The lsa aircraft that have thus far impressed me.

[Merlinspop]

I (of course) can't speak for others, but I certainly am not bored by this thread. It's about airplanes, for goodness sake!!

I hope I'm not boring you guys/gals with what this particular Pilot likes/dislikes and or wants/needs, again, it is my hope that when I post my thoughts, likes/dislikes, wants/needs and opinions, I will get the thoughts and opinions of others in an effort to become more intelligent in the LSA sector.

Anyway, this is a list of particulars that are features I personally feel I must have in an LSA, be it a high-wing or a low-wing:

1. "Drool-Factor" of course-

Drool factor is completely subjective. I've drooled more over a beautifully restored J3 than any other airplane. I just 'found' the SAM. Looks to be a 'vapor-plane' at the moment, but I'll be watching it. http://www.sam-aircraft.com/#/splash-page/ I also really really like the looks of the Thatcher CX4. But anything with wings that I'm not flying will cause me to drool a little.

2. Armrest- (one in the center and one on the door, basically, one for each arm.)

Armrests are handy. My thighs work nicely as such. Cupholders would be nice, which would increase the desireability of a "relief tube" too.

3. Electric Flaps-

You're on your own there. I much prefer having a bar to pull on. Less to break. I feel the same about trim. To me, it is much easier to get trim 'just right' using a wheel than by bumping a switch back and forth.

4. A power-plant that has a minimum 2000-tbo. If you get the chance, please check out the videos on the following:

a) Lycoming O-233-

b) D-Motor- (Will soon, if not now, have a 2000-tbo.)
(Extremely impressed with this power-plant, great fuel-burn, quiet, very few parts, light-weight, simple, yet modern in its features!)

c) MWFly-
(Another very impressive power-plant!)

d) Viking- (If it has a 2000-tbo.)

I WISH I flew enough that a 2000 hour TBO made a difference. As is, 2000 is more than 20 years flying to me. If you can afford 2000 hours worth of gas over (say) 5 years, then the cost of an overhaul probably isn't an issue; just has to be budgetted for.

5. A "finished" or "covered" interior- (I have seen some CTLS models with "un-finished" interiors. They now have/offer a "finished" interior that looks a lot better. I feel that having a "finished" interior may help in the reduction of noise and help with cabin insulation and when paying over 100k for any plane, it should at the very least have a "finished" interior!).)

Everyting is a trade off. A finished interior weighs more, costs more, etc. Paint is light and cheap. But it's all about what makes you as the owner happy to spend the time in.

6. Being a Private Pilot and having only flown aircraft with yokes, Having yokes in a high-wing LSA would be a must! If deciding on a low-wing, I would learn to live without the yokes, as I've yet to discover (1) LSA low-wing that has them-

First thing I ever flew with a stick was a glider, years after earning my PPL. If I never touch a yoke again, I won't feel bad. Sticks just feel so much more natural when controlling an airplane in 3 dimensions. But I won't turn down a chance to fly a plane with yokes if offered!

7. Push/Pull control Rods/Tubes for the control surfaces-

Not a requirement for me. Assumes 1) correctly swagged ends 2) properly rigged and tensioned cables. A lot of planes have both tubes and cables.

8. BRS-

I'm on the fence on this. I'm sure if I'm ever flat spinning down through clouds toward rocks or trees, I'd have a more definitive opinion on the matter...

9. T-handle throttle quadrant-

I prefer levered throttles, whether it's a T-handle between the seats, or a ball on a lever on the left sidewall (cubs, etc). But I won't turn down...

10. A "fair" starting retail price-

Perhaps the most undefinable term in aviation. Your view depends entirely on where you stand. Economies of scale rule the day in aircraft pricing. A manufacturer has to pay the bills and pay their employees whether they sell 1 plane a year or 1000.

Another feature that would be nice, but is not a must have, is an insulated cabin like the Paradise P-1 offers. Just a really nice touch imho.

Insulation = weight, places for problems to hide. Any sporting goods store has plenty of "personal insulation" that you can tailor to the current conditions. Again...it's only you that you have to make happy.

That's about it.

You know that's not true!

Thanks!

tl-3000pilot.

You're welcome!

Bruce

[cogito]

I really have nothing against the Rotax 912, just feel that the 233 brings some great advantages to the table. The additional 400-hrs until tbo is quite a long time for a recreational pilot and I'm guessing that the much lower r.p.m. cruise setting is somewhat more quiet. Again, what Mr. Milan has brought to the table in all of the design features that he has incorporated in the Bristell model, I could easily forget the fact that the Renegade has a 233, especially as I learn more about the 912's features and benefits.

The io233 has many advantages, but imho quiet cruise is not one of them. It could have been the installation in the Renegade, or my primary training behind a Rotax, but my impression of the Lycoming was it was LOUD, overpowering noise-canceling A20 headsets. When I got back in a 912 powered plane it sounded like a quiet purr in comparison.

Lately I've gotten used to flying behind a 300 hp Lycoming (non-LSA) but one doesn't expect (or want) that to be quiet.

[tl-3000pilot]

I (of course) can't speak for others, but I certainly am not bored by this thread. It's about airplanes, for goodness sake!!

I hope I'm not boring you guys/gals with what this particular Pilot likes/dislikes and or wants/needs, again, it is my hope that when I post my thoughts, likes/dislikes, wants/needs and opinions, I will get the thoughts and opinions of others in an effort to become more intelligent in the LSA sector.

Anyway, this is a list of particulars that are features I personally feel I must have in an LSA, be it a high-wing or a low-wing:

1. "Drool-Factor" of course-

Drool factor is completely subjective. I've drooled more over a beautifully restored J3 than any other airplane. I just 'found' the SAM. Looks to be a 'vapor-plane' at the moment, but I'll be watching it. http://www.sam-aircraft.com/#/splash-page/ I also really really like the looks of the Thatcher CX4. But anything with wings that I'm not flying will cause me to drool a little.

2. Armrest- (one in the center and one on the door, basically, one for each arm.)

Armrests are handy. My thighs work nicely as such. Cupholders would be nice, which would increase the desireability of a "relief tube" too.

3. Electric Flaps-

You're on your own there. I much prefer having a bar to pull on. Less to break. I feel the same about trim. To me, it is much easier to get trim 'just right' using a wheel than by bumping a switch back and forth.

4. A power-plant that has a minimum 2000-tbo. If you get the chance, please check out the videos on the following:

a) Lycoming O-233-

b) D-Motor- (Will soon, if not now, have a 2000-tbo.)
(Extremely impressed with this power-plant, great fuel-burn, quiet, very few parts, light-weight, simple, yet modern in its features!)

c) MWFly-
(Another very impressive power-plant!)

d) Viking- (If it has a 2000-tbo.)

I WISH I flew enough that a 2000 hour TBO made a difference. As is, 2000 is more than 20 years flying to me. If you can afford 2000 hours worth of gas over (say) 5 years, then the cost of an overhaul probably isn't an issue; just has to be budgetted for.

5. A "finished" or "covered" interior- (I have seen some CTLS models with "un-finished" interiors. They now have/offer a "finished" interior that looks a lot better. I feel that having a "finished" interior may help in the reduction of noise and help with cabin insulation and when paying over 100k for any plane, it should at the very least have a "finished" interior!).)

Everyting is a trade off. A finished interior weighs more, costs more, etc. Paint is light and cheap. But it's all about what makes you as the owner happy to spend the time in.

6. Being a Private Pilot and having only flown aircraft with yokes, Having yokes in a high-wing LSA would be a must! If deciding on a low-wing, I would learn to live without the yokes, as I've yet to discover (1) LSA low-wing that has them-

First thing I ever flew with a stick was a glider, years after earning my PPL. If I never touch a yoke again, I won't feel bad. Sticks just feel so much more natural when controlling an airplane in 3 dimensions. But I won't turn down a chance to fly a plane with yokes if offered!

7. Push/Pull control Rods/Tubes for the control surfaces-

Not a requirement for me. Assumes 1) correctly swagged ends 2) properly rigged and tensioned cables. A lot of planes have both tubes and cables.

8. BRS-

I'm on the fence on this. I'm sure if I'm ever flat spinning down through clouds toward rocks or trees, I'd have a more definitive opinion on the matter...

9. T-handle throttle quadrant-

I prefer levered throttles, whether it's a T-handle between the seats, or a ball on a lever on the left sidewall (cubs, etc). But I won't turn down...

10. A "fair" starting retail price-

Perhaps the most undefinable term in aviation. Your view depends entirely on where you stand. Economies of scale rule the day in aircraft pricing. A manufacturer has to pay the bills and pay their employees whether they sell 1 plane a year or 1000.

Another feature that would be nice, but is not a must have, is an insulated cabin like the Paradise P-1 offers. Just a really nice touch imho.

Insulation = weight, places for problems to hide. Any sporting goods store has plenty of "personal insulation" that you can tailor to the current conditions. Again...it's only you that you have to make happy.

That's about it.

You know that's not true!

Thanks!

tl-3000pilot.

You're welcome!

Bruce

Hey Bruce, great reply!

As far as the 2000-tbo goes, its about re-sale for me as well. Always looks nice when there's plenty of time left before tbo is required when selling.

I tend to be extremely (excuse the term) "anal" about certain things, as you can probably tell. These various power-plants that are available sure do make deciding hard as well. The more I learn about the D-Motor, the more I like it.

As far as insulated cabins go, it is something that I can definitely live without, especially with the right power-plant (one of a more quiet nature.)

I agree with you 100% about the cup-holders and a relief tube!

As far as tubes and cables, yes, many incorporate both, which I would be fine with. The Pipistrel Panthera has cables for the rudder and tubes for the for the other control surfaces.

You're probably right about my statement "that's about it", as I'm sure there is more "must haves"/"would definitely like to haves"! Lol! For example, I like the idea of aluminum wings, simply because there are more people out there that can repair a damaged aluminum wing, than a composite wing, possibly for less money and less time.

I have yet to fly a stick controlled airplane and certainly look forward to trying it out.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

tl-3000.

[tu16]

Many happy/safe hrs of flying in your P-2002, you are a very blessed Man to have such a plane!

Thanks! - Alas, I'm just a renter. Took my training and the first year of renting in it, though... So it has the sentimental value for me too. You know- First solo, checkride etc... Good times. Thought about ownership all the the time It is a bit hard to justify ownership in our climate with about 3mo good VFR weather in a year - the rest is marginal VFR at best... The FBO I was renting it from - closed the doors and my little plane was sold somewhere to a dryer place down the coast - in CA.

Wrt electrical flaps: pay attention. I had them in Tecnam and it was somewhat a pain in the neck. The motor moved through the range continuously and slowly - and you have to hold the darn switch down/up all the way (3-5sec) (until you reach desired deflection as visually read from flaps indicator) Unnecessary imho distraction at the time you have more important things to watch for. I was quite pleased when I got to planes with a manual lever and two fixed positions (Evektor, Sting S3) I'd say if you get electrical flaps, see of they have predetermined stops and you need just flick the switch up/down to move from one position to another, instead of holding/monitoring.

After flying in Sting S3 with T-throttle I really like the solid precision feel of it. I'd second that. Push/pull throttles were always a pain (My Tecnam was hard to adjust holding friction - tend to ether slip or almost freeze. Vernier in Evektor I rented was huge pain and was all but broken near idle setting that I had to fight over runway )

[drseti]

Vernier in Evektor I rented was huge pain and was all but broken near idle setting that I had to fight over runway )

I would venture to guess that the plastic gear in the vernier mechanism had one or more of its teeth broken off (can happen when rental aircraft are flown by ham-fisted Cherokee drivers). One that's in good condition, and properly lubricated and adjusted, will operate very smoothly, with far more resolution and precision than you can obtain with either a push-pull knob or a t-handle.

Try the vernier throttle on a well-maintained Bonanza sometime, and you'll never want to go back to any other type.

[drseti]

Much of this thread has dealt with how to narrow down an almost overwhelming range of SLSA airplanes to a manageable field of candidates. Of course (as Jack often points out) the mission will define the specific considerations, but let me tell you how I approached this.

My mission was to select a suitable LSA as a primary trainer for a new flight school. Four years ago, when I started my search, there were 85 approved SLSA airplanes (I think there are now nearly 150). So, I had to narrow things down a bit, as I couldn't possibly fly them all.

First step was to decide between conventional landing gear and tricycle. I really like taildraggers, but remember, this plane was not for me personally, so my preferences are irrelevant. From strictly a business point of view, a taildragger didn't seem to make much sense - it would cut my number of students in half, and double insurance costs. So, that eliminated all the Cub and Champ clones, knocking out 30 or so of the candidates. 55 to go.

Next, do I go with fabric, metal, or composites? Tube and fabric planes don't hold up well in this climate, so eliminate 15 models. Composite aircraft are sleek and beautiful, as well as lighter, but repairs require special training, tools, and materials I don't possess, whereas I can pound rivets and bend metal with the best of them (always admit to your limitations). Another 20 eliminated. We're down to 20 now.

Every flight instructor has to wrestle with the high wing vs. low wing dilemma. I've flown a lot of each, and noticed the low wing is often harder to land. Especially when the wing is very low, ground effect becomes severe, and the plane likes to float. That's a bad thing, no?

Actually, for training, that's a good thing, because it teaches the importance of airspeed control. So, I eliminated the high wingers. Ten candidates left.

All my background was with Lycoming and Continental engines, and when I started this exercise, the Lycoming IO-233 hadn't been announced yet. There were a couple of models with the Continental O-200, so I thought my choice was pretty much determined. But then, I started studying up on the Rotax 912ULS, and as I learned more about its light weight, high reliability, and clever design, I became a convert. So, Rotax it is, and now there were eight.

Next came avionics. In addition to Sport Pilot training, I wanted to offer Private. A VOR receiver with an OBS, though not essential, sure helps. I am also a CFII, and to do instrument training, you really need localizer and glideslope. This was not possible in half of the candidate models, so now we're down to four.

The Final Four ended up being the SportStar, SportCruiser, Gobosh, and Tecnam Sierra. I flew them all, and any one of them would have worked fine for me. It finally boiled down to which one gave me the best deal. As it happened, after making offers on some others, the SportStar won out by a slim margin.

Four years in, I don't regret my choice. For the mission, the plane is fine. Operating costs and maintainability are both within my parameters, and the plane teaches my students the skills I want them to acquire.

Notice that, for a flight school application where there's essentially no LSA competition, drool factor doesn't enter into the equation. For a personal aircraft, that's another matter, and would probably drive me to a different choice. But it's the mission that matters. For mine, I got the pack thinned out from 85 to 4, and then bought one.

[Jack Tyler]

Excellent description, Paul, of what many of us preach but you illustrated nicely. (One wonders if your flight school would have started 6 months later if you'd had to winnow 150 LSAs down to that one!)

[tl-3000pilot]

Many happy/safe hrs of flying in your P-2002, you are a very blessed Man to have such a plane!

Thanks! - Alas, I'm just a renter. Took my training and the first year of renting in it, though... So it has the sentimental value for me too. You know- First solo, checkride etc... Good times. Thought about ownership all the the time It is a bit hard to justify ownership in our climate with about 3mo good VFR weather in a year - the rest is marginal VFR at best... The FBO I was renting it from - closed the doors and my little plane was sold somewhere to a dryer place down the coast - in CA.

Wrt electrical flaps: pay attention. I had them in Tecnam and it was somewhat a pain in the neck. The motor moved through the range continuously and slowly - and you have to hold the darn switch down/up all the way (3-5sec) (until you reach desired deflection as visually read from flaps indicator) Unnecessary imho distraction at the time you have more important things to watch for. I was quite pleased when I got to planes with a manual lever and two fixed positions (Evektor, Sting S3) I'd say if you get electrical flaps, see of they have predetermined stops and you need just flick the switch up/down to move from one position to another, instead of holding/monitoring.

After flying in Sting S3 with T-throttle I really like the solid precision feel of it. I'd second that. Push/pull throttles were always a pain (My Tecnam was hard to adjust holding friction - tend to ether slip or almost freeze. Vernier in Evektor I rented was huge pain and was all but broken near idle setting that I had to fight over runway )

Thanks tu16!

Your right about some of the electric flaps out there. I personally learned to fly in a 1958 Cessna 172 (miss that bird!) and it had the manual flaps, which offered instant response, loved it. After getting/earning my PPL, I rented a 172 with electric flaps, and yes, they were so slow compared to the manual flaps for sure, but got used to it. Fortunately, the Cessna electric flaps lever has notches/indicator, so there is no need to leave your hand on the lever.

The reason I want electric flaps over manual flaps, is basil really. I just feel that it adds a sense of modernization to the plane for both me and any passenger I may have that is new to GA or anything other than an airliner. To me, it looks cool watching the flaps move smoothly into place when I'm a passenger in my friends V-Tail Bonanza and I want the same for any passenger/s I may have.

From what I have learned, most LSA today have very easy to operate electric flaps.

Thanks!

tl-3000pilot.

[Nomore767]

Having tried several LSAs recently...the aircraft that most fits my personal mission is the C-162. It has a combo of things I like and simplicity, sometimes too much...as in I don't like the interior that much!

It has the 200-D engine, 'stick' (stoke?), flap handle, great Garmin avionics. It's been the only LSA I could operate/fly almost instantly and the check-out was about 45 mins really and then just doing various t/o and landings to practice.

I can literally pull the a/c out of the hangar and be going in a few minutes, no burping or fiddling with a clumsy (in my view ) dipstick and getting light oil over my hands, every time.

The engine starts and runs easily. I like the nose wheel steering in the Remos better, but the manual flaps are quick and easier to use.

The aircraft interior isn't nearly as good as a Remos though. It looks and feels...cheap, but I'm sure it's a weight issue (whole other area for me to complain about!).

I think a used C162 with about 50 hours isn't a bad deal right now. I've heard an updated version may be on the way so I'm going to wait and see about that.
I'm kinda feeling...hmm, it's the C162 but then I'm still looking around at the other types available so it's not a done deal yet. However, for ME, the C162 seems the best overall option.

Not many around in my neck of the woods to rent so buying may be the best option.

[dstclair]

I definitely wonder what Cessna is up to. No SkyCatcher shipments last quarter as per GAMA and only a few (I seem to recall 26) the prior year. They announced they were going to certify it through the Primary category to open up the European market but that's been over a year. Lots of rumors but no data. Does have the potential to lower the used cost of a SkyCatcher so might be some good deals out there.

[tl-3000pilot]

Much of this thread has dealt with how to narrow down an almost overwhelming range of SLSA airplanes to a manageable field of candidates. Of course (as Jack often points out) the mission will define the specific considerations, but let me tell you how I approached this.

My mission was to select a suitable LSA as a primary trainer for a new flight school. Four years ago, when I started my search, there were 85 approved SLSA airplanes (I think there are now nearly 150). So, I had to narrow things down a bit, as I couldn't possibly fly them all.

First step was to decide between conventional landing gear and tricycle. I really like taildraggers, but remember, this plane was not for me personally, so my preferences are irrelevant. From strictly a business point of view, a taildragger didn't seem to make much sense - it would cut my number of students in half, and double insurance costs. So, that eliminated all the Cub and Champ clones, knocking out 30 or so of the candidates. 55 to go.

Next, do I go with fabric, metal, or composites? Tube and fabric planes don't hold up well in this climate, so eliminate 15 models. Composite aircraft are sleek and beautiful, as well as lighter, but repairs require special training, tools, and materials I don't possess, whereas I can pound rivets and bend metal with the best of them (always admit to your limitations). Another 20 eliminated. We're down to 20 now.

Every flight instructor has to wrestle with the high wing vs. low wing dilemma. I've flown a lot of each, and noticed the low wing is often harder to land. Especially when the wing is very low, ground effect becomes severe, and the plane likes to float. That's a bad thing, no?

Actually, for training, that's a good thing, because it teaches the importance of airspeed control. So, I eliminated the high wingers. Ten candidates left.

All my background was with Lycoming and Continental engines, and when I started this exercise, the Lycoming IO-233 hadn't been announced yet. There were a couple of models with the Continental O-200, so I thought my choice was pretty much determined. But then, I started studying up on the Rotax 912ULS, and as I learned more about its light weight, high reliability, and clever design, I became a convert. So, Rotax it is, and now there were eight.

Next came avionics. In addition to Sport Pilot training, I wanted to offer Private. A VOR receiver with an OBS, though not essential, sure helps. I am also a CFII, and to do instrument training, you really need localizer and glideslope. This was not possible in half of the candidate models, so now we're down to four.

The Final Four ended up being the SportStar, SportCruiser, Gobosh, and Tecnam Sierra. I flew them all, and any one of them would have worked fine for me. It finally boiled down to which one gave me the best deal. As it happened, after making offers on some others, the SportStar won out by a slim margin.

Four years in, I don't regret my choice. For the mission, the plane is fine. Operating costs and maintainability are both within my parameters, and the plane teaches my students the skills I want them to acquire.

Notice that, for a flight school application where there's essentially no LSA competition, drool factor doesn't enter into the equation. For a personal aircraft, that's another matter, and would probably drive me to a different choice. But it's the mission that matters. For mine, I got the pack thinned out from 85 to 4, and then bought one.

Great reply/post, thanks!

I totally agree and understand. For me, its personal use. It's all about comfort, reliability, solid/durable fabrication, features, range, use-full load. A plane that makes any passenger I have feel safe, comfortable and secure.

I'm very happy to hear that the Sportstar has provided you with all of your wants and needs in a trainer!

Thank you!

tl-3000pilot.

[tl-3000pilot]

TL-ULTRALIGHT 3000 SIRIUS:

Thus far, in a high-wing, the TL-ULTRALIGHT TL-3000 SIRIUS is at the top of my list. It has plenty of "drool-factor", reminds me of a GA high-wing, just more sleek and modern in its design of course. It has optional stick or yoke controls, T-handle throttle quadrant, push/pull control rods/tubes for the control surfaces, electric flaps with lighted setting indicator, over-head controls (much like an air-liner has), a nicely finished interior, armrests, spacious cabin and storage area, great range, great looking panel, rear window/s, excellent performance and seems to be priced "right". I'm assuming that the baggage weight of 55-pounds as stated on their web-site is with full tanks and that the max crew weight is 198 per crew member with full tanks? Carries 34-gallons of fuel. In the ultralightnews youtube video, the gentleman claims that you can carry 100-pounds in the rear luggage area, so I'm a bit confused there. Maybe he meant with less fuel and only (1) crew member?

http://youtu.be/c5riBxcNKfQ

http://youtu.be/v-As6oXot4g

http://youtu.be/c5riBxcNKfQ

http://tl-ultralight.cz/en/ultralight-a ... gallery/1/

p.s. From what I have gathered, TL-ULTRALIGHT has a long history of making very nice aircraft.

Note: The very beautiful Technam P-2008 was right up there with the TL-3000 Sirius in a high-wing, but its lack of control yoke option and pricing eliminated it from first choice in a high-wing for me.

[dstclair]

Been an TL customer for over 5 years (Sting S3) and have no regrets. High build quality, cabin (both TL-2000 and TL-300) fully upholstered which adds both comfort and noise dampening. US distributor, Sport Air out of Little Rock, is top notch and will tell you facts (not market hype). His shop is outstanding! I suggest calling them and get real-world numbers and not just marketing hyperbole. Here's a link to the POH: http://tl-ultralight.cz/content/downloa ... kts_en.pdf

I'd be surprised if the Sirius comes in at less than 800lbs typically equipped. Baggage limit is 75lbs (and you can easily fit golf clubs in the back although I've done it in my Sting S3 as well but had be creative!). Max useful load is going to be 520lbs. Going full fuel of 200lbs leaves 320lbs for crew and baggage. Assuming two mythical FAA standard adults at 170 lbs each, you will always be trading fuel for payload. Not necessarily a deal-breaker depending on your particular mission. You could still go with 340lbs of crew, 55lbs of baggage and 21 gallons of fuel allowing for 3.5 hrs of flying with VFR reserves.

[tl-3000pilot]

Been an TL customer for over 5 years (Sting S3) and have no regrets. High build quality, cabin (both TL-2000 and TL-300) fully upholstered which adds both comfort and noise dampening. US distributor, Sport Air out of Little Rock, is top notch and will tell you facts (not market hype). His shop is outstanding! I suggest calling them and get real-world numbers and not just marketing hyperbole. Here's a link to the POH: http://tl-ultralight.cz/content/downloa ... kts_en.pdf

I'd be surprised if the Sirius comes in at less than 800lbs typically equipped. Baggage limit is 75lbs (and you can easily fit golf clubs in the back although I've done it in my Sting S3 as well but had be creative!). Max useful load is going to be 520lbs. Going full fuel of 200lbs leaves 320lbs for crew and baggage. Assuming two mythical FAA standard adults at 170 lbs each, you will always be trading fuel for payload. Not necessarily a deal-breaker depending on your particular mission. You could still go with 340lbs of crew, 55lbs of baggage and 21 gallons of fuel allowing for 3.5 hrs of flying with VFR reserves.

Wow, that's great to hear!

I am very flexible when it comes to fuel and would have no problem filling the tanks accordingly to overcome weight issues.

How do you like the feel of push/pull control tubes/rods as opposed to all cables?

My research has shown me that TL really puts a lot of thought and effort in all that they do and that Sting has quite the pedigree imho.

Bill Canino seems to be a stand-up individual, so I can see why you have had 5-years free of regrets. He does not seem to be the type of man who would represent anything mediocre.

I too have noticed that the TL interiors are very nicely finished and can see how that would aid in dampening noise, as well as adding comfort.

Where are you located dstclair? Did they deliver your Sting or did you fly there to pick it up? Did they offer familiarization training or flights?

Though the TL-3000 Sirius is at the top of my list, I must really get in some low-wing time, just to be sure.

Thanks for the reply!

tl-3000pilot.

p.s. Thanks for the link!

[dstclair]

ow do you like the feel of push/pull control tubes/rods as opposed to all cables?
Bill Canino seems to be a stand-up individual, so I can see why you have had 5-years free of regrets. He does not seem to be the type of man who would represent anything mediocre.
.....
Where are you located dstclair? Did they deliver your Sting or did you fly there to pick it up? Did they offer familiarization training or flights?

Though the TL-3000 Sirius is at the top of my list, I must really get in some low-wing time, just to be sure.

Bill's a straight-forward guy and stands behind his products. Good person to do business with.

I'm just north of Dallas so it was an easy Southwest Airlines hop up to Little Rock to test fly the Sting S3 (current model at the time). We spent 1-2 hrs on the ground, pulling the cowl, checking build quality, pulling inspection plates and discussing Rotax/airframe maintenance. We then took the S3 up for a bit over an hour going through slow flight, stalls, non-aerobatic wing-overs, cruise then came back to the airport. In retrospect, Bill is definitely a trusting guy since this particular plane only had brakes on the pilot side. I just hopped in and off we went! I'd flown several LSA's and this was clearly my favorite. CTsw was #2 but I'm a low-wing guy. Also, at 6'4" I hate hitting my head on overhead wings

I believe officially Sport Air offers up to 5 hrs of transition time with each sale. Bill stated when I purchased that we'd fly until I was comfortable. Just checked my log book and I flew exactly 5.0 hrs before taking 595L home. Bill was my check pilot but I believe he uses a CFI now. Insurance companies require 5 hrs.

The S4 has some definite upgrades from the S3. There's a forum member who has an S4 that can comment on those features.

Can't really comment push/pull control tubes vs. cables. I had a hiatus from flying before buying my plane and have 99% of time in the last 5 years with tubes.

Good Luck in your quest!