none Archives - Page 3 of 5 - ByDanJohnson.com

none

Zenith Unveils Smoother, Faster CH 750 Cruzer

By Dan Johnson || April 11, 2013 2 Comments

Zenith unveiled their newest ... CH 750 Cruzer.

Seen above is the popular, roomier CH 750 STOL, which complements the CH 701 that remains in production. Watch our CH 750 video.

At Sun 'n Fun 2013, big kit manufacturer Zenith Aircraft debuted their new CH 750 Cruzer. Is it truly something new under the Sun ('n Fun)? Zenith said, "While influenced by its well-known STOL predecessors — STOL CH 701 "Sky Jeep," CH 750, and four-seat CH 801 sport utility aircraft — the CH 750 Cruzer is an all-new design." Company president Sebastien Heintz observed that many customers do not need off-airport capability or extreme STOL (short take-off and landing) performance so his team optimized the new design for cruise and more conventional hard-surface airports while yet retaining the popular enlarged cabin features of the STOL CH 750. Zenith's new Cruzer 750 sports a brand-new airfoil with a single streamlined strut. The empennage is also new with a symmetrical stabilizer and a shortened horizontal tail span. The vertical tail features a fin and rudder replacing the traditional all-moving vertical tail design of the STOL series. Not needing big tires for rough fields, Cruzer has smaller 5.00 x 5 aircraft wheels and new wheel fairings. The instrument panel of the new design is also wider and more conventional than the STOL CH 750. The earlier model has a narrower instrument panel to improve forward visibility in extreme nose-high attitudes associated with STOL flying. Sebastien flew the new Cruzer 1,000 miles from the factory in Mexico, Missouri. The speedier '750 is powered by a UL350iS 130-hp fuel-injected engine from UL-Power. It also boasts the latest Dynon SkyView glass panel display system. The Cruzer on display at Sun 'n Fun weighs 780 pounds yielding a useful load of 540 pounds at a LSA gross weight of 1,320 pounds. The company reports cruise speed is 118 mph (103 knots), rate of climb is 1,200 fpm, and stall speed is 39 mph (34 knots). Existing firewall-forward engine packages are readily available for the Continental O-200, Rotax 912 series, Viking (Honda), Jabiru, and Corvair engines. Component kits are scheduled for delivery starting in May 2013.

At Sun ‘n Fun 2013, big kit manufacturer Zenith Aircraft debuted their new CH 750 Cruzer. Is it truly something new under the Sun (‘n Fun)? Zenith said, “While influenced by its well-known STOL predecessors — STOL CH 701 “Sky Jeep,” CH 750, and four-seat CH 801 sport utility aircraft — the CH 750 Cruzer is an all-new design.” Company president Sebastien Heintz observed that many customers do not need off-airport capability or extreme STOL (short take-off and landing) performance so his team optimized the new design for cruise and more conventional hard-surface airports while yet retaining the popular enlarged cabin features of the STOL CH 750. Zenith‘s new Cruzer 750 sports a brand-new airfoil with a single streamlined strut. The empennage is also new with a symmetrical stabilizer and a shortened horizontal tail span. The vertical tail features a fin and rudder replacing the traditional all-moving vertical tail design of the STOL series.

UltraCub (Belite)

By Dan Johnson || March 31, 2013 Leave a Comment

[UPDATE -- fall 2009: This article about the Kitfox Lite refers to a company now several years out of business. The new Kitfox producer sold the Kitfox Lite design to Kansas entrepreneur, James Wiebe. His company, Belite Aircraft, now produces the Belite Carbon 254 (and other variations) and has significantly changed structure with carbon fiber components to lighten the weight, assuring that it meets Part 103. For the latest info on their offerings, contact the company directly. Information in this article, while similar to what Belite Aircraft produces today, will not be identical to the new model. --Dan] Kitfox Lite: tastes great; less filling One the best-selling kit-built aircraft of all time is the Kitfox series. First designed by Dan Denney for a company bearing his name, the airplane is now marketed in several variations by SkyStar. As ownership passed, the market matured and SkyStar astutely chose to widen the appeal of the well-known Kitfox name. What it did was add a single-seater that had been missing for so long. Why sell a single seater? Well, first of all, doing so under the FAA's demanding Part 103 regulations allowed SkyStar to market to pilots who've lost their medicals. It also caters to medically certified pilots who want to fly a truly lightweight aircraft. Since the Kitfox is revered for its light and snappy handling, plus its terrific performance envelope, a single-seat model promised to be a very interesting machine. It was a long time coming, but SkyStar got the Kitfox Lite right. In fact, enthusiasts of lightweight airplanes can rejoice! DOING IT RIGHT SkyStar passed on earlier requests to fly the Kitfox Lite for this Pilot Report. Knowing that it may have cost them a few sales, the company nonetheless held to its convictions. They wanted the aircraft to prove itself to factory experts before it went public. That's an attitude I admire, and like any customer, I don't want to be the one who discovers problems with a new design. If you buy a Kitfox Lite, rest assured that (1) the aircraft should perform as promoted and have reliable flight characteristics, and (2) assuming you build and paint carefully, you'll have an airplane that qualifies under Part 103 regulations. SkyStar is understandably proud of its efforts. Promotional literature says, "Unlike most other ultralights, the new Kitfox Lite is a real airplane with a real airplane heritage." The world of ultralights gives SkyStar an opportunity that Denney Aerocraft never realized. Some years ago, when I visited the company, Dan Denney expressed a desire to sell and deliver fully built Kitfoxes. He gave it a try, but aborted his plan shortly after he began it. Since the FAA won't let you sell ready-to-fly Experimental airplanes, he would have had to sell his aircraft to the overseas market. SkyStar, however, is selling the fully built Kitfox Lite under Part 103. For $19,995, you can come pick up your Kitfox Lite with the engine broken in and ready to fly. The factory conducts a production flight test to assure the rigging is right and the airspeeds are properly calculated. To keep it within Part 103, the plane is finished in white with no trim. Think of it. For less than the price of the average new car you can have a new, peppy and sharp little airplane that should afford years of flying fun. You can save some money by buying the kit, which sells for a $14,995 base price. If you do go that route, SkyStar offers options that reduce build time. The most significant is to buy the factory-built wings and have them attached to the fuselage. Not only does that speed up the building process, but it assures that the finished Kitfox Lite will fly straight and true. The company uses the same spar as used on the Kitfox IV but without an insert at the strut junction, as used on the heavier Kitfox. This suggests that although SkyStar limits flight loads to +3.8 and -1.5 G's, the plane should be more than strong enough for the demands of most buyers. STARTING OVER For the Kitfox Lite, SkyStar broke with tradition and went with the 2si engine instead of the venerable Rotax - all in the interest of keeping weight down and retaining a respectable level of horsepower. Based on the Cuyuna engine - the standard of the early ultralight days - the U.S.-built 2si has features like dual ignition, 35 horsepower and twin cylinders. The dual ignition system came in handy once when a 2si stuttered on the factory demonstrator. The engine continued to run on one cylinder and the pilot landed the airplane without incident. Company President Ed Downs explained that the problem was traced to a plug that came loose from the upside-down-mounted engine. It has since been secured to prevent similar problems in the future. As I flew the new Kitfox Lite, engine temperatures stayed approximately at 300_ on CHT (well below red line) and they stayed under 1,000_ on the EGT (also well within safety margins). Max rpm on the 2si is 6,900; it registered 6,200 on climbouts. One negative worth noting here is that the 2si needs to be hand-propped. The Kitfox Lite is so close to 254 pounds that SkyStar cannot afford the weight of a pull starter. The firewall, however, has a hole where the starter rope will route into the cabin once a few pounds are trimmed. Downs gave me arguably the finest preflight checkout that I've ever received, including a full walk-around inspection. A precise and knowledgeable leader, he should do well for SkyStar. The Kitfox Lite, like many Part 103 ultralights, enjoys a fairly wide cockpit. SkyStar says it measures 24 inches, but the figure isn't as illuminating as sitting in the aircraft. Most people will find plenty of elbow room. On the floor is a wood panel that provides foot support and allows your heels to slide readily, which makes the heel brakes easy enough to use. Otherwise, the cockpit is as simple as you'd expect in a 103-compliant ultralight. A center joystick fronts a well-padded seat cushion and a broad seat back is emblazoned with the company's famous Kitfox logo. I appreciated the four-point seat belts, but no parachute system was provided, as I always prefer. SkyStar has worked with ballistic parachute producer BRS, however, and now offers an installation option. For my shorter-than-average arms, the reach to the throttle was a little long in the Kitfox Lite, at least when I had the throttle well advanced. Also, no doubt to keep the cost down, the throttle is a simple bent-aluminum stock that has a bit of an edge to it. Of course, you could put a sheath over the handle end. The added weight would be minuscule. In flight, the windscreen does a good job of keeping the wind off you, though my arms were buffeted a little. In Florida's heat it cooled me, and in cool northern climates a jacket would suffice, I'm sure. NO-SWEAT TAILDRAGGER I've spoken to many pilots who, lacking taildragger experience, voice concern over the potential for ground loops and the challenge of taxiing a taildragger. In contrast to the company's Kitfox model - which sits up higher, has a steeper deck angle, and weighs considerably more - I believe most tri-gear pilots will find that the Kitfox Lite's conventional gear will not pose much of a problem. The test aircraft used a tiny tailwheel (a weight saver) that proved ineffective on Florida's dry sandy soil. It was like flying with a skid instead of a wheel, though that did allow for good directional control and some automatic braking on landing touchdown. Naturally, I had to accelerate enough to lift the tailwheel on takeoff, but that didn't add appreciably to the takeoff roll. Despite the trademark Kitfox cowl bumps (to simulate a radial engine installation), I was able to see over the cowling. Taxiing was easy. I was fascinated by an interesting progression of noise that occurred right as the Lite left the ground (while accelerating, of course). I perceived it as a Doppler effect. Though of course the aircraft has no turbo charger, it almost felt like one was kicking in at precisely the right time. Climb is stronger than any stock Cessna 150 I've ever flown. During approach to land, three notches of flap settings proved highly effective at pitching the aircraft nose down and increasing the descent angle. Using all four positions, including zero flaps, I had nothing but good landings in the Lite. Ground roll is exceedingly short, only 50 or 60 feet, qualifying the ultralight as well equipped for short runway operations. I remember clearly my experiences with the Kitfox IV, the XL, and the Vixen. All boasted extremely rapid roll rates, in the neighborhood of 1-1.5 seconds rolling 45_ to 45_. The Kitfox Lite also has that ability. While it assures there will be no problems maintaining control in crosswind conditions, it may prove to be a little too rapid for some newcomers. My advice is to take it easy at first, flying on days with mild weather and wind. After a short period of acclimatization, you'll come to love the fast response. It may even spoil you. The Kitfox Lite originally had an even faster roll rate, but SkyStar reduced the aileron span to about a foot less than the wing (per side). The roll rate must have been nothing short of exciting when they protruded out a bit from the wing on the prototype. Even with the shorter flaperons, the Kitfox Lite remains responsive. I believe I could have done dutch rolls to 45_ and possibly even 60_. PERFORMANCE IS LIGHTWEIGHT Using the 2si's 35 horsepower guarantees lots of pep for the light Lite. Even in all-time record heat for sunny Florida last April, the mini Kitfox acted as if it had a reserve of energy. Downs recommended climbing at 45 mph and cruising at 53-55. At 5,400 or 5,500 rpm, the 2si produced about 55 mph, a power setting that had the aircraft purring with a tolerable combination of noise and vibration. According to Product Development Manager Frank Miller, the Kitfox Lite's 2si burns about 2 gallons per hour. Given the Part 103 standard of 5 gallons of fuel, that amounts to a solid 2 hours of flying with a 30-minute reserve. More than that and I'm generally looking for a restroom anyway. The Kitfox Lite was nearly able to hold altitude on 5,000 rpm, at which point it seemed to be at a deceptively low power setting. I cannot comment on the Tiny-Tach's accuracy, but 5,000 rpm felt more like 4,000 on a Rotax 447. This is hardly a scientific comment, but regardless of the number, the Lite held altitude at a power setting that seemed unlikely to cause pilot fatigue. That said, the 2si engine showed considerable roughness at a reading of 4,700 rpm; however, since that setting yields slowly descending flight, it's not one that will be often used. Downs and Miller confirmed my impression, but also agreed that you'll either be at 5,000 or above while cruising or significantly below 4,000 if you wish to descend. All two-strokes have a place where they are less than smooth; overall, I have to admit that I was pleased with the 2si's smoothness and power. The aircraft performed well through my usual regimen of stability exercises. Stalls were uneventful, although, perhaps due to the short wingspan (25 feet) and small area (88 square feet), the nose did break over on everything but full power stalls. Personally I prefer stalls that break, as I believe such action clearly identifies the stall. Unlike heavier general aviation designs, a genuine ultralight will not lose much altitude even in deep stalls, so a stall break isn't threatening. When you add power, the Kitfox Lite raises its nose as expected, and when you reduce power it lowers the nose as you'd expect. I did note that it took longer than anticipated to return to level flight after I did a stick deflection from trim for my longitudinal stability evaluation. Without in-flight trim, however, the delay may have been due to the fact that I don't weigh the same as the usual air-show pilot, or it may have been due to the position of the fixed trim tab installed on the left elevator control. Regardless, you can make adjustments to accommodate your weight and see fast return to level flight. Either way, the light and authoritative pitch leaves you in full control any time. Since this Kitfox Lite was not equipped with a parachute, and since I did not know if the factory had conducted a full spin series, I did not perform any unusual attitude maneuvers. LITE ON YOUR POCKETBOOK Five years ago SkyStar offered its low-end Kitfox XL for the same price as it currently offers the kit version of the Lite - $14,995. Clearly the company is doing something right. And SkyStar has equipped the Lite very nicely. The fully welded 4130 chrome-moly airframe comes white powder coated. The wings come assembled. Flaperons have already been fitted, which saves several hours and assures you they've been done correctly. Differential brakes are connected to wide tires and metal wheels. The interior includes upholstered seat cushions and four-point seat belts. The panel has all the essentials, including tach, ASI, altimeter, and dual CHT and EGT gauges. And all wiring is included, plus a full set of hardware to put it all together. Although you will have to add your own paint, Stits Poly-Fiber 1.7-ounce covering material is the standard finish that comes with the kit. Paint can be costly, but to stay at 103 weight, you won't need as much. It's been a lengthy wait, watching SkyStar work toward what it considers a proper entry in the single-place market. For the flying public, however, it's been worth it. The Kitfox Lite is sure to make you smile. I know I had some trouble wiping the grin off my face.

Empty weight	250 lbs
Gross weight	550 lbs
Wingspan	25.2 ft
Wing area	88 sq ft
Wing loading	6.25 lbs/sq ft
Length	16.5 ft
Width	(interior) 24 in
Height	5.2 ft
Fuel Capacity	5 gal
Power	35-hp 2-stroke 2si 460F
Power loading	15.7 lbs/hp
Cruise speed	35-55 mph
Stall Speed (Flaps)	28 mph
Never exceed speed	80 mph
Rate of climb at gross	750 fpm
Takeoff distance at gross	100 ft
Landing distance at gross	75 ft

[UPDATE — fall 2009: This article about the Kitfox Lite refers to a company now several years out of business. The new Kitfox producer sold the Kitfox Lite design to Kansas entrepreneur, James Wiebe. His company, Belite Aircraft, now produces the Belite Carbon 254 (and other variations) and has significantly changed structure with carbon fiber components to lighten the weight, assuring that it meets Part 103. For the latest info on their offerings, contact the company directly. Information in this article, while similar to what Belite Aircraft produces today, will not be identical to the new model. –Dan] Kitfox Lite: tastes great; less filling One the best-selling kit-built aircraft of all time is the Kitfox series. First designed by Dan Denney for a company bearing his name, the airplane is now marketed in several variations by SkyStar. As ownership passed, the market matured and SkyStar astutely chose to widen the appeal of the well-known Kitfox name.

Part 103 Carbon 254

By Dan Johnson || March 31, 2013 Leave a Comment

DEARLY BELOVED - Those who've always loved the Kitfox but wanted a Part 103 ultralight need wait no longer. After fully refining the new model, SkyStar has a worthy new ultralight for your consideration.

While it may have been a long time coming, SkyStar Aircraft - the builder of the extremely popular Kitfox series - has done their Kitfox Lite version right. It was easily worth the wait. While the Kitfox Lite and Avid Aircraft's Champion were both flying regularly last summer, SkyStar elected not to have the plane flown for an Ultralight Flying! Pilot's Report because it was still a prototype. The company's president at the time, Ray Caldwell, said he preferred they work it out fully before letting me go aloft. Contrarily, Avid jumped at the chance for some press. In my flight review,1 it became obvious the Champion wouldn't easily qualify as a Part 103 ultralight. (For example, you had to fly with no engine cowling, among other efforts at weight reduction. Such requirements would not be popular with pilots, I concluded, so you had an aircraft which most buyers would have to N-number.) Though it cost them months of wait for publicity, SkyStar's professional efforts resulted in a Part 103 ultralight that meets all the definition - with cowling, folding wings, differential brakes and other features many buyers want. Doing It Right SkyStar passed the chance for a pilot's report of their product, and this may have cost them a few early sales. Yet they refused to bow to market pressure, preferring instead to make the product fully ready. At the end of the day, I admire this attitude.

INSIDER'S VIEW - When the wing is folded on the Lite, you get this interior view that shows the similarity to the well-established Kitfox wing. Yes, those are wood wing ribs.

The brightly painted prototype first seen in the air wasn't quite right, they said. They believed my pilot's report would better serve Ultralight Flying! magazine readers if my impressions were given after flying an ultralight exactly like that which buyers would receive. Who can argue with this wisdom? While I admit I was anxious to fly the Kitfox Lite - especially given SkyStar's excellent reputation - I respected the decision to wait until the plane had fully proven itself to the factory experts. Like any customer, I don't want to be the one who discovers problems with a new design, and all of us want to know what we're buying when we plunk down our hard-earned cash.

BELTED TO GO - SkyStar accommodates pilots like me who prefer 4-point security and helps everyone who wants a place to carry a few light goodies in the cloth cargo area behind the seat.

If you become a Lite buyer, you can now proceed with far greater assurance of two important things: (1) the Kitfox Lite should perform as promoted, with solid flight characteristics; and (2) assuming you build and paint carefully, you'll have an ultralight which qualifies under the Part 103 ultralight regulation. SkyStar is understandably proud of their efforts. The Idaho manufacturer is one of the most successful builders of recreational aircraft in history, and they have a right to regard their ultralight entry as a fine example of fly-for-fun planes. Entry into the world of ultralights gives SkyStar an opportunity that Denney Aerocraft (the original Kitfox manufacturer) never achieved. Some years ago when I visited Denney Aerocraft while Dan Denney still owned it, he expressed a desire to fully build the Kitfox, instead of offering it just as an owner-built kit. He found this endeavor tough - and abandoned the direction shortly after beginning. You can't fully build an aircraft licensed in the Experimental category for U.S. sales - it must be FAA-approved as a 51% owner-built aircraft from a kit. Fully factory-built aircraft (other than Part 103 ultralights) must be FAA Type-certificated, a very costly process of certifying the aircraft design. And then you have to certify your production process of building the aircraft, another very costly effort.

LITE INTERIOR - The Kitfox Lite's interior gleams back at our camera showing the simple cleanliness of the ultralight. Note throttle and flap lever at the pilot's left and heel brakes on the floor.

SkyStar won't fully assemble the Kitfox Lite. To do so means a wholly different effort of manufacture than making kits (not that kit building is a simple task). However, SkyStar can do some other interesting things under Part 103. The most significant is to fully build the wings and attach them to the fuselage. Building is a demanding and precise task. A prebuilt wing will hasten completion time and give far better assurance that the finished Kitfox Lite will fly straight and true. The company uses the same spar as used on the Kitfox IV but without an insert at the strut junction (as used on the heavier Kitfox). This suggests that although SkyStar limits flight loads to +3.8 and -1.5 Gs, the ultralight should be more than strong enough for the demands of most buyers. Straying From Traditions SkyStar broke with their long tradition of using Rotax for their powerplant. To keep the weight down and still offer enough power to be interesting, the company elected to install a 2 Stroke International twin-cylinder fan-cooled 35-hp 460F-35 2-cycle engine in what is surely a big boost for the American-manufactured motor. In my experience, the 2si has performed well on the Kitfox Lite and with Aero-Work's Aero-Lite 103,2 which has apparently returned to using a 2si engine after a temporary shift to Rotax. Based on the older and once popular Cuyuna engine that was the standard of ultralights in the early days of ultralight flying, the 2si now has features many buyers prefer. Twin cylinders bring smoother operations than single bangers like the 26-hp Rotax 277. They also deliver more power (the 2si engine has 35 horses), and the 2si of today has dual ignition.

GO AND SLOW - The bare aluminum throttle lever appears above the fuel cock, and the white flap lever is seen in the full-up and locked position.

With SkyStar's endorsement of the 2si engine, I'd say the days of Rotax 277s on new ultralights are gone forever. Of course, you can't order the 277 new anymore, but some manufacturers still specify the 277 as the engine you must employ to stay within Part 103 weight definitions, and some manufacturers say they can still sell you a Rotax 277 engine. Two ignition sources are routed to each cylinder on SkyStar's 2si engine. According to new company president Ed Downs, this was invaluable once when the engine stuttered on the factory prototype. The 2si continued to run on one remaining cylinder. Ed explained it was a simple problem of one plug coming off (the engine is mounted upside-down). A tie wrap now secures the plug against any repeat of this problem. The flight remained uneventful for the factory pilot aboard. As I flew the new Kitfox Lite, engine temperatures stayed approximately 300° on the cylinder head temperature (CHT), which is well below red line and below 1,000° on the exhaust gas temperature (EGT), also well within safety margins. Maximum rpm on the 2si is 6,900 rpm, and it registered a max of 6,200 rpm on my climbouts. One negative worth noting here is the present situation requiring hand-propping the 2si to start it. The Kitfox Lite is so close to 254 pounds that they cannot afford the weight of even a pull (recoil) starter. However, the firewall has a hole where the starter rope will route into the cabin (once SkyStar trims a few pounds to add a recoil start system). Downs struggled to get the 2si started for my flight in very hot conditions in Florida, but eventually the engine fired. Later, when I prop-started the engine so Ed could fly it, the engine jumped to life quite easily. Ed Downs gave me arguably the finest preflight checkout I've ever received, including a full walkaround inspection. He is a very precise and knowledgeable leader who should do well for SkyStar, if my experiences with him now and several years ago are any indication.

QUICK FOLD JOB - SkyStar president Ed Downs demonstrates the quick-folding wing of the Lite, naturally modeled after the Kitfox. Total time for wing folding appeared to be under 10 minutes.

The trim tab on the ultralight I flew will not be part of the standard kit thanks to greater adjustability on the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer (much like that used by Quicksilver on their GT series). Those builders who prefer to remain loyal to the Austrian Rotax engine line can elect to mount the 40-hp Rotax 447 or 50-hp Rotax 503 also thanks to the adjustment of the horizontal tail. But doing so will put the Lite above the Part 103 weight limit. SkyStar's Kitfox Lite, like many Part 103-capable ultralights, enjoys a fairly wide cockpit. The company says it measures 24 inches, but the figure isn't as illuminating as sitting in the ultralight. Most buyers will find plenty of elbow room. On the floor is a wood panel that gives you foot support and allows your heels to slide readily which makes the heel brakes easy enough to use. Otherwise, the cockpit is as simple as you'd expect in a Part 103 ultralight. A center joystick fronts a well-padded seat cushion and a broad seatback emblazoned with the company's famous Kitfox logo. I appreciated the use of a 4-point shoulder harness pilot restraint, although no parachute system was provided, as would always be my preference. SkyStar has worked with BRS and expects to offer an approved installation in the future. For my rather short arms, the reach to the throttle was a little long in the Lite, at least when I had the throttle well-advanced. Also, no doubt to keep the cost down, the throttle was made of simple bent aluminum stock which had a bit of an edge to it. Of course, you can put a sheath over the handle end. In-flight, the windscreen did a good job of keeping the wind off me, though my arms were buffeted a little. In Florida's heat, it cooled me. In cool northern climates, a jacket will suffice, I'm sure.

YANKEE POWER - These days it isn't so common to see an American-produced powerplant on the nose of an ultralight. However, SkyStar has worked to assure the 2 Stroke International engine is up to the task - and it is.

Easy Dragger I've spoken to many pilots who, lacking taildragger experience, voice concern over the potential for ground loops and the challenge of taxiing a taildragger. In contrast to the company's Kitfox model - which sits up higher, has a steeper deck angle and weighs considerably more - I believe most ultralight enthusiasts won't find the Kitfox Lite much of a problem. The test ultralight used a tiny little tailwheel (a weight saver), which proved ineffective on Florida's dry sandy soil. It was approximately like flying with a skid instead of a wheel, though this allowed for good directional control and some automatic braking on landing touchdown. Naturally, I had to accelerate enough to lift the tailwheel on takeoff, but this didn't add appreciably to my takeoff roll, I found. Despite the trademark Kitfox cowl bumps (to simulate a radial engine installation), I was able to see over the cowling. Taxiing was easy. I was fascinated by an interesting noise progression that occurred right as the Kitfox Lite left the ground (while accelerating, of course). I perceived it as a Doppler effect. Though, of course, it has no turbocharger, it almost felt like one kicking in at precisely the right time. While climb is stated at 750 feet per minute in company literature, I estimated it at closer to 400 to 500 fpm. Perhaps the culprit was Florida's very hot weather? However, the lack of a sensitive altimeter made the climb rate harder to judge. (Though they may save a few dollars, I never understand why people buy these gauges. Getting an accurate number is much harder when the entire swing of the needle equates to 10,000 feet.)

SIDE VIEW - Out either side of the Kitfox Lite's cockpit, pilots will see this distinctively Kitfoxlike flaperon setup. It was detuned a little (through a small span reduction) but still assures the famed highly-responsive Kitfox handling.

Approaching to land, three notches of flap settings proved highly effective at pitching the aircraft nose down and increasing the descent angle. I had all good landings in the Lite, using all four positions including zero flaps. Ground roll is exceedingly short, only 50 or 60 feet, qualifying the new ultralight as well-equipped for short ultralight airpark operations. I remember clearly my previous experience with the Kitfox IV, the Kitfox XL,3 and their Vixen model. All boasted extremely rapid roll rates, in the neighborhood of 1 to 1.5 seconds rolling 45° to 45°. This assures no problems whatsoever in maintaining control in crosswind conditions, but it may prove to be a little too rapid for some newer ultralight enthusiasts. For my money, I'd advise taking it easy at first, flying on days with mild weather and wind. After a short period of acclimatization, I believe you'll come to love the fast response. It may even spoil you. However, the Kitfox Lite was once even faster rolling. Since the prototype the company didn't want used for a pilot's report, SkyStar cut the span of the flaperons to about a foot less than the wing (per side). Before that change, they stuck out a bit beyond, and the roll rate must have been nothing short of exciting. The Kitfox Lite remains very responsive even with the shorter flaperons. I believe I could have done Dutch rolls to 45° and possibly even 60°, a very steep angle for this exercise. No Lite-Weight Performer The 2si engine's 35 horsepower guarantees lots of pep for the light Lite. Even in the heat and humidity of sunny Florida last April, the Kitfox Lite acted like it had a reserve of energy for me to enjoy.

LIGHTEN UP - With its classic Kitfox lines, the newest member of the family still shows its lighter weight with struts, gear legs and doorless cockpit that are slightly different than the original.

Ed Downs recommended a climb speed of 45 mph. He also recommended a cruise of 53 to 55 mph. At 5,400 to 5,500 rpm, the 2si engine produced about 55 mph, and at this power setting, the Kitfox Lite purred along with a tolerable combination of noise and vibration. According to product development manager Frank Miller, the Lite's 2si engine burns about 2 gallons per hour. Given the Part 103 limitation of no more than 5 gallons of fuel onboard, this amounts to a solid 2 hours of flying with a 30-minute reserve. More than that and I'm generally looking for a rest room. The Kitfox Lite was nearly able to hold altitude on 5,000 rpm, at which point it seemed to be at a deceptively low power setting. I can't comment on the tachometer's accuracy, but 5,000 rpm felt more like 4,000 on a Rotax 447. This is hardly a scientific comment, but regardless of the number, the Lite held altitude at a power setting that seemed unlikely to cause any pilot fatigue. That said, the 2si engine showed considerable roughness in the area of 4,700 rpm. However, since this yielded slowly descending flight, this setting won't often be used. Downs and Miller confirmed my impression but also agreed that you'll either be at 5,000 or above while cruising or significantly below 4,000 if you wish to descend. All 2-strokes seem to have some place where they are less than smooth, and overall I had to admit I was pleased with the 2si's smoothness and power. The Kitfox Lite performed well through my usual regimen of stability exercises. Stalls were quite uneventful although, perhaps due to the short wingspan of 25 feet 3 inches and small wing area of only 88 square feet, the nose did break over on each stall except full-power stalls. Personally, I prefer stalls which break, as I believe such action clearly identifies the stall. Unlike heavier general aviation designs, a genuine ultralight won't lose much altitude even in deeper stalls, so a stall break isn't threatening. When adding power, the Kitfox Lite properly raises its nose and on power reduction lowers it, as you'd expect.

MAIN DUDES - SkyStar president Ed Downs smiles from the cockpit, while product development manager Frank Miller beams his pride in the newly completed model.

I did note a longer time to return to level flight after stick deflection from trim (longitudinal stability evaluation) but without in-flight trim this may have been due to either my change in weight versus the usual pilot or the position of the fixed trim tab installed on the left elevator control. Regardless, you could adjust for your weight and see fast return to level as you may prefer. Either way, the light and authoritative pitch will leave you in full control at any time. Since no emergency parachute was installed and since I did not find out if the factory has conducted a full series of spin tests, I did not perform any unusual attitude maneuvers. Lite on Your Wallet Five years ago, SkyStar offered their Kitfox XL for the same price they're offering the Kitfox Lite today. Since that '94 price tag would easily reach $17,500 today (given the effects of inflation), SkyStar is revealing some efficiency in the $14,995 price for the Lite version. While it's true ultralight shoppers these days have lower-cost options, a quality fast-build kit for this price is fair. You should also recognize how well SkyStar equips their Kitfox Lite. The fully-welded 4130 chromoly steel airframe comes white powder coated, so you won't need to perform this arduous paint routine. The wings come assembled. Yes, you read that right: assembled. Flaperons are also prefitted saving several hours (plus assuring you they've been done correctly). You get differential brakes connected to wide tires and metal wheels, plus upholstered seat cushions and 4-point seat belts. The panel will have all the essentials, including tach, ASI, altimeter and dual CHT/EGT gauges. In addition, SkyStar says they provide all the wiring and naturally a full set of hardware to put it all together. Although you will have to add your own paint, Stits Poly-Fiber 1.7-ounce covering material is the standard finish that comes with the kit. Paint can be costly, but to stay at Part 103 weight, you won't need as much. True, the wait has been lengthy while SkyStar decided to make a proper entry into the ultralight market. But the final results are worth the time taken, and so what? You can now own a Kitfox Lite that is sure to make you smile. I know I had some trouble wiping the grin off my face. Notes: 1See "Pilot's Report: Champion Ultralight - An Avid for Ultralighters," October '98 Ultralight Flying! magazine 2See "Pilot's Report: Aero-Lite 103 - Well-Equipped for a Modest Price," November '97 Ultralight Flying! magazine 3See "Pilot's Report: SkyStar's Low-Cost Kitfox XL," February '94 Ultralight Flying! magazine

Published in Light Sport and Ultralight Flying

Seating	Single-seat
Empty weight	250 pounds
Gross weight	550 pounds
Wingspan	25 feet 2 inches
Wing area	88 square feet
Wing loading	6.3 pounds per sq ft
Length	16 feet 5 inches
Height	5 feet 2 inches
Fuel Capacity	5 gallons
Kit type	Assembly
Build time	150-200 hours
Standard engine	2si 460F-35 2-cycle
Power	35 hp at 6,000 rpm
Power loading	15.7 pounds per hp
Cruise speed	55 mph
Never exceed speed	80 mph
Rate of climb at gross	750 fpm
Takeoff distance at gross	100 feet
Landing distance at gross	100 feet
Standard Features	Folding factory-built wings, differential main wheel heel brakes, castoring tailwheel, 4-position flaperons, 4-point shoulder harness pilot restraint, belt reduction drive, instruments (ASI, tach, dual CHT/EGT, altimeter, slip/skid indicator), 2-blade wood prop.
Options	Upholstery (seat cushioning), transport trailer, baggage sack, paint; fully-assembled option.
Construction	Factory-welded 4130 chromoly steel fuselage, factory-assembled and prerigged wings, aluminum main wing spars, prefitted flaperons, steel parts white powder coated, 1.7-ounce dope and fabric covering.

Design

Cosmetic appearance, structural integrity, achievement of design goals, effectiveness of aerodynamics, ergonomics.

Pros - SkyStar took the time to make sure their Kitfox Lite can meet Part 103 - and it does! Company is highly respected. Well-engineered for structure and flight characteristics; wasn't hurried onto the market. Builds on the popularity of the Kitfox brand and credentials.

Cons - Until SkyStar trims a few more pounds, the Part 103 rating won't allow a pull starter. To save weight, SkyStar worked hard with 2 Stroke International, yet some buyers may resist choices other than Rotax. Controls are pretty fast for some beginning pilots.

Systems

Subsystems available to pilot such as: Flaps; Fuel sources; Electric start; In-air restart; Brakes; Engine controls; Navigations; Radio; (items covered may be optional).

Pros - Use of a 2si engine brings dual ignition and light weight, plus a modest cost (helping to hold down weight and price). Flaperons are effective and easily deployed. Folding wing option has long been popular with buyers. Differential heel brakes worked effectively. Easily accessed fuel squeeze bulb and easily checked fuel cock (to pilot's left in cockpit).

Cons - Requirement to hand-prop to start engine will dismay many buyers, but Kitfox Lite can't make Part 103 weight with pull starter (until factory trims a few pounds elsewhere). Belt drive reduction works well but may not convince those sold on gear redrives. No in-flight trim (but hardly needed with light controls).

Cockpit/Cabin

Instrumentation; Ergonomics of controls; Creature comforts; (items covered may be optional).

Pros - Roomy cockpit should accommodate most ultralight pilots. Overhead skylight aids visibility in turns and pretakeoff. Entry/exit is simple for most pilots. All controls easily accessed and panel is a close reach. Small cloth cargo pouch behind seat can hold items in-flight. Four-point shoulder harness pilot restraint is standard. Largely wind-free cabin, even without doors.

Cons - Doubtful if doors can be added while staying within Part 103. Checking fuel while flying isn't as certain as some other designs. Simple throttle lever has an edge (though you could install a protector). No quick seat adjustment.

Ground Handling

Taxi visibility; Steering; Turn radius; Shock absorption; Stance/Stability; Braking.

Pros - Good ground clearance and broad tires on main gear. Differential heel brakes are standard feature. Good taxi visibility over nose. Skylight helps in checking traffic before takeoff.

Cons - Small thin tailwheel acted like a skid in Florida's dry sandy soil. No suspension other than air in the tires (though this seemed sufficient). Some pilots are concerned about taildragger operations (although I found Kitfox Lite very compliant).

Takeoff/Landing

Qualities; Efficiency; Ease; Comparative values.

Pros - Takeoff roll is short: under 100 feet. Landing roll-out even shorter thanks to effective flaps. Flaps and good slip capability suggest very short field capability. Slow approaches easily possible. Good main gear ground clearance. Wide main tires bring improved performance on soft ground. Controls allow easy handling of crosswinds.

Cons - Tailwheel dragged in sandy Florida soil, lengthening short takeoff run. Taildraggers give concern to some pilots (though the Lite is much easier than a standard Kitfox). No other negatives discovered.

Control

Quality and quantity for: Coordination; Authority; Pressures; Response; and Coupling.

Pros - The good news is, the controls are fast and responsive (perfect for those with experience). Even better control harmony than company's Kitfox IV model. Light stick touch makes trim virtually unneeded (none is supplied). Precision turns are simple thanks to highly effective controls.

Cons - The bad news is, the controls are fast and responsive (wrong for some apprehensive beginners). Adverse yaw is definitely present. No other negatives discovered.

Performance

Climb; Glide; Sink; Cruise/stall/max speeds; Endurance; Range; Maneuverability.

Pros - Sprightly performance from 2si engine, 750-fpm climb per factory (see main article). Easily achieves Part 103 speeds without exceeding them; worthy effort by SkyStar to keep the Kitfox Lite within the FAR definition. Five gallons of fuel should allow more than 2 hours of cruise.

Cons - Flight loadings of +3.8 and -1.5 Gs suggests more modest use. Starting the 2si via hand-propping was challenging during flight test, although this may not be a problem on other installations. Only 25-foot 3-inch wingspan and 88-square-foot wing (though the Lite performed well).

Stability

Stall recovery and characteristics; Dampening; Spiral stability; Adverse yaw qualities.

Pros - Stall is very low, down into the upper 20s in mph. Good stall characteristics even with small wing area. Tail braced with cables to save weight though many feel this is stronger than the struts of larger Kitfox models. Secure 4-point pilot restraint appreciated. Normal power response and good longitudinal stability.

Cons - Stall did break (though not precipitously), probably due to small wing area resulting in higher-than-average 6.3-pounds-per-square-foot wing loading at gross weight. Adverse yaw is fairly significant. No other negatives discovered.

Overall

Addresses the questions: "Will a buyer get what he/she expects to buy, and did the designer/builder achieve the chosen goal?"

Pros - Good value at $14,995 complete with everything you need (except paint). Factory support reported excellent. Wing comes built as proof of a faster build time than older Kitfox models; also assures buyers of correct construction. Respected company will assure buyers. Design well-engineered before shipments began.

Cons - Painted surfaces add weight, increase build time and cost (compared to pull-on Dacron® wings). Not the cheapest ultralight you can buy. Not everyone loves taildraggers. Some won't prefer the 2si engine. Overall, the Lite was extremely hard to fault.

[UPDATE — fall 2009: This article about the Kitfox Lite refers to a company now several years out of business. The new Kitfox producer sold the Kitfox Lite design to Kansas entrepreneur, James Wiebe. His company, Belite Aircraft, now produces the Belite Carbon 254 (and other variations) and has significantly changed structure with carbon fiber components to lighten the weight, assuring that it meets Part 103. For the latest info on their offerings, contact the company directly. Information in this article, while similar to what Belite Aircraft produces today, will not be identical to the new model. –Dan] While it may have been a long time coming, SkyStar Aircraft – the builder of the extremely popular Kitfox series – has done their Kitfox Lite version right. It was easily worth the wait. While the Kitfox Lite and Avid Aircraft’s Champion were both flying regularly last summer, SkyStar elected not to have the plane flown for an Ultralight Flying!

Grand LSA News Wrap-Up… Pre-Oshkosh

By Dan Johnson || November 7, 2012 Leave a Comment

Cessna's Discover Flying team and their numbered Skycatchers: From left... Ed Honey (dispatcher); Conor Dancy; Luis Acosta; Jen Scanlan; Ben Alimena; Zoe Cunningham; Chris Rogers; Luke Patterson; and Taylor Breum.

Breezer Aircraft USA moves to the Sun 'n Fun campus.

One of each: the new Rotax 912 iS is installed on one side while the familiar 912 ULS remains on the left of Lockwood's AirCam.

Yowie! This airplane can almost jump off the ground. See it at Oshkosh. photo by Randee Laskewitz

The popular and versatile Lotus Floats have a new home and improved service.

Allegro gains support of more leaders in North Carolina.

CESSNA'S DISCOVER FLYING I met new business leader for the Skycatcher LSA, Tracy Leopold, at Sun 'n Fun 2012 where she confirmed the Wichita giant's support for their lightest aircraft, now being assembled in Independence alongside other Cessna models. As summer began, Tracy's Skycatcher group amped up their game with a program called Discover Flying Challenge. *** After hiring eight university graduate flight instructors — plus a ninth to act as dispatcher — the team took off in all directions and will reunite again at AirVenture 2012. Meanwhile, the youthful team is visiting Cessna Pilot Centers and non-CPC FBOs plus fly-ins and air shows all the while doing what college grads do these days: updating Facebook and Twitter feeds and blogging about their activities. *** "We wanted to do something different, something that would get the attention of the next generation of pilots while at the same time getting the Skycatcher in front of the public," explained Tracy. Keep up with the 8+1 at Big C's Facebook page. It's great to see Cessna's dedication to their littlest airplane and we wish them huge success at finding more, younger pilots. |||| BREEZER AT LAKELAND In early July, Breezer Aircraft USA, announced they entered into a five-year lease with Sun 'n Fun to move their flight training and related aviation services to the SnF campus at the Lakeland, Florida airport. Breezerites will headquarter in Hangar B, familiar to airshow attendees as part of the indoor displays. *** This is part of the vision that airshow boss John "Lites" Leenhouts has for making SnF into a seven-day-a-week, year-round destination, instead of just a once-a-year event. *** Along with their flight training ops, Breezer USA plans to offer builder's assistance for their Breezer II kits and will offer Rotax maintenance. They'll be joining Pilot Mall and the Seaplane Pilots Association on the SnF campus. Breezer USA chief Mike Zidziunas — pronounced by most folks as "Mike Z" — said, "We've been working on this plan for many months." At a "Fire Hub" event in late June, he was pleased to forecast the arrangement "...any day now." *** Mike Z also plans to work with students of the Central Florida Aerospace Academy at Sun 'n Fun, to have a hands-on program allowing students to obtain their A&P Certificate by the time they graduate from high school. Mike Z is an A&P with a Light Sport Repairman Rating, a certified Rotax Mechanic and importer of the Breezer II Light-Sport Aircraft. Contact Mike at 941-915-8883 or send him an email |||| FIRST U.S. ROTAX 912 iS INSTALLATION? So far as I know the very first Rotax 912 iS got installed and it will work side-by-side with its older brother, the ubiquitous 912 ULS. How's that? They are both installed on an AirCam (one of my favorite flying machines and the aircraft I used to obtain my multiengine rating). Proprietor Phil Lockwood and his Lockwood Aircraft team are completing the new installation, which other manufacturers have observed is a significant project. This should provide a superb test bed as AirCam can operate exceedingly well with either engine. *** One of Phil's top lieutenants is John Hurst, an electronics guru who has been hard at it for a year to totally redesign the Lockwood website. On my recent visit to Sebring to plan for the 2013 Expo, he gave me a brief review on my iPad (it works best in landscape mode). The navigation is vastly improved but of great interest to many mechanics or homebuilders are exploded-part drawings that themselves explode into detail views. You can zoom in so far that every nut and bolt seem to jump off the screen. The Lockwood bunch are like the Energizer Bunny, always moving and improving. I don't know how you do it, guys and gals, but keep on flyin'. |||| JUST AIRCRAFT'S EXTREME(ly) COOL AIRPLANE Speaking of flying, you never know what Troy Woodland might be cooking up at Just Aircraft. How about something, umm... genuinely extreme? Come to think of it, they haven't settled on a name for their new aircraft and Extreme rather fits the bill (even if it has become a bit overused). *** Their newest creation, which we just saw at Just in prototype form, is looking good and standing tall... quite literally on its huge tires and what seemed to be mile-long gear legs. Troy's business partner Gary Schmitt showed me a video of them drop testing the Extreme (or whatever it may be called) four-plus feet without any obvious damage or deformation. To those that have no experience with such tests that may not sound too high, but I've observed such tests in my days with BRS parachutes and I'm here to tell you that is huge! Commonly such test are done at two or even one foot. *** The giant tires and gear combine with automatic leading edge slats. Not fixed slots, these slats hinge sideways in two sections — inner and outer wing elements — to allow the bird to take off in something like two fuselage lengths. To assist, the flaps are elephant-ear sized, dropping to 40 degrees, which means the tail feathers also had to be enlarged. All this is a work in process and I'm spilling the beans a bit so don't hold me or Just Aircraft accountable, but what a so-cool project! *** The two section slats allow the inner section to slap closed before the outer, which means control stays effective even at ridiculously slow speeds. All this is great for the shortest imaginable takeoffs and landings and that's a good thing given Just's truly extreme factory runway. Right outside the factory is a parking lot leading to a 400-foot grass runway on a slope inclined enough that you could nearly foot launch a hang glider. Crazy? Not at all, as I witnessed young pilot John von Kaenel take off and return like it was any runway (well, assuming good preparation and technique). Hopefully attendees can watch demonstration flights of the extreme new Just at AirVenture 2012. |||| LOTUS FLOATS FINDS NEW HOME After years in the aircraft float business, the developer of inflatable Full-Lotus floats decided to focus on non-aviation products. Design rights, inventory and production tooling were sold to Aircraft Floats Manufacturing, Inc. (AFM), The Canadian company will continue producing the standard line of Full-Lotus floats and has started deliveries of floats as well as replacement parts for maintenance and repairs to existing owners. The company will soon start introducing type-specific rigging instructions for a variety of popular aircraft designs, something not previously offered by Full-Lotus. *** The one-of-their kind Full-Lotus floats are a lightweight, robust, air-inflated system introduced in 1985 for ultralight aircraft and since adapted for general aviation use. The design uses multiple bladders inside a tough vinyl casing with polycarbonate protective shell. "The result is a float system that can be beached on rocky shores without worry and that can bump most submerged objects at taxiing speed without damage," reported AFM. Inflation provides a shock-absorbing capability unique to aviation floats. *** AFM's new production facilities are located on the Huronia Airport (CYEE) in Midland, Ontario, next to Zenair Limited, the well-known kit aircraft manufacturer. Visit AFM's website, call 705-526-4537, or send email. |||| LSA AMERICA / ALLEGRO MOVES Wrapping our tour of LSA news, we look at another move for the U.S-based producer of the Allegro Light-Sport Aircraft. LSA America, which has already made one landing in Halifax County, North Carolina, "prepared for another flight today that will bring the company to the Halifax-Northampton Regional Airport," reported owners Doug and Betty Hempstead. The company will move from its current location in Littleton officials said at a recent groundbreaking ceremony at the new location. *** Halifax County Board of Commissioners Chairman James Pierce told the audience the company plans to build a 16,000-square foot manufacturing facility at the airport. "While the Littleton site works well, the airport needed to promote the business side. The [new] location is a great business opportunity." Pierce noted that LSA America's move is important to the community because it will create 34 jobs within two years. "We're excited about the opportunity to partner with LSA." You gotta love when politicians boost aviation so congratulations to Doug and Betty... and that's our news for now. We're traveling to Oshkosh for much, much more, so stay tuned to ByDanJohnson.com!

CESSNA’S DISCOVER FLYING I met new business leader for the Skycatcher LSA, Tracy Leopold, at Sun ‘n Fun 2012 where she confirmed the Wichita giant’s support for their lightest aircraft, now being assembled in Independence alongside other Cessna models. As summer began, Tracy’s Skycatcher group amped up their game with a program called Discover Flying Challenge. *** After hiring eight university graduate flight instructors — plus a ninth to act as dispatcher — the team took off in all directions and will reunite again at AirVenture 2012. Meanwhile, the youthful team is visiting Cessna Pilot Centers and non-CPC FBOs plus fly-ins and air shows all the while doing what college grads do these days: updating Facebook and Twitter feeds and blogging about their activities. *** “We wanted to do something different, something that would get the attention of the next generation of pilots while at the same time getting the Skycatcher in front of the public,” explained Tracy.

Older Gentleman Versus Enthusiastic Teenager

By Dan Johnson || May 23, 2012 Leave a Comment

Some Cessna 152s are in sweet condition...

...others not so much (hopefully, this one is headed to the paint shop).

Cessna Skycatcher is "different" than the same company's earlier two-seat trainer.

Remos' newest GX has all the modern equipment and a new-airplane smell.

Recently, an AvWeb video stirred controversy among many LSA fans; I heard from several and that usually means more feel similarly. The subject concerned the value and challenges of LSA as flight trainers compared to old standards like Cessna 150s. I want to express another view. *** Are LSA harder to fly, specifically, are they harder to land? The best way to respond is to say that they are different. In fact, that's what Cessna's top demo pilot says about Skycatcher compared to Cessna 150s and 172s. Here are some reasons why: • LSA are lighter so they tend to be affected by wind eddies more than a heavier airplane; • LSA generally have more responsive handling and commonly use joysticks versus yokes which, due to increased leverage, means pilots can more easily overcontrol them. Many are lighter in pitch than a Cessna 150 which can cause PIOs. Some say the lighter handling makes a better pilot and if you learn in a LSA, you won't notice any great challenge; • LSA perform better, especially in glide so they meet the runway at shallower angles, which demands somewhat more finesse. All this can mean some extra time is needed to convert from a Cessna 150 (or other GA airplane) to a LSA, however... *** LSA also offer several advantages: • Cessna 150s and 152s, the newest of which was manufactured in 1985 — 27 years ago; the average age is well over 35 years old — may be older than the students who come to fly them. The oldest LSA are seven years old and most folks agree that new is nice; • Cessna 150/152s almost never have any modern avionics, where nearly all LSA sport glass screens and more; • LSA are much quieter; listen for yourself; • C-150s use more fuel, certainly so compared to the new fuel injected Rotax 912 iS and most cannot use auto fuel at one third less cost (though STCs are available so 150s can burn mogas); • LSA are roomier, often having a lot more interior space. They have better visibility. Many come with airframe parachutes. And they smell newer. Really, would you love to rent a 35-year-old car from Hertz? *** Another point is the durability of LSA in a flight school. Here the Cessna 150 is a tried and true workhorse. Many have well over 10,000 hours. Some feel LSA cannot match this. None have passed that number of airframe hours but we have several examples with more than 3,500 hours on them and they seem to be holding up just fine. Here's one example. Here's another *** The downside for LSA: they aren't as well known, they cost a lot more (new always does), the mechanics don't know them as well, specifically, some ask if LSA are more difficult to keep maintained? Regarding the latter... *** US Aviation (the location for the above mentioned video) offered to tell us about another part of that video, namely the maintenance issues surrounding LSA and comparing that company's experience with Cessna 150/152s. Watch for it.

Sebring’s Record Crowds, Brisk Sales & Sunny Skies

By Dan Johnson || January 23, 2012 Leave a Comment

See more Sebring photos by my European colleague, Jan Fridrich.

Renegade's taildragger entry in development attracted plenty of attention.

Allegro 2007 is now 100% "Made In the USA."

Bristell from the Czech Republic generated good reviews from several media reporters.

iTec's Maverick road-worthy powered parachute is now aided by former EAA Senior VP Bob Warner. Overseas sales have begun.

The eighth running of Sebring just finished and a resounding success it was on nearly all counts. A few dour faces noted exhibitors were off a rather modest 5% (according to officials) but in every other category, smiles were broad from most attending or exhibiting at Sebring 2012. *** The weather was the best ever with temperatures hitting 80 degrees and every day was sunny and pleasant. My colleague, Jim Lawrence, presents many interesting points in his January 21 article. Here I'll add my own views and experiences and both of us will have more in the days ahead. *** Metric #1 — Attendance set an opening day record on Thursday the 19th, surprising many, though perhaps expectations were low after the last three years of economic sluggishness. On Friday evening, airport manager Mike Willingham told me an all-time Sebring Expo record was set on the second day and judging from the thick crowds clustered around nearly every booth and filling the walkways, that was easy to believe. Saturday was also good though the new Sebring management team hadn't yet tallied the results. See Update below. *** Metric #2 — Sales were reported from many aircraft sellers. My informal, non-scientific survey revealed solid sales (money paid or contracts signed) at the show possibly hitting 20 airplanes. Even more surprising was the estimate of perhaps 50 sales generated at the event that should follow in the weeks ahead. By any benchmark this would be outstanding and I heard positive comments from so many that the potential sales results seem credible. Plenty of happy pilots are going to be racking up flight hours this season. Numerous non-airframe vendors also reported good sales with several saying, "best Sebring ever... sold out of product," and similar comments. *** Metric #3+ — Demo operations were torrid with hundreds of demonstration flights given plus airport operations were busy enough — over 220 in one intense hour, officials reported — to make Sebring the busiest airport in Florida and enough to challenge the Atlanta and Chicago airline airports. Visiting aircraft flew in by the hundreds and were parked in long lines on Sebring's outlying runways and taxiways. In addition the parking lots were loaded. Food vendors were so busy that getting a seat in the 300-seat main activities tent sponsored by AeroShell meant planning ahead or eating after others were done. |||| Among the hundreds of demo flights were many by media reporters so you can expect pilot reports and more to follow in magazines and several online outlets. *** I was privileged to fly the Allegro 2007 — now 100% American made (formerly a Czech Republic product), the Bristell from the Czech Republic, and the 124-hp Lycoming O-233-powered Renegade — another all-American aircraft that first came out of Hungary. All three were very pleasant and inspiring aircraft, each quite different in various ways. *** The Allegro 2007 is ideal for primary flight training. Indeed, one Allegro has now logged more than 4,000 hours, all via instruction use thereby largely disproving the allegation that LSA can't hold up to student duty. The Bristell is a fifth-generation, highly refined SLSA that at least four reporters (including yours truly) flew to rave reviews. It seems designer Milan Bristela didn't miss a trick in executing this new design. The Renegade is one gutsy bird with the highest-powered engine in the LSA Fleet other than CubCrafters 180-hp Carbon Cub SS or the iTec Maverick. We saw 1,700 fpm climb after breaking ground and a rock-solid feel in the air. I can't wait to sample the taildragger version in late-stage development. All these aircraft will get more attention in the days ahead. Watch for articles to follow! *** Congratulations to Jana Filip, Mike Willingham, and the whole Sebring team for taking over from much appreciated founding chairman Bob Wood to continue the steady growth and development of the Sebring U.S. Sport Aviation Expo. After a sterling performance in 2012, Sebring is assured a prominent space in the aviation calendar and is certainly a positive and powerful way to start off the flying year. Based on 2012's quality outcome, I predict Sebring will grow and prosper well into the future. Update 1/24/12 — Sebring reported 16,000 visitors for the event, a number significantly larger than total attendees at AOPA's Summit and bigger than all but a few other aviation trade shows. —DJ

Doing What You Cannot Do in Most Aircraft

By Dan Johnson || October 24, 2011 Leave a Comment

Air-Cam N912LA looks (and is) completely airworthy after suffering major damage in the Tornado that hit Sun 'n Fun 2011. photos by Randee Laskewitz

For most, like passenger and friend Pat Lehotsky, flying in an open cockpit airplane is extremely rare; a tiny fraction of the population will ever experience anything like this. photo by Randee Laskewitz

Fall at Jekyll Island was much better for Air-Cam N912LA than spring at Sun 'n Fun, where a Tornado turned the twin-engine aircraft into a pile of tubes and fabric.

The Jekyll Island Club main buildings seen from Air-Cam. photo by Randee Laskewitz

My good friend and Air-Cam developer, Phil Lockwood, likes to hold fly-outs for his customers. More than 160 kits have been delivered and built; each fly-out has attracted several of these owners. Phil and his Lockwood Aircraft associate George Weber have invited me several times but I've had to miss earlier gatherings for owners of this iconic "twin engined ultralight" (it isn't really an ultralight but has its roots in that category). For once I got to attend. The destination was the beautiful Jekyll Island resort area of Georgia; it's near St. Simons Island, another popular vacation destination. *** On a stunningly beautiful day, I was privileged to take my wife and two friends aloft for 30-minute tours of the Island. This was great fun for all. But what made it especially interesting is that I did this in N912LA, one of three Air-Cams badly trashed by the tornado at Sun 'n Fun 2011 (photo). In an effort typical of the hard-working staff at Lockwood Aircraft, this and two other Air-Cams were returned to flight after looking like a crumpled pile of tubing and fabric. *** The Air-Cam is neither ultralight nor Light-Sport Aircraft but it acts like either one in some ways. For touring an idyllic setting like Jekyll Island, Air-Cam allows what you would be unlikely to do in any other airplane with which I'm familiar. Air-Cam, in which I obtained my multi-engine rating, flies so well on a single engine that you can fly low over marsh lands or stray over the ocean in near-certain safety. I have successfully taken off (solo) in Air-Cam with one engine at idle thrust; this is something you never consider trying in other twin-engine aircraft. If you lose an engine in flight at almost any attitude or altitude you can barely discern you've lost an engine, far different from the workout most twin-engine aircraft will give you after an engine quits. *** Air-Cam is so confidence inspiring at 50-200 feet off the surface that such becomes the standard cruising altitude on site-seeing missions as we flew over Jekyll. We literally had to climb to cross bridges, to allow the safe altitude mandated by FAA while flying above people on the surface. We also climbed to enter pattern altitude... yes, climbed. These amazing flight capabilities are backed by Lockwood's legendary maintenance. I've known Phil for decades and if he says an airplane is right, I ask no more questions. His word is gospel in matters of maintenance. *** Not only was the flying experience wonderful, we discovered those Air-Cam'ers really know how to pick excellent destinations. We stayed in the Jekyll Island Club hotel, an early 1900s facility kept in marvelous repair. It was pricey but worth the money. Twice we dined at hotel restaurants for some of the tastiest food any of us has enjoyed.

Hit or Myth? Flying with an All-Duct-Tape Covering

By Dan Johnson || October 21, 2011 Leave a Comment

James Weibe is a different sort of airplane pioneer. He doesn't make an LSA. He bought the rights to the former Kitfox Lite and has gone through several iterations of changing and improving the airplane. This makes sense considering his background in the computer accessory field, where he learned the constant upgrade path so common in the tech industry.

Belite's aircraft can meet Part 103 and other variations are Experimental Amateur Built. Evidently that wasn't enough work, so Belite also developed a line of superlight instruments. Just keeping up with this prolific fellow tires many folks. However, he also knows how to reach outside the aviation community. For example, on TV... mainstream TV.

When I was a kid, I used to say, "Just scotch it." I mean that Scotch (brand) tape could fix anything, or so my young mind thought at the time. Apparently, duct tape is the new Scotch tape, at least for aviators trying to fix tears on a fabric-covered aircraft. But, Mythbusters TV show asked, "Can an airplane actually fly covered only in duct tape?" The answer is, yes, it can. Mythbusters TV personalities Kari, Grant, and Tory patched up an airplane that had been mauled by a bear. Well, OK, not a real bear. It was Kari Byron using a mechanical claw. The show's storyline was invented from a true incident about two years ago when an Alaska pilot used duct tape to repair fuselage and tail damage to his Super Cub after it had been attacked by a bear.

In genuine Hollywood fashion Mythbusters went the distance, not merely patching with duct tape, but covering an entire Belite with the silver sticky stuff carefully striping the Belite vertically and horizontally (photo... yes, that's all duct tape!). After a very short flight without a turn, they found no tape had come loose; the Duct Tape Belite had achieved flight.

James Wiebe flew the plane during filming in June. And therein lies the real story, in my opinion. Through his duct-tape-airplane suggestion, James put light aircraft on national television. Mythbusters reaches about two million Americans, many of them younger people, with a science-is-fun message. I think it's great James got his bird on the show... heck, as the star of the show. OK, the Belite and duct tape. Wiebe's blog noted that the Mythbusters show drove so many people to Belite's website immediately after it aired that their website crashed. Another proof that even in an age of mobile Internet devices, television still plays a major role in global culture and communication.

James Weibe is a different sort of airplane pioneer. He doesn’t make an LSA. He bought the rights to the former Kitfox Lite and has gone through several iterations of changing and improving the airplane. This makes sense considering his background in the computer accessory field, where he learned the constant upgrade path so common in the tech industry. Belite’s aircraft can meet Part 103 and other variations are Experimental Amateur Built. Evidently that wasn’t enough work, so Belite also developed a line of superlight instruments. Just keeping up with this prolific fellow tires many folks. However, he also knows how to reach outside the aviation community. For example, on TV… mainstream TV. When I was a kid, I used to say, “Just scotch it.” I mean that Scotch (brand) tape could fix anything, or so my young mind thought at the time. Apparently, duct tape is the new Scotch tape, at least for aviators trying to fix tears on a fabric-covered aircraft.

Zenith’s CH 701 Kit is Sport Pilot-Ready

By Dan Johnson || July 4, 2011 Leave a Comment

NEW COWL - The newer firewall-forward 100-hp Rotax 912S installation comes with a new cowl design created in Germany. The two-piece enclosure can be removed quickly for engine access.

QUICK LAUNCH - Wow! Look at that takeoff angle. You may not make your first launches so aggressively but with practice, look at what's possible.

TAPERED WINGS - The CH 701's wings angle down to flat in the center, but this assures the occupants get a good view out to the side. In many designs, the pilot's head is above the wing's lower surface.

PLENTY OF POWER - With the 100-hp Rotax 912S engine, Zenith aircraft offers a "rear ring engine mount system for smooth operation." The installation includes a stainless steel exhaust system, radiator, and 3-blade Warp Drive propeller.

HOME BASE - A new CH 701 sits in front of Zenith Aircraft Company's 20,000-square-foot production facility in Mexico, Missouri.

JUNKERS FLAPS - While the leading edge slats extend forward of the wing, the CH 701's Junkers flaps are separate surfaces aft of the wing, maximizing their effectiveness.

HARD WORKING - This "business end" view of the CH 701 reveals a practical design made to function particularly well in some realms of flight. Beefy tires and low-speed wing are parts of this picture.

STANDARD PANEL - This panel is well equipped for most flying you'll do in the "off-airport" CH 701, though another view shows you can add more avionics if you absolutely must.

FIXED SLATS - Fixed-position slats ("slots" are movable) make for easy pilot workload yet remarkable slow-speed, high angle-of-attack flying.

CURVED LOWER - Tailplanes "lift" downward, but this Chris Heintz design makes that function very obvious with its "upside down wing" horizontal stabilizer. The rudder is a full-flying design.

AMPHIB FLOATS - Besides short airstrips, the CH 701 is very good for water operations. Even with the weight of amphibious floats, a 100-hp Rotax 912S-powered CH 701 will leave the water rapidly.

MODERN PANEL - Flat-screen technology is hard to resist, so if you have to have a GPS, EMS, or PFD screen, the CH 701 has space to install it.

Every Light Sport & Ultralight Flying magazine reader has probably heard of off-road vehicles. How about an "off-airport" flying machine? You may not have used the term but you probably know one of the candidates: Zenith Aircraft's highly functional CH 701. No one calls the CH 701 the most handsome aircraft in the fleet. That title may be better reserved for sleek carbon fiber jobs. But as a practical aircraft appealing to ultralight enthusiasts, the Chris Heintz design with a 20-year history is head of its class. While the design has not changed much in those two decades, the kit has changed quite a bit to make the builder's effort easier. The designs of engineer Chris Heintz have been around a long time, beginning with his early Zipper ultralight-like aircraft. A prolific and versatile creator, his aircraft models have put nearly 3,000 builders in the air. The low-wing CH 601 series is the most popular at better than 60% of all Zenith models followed by more than 700 CH 701's now flying around the world. Most of these planes are not in the USA, where about 150 fly. Ultralight enthusiasts who have built kits will find the all-metal CH 701 a reasonable project and quite ultralight-like to fly, though it also has the cabin comforts associated with light sport aircraft. Off-Airport "Sky Jeep" The Zenith Aircraft Company, based in Mexico, Missouri, is run by Sebastien Heintz, one of a family of brothers in the aviation business. Mathieu runs AMD, which fully manufactures the CH 601 and other Heintz designs, Michael runs a West Coast dealership selling both kits and fully built Zodiacs (as the line is also known), and Nicholas partners with Sebastien as head of the Zenith's technical support. A Canada-based business was operated for years by patriarch Chris Heintz, who now lives in the south of France. When the Heintz men get together at airshows they make quite a team. On at least three occasions, Zenith Aircraft demonstrated at airshows that the assembly of one of their kits could be accomplished in a week - albeit a busy one with long hours - complete with a test flight at the end. Chris Heintz first introduced his CH 701 in '86 "as an 'off-airport' short takeoff and landing (STOL) kit aircraft." It was intended to address the desires of sport pilots, yet it had to be a project that first-time builders could successfully undertake. Zenith Aircraft Company was formed in '92 to manufacture and market the Chris Heintz designs created by Zenair. Zenith is presently housed in a 20,000- square-foot facility at the Mexico, Missouri airport. The STOL CH 701 was never meant to be just another pretty light aircraft, according to Chris. Instead it was engineered to bring outstanding STOL performance, all-metal durability, and remarkable ease of construction. These are all qualities that should endear the CH 701 to the ultralight enthusiast looking for an all-metal design with ATV instincts. Indeed, the STOL CH 701 is a great example of form following function, to borrow an architectural metaphor. Some owners affectionately call their 701 a "Sky Jeep." With the STOL CH 701, designer Chris Heintz combined the construction of conventional aircraft with the short-field capabilities of an ultralight aircraft. The CH 701 features fixed leading-edge slats for high lift, full-span flaperons (combined ailerons and flaps), an all-flying rudder, and well-proven all-metal construction. The Heintz "Sky Jeep" excels in short-field performance. The CH 701 I flew, powered with a 100-hp Rotax 912S engine, was airborne in well under 100 feet of asphalt runway. Rotation came barely after I applied full throttle and lift-off began at 25 mph (as indicated on the ASI). The CH 701 leaped into the sky within 4 seconds from standstill. Naturally, a headwind would further shorten both time and distance for takeoff. In a word: impressive! Easy Entry Entry from in front of the wing strut with the gull-wing door opening wide against the bottom of the wing was simple. You merely sit down and swing your legs in, though I helped pull my feet with my hands to clear the front cowl post. The door closed with a single latch that was easily seen at approximately my outside knee. When opening, a friction latch appeared to prop open the door securely. The CH 701 seats were comfortable and the interior was nicely finished with carpeting. Shoulder belts are standard on both seats. The CH 701 offered for this flight test was equipped with a good range of instruments that offered all the information needed without technical overload, which seemed appropriate. I loved the great visibility out of the skylight. These windows are quite useful in turns opposite of the side on which you're sitting. To your side, you'll have to look out the side window before turning. Some folks have been critical of the way the wings "end" or flatten at the canopy, which is located well below the top of the wings. It does look somewhat unorthodox, but one benefit is that your head remains below the wing rather than slightly up inside it. The result is improved lateral visibility. Remember, this design is about function, not stylish beauty. For what it's worth, Cessna's new proof of concept LSA has a wing center section that looks very similar, so the Heintz design has good company. Visibility is not as enormous as the company's clear-canopy CH 601, but it was more than adequate in the CH 701. Of course, the design provided the downward visibility of all high-wings that many pilots prefer for aerial sightseeing. Flying over the green countryside, I was pleased to have a great viewing platform. Despite the wide cabin, my headset sometimes bumped a cross member overhead suggesting that the wearing of a helmet is unlikely except for shorter occupants. The CH 701's instrument panel switches were easy to reach and instruments could be clearly read. Adequate room was available for a variety of instruments and radios if you simply must load it up with such gear, though doing so starts to violate the simple effectiveness of this design, in my opinion. Chris Heintz's Y-shaped joystick handle worked well to my side (in the left seat), but I found it a bit more awkward moving it to the right. With a right-seat occupant, I found motions to that side bumped into the other person's leg. The left side of the stick was equipped with multiple switches for trim control and radio transmit. The Y-stick should work excellently for training and yields more legroom than dual joysticks. Powerful hydraulic brakes slowed the 1,100-pound aircraft well and the gear has generous ground clearance for off-field landings. According to others, the CH 701 slab gear is extremely stout. Thankfully, I never tested this ability. When you open the throttle of a 100-hp Rotax 912S-powered CH 701, be prepared for action. Much like a Quicksilver ultralight, ground break is extremely fast on takeoff. This is a central feature of the design. Its leading edge slots and full-flying flaperons were created to provide fast liftoffs from unimproved airstrips. Believe me, the concept works! Takeoffs were easy if you were prepared. Landings took a bit more finesse though the airplane can certainly handle rough touchdowns. I found I needed to keep the stick aft to prevent bobbing. My check pilot said the wing tries to start flying again unless you keep the angle high. Once you've started to raise the nose in preparation for final touchdown, keep it up. The wing can fly so slowly at such high angles of attack that lowering the nose just a tiny bit makes the 701 want to resume normal flight. Approaches were made at 50 mph with a bit of power, though it was obvious that I could come in much slower once I was ready to manage the plane's special low-speed performance characteristics. The mechanical flaps were difficult for me to fully deploy. I could get enough flaps down for normal operations, but needed a better technique to get them out all the way. You reach down (where a seat adjustment might be) and must pull forward, an awkward motion that I could only manage to the first notch. Since the company offers electric flaps as an option, I'd recommend them despite a modest weight penalty (see prices). Fortunately slips were very effective in either direction, thanks to the slab-side finish of the design. Given its slow approach speed potential, I can't imagine using slips to land very often. Standard large tires can make off-field landings no problem. Blast Off The CH 701's climb angle expressed as deck angle is very steep yet this is not unreasonable as the fixed-slat wing provides genuine STOL characteristics. I measured climb with the Rotax 912S at better than 1,000 fpm dual and nearly 1,500 fpm solo. All measurements were done at about 1,000 msl on a cool 20° F day. The leading edge slots account for some of the CH 701s capability in fast takeoffs and high rates of climb, but the Hoerner wing tips - angled up to a extended upper surface line rather than rounded tips - help increase effective span by pushing the wake vortices beyond the span. I cruised at near red line, about 105 mph, thanks to the 100-hp Rotax 912S. Frankly, I found it too much engine for the plane and others have agreed. I'd save the $1,800 extra it costs for a 912S and stick with the highly reliable 80-hp Rotax 912. However, if you want amphibious floats, fly at high elevations, or intend to fill the plane to gross weight on all flights, the 100-hp 912S may be the right selection for you. Several CH 701 pilots with whom I've spoken agreed that the 701 has a rather high sink rate. This is a deliberate design feature that helps you get into tight fields, but I encourage guarding your altitude when not near a landing field, even if a landing field can be mighty small. I was told, "At 1,000 feet agl, you'll be on the ground in 60 seconds without power." Later trials showed the 1,000-fpm sink rate to be about right despite the high-lift wing. Wing loading is 9 pounds per square foot, much higher than most ultralights; here's where such differences show. In a demonstration of superior low-speed performance, a CH 701 was configured to tow hang gliders in Germany. These aircraft prefer tows below 30 mph and the CH 701 can do it. The low stall speed and excellent climb performance of the aircraft make the STOL CH 701 an ideal towplane for the slow-flying hang gliders. As is often the case in my line of work, I got to fly a nearly new airplane. As is also often the case, all the pulley wheels and linkages were still a bit tight. Consequently, the CH 701 rudders were rather stiff. They tended to stay where they were put, which gave false impressions of handling. I once thought the plane had a left turn only to realize (from the ball's position) that I had the rudder slightly depressed from a previous maneuver. Such tightness will loosen in time and should not be an ongoing problem. Contrasting with the rudders were very responsive ailerons, virtually regardless of speed. When I flew at a low (though probably not minimum) speed, roll pressures seemed almost as light as at cruise speed, though the response degree lessened somewhat due to slower airflows past the surfaces. My Dutch roll coordination exercises were sloppy owing to the stiff rudders. At speed very little rudder is needed while at slow speeds more is needed (logically). A medium-power stall did break and went rather sharply to the right side, rapidly enough that my check pilot started to reach toward the controls. Despite the abrupt maneuver, recovery was easy. One factor affecting this behavior may have been the powerful engine and a propeller set up for fast climb. Stick with the 80-hp engine and a medium prop and you may never experience a sharper break. Contrarily, low-power stalls never broke and were extremely well behaved. With stalls coming at nearly 30 mph and with top cruise nearly 100 (in the 100-hp Rotax 912S-powered version), the CH 701 has a wide speed envelope of better than three to one. Why Cross-Country? The CH 701 is not your ideal cross-country cruiser. It wasn't designed for that kind of flying; Zenith's CH 601 will prove much better in this realm of flight. But if you fly from unimproved, short, or soft airstrips, the CH 701 may be your dream plane. Like 4x4 off-road vehicles, the CH 701 is not a pretty airplane, but it can take off from airstrips you wouldn't think of using in your composite LSA. Lots of ultralight pilots can enjoy such gutsy performance. The CH 701 easily fits Light-Sport Aircraft definitions, though when built as an amateur-built (51%) kit, it retains that airworthiness. Technically it is not an LSA although a Sport Pilot-certificated pilot may fly it under SP/LSA rules. Zenith Aircraft calls the model "Sport Pilot Ready" and that's an apt description. Chris Heintz with sons Sebastien and Nicholas participated in the ASTM standards-writing efforts. Their aircraft easily meet the standards. One advantage of building your own kit is that you are allowed to do all the maintenance without asking FAA for permission. You are also permitted to make modifications, something you cannot do with a Special Light-Sport Aircraft (SLSA). In an LSA, additional training is required. On the downside, kit builders remain the "manufacturer" forever, so when you sell your plane (as you will one day), the manufacturer liability sticks with you. For this reason, some kits are simply retired and not sold to customers but that creates a deferred cost. For the CH 701, donations to charitable missions is a great way to offset this problem and aid some good work. You should be able to get a well-equipped CH 701 in the air for around $35,000 if you don't put a value on your labor hours. This figure comes from adding the basic CH 701 airframe kit ($12,980) to an 80-hp Rotax 912 engine ($12,800) with a $3,700 firewall forward package plus $1,000 for engine instruments. The parts Zenith supplies total a shade over $30,000. By the time you add exterior and interior finish to your satisfaction and install a few instruments, you could stay under $35,000. In an age of $100,000 LSA, this represents quite a bargain in a long-lasting airplane. Of course, you may want some accessories like extra wing tanks, doubling your fuel capacity ($995), electric trim ($290), the cabin-widening "bubble" doors ($455), a navigation and strobe light package ($465), cabin heat ($165), or the folding wing kit ($560). Get the larger 100-hp Rotax 912S engine and its install package for $1,800 additional plus the aforementioned options and you'll go beyond $40,000. While you have a couple of choices in the $50,000 range for a ready-to-fly SLSA, you won't find any at $40,000 and very few have flight qualities anything like the CH 701. The longer story of purchase invites you to the Websites at the end of this article where all manner of descriptions and information can be found. You'll want to talk to Zenith Aircraft. For serious shoppers, Zenith offers an info package for $35 that is as complete as anything I've seen from any producer, even those selling $100,000 Special Light-Sport Aircraft. While no CH 701 will be envied for its striking good looks, the STOL design more than makes up for its workhorse appearance with toughness and outstanding short-field performance. And a 20-year-plus history in the field speaks volumes to the model's market and aerodynamic success. I once drove behind a Chrysler Jeep, which had a wide bumper sticker across the top of the rear window that read, "It's a Jeep thing. You wouldn't understand." If you're an off-airport CH 701 "Sky Jeep" buyer, you probably do understand.

Published in Light Sport and Ultralight Flying

Seating	2, side-by-side
Empty weight	580 pounds
Gross weight	1,100 pounds
Wingspan	27 feet
Wing area	122 square feet
Wing loading	9.0 pounds/square foot
Useful Load	520 pounds
Length	20.9 feet
Payload (with full fuel)	400 pounds
Cabin Interior	41 inches at shoulder
Height	8.6 feet
Fuel Capacity	20 gallons
Baggage area	40 pounds, cabin shelf
Kit type	Construction kit
Build time	350 to 400 hours
Standard engine	Rotax 912
Power	80 hp at 5,800 rpm
Power loading	13.8 pounds/hp
Max Speed	95 mph
Cruise speed	80 mph
Stall Speed	30 mph
Never exceed speed	110 mph
Rate of climb at gross	1,200 fpm
Service Ceiling	12,000+
Takeoff distance at gross	90 feet
Landing distance at gross	150 feet
Range (powered)	400 miles - 5 hours
Fuel Consumption	about 4.0 gph
Standard Features	80-hp Rotax 912, with electric starter, stainless steel exhaust, radiator, and 3-blade Warp Drive prop; dual 10-gallon fuel wing tanks (20 galoms total); wide, dual doors; independent hydraulic brakes; mechanical flaps; 16-inch tundra tires, removable wings (also see options); complete engine instrument package (Rotax); fully enclosed cabin; in-flight trim; sturdy single piece landing gear construction; steerable nosewheel; all-metal wings, tail, and fuselage; seat belts with shoulder harness.
Options	100-hp Rotax 912S (as tested) and several other engine sizes and brands; additional fuel tanks (40 gallons total); electric trim; folding wings; amphibious or straight floats; cockpit-widening "bubble" doors (add six inches of effective cabin space and more visibility); navigation and strobe lights; cabin heat (with Rotax engine); additional instruments.
Construction	All-metal airframe, wing, and tail; many skins predrilled; factory-riveted wing spars and lower cabin frame sides; fiberglass fairing. Kit components made in the USA; sold by U.S.-owned company.

Design

Cosmetic appearance, structural integrity, achievement of design goals, effectiveness of aerodynamics, ergonomics.

Pros - Short takeoff and landing (STOL) design uses fixed slats to achieve excellent performance. Highly functional aircraft; can operate easily from short, unimproved strips. More than 20 years of field experience with more than 700 CH 701's flying.

Cons - If you're looking for sleek or pretty, the CH 701 isn't your bird. Not fast enough for regular, long cross-country flights. Available only in kit form at present (though cost is therefore lower). Builder remains the "manufacturer" indefinitely.

Systems

Subsystems available to pilot such as: Flaps; Fuel sources; Electric start; In-air restart; Brakes; Engine controls; Navigations; Radio; (items covered may be optional).

Pros - Flaps, trim, electric start, differential brakes are all standard on the CH 701. Fuel (20 gallons standard) contained in the wings, away from occupants. Engine access through easily removed cowling. Generous useful load allows adding optional equipment without losing utility.

Cons - Flap handle proved challenging for me to deploy to the last notch (though this may have been a fact of the new, test aircraft). Trim control located only on left half of stick. Flap position must be checked via lever position or visual; no indicator (though builder could add it if desired).

Cockpit/Cabin

Instrumentation; Ergonomics of controls; Creature comforts; (items covered may be optional).

Pros - With "bubble" doors, the CH 701 is adequately roomy for all but the largest occupants. Baggage space in hat rack position. Very easy entry through wide doors; good for larger or less flexible occupants. Shoulder belts standard. Doors secure well. Reach to panel is good.

Cons - Cabin is modestly wide compared to many LSA (though "bubble" doors add effective width). Center joystick tended to hit right-seat occupant in flight (though I was deflecting more than most normal inputs). Interior is rather Spartan unless builder elaborates.

Ground Handling

Taxi visibility; Steering; Turn radius; Shock absorption; Stance/Stability; Braking.

Pros - Strong, differential brakes aid ground handling. Gear and structure can handle fairly rough terrain. Skylight adds good upward visibility for traffic checking prior to takeoff. Landing gear easily able to handle fairly rough terrain. Good ground clearance.

Cons - Lateral visibility is less open than in the bubble canopy CH 601. Test aircraft had brakes only on the left; going dual will add some cost and weight. No other ground handling negatives.

Takeoff/Landing

Qualities; Efficiency; Ease; Comparative values.

Pros - Takeoff is very rapid and requires a very short distance, perhaps the model's top attribute; ground roll is only 100 feet and rotation starts almost immediately, thanks partly to leading edge slats. Approach speeds can be very slow with practice, good for the shortest field landings.

Cons - Landings have a slight challenge that demands a little practice; you must keep the nose up once lifted or the CH 701 merely resumes flying. Sink rate after power retarded is quite high (1,000 fpm); this is a useful design feature allowing STOL landings, but you have to anticipate.

Control

Quality and quantity for: Coordination; Authority; Pressures; Response; and Coupling.

Pros - Aileron forces were very pleasant and responsive. Efficient rudder control surface, a full flying design (but see "Cons"). Pitch forces were light without being sensitive, a good combination. Control forces at very low airspeeds permitted by wing/slat design were reasonable.

Cons - Control harmony hard to check in test aircraft as rudders were still tightly adjusted; tended to stick slightly (though possibly only on this aircraft). Wing can fly so slowly that controls necessarily become more sluggish due to low airflow.

Performance

Climb; Glide; Sink; Cruise/stall/max speeds; Endurance; Range; Maneuverability.

Pros - Terrific takeoff performance, better than all but the very lightest ultralights. Climb very strong at 1,000+ fpm at gross. Very capable airplane for low-and-slow flying over landable terrain; extremely slow speeds (in the 30s) with practice and caution.

Cons - Rather high idle thrust sink rate (1,000 fpm); neither glide is very long (though this is considered a deliberate design feature for a STOL airplane). Cruise speed of 80 mph won't carry you too far. Fuel at 20 gallons standard is four hours or less (though sufficient for most operations).

Stability

Stall recovery and characteristics; Dampening; Spiral stability; Adverse yaw qualities.

Pros - Mild stalls at most angles and speeds (though see "Cons"). Longitudinal and lateral stability appeared very normal in all tests. Response to power input/decrease from trim flight was positive and predictable with few oscillations.

Cons - Stalls with the 100-hp CH 701 (as tested) can be done aggressively enough to cause a sharper break (though recovery remains quick and simple). Adverse yaw was quite significant, something to be remembered at very low speeds the CH 701 can achieve.

Overall

Addresses the questions: "Will a buyer get what he/she expects to buy, and did the designer/builder achieve the chosen goal?"

Pros - Longtime, well-proven supplier (est. 1992) gets excellent comments from customers for technical support and customer service. Can be flown by Sport Pilot certificate holder. Can get airborne with good basic equipment for about $35,000 (and 400 hours of your labor), far less than many light sport aircraft.

Cons - Not a Special- or Experimenta light-sport aircraft (yet), so Amateur-built rules mean builder always remains the "manufacturer," with attendant legal responsibility. Build time is 350 to 400 hours (though factory support can ease the burden). Even $35,000 is more than some ultralight kits (though with 4-stroke engines, it will be closer).

Every Light Sport & Ultralight Flying magazine reader has probably heard of off-road vehicles. How about an “off-airport” flying machine? You may not have used the term but you probably know one of the candidates: Zenith Aircraft’s highly functional CH 701. No one calls the CH 701 the most handsome aircraft in the fleet. That title may be better reserved for sleek carbon fiber jobs. But as a practical aircraft appealing to ultralight enthusiasts, the Chris Heintz design with a 20-year history is head of its class. While the design has not changed much in those two decades, the kit has changed quite a bit to make the builder’s effort easier. The designs of engineer Chris Heintz have been around a long time, beginning with his early Zipper ultralight-like aircraft. A prolific and versatile creator, his aircraft models have put nearly 3,000 builders in the air. The low-wing CH 601 series is the most popular at better than 60% of all Zenith models followed by more than 700 CH 701’s now flying around the world.

The Range of LSA is Wide as the USA

By Dan Johnson || July 1, 2011 Leave a Comment

Plenty of folks think LSA are mainly carbon fiber speedsters with autopilots and huge computer screen instrumentation. No doubt, we have some beauties that are equipped like luxury sport planes. If you've got the budget, the Light-Sport industry has the aircraft. Yet not everyone can afford those birds and not everyone wants one. *** FAA pretty much eliminated ultralights when they came out with the SP/LSA rule... well, except for genuine ultralights of the single place variety. The latter still exist, and yes, you can still buy a ready-to-fly ultralight "vehicle" for which you need no N-number, no medical, and no pilot license. Those 254-pound (max empty weight) aircraft prove America remains the land of the free and I, for one, love to fly them. *** On our way north for AirVenture my wife, Randee, and I made a series of stops. In Alabama — just a mile apart — we hit two fixed wing producers of "ultralights" that qualify as official SLSA. You can buy either of these ASTM-certified two-seat Light-Sports for $35,000 to $40,000; you can save even more with kit versions. *** CGS reported a couple sales after our visit when we saw proprietor Danny Dezauche (de-ZOSH) fitting a CGS Hawk with a Rotax 912 (photo). Danny bought the CGS Aviation operation from founder and light aviation icon, Chuck Slusarczyk. (Evidently Chuck needed to be sure someone with a tongue-twisting last name kept the brand alive.) *** After CGS, we went to Paul Mather's M-Squared where we toured his facility adorned with fascinating photos of Paul's many years in light aviation (he put in 17 years at Quicksilver before striking out on his own). Today, he augments his airplane manufacturing by being an FAA Designated Airworthiness Representative. *** While both of these companies are struggling with the rest of aviation, each is prepared to stay the course and keep offering genuinely low-cost ways to get in the air. Paul likes to say his airplanes aren't fast, they're fun! Amen to that for both brands. *** Heading north we paid a visit to SportairUSA, home to this impressive list of terrific LSA: Sting, Sirius, iCub, and soon, the aerobatic Snap (come to Oshkosh and the LSA Mall for more info). Boss Bill Canino is an architect by training and his unique office-in-a-hangar shows his flair for decorating (photo). When a tornado leveled their earlier hangars, they moved into other quarters yet you'd hardly know you were in a hangar until you left the building. *** We ended our tour at the home of Aviators Hot Line, the much appreciated LAMA sponsor that makes possible the LSA Malls at Sun 'n Fun and Oshkosh. These industry displays have proven popular enough with attendees that both organizations show the LSA Mall on their grounds maps, a distinction assigned only to airshow "destinations." *** We also visited kit giant, Zenith Aircraft, where we each flew in the STOL CH 750... more on that in another post coming soon. America's heartland is home to some interesting enterprises that make up the diverse field of Light-Sport aviation. Randee and I enjoyed visiting them and as our nation celebrates its birthday, we're very pleased these businesses are keeping the faith of sport and recreational aviation. Happy July 4th!

Air-Cam Developments under Lockwood Leadership

By Dan Johnson || June 5, 2011 Leave a Comment

A future Air-Cam pilot tries out the open cockpit. The whimsical paint job is the work of owner Anita de Villegas. [Top] The Rotax 914 Turbo installation. Check Air-Cam specs.

Air-Cam isn't a Light-Sport Aircraft because it has two engines. OK, it's also a shade heavy but if Air-Cam could, it would be a LSA. Certainly it's "light" and "sport" compared to most twins. Regardless, it's a favorite of all the airplanes I've flown so I'm pleased to see its rapid progress under the leadership of Phil Lockwood, the original developer. *** The latest accomplishment is a factory-authorized amphibious float system from Montana Floats that includes all mounting hardware. As though it needed any more power -- Air-Cam is the only multiengine airplane I've flown that can launch with one engine -- the twin pusher can now be equipped with two Rotax 914 Turbos. Combined with the extra power (230 hp total), Air-Cam can be fitted with a constant speed reverse pitch prop system ideal for float-equipped Air-Cams. A new rigid mount can now accommodate High Definition video cameras...it is, after all, the Air-CAM. They've also updated all the manuals, a big job that builders and owners will appreciate. *** Lockwood Aircraft is finishing a new DVD and they have a factory Air-Cam for demo flying and testing. Projects to come include a BRS airframe parachute system and a full enclosure.

Air-Cam isn’t a Light-Sport Aircraft because it has two engines. OK, it’s also a shade heavy but if Air-Cam could, it would be a LSA. Certainly it’s “light” and “sport” compared to most twins. Regardless, it’s a favorite of all the airplanes I’ve flown so I’m pleased to see its rapid progress under the leadership of Phil Lockwood, the original developer. *** The latest accomplishment is a factory-authorized amphibious float system from Montana Floats that includes all mounting hardware. As though it needed any more power — Air-Cam is the only multiengine airplane I’ve flown that can launch with one engine — the twin pusher can now be equipped with two Rotax 914 Turbos. Combined with the extra power (230 hp total), Air-Cam can be fitted with a constant speed reverse pitch prop system ideal for float-equipped Air-Cams. A new rigid mount can now accommodate High Definition video cameras…it is, after all, the Air-CAM.

AirCam, Drifter… Dust Settles; We Have a Winner!

By Dan Johnson || June 5, 2011 Leave a Comment

The Drifter, one of the most popular and rugged ultralights ever built, is now sure to continue its life under the direction of one-time Drifter marketing man, Phil Lockwood (nearly at the beginning of his career in light sport aviation).

Among all airplanes I've flown the AirCam may be the most fascinating. This superlative twin-engine "ultralight" offers flying in a way few (or no) other airplanes can. (I earned my multi-engine rating in an AirCam.) Given my interest, I've followed the efforts by owner Antonio Leza to sell the operation. Over the last few years several would-be buyers came and went. No deal happened. Last fall I SPLOGged that Sebring businessman Shawn Okun appeared to have it sewn up. Again, no deal. *** But that's over now. The dust has settled and AirCam is headed back to someone I consider its "rightful owner:" Phil Lockwood. This time the sale is for real and includes all design rights, tooling, jigs, and inventory for the AirCam and Drifter. Phil has a long history with both designs; he knows each intimately. *** Phil and wife Tish have worked hard to build an expanding enterpise at Sebring. Recently, they added building space and one area set aside for growth will now be filled with AirCam and Drifter components. Phil reported, "A LOT of inventory is included." No production plans have been announced yet. Phil clarified, "We won't have time to work on this until after AirVenture Oshkosh," so it will be August before further announcements can be made. Meanwhile...Welcome home, AirCam and Drifter!

Among all airplanes I’ve flown the AirCam may be the most fascinating. This superlative twin-engine “ultralight” offers flying in a way few (or no) other airplanes can. (I earned my multi-engine rating in an AirCam.) Given my interest, I’ve followed the efforts by owner Antonio Leza to sell the operation. Over the last few years several would-be buyers came and went. No deal happened. Last fall I SPLOGged that Sebring businessman Shawn Okun appeared to have it sewn up. Again, no deal. *** But that’s over now. The dust has settled and AirCam is headed back to someone I consider its “rightful owner:” Phil Lockwood. This time the sale is for real and includes all design rights, tooling, jigs, and inventory for the AirCam and Drifter. Phil has a long history with both designs; he knows each intimately. *** Phil and wife Tish have worked hard to build an expanding enterpise at Sebring.

Aero 2011 Pre-Show Attention Getters

By Dan Johnson || April 13, 2011 Leave a Comment

Designer Peter Funk poses beside his attention-getting Fk14 Lemans. Each occupant has his/her own windsreen; entry is made easy as the entire arrangement hinges open.

Reporter Marino Boric and designer Aki Suokas (right) discuss the details of the unusual and fascinating FlyNano "boxwing."

The major European Airshow, Aero, opened this morning with the usual unveiling of new designs but one aircraft appeared to be the center of attention. Peter Funk had an idea five years back but shelved it for other projects. Now the time is right for his distinctly retro treatment of one of Light-Sport aviation's sharpest designs, the Fk14 Polaris (Alert readers will identify Polaris as the Cirrus SRS, that GA company's onetime entry in the LSA sweepstakes.) *** Even experts accustomed to following the latest in new or updated designs were caught off guard by the unorthodox entry (photo). With dual windscreens and race car bodywork, the open cockpit creation charmed many who gained early access to the great exhibit halls of Aero... 11 of them, each the size of a gymnasium. While exhibitors were assembling their displays Fk Lightplanes' staff grabbed lots of attention with their Fk14 Lemans. *** Constrained by their ongoing contract with Cirrus until the end of the year, Fk Lightplanes sought permission before revealing Lemans and sales will not happen in 2011. Yet Lemans will be a show hit for Fk — it already was, actually, even before Aero opened. Get more info on Fk Lightplanes. ||||| Another fascinating project is the FlyNano "Boxwing." Created in Finland by Aki Suokas FlyNano has several distinctive features... besides the connected lower lifting wing and upper stabilizing surface. From a weight standpoint, the tiny carbon fiber aircraft could easily fit America's Part 103 category at a mere 70 kilos (154 pounds) empty. So even powered by the British Bailey four-stroke engine, which the designer thought had sufficient power, FlyNano handily fits Part 103's slim weight limit. And FlyNano is a seaplane, using a hull as its main lower fuselage component. It hasn't flown yet but is ready "as soon as our lakes unfreeze." Get more info on FlyNano. ||||| The other major development for Light-Sport at Aero 2011 are several new entries in larger airplane classes. Tecnam started this trend with the twin engine four seater they type certified last year, now greatly topping that by revealing an 11-seat regional commuter aircraft. The company also has a new Lycoming O-233-powered Eaglet LSA plus a four seater amid their huge airshow display. More on these after their press conference. Flight Design unveiled their four seat C4 via a full-sized mockup. The new GA candidate looks like a very grown-up CTLS, arguably the most handsome iteration yet of their best-selling CT series. Pipistrel has a four seater... and... well, Aero has lots more. Return soon to see and read about many fascinating entries at Aero 2011, where more new airplanes are introduced than any other show I attend.

Born in Eastern Europe, Raised in America: Allegro

By Dan Johnson || April 12, 2011 Leave a Comment

One of the early success stories in Light-Sport aviation was the Allegro. The #3 Special LSA to be approved started out so strong that even after three years of no sales following the collapse of the Czech Fantasy Air company, Allegro still holds the #14 spot on the SLSA Market Share chart. When Fantasy Air ceased manufacturing many wrote off the metal wing, composite fuselage LSA. They judged too soon. *** Importers Doug and Betty Hempstead took a hit when Fantasy Air went down, but they picked each other up, dusted themselves off, and set a plan in motion to build the Allegro in America. The first effort went south when a west coast manufacturing facility closed its doors last year. Most folks would've given up for good, but Doug and Betty are tenacious aviation entrepreneurs. A few days after Sun 'n Fun 2011, they went home and anxiously awaited a visit from the North Carolina governor. The NC Gov' came to announce cash incentives, thus the tortured Allegro story took a very positive turn. The state's One North Carolina Fund is kicking in $136,000 along with a reported $400,000 from the company. *** The headline blared: 34 jobs Flying to Halifax County; LSA America to Locate in Halifax Thanks to a State Grant. Eyewitness News 9 writer George Crocker published a story on April 6, 2011 just three days after Sun 'n Fun ended. Crocker reported,"Governor Bev Perdue announced that LSA America will build a new production facility at the Halifax-Northampton Regional Airport [creating] 34 jobs." Governor Perdue stated, "As we work to put more North Carolinians back to work we have focused on creating 21st century jobs, and that includes creating an aerospace cluster in our state with companies such as LSA America. Our efforts to expand this fast-growing industry will continue to create jobs in Halifax County and around the state." *** While declining to reveal his big news at Sun 'n Fun, Doug stated at the official ceremony, "LSA America is very pleased to establish production of its Allegro Light-Sport Aircraft in North Carolina with its rich aviation history. The incentives and dedicated people we worked with made North Carolina and Halifax County an easy choice." *** Other politicians — such as Representative Angela Bryant, of Rocky Mount NC and Senator Ed Jones, of Enfield, NC — were equally happy to celebrate new jobs coming from LSA America's plans. *** Those securing work will be happy but so will Yankee pilots who can now welcome a handsome LSA to American soil. Hempstead reported he acquired all design rights, tooling, and a considerable parts inventory. Knowledgeable Czech experts are coming soon to help establish the new operation, he said, and by summer or fall, buyers can evaluate this modestly-priced and good flying LSA in a new way... as a Made in the USA airplane. I say, give a big hand to the Hempsteads!

Budget Builds (Low Cost Homebuilts)

By Dan Johnson || August 12, 2010 3 Comments

Zenith Aircraft President Sebastian Heintz says that 90% of the company's builders complete their airplanes for less than $40K. Builders of the Zodiac CH-601 usually spend a bit more money than their CH-701 (below) counterparts due to more sophisticated instrument panels and fancier interiors.

Zenith Aircraft CH-701

The RANS S-6ES Coyote II kit ($14,700) features a Dacron wing and fuselage covering, which eliminates the need for paint-a built-in budget saver.

Figure 1 illustrates how the six airplanes from Sonex, Ltd. can all be built for less than $40,000.

According to Sonex GM Jeremy Monnett, you can expect to easily build a Sonex for less than $40K unless you plan to install a state-of-the-art instrument panel.

The Mustang II has always offered great performance for a limited (monetary) investment. Mustang Aeronautics President Chris Tieman says a willingess to spend time doing the airframe, avionics, paint job and interior yourself is key.

Murphy Aircraft's Rebel is one of three models that can be built for less than $40K. A Rotax 912 or used Lycoming is your best bet if you hope to build to our target budget.

Mary Carlson of SkyTek says that none of the 60 flying Sparrow II XTC airplanes has cost more than $40K to build. All SkyTek kits, including the $18,000 II XTC, provide quickbuild components at no extra charge.

Wag Aero's Sport Trainer-an exact replica of the Piper J-3-has been offered since 1974. Builders have the option of installing the Continental A-65 or A-85; a rebuilt engine should keep the cost of the plane under $40,000.

If you're willing to get a little creative, it's feasible that you could complete a Van's RV-9/9A for $40K. Choosing a Lycoming O-235 instead of the larger powerplant choices is a step in the right direction.

Fisher Flying Products offers a number of two-place designs that are regularly completed for our target price even when a new engne is used and quickbuild options are purchased. The wood-based Dakota Hawk and the steel-tube RS-80 Tiger Moth (below) are two of the company's more popular choices.

Fisher Flying Products steel-tube RS-80 Tiger Moth.

Yes! You can build and fly a "real" airplane for the cost of a new SUV. Contrary to popular opinion, airplanes don't have to be outrageously expensive-at least not all of them. The Sport Pilot/Light-Sport Aircraft initiative is one program that promises to lower the cost of ready-to-fly aircraft. But many of these Special LSAs and Experimental LSAs will be priced well more than $40,000 and can run upwards of $85,000. One way to get airborne for less than $40K is to choose an ultralight, powered parachute or weight-shift trike. But if you want something more conventional, more comfortable or larger, you're likely to find what you want in the world of kit aircraft. After all these years, building an Experimental/ Amateur-Built airplane still qualifies as one of the least expensive ways to get a get a great airplane into the air on a reasonable budget. Our $40K benchmark is designed to narrow the field for builders on a budget-and that benchmark means a completed, ready-for-flight airplane. We're not going to play the marketing game and list $39,900 airframe kits that will approach or exceed the $100,000 mark by the time they're in the air. It's not an easy goal, but it can be achieved. To prove it, we'll detail more than a dozen interesting machines from across the spectrum. But what's so special about $40,000? After some contemplation, we determined that $40K provides the best estimate of what a typical, medianincome builder might be able to afford without being forced to sacrifice the rest of his or her life. In today's market, this figure might buy you a fine automobile or (extra-fine) motorcycle, a mid-level SUV, or even a small boat. If airplanes can remain in the same category, price-wise, as these other luxury items, they'll have a lot more appeal to that average builder. But to have a cross-country aircraft that's roomy and reliable for this sum of cash will take some effort. You may have to forego all the bells and whistles (high-tech instrument panels, luxurious interiors, award-winning paint jobs and souped-up powerplants), but the following kit manufacturers insist that you can reasonably expect to get these airplanes into the air for the target amount. We are assuming, however, that you're starting with an average stock of tools and a decent workshop to build in; starting from scratch can add thousands to any project. And we're omitting things like sales tax on the kit and local use taxes. To choose from the hundreds of kit aircraft available, we established some basic criteria for our selections. These rules weren't written in stone, but we tried to limit the field to proven designs that will appeal to the flying interests of a wide number of KITPLANES® readers. The Criteria To help define our target, we elected to specify a minimum cruise speed of about 100 mph-even though as a practical measure we all want more. Why this requirement? We figured that most pilots would want an aircraft that was capable of at least short crosscountry trips and one that would get them there faster than an automobile. Many otherwise highly enjoyable aircraft weren't designed for such speeds and were not included; on the other hand, reaching toward 200 mph will dramatically raise your powerplant and prop costs. We also searched for aircraft with interiors that invited two people of normal size (pilot plus one passenger) to fly for 2-3 hours in relative comfort. Many pilots will prefer side-by-side seating, but we included some tandem aircraft. We wanted full enclosures, the preference for most pilots who wish to pursue cross-country flying. Seeing America from an open-cockpit airplane is great in the summer and for short periods, but this kind of adventure eventually wears quite thin. And, for the purpose of staying within budget, we've eliminated any quickbuild kit options from the equation. Unless noted, prices listed and used in calculation are for the airframe alone with no quickbuild components or optional add-ons. This is where you save money, but contributing your own efforts to the cause. Most pilots prefer four-stroke engines. This eliminates many ultralight aircraft that make good use of the high power-to-weight ratio of two-stroke engines. When we limit ourselves to four-stroke engines, however, the powerplant cost alone can hit or exceed half our budget. You can choose an 80-hp Rotax 912 for about $12,000 or lower your cost significantly with the similarly powered AeroVee engine from Sonex, Ltd. for less than $6000 (it's a kit engine, so you have to build it). However, if you insist on Lycoming or Continental, a used engine will be required in all cases to keep within budget. Lycomings in particular are available in large numbers on the used market in various states of time remaining before overhaul. Other economic engine choices include the Jabiru line-the company's 120-hp 3300 model ($15,400) will lift any of the following aircraft without problems, and some will do fine with the 85-hp 2200 model ($10,400). Others may be interested in VW, Subaru and other auto conversions. Most pilots are awed by the impressive capabilities of fancy glass cockpit avionics. Ken Scott of Van's Aircraft says RV builders are installing more avionics than in the past: "With IFR panels, you can spend $40,000 in the panel alone," he said. With avionics consuming a substantial percentage of many builders' budgets, will you have to suffice with ordinary instruments? Probably not, unless IFR flight is your desire. New software-based electronic instruments are available that have far better prices for features even including attitude instruments. Some of these units are in the $3000 (or less) range for a surprisingly capable unit that also does not take up much panel space. Or, you can opt for only the necessary analog gauges and put together a functional panel on a really tight budget. Our Candidates But first, a disclaimer... Using the above criteria, we selected nine companies and nearly 20 aircraft models from a large field (more than 600 kit/plans aircraft are available). Winnowing this group to a few aircraft forced us to omit other choices. Consider this a sampler more than an exhaustive survey of what's available. Moreover, pay particular attention to our selection criteria so you can use it on models not presented here. Are you ready to build? Expand your search beyond these airplanes, but keep in mind some of the following points as they apply to many designs. As always, a good place to start is the 2005 Directory of Homebuilt Aircraft, Published in Kitplanes Magazinethe December 2004 edition of KITPLANES® and also available in electronic format at www. kitplanes.com. Our candidate list represents a wide range of types and design styles. The airplanes are not presented in any particular order-choosing the right airplane for you is ultimately a personal decision based on your individual situation. Zenith Aircraft According to Zenith Aircraft President Sebastian Heintz, "$40,000 is more than most of our customers spend on their projects. Ninety percent of builders keep it under $40K." Continuing the common theme heard while in researching this story, Heintz said the only thing that pushes the final price above $40,000 is the builder's choice of avionics. Heintz broke down the typical cost for a CH-601 or CH-701 (the latter Jeep-like airplane typically costing less because interior appointments and fancy avionics are rarely added): $12,000-16,000 for the airframe kit; $17,000 for Rotax or Jabiru powerplants with propeller and accessories; $1000-2000 for paint using a local auto-body shop; and anywhere from a few hundred dollars to $3000-4000 for upholstery depending on how fancy builders want their airplane to be. The 701's interior is typically simpler with some seat cushion and carpeting; the low-wing 601 might use leather or other higher-quality materials, which raises the cost. Assuming the averages, that leaves more than $5000 to devote to an instrument panel while allowing the builder to come in at less than $40,000. And Heintz says that builders can even take advantage of some of the company's quickbuild components with a target $40K maximum. RANS Aircraft With more than 1500 flying, one of the most popular light planes in the world is the RANS S-6ES Coyote II. The S-6ES features a Dacron wing and fuselage covering, which saves the need for paint-a built-in budget saver. The S-6S model is essentially the same airplane with dope and fabric covering. Another popular RANS model is the tandemseat S-7 Courier. Both the Coyote II and Courier airplanes can be built and flown for less than $40,000, one more easily than the other. An S-6ES kit costs $14,700. If you opt for the common Rotax 912, you'll add about $12,000 plus a $3000 motor mount kit for a total of around $30,000. Since you don't have to paint (unless you choose the S-6S) and because the interior can remain basic, you can spend the balance of your budget on propeller, instruments, avionics, radios, wheelpants and other goodies. In other words, it's pretty easy to stay within your means. One option-a thermal-formed interior-adds $650 but will greatly speed your interior finish. You can either select from the extras mentioned or order the quickbuild kit (about $5000 more) without breaking budget. The S-7S is the kit version of the much-refined C version of the Courier. It retains the keep-it-simple theory that company founder and leader Randy Schlitter designed into it from the beginning. Keeping the S-7S below $40K is possible but more of a challenge than with the S-6. The base kit costs $18,265. Add the same 80-hp Rotax 912 plus a $4000 engine install kit and you've spent about $34,000. That leaves $6000 for paint (this model is fabric-covered), propeller, instruments and other options. It'll be a tight squeeze and you'll have to do without many extras, but you can still build an excellent Cub-like airplane for the allotted budget. Both the S-6 and S-7 series aircraft began life behind two-stroke Rotax engines. And if you're willing to sacrifice horsepower and opt for a two-stroke, you'll have a lot more money left to devote to extras. Sonex, Ltd. As with all the manufacturers, my first question to Sonex General Manager Jeremy Monnett was straightforward: Is it possible to build any of your kits and get airborne for $40,000 or less? His answer? Yes, all six Sonex airplanes (the Sonex, Waiex and Xenos models, each with two engine choices) can be built for that amount. Monnett supplied a spreadsheet illustration (Figure 1) for specific cost breakdowns of the Sonex models. Each total price includes full paint and interior treatment and a Sensenich wood propeller, plus you can select most of the company's more popular amenities. In coming up with these estimates Sonex allocated $2500 for a basic instrument panel that includes a Stratomaster EFIS system for instrumentation, plus a radio and handheld GPS. Improvements and additions must be factored into the leftover funds. "Unless they choose exotic or expensive avionics, nearly every Sonex builder achieves this ($40K benchmark)" during the build process, Monnett says.

Published in Kitplanes Magazine

Seating	2 side-by-side
Empty weight	600 lbs
Gross weight	1,150 lbs
Wingspan	28.5 ft
Wing area	128 sq. ft
Wing loading	9.3 lbs/sq. ft
Useful Load	550 pounds
Length	19 feet 9 inches
Cabin Interior	38 inches
Height	6 feet 1 innch
Load Limit	+5.7, -2.28 g
Fuel Capacity	12 gallons ¹
Baggage area	hat rack
Notes:	¹ Optional wing tanks available at 7 gallons each.
Standard engine	Rotax 912, 80 hp
Power	65-100 hp
Power loading	14.3 lbs/hp
Max Speed	120 mph
Cruise speed	90-100 mph
Economy Cruise	Duration-3 hrs, Range-250 miles, Fuel Consumption (Economical)-about 3.0gph
Stall Speed	35 mph
Never exceed speed	120 mph
Rate of climb at gross	800 fpm
Takeoff distance at gross	350 ft
Landing distance at gross	400 ft
Notes:	Service Ceiling (est.)-10,000 ft.

Seating	2, side-by-side
Empty weight	700 pounds
Gross weight	1,300 pounds
Wingspan	27.0 feet
Wing area	132 square feet
Wing loading	9.8 pounds/per square foot
Length	20 feet
Height	6.5 feet
Fuel Capacity	24 gallons, usable
Standard engine	Rotax 912 S
Power	100 hp*
Power loading	13.0 pounds/hp*
Max Speed	180 mph
Cruise speed	132 mph**
Stall Speed	44 mph
Never exceed speed	180 mph
Rate of climb at gross	900 fpm
Takeoff distance at gross	550 feet
Landing distance at gross	500 feet
Range (powered)	600 miles
Notes:	* Assumes the Rotax 912S engine, per factory literature. ** Meets the proposed light-sport aircraft category with correct prop, assuming maximum continuous power.

Seating	2, side-by-side
Empty weight	1,105 ¹
Gross weight	1,600 ²
Wingspan	24.3 feet
Wing area	97.1 square feet
Wing loading	16.5 pounds/square foot
Useful Load	495 pounds
Length	19.5 feet
Cabin Interior	40 inch width
Height	5.5 feet
Fuel Capacity	25-61 gallons ³
Baggage area	80 pounds
Notes:	¹ equipped as Schmidtbauer's Mustang II ² flown in normal category, the factory allows up to 1850-lb. gross, but only if the additional weight is fuel in the wings; aerobatic category limits gross weight to 1350 lb. ³ 37 gallons in aircraft tested All specs and performance were provided by the factory and assume a conventional Mustang II kit with a 200-hp engine. Figures stated in the article were for Schmidtbauer's customized Mustang II.
Standard engine	200-hp Lycoming IO-360
Power loading	8 pounds/horsepower
Max Speed	230 mph ¹
Cruise speed	220 mph
Stall Speed	58 mph
Rate of climb at gross	1,900 fpm
Service Ceiling	20,000 feet
Takeoff distance at gross	470 feet
Landing distance at gross	680 feet
Notes:	¹ for 200-hp engine; 210 mph with 160-hp engine

Seating	2, side by side
Empty weight	620 lb
Gross weight	1,100 lb
Wingspan	22 feet
Wing loading	11.22 lb/sq.ft
Useful Load	480 lb
Payload (with full fuel)	384 lb
Cabin Interior	40 inch
Fuel Capacity	16 Gal
Baggage area	50 lb
Standard engine	AeroVee 2180
Prop Diameter	Sensenich 2 blade fixed-pitch
Power	80 hp@3400 rpm
Cruise speed	150 mph (130 kt) 8000 feet @ 75% power
Stall Speed (Flaps)	40 mph (35 kt)
Stall Speed	46 mph (40 kt)
Rate of climb at gross	500 fpm (1,200 at aerobatic weight)
Takeoff distance at gross	400 ft
Landing distance at gross	500 ft
Fuel Consumption	4 gph
Options	Engine: Jabiru 2200 Engine: Jabiru 2300

Yes! You can build and fly a “real” airplane for the cost of a new SUV. Contrary to popular opinion, airplanes don’t have to be outrageously expensive-at least not all of them. The Sport Pilot/Light-Sport Aircraft initiative is one program that promises to lower the cost of ready-to-fly aircraft. But many of these Special LSAs and Experimental LSAs will be priced well more than $40,000 and can run upwards of $85,000. One way to get airborne for less than $40K is to choose an ultralight, powered parachute or weight-shift trike. But if you want something more conventional, more comfortable or larger, you’re likely to find what you want in the world of kit aircraft. After all these years, building an Experimental/ Amateur-Built airplane still qualifies as one of the least expensive ways to get a get a great airplane into the air on a reasonable budget. Our $40K benchmark is designed to narrow the field for builders on a budget-and that benchmark means a completed, ready-for-flight airplane.

Judging Winners Sun ‘n Fun 2010

By Dan Johnson || May 11, 2010 Leave a Comment

I once followed judging at shows like AirVenture and Sun 'n Fun. In fact, an aircraft I helped inspire -- a modernized primary glider called the SuperFloater -- won Outstanding New Design at Sun 'n Fun 1995. Judges closely examined homebuilts, kit or restored vintage airplanes, and warbirds. If they included factory built aircraft, I was not aware of it. *** So, this year I admitted surprise after learning factory-built Light-Sport Aircraft won awards. *** To honor the hundreds or thousands of hours people put into their winners, I want to highlight some LSA and ultralights that judges liked. The Grand Champion LSA was Wayne Spring's 2010 Predator powered parachute; Reserve Grand Champ was James Jonannes' 2009 Arion Lightning LS-1; Grand Champion Ultralight was James Wiebe's 2010 Belite Superlite; and, Reserve Grand Champ was Danny Dezauche's 2010 CGS Hawk Ultra. *** Other LSA winners included "Best Commercial" -- Gobosh 700; "Special Award for Innovation" -- Powrachute AirWolf; and, "Outstanding New Design" -- Evolution Revo. *** Rainbow Aviation imports the 3Xtrim Navigator 600 and won a Special Award for Safety Practices in Light Sport Aircraft. Importer Waldemar Wrona said, "Many visitors were impressed with detailing inside and out on the Navigator 600." He thinks that after a few years of LSA, customers are more educated and looking for quality, safety, and durability. "Our plane can deliver." *** Lightweight trike maker, Mike Theeke of Tennessee walked away with two awards: "Best Commercial Ultralight" and "Best Type - Trike Ultralight." *** Congratulations to all winners. Click for a list. *** Piper Aircraft won an award for their handsome overall display, which prominently featured their PiperSport LSA. *** Winning is not a popularity contest. These judges practically use a microscope; even scratches on a bolt head will cost points. Any individual or company passing these judging standards has done something significant. In fact, the hours it takes to win usually explains why owner/builders beat professional factory technicians. A factory cannot usually put the time in to make a winner meaning LSA producers capturing awards are doing something right.

I once followed judging at shows like AirVenture and Sun ‘n Fun. In fact, an aircraft I helped inspire — a modernized primary glider called the SuperFloater — won Outstanding New Design at Sun ‘n Fun 1995. Judges closely examined homebuilts, kit or restored vintage airplanes, and warbirds. If they included factory built aircraft, I was not aware of it. *** So, this year I admitted surprise after learning factory-built Light-Sport Aircraft won awards. *** To honor the hundreds or thousands of hours people put into their winners, I want to highlight some LSA and ultralights that judges liked. The Grand Champion LSA was Wayne Spring’s 2010 Predator powered parachute; Reserve Grand Champ was James Jonannes’ 2009 Arion Lightning LS-1; Grand Champion Ultralight was James Wiebe’s 2010 Belite Superlite; and, Reserve Grand Champ was Danny Dezauche’s 2010 CGS Hawk Ultra.

Going Multimedia (Reluctantly at First)

By Dan Johnson || January 28, 2010 Leave a Comment

LSA Videos -- Direct from Sebring 2010... thanks to ultrafast editing by UltralightNews -- here are quick takes (top left, clockwise) on Rose Pelton's own Skycatcher; Belite Aircraft's Part 103 ultralight vehicles; the just-announced PiperSport; and the HKS-powered Quasar Lite.

Lots of other aviation news organizations embraced multimedia before ByDanJohnson.com did. We figured online was already quite lively with hyperlinks and true interactivity as represented by our exclusive PlaneFinder 2.0 feature. *** About a year ago, of UltralightNews approached me with an idea to do brief reviews of LSA. I accepted his invitation and today we are well on our way to having a 4-8 minute video mini-review for each of the 105 SLSA on the market. Other professional outlets like AvWeb, ANN, AOPA, and EAA offer multimedia topics all over the aviation map, but ByDanJohnson.com maintains a tight focus on all manner of light aircraft flown by Sport Pilots. *** With that manifesto in mind, we observe for you that we just posted new reviews on our LSA Videos page and we invite you to watch these... for free and without even having to register. That's the Internet way, though I hope you will consider signing up as a member for only $29 a year -- you can read hundreds of full-length pilots reports for the fee. *** After Sebring 2010, Loveman and I have made short videos of about 50 of the 105 SLSA plus a few other interesting aircraft in the Light-Sport space. We hope you enjoy them all. You can see these here or on UltralightNews' YouTube channel, which helps enlarge the number of viewers. But if you view them right here, you'll get a short paragraph to help you decide which ones to watch plus an easy hyperlink to all other content we have on that aircraft including all contact info. By this means, we think ByDanJohnson.com is delivering more value than other LSA resources. Go enjoy! They are fun, fast, factual, and free.

Under Intense Scrutiny — Zenith & AMD CH-601XL

By Dan Johnson || November 24, 2009 Leave a Comment

This 25-year-old design has been the focus of several media reports and speculations are whirling around the globe. Click here for a detailed explanation of the company's actions to mitigate the problem.

Bad as in-flight break-up accidents are, many opinions often blur the big picture. Last spring NTSB recommended FAA "ground the fleet," so to say. FAA chose further study. When additional CH-601s became involved, media and organizations jumped on the bandwagon. Let's review. *** The focus is on the CH-601XL, of which about 1,500 kits have been sold since its introduction in 1984. Approximately half are complete and flying, said Zenith boss, Sebastien Heintz. *** Of the airplanes that broke up two were fully-built SLSA. One was built by Czech Aircraft Works; the other by AMD. The rest are owner-built kits... essentially one-off airplanes. Comparing one to a factory-built airplane is apples and oranges. *** Some allege Zenith and AMD have ignored the problem, but lots of detailed info on Zenith's website suggests otherwise. Sebastien buttressed this saying, "We believe our effort is an example of an industry doing the right thing. Zenith has not ignored this situation. We stepped up and worked hard to create an 'Upgrade Package' that beefs up the aircraft substantially. We are making the package available to builders for $350, which is below our cost. FAA has recommended the upgrade package, advising owners not to fly until finishing the project." *** Designer Chris Heintz says, "...after thousands of man-hours of investigations, multiple design reviews and an unheard-of amount of testing, the accidents in question still do not share a common cause." But he believes the strategically-added components more than do the job. "With all the changes installed, it will be that much more difficult for a pilot to inadvertently 'over-stress' the aircraft." The company summarizes stating, "We strongly believe that implementation of the comprehensive Upgrade Package kit, combined with continuing pilot education and training, as well as an ongoing airworthiness / maintenance program, will put an end to the type of tragic accidents that have been happening and restore this aircraft's reputation as a capable and fun light sport aircraft."

Bad as in-flight break-up accidents are, many opinions often blur the big picture. Last spring NTSB recommended FAA “ground the fleet,” so to say. FAA chose further study. When additional CH-601s became involved, media and organizations jumped on the bandwagon. Let’s review. *** The focus is on the CH-601XL, of which about 1,500 kits have been sold since its introduction in 1984. Approximately half are complete and flying, said Zenith boss, Sebastien Heintz. *** Of the airplanes that broke up two were fully-built SLSA. One was built by Czech Aircraft Works; the other by AMD. The rest are owner-built kits… essentially one-off airplanes. Comparing one to a factory-built airplane is apples and oranges. *** Some allege Zenith and AMD have ignored the problem, but lots of detailed info on Zenith’s website suggests otherwise. Sebastien buttressed this saying, “We believe our effort is an example of an industry doing the right thing.

Belite’s Carbon Fiber Part 103 Ultralight Vehicle

By Dan Johnson || November 19, 2009 Leave a Comment

If you've been around aviation long enough you've heard the Q&A: "Know how to make a small fortune in aviation? Start with a large one!" Yet aviation can always use fresh talent, so welcome former tech entrepreneur, James Wiebe, turned aviation businessman. From his days building Mac peripherals under the name Newer Technology (and reaching sales of $60 million), Wiebe sold his tech enterprises and, in January 2009, bravely launched Belite Aircraft. The first flight came July 4th. Wiebe chose to incorporate stronger, lighter carbon fiber technologies to replace steel, wood, and aluminum. The result is a three-axis, full-cockpit airplane with a full instrument panel that can be built to weigh less than Part 103's 254-pound maximum. Though employing plenty of costly carbon fiber including on the firewall, Belite uses a welded steel frame for strength and safety. The premium Belite 254 CF includes carbon fiber wing spars and ribs, hydraulic brakes, aluminum wheels, full flight instrumentation, built in transceiver, a bigger 45-hp engine, enhanced electrical system, and a Gizmo GPS dock. Belite also features a five-gallon detachable tank with integrated electronic fuel sender for easy refilling, full Lexan windshield and skylight and easily-foldable wings. A simpler model weighing only 242 pounds actually allows some options. You probably won't be surprised to hear that a tech entrepreneur would make use of the Internet. Check James Wiebe's blog about Belite.

If you’ve been around aviation long enough you’ve heard the Q&A: “Know how to make a small fortune in aviation? Start with a large one!” Yet aviation can always use fresh talent, so welcome former tech entrepreneur, James Wiebe, turned aviation businessman. From his days building Mac peripherals under the name Newer Technology (and reaching sales of $60 million), Wiebe sold his tech enterprises and, in January 2009, bravely launched Belite Aircraft. The first flight came July 4th. Wiebe chose to incorporate stronger, lighter carbon fiber technologies to replace steel, wood, and aluminum. The result is a three-axis, full-cockpit airplane with a full instrument panel that can be built to weigh less than Part 103’s 254-pound maximum. Though employing plenty of costly carbon fiber including on the firewall, Belite uses a welded steel frame for strength and safety. The premium Belite 254 CF includes carbon fiber wing spars and ribs, hydraulic brakes, aluminum wheels, full flight instrumentation, built in transceiver, a bigger 45-hp engine, enhanced electrical system, and a Gizmo GPS dock.

Triple Play: Fk Lightplanes Is High, Low, and Bipe

By Dan Johnson || October 20, 2009 Leave a Comment

Fk Lightplanes airplane trio is the Fk14 Polaris on top (the model selected to be Cirrus Design's SLSA though that project is presently suspended); FK12 Comet in the middle with the folding wings and multiple cockpit configurations; and the Fk9 ELA. Read an up-to-date report in the December 2009 issue of Light Sport and Ultralight Flying. Photo by Frank Mullez, courtesy of Fk Lightplanes

Light-Sport Aircraft are nothing if not diverse. We have all manner of aircraft on our SLSA List of 104 approved models. Germany's FK Lightplanes illustrates diversity through their trio of models: high wing Fk9 series; biplane Fk-12; and low wing Fk14. *** In May 2009, the newest iteration of the Fk9 series was flown by designer Peter Funk. The Fk9 ELA (a reference to European Light Aircraft, a new class EASA is planning) is a stretched, roomier model of the popular series. The changes should play well in the American market. *** Peter Funk commented, "It seemed that [Fk9 ELA's new] winglets are improving control efficiency and low speed characteristics." In addition, the newest model boasts a larger cabin space, a larger panel with room for big screens, more baggage area, electric flaps, and optional longer-range fuel tanks. The versatile Fk9 ELA is also available on straight or amphibious floats or in taildragger gear. *** Another feature-laden model is the Fk12 Comet with its swept biplane wings that also fold. You can have Fk12 with a full bubble canopy enclosure, or two open cockpits with windscreens, or a front, covered cockpit and aft windscreen only. *** Though still under contract with Cirrus for the low wing model, Fk14 Polaris is sold in Europe with a choice of tri-gear or taildragger. Fk Lightplanes has also experimented with powerplants including an engine from Mercedes. As the company completes work toward SLSA approval for Fk9 ELA and Fk12, they are also seeking additional representatives for the U.S. market. Interested?

Light-Sport Aircraft are nothing if not diverse. We have all manner of aircraft on our SLSA List of 104 approved models. Germany’s FK Lightplanes illustrates diversity through their trio of models: high wing Fk9 series; biplane Fk-12; and low wing Fk14. *** In May 2009, the newest iteration of the Fk9 series was flown by designer Peter Funk. The Fk9 ELA (a reference to European Light Aircraft, a new class EASA is planning) is a stretched, roomier model of the popular series. The changes should play well in the American market. *** Peter Funk commented, “It seemed that [Fk9 ELA’s new] winglets are improving control efficiency and low speed characteristics.” In addition, the newest model boasts a larger cabin space, a larger panel with room for big screens, more baggage area, electric flaps, and optional longer-range fuel tanks. The versatile Fk9 ELA is also available on straight or amphibious floats or in taildragger gear.