So Rans has recently announced some improvements to their S-7LS Courier, and even more recently announced that their S-6 and S-19 is going to be discontinued in the Ready to Fly category.
I can't blame them, and I think it'll do well for the industry. Here's why: too much competition.
Piper could make an affordable airplane in the 1940s because they built thousands of them. At one point, one J-3 was rolling off the assembly line every 20 minutes. They build 19,073 of them. Nineteen *thousand* seventy three. The LSA manufacturer's have trouble selling a couple hundred, these folks sold almost twenty thousand.
But think about it, what competed with the J-3 at the time? The Aronca Champ/L-3, the various offerings from Taylorcraft, to a point some Luscombes, and that's about it. There weren't zillions of 60 year old aircraft, nor were there 19 other manufacturers building an airplane damn near identical to yours.
That's what's going on today. Gee, how do you decide which do buy? Rans S-6 Coyote, Kitfox, Eurofox, Just Aircraft Highlander, X-Air, Cheetah...All of these are Rotax 912 powered, tube-and-rag, side-by-side LSAs, most available with folding wings and with the capability to be easily converted from taildragger to trike and back again. The market didn't need the SLSA Coyote. It's a great aircraft, but the world just doesn't need teh SLSA version. I'm glad the kit is still produced.
Same with the S-19 Venterra. It blends right in with the Sting Sport, Sport Star, SportCruiser, Tecnam Sierra, and others like them (low wing, rotax powered, all metal (the sting is composite), side by side tricycle.) The S-19 didn't have much to set it apart. In fact, I would rather have another plane in that list than the Rans.
The S-7LS Courier though. Ooh buddy. I spent some time drooling over the SportCruiser/PiperSport, and I'm gonna drool here too.
The SportCruiser is the modern, sleek thing you see yourself looking sexy on a California cold winter ramp in your leather jacket and khakis, loading your leather flight bag in the back and taxiing out onto that long black asphalt runway. The Courier is more at home on a grass field in the late summer, with a pilot in shorts and sandals leaning on a faded "learn to fly here" sign. If the SportCruiser looks like the hot college daughter of a DA-20 and an XL-2, the Courier is her hot roommate, the daughter of a Cub and a Citabria.
The Courier is on a niche of it's own. It's not one of the Kitfox clones I listed above because it's seated in tandem rather than dual. It isn't a boldfaced ripoff of the Piper Cub like the products Cubcrafters and American Champion. It's more like a modern homage to the classics as a whole. There's some cub in there, there's some champ in there, and there's a few things that are all her own. You can own one for less than $100,000 too.
This is the kind of thing that needs to happen for Light Sport to survive. Duplicates need to go. Can you tell me why the market needs both the CTMC and the Tecnam Eaglet? Some manufacturer's need to stick to EAB kits. Vans has an interesting idea: They certified one SLSA, haven't sold it, and are selling RV-12 ELSA kits by the gross, while still selling their other experimental kits. Sonex is doing well without producing ready-made aircraft.
I think the industry could do very well if there were a lot of manufacturers of very quick build kits (think 50 hours or less, mostly assembly and rigging), and a few very good SLSAs. I think Rans is doing about what it should.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Monday, December 20, 2010
Updates and other news
Well, I finally did it. I took the checkride, passed, and I'm now a certified and working flight instructor. Yay for me!
Now that I have secured a source of income, I'm onto phase 17 of my Master Plan: Moving the crap out of my parent's house. I can't afford an apartment, plus there are undesirable side effects of apartment life: very close, irritating neighbors. I have become enamored with very tiny houses a la Jay Shafer's Tumbleweed houses, particularly his Fencl.
I can't just buy or build a Fencl as designed, though. North Carolina law doesn't provide for a house built on a utility trailer. Either it's titled as an RV, or it's subject to the building code. So, the options I have explored are as follows:
Building on pontoons: As far as I can tell, you can do just about any dang thing you want on a pontoon boat. I could even float it on a private pond without ever contacting the government once. Without an engine or related systems, it would essentially be the aquatic version of building on a trailer. The downside here is huge: I have absolutely no experience designing and building a boat, and I'm worried about how heavy/topheavy this thing is. I'm also concerned that the required pontoons would be more expensive than building on a trailer.
Building an RV: This is as close to the original plan as I can figure. Instead of using a utility trailer as a chassis, I'll use axle kits and so forth to create a custom chassis. This way I can build a homebuilt RV, with a recreational vehicle title and everything. Then it becomes about building it to DOT standards. My metalworking is questionable at best, but I imagine I could construct a roadworthy chassis to mount an axle kit or two on. I also have to build it light enough to be towed by my pickup truck, though probably only over short distances.
I'll keep a record of progress here.
Now that I have secured a source of income, I'm onto phase 17 of my Master Plan: Moving the crap out of my parent's house. I can't afford an apartment, plus there are undesirable side effects of apartment life: very close, irritating neighbors. I have become enamored with very tiny houses a la Jay Shafer's Tumbleweed houses, particularly his Fencl.
I can't just buy or build a Fencl as designed, though. North Carolina law doesn't provide for a house built on a utility trailer. Either it's titled as an RV, or it's subject to the building code. So, the options I have explored are as follows:
- Build the house to code on a foundation
- Build the house on pontoons and call it a houseboat
- Construct an RV from scratch with the houses floor plan
Building on pontoons: As far as I can tell, you can do just about any dang thing you want on a pontoon boat. I could even float it on a private pond without ever contacting the government once. Without an engine or related systems, it would essentially be the aquatic version of building on a trailer. The downside here is huge: I have absolutely no experience designing and building a boat, and I'm worried about how heavy/topheavy this thing is. I'm also concerned that the required pontoons would be more expensive than building on a trailer.
Building an RV: This is as close to the original plan as I can figure. Instead of using a utility trailer as a chassis, I'll use axle kits and so forth to create a custom chassis. This way I can build a homebuilt RV, with a recreational vehicle title and everything. Then it becomes about building it to DOT standards. My metalworking is questionable at best, but I imagine I could construct a roadworthy chassis to mount an axle kit or two on. I also have to build it light enough to be towed by my pickup truck, though probably only over short distances.
I'll keep a record of progress here.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
In unrelated news...
I'm beginning to hate the phrase "Exhibits knowledge of the elements related to..." It's a grammatical nightmare that can be replaced by the word "understands." It's the FAA doing what a government does best: complicating things. To the government, a spade is not a spade, it is a user-enabled terrain altering earth leveraging device. Either way, I call it a shovel.
I'm going to label the junk drawer in my kitchen "Various random and sundry articles of assorted miscellaneous paraphernalia" just to see if anyone notices. I'll probably get taxed, somehow.
I'm going to label the junk drawer in my kitchen "Various random and sundry articles of assorted miscellaneous paraphernalia" just to see if anyone notices. I'll probably get taxed, somehow.
Flying with Angels
The Blue Angels are performing in Cherry Point this week. Their work simply amazes me; I would give my eyeteeth to have that level of control and precision. Anyone who has ever tried doing a "simple" steep turn in an airplane can appreciate the sheer amount of work and discipline and practice that goes into a Blue Angels performance.
I want that skill.
I want that skill.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Value in Aviation
Today I'd like to rant about what a ripoff most things in flying are.
I recently purchased some training material from King Schools, their Sport Pilot Instructor Checkride Course. $119 plus shipping and handling. I had it shipped by the cheapest method, $11 or so by UPS ground. That's a deal if you think about what it costs to move a pack of CDs across the country, it came from California.
I wait a week for my course to arrive. A box from King Schools was on my porch. I opened it up, and inside was the Sport Pilot Checkride Course, along with the packing slip, a commercial for Avemco insurance, two (count 'em, two) King Schools catalogs, some krinkled paper, and a pad of useless navlogs (Free! With your purchase of $49 or more!) that don't have proper space to perform wind correction calculations. A blank pad of paper would be more valuable to me.
Anyway, you may note that I got the wrong checkride course. And I'll give credit when it's due, I can see how the mistake happened. The course consists of a clear plastic bag, similar in construction to a potato chip bag, except made of celophane rather than mylar. Inside of this is one of those CD keep cases that resembles a DVD keep case except it's about an inch thick, and a copy of the PTS. The neat thing is that this print copy of the PTS deletes the Weight Shift Control and Gyroplane pilot and flight instructor portions, including just the airplane pilot and CFI sections. Sweet!
The keep cases are almost identical in appearance, the only difference being that one says "Sport Pilot" in the green circle on the front, the other says "Sport Pilot Instructor/FOI" on the front. Both cost the same, hell, I could have mixed them up. But I still had to call the company.
It rang three times and a gentleman picked up the phone. "Thank you for calling King Schools, this is Name, how may I help you?" I had to restrain myself from saying "Wow, a real person!" I told my story about getting the wrong thing, and he fast fed-exed me the correct thing. That was on Friday, it got here Monday.
Inside this keep case (I didn't open the incorrect package) are 6 CD-ROMs, which contain a simple bit of software that acts as a media player, playing several youtube quality videos, 2 or 3 of which appear on each disc. The videos show John King acting as a CFI-SP applicant, and he hired a f'real DPE (who just so happened to be wearing a NAFI shirt, I think because he's a higher-up in the organization) to act as the examiner. They did a what I think was a complete checkride, demonstrating the skills required of an applicant, and how to pass the checkride. Notably absent--although it's mentioned on the case--is any oral quizzing about the PTS, it's just a bunch of "how would you teach___?" Unless I somehow missed it.
***
Here's the problem I have. I bought a similar product last year from ASA, one that is equivilant to the course I was sent by mistake. It's a single DVD that covers the sport pilot checkride, by a man named Paul Hamilton, CFI/DPE. It plays in a normal DVD player, and shows Paul giving checkrides to various students, demonstrating what the checkride will be like. It came with a book, a rather comprehensive study guide that includes the checkrides for Airplane, Weight-Shift and Powered Parachute, plus Flight Instructor. DVD and book: $59.95 plus shipping and handling. It also got here correct and on time.
You wanna know the real ball biter? The King Schools set (twice the price of the ASA set) has a license agreement that basically boils down to "One set per person. Don't show it to your friends. Don't let your friends hear the audio. Don't pass Go. Don't collect $200." It has an "enrollment password" system which is basically a software activation code. The code that came with my set was--as if by magic--already taken. I had to call the company again by phone to even use the product I bought. Now I see why there were no used sets for sale on the internet.
Also, without breaking their license agreement and facing a lawsuit, I can't use this product as a teaching aid. When I pass the checkride, I might as well melt the discs. Paul Hamilton's disc says "No Unauthorized Use" at the beginning. I can use it as a teaching aid, as long as I don't start selling copies.
So, what I got was something that is twice as expensive as it could be, in a form factor that's worse than it could be, that's 4.7x10^27 times less useful in the future than it could be. I will be contacting both authors and making that point.
Do I regret buying the King Schools course? No, it's a helpful training aid which I have learned from and become a better educator and aviator. I regret paying 120 bucks for it though. I only bought it because it's the only one like it on the market that I found. I'm pretty sure I've made my last purchase from King Schools. It's like a $65,000 Honda Civic. It's good, it'll get the job done, but it costs way more than it should. Oh, and they send you the one you didn't order, you wait a weekend not driving the car you were sent by mistake, and when your car finally gets to your house, you have to call the company and ask why your key doesn't start the car.
Likewise, the PiperSport: Base model, $120,000; LT, $130,000. The difference in equipment? a $2,000 EMS, some of the cost of which is mitigated by the fact that it replaces several instruments you don't have to install. likewise, there's the LTD for $140,000, the difference between it and the LT is two $750 servos, wiring thereof, and two panel-mounted control blocks together costing $1,100. $1,850 worth of equipment can be yours for another ten grand.
Blogging about mildly irritating events is a nice, healthy way of dealing with life's little frustrations. It's better than a private journal because it's allegedly public; at least 2 perfect strangers have found it so far.
I recently purchased some training material from King Schools, their Sport Pilot Instructor Checkride Course. $119 plus shipping and handling. I had it shipped by the cheapest method, $11 or so by UPS ground. That's a deal if you think about what it costs to move a pack of CDs across the country, it came from California.
I wait a week for my course to arrive. A box from King Schools was on my porch. I opened it up, and inside was the Sport Pilot Checkride Course, along with the packing slip, a commercial for Avemco insurance, two (count 'em, two) King Schools catalogs, some krinkled paper, and a pad of useless navlogs (Free! With your purchase of $49 or more!) that don't have proper space to perform wind correction calculations. A blank pad of paper would be more valuable to me.
Anyway, you may note that I got the wrong checkride course. And I'll give credit when it's due, I can see how the mistake happened. The course consists of a clear plastic bag, similar in construction to a potato chip bag, except made of celophane rather than mylar. Inside of this is one of those CD keep cases that resembles a DVD keep case except it's about an inch thick, and a copy of the PTS. The neat thing is that this print copy of the PTS deletes the Weight Shift Control and Gyroplane pilot and flight instructor portions, including just the airplane pilot and CFI sections. Sweet!
The keep cases are almost identical in appearance, the only difference being that one says "Sport Pilot" in the green circle on the front, the other says "Sport Pilot Instructor/FOI" on the front. Both cost the same, hell, I could have mixed them up. But I still had to call the company.
It rang three times and a gentleman picked up the phone. "Thank you for calling King Schools, this is Name, how may I help you?" I had to restrain myself from saying "Wow, a real person!" I told my story about getting the wrong thing, and he fast fed-exed me the correct thing. That was on Friday, it got here Monday.
Inside this keep case (I didn't open the incorrect package) are 6 CD-ROMs, which contain a simple bit of software that acts as a media player, playing several youtube quality videos, 2 or 3 of which appear on each disc. The videos show John King acting as a CFI-SP applicant, and he hired a f'real DPE (who just so happened to be wearing a NAFI shirt, I think because he's a higher-up in the organization) to act as the examiner. They did a what I think was a complete checkride, demonstrating the skills required of an applicant, and how to pass the checkride. Notably absent--although it's mentioned on the case--is any oral quizzing about the PTS, it's just a bunch of "how would you teach___?" Unless I somehow missed it.
***
Here's the problem I have. I bought a similar product last year from ASA, one that is equivilant to the course I was sent by mistake. It's a single DVD that covers the sport pilot checkride, by a man named Paul Hamilton, CFI/DPE. It plays in a normal DVD player, and shows Paul giving checkrides to various students, demonstrating what the checkride will be like. It came with a book, a rather comprehensive study guide that includes the checkrides for Airplane, Weight-Shift and Powered Parachute, plus Flight Instructor. DVD and book: $59.95 plus shipping and handling. It also got here correct and on time.
You wanna know the real ball biter? The King Schools set (twice the price of the ASA set) has a license agreement that basically boils down to "One set per person. Don't show it to your friends. Don't let your friends hear the audio. Don't pass Go. Don't collect $200." It has an "enrollment password" system which is basically a software activation code. The code that came with my set was--as if by magic--already taken. I had to call the company again by phone to even use the product I bought. Now I see why there were no used sets for sale on the internet.
Also, without breaking their license agreement and facing a lawsuit, I can't use this product as a teaching aid. When I pass the checkride, I might as well melt the discs. Paul Hamilton's disc says "No Unauthorized Use" at the beginning. I can use it as a teaching aid, as long as I don't start selling copies.
So, what I got was something that is twice as expensive as it could be, in a form factor that's worse than it could be, that's 4.7x10^27 times less useful in the future than it could be. I will be contacting both authors and making that point.
Do I regret buying the King Schools course? No, it's a helpful training aid which I have learned from and become a better educator and aviator. I regret paying 120 bucks for it though. I only bought it because it's the only one like it on the market that I found. I'm pretty sure I've made my last purchase from King Schools. It's like a $65,000 Honda Civic. It's good, it'll get the job done, but it costs way more than it should. Oh, and they send you the one you didn't order, you wait a weekend not driving the car you were sent by mistake, and when your car finally gets to your house, you have to call the company and ask why your key doesn't start the car.
Likewise, the PiperSport: Base model, $120,000; LT, $130,000. The difference in equipment? a $2,000 EMS, some of the cost of which is mitigated by the fact that it replaces several instruments you don't have to install. likewise, there's the LTD for $140,000, the difference between it and the LT is two $750 servos, wiring thereof, and two panel-mounted control blocks together costing $1,100. $1,850 worth of equipment can be yours for another ten grand.
Blogging about mildly irritating events is a nice, healthy way of dealing with life's little frustrations. It's better than a private journal because it's allegedly public; at least 2 perfect strangers have found it so far.
Monday, February 8, 2010
To make it perfect
So I've flown the PiperSport/SportCruiser, and I can suggest a few ways to make it perfect.
1. Uninstall and throw the Dynon instrumentation.
2. Uninstall and throw the electric trim system.
3. Lower the glareshield to be absolutely no higher than the cowling.
4. Cut the canopy slightly larger. hmm, what words should I describe this with...Okay, there's to much can't see-through, and not enough see-through. It's hard to see over the nose, and it's hard to see ahead and beneath the wings. If you're going to ignore any one of these, make it this one.
5. Rig the flight controls a little heavier. I don't mean that it has to feel like an airbus, but shorten the levers slightly so it takes more control movement and pressure to maneuver the aircraft.
If these things happen, then I've found my airplane.
1. Uninstall and throw the Dynon instrumentation.
2. Uninstall and throw the electric trim system.
3. Lower the glareshield to be absolutely no higher than the cowling.
4. Cut the canopy slightly larger. hmm, what words should I describe this with...Okay, there's to much can't see-through, and not enough see-through. It's hard to see over the nose, and it's hard to see ahead and beneath the wings. If you're going to ignore any one of these, make it this one.
5. Rig the flight controls a little heavier. I don't mean that it has to feel like an airbus, but shorten the levers slightly so it takes more control movement and pressure to maneuver the aircraft.
If these things happen, then I've found my airplane.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Parentage
Apparently my previous post was noticed by whomever operates Piper's facebook and twitter. My line about the PiperSport resembling the lovechild of a Liberty and a Diamond particularly.
I haven't flown a DA-20 yet, but I have had the opportunity to fly a Liberty. I first learned of Liberty from a little ad in AOPA's Flight Training magazine. I liked the clean, simple panel featuring regular round dials (I like traditional instruments, to the point of boycotting Garmin) and it's claim of being a cheap, affordable trainer.
One day I was at the airport and there was one sitting outside the flying club next door. A salesman was trying to sell them on the plane to replace their aging fleet of C-152's. I love looking airplanes over and determining what systems they have on board and critiquing their instrument panels. I struck up a conversation with the salesman and he offered to take me up. I don't pass up those opportunities if I can help it.
First thing you notice about the plane is it's pudgy appearance. For it's length and wingspan, it just looks plump. An unusual feature for a low-wing airplane is that it's boarded from the front of the wings rather than the back. One reaches up, opens the DeLorean door, steps on one of those little footsteps, steps up on the leading edge of the wing, sits on the wing/doorsill, and slides into the chair. A clever way to keep students and passengers from stepping on the daggum flaps a la every other low-winged airplane ever.
Then the problems begin to stack up. First of all the trim is all electric. My experience flying this airplane is why I'm leery of electric trim. I found it difficult to find "just right" with this airplane because the trim only moved at one speed. With manual trim you can make precise inputs.
Now, there's trim where all you've got is the electric buttons and motor, and then there's the regular, manual trim that can also be electrically controlled like you find on newer Cessnas. I like the latter because you could trim the airplane in the event of an electrical failure.
The flaps of the Liberty are also controlled by the same style rocker switch (wouldn't suprise me if both switches were the same part number). The flaps are infinitely adjustable throught their range. Back in my days of flying Cessnas I would have seen this as a negative feature, but given the pre-selectable flaps of the Allegro (-2, 15 and 48 degrees deflection) I like the idea of being able to put the flaps wherever I please.
Then there's the brakes. Castering nosewheel, differential finger brakes. Next to the throttle are two small levers set like the throttles of a twin. They are spring-loaded forward; to apply the brakes, you pull the levers aft. Pulling aft on the left one applies the left brake etc. These are the only way of braking and steering the airplane on the ground. The rudder pedals control only the rudder and are useless at taxiing speeds. In fact, at the beginning of the takeoff roll, it's impossible to hold the plane perfectly straight using only rudder, so until you build up airspeed and gain rudder authority, you might have to apply a tiny bit of right brake, or maybe line up aimed a little bit to the right of centerline.
Also, don't try any short field landings in the XL2. Those brakes are hard to pull and aren't very effective. In short, don't try to taxi the XL2 without a tube of Preparation H on board, cause it's a pain in the ass. I seem to recall the Liberty Rep saying that differential toe brakes were a cost option, but IMHO they should be standard for a castering nosewheel plane.
The control stick was a pain too. It didn't get in the way as bad as the brakes or trim, but you'll find that the sticks (one for each seat) are actually one stick, kinda like the old Skyboy except much larger. There's just one set of linkage amidships under the floor, and the stick is a giant U to give both pilots an end to hold. This makes the stick feel odd, because applying left aileron (from the pilot's seat, it'll be backwards from the right) feels like it goes down toward your thigh, but right aileron feels like the stick is going up toward your shoulder.
Liberty really loses points from me by marketing their plane as "FADEC Equipped." It isn't. They claim FADEC because the engine is equipped with Electronic Fuel Injection. The throttle is still controlled directly by the lever in the cockpit via push/pull cables, ignition is still performed by a pair of magnetos, and the propeller is fixed pitch. But, where many airplanes are still carbureted and require manual mixture control (or are equipped with mechanical fuel injection and require manual mixture control), the Liberty is equipped with EFI which automatically adjusts the mixture.
Now sure, the pilot can't control the mixture, so he has no authority over the mixture, (thus the EFI computers have full authority) it is digital and electronic (the E in FADEC stands for Electronic, not Engine), and it does control the engine, but FADEC implies that all powerplant related things are controlled by two or more identical and redundant computers in a coordinated manner, so that the ignition timing, fuel injection timing and duration, throttle position, turbo waste gate and propeller pitch all work together, rather than as separate systems.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH EFI! But Liberty didn't call a spade a spade. They called a spade a soildynamic personal earth moving device.
Last, the plane's handling was either docile or boring, depending on which hat I'm wearing while describing it. If I'm wearing the instructor hat, it's docile, very easy to control and ideal for a new student to learn how to climb, descend and turn. As an experienced pilot who's ready for some aerobatics training, it's boring. Great for primary training, but if I won one in a sweepstakes or something I would get weary of it quickly. "It's a nice day, I might go to the airport...or I would, except I've got that dreadful Liberty."
I just reminded myself of some of the folks who post on the PiperSport's Facebook fanpage. "Neat little plane, but can it hover in midair or land on a rooftop?" Don't buy an airplane if you need a helicopter. And don't buy a Liberty if you want a Pitts.
The demo model the Liberty rep had was sparsely furnished. The area behind the seats had no carpet, the fiberglass was naked and unfinished. I was told it was missing quite a few cost options which would make living with the bird more bearable.
The DA-20 Eclipse, from what I've read, seems to have it's act more together. The DA-20 is Utility category spin-certified, and has better thought out features. Trim and most secondary controls are manual, flaps are pre-selectable electric, and it comes with toe brakes. On the downside, there's a red-handled lever next to the throttle. But with a little hunting, you could find an older DA-20 Katana which was Rotax 912 powered.
And now onto a different topic: Why isn't there a utility LSA? Why can't you spin any of them? CFI-SP's can't take a sport pilot all the way to instructor without sending them to someone else because there isn't an LSA that can do spin training. I'm not rich enough to purchase a copy of the ASTM standards, so I can't get the answer from the jackasses mouth (I don't like ASTM because they're keeping aircraft certification standards a trade secret when it should be public information). Is it just prohibitively expensive to insure a spinnable S-LSA so they placard all of them against it?
And to one last topic before I bring this long post to a close. The PiperSport. If I may make a few humble suggestions to Piper Aircraft regarding their new acquisition. First, change the name to something less lazy, for the reasons mentioned in my last post. I also made fun of the Skycatcher by calling it the CessnaSport, which was that airplane's working title until they came up with Skycatcher. Please, just don't use the word Sport in the title, and no capital letters mid-word. Maybe call it the Skycoupe, a name Piper applied to a prototype in the 40's that was never produced. Piper Skycoupe a lot catchier than Piper PiperSport. Hell, I don't see what's wrong with Piper SportCruiser.
Once you've got that figured out, import it from the Czech Republic for awhile until you can tool up for American production and build those destined to fly over this continent on American soil. See, there are a lot of jobless people in America right now who don't like to buy products built by foreigners. Is it really more cost effective to build an airplane in another country 6 to 8 time zones away, box it up, and ship it across an ocean? If you built it here, you could wave an american flag over your entire product line and proclaim "The Piper Family, now built entirely in the USA."
Give us manual, or at least semi-electric trim. It's gotta be cheaper and lighter. ALWAYS offer a traditional panel, don't go to a 100% glass fleet. I would suggest doing that on all your trainer models, keep a traditional instrument panel as an option. Offer the parachute as an option and not as standard equipment. That thing costs like $10 grand and it weighs 30 pounds. Some of us would rather save the weight and carry superior training and skill in it's place. I bet you could sell a few more planes for $10,000 off. And maybe certify the ones carrying parachutes for intentional spins. An airplane that can be spun would be a nice addition to the Piper line (You've already got the only complex trainer, so if you had an airplane that could spin you could take a pilot from discovery flight to Instrument, Commercial, CFI, CFII, MEI all in Piper aircraft), and CFI-SP's could practice and become proficient in spin recoveries in the airplanes they teach in.
See, I took my spin training in a Cessna 150, an airplane I know I won't be training pilots in any time soon. It's spin characteristics are going to be different from that of whatever LSA I wind up with. And I can't practice the maneuver on my own, and examiners can't test instructors on spins. LSA's tend to be a bit twitchy about the yaw axis, so spins are easy to get into. I think instructors should be very sharp in spin recovery, not just "I've done them a few times as a prerequisite to taking the instructor checkride." Hell, I think pilots should all be trained in spin recovery.
I would just like to see an S-LSA without that placard on the panel. If Piper can do it, great.
I haven't flown a DA-20 yet, but I have had the opportunity to fly a Liberty. I first learned of Liberty from a little ad in AOPA's Flight Training magazine. I liked the clean, simple panel featuring regular round dials (I like traditional instruments, to the point of boycotting Garmin) and it's claim of being a cheap, affordable trainer.
One day I was at the airport and there was one sitting outside the flying club next door. A salesman was trying to sell them on the plane to replace their aging fleet of C-152's. I love looking airplanes over and determining what systems they have on board and critiquing their instrument panels. I struck up a conversation with the salesman and he offered to take me up. I don't pass up those opportunities if I can help it.
First thing you notice about the plane is it's pudgy appearance. For it's length and wingspan, it just looks plump. An unusual feature for a low-wing airplane is that it's boarded from the front of the wings rather than the back. One reaches up, opens the DeLorean door, steps on one of those little footsteps, steps up on the leading edge of the wing, sits on the wing/doorsill, and slides into the chair. A clever way to keep students and passengers from stepping on the daggum flaps a la every other low-winged airplane ever.
Then the problems begin to stack up. First of all the trim is all electric. My experience flying this airplane is why I'm leery of electric trim. I found it difficult to find "just right" with this airplane because the trim only moved at one speed. With manual trim you can make precise inputs.
Now, there's trim where all you've got is the electric buttons and motor, and then there's the regular, manual trim that can also be electrically controlled like you find on newer Cessnas. I like the latter because you could trim the airplane in the event of an electrical failure.
The flaps of the Liberty are also controlled by the same style rocker switch (wouldn't suprise me if both switches were the same part number). The flaps are infinitely adjustable throught their range. Back in my days of flying Cessnas I would have seen this as a negative feature, but given the pre-selectable flaps of the Allegro (-2, 15 and 48 degrees deflection) I like the idea of being able to put the flaps wherever I please.
Then there's the brakes. Castering nosewheel, differential finger brakes. Next to the throttle are two small levers set like the throttles of a twin. They are spring-loaded forward; to apply the brakes, you pull the levers aft. Pulling aft on the left one applies the left brake etc. These are the only way of braking and steering the airplane on the ground. The rudder pedals control only the rudder and are useless at taxiing speeds. In fact, at the beginning of the takeoff roll, it's impossible to hold the plane perfectly straight using only rudder, so until you build up airspeed and gain rudder authority, you might have to apply a tiny bit of right brake, or maybe line up aimed a little bit to the right of centerline.
Also, don't try any short field landings in the XL2. Those brakes are hard to pull and aren't very effective. In short, don't try to taxi the XL2 without a tube of Preparation H on board, cause it's a pain in the ass. I seem to recall the Liberty Rep saying that differential toe brakes were a cost option, but IMHO they should be standard for a castering nosewheel plane.
The control stick was a pain too. It didn't get in the way as bad as the brakes or trim, but you'll find that the sticks (one for each seat) are actually one stick, kinda like the old Skyboy except much larger. There's just one set of linkage amidships under the floor, and the stick is a giant U to give both pilots an end to hold. This makes the stick feel odd, because applying left aileron (from the pilot's seat, it'll be backwards from the right) feels like it goes down toward your thigh, but right aileron feels like the stick is going up toward your shoulder.
Liberty really loses points from me by marketing their plane as "FADEC Equipped." It isn't. They claim FADEC because the engine is equipped with Electronic Fuel Injection. The throttle is still controlled directly by the lever in the cockpit via push/pull cables, ignition is still performed by a pair of magnetos, and the propeller is fixed pitch. But, where many airplanes are still carbureted and require manual mixture control (or are equipped with mechanical fuel injection and require manual mixture control), the Liberty is equipped with EFI which automatically adjusts the mixture.
Now sure, the pilot can't control the mixture, so he has no authority over the mixture, (thus the EFI computers have full authority) it is digital and electronic (the E in FADEC stands for Electronic, not Engine), and it does control the engine, but FADEC implies that all powerplant related things are controlled by two or more identical and redundant computers in a coordinated manner, so that the ignition timing, fuel injection timing and duration, throttle position, turbo waste gate and propeller pitch all work together, rather than as separate systems.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH EFI! But Liberty didn't call a spade a spade. They called a spade a soildynamic personal earth moving device.
Last, the plane's handling was either docile or boring, depending on which hat I'm wearing while describing it. If I'm wearing the instructor hat, it's docile, very easy to control and ideal for a new student to learn how to climb, descend and turn. As an experienced pilot who's ready for some aerobatics training, it's boring. Great for primary training, but if I won one in a sweepstakes or something I would get weary of it quickly. "It's a nice day, I might go to the airport...or I would, except I've got that dreadful Liberty."
I just reminded myself of some of the folks who post on the PiperSport's Facebook fanpage. "Neat little plane, but can it hover in midair or land on a rooftop?" Don't buy an airplane if you need a helicopter. And don't buy a Liberty if you want a Pitts.
The demo model the Liberty rep had was sparsely furnished. The area behind the seats had no carpet, the fiberglass was naked and unfinished. I was told it was missing quite a few cost options which would make living with the bird more bearable.
The DA-20 Eclipse, from what I've read, seems to have it's act more together. The DA-20 is Utility category spin-certified, and has better thought out features. Trim and most secondary controls are manual, flaps are pre-selectable electric, and it comes with toe brakes. On the downside, there's a red-handled lever next to the throttle. But with a little hunting, you could find an older DA-20 Katana which was Rotax 912 powered.
And now onto a different topic: Why isn't there a utility LSA? Why can't you spin any of them? CFI-SP's can't take a sport pilot all the way to instructor without sending them to someone else because there isn't an LSA that can do spin training. I'm not rich enough to purchase a copy of the ASTM standards, so I can't get the answer from the jackasses mouth (I don't like ASTM because they're keeping aircraft certification standards a trade secret when it should be public information). Is it just prohibitively expensive to insure a spinnable S-LSA so they placard all of them against it?
And to one last topic before I bring this long post to a close. The PiperSport. If I may make a few humble suggestions to Piper Aircraft regarding their new acquisition. First, change the name to something less lazy, for the reasons mentioned in my last post. I also made fun of the Skycatcher by calling it the CessnaSport, which was that airplane's working title until they came up with Skycatcher. Please, just don't use the word Sport in the title, and no capital letters mid-word. Maybe call it the Skycoupe, a name Piper applied to a prototype in the 40's that was never produced. Piper Skycoupe a lot catchier than Piper PiperSport. Hell, I don't see what's wrong with Piper SportCruiser.
Once you've got that figured out, import it from the Czech Republic for awhile until you can tool up for American production and build those destined to fly over this continent on American soil. See, there are a lot of jobless people in America right now who don't like to buy products built by foreigners. Is it really more cost effective to build an airplane in another country 6 to 8 time zones away, box it up, and ship it across an ocean? If you built it here, you could wave an american flag over your entire product line and proclaim "The Piper Family, now built entirely in the USA."
Give us manual, or at least semi-electric trim. It's gotta be cheaper and lighter. ALWAYS offer a traditional panel, don't go to a 100% glass fleet. I would suggest doing that on all your trainer models, keep a traditional instrument panel as an option. Offer the parachute as an option and not as standard equipment. That thing costs like $10 grand and it weighs 30 pounds. Some of us would rather save the weight and carry superior training and skill in it's place. I bet you could sell a few more planes for $10,000 off. And maybe certify the ones carrying parachutes for intentional spins. An airplane that can be spun would be a nice addition to the Piper line (You've already got the only complex trainer, so if you had an airplane that could spin you could take a pilot from discovery flight to Instrument, Commercial, CFI, CFII, MEI all in Piper aircraft), and CFI-SP's could practice and become proficient in spin recoveries in the airplanes they teach in.
See, I took my spin training in a Cessna 150, an airplane I know I won't be training pilots in any time soon. It's spin characteristics are going to be different from that of whatever LSA I wind up with. And I can't practice the maneuver on my own, and examiners can't test instructors on spins. LSA's tend to be a bit twitchy about the yaw axis, so spins are easy to get into. I think instructors should be very sharp in spin recovery, not just "I've done them a few times as a prerequisite to taking the instructor checkride." Hell, I think pilots should all be trained in spin recovery.
I would just like to see an S-LSA without that placard on the panel. If Piper can do it, great.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)