Talk about airplanes! At last count, there are 39 (and growing) FAA certificated S-LSA (special light sport aircraft). These are factory-built ready to fly airplanes. If you can't afford a factory-built LSA, consider buying an E-LSA kit (experimental LSA - up to 99% complete).
I've been working with the folks at Allegro LSA for a while, and we're starting to talk about offering some retro-fits to the older 2007 models, 2000 models, and also start coming up with things that would make the aircraft more appealing to various types of people.
Now, if you come out and say 'its a high wing and I really wanted a low wing'... that's not overly realistic
I'd like to know more about what would make you want to fly one more - Better cruise speed? Cabin creature-comforts? some aspect of flight? More fuel? etc.
We've already had one gentlemen approach us to add the wing fuel tanks to his aircraft, and that has gotten us thinking about what else we could do.
Please let us know, and I'll make sure I get back to this thread with more information as it comes up!
theskunk wrote:Now, if you come out and say 'its a high wing and I really wanted a low wing'... that's not overly realistic !
Sure it is, Skunk. Just make it fully aerobatic, so us low-wing guys can fly it inverted.
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, KLHV [email protected]
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US
CTLSi wrote:Dump the wing struts. Dump the aluminum. Widen the cockpit. Configure with 912i fuel injected engine. Improve the control inputs. Add a BRS. Add 10 gallons to fuel capacity. Create some real baggage space. Center joystick is crude and clumsy.
But then improvements would have to be limited, and small or you quickly get out of your niche, right?
One of the problems with the wide range of LSA capability is comparing a plane like the Allegro (and Aerotrek) which are really factory built kit plane, to the cross country capable cruisers like the Tecnam and Flight Design.
On your points - dumping the wing struts is on the road map, to move to a cantilever wing.
Dumping aluminum is not likely, as we believe that having aluminum control surfaces will help in the long run when hangar rash occurs. It also helps soak up some of the bumps (for reference, the Tecnam P2008 uses an aluminum wing).
912i is an option, but nobody has requested it yet.
Improving the control inputs - what part did you feel was missing? At what airspeed?
BRS is an option, wing tanks for additional fuel capacity is an option, How much baggage space do we need?
Center stick may seem crude, but it is part of our design that folks seem to like, especially when you have your lap free for other things...
You're absolutely right that comparing them would make things different, but our aircraft also has a different mission than a cross-country tourer. We're looking for small improvements (that aren't already available options) that people would want on their older aircraft, from the factor. Arm rest is a great suggestion and we'll work on that.
CTLSi wrote:Dump the wing struts. Dump the aluminum. Widen the cockpit. Configure with 912i fuel injected engine. Improve the control inputs. Add a BRS. Add 10 gallons to fuel capacity. Create some real baggage space. Center joystick is crude and clumsy.
In other words, you're saying, build a completely different airplane. Like, maybe, a CTSi. (After all, it's not as though somebody could buy a CTLSi already...)
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, KLHV [email protected]
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US
I don't like the center stick or the setup of the panel. With the center stick, it is difficult to reach around to the radios on the far side of the panel. I guess it just feels weird having the throttle on the left and then having to reach all the way to the right to hit the flaps, and to switch hands to reach the radio. imho, it would be better if the stick were between my legs, and the throttle in the center of the panel so there wouldn't be as much juggling and reaching back and forth across the cockpit. Maybe move the trim to the panel or center console too. This way you could fly the stick with your left hand and hit the radio, trim, flaps and throttle with your right and not have to switch hand across your body and reach up to the trim above your head on the left, over to the flaps on the right, then back down to the throttle on the lower left. I fell like zoro in there sometimes.
Could we do something about the prohibition of tailwind operations? I understand that the performance suffers greatly in such case but in some places it is unavoidable. KLAM is the classic example in my backyard. KAXX is too: although it's two-way, smart people eat tailwind component there and roll downhill.
I have seen several different specs posted for the Allegro 2007, some list 1320lb gross, others 1232lb. Either way, the Allegro has over 600lb useful load at it's empty weight of 605-630 (depending on whose specs you read).
The Allegro has a *very* nice useful load, but it's not a great traveling airplane because of limited storage space. Frankly, a 22lb limit for the baggage area is pitiful; it's just enough weight for the junk you normally leave in an airplane (cover, tie downs, basic tools, etc) and what two people might throw in it for a short flight.
I'd concentrate first on making the useful load "useful". With a 600lb+ useful load, it needs at least a 60lb baggage capacity and the space to put that much in it. With 27 gallons of fuel that airplane can do long legs, but not if you can't take enough gear for even a weekend. Even if you have to add weight somewhere to get the W&B to work out, it would be worth it since you have plenty of extra weight to give up if necessary.
It's not the fastest airplane, but it's not a dog either. 100 knot (118mph) cruise is respectable. If there are easy mods to increase speed, go for it, but I'd first work on making it an airplane people can look at and say "Wow, with that useful load and those cargo areas, I could do X with that plane!" I think right now people look at the Allegro and see a nice handling airplane that is decent for training or short trips in the local area, but not a real traveling airplane.
For comparison, my 2007 CTSW has a 585lb useful load, less than the Allegro, but I can actually use it. If I want to put 110lb of baggage in the airplane and run less fuel as a result, I can. I can load me and the wife and 70lb of bags and 24 gallons of gas, or both of us and 110lb of bags and 14 gallons, plenty for a 1.5 hour leg and a one hour reserve. I could fly this airplane from our home in Georgia to visit the wife's folks in Michigan, and carry enough baggage for a week or two of visiting. The Allegro just can't really do this in the present configuration, and the main issue with it is not speed, fuel, or useful load, it's the space to effectively carry that load.
Last edited by MrMorden on Mon Oct 21, 2013 9:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA
This is great feedback guys.. I'm passing on everything that has been mentioned her to the manufacturing/development folks and we're taking this very seriously.
theskunk wrote:This is great feedback guys.. I'm passing on everything that has been mentioned her to the manufacturing/development folks and we're taking this very seriously.
-Rob
Good luck with it Rob, I always thought the Allegro is a very neat airplane, other than the shortcomings (IMO) that I listed.
BTW, do you know the reason for the design decision of making the airplane with a T-tail? Nothing wrong with it, I'm just curious what led to that configuration, since most T-tail planes have pretty specific reasons for doing it. The downside, of course is the loss of prop wash over the tail at low speed to give more control authority, but if that is not a problem for the airframe then there are definite benefits of the T configuration.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA
I gather those people come from glider world where the aerodynamic benefit of reduced interference drag make everyone have a T-tail. Pipistrel is another example of such carry-over from glider to LSA.
Talked to Ross at B bar D today and he told me that the 22lb baggage limit is with the ballistic parachute. The limit without is 55lb.
Also, I trained on the Allegro (and like it). But when I went to fly different planes the stick/throttle arrangement was different on every other plane I flew. Almost every other plane has the throttle coming out of the center of the console. This means that you fly with the left hand. This took some getting used to.
