LSA Values Declining?

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
FastEddieB
Posts: 2880
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:33 pm
Location: Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by FastEddieB »

CTLSi wrote:The theme that keeps surfacing is how frustrated you guys are over the 1320 limit.
I'm not frustrated at all. In fact, I feel blessed that just at the time in my life that medicals were becoming more problematical, time consuming and expensive, an option opened up for me to stay in the air without one - an option that never existed before.

If the limit had been 1,220 or 1,120, I still would have been happy to buy a simpler, lighter plane and still experience the joy of flight.

BTW, bitching about weight limits is hardly the sole province of Light Sport. The original SR22 had a decent useful load with max gross at 3,400. But as more and more stuff kept getting added to the airframe, useful load became problematical, turning it into a 2-passenger plane with full fuel.

Anyway, good luck with your CT4. Any idea when you'll be getting it?
Fast Eddie B.
Sky Arrow 600 E-LSA • N467SA
CFI, CFII, CFIME
[email protected]
3Dreaming
Posts: 3132
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:13 pm
Location: noble, IL USA

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by 3Dreaming »

CTLSi wrote:The theme that keeps surfacing is how frustrated you guys are over the 1320 limit. My new C4 will have 1320 useful load. Maybe that's will alleviate some of the frustration out there? Oh wait. You guys can't fly a certified 4-seater. Oh well...
I really don't think it is the 1320 pound weight limit people are getting frustrated with, at least around here.
sandpiper
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:48 pm
Location: Independence, Oregon

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by sandpiper »

Well, I hope your C4 does have a 1320 useful when it arrives. But, I doubt that it will. Seems like most planes in the pre-certification stage promise more than the plane actually ends up delivering.
John Horn
Independence Airpark (7S5), OR
CFII, LSRM-A
Rotax Service, Maint, and Heavy Maint. trained
Flying a CTSW, building an RV-12
Nomore767
Posts: 929
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by Nomore767 »

CTLSi wrote:The theme that keeps surfacing is how frustrated you guys are over the 1320 limit. My new C4 will have 1320 useful load. Maybe that's will alleviate some of the frustration out there? Oh wait. You guys can't fly a certified 4-seater. Oh well...


The FD C4 is going to be a really nice airplane. As is the Tecnam 2010.

Currently, the C4's proposed empty weight is 1320lbs, 'typically equipped'.

However, in the 'real world' check out FD's own brochure on the proposed C4:-

http://flightdesign.com/files/Media/Bro ... 4_2013.pdf

You'll see that FD realistically offers several different scenarios for 'different missions' that the C4 could do and shows the various loading configurations (passengers/baggage/fuel) which would result. This is good on FD's part, although I'm not sure how many would want to fly over 11 hours, unless you're ferrying over the Atlantic. Still, impressive numbers.

Their ' average load' uses a real world passenger weight of 198lbs (in their example 4 passengers each at 198lbs). Even though the airplane can carry up to 70 gals of fuel and up to 165lbs of baggage, FD's example reduces baggage weight and fuel in order to meet the 2640lb max gross weight.
This is assuming that the proposed typical empty weight remains at 1320lbs and/or a customer doesn't order some heavier options which could increase the empty weight and thus further compromise the allowable load.

Again, the C4 looks to be a fine airplane…BUT…in the real world…like most airplanes…the mission still dictates the load, as in how many passengers, how much baggage, and how much fuel. In FD's example the plane could carry 2 200lb pax, 2 167lb pax, and full fuel and full bags.

Caveat emptor.
IFlyRC
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:38 am

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by IFlyRC »

Now only if they had a sporty low wing... The c4 does sound fantastic, though. It's good to see some new & exciting aircraft in the certified marketplace. Tecnam vs. FD: stoke vs stick?
User avatar
AJChenMPH
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 7:34 am
Location: Bucks County, PA / KTTN
Contact:

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by AJChenMPH »

Back to the original question at hand:

If the FAA no longer requires the Class 3 medical for the PPL, I do know one person who is a PP-ASEL-IR who has increasingly had trouble passing his Class 3 medical, and is seriously looking at LSAs (now that I've told him about flying under SP privileges). He is one person whom the relaxation of the Class 3 medical requirement will benefit and allow him to fly a C182 (in which he was a partner...might have sold his share already, though).

That said, it will have absolutely zero impact on me. I passed the Class 3 medical on July, so I'm good at least until July 2016. I may be in the minority, but an LSA is still appealing to me as a future owner because there simply aren't that many affordable certificated two-seaters with a low wing, bubble canopy, and a stick. (Hey, those are my personal preferences...knock yourselves out with the high-wing planes with yokes. I'm learning to fly in a C172 right now, and am happy to rent whatever, but if I were to own something, I want to own something that I want to own. And I want to own a low-wing with a bubble canopy and a stick.)

My mission requirements call for mainly flying around the patch and taking a friend up for a joyride, with the odd day trip for work, and the even odder cross-country trip with my wife (she's already said that she won't fly with me unless there's a crystal-clear cost- and/or time-benefit to doing so). I was originally gung-ho on getting my instrument rating, but with my current schedule, I doubt I'll get in more than 30 or 40 hours of flying a year...I might as well wait until I retire (13 more years to go before I plan to leave active-duty) before I get my IR so that I can utilize it more and get my money's worth.

So, the LSA is where it's at for me. There are some really nice used ones with NDH on the market listed in the $50-$60k range. There's currently a Liberty XL-2 (IFR-certified 2-seater) for sale in Kentucky for $55k, but it doesn't say whether or not there's any damage, and frankly, I'm not ready to buy a plane yet...so who knows if it'll still be available when I am ready to buy one.

I might be in the minority, but I can't be the only guy/gal that's in this position. So this is my long-winded way of saying that while perhaps LSA values will decline (which will be good for me personally for when I'm ready to buy), I don't think they'll decline all that much.

PS/edit...random question re: weights -- I thought glass panels in general were lighter in weight than the old steam gauges...? For example, a single Aspen Avionics panel weighs just under 3 lbs...the Dynon Skyview 10" panel looks like it weighs about 3 lbs...even the Dynon D10A looks to be just under 2 lbs. What does each steam gauge weigh?

Aspen 1000 VFR PFD (click on "Specifications" tab): http://www.aspenavionics.com/vfr
Dynon Skyview (go to App B): http://dynonavionics.com/downloads/Inst ... _v11.0.pdf
D10A (go to App G): http://dynonavionics.com/downloads/Inst ... _Rev_J.pdf
Andy / PP-ASEL
CTLSi
Posts: 783
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:38 pm

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by CTLSi »

......
Last edited by CTLSi on Sun Nov 30, 2014 9:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
AJChenMPH
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 7:34 am
Location: Bucks County, PA / KTTN
Contact:

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by AJChenMPH »

CTLSi wrote:The Liberty XL-2 is not an LSA. It has about the same performance specs as the most LSAs. But it's gross weight is too high.
Yep, sorry -- didn't mean to make it sound like I thought the XL-2 is an LSA. I meant that for a certifcated IFR 2-seater, the cost was very reasonable on that particular one, and that there were no guarantees that it's be available (or that I could find a comparable one for the same price) when I was ready to buy.
CTLSi wrote:Just so you know, the Flight Design CT (CTLSi, CTLS, CTSW) is a high wing with a stick and wide cockpit. You may want to check them out.
Nothing against them, I just want a low-wing plane. Like I said, it's just personal preference...kinda like you really want the red Corvette vs. the black Corvette.
CTLSi wrote:Glass becomes heavier if you add all the goodies that integrate with Dynon Skyview or Garmin G3x. Like autopilot, and ADS-B.
Gotcha. I did a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation using 2" Mid-Continent instruments...classic six-pack is about 8 or 9 lbs. I'd imagine standard 2 3/8" gauges are a touch heavier, but I could be wrong. I think ADS-B is a wash -- everyone's going to need it eventually (at least, ADS-B out). Will the autopilot module by itself weigh more than 6 lbs or so? What else could one add that would add weight?
CTLSi wrote:Even if you buy a used LSA just know that you cannot fly LSA into IMC regardless of having an IFR Navcom setup.
Oh, I know...I was "that guy" who resurrected the brouhaha in that other light-sport IFR thread. :mrgreen:
Andy / PP-ASEL
CTLSi
Posts: 783
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:38 pm

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by CTLSi »

......
Last edited by CTLSi on Sun Nov 30, 2014 9:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
drseti
Posts: 7236
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: 1C9, Hollister CA
Contact:

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by drseti »

AJChenMPH wrote:What does each steam gauge weigh?
Old-school full sized analog gauges weigh in at two to three pounds per instrument (plus the vacuum gauge system needed for powering some gyros). So, a Dynon Skyview, for example, weighs 12 to 18 pounds less than a six-pack.

The comment about an autopilot, ADS-B, and other options adding to the weight of the Skyview is true. Same goes for adding similar equipment to a six-pack equipped plane, so it's not an issue when comparing round gauges to glass.
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, 1C9
[email protected]
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US
User avatar
drseti
Posts: 7236
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: 1C9, Hollister CA
Contact:

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by drseti »

AJChenMPH wrote:kinda like you really want the red Corvette vs. the black Corvette.
Exactly, Andy! When I had to choose between the red Corvette and the black Corvette, I picked the black Porsche. :P
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, 1C9
[email protected]
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US
User avatar
drseti
Posts: 7236
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: 1C9, Hollister CA
Contact:

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by drseti »

CTLSi wrote:Even if you buy a used LSA just know that you cannot fly LSA into IMC regardless of having an IFR Navcom setup.
Well, that's true -- for now (until such time as ASTM releases IFR standards). Remember that this is an ASTM issue, not an FAA issue -- and Committee F39 is hard at work trying to come up with those standards.
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, 1C9
[email protected]
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US
SportPilot
Posts: 1060
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 3:39 pm

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by SportPilot »

.......
Last edited by SportPilot on Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
AJChenMPH
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 7:34 am
Location: Bucks County, PA / KTTN
Contact:

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by AJChenMPH »

drseti wrote:
AJChenMPH wrote:kinda like you really want the red Corvette vs. the black Corvette.
Exactly, Andy! When I had to choose between the red Corvette and the black Corvette, I picked the black Porsche. :P
Image
Andy / PP-ASEL
User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 2184
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: LSA Values Declining?

Post by MrMorden »

SportPilot wrote:If I was going to purchase an LSA, I would want little more than a comm radio, transponder, and ADS-B out plus needle, ball, and airspeed. All the other stuff does NOTHING to increase the utility of the LSA and adds weight. After all, useful load is the limitation of LSA. That and airspeed. I would also what extra fuel capacity for when I'm flying alone and have useful load available for more fuel and/or baggage.
I sort of agree...but while extra instrumentation and avionics does not increase the *base* utility of the airplane, I would argue it *does* enhance the utility. My CTSW has a Dynon D-100 EFIS, a Garmin radio, transponder, and 496 GPS, and a TruTrak autopilot. Could I make flights that are just as complex without all that stuff and just basic flight and engine instruments? Of course. But the workload is literally orders of magnitude higher if you do everything manually, and the chance for errors (and thus running afoul of regulations) is much greater.

If I need to know the density altitude, I don't have to do any math, I look at the Dynon and it's right there, taken from the OAT sensor, the altimeter, and the barometric pressure setting. Trying doing that math while trying to hold an airplane steady in bumpy air and follow a course on a paper sectional by alternately looking at your finger on the chart and outside for landmarks... Can it be done? YES! But why make it hard on yourself?

I recently found a feature that I didn't know I had: On my 496, I can hit the "nearest" button and get a list of nearby airports. If I select one, and then go to "comms" and select one of the airport frequencies, the frequency is automatically loaded into the alternate frequency on the SL40 radio. I hit the "flip-flop" button and I'm ready to talk. I can do all of this while largely looking outside and just making quick glances in the cockpit. I could do it by looking up freqs on a sectional or AFD and putting it in manually, but that would take a lot longer and take more attention away from flying. Twice this feature has helped me enormously when I needed to divert for weather and get to the nearest airport (once in a completely unfamiliar area of the country where I didn't even know the airport names) RIGHT FREAKIN' NOW.

It really depends on what kind of flying you want to do. Cubs and Champs have flown for generations with little more than airspeed, altitude, and an oil temp gauge and done fine. If that kind of flying appeals to you, and you want mostly local flying and/or you really like the challenge of doing things "old school", then don't let anybody talk you out of it. But all the new autopilots, glass panels, GPS moving maps and other gadgets have their place for those who want to travel far and wide with the most safety and convenience, and the least chance of busting airspace or violating other regulations.

EDIT: One other thing...all the gadgets are not really all that heavy. My autopilot weights 6lb, that is with both servos, head unit, and wiring (I know because I added it later). Even with all the gadgets I mentioned, my CTSW still has a 575lb useful load, which is me, the wife, 26 gallons of fuel, and 60lb of baggage. If you start with a light airplane you still do quite well on weight.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA
Post Reply