The lsa aircraft that have thus far impressed me.

[tl-3000pilot]

Well, I've listed the LSA high-wing favorites, now the low-wing:

1. The Bristell as seen in this thread-

2. The Falcon LS from Renegade-

3. The SportCruiser from Czech Sport-
(Noticed the PS-28 model, not quite sure of any major differences between it and the SportCruiser?)

4. The TL-Sting S-4-

5. The Vulcan C-100-

6. The Storm Century-

7. The Viper SD 4-

8. Marion Lightning (Another great looking low-wing, just hate that it dies not have the T-handle throttle quadrant.)

9. Tecnam's new Astore low-wing-

Not solely based on "drool-factor", though it does play a big part in my choices. Having to choose one of the above would be extremely difficult. As far as my mission goes, its all about "drool-factor", safety, comfort, reliability, solid fabrication, ease of serviceability, pay-load, price point and customer support.


Thanks!

tl-3000pilot.

p.s. Can all be seen via YouTube of course.

[tl-3000pilot]

You hit it 3000! Old planes on the ramp do nothing for me. Although they might still do their jobs quite well, unless it is a really awesome old plane I have no interest. What I like about Light Sport are the exciting modern aircraft. I want to be excited before the motor starts, kinda like a Porsche! I fly the PiperSport / SportCruiser and have seen 3 of them hold up very well in a busy training environment at Fleming Aviation at KGAI.

The Carbon Cub SS is an awesome aircraft too, with a very strong company and demand behind it (Wait list from a big factory!) Check out this video from Sun n Fun:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtV3LFpR ... ata_player

The new Tecnam P-2010, Pipstrel Panthera, Diamond DA-40 and Flight Design's C-4 are perfect examples of what I was trying to say about Cessna and Piper's dated designs. Not only do these companies bring great styling, but, competitive pricing, fuel savings, more room/comfort, abilities and safety.

Thanks!

[tl-3000pilot]

:)Maybe I'm freak, but I cannot make myself to drool over CT, sorry I'm a big sucker for sleek low-wing LSAs with their deadly canopies

The leader for me in a drool factor is this (and no, I haven't have a privilege to fly one ) :









And let me quote:

An ultra-wide 51” cabin with easily adjusted pedals from the pilot seated position (No more getting upside down to change your pedal settings…a common issue in light sport aircraft) assure pilot and passenger comfort on those long trips! 44 pounds of baggage in each wing locker (88 pounds total) and 33 pounds of baggage behind the seats in the cockpit. Just to put that in perspective, 48-50 pounds is the largest bag that you can check at the airline counter without having to pay extra!

And did I mention 34G of fuel? Or 750lbs empty weight?

But enough of the drooling already....

Apparently the same man (Milan Bristela), that designed the SportCruiser, also designed the Bristell as seen in your post. He claims that he had all the freedom he wanted when designing the Bristell LSA, very evident. Many great design features for sure!

Thanks!

[drseti]

I've met Milan a couple of times. He impresses me as a very competent engineer. The pedigree of the Bristell is very evident if you line it up alongside a Sportstar and a Sport Cruiser / PiperSport (he was involved in the design of all of those). Just as the SportCruiser looks and flies like a refined, improved SportStar, so does the Bristell look and fly like an improved, refined Sport Cruiser. I can't wait to see his next design!

[tl-3000pilot]

I've met Milan a couple of times. He impresses me as a very competent engineer. The pedigree of the Bristell is very evident if you line it up alongside a Sportstar and a Sport Cruiser / PiperSport (he was involved in the design of all of those). Just as the SportCruiser looks and flies like a refined, improved SportStar, so does the Bristell look and fly like an improved, refined Sport Cruiser. I can't wait to see his next design!

Your're right, the similarities are obvious. I too look forward to his next design. Based on a few of the nice features that he's incorporated into the Bristell, I'm sure that anything new will be an amazing airplane.

Thanks!

[Merlinspop]

I sat in a Bristell a year or so ago at a Hagarstown event. Pegs out my drool meter, too. (the Carbon Cub bends the needle, though). I have learned to be very skeptical of claimed empty weight. Just because someone says a certain weight, ask to take a peek at the W&B sheet. "Oh, you want paint and seats and landing gear? Those add to the weight" (okay, that was sarcasm, and NOT directed towards any specific aircraft).

- B

[drseti]

"Oh, you want paint and seats and landing gear? Those add to the weight"

But not as much weight as other options, like an engine and prop.

You will note that, all else being equal, the composite aircraft end up weighing less than the all-metal ones, and steel tube and fabric aircraft still less. (Too bad I like sheetmetal...)

[Merlinspop]

My proximity to DC, Camp David, and the desire to enter/traverse the SFRA make silly options like radios, transponders and before too long ADS-B in/out requirements. Otherwise, an old J3 or Champ would more that scratch my itch. I kinda have a split personality... I perfer low wing trikes, but high wing, tube and fabric taildraggers. A nicely electronically decked out kitfox would be lovely!

[tl-3000pilot]

You certainly see the changes made between the Bristell and the SportCrusier. Though I prefer high-wing, the design features in that Bristell have really impressed me. If I were to get a low-wing, it would be a very difficult decision between the Renegade Falcon LS and the Bristell.

I personally like the idea of push/pull tubes for the control surfaces, which the Falcon LS has, pretty sure the Bristell does as well.

One of the main features that make the Falcon LS so attractive to me, is the Lycoming O-233. Though it weighs more than a Rotax 912, the pedigree, lower r.p.m. and additional 400-hour tbo outweigh that weight issue for me. According to Renegade, the light weightness of the Falcon helps to offset the weight difference. Again, the Bristell's many great design features could also make me forget about the advantages that I feel the 233 brings to the table.

For me, it would be a very tough choice between the TL-3000 Sirius, Renegade Falcon LS and Bristell.

Thanks for the hands on opinion of the Bristell btw!

tl-3000.

[Mark Gregor]

The falcon has been promissed for a long time now but none have been delivered that I know of.
With all the projects renegade has going are they serious about getting this plane into production?

I meet alot of pilots that are negative on rotax yet have never tried one. Most of us here were cautious of the
rotax at first but after some experience had no desire to go back to a lycoming or continental. Myself included.

Do you have any specific reasons you prefer the lycoming?
Jake

[tl-3000pilot]

The falcon has been promissed for a long time now but none have been delivered that I know of.
With all the projects renegade has going are they serious about getting this plane into production?

I meet alot of pilots that are negative on rotax yet have never tried one. Most of us here were cautious of the
rotax at first but after some experience had no desire to go back to a lycoming or continental. Myself included.

Do you have any specific reasons you prefer the lycoming?
Jake

Hello Jake,

Thanks for the in-put!

As far as my preference for the 233, it has mostly to do with the additional 400-tbo, direct-driven prop (less parts), 2400-r.p.m. cruise power setting *and the fact that many A&P Techs will be more familiar with it. It is my understanding that one of the major changes in the 233, is the fact that there are no magnetos, also that Lycoming has supposedly already sent out all of the necessary materials to the various repair facilities.

I really have nothing against the Rotax 912, just feel that the 233 brings some great advantages to the table. The additional 400-hrs until tbo is quite a long time for a recreational pilot and I'm guessing that the much lower r.p.m. cruise setting is somewhat more quiet. Again, what Mr. Milan has brought to the table in all of the design features that he has incorporated in the Bristell model, I could easily forget the fact that the Renegade has a 233, especially as I learn more about the 912's features and benefits.

It would be nice if anyone would please let me know if the higher r.p.m. cruise setting in the Rotax is that noticeable in all aspects.

*As far as servicing goes, I'm not that concerned. The fact that over 90% of LSA use the Rotax, I would think that many Service Centers would wise-up to that fact and not want to pass up on the opportunities to make those servicing dollars.

From what I have thus far gathered, there are numerous, very intelligent Pilots on this Forum and if the Rotax works for them, I'm sure it would work for me.

It is also my understanding that replacement or maintenance parts cost less for the Rotax, if so, that is a huge bonus for the Rotax of course!

All corrections and feedback will be greatly appreciated.

Respectfully,

tl-3000pilot.

p.s. Did some research on the Flat-head D-Motor and the Mwfly motor, both very impressive. Thoughts/opinions on those powerplants greatly appreciated.

[tl-3000pilot]

Just thought I'd mention the Storm LSA line-up, mainly their pricing. I have found, as I'm sure that the rest of you have, that many of these LSA can be quite expensive, but not so much with Storm, even their "loaded" versions. With a few very minor improvements, I feel that they are definitely on the right track to helping more people get in the air! The Storm Century low-wing does have some "drool factor" imho. Add some arm-rests and I feel that they've got a very, very nice LSA for the money.

Thanks!

tl-3000pilot.

[tu16]

Well, I've listed the LSA high-wing favorites, now the low-wing:

1. The Bristell as seen in this thread-

2. The Falcon LS from Renegade-

3. The SportCruiser from Czech Sport-
(Noticed the PS-28 model, not quite sure of any major differences between it and the SportCruiser?)

4. The TL-Sting S-4-

5. The Vulcan C-100-

6. The Storm Century-

7. The Viper SD 4-

8. Marion Lightning (Another great looking low-wing, just hate that it dies not have the T-handle throttle quadrant.)

Not solely based on "drool-factor", though it does play a big part in my choices. Having to choose one of the above would be extremely difficult. As far as my mission goes, its all about "drool-factor", safety, comfort, reliability, solid fabrication, ease of serviceability, pay-load, price point and customer support.


Thanks!

tl-3000pilot.

p.s. Can all be seen via YouTube of course.

Surprised not seeing on the list my beloved Tecnam Sierra I've spent 80+ hrs in... A bit of a "rudder pig" - but sweet, easy to fly/land plane, decent payload.... Not cheap though... They juust anounced their new model: Tecnam Astore

[tl-3000pilot]

Well, I've listed the LSA high-wing favorites, now the low-wing:

1. The Bristell as seen in this thread-

2. The Falcon LS from Renegade-

3. The SportCruiser from Czech Sport-
(Noticed the PS-28 model, not quite sure of any major differences between it and the SportCruiser?)

4. The TL-Sting S-4-

5. The Vulcan C-100-

6. The Storm Century-

7. The Viper SD 4-

8. Marion Lightning/Tecnam Sierra- (Another (2) great looking low-wing, just hate that it dies not have the T-handle throttle quadrant.)

9. Technam Astore-

Not solely based on "drool-factor", though it does play a big part in my choices. Having to choose one of the above would be extremely difficult. As far as my mission goes, its all about "drool-factor", safety, comfort, reliability, solid fabrication, ease of serviceability, pay-load, price point and customer support.


Thanks!

tl-3000pilot.

p.s. Can all be seen via YouTube of course.

Surprised not seeing on the list my beloved Tecnam Sierra I've spent 80+ hrs in... A bit of a "rudder pig" - but sweet, easy to fly/land plane, decent payload.... Not cheap though... They juust anounced their new model: Tecnam Astore

I was very close to mentioning the T-Sierra, as well as a few others that are indeed very nice low-wing LSA. The P-2002 Sierra is certainly a nice plane, especially coming from a company with a long history like Tecnam, but there's (1) important "must have" feature that I have always wanted in an aircraft, and that's the T-handle throttle quadrant. I have always flown Cessna aircraft (150, 152, 172) and none of them gave that feature. When peering inside of Beech Skippers, Piper Cherokees, Piper Tomahawk and even a few RV-10 airplanes (noticed that some RV-10 aircraft have either a push/pull throttle or T-handle) on the tarmac, I would always be envious of the T-handle throttle.

When I was searching for a CFI to teach me to fly, one of them said "hey, you would love learning with me in my Skipper, its got a really cool T-handle throttle". I agreed, the T-handle throttle was a nice feature, but I ended up finding a better Instructor that better suited me and learned to fly in a 1958 C-172.

Though the T-handle throttle is a very small feature, it is huge to me.

I did include the Sierra with the Arion Lightning above, as I should have when mentioning the Arion Lightning.

It's funny, I just watched a video on the new Astore just prior to reading your post, it is certainly another great looking aircraft from Tecnam. It is my understanding that the wings are the same as the Sierra. I find it to be a very clean and sleek design myself.

Thank you for sharing!

Many happy/safe hrs of flying in your P-2002, you are a very blessed Man to have such a plane!

tl-3000.

[tl-3000pilot]

I hope I'm not boring you guys/gals with what this particular Pilot likes/dislikes and or wants/needs, again, it is my hope that when I post my thoughts, likes/dislikes, wants/needs and opinions, I will get the thoughts and opinions of others in an effort to become more intelligent in the LSA sector.

Anyway, this is a list of particulars that are features I personally feel I must have in an LSA, be it a high-wing or a low-wing:

1. "Drool-Factor" of course-

2. Armrest- (one in the center and one on the door, basically, one for each arm.)

3. Electric Flaps-

4. A power-plant that has a minimum 2000-tbo, I like the idea of a direct-driven propeller, as I feel having less parts means less weight, as well as maintenance. If you get the chance, please check out the videos on the following:

a) Lycoming O-233-

b) D-Motor- (Will soon, if not now, have a 2000-tbo.)
(Extremely impressed with this power-plant, great fuel-burn, quiet, very few parts, light-weight, simple, yet modern in its features!)

c) MWFly-
(Another very impressive power-plant!)

5. A "finished" or "covered" interior- (I have seen some CTLS models with "un-finished" interiors. They now have/offer a "finished" interior that looks a lot better. I feel that having a "finished" interior may help in the reduction of noise and help with cabin insulation and when paying over 100k for any plane, it should at the very least have a "finished" interior!).)

6. Being a Private Pilot and having only flown aircraft with yokes, Having yokes in a high-wing LSA would be a must! If deciding on a low-wing, I would learn to live without the yokes, as I've yet to discover (1) LSA low-wing that has yokes-

7. Push/Pull Control Rods/Tubes for the control surfaces-

8. BRS-

9. T-handle throttle quadrant-

10. A "fair" starting retail price-

Another feature that would be nice, but is not a must have, is an insulated cabin like the Paradise P-1 offers. Just a really nice touch imho.

That's about it.



Thanks!

tl-3000pilot.