Sport Pilot Talk

Hi;

In looking into an LSA to own, the ubiquitous CTLS pops up all the time. But what about the CTSW? It has a higher useful load and seems well built? Any thoughts? How do you think the two aircraft compare?

jjfjr

Having owned both I prefer the CTLS, but the CTSW is still a good airplane.

Hi;

Thanks for the reply. Do any pros and/or cons for either aircraft come to mind?

jjfjr

I think that the CTLS is a little bit more "refined". It also has a slightly longer tail giving it better stability in the vertical (yaw) axis.

That said, I like the CTSW better. The CTLS typically gives up 50lb or more in carrying capacity to the CTSW, and that can mean a lot in the LSA world. Less that about 540lb makes it very hard to take two normal American-sized people on trips of any distance, IMO -- that would be two 200lb people, 20 gallons of fuel (about 3hr plus reserves in a CT) and 20lb of bags.

You can't really go wrong either way, both the CTLS and CTSW are great airplanes.

Things I like about the CTLS over the CTSW. It's more stable in pitch and yaw, has nicer landing characteristics, a more robust feeling in the landing gear, more comfortable seats, hat shelf and "D" windows making the cabin feel larger, the "D" windows provide a little more visibility, and carb heat that works.

Things I like about the CTSW over the CTLS. Better useful load, and it might be a little faster.

I have about 350-400 hours flying a CTSW, and about the same or a little more in the CTLS. My recent CT time is in the LS, but I get the chance to go back and fly a SW on occasion. For me personally I prefer the LS, if you are not giving up a large weight penalty.

In the CTSW's I prefer the evolution of airplanes built between mid 2006 and mid 2007. For the CTLS I like the airplanes built from mid 2008 to when they introduced the Dynon Skyview.

CTSW for me and has been for 1200 hrs. I like the seating and larger baggage area and extra payload.

roger lee wrote:CTSW for me and has been for 1200 hrs. I like the seating and larger baggage area and extra payload.

I felt the same way until I had spent quite a bit of time in the CTLS and then flew a CTSW.

One note about landings. The CTLS definitely has better and more forgiving landing gear. But the longer tail requires greater care on slow, full-stall landings to prevent scraping the ventral tail fin. I'm sure it could also be done in a CTSW, but the tail is so short the landing angle would have to be extreme.

The reason I started looking at the CT series was because they have the best payload and are also fast. There are some other airplanes like the Highlander with greater load carrying capacity (700lb+ ), but not with the same speed as a CT. So the lens I look at these airplanes through is carrying capacity combined with speed. That makes the CTSW the winner, but other pilots have different needs or desires in an airplane.

BTW, the tundra gear in the CT series is nice for landing on grass and rougher strips, but you will give up some speed (4-8kt) over the smaller wheels. just something to consider when you are deciding what you want.

MrMorden wrote:One note about landings. The CTLS definitely has better and more forgiving landing gear. But the longer tail requires greater care on slow, full-stall landings to prevent scraping the ventral tail fin. I'm sure it could also be done in a CTSW, but the tail is so short the landing angle would have to be extreme.

Andy, I have quite a bit of time flying and instructing in both, and I don't think the CTLS takes greater care on landing to keep from scraping the tail. The sub fin on the CTLS is not as tall as the one on the CTSW. Both will drag under the same extreme nose high landing. The point of contact is different between the two. If you drag the tail on a CTLS it hit the very back corner making it easier to see. If you drag the tail on a CTSW it hits midway on the underside of the sub fin. You can't see the damage unless you get under the airplane and look. For the CTLS the damage is usually limited to the corner of the sub fin. For the CTSW the damage is usually a long scrape on the bottom of the fin. I have repaired damage to both CTSW and CTLS from tail strikes. The later CTLS have a easily replaceable bumper block that normally take the brunt of a tail strike.

3Dreaming wrote:

MrMorden wrote:One note about landings. The CTLS definitely has better and more forgiving landing gear. But the longer tail requires greater care on slow, full-stall landings to prevent scraping the ventral tail fin. I'm sure it could also be done in a CTSW, but the tail is so short the landing angle would have to be extreme.

Andy, I have quite a bit of time flying and instructing in both, and I don't think the CTLS takes greater care on landing to keep from scraping the tail. The sub fin on the CTLS is not as tall as the one on the CTSW. Both will drag under the same extreme nose high landing. The point of contact is different between the two. If you drag the tail on a CTLS it hit the very back corner making it easier to see. If you drag the tail on a CTSW it hits midway on the underside of the sub fin. You can't see the damage unless you get under the airplane and look. For the CTLS the damage is usually limited to the corner of the sub fin. For the CTSW the damage is usually a long scrape on the bottom of the fin. I have repaired damage to both CTSW and CTLS from tail strikes. The later CTLS have a easily replaceable bumper block that normally take the brunt of a tail strike.

Well, your experience is greater than mine, I was just relating what others have said about the CTLS. I will take your actual experience over my rumors any day!

You are definitely right about the location of the CTSW tail strikes, I pulled my tail back on the ground to see where it would hit and what the angle would be. I do pretty much full-stall landings, and don't think I've ever come close to banging the tail. I'd think it would take some real work to get it to happen.

Hi;

Thanks for all your replies. A comparable aircraft seems to be the Remos g3/600. Does anyone have experience with it as an owner or pilot?

jjfjr

.......

G3 is the original like CTSW and GX is the second generation like CTLS. Almost all my time was in GX, but I prefer CTLS, theoretically speaking (it was a while). The biggest issue I have with this, as with any airplanes, is my height. CTLS offers better control clearance and significantly thinner door frames. It is also faster with its reflex flaps.

When G3 came on the American market, people killed themselves once in a while by forgetting to reconnect the controls. This is something a GX flier must be impeccably vigilant about. Always take a bright flashlight and have a good peek in the tailcone, even if it's your airplane that you never fold. Generally, in American conditions, nobody ever folds wings on Remoses. It's too much hassle and it's very rare to find a hangar partnership that would only work if you fold the wings. In German flight schools you can see a row of Remoses parked for the night with wings folded like on aircraft carrier, but not in America.

The control feel on CT is faked with springs in all 3 axis and honestly I prefer the natural feel of GX, but it's not enough to offset the visibility disadvantage for me.