GT 500 Archives - ByDanJohnson.com

Quicksilver Aeronautics GT 500

Website: https://www.air-techinc.com/index.php

Phone: 985-536-3994

Reserve, LA 70084 - USA

Quicksilver Aeronautics — GT 500 Restore (0715)

By Dan Johnson || August 19, 2016 Leave a Comment

In this video, we think you will see something unusual. This is a 1991 Quicksilver GT500 that looks as though it just rolled off the assembly line. That may be common in vintage aircraft but here's one you can afford and which nearly anyone can fly. Longtime Quicksilver expert, Todd Eleffson went through this particular GT500 from nose to tail beautifully restoring it. A friend who asked me about it bought the plane before AirVenture 2015 ended because it was an excellent value. More of this is coming as Quicksilver are common around the world.

In this video, we think you will see something unusual. This is a 1991 Quicksilver GT500 that looks as though it just rolled off the assembly line. That may be common in vintage aircraft but here’s one you can afford and which nearly anyone can fly. Longtime Quicksilver expert, Todd Eleffson went through this particular GT500 from nose to tail beautifully restoring it. A friend who asked me about it bought the plane before AirVenture 2015 ended because it was an excellent value. More of this is coming as Quicksilver are common around the world.

Quicksilver Aeronautics — GT500

By Dan Johnson || August 19, 2016 2 Comments

Quicksilver is one of light aviation's strongest brands, and also one of the biggest with more than 15,000 delivered since the early 1970s. In this video we speak with national sales guru Todd Ellefson about the company's plans to achieve Special Light-Sport Aircraft status meaning you will be able to buy a ready-to-fly GT500 or Sport 2S model. Kits will remain available and you can hear about other operations to provide models to enthusiasts.

Quicksilver is one of light aviation’s strongest brands, and also one of the biggest with more than 15,000 delivered since the early 1970s. In this video we speak with national sales guru Todd Ellefson about the company’s plans to achieve Special Light-Sport Aircraft status meaning you will be able to buy a ready-to-fly GT500 or Sport 2S model. Kits will remain available and you can hear about other operations to provide models to enthusiasts.

Quicksilver Adds Five Aircraft to FAA Kit List

By James Lawrence || November 8, 2012 Leave a Comment

Quicksilver's GT 400 does a hard break over the Sport 2S

Smooth-air, dawn and dusk flying is one of the great pleasures of the ultralight experience.

The MX Sport 2S with struts and full-span ailerons is a treat to fly.

The GT 500 is in the ASTM approval process as an SLSA

Last Spring I had the pleasure of photographing the several aircraft that make up the stable of the re-emergent Quicksilver Aeronautics company. Quicksilver is the once-and-future, Cessna-style flagship of the ultralight industry back in the 70s and 80s, when it sold almost 15,000 single seater and two-seat aircraft kits under the FAA Part 103 regulation. What always blew me away about Quicks, beyond their easy-to-fly, docile performance and truly bugs-in-teeth fun personality was the impeccability of the kits themselves. I haven’t seen one in years, but according to people I’ve talked to, they’re even better than they were back then…and that’s saying something! Quicksilver kits were the epitome of how a kit should be produced for sale. If you ever put together a Revell plastic model then you’ve got some idea of how a Quick kit arrives. All the anodized aluminum structural tubes for example are predrilled, immaculately finished and vacuum shrink-wrapped onto large printed cardboard sheets that individually identify every piece right where it’s “mounted” onto the sheet. Inventory is a breeze, and assembly doubly so, since you don’t cut open any clear blister pack of parts until you actually need them. Believe me, having built my share of hang gliders and ultralights in those days , including several Quicksilvers for a company I worked for, being able to keep track of hundreds or thousands of parts that can easily disappear in the shop is a real boon. Quicksilver kits also really are, by and large, giant Erector Sets. If you’re even halfway decent following instructions, and Quick instruction manuals are wonderfully thorough, you can breeze through the assembly in a matter of a few days, rather than the weeks or months or even years more typical of EABs. You couldn’t be blamed, therefore, for thinking, with this high degree of prefabrication, that Quicksilver kits would stumble on the 51% requirement of the FAA Experimental Amateur Built (EAB) category. Yet just today Quicksilver Aircraft announced five of its kits have just passed the FAA’s EAB criteria. Congrats are due. Joining the ranks EAB aircraft are the Quicksilver MX Sport, MX II Sport, MX Sprint, MX II Sprint, and the Sport 2S. Two models are single seaters and three are side-by-side two-seaters. Check the choices at the FAA list of all Amateur-Built Aircraft kits. In a release, Will Escutia, president of Quicksilver Aircraft, said “FAA’s visit proved the company under new leadership is maintaining the high standards for which Quicksilver has been known.” Ops Chief Dan Perez went on to talk about the two LSA-style models, the GT 400 enclosed single-seater and the GT 500 enclosed tandem two-seater. “Both GT series models have already been approved and, with the MX series, all appear on the FAA’s approved kit list.” That brings the Quicksilver fleet to seven EAB models. Quicksilver, which had quietly soldiered on in the ’90s and 2000′s until Mssrs. Escutia and Perez bought the company, received a fresh infusion of greenbacks and is more aggressively marketing it’s time-proven products. Production will continue in Temecula, California, the long time home of the company. For our corner of the aviation galaxy, the GT 500 will be offered as an SLSA in the future. The company is currently going through the ASTM certification process. Some of you may remember that sunny day at Oshkosh (1993) when EAA’s then-President Tom Poberezny and Lyle Byrum, flamboyant former head of Quicksilver, jointly announced the first-ever aircraft approved by FAA to live under the Primary Aircraft category, which can be seen a kind of precursor to the Light Sport Rule. There are many Quicksilver dealers throughout the country and around the world. Thousands of fun-flying Quicks are flying in nearly 100 countries, with an enviable safety record. Pricing isn’t posted online: Contact your local dealer.

Discussion: LSA – Primary Category – Part 23

By Dan Johnson || August 12, 2012 Leave a Comment

Icon Aircraft has requested a weight exemption for their A5 amphibian. What does this mean?

Cessna elected to go Primary Category with the Skycatcher. What are the implications?

Quicksilver Aeronautics (as it's now called) was the very first to win Primary Category approval for its GT500, way back in 1993. The company will now add SLSA and ELSA status to Experimental Amateur Built, thereby covering every possible method of FAA approval.

Rans also gained Primary Category approval for its S-7 Courier in addition to SLSA and EAB methods. They report $1.4 million to certify as Primary; can they charge enough to cover this?

Since AirVenture 2012, I've been part of several discussions about the way — and reasons why — aircraft become certified. Sound boring? Yes and no. One way this might get your interest is to consider if Icon could join Cessna in going Primary Category instead of LSA. Disclaimer: I have no info about any such decision from Icon; this is merely a discussion. Perhaps even more to the point is the price of airplanes based on their certification cost. *** COST Some informed estimates from knowledgeable persons suggests the cost of taking a fully designed, tested, and otherwise ready LSA through the full process of ASTM approval including the manufacturing process may be the cost of one airplane at retail. In other words, it might cost $125-150,000 to "certificate" a new LSA, after all design work and testing has been done. A weight shift trike might cost $80,000 as ASTM standards are somewhat simpler for those aircraft types. • The cost of Primary Category has been similarly estimated at about $1 million, but understand all these figures are just discussion, not fully informed values. • And a major organization has estimated the cost of Part 23 certification to be valued at $50 million, however, that figure reportedly includes the cost of designing and testing... so certification cost alone might be perhaps half, or $25 million. It's challenging to be certain of the total cost of certification as some expenses will be comingled or "burdened" by non-certification tasks. But in round numbers and just for discussion certification costs might be $150,000 for an LSA, $1 million for a Primary, and $25 million (or so) for Part 23. Even if the numbers are off by a wide margin, the differences are huge and you don't have to be an economist to see how this affects the retail price of airplanes. *** INNOVATION A smart, motivated small producer might come up with an innovative new LSA and achieve it for a fairly modest investment, perhaps $250,000 to design and "certify" to ASTM standards, though costs might be higher for a more complex aircraft or less for one of the simpler categories of LSA. In contrast, just to gain FAA approval for a new GA-type airplane might cost $25 million... 100 times more than doing it all for a LSA! This enormous disparity explains how designers can create 126 new SLSA in seven years and why so few type certificated airplanes have come to market in recent decades. The incredible flowering of LSA designs has been one of the sector's most impressive achievements. *** COMPANY GOALS Cessna has said it will go Primary and most experts believe this is mainly to get into the European market without waiting five or more years for EASA to establish clear rules. However, Cessna has said it will remain Sport Pilot eligible in the USA, meaning a Sport Pilot certificate holder can fly it, meaning it can't weigh more than 1,320 pounds. Therefore adding weight to the Skycatcher isn't presently in the cards... apparently. *** EXEMPTIONS Icon has requested a higher weight exemption. Absent such an exemption, a Sport Pilot might not be able to fly the A5 because its designers want to provide features that could cause the design to exceed LSA weight parameters. If the exemption isn't granted by FAA, would Icon go Primary to solve this dilemma? Ah, one more detail emerges. *** A Primary Category Skycatcher or A5 could be flown without a medical if the EAA/AOPA third class medical exemption is granted. An aircraft heavier than LSA parameters would still require a Recreational or Private pilot license but possibly not a medical. Would this meet the goals of either Cessna or Icon? Both companies state the more easily achieved Sport Pilot certificate factors significantly into their plans. *** PERFORMANCE One more thing: Should Icon be granted their weight exemption (to 1,680 pounds) and if they stick with the Rotax engine, will the 100-hp 912 iS give the plane enough power to meet their design goals? Some are convinced 100 horsepower isn't enough, but others observe that the Diamond Katana with a 100-hp Rotax flies satisfactorily at about the same weight although it is a cleaner airplane. *** Again, I repeat, the preceding is merely a discussion, but one with many plot twists. It will certainly be interesting to watch how FAA rules on either exemption mentioned above and how companies and organizations pursue their goals. More importantly, how will the market (that is, you pilots) demand each kind of certification? Only time will tell.

Since AirVenture 2012, I’ve been part of several discussions about the way — and reasons why — aircraft become certified. Sound boring? Yes and no. One way this might get your interest is to consider if Icon could join Cessna in going Primary Category instead of LSA. Disclaimer: I have no info about any such decision from Icon; this is merely a discussion. Perhaps even more to the point is the price of airplanes based on their certification cost. *** COST Some informed estimates from knowledgeable persons suggests the cost of taking a fully designed, tested, and otherwise ready LSA through the full process of ASTM approval including the manufacturing process may be the cost of one airplane at retail. In other words, it might cost $125-150,000 to “certificate” a new LSA, after all design work and testing has been done. A weight shift trike might cost $80,000 as ASTM standards are somewhat simpler for those aircraft types.

Kodak Moment for Quicksilver Aeronautics

By Dan Johnson || March 2, 2012 Leave a Comment

Quicksilver Manufacturing
is now Quicksilver Aeronautics

Among these and other models, Quicksilver has produced more than 15,000 aircraft.

Will Escutia (R) worked at Kodak, Panasonic, and Technicolor in engineering, quality, manufacturing, and operations. Dan Perez (L) had a 20-year career with Eastman Kodak as a director of the quality, manufacturing, global logistics, and business operations for the Americas.

Carl von Hirsch served as president and co-owner of Quicksilver Manufacturing for the last 13 years. He was supported by his sons Robert and Richard and business partner Manuel Perez.

Among all aircraft producers in the world, a very limited number have exceeded the daunting barrier of delivering more than 10,000 airplanes. Those in this exclusive club include manufacturers of major aircraft such as Boeing, Cessna, Piper and precious few others. While Van's Aircraft is approaching this number with their RV kit-built aircraft series (itself a rather incredible achievement), no recreational aircraft company has passed the 10,000 unit mark... except one: Quicksilver. *** For many pilots Quicksilver makes "ultralights." Indeed they do, in that some models can be built to stay within FAA's Part 103 rule. Quicksilver also makes two seaters in two model lines — the MX series and the GT series — and those are now considered Experimental Amateur-Built aircraft. Except for dealer-built Part 103 Quicksilver aircraft, er... "ultralight vehicles" to use the preferred FAA term, all the California company's aircraft have been constructed from kits. That means the company and its dealers gave lots of builder support because Quicksilver has delivered more than 15,000 units. *** The longtime producer goes back into the 1970s and over all those years has one of the best safety records of any brand. The support was easier and safety good as Quicksilver invested heavily into making what may be the best assembly manuals in the kit aircraft business. Then they further proved their aircraft with thorough testing, enough so that the GT500 model was the very first to win FAA's Primary Aircraft approval. *** Quicksilver has had a few owners over the decades but for the past 13 years it has been known as Quicksilver Manufacturing lead by Carl von Hirsch and partner Manuel Perez. Running the operation has been Carl's sons Richard and Robert. Sales have been handled nationally by Todd Ellefson, also with the team for many years. They'll all continue but new leadership and ownership was recently announced. *** Taking over as president is Guillermo "Will" Escutia and running the operation is Daniel Perez. Both men worked at Kodak for many years before that American icon fell upon difficult times. Escutia and Perez moved on to new challenges but both bring solid corporate strengths to the aircraft builder. Each man also has extensive international experience. *** Dan co-founded Flying Spirit Aircraft with Will building on a 30-year friendship that began in their first year of college. A 10-year pilot of ultralight and general aviation aircraft Will is also an aviation mechanic. He stated, "Quicksilver will continue to provide our customers with excellent quality and fairly priced kit planes in a minimum of time." *** Outgoing CEO Carl von Hirsch said, "I am excited about the future for Quicksilver. This change to a younger and more dynamic leadership team provides for a stable growth oriented organization that should ensure ultralight type and light aviation enthusiasts continue to receive excellent quality and service for many years."

Is Flying for Fun Shrinking? Here’s Another View.

By Dan Johnson || October 25, 2011 Leave a Comment

Titan's Tornado Experimental Amateur Built "fun" flyer. photo by Scott Wilcox of Light Sport and Ultralight Flying magazine

Cessna's 172 Skyhawk. photo by Lonna Tucker courtesy of Check-6.com

Quicksilver's GT 500 ultralight that also was the first-ever Primary Category aircraft to be certified.

Our good friend, Mary Grady, posted an article on AVweb, one of our favorite aviation news sites; lots of good content available. Mary recently editorialized about electric aircraft and their potential appeal. Following the NASA Green Flight Challenge, her timing was as impeccable as her writing. I encourage you to go read the editorial, but what you'll find at least as entertaining as Mary's editorial are a great many reader comments; the topic clearly inspired aviators. *** That said, I had to write Mary* about one line and I want to share some of what I told her. *** Mary wrote, "For people who fly for fun — presuming there are many of those left, it seems to be one of the fastest-shrinking segments of GA — electric airplanes are sure to appeal." *** In my communication to Mary, I asked about the source of the knowledge that flying for fun is shrinking. Is it really? Who says? On what information? I am keenly aware light aviation is suffering, via sales in particular as are all segments of aviation, but I am not aware that flying for fun is shrinking fast. Reminded of the impeachment-hearing logic of ex-President Bill Clinton, I'm inclined to ask, "What is the definition of "flying for fun?" As one answer to the question, let me recount a story. *** Years ago when I visited the Cessna 172/182 Club Annual Convention, my travel mate and fellow ultralight pilot, Gregg Ellsworth, and I came away thinking, "These 172/182 pilot/owners are essentially ultralight pilot/owners." (In those days, we didn't yet have LSA.) We felt this way because we observed that their flight missions were remarkably similar. Asking simple questions we discovered these owners commonly flew one long trip per year (several states away) and a few regional trips (one or two states away). Mostly they flew local trips (in-state or within a couple hours). So far as we were concerned, these GA pilots used their aircraft in almost identical ways to ultralight owners. If ultralight pilots fly for fun, these these 172/182 pilots do so as well, even if someone might not consider their aircraft as "fun" flying machines. Our information came from 150 attendees at the event. Our methods weren't scientific but we had a decent sample of 172/182 pilots and nearly every one told a similar usage story. *** Now, I don't know how someone else might characterize such flying, but I'd say those 172/182 owners were "flying for fun." Such airplane trips are certainly not business or commercial flying. If accurate and if those surveyed truly represent fun flyers, then I can't imagine how the number of pilots flying for fun are shrinking any faster than the pilot population as a whole. Of course, I might be wrong and statistics can be manipulated to bolster an outcome. I simply don't see shrinkage among the fly-for-fun set that is my entire focus in aviation. If you fly for fun, maybe you better speak and be heard! * Mary Grady's Reply — "You're right [about the 'shrinking' comment], it's just a statement of opinion based on casual chitchat and input we get from readers who say they have put off fun flying to save money. I'd be glad to be wrong on it. *** What also has given me the impression of less fun flying is the slump in ballooning, which is where I got my start in aviation. I guess my thinking is that business-related flying is easier to justify and maintain.

Big Crowds at the Sun ‘n Fun LSA Mall

By Dan Johnson || April 20, 2008 Leave a Comment

If you missed the Sun 'n Fun LSA Mall in 2008, please accept an invitation for April 21-26, 2009.

Sun 'n Fun 2008 is history, but planning is already underway for the 2009 event. Event boss John Burton confirmed we will again have the LAMA-hosted LSA Mall right at the front gate next April 21-26. A major success at this year's Lakeland, Florida airshow, the industry Mall presentation featured 17 Special Light-Sport Aircraft. Weather prevented Fantasy Air's Allegro from attending. Two days before the event, a tornado crushed a Sting S3 planned for display. And work at Quicksilver Manufacturing postponed the exhibit of the GT500 (they're finishing SLSA approval, reports national sales manager, Todd Ellefson). *** The 17 who were in the '08 LSA Mall enjoyed significant traffic all week and virtually every visitor to Sun 'n Fun was at least exposed to Light-Sport Aircraft in a wide variety (although we were not able to enlist any trike or powered parachute companies). Aircraft shown were: Flight Design CTLS, AirMax SeaMax, Jabiru USA J-250, IndUS Thorpedo, CubCrafters Sport Cub, FP&A A-22 Valor, Sportsplanes.com Breezer II, Just Aircraft Highlander on floats, Lambada motorglider, Gobosh G-700S, Remos G-3, CZAW SportCruiser, Legend Cub, AMD Patriot and CH-601, Evektor SportStar, and Paradise P-1. *** Joining LAMA inside the big welcome tent were Rotax and Jabiru LSA engines, BRS emergency parachutes, AirFleet Capital (LSA financing), and ASA training resources featuring Paul Hamilton (who also made a special 30-minute DVD of LSA flying in scenic locations). LAMA plus tens of thousands of visitors thank all who participated!

Sun ‘n Fun 2008 is history, but planning is already underway for the 2009 event. Event boss John Burton confirmed we will again have the LAMA-hosted LSA Mall right at the front gate next April 21-26. A major success at this year’s Lakeland, Florida airshow, the industry Mall presentation featured 17 Special Light-Sport Aircraft. Weather prevented Fantasy Air’s Allegro from attending. Two days before the event, a tornado crushed a Sting S3 planned for display. And work at Quicksilver Manufacturing postponed the exhibit of the GT500 (they’re finishing SLSA approval, reports national sales manager, Todd Ellefson). *** The 17 who were in the ’08 LSA Mall enjoyed significant traffic all week and virtually every visitor to Sun ‘n Fun was at least exposed to Light-Sport Aircraft in a wide variety (although we were not able to enlist any trike or powered parachute companies).

Rotax Certifies 582; Good for American Designs?

By Dan Johnson || June 19, 2006 Leave a Comment

Once the largest selling engine in the Rotax line of engines, the Rotax 582 sold hot and heavy for powered parachutes but also to many fixed-wing ultralights. It's approval may open the door to more American SLSA.

Perhaps a long time coming Austria-based Rotax recently certified the 65-horsepower R-582 two-stroke engine under ASTM standards. Now, some American designs may proceed with pursuing their Special Light-Sport Aircraft approval. One that pops into my mind immediately is Quicksilver's already-certified GT500 (under Primary Catetory from the mid-1990s) but many more could be close behind...for example, powered parachutes and other popular American ultralights. While most SLSA are hitting the gross weight limit of 1,320 pounds, LSA aren't required to be that heavy so the 65-horse engine could be a most appropriate powerplant. One interesting note is that if A&Ps currently resist working on the 912 series what will they think of two-stroke engines? A swing factor could be Cessna, should the big company choose the lightweight 9-series Rotax over a Lycoming (part of Cessna's corporate family). If Cessna goes Rotax, then the door may open to mechanic acceptance. As with so much in SP/LSA, time will tell.

Perhaps a long time coming Austria-based Rotax recently certified the 65-horsepower R-582 two-stroke engine under ASTM standards. Now, some American designs may proceed with pursuing their Special Light-Sport Aircraft approval. One that pops into my mind immediately is Quicksilver‘s already-certified GT500 (under Primary Catetory from the mid-1990s) but many more could be close behind…for example, powered parachutes and other popular American ultralights. While most SLSA are hitting the gross weight limit of 1,320 pounds, LSA aren’t required to be that heavy so the 65-horse engine could be a most appropriate powerplant. One interesting note is that if A&Ps currently resist working on the 912 series what will they think of two-stroke engines? A swing factor could be Cessna, should the big company choose the lightweight 9-series Rotax over a Lycoming (part of Cessna’s corporate family). If Cessna goes Rotax, then the door may open to mechanic acceptance.

Quicksilver’s GT500 Qualifier

By Dan Johnson || April 18, 2005 2 Comments

Jon Thornburgh and Carol Carpenter taxi out for an air-to-air photo mission in the Quicksilver GT 500. Note the BRS chute canister exiting the side of the aircraft. Zipped-down doors provide cool air while taxiing.

A black panel just below the windshield reduces glare off the nose of the aircraft.

Unlike the shiny panel in the GT 500 Dan flew for this pilot report, this GT 500's panel was painted a dull gray, reducing glare and making it easier for the pilot to read the instruments.

Tandem seating gives pilot and passenger an equal-opportunity view of the same sights. Dual controls make the GT 500 valuable as a trainer, though the backseat pilot must look over the front-seat occupant's shoulders to check instruments. The zippered doors can also be removed completely when open-air flying is desired.

The Primary Category

Quicksilver's GT 500 is ready for sport pilots In the automotive world, GT stands for Grand Touring and that may be an appropriate comparison for the GT 500 from Quicksilver Aircraft Manufacturing. With the unlimited view from the front seat of this tandem two-seater, touring in the GT 500 is definitely a treat. When the sport pilot/light-sport aircraft (SP/LSA) final rule arrives on the aviation scene, this top-of-the-line model from the longtime Southern California ultralight manufacturer may well be one of the first available ready-to-fly light-sport aircraft (LSA). Quicksilver co-owner Carl von Hirsch has indicated the company will build the GT 500 as a ready-to-fly Special LSA. It will also offer the strutbraced MX Sport IIS as a LSA entry. You might say the GT 500 is preapproved; in 1993 the tandem, two-seat aircraft received both a type and production certificate in the Primary Category (see sidebar). It's pretty safe to say that the design will quickly pass muster under the FAA-mandated LSA consensus standards under development by ASTM International. You can buy a GT 500 right now, even ready-to-fly, but until SP/LSA is made law, you'll have to operate it with a minimum of a recreational pilot's certificate unless you're flying it under exemption as an ultralight trainer. A Grand Tour of the GT 500 Tom Price and Dave Cronk, two of the ultralight/lightplane industry's most experienced engineers and designers, created the GT 500, and Quicksilver introduced it at the Sun 'n Fun EAA Fly-In in 1990. Dave was one of the original designers with Eipper Formance, the hang glider company that first marketed the footlaunched Quicksilver glider. The glider later evolved into the powered Quicksilver ultralight and gave birth to the company we know today as Quicksilver Aircraft Manufacturing. The GT 500 followed on the success of Cronk and Price's single-place GT 400, which has sold more than a thousand units. After a couple of years of careful design deliberations, the duo followed with the GT 500. Since it came on the market more than a decade ago, the plane has retained its underlying design philosophy of being a higherend "ultralight" while changing in subtle ways-for example, adding a zip-up full enclosure for those who enjoyed enclosed cockpit flying as opposed to open-air ultralight flying. One obvious change is the presence of the 80-hp, four-cylinder, four-stroke Rotax 912 engine, though you can still order the machine with the 65-hp Rotax 582. Bells and Whistles The GT 500 is actually a light airplane ahead of its time. The aircraft offered for this evaluation flight sported a well-equipped full panel with tachometer, water temperature gauge, Hobbs hour meter, magnetic compass, altimeter, vertical speed indicator, front and rear airspeed indicators, plus oil temperature and pressure gauges. It had the optional zip-up enclosure. In the cockpit several levers allow you to optimize your flight. You'll find a trim lever to the left of the front yoke base, a hand brake on the right, plus throttles on the right in both front and rear seats. The front seat has a choke and primer plus electrical switches. A mechanical flap handle on the floor to the right of the main boom tube is easier to operate for most pilots than the overhead lever used in some designs. Overhead levers demand an awkward motion; however, engaging the flaps in the GT 500 still requires moderate physical exertion. Quicksilver's factory pilots will tell you to keep your hand on the flap lever as you retract it. Failure to observe this advice will cause air loads on the flaps to snap the lever forward aggressively. In the GT 500 you can lean far back in the seat and look up into the wing root to see fuel quantity. Because airplane fuel gauges, including those in general aviation (GA) airplanes, seem to be notoriously inaccurate, it's nice to be able to perform this visual check. The instrument panel in this GT 500 had a shiny, satin-finish aluminum. It looked high tech, but it produced a significant reflection in the windscreen when flying with the sun at my back. A dull black panel is often preferred exactly for this reason. With its flexible plastic doors, this GT 500's noise level was tolerable. To prevent hearing loss, I wore a headset. But the 912 engine is less noisy than many two-stroke powerplants. Getting in and out of the GT 500, especially the back seat, can require some contortions. Jon Thornburgh, who often instructs from the rear seat of a GT 500, refers to his technique for getting into the rear seat as his "snake entry." As he demonstrated, he worms his way around the aircraft's hefty structural tubing on either side of the aft seat. He uses the large tubes to ease his upper torso inside, working his way to the back of the seat. Then he draws his legs inside. It just doesn't work well to try to put one's feet in first. The front seat is considerably easier to enter because there are no tubes blocking the entrance. Let's Go Flying! The view from GT 500's front seat is wide open in every direction. Todd Ellefson, Quicksilver sales director, had this demonstrator GT 500 fitted with a skylight that expanded the view even further. I felt confident that the runway was traffic-free before takeoff. As I've often found on light aircraft, the 80-hp Rotax 912 engine is more power than needed. I understand the desire for four-stroke engines, but even so it offers excess thrust on many light machines. After the first takeoff, I subsequently launched with less than full power just to keep the climb angle better for forward vision. The GT 500's wide-open visibility is valuable on landing approaches, too. You'll enjoy good side visibility regardless of which way the airport pattern works. In this regard, its tandem seating is superior to side-by-side seating. Speaking of landing, with engine power reduced, I made my approaches at the common ultralight "50-is-nifty" speed. At idle thrust, 20 degrees of flaps produced a significantly low nose, which is great for forward landing visibility, and this flap angle restrains speed well too. The flaps on the GT 500 are dynamic control surfaces with plenty of power. With flaps lowered two notches, I was delighted to fly low and slow in a relaxed and enjoyable manner. Unfortunately, at level slow cruise with the yoke held back slightly, reaching forward to the flaps is a stretch. I could barely touch them without moving the yoke forward slightly to accommodate the action. Overall, the collection of several levers in the cockpit makes for a busy space. This particular GT 500's trim lever didn't seem to have much effect, though that may have been caused by a rigging error or adjustment problem. However, the brakes fitted to this GT 500 were quite effective, but you must let go of the throttle to use the hand brake, as both are mounted on the right side of the yoke. This demonstrator GT 500 had one of my favorite fail-safe instruments-a yaw string. However, I was frustrated in my attempt to keep it perfectly centered in my Dutch roll coordination exercises. A yaw string is highly sensitive if the string is light enough, and most pilots will find they like it even better than the turn-and-bank ball. This GT 500's yaw string showed a certain momentum when moving the rudder. I believe the problem centered on the rudder pedal action. The pedals on this GT 500 were heavier in relative feel than the ailerons, and the rudders were rather lethargic. This left me unsure if I was lagging or leading with rudder in attempting to precisely coordinate the controls. However, according to my in-flight notes, the rudder action felt better than it looked. But yaw strings cannot lie. I suppose that the curved windscreen of the GT 500 caused the string to seem more sensitive; once it got off center, it tended to go farther off with little provocation. Conventionally trained pilots accustomed to general aviation aircraft will probably feel right at home with the GT 500's yoke. I've long preferred a control stick in a sport aircraft, but I must admit that a yoke offers good leverage and perhaps the chance for finer control motion, especially in comparison with a side-mounted joystick. Like all components in this airplane, the yoke arrangement in the GT 500 was well executed. However, I tended to bury the yoke into my leg whenever turning to the right in steep turns. The tendency was much less so to the left, no doubt because of P-factor influences. I'm near the FAA's average 170-pound pilot, so if I bumped my leg, a larger pilot might feel space is cramped when making fullstop control actions with the yoke. Discounting coordination qualities and stick motion, steep turns and all other turn maneuvers went well in the GT 500. Despite some control force disharmony and the ergonomic issues, the GT 500 is remarkably precise in handling. Turns to headings and fine adjustments on final approach showed strong control authority. Many aircraft I've flown offer more fluid control motions than the GT 500, though that can translate to faster control response that does not please everyone. Oftentimes, aircraft with lighter handling gain this quality by flying faster, yet many ultralight enthusiasts relish flying slowly over fields, an activity which the GT 500 does extremely well. The GT 500 was well behaved at high cruising speeds also. At 90 mph indicated, the aircraft felt solid. Nonetheless, in this evaluation aircraft with the power set at 4200 rpm yielding 50-55 mph, I experienced almost a continuous shudder that seemed to come from the tail. It wasn't disturbing, but I could not ignore it. At 4400 rpm, I cruised 60 mph in level flight, which turned out to be a pleasant flying speed. Noise and vibration were low, plus fuel consumption was quite miserly. When flying at 55 mph, deploying 10 degrees of flaps hardly changed the attitude and flight characteristics. But with flaps deployed 20 degrees, I saw a decrease of about 5 mph. At full flaps, or 30 degrees, speed in the GT 500 dropped down another 5 mph to 45 mph. In the highly engineered GT 500, power-off and power-on stalls broke forward in every single trial. The break was clearly noted, but all were gentle. If you lower the GT 500's nose ever so slightly you recover almost instantly. After doing steep turns at 45 degrees of bank, I performed accelerated stalls that were noticeable only by a faint burbling when the air separated the wing. I'd observe that my ability to note this subtle quality of handling after flying the aircraft for just 45 minutes tells you something about how quickly you can become comfortable in the GT 500. How Much? Currently, the GT 500 can be flown as an ultralight trainer, as a 51-percent amateur-built aircraft, or as a Primary Category aircraft. Bought as a complete kit, the GT 500 is priced at about $34,000 for the 912-powered model, but it is quite well equipped for that price. Comparable aircraft from other American suppliers may seem lower priced, but you must compare them with the same equipment. Still $34,000 is hardly pocket change to most of us. If that figure seems too high, you can knock it down by $7,000, to about $27,000, by going with the two-stroke Rotax 582 engine that has proven itself for years on this design. A 582-powered GT 500 also weighs 63 pounds less; therefore, it can climb at the same rate even with 15 less horsepower. Quicksilver lowers the gross weight to 1,000 pounds with the 582 but payload remains within 37 pounds of the more powerful model. Of course, fuel consumption will actually rise with the smaller engine, one of the facts of four-stroke efficiency. A factory-built, Rotax 582-powered GT 500 sells for about $33,000. For a ready-to-fly price on the R-912 version, Quicksilver advises you contact one of their many dealers, but you can come in under $40,000, I suspect. Before comparing purchase prices with other aircraft, you should check with a local dealer, as Rotax engine prices alone can affect the final price significantly. With the euro's 20-percent increase against the dollar in recent years, the Austrianbased engine manufacturer has been forced to raise prices. Naturally, this is true for any airframe brand using imported components. As one of America's most likely early entrants for LSA and as a model that has earned a loyal following, GT 500 deserves your close look.

Published in EAA Sport Pilot & Light Sport Aircraft Magazine

Seating	2, tandem
Empty weight	638 pounds
Gross weight	1,100 pounds ¹
Wingspan	30 feet
Wing area	155 square feet
Wing loading	7.1 pounds per square foot
Useful Load	462 pounds
Length	20 feet 6 inches
Payload (with full fuel)	366 pounds
Height	6 feet 6 inches
Fuel Capacity	16 gallons
Kit type	Fully assembled ² or kit
Build time	160-190 hours
Notes:	¹ 1,000 gross weight if powered by 65-hp Rotax 582 ² Primary Aircraft model with Rotax 582. Also under proposed Light-Sport Aircraft rule.
Standard engine	Rotax 912
Power	81 hp
Power loading	13.8 pounds per hp
Max Speed	91 mph ¹
Cruise speed	83 mph
Stall Speed	42 mph
Never exceed speed	103 mph
Rate of climb at gross	650 fpm
Takeoff distance at gross	245 feet
Landing distance at gross	390 feet
Range (powered)	295 miles (65% power)
Fuel Consumption	about 4.3 gph (65% power)
Notes:	¹ With doors installed; 88 mph with doors removed.
Standard Features	Rotax 912 (as tested), full dual controls, three-position flaps, steerable nosewheel, hydraulic brakes, parking brake, instruments: tachometer, temp, Hobbs, compass, altimeter, VSI, front and rear ASI, oil temp and pressure, 16-gallon fuel capacity in two tanks, 3-blade carbon fiber prop, electric starting, trim, adjustable seats, front and rear shoulder belt system.
Options	65-hp Rotax 582 (saves $7,000), float system, wide variety of other instruments and avionics, ballistic parachute (custom-fitted to GT 500), crop dusting system.
Construction	Aluminum tube and gusset airframe, fiberglass fairings, Dacron wing and tail coverings, steel components. U.S.-owned company.

Design

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

Pros - Originally 4 years in development and now 10 years after original certification, the GT 500 may be one of the first Light-Sport Aircraft (LSA) to be FAA-approved. An 81-hp Rotax 912 adds to earlier 2-stroke power; the 65-hp Rotax 582 still offered. Corporation is now very stable (after years of leadership turbulence).

Cons - The GT 500's parts count is quite high; sophistication appears chosen over simplicity. Equipped like the test aircraft, you must either have a conventional pilot's certificate or wait for proposed Sport Pilot ticket; either takes more than any ultralight rating. Some buyers avoid tandem configuration.

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 - In a proposed LSA, you can have all the GT 500 offers: brakes, electric start, flaps, a panel full of instruments, trim, adjustable seats, ballistic parachute, 4-point seat harness and more. Over the years, Quicksilver has filled the cockpit with features appreciated by many pilots.

Cons - Control yokes are less comfortable than joysticks for long flights (and add complexity). I found the trim relatively ineffective (a rigging error?). Flap handle must be controlled during retraction or it can slap forward with some power. Fuel filled on top of wings; less accessible.

Cockpit/Cabin

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

Pros - Visibility from the front seat is very good; the position ahead of the wing greatly helps broaden your view. Both seats feel comfortable and offer 4-point seat harnesses. Seats can adjust to accommodate more pilot sizes. Zip-up doors work well and you can open them in flight or remove completely.

Cons - Entry to the rear will be difficult for many (hint: go headfirst). Rear seat is noisier than the front and has poorer visibility. No eye contact between occupants; an intercom will be needed to communicate. No flap actuation from the rear, an impediment to instructional use. Tail tips to the ground upon exit.

Ground Handling

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

Pros - Excellent ground manners in all respects; precise steering and effective brakes with handles, front and rear. Adequate ground clearance for off-field landings. Prop is well protected above the tail boom. Very sturdy gear gives good stability even if off field.

Cons - Older heel-actuated nose brake gave way to hydraulic main gear brakes with greater weight, complication, and cost (though greater effectiveness). You must release your right hand from the throttle to use the brake unless you can reach across. Nondifferential brakes.

Takeoff/Landing

Qualities; Efficiency; Ease; Comparative values.

Pros - The GT 500's takeoff and landing behavior is as good as any 2-place ultralight-like aircraft I've flown: highly predictable, short ground roll, strong climbout, terrific visibility on landing, good control authority for crosswind operations, low approach speeds, effective flaps, good slip qualities, strong gear.

Cons - From the rear seat, visibility is much impaired compared to the front; this may be a major drawback for instructional use. Control response is not particularly fast should the need arise. Energy retention is not as strong as on faster, sleeker planes.

Control

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

Pros - Docile and highly predictable handling. Controls exhibit reasonable harmony though the ailerons are slightly stronger. All controls are moderate in response, which may be ideal for novice use such as student training. Adverse yaw is moderate. Crosswind authority was moderately strong.

Cons - Not fast responding in any axis (though this is exactly what some pilots seek). Rudder pedals were rather heavy in the test GT 500. Control yokes can tire the arms in that they lack a place to rest your arms; many sport pilots prefer joysticks.

Performance

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

Pros - Exceptionally well-rounded performance. With an 81-hp Rotax 912 powerplant, takeoffs and ground rolls are short and fuel consumption is better than with a 65-hp Rotax 582. Climbs 650 fpm at full gross. Wonderful low-over-field qualities; the GT 500 seems comfortable going slow or fast.

Cons - Speed range, once thought quite wide, is narrower than several other LSA candidates. Glide and sink aren't particularly strong (though they match many other light 2-seaters). Bleeds energy in ground effect faster than composite fuselage and wings.

Stability

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

Pros - Extremely mellow stalls; true for power-off, power-on, and accelerated versions; all break straight ahead. Solid and predictable feel throughout steep turns maneuvers. Quicksilver has long supported ballistic parachutes; appreciated for my flight report flying. Response from yoke back or yoke forward and release were superb, returning to level in only 1.5 to 2 oscillations.

Cons - I discovered no negative attributes in the stability category, a credit to its engineering and design team, and one reason the 13-year-old GT 500 has not changed appreciably.

Overall

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

Pros - The GT 500 is a dependable and trustworthy design that has proven itself over many years of duty in a variety of roles. The company behind the design has now been very stable for many years. One of America's most likely early entrants for LSA.

Cons - Rear position has much more restricted view and is less appealing for some instructors. The GT 500 isn't your least expensive choice. To some, this looks like an aging design; she hasn't changed much while other designs have emerged.

Quicksilver’s GT 500 is ready for sport pilots In the automotive world, GT stands for Grand Touring and that may be an appropriate comparison for the GT 500 from Quicksilver Aircraft Manufacturing. With the unlimited view from the front seat of this tandem two-seater, touring in the GT 500 is definitely a treat. When the sport pilot/light-sport aircraft (SP/LSA) final rule arrives on the aviation scene, this top-of-the-line model from the longtime Southern California ultralight manufacturer may well be one of the first available ready-to-fly light-sport aircraft (LSA). Quicksilver co-owner Carl von Hirsch has indicated the company will build the GT 500 as a ready-to-fly Special LSA. It will also offer the strutbraced MX Sport IIS as a LSA entry. You might say the GT 500 is preapproved; in 1993 the tandem, two-seat aircraft received both a type and production certificate in the Primary Category (see sidebar). It’s pretty safe to say that the design will quickly pass muster under the FAA-mandated LSA consensus standards under development by ASTM International.

The Primary Category

By Dan Johnson || March 15, 2005 Leave a Comment

FAA established the Primary Category in 1992 at the request of EAA and other general aviation groups, to allow for the manufacture of ready-to-fly airplanes or kit aircraft that could be built under a manufacturer-supervised program. Primary Category aircraft are limited to a gross weight of 3,000 pounds, or less, and must be powered by a certificated engine and propeller. They can be used for training or recreational flying. A sub-category of the Primary Category is called Sportplanes; a sportplane is defined as any single or two-place aircraft with a maximum takeoff weight of 1,200 pounds, or less, and a maximum stall speed of 45 knots. They are limited to day VFR, normal category operation. Currently, two aircraft-the Quicksilver GT 500 and the RANS S-7C-have been certified under this category. A minimum of a Recreational pilot's certificate (or student endorsement) is required to operate such aircraft.

Published in EAA Sport Pilot & Light Sport Aircraft Magazine

FAA established the Primary Category in 1992 at the request of EAA and other general aviation groups, to allow for the manufacture of ready-to-fly airplanes or kit aircraft that could be built under a manufacturer-supervised program. Primary Category aircraft are limited to a gross weight of 3,000 pounds, or less, and must be powered by a certificated engine and propeller. They can be used for training or recreational flying. A sub-category of the Primary Category is called Sportplanes; a sportplane is defined as any single or two-place aircraft with a maximum takeoff weight of 1,200 pounds, or less, and a maximum stall speed of 45 knots. They are limited to day VFR, normal category operation. Currently, two aircraft-the Quicksilver GT 500 and the RANS S-7C-have been certified under this category. A minimum of a Recreational pilot’s certificate (or student endorsement) is required to operate such aircraft. Published in EAA Sport Pilot & Light Sport Aircraft Magazine

First to Achieve Light-Sport Aircraft Status?

By Dan Johnson || February 19, 2004 Leave a Comment

COMMON BASE - The airport setting of this photo may prove to be a common base for a proposed certified Light-Sport Aircraft GT 500. Quicksilver Manufacturing plans to be ready to launch the GT 500 as a LSA when the rule is confirmed.

DACRON WINGS - One of the ways Quicksilver can afford to fully build the GT 500 for a reasonable cost relates to the use of sewn Dacron wings. It saves time and weight.

GAUGE THIS - Quicksilver North American Sales Manager Todd Ellefson equipped his demonstrator with enough instruments to satisfy a Learjet pilot. The transponder on the lower left allows flight (with permission) into certain airspace ultralights don't typically fly.

FLAP CONTROLS - The earlier version placed the flap lever overhead where it was less accessible. Later versions placed the lever on the main boom near the yoke.

CONTROL PANEL - To the pilot's right are clustered several controls: throttle, primer, electrical switches and fuses, plus brake handle (in hand). You exit on the left, leaving this area undisturbed.

BUTTONED UP - The GT 500 with full enclosure is being prepared for sale as a Light-Sport Aircraft (LSA). Since it has already been certified under Primary Category, the model is likely to be an early-qualified LSA.

ADJUSTABLE HORIZONTAL - At the right edge of the photo, the black components allow adjustment that helps the GT 500 maintain a desirable trim. Sewn Dacron coverings allow bright colors to be easily added.

MASTER INSTRUCTOR - A man of many talents, Jon Thornburgh flew with me as I checked out the newest version of the GT 500. Thornburgh also demonstrated the special entry he uses for the aft seat.

BIG POWER - Formerly the GT 500 came with the 65-hp Rotax 582, but now the 81-hp Rotax 912 is available, especially for proposed Light-Sport Aircraft operations. A factory-built model can be used for instruction or rental under the proposed rule.

TANDEM SEATER - The front seat of the GT 500, like its single-seat sibling, offers a glorious view. The rear of this GT 500 was equipped for instruction with a good complement of instruments.

Discounting coordination qualities, steep turns, well, all turns went very well in the GT 500; it is very precise in handling. You can always point the plane where you wish. Many pilots, especially those trained in general aviation aircraft, love the yoke. I much prefer a joystick. This is personal preference, but you can't fault the execution of the yoke arrangement in the GT 500. Like all components, it's very well done. Since I'd just flown the Flight Design CT before the GT 500, comparisons were easy. Handling in the composite CT aircraft was much more fluid (though that may not suit everyone). The CT could also fly nearly as slowly over the fields as the GT 500, showing the possibilities in new aircraft designs. The GT 500 behaved very properly at speed. Cruising at 90 mph indicated, the design felt very solid and gave every assurance. However, at 4,200 rpm and 50 to 55 mph, I experienced almost a continuous shudder that seemed to come from the tail. It wasn't disturbing but if you were trying to shoot photos from the plane, that speed setting would likely confound your efforts. My in-flight recorded notes show that 4,400 rpm produced 60 mph at level cruise, which turned out to be a very pleasant flying speed. Noise and vibration were low, plus fuel consumption must have been very miserly. At 55 mph and 4,300 rpm, deploying 10° flaps changed nothing. However, with 20° of deployment, I could see a drop of about 5 miles an hour. At full flaps or 30°, speed in the GT 500 dropped to 45 mph. Accelerated stalls were quite faint, noticeable only by a burbling when the air separates the wing. However, this observation shows the fine overall quality to handling such that I could discern air separation after flying an aircraft for 45 minutes. Power-off stalls and power-on stalls always broke forward in every trial. The break was obvious but all were very gentle. Lower the nose slightly and you recover; no thrills ride here. Ellefson equipped his GT 500 demo airplane with a BRS parachute and I'm always pleased to have this safety gear along for a flight. For the GT 500, Quicksilver has worked closely with parachute producer BRS to assure a clean and functional installation. Yankee LSA One of the questions people may ask is, "How will American Light-Sport Aircraft compare to the entries from Europe?" Indeed, flying the German CT right before the Yankee GT 500 provided me with a fascinating comparison. The two could hardly be more different yet they're after the same prize - your dollars. The side-by-side CT is much faster and handles more briskly. In fairness, these two designs don't compare well, as they follow very different construction techniques. Quicksilver's aluminum tube and Dacron approach has years of experience and demonstrated low maintenance requirements. The CT is more curvaceous but some pilots express concerns about composite construction. The CT cruises 40 mph faster than the GT 500 but for an ultralight quality of flight, the GT 500 delivers. To get somewhere fast, the CT wins hands down, but the joy of flight is just as much the journey as reaching the destination quickly. By example, the GT 500's zip-off doors seem clunky compared to the CT's shapely fiberglass ones. But you can open those on the GT 500 while flying and enjoy the smell of the countryside. You can't do so in the CT. You'll spend some money to acquire the GT 500 as flown. Equipped as tested, this plane would retail for more than $36,000. The complete kit is $33,995 for the 912-powered model, but you should keep in mind that the GT 500 is very well equipped for that price. Comparable aircraft from other American suppliers may look lower at first but you must compare them with the same equipment. If that seems too steep for your budget, you can drop the price by $7,000, to $26,995 by going with the 65-hp Rotax 582, which has proven itself for years on this design. Since the 582 GT 500 weighs 63 pounds less empty, it can climb at the same speed even with 16 less hp. Gross weight is lowered to 1,000 pounds with the 65-hp Rotax 582 but payload remains within 37 pounds of the more powerful model. A 65-hp Rotax 582-powered GT 500 can be purchased factory-built for $32,995. For a price on the Rotax 912 version, Quicksilver says to contact one of their many dealers. Of course, before comparing purchase prices you should check with a local dealer as Rotax engine prices alone can affect the final price significantly. With the euro's sharp 25% rise against the dollar in the last 18 months, the Austrian company has been forced to raise prices. Naturally, this is true for any airframe brand using imported engines. As one of America's most likely early entrants for LSA and as a model that has earned a loyal following the GT 500 deserves a close look. 1See "Pilot Report: GT 500," May 1990 Ultralight Flying! magazine. 2As an insider on the issue at the time, I observe for you that the GT 500 went through all its FAA-pilot test-flying for certification with a BRS ballistic parachute fitted. The FAA pilots reportedly wanted it left on while they test-flew the design, yet failed to certify the parachute system in the same way it did with the 65-hp Rotax 582. When the aircraft was proudly announced as the first approval under Primary Category, the parachute had to be removed. The agency later certified several models of airplane parachutes.

Published in Light Sport and Ultralight Flying

Seating	2, tandem
Empty weight	638 pounds
Gross weight	1,100 pounds ¹
Wingspan	30 feet
Wing area	155 square feet
Wing loading	7.1 pounds per square foot
Useful Load	462 pounds
Length	20 feet 6 inches
Payload (with full fuel)	366 pounds
Height	6 feet 6 inches
Fuel Capacity	16 gallons
Kit type	Fully assembled ² or kit
Build time	160-190 hours
Notes:	¹ 1,000 gross weight if powered by 65-hp Rotax 582 ² Primary Aircraft model with Rotax 582. Also under proposed Light-Sport Aircraft rule.
Standard engine	Rotax 912
Power	81 hp
Power loading	13.8 pounds per hp
Max Speed	91 mph ¹
Cruise speed	83 mph
Stall Speed	42 mph
Never exceed speed	103 mph
Rate of climb at gross	650 fpm
Takeoff distance at gross	245 feet
Landing distance at gross	390 feet
Range (powered)	295 miles (65% power)
Fuel Consumption	about 4.3 gph (65% power)
Notes:	¹ With doors installed; 88 mph with doors removed.
Standard Features	Rotax 912 (as tested), full dual controls, three-position flaps, steerable nosewheel, hydraulic brakes, parking brake, instruments: tachometer, temp, Hobbs, compass, altimeter, VSI, front and rear ASI, oil temp and pressure, 16-gallon fuel capacity in two tanks, 3-blade carbon fiber prop, electric starting, trim, adjustable seats, front and rear shoulder belt system.
Options	65-hp Rotax 582 (saves $7,000), float system, wide variety of other instruments and avionics, ballistic parachute (custom-fitted to GT 500), crop dusting system.
Construction	Aluminum tube and gusset airframe, fiberglass fairings, Dacron wing and tail coverings, steel components. U.S.-owned company.