Cessna Skycatcher Coming to Town

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

Post Reply
User avatar
KevinV
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:03 pm
Location: Winter Haven, FL

Cessna Skycatcher Coming to Town

Post by KevinV »

When I was at my local FBO today, I had a chance to speak with the owner. They currently have 2 LSA's, an Aerostar 1, and an Elitar Sigma. He said that he plans on selling them both, and replacing them with a Cessna Skycatcher. It's still about a year out, but I look forward to having the opportunity to fly one. It's certainly an attractive and comfortable looking plane.
KSCessnaDriver
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:15 pm
Location: KOJC

Post by KSCessnaDriver »

Have you flown the Sigma at all? I've seen one once, and want to get an opportunity to fly one sometime.

In regards to the Skycatcher, it doesn't really appeal to me. Its too late to the party, with specifications that nearly every other LSA can beat. Plus, the panel is really overkill for what Cessna is building the 162 for.
KSCessnaDriver (ATP MEL, Commerical LTA-Airship/SEL, Private SES, CFI/CFII)
LSA's flown: Remos G3, Flight Design CTSW, Aeronca L-16, Jabiru J170
Jim Stewart
Posts: 467
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 6:49 pm

Post by Jim Stewart »

It's certainly an attractive and comfortable looking plane.
I may be biased, but I think my Flight Design CTSW is more attractive and more comfortable.
Philip B
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 3:06 pm
Location: Winter Haven, Florida

Post by Philip B »

It is not a bad looking plane and I look forward to giving it a try, but I am looking to possibly purchase a used AMD ZODIAC CH601 XL or close. I like the looks of the Zodiac but need to take a spin and see if I like the ride.
User avatar
KevinV
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:03 pm
Location: Winter Haven, FL

Post by KevinV »

KSCessnaDriver wrote:Have you flown the Sigma at all? I've seen one once, and want to get an opportunity to fly one sometime.
I haven't tried the Sigma. My instructor seemed to shy away from it. I really like the openness of it for viewing the ground. I think at this point I'd prefer a high wing plane to train in. That's part of what drew me to the P92 I'm going to try at Lockwood.
KSCessnaDriver
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:15 pm
Location: KOJC

Post by KSCessnaDriver »

KevinV wrote:
I haven't tried the Sigma. My instructor seemed to shy away from it. I really like the openness of it for viewing the ground. I think at this point I'd prefer a high wing plane to train in. That's part of what drew me to the P92 I'm going to try at Lockwood.
I may have to stop in at Winter Heaven this fall. I saw the Sigma at Sebring this spring, and right then decided I had to get in that airplane sometime.
I'd agree with the CTSW. Also, a Remos G3/GX is nearly identical (cockpit wise) to the CTSW.
KSCessnaDriver (ATP MEL, Commerical LTA-Airship/SEL, Private SES, CFI/CFII)
LSA's flown: Remos G3, Flight Design CTSW, Aeronca L-16, Jabiru J170
jlong16
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 9:50 am
Contact:

Post by jlong16 »

I've flown the Sigma. It does have great visibility and handles pretty light. Once you set it up to glide in, you almost don't touch the stick again. It's kind of a non-event, which surprised me. I expected it to be very squirrley near the ground.
The plane is exactly what you think it is. It flies about 100 mph, burns about four and a half a gallons an hour and is pretty quiet with the tractor mounted engine. I like the air vents. Florida gets pretty hot but the sigma has a lot of vents and they work good.
It is set up very basically. You have fewer instruments than the Cessna which seems to want to build a 172 in an LSA. I bet they have to bulk up the generator to handle teh power demand on the 162.
Post Reply