Best LSA For New Pilot

[Scotsman58]

Hi. I just joined this forum. I'm progressing towards my sport pilot ticket (just completed my second solo in the Flight Design CTLS), starting to think about getting my own plane sometime this spring. I would be interested in views on the best options to help keep a low-timer safe.

Although I keep hearing that the Flight Design is for more experienced pilots, I'm getting more comfortable in it. Maybe that's because I've done most of my training in the CTLS, and I have a great instructor who really knows this plane. I could definitely see myself staying with FD, and for me the standard BRS is a plus (not to mention the glass cockpit, great visibility, standard equipment, etc., etc.)

I would like to go with a manufacturer that seems well-positioned to survive the shake-out that may be coming to LSAs, and that can support me (I live in Connecticut). The obvious candidates besides Flight Design seem to be Tecnam, and the new Pipersport. Maybe the Cessna Skycatcher, but the delays in its production may not work for me. Any views on these, or on other options?

[LightSportFlyer]

I vote for the Tecnam P 92 Echo Classic or Eaglet -

- Been in production since 1992, thousands flying

- Has a steel roll cage, very few other LSAs have one

- Very gentle handling with minimal P factor

- Easy maintenance all metal construction

- Good useful load

- Good factory support

- Very good safety record

- Demonstrated crosswinds of 20 kts

- Per their new distributor they'll install any avionics you want.

- I read the previous American distributor, Lynn Birmingham, say "All Tecnam aircraft are tested to meet the CS-VLA standards, which are equivalent to the FAA’s Part 23 full certification regs, and all Tecnam LSA meet the much-higher certification standards imposed by the European body, which is “virtually the same” as the FAA’s Part 23 requirements for “certified” aircraft."

“The bottom line is that Tecnam products meet the flight and certification standards applied to certified aircraft in the USA,” Birmingham said.

- And according to a review in Plane and Pilot, the "Eaglet is spin-certified in the United States in the flight-training environment. Its famed 80-something designer, Luigi Pascale, does loops and rolls in it—at 1,000 feet AGL yet!"

http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/aircraf ... ml?start=2

[KSCessnaDriver]

The only person who can really answer the question for you, is, well, you. Go fly a whole bunch of them, or at least look at them. What do you like, what don't you like? Then, start finding what works well for you, and what price range works well for you.

Also, consider who is going to be able to work on the plane for you, and how far away that is from you.

[scottj]

This is a complicated question. The best answer is which one makes you happy.

Yes, you need to test fly different models. Go to OSH Kosh in July and see 100 different LSA side by side. You can even fly them. Which one is easier to fly?

Write down your goals and mission. What types of flying will you be doing - short or long trips? Solo or double?

What is your weight, your passenger? How tall and wide are you? Do you both fit in the airplane? Can you enter and exit it easily? Can you see out the windows?

How long of legs do you want to fly ~ 2 hours or 8 between fuel stops? How many gallons does the airplane hold? Are you still under 1320 pounds with full fuel and passengers?

How much baggage room do you have?

Does it have the BRS installed as standard equipment?

Auto pilot? Glass cockpit? Leather seats and more...

Dealer and support systems around the country? Who fixes it when it breaks?

What is the safety record? Check the NTSB and do some Google searches. Accidents, how many are injuries, fatals, or just walk aways? BRS and carbon fiber save lives.

Don't buy, like many do, an airplane just because it has a well known name on the door or you like the color. Do you your homework, and you will be happy in the long run.

Scott

[Scotsman58]

Thanks for these helpful suggestions. I fully intend to do my research and test flying, and compare features that are important to me. I would like to focus here on specific handling or other features that those with experience on this forum believe would be beneficial to the low-time pilot.

Any other perspectives on the Tecnam Eaglet? What about other Tecnams?

[garbageman]

I bought a Tecnam Eaglet in Nov 2009. I lease it back to CSP @ W29. I love it. It is very easy to fly, and land. No bad habits. Did most of my training in a Tecnam Echo Super--no longer made--but the Eaglet is almost the same. Has a basic 6 pack, GPS, radio, and transponder. Got my ticket in July 2009, but have been involved in aviation forever. Test flew many SLSA's at Sebring in 07,08,&09. Like Tecnam best. Come down to W29 in Maryland and I'll take you for a flight, or sign up with Chesapeake Sport Pilot for an intro flight in a glass Eaglet or Sierra.

[Scotsman58]

Thanks, garbageman -- that's a very generous offer to take me flying in your Eaglet. I've actually been in touch with CSP, and I understand that they may be up here in Connecticut sometime in the not-too-distant future.

Are you willing to share some more on why you picked the Eaglet, as opposed to the Sierra/Bravo? I would imagine benign handling might have been one factor. Am I correct in thinking that spins are permitted in the Eaglet, but are placarded against in the other Tecnams?

[Murrell]

Eaglet
Not Approved for intentional spins.

http://www.recreationalpilots.com.au/te ... review.htm

Google is wonderful !

Murrell

[CharlieTango]

The best SLSA for a new pilot depends on a number of things.

best to rent? here your desire for benign handling makes more sense.

best to buy? today's benign SLSA might turn into a dog overtime as you develop skills and then want a more specialized design.

[garbageman]

The Eaglet is a perfect trainer. On go arounds, it does not sink. Its stall is very benign, easy to catch as the nose drops through the horz. Slow flight is just like it is suppose to be. Take offs are smooth--if you use the right amount of right rudder. Crosswind takeoffs and landings are just like in the book. It looks like an airplane!!
I've not flown a sierra or bravo, but I know with their different wing, they do not do the above as well as the Eaglet. I wanted an airplane that was easy to fly, and one that was very forgiving. That's why I bought the eaglet. You should watch the abuse inflicted on the CSP airplanes, and look how well the eaglet "could care less".

[garbageman]

With regard to spins, I did spin training in a Pitts S2. That airplane "spins". I was with a spin qualified instructor a few months ago, and tried to spin the echo super. It does not really spin. More like a half rotation in a spin, then it drops its nose , picks up airspeed, and flies out. I believe you would have to work very hard to keep it in the spin. The echo super and eaglet are cleared to do 1 and a half rotations for the purpose of flight instruction only with a trained CFI on board, but don't try this at home. The difficulty in spinning the eaglet is one of the things that make it a great trainer. If you want to spin, go fly a Pitts or an Extra.

[Scotsman58]

Sorry to take a few days to respond, garbageman. I guess what I was getting at on the subjects of spins is which LSAs have been thoroughly spin tested. For example, it seems that, following some initial incidents, the Skycatcher has been pretty thoroughly tested, and its behavior significantly corrected. I'm not interested in the ability to demonstrate spins (other than in advanced attitude correction training with an appropriate instructor) -- just in avoiding unintentional ones.

Have any other LSAs been spin-tested in the same way as the Skycatcher? Tecnams? Flight Design? Pipersport (formerly the CZAW Sportcruiser)?

[garbageman]

I don't know. Perhaps one of the experts does.

[3Dreaming]

I think some spin testing is required under ASTM standards. This may not be as extensive as CFR part 23. Tom

[drseti]

The ASTM consensus standard merely requires testing of altitude loss and number of rotations in recovering from a 1-turn spin. Not very rigorous, but better than nothing.