Quattro cruiser

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).

Moderator: drseti

Warmi
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Frankfort, IL

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby Warmi » Tue May 01, 2018 7:47 am

Yeah , I know ... 30 minutes is nothing and frankly, on another day with completely different settings ( weather, the way I got up from my bed that morning etc ) ... it could have been very different.

But ... it is an imperfect world and I am glad I got that 30 minutes to begin with :-)

My story is kind of similar to yours ...I did my initial training in Remos GX and then finished it up in my own Sting S4 ( I had my check-ride a month ago - still waiting for my official papers and flying with a printout ) :D
Flying Sting S4 ( N184WA ) out of Illinois

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1967
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby MrMorden » Tue May 01, 2018 8:28 am

ShawnM wrote:
MrMorden wrote:I take your point, but it's not really fair to compare a new airplane with a used one, given how much they depreciate in the short term. A new Cirrus SR22 is easily $550-700k. So you could say you are "saving" $150-300k by building...


Are you really saving $150-300K? Are you telling us your time is worth nothing?


2000 hours of my time is not worth $300k, or that would be my salary. YMMV.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1967
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby MrMorden » Tue May 01, 2018 8:32 am

Warmi wrote:
MrMorden wrote:
Warmi wrote:To be frank, all of the low wings I have tried , SportCruiser was my least favorite ... it does look very cool from outside but just didn't feel right - very subjective I know :D . I preferred Evektor , Sting and best of them all , Sling 2.


I did not love my one checkout flight in a SportCruiser. It was super light on controls and very "floaty" on landing. But I'm sure once you get used to it it's fine. A lot of "liking" a particular airplane comes down to what you're used to I think.


Yeah ,I am sure I would get used to it as well ... there is got to be a good reason why SportCruisers are so popular ...


I think the SC appeal is at least partially "sex appeal"...it's a very good looking airplane. It has other nice qualities as well, and it seems to be a well-built airplane. But if you are deciding to buy something "egglike" like my CT, or a SC that looks like it's doing 200mph standing still, then all other factors being equal the sexy airplane will probably win that fight.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1967
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby MrMorden » Tue May 01, 2018 8:39 am

ShawnM wrote:And I agree that our preferences come down to what we are used to. I only have time in a Remos and my SportCruiser. I love how responsive it is and early on I did have some floating issues during landing but those go away with time. After a couple hours I was completely comfortable in the plane.

My instructor had an Evektor but I never flew it. I was able to train in my own SportCruiser. :mrgreen:

30 minutes in a SportCruiser? Does that really count? Was that one trip around the pattern? I wouldn't say you actually "flew" a SportCruiser then. Just sayin' :mrgreen:

The Sling 2 is a nice looking plane, looks a lot like the SportCruiser, but I've never flown one.

If my pockets had no bottom or weren't just filled with lint I really love the new Tecnam P2002 Sierra MkII. Never flown on though.


Folks say my CTSW controls feel heavy compared to other LSA (and they do), but I am completely used to it so that to me is "normal". I'm sure you can tame the float in the SC by being on speed and knowing the airplane.

I said one flight, not 30min. It was about 1.5hr and included steep turns, stalls, ground reference maneuvers, and 3 takeoffs and landings all done by me. It was not unpleasant, it just felt very light and the airplane didn't really want to come down to land. That can be a good quality as you can probably land it very slowly.

I don't like the look of the Evektor, the shape of the canopy looks like it wants to pin your arms down and put plexi six inches from your nose (though I'm sure that's not the case). The Tecnams are wonderful flying airplanes, I did half of my training in one. Very stable and predictable.

EDIT: Whoops, you meant Warmi when you said 30min. I got confused because in the first part of your post you reference something I said. sorry about that.
Last edited by MrMorden on Tue May 01, 2018 8:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

User avatar
ShawnM
Posts: 331
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:59 pm
Location: Clearwater, FL / KZPH

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby ShawnM » Tue May 01, 2018 8:41 am

MrMorden wrote:I think the SC appeal is at least partially "sex appeal"...it's a very good looking airplane. It has other nice qualities as well, and it seems to be a well-built airplane. But if you are deciding to buy something "egglike" like my CT, or a SC that looks like it's doing 200mph standing still, then all other factors being equal the sexy airplane will probably win that fight.


I'll admit, that's what drew me to the SportCruiser in the first place, her sex appeal. That's why I named my SportCruiser "Ginger", from Gilligan's Island, remember? My girlfriend still gives me a hard time to this day when I tell her I'm going to visit Ginger for a few hours.

Sure MaryAnn was cute and fun but wouldn't you want to take Ginger home? :mrgreen:

We all have our own taste, likes and dislikes and at the end of the day we are all happy with our decision, right?

User avatar
ShawnM
Posts: 331
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:59 pm
Location: Clearwater, FL / KZPH

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby ShawnM » Tue May 01, 2018 8:48 am

MrMorden wrote:Folks say my CTSW controls feel heavy compared to other LSA (and they do), but I am completely used to it so that to me is "normal". I'm sure you can tame the float in the SC by being on speed and knowing the airplane.

I said one flight, not 30min. It was about 1.5hr and included steep turns, stalls, ground reference maneuvers, and 3 takeoffs and landings all done by me. It was not unpleasant, it just felt very light and the airplane didn't really want to come down to land. That can be a good quality as you can probably land it very slowly.

I don't like the look of the Evektor, the shape of the canopy looks like it wants to pin your arms down and put plexi six inches from your nose (though I'm sure that's not the case). The Tecnams are wonderful flying airplanes, I did half of my training in one. Very stable and predictable.

EDIT: Whoops, you meant Warmi when you said 30min. I got confused because in the first part of your post you reference something I said. sorry about that.


Andy, yup, the 30 minute comment was directed to Warmi, he said 30 minutes. Sorry for the confusion. :mrgreen:

And yes, I can get down around 50 kts if needed when landing the plane on a calm day. It's nice and gentle on Ginger.

I agree with you on the Evektor, I also dont like the look, the canopy kills it for me.

jetcat3
Posts: 97
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:01 pm

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby jetcat3 » Tue May 01, 2018 8:52 am

MrMorden wrote:
jetcat3 wrote:I’m honestly shocked they didn’t utilize and build this airplane around the 915 iS. Seems like the perfect engine for this airplane given the weights as they are similar to the Sling 4.


915iS is 135hp. The IO-540 they are using is 350hp. The lowest powered engine they are using is 200hp. The 915iS is not even in the same galaxy for what they are trying to do.


First of all, the 915 iS is 141 HP max, 135 HP continuous. The engine most assuredly is suitable if it was designed for it in the beginning. The Sling 4 has a very similar empty weight and they are able to achieve 700 ft/min climbs with four 200 pound adults and 140 knots true at altitude with only a Rotax 914. The 915 iS just makes that aircraft even more capable with more useful load to boot. The 915 iS can take 135 HP all the way to 15,000ft. At high altitudes it would easily compete if not beat the UL 520i engine. Installed weight of this engine is 264 lbs, quite a bit more than the 915 iS even with all of its accompanying equipment.

I’ve had the privilege of flying in Sportcruisers almost everyday for multiple hours instructing in the last seven months and I really feel as though I’m intimate with the airplane now. A weird word to use I know. The Sportcruiser does have it’s flaws, and the handling is a bit too sensitive than I’d like for new students to learn on, but it is an extremely docile aircraft and pretty easy to land once you get a feel for it. Even practicing the commercial maneuvers is so easy in the Sportcruiser. Chandelles, Lazy Eights, Eights on Pylons, and even accelerated stalls are so benign and gentle. It can consistently make an engine out 180 degree impossible turn while only losing 100 ft of altitude. It is indeed very maneuverable. I just wish the factory was actually open to giving a crap and be willing to improve the product instead of giving us fluff and hiring their show girls to distract us at airshows.

I recently took a flight in a Bristell and I was extremely impressed. The airfoil they use, the shortened wing, all helped smooth out bumps and turbulence and the handling was quite a bit heavier than the Sportcruiser. It seemed more refined than the Sportcruiser. I really enjoyed flying the Bristell, and my favorite part about it was the sight picture out of the cockpit. You sit higher in your seat and the panel has been lowered in comparison to the Sportcruiser. Without a booster seat, most of our students just stare at the panel in the Sportcruiser. As a result, they like to dip the nose to have better visibility out the nose and we then lose altitude. The Bristell fixes this and it did have some of the best visibility for a low wing that I’ve seen.

It has been eye opening to have flown various SLSA’s and learn how they handle and respond. For the most part, they are quite similar in general terms, but it also amazes me how different some feel and handle in different situations. To this day, I can’t get over the handling of the Tecnam P2008, not only with its feel and feedback on the controls but also the way it takes bumps and gusts via its laminar airfoil. The Sling 4 was another that just had buttery feedback and control and was so well balanced along all of its axis.

Warmi
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Frankfort, IL

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby Warmi » Tue May 01, 2018 9:01 am

I keep hearing that Sling 4 seems a bit under powered with the 914 ... I am sure it would feel much better with the new 915is - but even then , this is not the same category as Cirrus nor is it trying to be - it is definitely lighter and slower plane while the new SportCruiser Quattro seems to be aiming at the lower end of Cirrus market.
Flying Sting S4 ( N184WA ) out of Illinois

User avatar
ShawnM
Posts: 331
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:59 pm
Location: Clearwater, FL / KZPH

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby ShawnM » Tue May 01, 2018 9:24 am

jetcat3 wrote:I’ve had the privilege of flying in Sportcruisers almost everyday for multiple hours instructing in the last seven months and I really feel as though I’m intimate with the airplane now. A weird word to use I know. The Sportcruiser does have it’s flaws, and the handling is a bit too sensitive than I’d like for new students to learn on, but it is an extremely docile aircraft and pretty easy to land once you get a feel for it. Even practicing the commercial maneuvers is so easy in the Sportcruiser. Chandelles, Lazy Eights, Eights on Pylons, and even accelerated stalls are so benign and gentle. It can consistently make an engine out 180 degree impossible turn while only losing 100 ft of altitude. It is indeed very maneuverable. I just wish the factory was actually open to giving a crap and be willing to improve the product instead of giving us fluff and hiring their show girls to distract us at airshows.


Thanks for the great response jetcat3.

After I bought my SportCruiser I read that it doesn't make the best aircraft for training in, I thought oh no, what did I just do? :o As I bought it to get my SPL.

I think it handles very well and very easy to maneuver because it's so responsive. Very little effort to get it to do anything. Stalls are a non event, all variations of them. I'll admit I haven't experimented with the impossible turn yet. My old instructor and I were just talking about this with another new SportCruiser owner last week.

As far as the factory, your comment nailed it. Thank you. :mrgreen:

Warmi
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Frankfort, IL

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby Warmi » Tue May 01, 2018 11:39 am

MrMorden wrote:.... The Tecnams are wonderful flying airplanes, I did half of my training in one. Very stable and predictable.



Why CTSW then and not 2008 or the Eaglet ?
Flying Sting S4 ( N184WA ) out of Illinois

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1967
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby MrMorden » Tue May 01, 2018 11:43 am

Warmi wrote:
MrMorden wrote:.... The Tecnams are wonderful flying airplanes, I did half of my training in one. Very stable and predictable.



Why CTSW then and not 2008 or the Eaglet ?


Speed, useful load, features, and price. At the time I was looking I would have loved a P92, but they were rarely for sale. I wanted utility over anything else, so I picked the LSA with the best bang for my buck.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

Warmi
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Frankfort, IL

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby Warmi » Tue May 01, 2018 12:06 pm

One day we should probably all get together in some neutral location with our planes and collectively decide once for all which one is the uber-LSA :D
Flying Sting S4 ( N184WA ) out of Illinois

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1967
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby MrMorden » Tue May 01, 2018 12:26 pm

Warmi wrote:One day we should probably all get together in some neutral location with our planes and collectively decide once for all which one is the uber-LSA :D


How about Page, AZ for the CT/LSA fly-in in October? :D
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

Warmi
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Frankfort, IL

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby Warmi » Tue May 01, 2018 12:57 pm

Yeah, I was thinking about that as well. Have seen your videos and it looks like awesome way to spend a few days buzzing around some truly spectacular terrain.
Not sure if I will be ready - with only 100 hours to my name , I need some serious cross country practice before I am comfortable to go on this type of journey ( for instance your unexpected Texas MFVR diversions going back home comes to mind )
Will probably start with something simple like flying around lake Michigan in a weekend hehe..
Flying Sting S4 ( N184WA ) out of Illinois

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1967
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: Quattro cruiser

Postby MrMorden » Tue May 01, 2018 1:05 pm

Warmi wrote:Yeah, I was thinking about that as well. Have seen your videos and it looks like awesome way to spend a few days buzzing around some truly spectacular terrain.
Not sure if I will be ready - with only 100 hours to my name , I need some serious cross country practice before I am comfortable to go on this type of journey ( for instance your unexpected Texas MFVR diversions going back home comes to mind )
Will probably start with something simple like flying around lake Michigan in a weekend hehe..


If you can hook up with a more experienced pilot and fly a two-ship out, or both of you in your airplane, that is a very reassuring way to do a long cross country your first couple of times. It gives you another set of eyes and somebody to bounce ideas and decisions off of.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA


Return to “Light Sport Aircraft”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests