Comparing low wing LSA

[deltafox]

Reference: http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=v ... e502c9e80a

An ANN Editor Assumes The Role Of Potential LSA Buyer/Pilot

News Editor Tom Patton took the opportunity at Sebring to fly three different examples of the low-wing, tricycle gear airplanes that most appeal to him; the Bristell, the Vans RV-12 and the Zenith CH 650.

[CTLSi]

......

[FastEddieB]

Before getting too high and mighty...

...remember the photos of composite planes having serious problems.

And it being suggested it was because they got wet or used the wrong ph cleaner.

My last two planes have been composite, so I'm obviously fine with it. But aluminum is tried and true and does not a "beast" make.

Unless you meant "beast" in a good way!

Back on point, I think I have an overall preference for low wings, interestingly because I perceive them as giving a better view. My current ride is the best of both worlds - high wing but set so far back it's completely out of view for the pilot, and largely so for the passenger.

But different strokes and all that!

[Nomore767]

"Low wing is personal preference, I find them hot, and the wing blocking the view and the cross wing slip landings more hazardous and less appealing.

The Bristell is an all metal relatively inefficient aircraft, but then again, so is the Zodiak. I take it the RV is also a metal beast.

The price of the Bristell is about the same as a Flight Design CTLSi. Compare those two if you want to see whats possible in an LSA made of all carbon fiber versus metal.[/quote]"

You're right it's personal preference. I was looking at high wings over low wings before I settled on the RV-12.

I just flew across the CA desert, AZ, NM and west TX in July often at mid-day. Yeah it was HOT. Then again I can crack the canopy when taxiing and the resulting breeze is great until ready to roll. I've found the sun-shade to be excellent too. The plane climbs well to 5500-9500' and so it quickly gets cooler. Hot is hot, in any plane. The direct sunlight issue is mitigated by the shade but that is one area where I preferred the high wing. Harder to read Foreflight on my iPad but hey, I'll get over it.

In the RV-12 the cabin is set towards the front of the wing so you can see down much better as well as above and I can also see see the tail wings. In most of the high wings airplanes I flew my eye-line was along the under side of the wing or I had to stoop somewhat to look out. Except in the Skycatcher.

The RV-12 slips as good as any other plane I've flown, so I don't get your point. A slip is a slip.

The RV-12 is all metal, it's one reason I chose it. I saw an RV-12 that got an accidental ding and they quickly, and easily, replaced the panel and repainted. On the there hand a Remos I flew, with a similar ding was out for months and was many times more expensive to repair, and dealing with the company in Germany was a hassle, and much more expensive. Just saying, that's what actually occurred, not my spin.

"Metal beast'? Not really…my plane has an empty weight of 765lbs and is on the 'heavy' side for an RV-12. but I also have all the options. ADSB-IN and mostly OUT. I also have the Seattle VFR Sectionals loaded which I can alternate between the Dynon chart.

But…my wife and I can fly, with full fuel, with 50lbs of bags and be a little under max gross. It'll fly for a little more than 3 hours and that's more than enough for us. I don't care a hoot what anyone else thinks, that's fine for US.

Cross country? I just flew 2800 miles in 5 days and it did a fantastic job, at an average of 4.5 gph at 5140rpm and 114-116kts TAS. Personally, I think that's pretty good.

With the ADSB , traffic, sectional charts, autopilot, weather, and the ability to get the latest METAR and TAF for about any airport, plus frequencies and an overlaid airport chart for every field I have more capability that at the airline in many ways!

I looked at an LSA that was listed at $195k which carried 30 gallons, was mostly carbon fibre fuselage, and had an empty weight that was 110lbs over the plane I got. It was a lovely plane, and should be for $70k more than I paid for the RV. It also had the 912iS engine which was very nice , but…I didn't really NEED it and I'm glad I didn't get it now.
I looked, and flew, the CTLS, and though I think it's a nice LSA, it wasn't really what I wanted or NEEDED for MY particular mission.

In the end I didn't get all I wanted but I did get just about everything I NEEDED and at a price that was well under most of the competition. I'm well satisfied.

Did I say that it's MADE in the USA?

I looked at the Champ, Remos, Skycatcher, CC Sport Cub, CTLS, Tecnam, and Sky Arrow and I flew most of them.

I have to say doing a long (hour a half) demo with Mitch Lock in the RV-12 made all the difference. He has 2 planes to demo. One that he built and the one I flew is the prototype RV-12 SLSA N112VA and has dual Garmin GX3 Touch screens. I found the airplane to be a lovely flying plane and very sporty too. It's the fastest of the LSAs I personally looked at and still gets great fuel economy with the 912ULS engine. The G3X Touch screens were pretty awesome and I liked the second one so that I could have full screen sectionals if I was alone and an EFIS if I had someone with me.

I have 2 gas stations here in SC near the airport which have 93 non-ethanol at the pump as well as Barnwell airport about a 40 min flight away which has 93 non-ethanol at the pump. This was one of the factors in the decision to go Rotax.
BTW at Barnwell I made friends with a guy who was first in line for the SLSA version of the RV-12 but waited and bought unit number 6.

My plane N767HG is 12038 serial # but that's because I didn't elect to have one of the block numbers that Vans had reserved. 12037 is an SLSA N245VA that Vans use for training purposes. They seem to be delivering a new SLSA every Friday and that's on course for their stated goal of 50 SLSA per year.

Lastly, I've put info on here because I've had numerous e-mails and texts asking for it. I'm not selling my particular plane of choice. I made my decision and am comfortable with it. GlasAir have the new Merlin coming along and, on paper, it looks very good. High-wing, a lot like a retro-fit Skycatcher style high wing with dual Skyview Touch, a/p, 912Sport engine and good weight. Just not at market yet but later on would it be a better choice? Likely.

Let's not get into pissing contests over which is 'better' and start knocking other LSAs and airplanes. The first and main thing is to get folks flying, youngsters interested in flying, and encouraging new pilots and students to start flying. Explaining the realities of ownership along with its advantages is where we should be focussing our attention.

I love planes, all planes. When I was a kid I would watch planes for hours, I thought the guy at the airport who owned his own Cherokee was a God. One day, "I" would own my own little plane so that I could just decide to go flying and with little difficulty, get my plane out of the hangar and go and do it. I owned a lovely Tiger Moth for a while and now I have a RV-12. I'm very lucky, I'm very blessed and I've already had an exciting and rewarding commercial flying career.
Now it's time to put some icing on the cake as well as enjoy the company of fellow pilots, owners and friends and share the flying experience.

I'd like to thank all of you who answered my numerous questions, gave advice, tips and encouragement. It's very well appreciated, believe me.

Thanks!

[MovingOn]

.......

[Nomore767]

rv-12 1.jpg (17.75 KiB) Viewed 5428 times

RV-12 2.jpg (26.44 KiB) Viewed 5428 times

Here are a couple of pics from the RV-12, right and left. The second pic is going by Auburn University in AL on the way into Columbus GA

It's a low wing but the pilot sits farther forward so you can see directly down as well as out and over your shoulder (plus unlimited above). You can't tell as well from the picture but the pilot sits quite high over the panel and the side so you can easily look straight down.
The price you pay is the sun but the sun-shade does a much better job than I thought.

[drdehave]

Low-wing or high? I think we pretty much fall in love with whichever one we buy--and then rationalize in support of our choice.

I'd be more concerned about a few other key issues: How fast will it cruise? How comfortable are those seats? What's the fuel capacity and range? What type of panel and avionics? Does it have autopilot? What is the luggage/storage configuration? How easy is the engine to access and work on? If it is an S-LSA, which maintenance items does the manufacturer state that I (as pilot/owner) am allowed to do? etc.

This kind of discussion is what would bring me to my decision--not where the wings were attached. Just my 2 cents...

[Wm.Ince]

Low wing is personal preference, I find them hot, and the wing blocking the view and the cross wing slip landings more hazardous and less appealing.
The Bristell is an all metal relatively inefficient aircraft, but then again, so is the Zodiak. I take it the RV is also a metal beast.
The price of the Bristell is about the same as a Flight Design CTLSi. Compare those two if you want to see whats possible in an LSA made of all carbon fiber versus metal.

Have you ever flown a Bristell?
If not, then shut up.

Your attitude continues to be condescending and rude. Grow up.

[drseti]

William, that was unnecessary. I happen to disagree with CTLSi, but I don't find him condescending. I welcome his posts, as well as yours, and encourage you both to keep expressing your opinions - respectfully. As for rude - well, maybe a little, but so was your response. We don't need this. Ours is a friendly community; let's keep it that way.
Thanks.