Prof: New Plane?

[drdehave]

Roger that~! Thanks, Paul.

[drseti]

Last weekend, on the 50th day since I took delivery on the new SportStar Max, the Hobbs ticked over 50 hours of operation in my flight school. Here is what I've experienced in the maintenance department:

Dead battery at day 10. Replaced UB 12180 with a new Odyssey PC-680 (with LoA, of course), and updated Wt/Bal.

Flat tire at day 11. Replaced Cheng Shins with new Michelins (with LoA, of course), and updated Wt/Bal. At same time, replaced scored brake rotors with new Matco discs, repacked wheel bearings, and completed a SB for inspection of some rivets.

On day 12, installed new Winter slip indicator in panel (with LoA, of course), performed compass calibration, and performed VOR receiver check.

On day 26, performed backup battery tests on both Dynon Skyview panels.

Performed oil change and condition inspection on day 33.

Updated Dynon Skyview system software on day 41.

So far, nothing out of the ordinary.

[Wm.Ince]

Updated Dynon Skyview system software on day 41.

Paul,

Which Skyviews is the airplane equipped with?

[drseti]

Bill, I have one SV-D1000 and one SV-D700, both upgraded to firmware v13.0.3, networked, with dual ADAHRS and dual backup batteries. Either screen can control the autopilot. Total redundancy!

[3Dreaming]

Dead batteries, flat tires, and scorched brake disk doesn't sound ordinary to me. Easy to take care of maybe, but not ordinary.

[drseti]

Not scorched, Tom, scored (as in the dealer let the pads wear down to the rivets). The dead battery was consistent with a demo acft not being flown very often. The flat tire was from damage to a tube consistent with it being pinched between wheel halves. Plenty of tread, but as long as I had to replace a tube, I figured I might as well go to Michelins. As you say, all easily fixed.

[drseti]

Soloed a student today, so I finally got my first look at the new SportStar in flight:

[Wm.Ince]

Soloed a student today, so I finally got my first look at the new SportStar in flight:

I must admit, it is a good looking LSA.

[CTLSi]

The Sportstar like the RV12 are the same low wing, all metal, bubble canopy, 912ULS, short range (350nm), slower cruise 110ktas trainer class SLSAs.

Given the Sportstar has a 46 inch wide cabin versus the RV12 43 inch wide cabin, the comfort is better.
The two low wing planes also use vernier throttle and choke controls. But the Sportstar has very sparse avionics while the RV12 can be ordered with Dynon and Garmin touch glass.

The Sportstar can also be purchased with the all-plane chute, the RV12 lacks that critical feature.

[Nomore767]

Once again a lively discussion is spoiled by the intrusion of negative bias and criticism.

CTLSi if you can't say something without being snide, can you please leave it alone?

[Nomore767]

The Sportstar like the RV12 are the same low wing, all metal, bubble canopy, 912ULS, short range (350nm), slower cruise 110ktas trainer class SLSAs.

Given the Sportstar has a 46 inch wide cabin versus the RV12 43 inch wide cabin, the comfort is better.
The two low wing planes also use vernier throttle and choke controls. But the Sportstar has very sparse avionics while the RV12 can be ordered with Dynon and Garmin touch glass.

The Sportstar can also be purchased with the all-plane chute, the RV12 lacks that critical feature.

What would a thread be here about someone's new plane without a not so subtle personal bash from yourself against anything and everything that doesn't suit your own personal bias. Allow us the courtesy and ability to read manufacturers brochure's ourselves? Some of us are grown-ups and can actually decide for ourselves?

That said, since you are a very recently qualified low time Sport Pilot, and refrain from flying low wing airplanes of any kind we can assume that you have never even flown any of the models mentioned here so once again you're simply spouting brochure specs in a blatant effort to sling mud and cast aspersions about other people's airplanes because of some weird personal agenda. Oh and did you forget to include the Sport Cruiser and Bristell somehow?

You have no personal experience to back it up so why even make a posting?

I'm surprised that it's tolerated.

[Nomore767]

Soloed a student today, so I finally got my first look at the new SportStar in flight:

I must admit, it is a good looking LSA.

Bill,

I agree, a really nice looking LSA.

Paul, I'm intrigued, what is the material on the canopy which looks to be a permanent sunshade? Is it attached to the canopy itself?

I saw a guy in the UK who had modified his home built RV-12 and had the same type of shade/screen and I have to say it looks nice and appears to do a good job>

Did you choose the SportStar because of your experience with the last one you had or did you look at other models before you made your decision.

I've just upgraded my SkyView Touch to SV 13.03 and it's performing very well.

How did the weight come in and how do you operate in training regards empty weight, fuel and student weights?

I did some training at a school that had an all FD CTLS fleet and though I liked the plane it didn't seem to be holding up well in the training environment. One airplane was in the hangar for quite a while waiting a composite repair. The baggage door had developed a large crack as had one wing tip .

Are you using 100LL with an additive or can you get a good supply of suitable MoGas?

Wish you a lot of luck with the new airplane!

[3Dreaming]

I did some training at a school that had an all FD CTLS fleet and though I liked the plane it didn't seem to be holding up well in the training environment. One airplane was in the hangar for quite a while waiting a composite repair. The baggage door had developed a large crack as had one wing tip.

I know your question was directed at Paul and this thread is about his airplane, but I want to address this.
I have quite a bit of time using both a CTSW, and now a CTLS in the flight training environment. I have seen minimal issues related to flight training in the aircraft. That being said I am the owner of the airplane, the instructor, and the maintenance provider for the airplane. I think this makes a big difference in how the airplanes are treated. In my opinion if you don't have well qualified instructors who take a keen interest in the aircraft owned by the school you will have problems, and aircraft type has nothing to do with it.

[Nomore767]

I did some training at a school that had an all FD CTLS fleet and though I liked the plane it didn't seem to be holding up well in the training environment. One airplane was in the hangar for quite a while waiting a composite repair. The baggage door had developed a large crack as had one wing tip.

I know your question was directed at Paul and this thread is about his airplane, but I want to address this.
I have quite a bit of time using both a CTSW, and now a CTLS in the flight training environment. I have seen minimal issues related to flight training in the aircraft. That being said I am the owner of the airplane, the instructor, and the maintenance provider for the airplane. I think this makes a big difference in how the airplanes are treated. In my opinion if you don't have well qualified instructors who take a keen interest in the aircraft owned by the school you will have problems, and aircraft type has nothing to do with it.

Good points and I agree.

The 3 or 4 CTLS planes that I flew weren't kept up to what I would have done had I worked there but then that's me. I found a lot of the decals coming off or missing, a bit shabby in the cleaning department and they had one in the hangar with a dinged wing tip and the other with a big crack at the cargo door. The nicest one had dual SkyViews and I flew that last as I was curious about the Dynon avionics.

If the CFIs taught due care and respect then you would hope the planes stood up to the inevitable wear and tear of training. In another thread I mentioned how I thought it was odd that the CFI with whom I flew was reluctant to remove the chute pin and to me anyway seemed nervous about it and didn't want to talk about it.
I wasn't flying there long and they closed anyway shortly after I began so only flew a few times. I was disappointed as there wasn't another CTLS available for training anywhere remotely near me as far as I could find. So I moved to a Remos GX.

The point you make about being the owner, instructor, and maintenance guy is just like Paul and I agree you'd be able to keep your planes in great shape.

[dstclair]

I decided to upgrade to Light Sport around 8 years ago and get back in the airplane ownership club. To make sure this was the type of flying I wanted, I found a local flight school that had 2 Sportstars on the line. I did a couple phases of the Wings program in one of the Sportstars, logging a bit over 5 hrs with 15 take-offs/landings and 1.1 hrs of hood time. I also did several 1 hour test flights of the other LSAs at that time.

I found the Sportstar to be very roomy for my 6' 4" body with plenty of shoulder and head room. Stable in flight with good coordination of controls. Rudder reminded me of my Cherokee flying days. I did plenty of crosswind landings and didn't find anything to dislike in the air. I do think the landing gear is a little narrower than some other planes which makes it feel a bit less stable once on the ground in gusty crosswinds. Perhaps this contributes to a lower demonstrated crosswind?

These particular planes were quite a bit slower in cruise than my Sting S3 and the CTSW and Remos I test flew. I couldn't get much past 100 IAS. I think some of this was due to the prop pitch.

I liked the SportStar enough to think about buying one but they wanted about $25K more than the CTSW and Sting and they had a lower MTOW and no chute (MTOW has been addressed and I believe chutes are available now).

Nice plane, all things considered.