Give me your ideas-which A/C...

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

jbesper
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: montana

Give me your ideas-which A/C...

Post by jbesper »

Hi folks-
I work for a Sheriff's Office in Montana, and am working on proposing an Aviation Unit. I have been looking mostly at LSA'a for the following reasons;
-Relatively affordable
-Less maintenance
-Great slow flight
-Great visiblity
-Low operating costs
-Easier to train newbies on (as opposed to a turbine helo)

We would be doing day-to-day patrol/observation to help with general calls, pursuits, searches, fires, floods, etc. Obviously NOT transporting SWAT teams, or strafing any Unabombers.

I have gathered a few makes/models that I think are contenders, but would love to hear from the folks who actually fly these things- what a/c would YOU propose if you were me. (And any traditional a/c that meet the above criteria are welcome *Thanks-Chuckhill*).
Chuckhhill
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:15 pm
Location: Concord, CA

Post by Chuckhhill »

jbesper,

Some of the characteristics I think you need to consider:

View--High wing is probably better. The Sky Arrow is particularly good in this area, but it has other issues. Most of the high wings would rank highly, perhaps the AEROPRAKT A22 Valor may be best in this particular characteristic.

Comfort--Crew performance is effected by comfort including noise.

Payload/panel space--This becomes an issue if you need to bring along equipment like additional radios to communicated with ground units, night vision devices, recorders, and ballistic seat cushions. If possible look at actual weights of aircraft rather than published weights, there may be a significant difference. The weight of the crew can even become an issue.

TriGear vs Tail Dragger--TriGear is far easier to insure and unless you are going to consistently operate from grass probably safer.

How many are out there? Many LSAs are produced in very small numbers. There are valid questions about the long term viability of some of these companies. You may want to lean toward the more numerous types. You can find out how many of a type are out there by checking the FAA web site below. You may also be able to use it to locate an example near you.

http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/

IFR capabilities--Will you have to terminate operations when the weather becomes marginal?

At the very least, you need to look at the Flight Design CTLSA because Flight Design aircraft are by far the most numerous. In addition I would also look at the TECNAM Eaglet/Bravo, the Jabiru 230, and the new Remos.

Good Luck,
Chuck
sethdallob
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:37 am
Location: Cedarpines Park CA

Post by sethdallob »

I'm very happy with my Eurofox and it is about half the price of the CT.
Norm
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 11:02 am
Location: Spokane, WA

Post by Norm »

In your case, I'd lean toward the upcoming Cessna 162. It's made mostly of metal (more easily repairable) and will have a Continental engine that can be worked on by any A&P as I'm sure your commercial insurance won't allow for "owner maintenance". This would give your police force a high wing plane, easy to land and with the backing of the largest general aviation manufacturer.
Former CFII
Sold my '01 Maule M7 260C
I'm thankful I had so much to lose:
www.shaunlunt.typepad.com
User avatar
SoaringSam
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 10:44 am
Location: Savannah, GA

Post by SoaringSam »

If you want an example of a non-LSA aircraft that may fit the bill, you may wish to contact Maul, http://www.mauleairinc.com/. I used to work on a SAR team, many years ago, and we looked at a Maul that had been outfitted specifically for search and rescue operations - clear doors, larger windows, etc. We were impressed but political red-tape killed the deal. Hopefully you will have better luck, LSA or otherwise.
Sam
Cub flyer
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:30 pm

Post by Cub flyer »

take a look at these. Compare the list of standard equipment to most LSA

You will need the optional 1950 gross weight and a set of Alaska Bushwheels tires, tailwheel.


http://www.amerchampionaircraft.com/new ... pprice.htm

The Scout is also very good in your area. I flew one from Boise with a MT prop and was very impressed.

No wood spars in these. Only aluminum.

If you get a list together of what equipment you will use or need installed and e-mail it to the manufacturers you should be able to get cost and empty weight estimates.

Then compare to your weight and observer weight plus fuel and hand held equipment to see if it all works out.

I'd recommend an airplane with high wings and tandem seating for visibility out both sides.

As far as LSA might try the Rans S-7, Sport Cub, Legend Cub or Savage. I'm sure there are others. Useful load, loiter time, visibility will be the deal makers.

Do you have a hangar available?

Have a long talk with the manufacturer to make sure of the companies business position. Can you get parts 10 years down the road and is there assistance/ parts available now. Visit the importer or factory if you can.

Law enforcement agencies have purchased odd aircraft / equipment only to pay way more in parts and eventual early replacement. (New Mexico Police and Adam aircraft is an example)

Of course all of these airplanes are MUCH cheaper than a helicopter to buy, operate, insure. and a airplane with proper tundra tires can operate well in remote areas.
jlong16
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 9:50 am
Contact:

Post by jlong16 »

From the standpoint of economy of cost, STOL, slow flight capability, grass / hard surface runways, visibility, comfort and dependability,

I recommend the A-22 Valor, made in Sebring , Florida.
It is quick but not fast, uses very little runway, is fairly comfortable and has unbelievable visibility.

The slow characteristics are superb and you can scud run if necessary. it is built for it.

www.FPNA.com
User avatar
CharlieTango
Posts: 1000
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 10:04 am
Location: Mammoth Lakes, California

Post by CharlieTango »

how can a plane be built for scud running?
jbesper
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: montana

Post by jbesper »

Thanks to everyone for chiming in. Please keep the ideas coming.
[email protected]
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:28 am
Location: Sarasota, FL

Law enforsement plane

Post by [email protected] »

Take a look at the Remos GX. Other law enforsement have looked at this plane due to the folding wings making it easy to transport on the ground from place to place.

Wings fold in a mater of minutes and it fits on a trailer or a rollback truck.

Very well put together a/c.
Jim Julius
SportPlanesFlorida.com
Remos Authorized Distributor
for North America
Sport Pilot Training
SRQ Florida
[email protected]
Cub flyer
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:30 pm

Post by Cub flyer »

Some other things to consider when purchasing an airplane for this mission.

How will the Rotax 912 hold up to low power loitering for long periods?

how visibility is in slow flight? not normal cruise

a stall warning of some sort would be nice for this type of flying.

How much room there is to hold all handheld cameras, radios, gear along with the room needed by the pilot to fly.

Starting and operating in cold (-20F) conditions. Preheat is a must for any engine but how will it operate after that?

Any off field operations expected? Ski operations?

Can the airplane be flown with full winter gear and boots?

912 will need 100LL and 25 hour oil changes. Ethanol will probably be in Montana. Continental or Lycoming will allow 50 hour oil changes and longer TBO.

Metal prop?

How good is the cabin heat? Summer Ventilation?

can you sit carrying a sidearm?

I fly many hours each winter counting wildlife at night with a 1967 Cessna 206 that has a 50 lb FLIR infrared camera bolted to the left strut on a gyro stabilized mount. We fly 60-65 knots. 1000ft AGL and can deviate 100ft up and down, left right. 4 hour on station missions are common. The airplane has wing extensions, droop leading edge, and vortex generators 12 and 24 V electrical systems with separate alternators and batteries. It is the smallest airplane that can really carry all winter gear, all camera gear and luggage to be self transporting anywhere in the country.

Pilot sits front left and observer/sensor operator sits in the back. Other room is for lap top computers, survival gear, 4 GPS units, monitors, snack food, maps, etc.

Forward visibility is almost zero but there is nobody out there anyway at that time of night and that low. Stall warning is constantly cycling off and on with every bump. hard turns at each end of the line or over a herd, We are maneuvering to fly transect lines 600-800 ft apart At the power settings we fly it is normally 45% power or lower. 9.5- 11 GPH Cowl flaps open, 20 deg flaps. Using a Garmin 496 on the 50 ft scale. Airplane is so modified it operates in the Restricted category.

I imagine your flying will prove similar in actual operation.

It's amazing how much stuff two people need to live on the road for weeks on end, keep an airplane flying, maintain sensor gear, have enough comfortable gear for survival in a forced landing.

The 206 has 1400 lbs of useful load and is usually completely full when ferrying between locations.

Might be smart to determine exactly what type of flying this airplane will be doing and then when testing them try the same maneuvers at the correct loading.
jbesper
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: montana

Post by jbesper »

Cub-
Excellent points. Of all the stuff I've thought of, I hadn't considered winter/survival gear. It's so obvious I feel like an idiot for not thinking of it myself - but, that's why I'm here. The experience and insight around here is invaluable.

I can say this...if we use an LSA, our mission profile would be very conservative. primarily day VFR, possibly some night ops if the weather is good enough. I don't anticipate any ski or float ops. I'm imagining most of our patrol activity being centered around the municipalities, although being able to get to the remote or less patrolled areas is definitely something we want to do.

From what I'm seeing, with the weight of two people, fuel & misc. gear, I think we are going to be at or already over the 1320. Add spot light and/or FLIR and it's pretty much a no-go just based on the math. Also I'm somewhat concerned about the performance of the Rotax with these factors in mind, especially in the summer (max weight, high altitude, warm weather and big mountains - hmmm). I'd really love opinions specific to this point from other mountain area pilots with field elevations of 4500 and up (Charlie Tango, got your ears on?).

Perhaps I should be looking more at standard category a/c with mods for better slow fight characteristics? But then it isn't too long until the a/c price and operating costs become a prohibitive factor once again. What say you??
ka7eej
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:54 pm
Location: Taylor, Az
Contact:

Post by ka7eej »

Just to be way off the wall, have you looked at any gyroplanes..Sportcopter2, Xenon, Ufoenforcer are some names of new modern Gyroplanes that just may work for your misson..slow flight, steep turns, short landing and takeoff(not vertical).. Take a look!! I have never flown one but they look interesting for small law enforcement use.
Brian
Owner of N3081X (Cover Girl) A Beautiful Allegro 2000 as seen on the cover and inside of several magazines!!
Chuck
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 5:30 pm

Post by Chuck »

www.kitfoxaircraft.com, in Homedale, Idaho, puts out a Kitfox Super Sport that is a homebuilt LSA. They do have optional landing gear that increases the maximum takeoff weight from 1,320 to 1,550 pounds. It also has 9 cubic feet of luggage space with a weight limit of 150 pounds.

It is a high wing aircraft with full length lexan gull wing doors that can be opened in flight. The doors are slightly bulged out making the visibility amazing. It also has great short takeoff and landing capabilities.

Presently they do not have a turn-key aircraft. John McBean, owner, has indicated they will be looking at a turn-key in the near future.

In the meantime, if you want to excercise elbow grease you can get a kit with all the optional goodies for around $29K. Add another $18K for a rotax 100 hp engine, and, another $15K or so for avionics. Add it all up and you have your mission aircraft for under $65K.

John McBean, I'm sure, would be happy to give you a demo ride in the company airplane. No matter what aircraft you think is on your short list of contenders, I would suggest a demo ride by you and some of those that will be using the aircraft would be a highly desireable thing to do.
Cub flyer
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:30 pm

Post by Cub flyer »

http://tappix.com/801334
http://tappix.com/809155
http://tappix.com/807335
http://www.trade-a-plane.com/redirect?t ... nsales.com

Here's some to look at.

wonder if a 180 hp 172 with a sportsman leading edge or horton kit and a set of VG's would work. Also add on 8.50 mains and a larger nose fork and your ready for most anywhere.

You could get one of the Ex CAP airplanes which are around the country. They have 12 and 24V systems, GPS capable of grid patterns for search and rescue. All 337 forms and paperwork done. High visibility paint and are usually later than 1980 P models. The P has some changes to give better handling and aileron response. You want the long range tanks and Airplains gross weight upgrade to 2250 lbs. Gives just over 1000 lbs useful load.

You can buy these for around 75K. We have two based on the field from the CAP auction and they have been good airplanes.

check out CAP aircraft sales online and see if there are any coming up.
"Perfection is finally attained not when there is no longer anything to add but when there is no longer anything to take away." Antoine de Saint Exupery
Post Reply