg. At 472.5 kg the Virus SW 80/100 also meets all requirements for the microlight/ultralight class in Europe – including the stall speed of 64 km/h (34 kts) thanks to the innovative flaperon system.”

I cannot see, why it would be “extremely dangerous” to assume, that this aircraft is capable for 600kg MTOM. From my POV it would be dangerous to assume that in general, though.

The Europa XS has a MTOM of 621 kg e. g. in the UK and 657 kg in the US and Sweden for instance – identical structure.

Last Edited by europaxs at 20 Nov 08:46
EDLE

BeechBaby wrote:

I only mention this because @Aart will be coming from a DA42, with its nice and shiny exterior, its CofA, and life in the other lane unless you really know what you are doing, appears somewhat difficult.

IMO that is the difference between an old homebuilt and a new microlight. A new (and expensive) microlight with a Rotax, and Garmin/Dynon, there aren’t much that can go wrong. They just keep on flying, and the only thing that needs to be done is to change oil and spark plugs every now and then for the first 2000h. As with everything else, if yo start to tinker with it, you have to have some basic understanding, or you will make things worse. Yet, it’s nothing that a normal person shouldn’t be able to manage, and there are lots of people who can help, like a standard aircraft mechanic for instance.

Another thing is that lots of people actually do like tinkering with their airplanes. That is 90% of the hobby. Make a little change here, replace some odd equipment there, then figure out if it works better or worse. It’s more of a way of life perhaps, a way of life that is more prevalent in some circuits than others.

Last Edited by LeSving at 20 Nov 09:13
The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

It’s probably also the difference between spending €X and €2X… Or, if buying ready built, the difference between a builder who was not good (and bear in mind that the vast majority of builders only ever built the one machine, and learnt all they know on that one machine) and a builder who was good. The downtime in this department is often massive as a % of the total ownership time.

There is no free lunch and the same things go round and round… If I had to go “off cert” (e.g. if I lost my medical and had to get an annex 2, for NPPL UK flying) I would get a really well made RV. It would not be cheap though – 100k?

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

I would get a really well made RV. It would not be cheap though – 100k?

- or – you could get a quick built kit, and be finished within in 2-3 years when your medical “runs out”. At 100k you will pretty much get it exactly as you want, a thing you will have no hope of getting when buying one that is built by someone else.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top