CTLS pilot report

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
MikeM
Posts: 64
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:34 pm
Location: Bucyrus, Ohio

CTLS pilot report

Post by MikeM »

I finally got a chance to fly the Flight Design CTLS. It was equipped with the Dynon displays and had the CT auto pilot. I think the airplane looks better without the drooped wingtips, and the stretched fuselage helps the looks too. Flight Design now vents the fuel tanks at the wing tips instead of using vented fuel filler caps, so there is no need to worry about correctly lining up the vent tubes when the caps are installed.

The engine seemed quieter then the CTSW, maybe because of more room in the cabin. The controls felt much stiffer, especially the ailerons, possibly because of the auto pilot servo. The flap motor has been moved and is harder to hear when operating. The airplane felt stiffer and easier to control when taxiing, although the CTSW might just have been slightly out of rig as it required constant rudder pressure to keep going straight.

The first impression that I got is that it flies like a bigger, heavier airplane. It felt much more stable than the CTSW that I did my training in, almost like I was flying a Cessna 172. Stick forces were much higher and less rudder input was required. Power-on and off stalls felt the same as the CTSW and it was also easier for me to hold altitude.

Landing required a little power on the base and final legs with 15 degrees of flaps. Directional stability was good, but there was very little wind to contend with during my landings. The landing gear seemed to be much less bouncy than the CTSW's (I don't think my landings have gotten any better :D ).

It will take a while to get used to the flat panel displays, as I have never flown with them before. We're going to try and get extra manuals to help us learn how to use them. The auto pilot seems easy to use. The guy who flew the airplane back from the distributor said the auto pilot held altitude within 20 feet

The CTLS looks like it's going to be a great airplane to fly, although it has lees usefull load than the CTSW. It looks like I'm going to have to cut back on the pancakes at the the fly-in-breakfasts. :oops:
Roger
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:05 am

Pancakes!

Post by Roger »

You could always buy an SW and not have to cut back on the pancakes!!

I believe (but please check me out) that the old fuel vents that need to face forward are back on the LS as well.

The glass panels are great and should take little time to get use to. Like most computer stuff there's more then you'll ever use. The manuals can be downloaded from Dynon's web site.

The engine does sound different. The SW you flew may not have had the firewall blanket that the more recent models have making it a tad bit quieter.

On my SW in straight and level flight I can take my feet off the pedals - small inputs are required for turns and of course on take off and power reduction. It should also track straight during taxi. Sounds like some adjustments need to be made. My SW trims up great.

Enjoy - both models are terrific and both have their plus and minus characteristics.

Roger H
MikeM
Posts: 64
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:34 pm
Location: Bucyrus, Ohio

Post by MikeM »

The CTLS that I flew was fresh off the boat. It has fuel vents in the winglets on the wing tips and not on the fuel caps. The fuel caps are 1/4 turn quick-release and do not screw out. Also the fuel dip stick that came with the plane does not have two scales for left and right. I have no idea if these changes started with the introduction of the CTLS or if they are running changes being made as they are built.

The CTSW feels like a sports car compared to the heavier-feeling CTLS. One is not better than the other, just different. I would gladly fly either one.
User avatar
CharlieTango
Posts: 1000
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 10:04 am
Location: Mammoth Lakes, California

Post by CharlieTango »

the vents in the wingtips sounds problematic.

ct's are easy to slip because you can't see any cowling. when slipping there is another vector that the fuel follows and that is towards the trailing wingtip.

this geometry sounds worse than the ctsw type vents which are inboard compared to the wingtip vents.
Post Reply