Pirep: Cessna 162 Skycatcher
Posted: Sun Feb 06, 2022 11:10 am
I realize I'm a bit late to the party. A week ago last Monday, I finally got to fly the Skycatcher for an hour and a half, just to get the feel of it prior to giving a checkride in it. My general impression is that I would personally not choose to own one, but it's not a bad starter LSA.
Pros:
Easy to fly, controls reasonably well coordinated. The Garmin G300s are a fairly good avionics package (although, I personally prefer the Dynons). Rudder pedal adjustment is excellent - no need for moving seats. Stalls relatively docile. Stoke was surprisingly easy to get used to (I didn't expect to like it...) Rudder authority is typical of LSAs. Lots of bagagge room behind the seats (which is a mixed blessing, as it can be pretty easy to overload it). CG stays in envelope as fuel burns off. Manual flaps are easy to operate. Electric elevator trim on the stoke (but no aileron trim).
Cons:
Not a lot of useful load. The O-200D engine is HEAVY! But it keeps the CG from shifting too far aft when you carry baggage. Doors are flimsy, and if not latched properly, can do $10,000 worth of damage when they open in flight. (There are three separate latches on each door. You MUST check ALL 3 before takeoff!) Forward visibility on takeoff was marginal for me without sitting on a cushion. Castering nosewheel requires both lots of brake AND quite a bit of power to control on the ground. Interior is a bit shabby. Sets are pretty close together, and cabin is relatively narrow. No fuel gauges in the panel, just sight tubes at the wing roots.
Concerns:
Preflight procedure is a bit odd (be absolutely certain to follow the checklist!) There are 2 fuel drains in each wing, and 2 gascolators on the firewall to drain. You can push up on the ailerons to check them, but not down. You can push down on the flaps to check them, but not up! It's a bit hard to reach the control rods to check for freedom of movement. Fuel tanks are a bit small for doing a serious cross-country.
On Tuesday Jan 25th, I gave the checkride. That gave me 2.5 more hours in the plane, and both it and the applicant performed well. My overall conclusion is that this plane makes a suitable trainer, but certainly wouldn't fit my mission. But for anyone who's flown Cessnas beore, it should be a very easy transition.
FWIW, in an AvWeb review, the author said something along the lines of "the 162 is just a scaled-down 152, which is just a scaled-down 172, which is just a scaled-down 747."
Pros:
Easy to fly, controls reasonably well coordinated. The Garmin G300s are a fairly good avionics package (although, I personally prefer the Dynons). Rudder pedal adjustment is excellent - no need for moving seats. Stalls relatively docile. Stoke was surprisingly easy to get used to (I didn't expect to like it...) Rudder authority is typical of LSAs. Lots of bagagge room behind the seats (which is a mixed blessing, as it can be pretty easy to overload it). CG stays in envelope as fuel burns off. Manual flaps are easy to operate. Electric elevator trim on the stoke (but no aileron trim).
Cons:
Not a lot of useful load. The O-200D engine is HEAVY! But it keeps the CG from shifting too far aft when you carry baggage. Doors are flimsy, and if not latched properly, can do $10,000 worth of damage when they open in flight. (There are three separate latches on each door. You MUST check ALL 3 before takeoff!) Forward visibility on takeoff was marginal for me without sitting on a cushion. Castering nosewheel requires both lots of brake AND quite a bit of power to control on the ground. Interior is a bit shabby. Sets are pretty close together, and cabin is relatively narrow. No fuel gauges in the panel, just sight tubes at the wing roots.
Concerns:
Preflight procedure is a bit odd (be absolutely certain to follow the checklist!) There are 2 fuel drains in each wing, and 2 gascolators on the firewall to drain. You can push up on the ailerons to check them, but not down. You can push down on the flaps to check them, but not up! It's a bit hard to reach the control rods to check for freedom of movement. Fuel tanks are a bit small for doing a serious cross-country.
On Tuesday Jan 25th, I gave the checkride. That gave me 2.5 more hours in the plane, and both it and the applicant performed well. My overall conclusion is that this plane makes a suitable trainer, but certainly wouldn't fit my mission. But for anyone who's flown Cessnas beore, it should be a very easy transition.
FWIW, in an AvWeb review, the author said something along the lines of "the 162 is just a scaled-down 152, which is just a scaled-down 172, which is just a scaled-down 747."