Pilot Reports Archive - Page 7 of 33

Simple Done Right

By Dan Johnson || February 23, 2005 2 Comments

AirBorne's fully outfitted XT model is powered by a Rotax 912S engine and uses AirBorne's double-surface Streak II wing.

Dan Johnson pilots the AirBorne Outback with the Wizard wing on Antares floats near Anchorage, Alaska. The Outback is also offered with a Tundra tire option, paving the way for the aircraft to be flown off beaches and unimproved airstrips. Antares floats are constructed of marine plywood and fiberglass and have a flat surface on top, allowing pilot and passenger to walk along the floats as necessary. For information on Antares floats, visit www.Antares-us.com

The Outback's simple pod houses needed instrumentation, including AirBorne's specially built airspeed indicator showing VNE's for its three wings models, the Streak, Edge, and Wizard.

The tandem two-seat Outback's simple air frame makes it a lighter-weight machine than the dressed-out XT model, however, the aircraft's performance is equally satisfying.

AirBorne's Redback trike poses in front of the AirBorne factory near Redhead, New South Wales, Australia. The Redback offers trike flying in its simplest, lightest form.

The Outback S model (above, top) uses AirBorne's higher-performance Streak II, double-surface wing with a Rotax 582 engine.

The basic Outback is sold with AirBorne's single-surface Wizard wing.

AirBorne's Outback trike has all the essentials
Light-sport aircraft (LSA) are on the minds of many would-be sport pilots, especially now that the proposed rule has advanced from the Depart-ment of Transportation (DOT) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its last review. But the big-picture view of these airplanes is complex. Yes, we'll have sleek im-ported machines like the CT2K, G3 Mirage, SkyBoy, or SportStar, but we'll also have much more. We will also still have popular American-made machines like Zenith's CH 601, SkyStar's Kitfox, Quicksilver's MX or GT series, RANS' Coyotes, Quad City Ultralight's Challenger, and more. And we'll have trikes, powered para-chutes, gliders, airships, gyros, and who-knows-what-else. The new LSA category actually represents a virtual zoo of different aerial animals. The fiberglass or metal versions that may enter our market from Europe are but the upper end of the spectrum, in both speed and price.
Trikes, in particular, may be one of the earlier qualifying entries. They enjoy worldwide acceptance, are eas-ily repaired, and cost less. Most importantly, some models are al-ready certificated in many countries. Those certification efforts may help those trikes win some of the first ap-provals under the new FAA rule.
AirBorne Australia's Outback is one of those already certificated trikes that may be among the first to gain light-sport aircraft status. It's a simple, economical machine. While AirBorne has built hundreds of trikes of varying complexity, including the AirBorne Edge XT, which shows it can design and build a big rig with excellent attention to detail, why wouldn't you suppose AirBorne could build and certificate an equally re-fined simple trike? The lovely and exquisite XT model with its powerful four-stroke Rotax 912 engine defi-nitely looks like it should pass the LSA test, and you should feel simi-larly when you look at the Outback model from down under.
AirBorne is a company wanting to sell trikes, and more models fitting more customers is the way to do so.

Some pilots feel you can't have too much power on an aircraft. Of course, any qualified designer will tell you otherwise. The airframe simply must be matched to the powerplant, and the overall design created around a certain power range. Much like a V-8 engine in a VW Beetle, a four-cylinder, four-stroke, liquid-cooled engine powering a trike seems like, well|too much.
Indeed, after my first launch in AirBorne's XT 912, I never again took off with full power. It just isn't neces-sary, and the use of full power demands greater attention. Then, of course, there's the issue of money. A four-stroke-powered deluxe trike runs well more than $30,000-the Rotax 912S engine by itself, with its price fluctuating with the Euro, was about $13,000 when I last checked in early 2004.
Comparatively, the 65-hp, 582-powered AirBorne Outback was selling for a bit more than $18,000 in January. Given its level of quality construction, its Australian certifica-tion, the support of a respected manufacturer, and professional rep-resentation in the United States, the Outback represents a good value. Likewise, it should have no problem meeting the LSA standards.
Available for even less money- yet with the same government seal of approval-is the Redback, a simpler-yet version of the Outback using a Rotax 503 engine. It is 10 pounds lighter than the Outback and sells for less than $15,000 using the Wizard III wing.
Given the weakening dollar, Air-Borne Australia announced price increases in the new year. Before you commit your budget to any imported machine, you'll want to check the latest exchange rates and prices.
Simpler by Design

Simpler doesn't mean less capable. Nor does it mean there's been any scrimping on hardware. It may mean there's less of it, and that's not neces-sarily bad. But, generally, it means a lower-cost, two-stroke engine.
AirBorne does not feel the lower price tag of the Outback means you'll get any less value from your pur-chase. The company promotes Outback as "the most versatile trike on the market today."
The Outback's design is based on the certificated Edge X model. A 65-hp Rotax engine coupled with a lightweight instrument pod and few other adornments "allows the pilot to use the Outback in a range of dif-fering terrain depending on the options that are added," says the company.
It believes the wide-tire tundra op-tion (not evaluated for this article) allows for landing in harsher-than-normal terrain (compared to the standard undercarriage). AirBorne re-ports that trike pilots in Alaska have been using the tundra option suc-cessfully for years. That option works equally well on sand or packed snow, although snow skis are also available to fit the Outback.
AirBorne's also investigating floats as an option. It has experimented with the Outback on Krücker and Antares floats. Initially, the company has been happy with results. My own experience of flying a Wizard II wing on an AirBorne Edge trike atop Antares floats last spring in Alaska was positive. The Ukraine-made floats are imported into the United States by Antares trike designer Sergey Zozulya, who lives in Alaska.
Antares floats are built from fiber-glass and marine plywood. A hydrodynamically efficient design al-lows them to quickly get up on the step for quick takeoffs. Flown dual or solo, I found little difference in water operations. A single rudder made for secure water taxiing.

"Our floats can be mounted on any trike in minutes. They come with stainless steel, titanium, and aluminum hardware for easy installa-tion," says Sergey. "On the AirBorne Edge trike, or the Outback, Antares floats can be mounted in approxi-mately 20 minutes, and no modifications are required to the trike itself. The front yoke bushing mounts directly to the keel tube by using existing holes. The floats are at-tached to the mounting brackets with rubber bushings."
The Outback coupled with the Wizard wing is great for floats or skis as it lifts the aircraft off the ground quicker. The large, single-surface wing is also an excellent choice for a hang glider tug according to Air-Borne factory representatives, and it's been proven by towing the com-pany's own hang gliders aloft. If this interests you, AirBorne can supply all the necessary hardware.
Want Even More?
For those who want greater cross-country speeds but like the simpler trike, an Outback S model has the same features as the basic Outback, but it comes with AirBorne's new Streak II wing instead. However, the Outback S is not recommended for landing on rough terrain because of its higher landing speeds.
AirBorne's trike wing line is now focused on the Streak II wing atop the XT and the Wizard III lifting the simpler and lighter Outback and Red-back models (though you can mix and match to some extent). These two wings are dramatic comparisons, with much different speed ranges.
Regardless of which AirBorne trike or wing interests you most, all are built to demanding standards and exhibit excellent quality.

Perhaps it was merely the noise-deadening Lynx headset and intercom system AirBorne lent me, but when I taxied the AirBorne trikes, they seemed exceptionally solid. Un-like some other light aircraft, nothing creaked or groaned as I maneuvered on lumpy terrain.
In its base form, the Outback is powered with the Rotax 582 produc-ing 65 hp mated to a Rotax C-type gearbox. AirBorne likes the Brolga four-blade prop and offers an exhaust with ceramic coating, which should prevent ugly discoloration after a few hours of heat flow through the pipe.
A black instrument pod, called a "binnacle" in Australia, can hold a variety of instruments, and AirBorne includes an airspeed indicator, al-timeter, hour meter, tachometer, and exhaust gas temp and water temp gauges. More instruments are avail-able under option. (For those curious about words, binnacle is a case that supports and protects a ship's compass.)
The Outback comes with a front wheel drum brake that includes a parking brake feature plus an 11-gal-lon fuel tank. AirBorne advises that the R-582 on the Wizard burns 2.6 to 3.1 gallons per hour.
The cockpit of the Outback lacks a nose pod, but this affords you an even wider view. Given the slower Wizard wing, I enjoyed the openness of the Outback compared to the full-pod and blazing-fast XT 912 model. Seated astride the trike, an easily reached choke is to the left. One hand-operated throttle is located un-der the right knee of someone in the back seat, otherwise the forward-seat pilot uses the foot controls common to most trikes: throttle on the right, brake on the left.
hand-operated throttle is located un-der the right knee of someone in the back seat, otherwise the forward-seat pilot uses the foot controls common to most trikes: throttle on the right, brake on the left.

No Need to Streak
The Streak II wing has a trimmer and makes good use of one. The Wizard III wing does not have one nor is it needed. Its lighter pitch handling makes the extra weight, complexity, and cost of a trim system less worthwhile.
AirBorne's Streak/XT uses a 60 mph approach speed to landing. If you pull the bar in as you do when landing many trikes, you'll end up flying 80 mph. Not so on the Wizard III/Outback combination. Unless you're determined to make some long trips in your AirBorne trike, the Wizard will provide plenty of speed. It'll cruise at 45-50 mph and can carry you 200 miles if you have the time.
While AirBorne's speedy XT/Streak combination floated well down the runway, the Wizard/Outback combi-nation showed less retained energy. Of course, this is partly because the Wizard/Outback trike approaches considerably slower in the first place. If you're willing to give up some speed, you'll be rewarded with light and pleasant handling.
AirBorne has done a masterful job of lightening control pressures on its Streak II wing, but it still can't com-pare to the roll-in/roll-out ease and general lower pilot muscle require-ments of the well-refined Wizard, now in its third design iteration.
In reality, the Rotax 582-powered Outback chassis with a Wizard sin-gle-surface wing felt nearly as powerful as the awesomely powerful XT 912 with Streak II wing. This may have been because Outback's chassis weight is much less on this simpler model and the wing is a higher lift design. Outback tips the scales a full 90 pounds less than the XT.

Contrary to popular opinion, Air-Borne reports the Rotax 582 on the Outback/Wizard gets slightly better fuel economy than the XT's 912S (roughly 3 gph versus 4 gph). Of course, it depends on how you use the engine. A lightweight trike might use lots of power zooming up, down, and around the local area, whereas an XT 912 would of-ten be used for straight and level cross-country flying.
Proper and Professional
AirBorne is a company that has earned a reputation for quality hardware and well-built trikes. It has also earned approvals from the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Au-thority (CASA) for all its trike models. CASA administers a strict program, and buyers can be assured AirBorne aircraft have met a tough standard. The company proudly proclaims, "The Outback is Aus-tralian Civil Aviation Safety Authority Approved and tested to 6g positive and 3g negative under strict government control."
Part of CASA's certification pro-gram includes issuing airworthiness directives (ADs) when needed.
AirBorne's Rob Hibberd says the company puts any airworthiness di-rective up on its website and sends copies to dealers. He continues, "I would like to educate our customers to keep an eye on the website for di-rectives. It is the most efficient notice board since everyone knows someone with a computer. We were thinking about a database solution for people to update change of own-ership; however, this is less reliable as aircraft change hands and we don't get notified, especially with older planes." Rob asked that I sug-gest in pilot reviews that it is recommended to regularly keep an eye on the AirBorne website for this reason.
The company plans to reinforce this communication effort in future advertising. All products can have problems from time to time. In avi-ation, ADs affect aircraft from NASA and Boeing designs to hang gliders and ultralights. I find it most en-couraging that AirBorne (among other good companies) makes such an effort to inform its customers.

The far-away company also has an excellent representative in the United States in Wayne Bezner-Kerr, with whom I flew in the company's aircraft during Sun 'n Fun 2003. He works with dealers and assists the factory with its contact with them.
His job involves qualifying dealers for the distant company and assur-ing adequate spare parts in this country, but he also finds time to run a flight school.
AirBorne has steadily approached marketing and sales to the U.S. mar-ket, many thousands of miles from its factory. Virtually every year, rep-resentatives of the company endure long hours on airliners to attend the Sun 'n Fun and EAA AirVenture Oshkosh fly-ins, while their dealers represent them at other shows. All this effort is paying off.
The company isn't focused only on the United States either. Air-Borne sells actively into other markets around the world; for ex-ample, a good number of the company's trikes are flying in China. Another fact you may not know is that AirBorne is a world leader in the manufacture of hang gliders, like its Climax. Hang glider pilots are notoriously demanding of top performance and workman-ship.
AirBorne leaders Russ and Rick Duncan and Rob Hibberd have every reason to feel proud of their global sales success.
Down-Under Wizardry
Priced well below the average price of a new car in America, cer-tificated to a tough Aussie standard, supplied by a company with a glow-ing reputation, and with fun flight characteristics and good handling, Outback makes an excellent choice for the recreational pilot in 2004. A choice of wings allows potential buyers to find the performance range that meets their needs. How-ever, unlike nearly all three-axis machines, you could opt for two wings and essentially have two air-craft for the cost of an extra wing.
You can choose from a long list of options, load up a friend, and head to your own outback in an Outback. I'm betting you'll return with tall tales and a pleased expres-sion on your face.

Published in Experimenter Magazine

Seating	2, tandem
Empty weight	370 pounds
Gross weight	948 pounds
Wingspan	32 feet
Wing area	180 square feet
Wing loading	5.2 pounds/square foot
Length	11 feet
Height	11.5 feet
Fuel Capacity	11 gallons ¹
Notes:	¹ Calculated; tank is measured in liters.
Standard engine	Rotax 582
Power	65 hp
Power loading	14.5 pounds/hp
Cruise speed	35-50 mph
Stall Speed	30 mph
Never exceed speed	62 mph
Rate of climb at gross	750 fpm
Takeoff distance at gross	250 feet
Landing distance at gross	400 feet
Range (powered)	about 200 miles (3.5 hours)
Fuel Consumption	about 3.0 gph

AirBorne’s Outback trike has all the essentials Light-sport aircraft (LSA) are on the minds of many would-be sport pilots, especially now that the proposed rule has advanced from the Depart-ment of Transportation (DOT) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its last review. But the big-picture view of these airplanes is complex. Yes, we’ll have sleek im-ported machines like the CT2K, G3 Mirage, SkyBoy, or SportStar, but we’ll also have much more. We will also still have popular American-made machines like Zenith’s CH 601, SkyStar’s Kitfox, Quicksilver’s MX or GT series, RANS’ Coyotes, Quad City Ultralight’s Challenger, and more. And we’ll have trikes, powered para-chutes, gliders, airships, gyros, and who-knows-what-else. The new LSA category actually represents a virtual zoo of different aerial animals. The fiberglass or metal versions that may enter our market from Europe are but the upper end of the spectrum, in both speed and price. Trikes, in particular, may be one of the earlier qualifying entries.

A Civilized Kolb Sport 600

By Dan Johnson || February 23, 2005 2 Comments

The Kolb Sport 600 features a composite fuselage and all-metal wings and control surfaces. The main gear legs are heat-treated 4130 chromoly steel tubing while the front nose gear uses a 4130 chromoly gear leg and aluminum fork. Originally introduced in Canada as the Pelican Sport, the New Kolb Aircraft Company is currently selling 51-percent kits and expects the aircraft to meet ready-to-fly Special light-sport aircraft status when FAA finalizes the light-sport aircraft rule.

The aircraft flown by Dan Johnson for this report was the taildragger version of the Sport 600, which is the personal aircraft of Bruce Chesnut, president of the New Kolb Aircraft Co. The design is available as either a taildragger or tricycle gear and can be adapted to floats or skis. Currently 50 Sports are flying in the United States today while another 300 are in operation in Canada and other countries, making the aircraft a well-proven design. (Helen Melburn photo courtesy of New Kolb Aircraft Co.)

Flip-up doors ease entry and exit into the aircraft and offer great visibility to the side, as do dual Lexan skylights in the ceiling of the cockpit. Flip-up doors also ease operations on floats.

The instrument panel of the Sport 600 allows generous room for a variety of instruments to meet most pilots' requirements. This VFRequipped Sport 600 features an electronic instrumentation system (EIS) as well as standard airspeed and attitude indicators and engine monitoring gauges. Exactly what instruments a special LSA version of the Sport 600 will feature has not been finalized.

Bruce Chesnut is the president of the New Kolb Aircraft company, leading the venerable company founded by Homer Kolb into the future.

My first thought when I exited the Kolb Sport 600 after flying it was, "This is a very civilized aircraft." Is that typical of what we can expect when light-sport aircraft (LSA) become the law of the land? I sure hope so|though I also hope Part 103 ultralights and kit aircraft continue to enjoy a solid share of the overall market.
With its sleek composite exterior, all-metal wing, custom interior, international (Canadian) design heritage, and cross-country performance, the Sport 600 from New Kolb Aircraft sets a pace others may hope to follow.
My test airplane for this month's article was the personal property of New Kolb Aircraft owner Bruce Chesnut. That explains the gorgeous interior finished by a professional in Alabama: Leather-covered seats and fittings, tasteful embroidery, and beautifully formed and finished plastic covers graced the aircraft. Bruce's Sport 600 also had attitude (IFR, or instrument flight rules) instruments, which is rare in the ultralights or kit-built aircraft I typically review.
I had the occasion to fly the Pelican from Ultravia, from which the Kolb Sport 600 evolved, several years ago, and this new model is a clear improvement of the species. The Pelican flew well then, and the Sport 600 does so now, too, but the designers and the New Kolb Aircraft Co. have done a lot of refinement, and the Sport 600 is now poised to become one of the earliest LSA entries.

Before we have a closer look at this potential LSA, however, we must remind readers that the final parameters that will define what is or is not a lightsport aircraft won't be known until the final sport pilot and light-sport aircraft rules are released. At that time, manufacturers may have to make adjustments for their aircraft to comply with the definition. In addition, each manufacturer will have to show compliance with the consensus standards for that category of aircraft-that is, fixed wing, powered parachute, or trikes. Only after meeting both requirements will an aircraft officially qualify as an LSA.
The Boss's Plane
Bruce elected not to accompany me while I stalled and steep turned the airplane for an hour plus. But he gave me a good verbal checkout, and then we reviewed the aircraft's switches and knobs. There are quite a few of each in his personal Sport 600 because of the IFR instrumentation.

Getting in the luxurious cockpit requires a lean-back movement. Grab hold of the strut and door frame and lower yourself back into the pilot's seat. While still thusly braced, raise your right leg up and over the joystick. At this point you can slide back into the seat and bring in your left leg. The front edge of the seat is forward of the doorframe, and the seat bottom is long (and comfortable). If you don't use this procedure and simply sit down as I did, you'll probably have to use your arm to bring in your right leg.
Bruce told me I'd have a lot of rudder authority, and he was right. During taxi operations all maneuvers were quite precise; however, you must fishtail back and forth during taxiing because you cannot see over the nose. In fact, Bruce had offered a seat cushion to raise me, and I should have accepted. The seats were rather low, which is well suited for a tall person but too low for someone of my average height. Of course, a kit builder can make changes as needed.
The Sport 600's seats were quite comfortable, despite their aft rake on the ground. In flight they felt right, and visibility over the nose was unobstructed. The overhead skylight was tinted green, a pleasant change from the usual clear, and it cut the heat from Florida's bright sun.
Bruce did not fit his Sport 600 with an in-flight adjustable or constant-speed prop because these items won't be permitted under the proposed LSA rules. But he did equip the plane with a radio and a transponder so he could fly it cross-country to air shows.
When I started the engine and it caught rapidly, the blast of air took the door out of my hand and slapped it noisily against the underside of the wing. Bruce said he'll remedy that problem with a gas piston. This aircraft had dual fuel drains under the wings that hung down into the airstream such that the doors could strike them. Bruce said he'll also recess the drains on later models.
You could fly this aircraft with the doors off, but I'm told you wouldn't want to open them in flight, probably as the lift caused by their curved shape could overstress the hinges. However, on warm summer days, I'll bet the plane would be fun with no doors. Even with the doors on, side visibility was good, as the window is set into the top two-thirds of the door.
A long lever between the seats operates the aircraft's flaps. A detent button allows you to fix the position, but when deploying the flaps, the pulling air loads were significant. When you deploy the flaps, the ailerons also droop a bit in a ratio of about 3-to-1 to assist the flap operations. The ailerons then have some reduction in their total effect since they're drooping on both sides.

The brakes were quite strong, as advertised. And the Sport 600's full swiveling tail wheel helps you push the bird back into a hangar or tie-down spot. Although the airplane weighs 720 pounds empty, it's easy enough to handle on the ground.
I found it slightly awkward to fly with my left hand on the stick. I'd prefer my right hand on the stick and left on the throttle, but the Sport 600 locates its one throttle in the center. Cessna or Piper drivers may not notice this because they use their left hand on the yoke and right hand on the throttle. In the future I might fly the aircraft from the right seat (where I've done a lot of duty as a flight instructor). I could better finesse my landings with my right hand on the stick.
Quick Takeoff
Feeding the throttle of the Rotax 912S engine to 100 hp gives an inspiring sensation of power in this aircraft. Loaded to about 1,000 pounds (I was solo and 300 pounds under gross), the Sport 600 zoomed off the runway behind its 912S and immediately took on a well-behaved attitude. Years of working on this basic design have resulted in a finely achieved airplane.
Bruce Chesnut chose to build a taildragger -you can build the aircraft either as a taildragger or tri-gear-and the Sport 600 is said to perform and behave well on floats. I loved that my evaluation aircraft was a taildragger, yet taildraggers aren't for everyone. Bruce said he's still struggling to have consistent, perfect landings. He admitted, "If I only have a one-lurch landing, that's pretty good." He means a less than squeaky-smooth touchdown of wheels to ground with no rebound.
Bruce identified the problem that half of all pilots have with taildraggers-getting the speed down for a three-point landing means holding the nose high, which interferes with your ability to see forward, requiring a new technique right in the middle of your landing touchdown. I look to the side and feel my way down; others use peripheral vision, taking in both sides. Many just say no to taildraggers.
The other problem for pilots who struggle to land taildraggers is that they don't have happy feet. If you don't keep the rudder and tail wheel moving in short, regular applications, you could enter a ground loop. For these reasons, New Kolb Aircraft expects most sales will be the tricycle-gear Sport 600.

Bruce had encouraged me to do wheel landings and suggested that if I rebounded I should ease the stick forward. I replied that I wasn't really comfortable doing that because a known rut in South Lakeland's runway might help the airplane nose over, especially if I acted too forcefully with forward stick motion at a higher speed. Instead, I sought to do the usual slow, three-point touchdown that is the holy grail of taildragger pilots.
I bounced a little (or lurched as Bruce said) on the first effort, but I knew it didn't challenge the structure. Subsequent trials got better, mainly, I think, because I kept the speed down. On that first landing, I let my speed creep up and then had more energy to dissipate. Slower approaches with generous flaps seemed to work well. Fortunately, the Sport 600 handles well at slow speeds.
I made four landings that I thought were pretty fair. The New Kolb Aircraft folks, Bruce Chesnut and Norm Labhart, didn't exactly glow over my touchdowns, but they seemed to think they were satisfactory. With a bit of practice and patience, the technique should become well ingrained.
The Sport 600's wheelpants were cowled tightly enough that as we pushed the aircraft back into a new T-hangar with a fresh concrete apron, one wheelpant scraped slightly as we hit a lip. Tight-fitting wheelpants give me some concern on turf runways where a clod of dirt or clump of grass might lodge itself between the wheelpant and wheel, giving the same effect as firmly hitting one brake. My concern notwithstanding, I landed and taxied on sandy soil and experienced no problems.
The Sport 600's handling is nicely coordinated. I had some initial concerns about stick range. When I tested its range on the ground before flight, I clunked up against the stops rather quickly. This assures you aren't bumping into your legs. Yet in flight, I found no problem whatsoever with range. You have plenty of capacity and authority in every direction.
I was able to do mild Dutch roll coordination exercises, to about 30 degrees, almost immediately, which speaks well of control harmony. Later in the flight, after gaining more familiarity, I did rolls that were 45 to 50 degrees. In these steeper Dutch rolls, I was still a little sloppy in pitch control, but I had no trouble rolling the nose about the longitudinal axis without initiating a turn.
Steep turns went very well with about 5000 rpm; I never needed to add more power, which is common in other designs. The Sport 600 let me perform 70- degree steep turns and was well behaved in them. The airplane actually wanted to gain altitude at this power setting (at well under gross).

Cross-Country Cruiser
Transportation is a new aspect that LSA will offer recreational pilots. With a 132 mph maximum straight and level cruise speed limit, you can fly faster than most Cessna 172s as well as a bunch of other so-called commuter aircraft. This quality sets LSA apart from Part 103 ultralights, which are not about transport. While ultralights are truly for fun flying, you might rationalize that LSA may have some transportation use.
I found cruising in the Kolb Sport 600 was most comfortable at about 110 mph (corrected), with a power setting below 5000 rpm. Fuel economy is quite good, and you'll still be moving in triple digits. Noise and vibration seemed especially subdued at 4700-4800 rpm. At this fuelefficient level, fuel consumption may be 2.5 gph, giving a range of more than nine hours. Before slowing down at the far end of downwind, I also used this setting/speed in the landing pattern, so it's easy to set power and leave it alone for a long flight.
At flat-out power, I recorded a speed of 120 mph indicated. As I constantly repeat, on-board ASIs (airspeed indicators) are often wrong. Bruce told me that based on flights with other aircraft, he believes the instrument is off by about 12 mph at that speed, which, conveniently, means the Sport 600 can hit 132 mph, the exact speed limit specified under FAA's proposed LSA rule.
During another test run, I observed 112 mph at 5200 rpm. Assuming the same error percentage, this translates to about 124 mph of cruise. This is the setting at which Bruce often flies, earning a respectable cruise that could help the Sport 600 cover a range of 800 miles in six-and-a-half hours.
Typically, I operated below Bruce's favorite setting of 5200 rpm because I was in no hurry, and I liked the smoother, quieter operation. Bruce said the Rotax 912S will run all day at 5500 rpm, but he indicated he can feel the stress on the engine at that power setting. At full throttle I saw about 5600 rpm, at which point the electronic instrument system (EIS) began to flash at me suggesting I had reached an overspeed condition. Different props can change all this power-setting talk, but for LSA it is likely all planes will come with the same optimized prop.
On short approach and in ground effect at a familiar airfield, I could sense the design produces a good glide angle. Of course, the wingspan is wide for the wing area, yielding an aspect ratio of about 9, and the wing uses no interplane struts, so drag is minimized.

Speaking of efficiency, Bruce lent me his Bose Aviation X headset with a noisecanceling feature that was simply outstanding. The headsets were so quiet I almost wondered if the engine was still running. Of course, at $995, they'd better be pretty good.
The Sport 600 was a little fast for low-over-the-field flying, which I love to do in conventional ultralights. However, the day I was flying Bruce's airplane the air was quite bumpy from thermal formation, so I may not have experienced its true potential. Even with a couple notches of flaps, I was still traveling about 60 mph, and that simply didn't feel comfortable down very low.
Good Manners
Stalls in the Sport 600 had very benign characteristics. I wasn't able to do poweroff stalls at idle thrust, as this engine was idling a bit high. But in low-power stalls, separation appeared to come at 40-41 mph. Bruce indicated the ASI should be corrected at this speed by 2-3 mph, which yields a stall of 42-44 mph, a near-perfect LSA fit.
In some stalls, I thought I noticed some tendency to fall on a wing. The airplane never really did so, but to test my theory, I did a few stalls with a more aggressive entry. Though the nose got very high, the Sport 600 broke only modestly and always straight ahead.
When I did a near-full-power stall, the nose raised so high that it started wandering, and I chose to back off rather than push for a break. I don't believe I would have reached actual stall, but I wasn't up for getting unnecessarily aggressive. No ballistic recovery parachute had been installed in this aircraft, and as vice-president of corporate communications for BRS (Ballistic Recovery Systems), I highly favor their use.
I attempted accelerated stalls, and again got the nose rather high, but no clear break was observed. When I got close to this edge, the Sport 600 cooperatively wanted to right itself.

I was able to slow fly the Sport 600 into the higher 4000-rpm range with a couple notches of flaps and consistently hold speed just above stall. I did not have to add power to achieve slow flight, which again suggests an efficient design.
How About You, Sport?
The Sport 600's composite body and most of its aluminum material come to Kolb from Canadian-based Ultravia Aero Int'l Inc. Kolb then integrates the pieces into a full kit. Bruce Chesnut confirmed the company's plans to offer a ready-tofly Special LSA.
New Kolb Aircraft believes the Sport 600 will be approved under European JAR-VLA (Joint Airworthiness Requirements- Very Light Aircraft) rules before LSA is introduced. Thereby, they expect to be one of the first Special LSAs on the market along with RANS, Zenair, and Quicksilver. Bruce made a hand gesture about 2-feet high and said the company would have a document stack "this big" in readiness to meet the ASTM standard being created. Today, you can buy a kit Sport 600 for $34,000 with a Rotax 912, 80-hp engine. To get the 912S and 100 hp, you'll need another $1,500. Those who want all the kick they can get can choose the Rotax 914 engine, but that'll increase the aircraft's cruise speed to 142 mph above the LSA limits. And, it will cost them $38,500 to complete the aircraft.
Naturally, the attitude instruments and professionally customized interior are not included in the base kit prices. But New Kolb's kit comes with lots of factory work already accomplished. For the whole list, go to its website; I think you'll be impressed. Builders should expect around 900 to 1,000 hours to complete a kit.
It's likely a fully built, ready-to-fly Kolb Sport 600 will cost in the neighborhood of $59,995, considering American labor and Canadian license fees. An experienced businessman in the food industry, Bruce sees a $60,000 price ceiling for ready-to-fly light-sport aircraft. Whether he's right or wrong, time will tell. You'll raise the tab a few thousand more if you equip your Sport 600 like Bruce's and include costlier items like floats or an emergency parachute.
About 50 Sport 600s are flying today, most originating with the Canadian designer. Ultravia Aero Int'l Inc., our northern neighbor, has built more than 300 planes, all variations based on the Pelican, so this is a well-established aircraft design. Add to that the respected name of Kolb Aircraft in the United States, and you have a formula that should make Sport 600s proliferate under the proposed LSA rules. Kolb believes the orders will flow when the rule is announced, and I'm inclined to agree.

Published in Experimenter Magazine

Seating	2, side-by-side
Empty weight	720 pounds
Gross weight	1,320 pounds ¹
Wing area	117.3 square feet
Wing loading	11.2 pounds/square foot
Useful Load	600 pounds
Length	19.9 feet
Payload (with full fuel)	462 pounds
Cabin Interior	46 inches at elbow
Height	8.5 feet
Fuel Capacity	23 gallons
Baggage area	Full cabin width aft of seats
Notes:	¹ The notice of proposed rulemaking for the sport pilot and light-sport arircraft rules listed the maximum gross takeoff weight for LSAs at 1,232 pounds. EAA and others suggested that weight should be raised to 1,320 pounds, which is the current gross weight listed for the Sport 600. The final weight to be allowed won't be known until FAA releases the final rule. At that time, New Kolb Aircraft Co. may revise the gross takeoff weight, if necessary.
Standard engine	Rotax 912S, (80-115 hp)
Power	100 hp
Power loading	13.2 pounds/hp
Max Speed	132 mph
Cruise speed	100-125 mph
Stall Speed (Flaps)	44 mph
Never exceed speed	155 mph
Rate of climb at gross	1,350 fpm
Takeoff distance at gross	300 feet
Landing distance at gross	400 feet
Range (powered)	750+ miles
Fuel Consumption	3.5 gph

My first thought when I exited the Kolb Sport 600 after flying it was, “This is a very civilized aircraft.” Is that typical of what we can expect when light-sport aircraft (LSA) become the law of the land? I sure hope so|though I also hope Part 103 ultralights and kit aircraft continue to enjoy a solid share of the overall market. With its sleek composite exterior, all-metal wing, custom interior, international (Canadian) design heritage, and cross-country performance, the Sport 600 from New Kolb Aircraft sets a pace others may hope to follow. My test airplane for this month’s article was the personal property of New Kolb Aircraft owner Bruce Chesnut. That explains the gorgeous interior finished by a professional in Alabama: Leather-covered seats and fittings, tasteful embroidery, and beautifully formed and finished plastic covers graced the aircraft. Bruce’s Sport 600 also had attitude (IFR, or instrument flight rules) instruments, which is rare in the ultralights or kit-built aircraft I typically review.

Ultralight Trainer from RANS

By Dan Johnson || June 30, 2004 3 Comments

NOSE JOB - As with the later single-place S-17 Stingers, the S-18 Stinger II offers a rounded fiberglass nose pod and sweeping windscreen. The front seat is well protected from wind blast.

FULLY FLAPPED - While the single-place S-17 Stinger did not have flaps (the flap-like section was fixed in position), the S-18 Stinger has large flaps that slow your approach.

INSTRUMENT POD - With typically gorgeous RANS factory finish, an instrument pod holds a cluster of gauges close to you for easy use. Note the brake on the front side of the joystick.

WEE WINGS - The small panels of smoked plastic on either side of the windscreen redirects enough airflow to remove a slight tail shake.

SMILIN' JEFF - I'd say RANS is lucky to have Jeff Hudson as their representative at the factory store in Florida. Here he shows off the super-sturdy seat belt system.

LEVERS & KNOBS - Everything is close to the front seat pilot; the flap lever is on the pilot's left side. Slightly inside of this is the throttle (curved tube) followed by trim (round knob). Flaps employ a push-button detent system.

TOUGH TAIL - Simple but smooth, the S-18 tail is cable-braced and tautly covered with a slip-on Dacron finish.

LASHED TAIL - In typical RANS fashion, you slip a Dacron cover over the tail skeleton and lash it (see lower edge of rudder). This is a well refined system that makes covering much faster.

BIGGER STINGER - RANS introduced their 2-seater in the spring of 2001, showing a tandem version that resembles the single-place S-17, though it (understandably) looks larger.

“RANS is back!”
said many ultralight enthusiasts when the company offered their production version of the S-17 Stinger in September, 1999. Now the Kansas company has reaffirmed their commitment to the ultralight community by offering an enlarged S-17 with an added, tandem seat. Welcome to the S-18 Stinger II.
Of course this isn’t the first ultralight trainer from RANS. They continue to sell their S-12XL Airaile 2-seater. Others may observe that the S-6 Coyote 2-place can be built to operate within the limits of the Part 103 training exemption.
But when RANS first talked about their single-place Stinger – the prototype model that was never marketed – the company had been going in another direction. In those days the apparent darling of the company was the S-16 Shekari that is more accurately described as competition for Van’s RV series than as an ultralight. RANS president Randy Schlitter was able to see that ultralights didn’t simply grow up and become “light aircraft.” And, since Schlitter wants a share of the ultralight community, the S-17 single-place Stinger was his 1999 entry to entice ultralight flyers to the RANS brand name. The plan is evidently working well enough that his company has now added a 2-place version of the Stinger previously offered.
The Making of a Stinger

Randy Schlitter says the original 1997 Stinger prototype was “kinda neat to fly.” He offered to let me fly it but I declined – it would never reach the market. Instead, Schlitter and his team started from scratch.
The original prototype Stinger was a tractor engine, short-span wing, high boom, tri-gear aircraft that proved to be a fairly hot-performing ultralight. Schlitter also indicated it could easily tip and touch a wing to the ground if your taxiing technique wasn’t good. Neither the production S-17 Stinger single-seater nor the S-18 Stinger 2-place exhibit this clumsiness.
I flew the S-17 Stinger barely a week after its maiden flight on September 10, 1999. On a mild fall evening in Hays, Kansas, I found myself aloft in the first RANS ultralight in many years.
While the first Stinger had no windscreen and no nose pod, RANS changed the production model they brought to shows. By the spring of 2000, the revised Stinger sported a nose pod and windscreen, though these remain optional items.
The production Stinger and the 2-seat S-18 Stinger II are pusher engine, longer span, low boom, taildraggers with more predictable handling qualities. Both models share the Stinger name and bumblebee logo.
RANS said their new 2-seater was nearly ready in 2000. But it was not until spring 2001 that they felt ready to show the new S-18 model. As always, the Kansas leader presents beautifully-done aircraft and the 2001 Stinger 2-place was no exception.

The S-18 Stinger II can operate under the training exemption to Part 103. At 478 pounds of base empty weight, you’ve got room for a few carefully-selected options to stay under 496 pounds.
The S-18 Stinger makes use of the wings and tail of the S-12XL Airaile, though RANS says it has a unique look and feel owing to its tailwheel design and tandem seating.
Equipping the S-18 Stinger
The S-18 Stinger II evaluated was only equipped with a pull starter at the rear seat (apparently aimed at being operated by the instructor). Neither is a remote primer routed for use while seat-belted. Therefore, in the S-18 you cannot perform an in-air restart. Some have asked RANS to route a pull starter to the front seat of the S-18, especially when used as a trainer.
Presently, all Stinger models use a pull-start system that is done while standing near the rear seat, though customers can install electric starting. My test S-18 was equipped only with a pull starter that an instructor can use after first seating his student. Instructors must also add a primer control if they add remote pull starting or an electric starter.
Our test S-18’s in-flight trim proved to be completely incapable in the air, a linkage problem. The control cable didn’t fit into a guide well and so airborne use of trim was ineffective. Based on a casual inspection, it won’t take much to remedy.

The S-17 Stinger single-place had no trim and didn’t need it much. The S-18 Stinger II’s lever is conveniently located at the base of the pilot’s seat. Trim is of more value on this tandem trainer but, despite the nonworking control, in an hour’s flying I noticed little fatigue keeping the speed where I desired using stick control alone.
Where the S-17 Stinger has a fixed trailing edge on the inner half of each wing, the S-18 uses conventional flaps. The control surfaces weren’t needed on the single-seater but they play a training role for students and may be needed when operating at the heavier weights of the S-18 Stinger II.
That first tipsy original prototype Stinger used a twist-grip throttle similar to the one on the Aero-Lite 103. Both the S-17 and S-18 now use a common lever throttle, thank goodness. Most ultralighters will be happier with the newer one; twist grips aren’t universally accepted. The lever is repeated on the 2-place Stinger, linking throttles at both seats.
Almost a “Cabin”
The S-18 Stinger II uses the same seat structure as the single-place S-17. This means simple and light but surprisingly comfortable, benefiting from RANS’ long work with recumbent bicycles. The mesh seat back allows better ventilation plus you can remove and wash the seat bottom covers.
Each S-18 Stinger II features seat adjustments for both the seat back and the seat cushion. The seat cushion moves fore and aft through a 4-hole, 4-inch range while the seat back adjusts the angle through 10 different positions. Different sized pilots can fit into the S-18, which speaks well for its use as an ultralight trainer.

Randy Schlitter is continuing to use his cinching double lap belt system from the single-place Stinger. These heavy-duty restraints provide assurance in an ultralight as open as this one. Both students and pilots used to enclosures will appreciate the security. You can snug this belt so much that you could risk cutting off circulation to your legs. The S-18 Stinger II installs such a cinching restraint system at both seats.
The S-17 Stinger single-seater had no flaps. The S-18 adds the control and places the flap handle outside your left thigh. The control is a push-button detent configuration. It proved to be a reach for me when I tried to return it to the full- down position. And to first pull the flap lever from an undeployed position I had to loosen my left side shoulder belt. According to RANS Florida rep Jeff Hudson, Schlitter may move the lever aft a few inches. Hudson also suggested the angle may be changed to make reaching the full-down position easier. No entry conflict would occur as you usually step in from the right side, opposite the throttle.
The 2-place Stinger continues the nose and windscreen arrangement of the single-seat S-17, though both models remain very open-air ultralights. While the aft seat in the S-18 is under the wing, the front seat occupant is completely in front of the wing.
If you like either Stinger model, you’d probably like the Drifter, Talon, or Toucan with their far-forward seating. Perhaps an acquired taste, these ultralights bring the best view in aviation. Nonetheless, many ultralight pilots and a lot of other pilots prefer some kind of enclosure.
At the S-17 Stinger’s cruise speeds of 40 mph or less, the open cockpit is a plus. However, the S-18 Stinger II is obviously faster and constant wind will wear even hardy pilots.
The S-18 Stinger has a $995 windscreen option if you buy it with the airframe kit purchase; wait till later and you’ll pay $1,200. However, the S-18 comes standard with a fiberglass nose pod connected to an aluminum belly pan plus a short windscreen. I didn’t fly the short screen model, but I’ll bet I’d like it. Other open-cockpit enthusiasts may feel similarly.

Both Stinger models seat the front-seat pilot forward of the wing with a center-mounted joystick and throttle to the pilot’s left, leaving that majority of right-handers with the joystick in their preferred grip.
The 2-place S-18 got rid of the ill-fitting stirrup footrests of the S-17 single-seater. An aluminum channel on the belly pan floor now gives you a place to rest your heel as your toes operate the rudder pdeals.
The S-17’s instruments are located on a forward panel between the rudder pedals. Switches on that panel were too far to reach with the seat belts tightened, but on the S-18 instruments are located in a pod between your calves. Positioned several inches rearward, readability and access to knobs is better. The S-18 Stinger’s engine switches are at the joystick base, protected against a brushing movement that might accidentally kill the engine. The same switches are overhead in the single-seater.
Schlitter says he’ll increase the curvature of the windscreen, including raising the height of the windscreen over the front seat; currently it’s something of a tight squeeze. He emphasized that it won’t be any higher as it meets the wing’s leading edge.
All Stinger models use the full swivel tailwheel designed by Schlitter; it is not a Matco product. Ground handling is easier on all Stingers because of it.
Flying the Stingers

The S-17 Stinger needed taller main landing gear to help elevate the nose further for landing touchdown. Before modifications were made, it was common to touch the tailwheel first as I did in my flight aboard the first production Stinger single-seater. The S-18 Stinger II solves that problem with a slightly raised deck angle and larger main gear tires.
It was recommended that I approach at 50 mph in the S-18, but this was barely sufficient to retain energy. I landed on the gear rather firmly one time when I got too slow. Bumping up to 55 mph, I had good landings and the gear position and deck angle seemed better.
The S-18 Stinger uses a stout slab of metal for main gear, robust enough that RANS will want to speak to an owner ordering another such part to determine if other damage may be present.
The flaps on the S-18 had the effect of lowering the nose once speed bled off. Considering it has no side area, slips were fairly effective in the S-18. Descent rate was increased enough to be useful in landing approaches.
The S-18 Stinger’s rudder pedals were a little stiff; it was a new plane, they might loosen. Contrarily the joystick was nice and fluid. The combination made for some control disharmony – though the flight qualities were balanced well enough.
This test S-18 Stinger had a slight right turn in it. All during normal flight, a little left rudder was needed. Also, 720° steep turns went better to the left then to the right, possibly due to that same right-turn characteristic. However, the Stinger II held altitude with only 5,000 rpm during steep turns, a fairly low number for a 2-seat ultralight, suggesting better efficiency.

My Dutch roll coordination exercises went well to fairly steep angles. However, it took vigorous effort on the rudder pedals compared to the joy stick.
Lots of general aviation pilots are accustomed to small-movement control motions at speeds over 100 mph. To many of them, typical ultralight controls seem sluggish though this sensation is probably tied to slower flying speeds than any shortcoming of the control system.
Neither of the Stinger models are fast-handling aircraft, but I was never in doubt and felt I could handle the plane in fairly strong crosswinds.
Two-Place is Much Faster
In my evaluations, I reached a maximum speed in level flight of about 90 mph (indicated). The single-place Stinger flew slower, at more common ultralight speeds. You may not want to fly either Stinger across the U.S., but the 2-place S-18 cruises in a speed realm adequate for shorter cross-country flights.
RANS quotes normal cruise speeds at 70 mph in the 50-hp Rotax 503-powered S-18 Stinger but closer to 80 mph in the 65-hp Rotax 582-powered version with optional windscreen and nose pod.

I performed low-over-the-field evaluations in the S-18. I flew with full flaps deployed and noted a speed of about 50 mph. With flaps fully retracted that speed increased to about 55 mph.
Sink rate in the 2-place S-18 was close to 500 fpm, which is an improvement over some other RANS designs I’ve flown. Even with some thermal activity disturbing my measurements, the highest descent rate I saw was 700 fpm.
Stalls in the S-18 2-place measured 35-40 mph, according to the ASI, usually occurring in the higher end of that range. Stalls exhibited no serious break, and power-on stalls continued climbing at about 500 fpm on the 65-hp Rotax 582-powered test plane. Without a break it was easy to tell onset of stall by a distinct prop noise. Stalls in the S-18 also showed no tendency to fall off on a wing.
In order to remove a slight shake from the tail, Schlitter created small vortex generators on the edges of the windscreen (see photo). However, I still noticed a modest shuddering primarily during takeoff, suggesting it’s a low-speed event. My tape-recorded notes did not reflect this movement at higher speeds.
Longitudinal stability – push/pull-and-release – in the S-18 was good, recovering after only a few oscillations. Naturally, like most high thrust line ultralights, the S-18 nosed over on power-up and nosed up when I backed off abruptly.
I found almost no adverse yaw in the S-17 Stinger. When I applied significant stick movement with no rudder input, the single-place Stinger hesitated only briefly then turned in the desired direction. The 2-seat model continued this good trend, though it had a little more hesitation.

Which One for You?
The base S-18 Stinger II airframe kit with Rotax 503 mount but no engine or exhaust is $13,640 at the end of 2001. For a Rotax 582 airframe and mount, add about $1,000. The 2-place Stinger comes with several instruments including ASI, dual EGTs, dual CHTs, and digital rpm/hour meter. Tundra tires are also part of the base price. The 50-hp Rotax 503 dual carb engine sells for $2,860 with exhaust. With airframe kit it’ll total $16,500.
If you want the Rotax 582 and some instruments in the form I evaluated, the S-18 Stinger sells for a shade over $19,000 in kit form. The 81-hp Rotax 912 4-stroke engine is also an option.
Those with extra funds can add electric start for $700 though you must be careful weight-wise if you intend to fly under the training exemption. The efficient avionics panel costs $175 and a painted boom to match the fuselage sells for $100, though the welded steel fuselage comes painted as part of the base price.
A couple of new accessories have been added since I flew the S-18. RANS now offers some smoothly contoured saddle bags that lash to the welded fuselage aft of the rear seat on either side. The 3-cubic-foot bags are rated for 30 pounds each, have a Lexan insert to hold a smoothly curved shape, and sport a shoulder-carrying strap. Cost: $100 for one or $195 for two. Regular 2-seat operators may want another smaller bag that mounts between the seats and can hold a Comtronics intercom. You need such bags as the cockpit is otherwise totally open.
Since its spring debut in 2001, RANS has earned FAA approval for a 51% kit of the S-18 Stinger II as well as for the quick-build option. Build time is low, says RANS, quoting 200 hours for the standard kit “due to low parts count.” The quick-build kit takes 100 hours “or less,” says the company. With the quick-build kit, you get wings, tail group, aileron, and flaps assembled, covered, and clear coated for an additional $4,600 over the standard kit. Crating is also included at no extra charge, a value typically worth around $500.
To offer another sales outlet than is common for a factory, RANS drafted an arrangement with ultralight veteran Jeff Hudson. He operates factory-owned aircraft from his Sebring, Florida home base. Inventory currently includes an S-18, an S-6 Super Coyote, and an S-12 Super Airaile. Hudson provides training and demonstrations and attends airshows for the company. He will also aid the factory parts shop by helping determine what parts customers need. Then RANS will drop ship the items directly to their customers, freeing up factory personnel to allow faster deliveries.
If you liked the S-17 Stinger but want a second seat for training or a friend, the S-18 Stinger II should satisfy nicely.

Published in Light Sport and Ultralight Flying

Seating	2, tandem
Empty weight	478 ¹
Gross weight	920 pounds
Wingspan	31 feet
Wing area	152 square feet
Wing loading	6.1 pounds per square foot
Length	22 feet
Height	6.75 feet
Kit type	Assembly kit of Quick-Build kit
Build time	200 or 100 hours
Notes:	1. as published with standard Rotax 503
Standard engine	Rotax 503
Power	50 hp at 6,500 rpm
Power loading	17.7 pounds per hp ¹
Cruise speed	70 mph
Never exceed speed	90 mph
Rate of climb at gross	500 fpm ¹
Takeoff distance at gross	330 feet
Landing distance at gross	200 feet
Notes:	1. as published with standard Rotax 503
Standard Features	Dual center-mounted joysticks, dual rudder pedals, dual throttles, push-button lever flaps, trim, heavy-duty 4-point seat belt, hand-lever brakes with parking brake feature, nose pod, short windscreen.
Options	Extended-to-the-wing windscreen, 65-hp Rotax 582 or 81-hp Rotax 912 engine, complete instrument package, electric start, saddle bags, quick-build option to cut build time in half, custom colors, factory-painted boom, second 9-gallon fuel tank.
Construction	Aluminum tubing wings, tail, and boom; welded steel fuselage; Dacron® sailcloth wing and tail covering.

Design

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

Pros - RANS is known for distinctive designs and the S-18 Stinger II continues the trend. Follows closely in the tradition of the Drifter with front pilot seated ahead of wing. Nose and sweeping windscreen please the eye (and many buyers). Very sturdy welded steel fuselage. Two- seater lands even better than the S-17 single. Long established company, an industry leader.

Cons - Wide open cockpit even with windscreen and pod; not everyone will like it. Tandem seating is not preferred by many instructors. While the same basic design as the single-seater, the S-18 is 220 pounds heavier on 25 more square feet of wing; it requires more attention.

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 on the S-18; were not on the single-seat S-17. Parking brake on the joy stick-mounted lever which slows both wheels fairly effectively. Trim is easily reached below your left thigh. Good engine access, in fact, most parts of the S-18 are open to inspection - a good thing overlooked on more enclosed ultralights.

Cons - No in-flight starting; only option is electric or starting before being seated (though factory has been asked to add remote pull starting). Trim was completely ineffective on my test flight (a rigging error only). Nondifferential braking.

Cockpit/Cabin

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

Pros - Excellent instrument pod; good access and readability, making good use of space. All controls within an easy grip (though I stretched a bit to fully retract the flaps). Seat backs adjust through a good range as does fore/aft position. Seats look small but felt fine for an hour and a quarter flight. Windscreen worked well in front seat.

Cons - Entry is trickier than the single-seat S-17; you have to duck around the (optional) windscreen. Seats are rather minimalist for some large Americans (though you're held securely with those enormous seat belts). Rear seat is said to be quite windy. Rear seat has no engine controls (except throttle).

Ground Handling

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

Pros - Improved clearance over the single-place S-17 thanks partly to larger tires; good for most off-field landings. Slab main gear felt strong, good for training duty. RANS-brand full swivel tailwheel is excellent. Superb visibility in nearly all directions from front seat. Brakes proved reasonably effective.

Cons - Rear seat visibility is restricted; best occupied by an experienced instructor or a passenger. Heavier S-18 brakes slower than S-17. Turn radius is wide until you break the full swiveling tailwheel loose. Though this is a docile taildragger, they all take more attention than tri-gear.

Takeoff/Landing

Qualities; Efficiency; Ease; Comparative values.

Pros - Takeoff and landing visibility doesn't get any better (especially without the optional windscreen). Approach speeds can be slow for smaller fields. Flaps help make steep approaches without speed buildup; lever works well with easily felt position detents. Clearance shouldn't be a problem except on very rough fields.

Cons - Takeoff roll is a little long even with the 65-hp Rotax 582 (50-hp Rotax 503 not test-flown). Slips are less effective than on ultralights with more side area.

Control

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

Pros - Adverse yaw was moderate (though with more hesitation than the S-17 single-place). Reversing 45° bank turns went well to good angles. Higher wing loading of the 2-place S-18 produced crisp handling response. Handling in crosswind conditions should pose no problem.

Cons - Rudder pedals were rather stiff on the test S-18 Stinger II while the stick was nice and fluid, making controls feel less harmonious. Test aircraft had a slight turn in it which can be remedied by rigging adjustment.

Performance

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

Pros - Climb was strong in the 582 model; RANS offers the 912 as well. Cruise is speedy, and 80 mph speed is normal, says the factory (I flew it a little slower but that may just be my style). Sink rate averaged about 500 fpm, a respectable number. Even in steep turns, the Stinger held altitude with 5,000 rpm, another reasonable figure.

Cons - Equipped with the base 50-hp Rotax 503 model, climb could be a bit weak. Sold without windscreen, which reduces top speed 10 mph. Fuel consumption won't win any awards.

Stability

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

Pros - All stalls showed benign qualities with no significant breakthrough; full-power stalls kept climbing 500 fpm (with 65-hp Rotax 582, as tested). Longitudinal stability tests were positive. Lateral stability was good. Steep turns held bank angle easily (even without adding excess power). Seat restraint system is the most robust in ultralight aviation.

Cons - Despite the little vortex generators on the windscreen, the tail still had a mild shudder on takeoff, a slow-speed event I didn't notice at cruise. Adverse yaw exhibited more lag than the S-17 (though still quite good). Throttle response noses over the S-18, typical of high-thrust ultralights.

Overall

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

Pros - RANS' price list makes it easy with "minimum flyable" and "nicely equipped" prices: $16,900 with 50-hp 503 and some instruments or $19,335 with 65-hp 582 and a full panel. FAA 51% approval received. RANS is one of the most secure businesses in ultralight aviation.

Cons - Quick-build kit adds $4,600 expense to cut build time in half (but still may be worth it to many who prefer flying to building). Design is similar in many ways to more proven Drifter (though with desirable differences). Watch options to stay within Part 103 exemption if 582-powered; climb with the 503 may be too weak in some locations.

“RANS is back!” said many ultralight enthusiasts when the company offered their production version of the S-17 Stinger in September, 1999. Now the Kansas company has reaffirmed their commitment to the ultralight community by offering an enlarged S-17 with an added, tandem seat. Welcome to the S-18 Stinger II. Of course this isn’t the first ultralight trainer from RANS. They continue to sell their S-12XL Airaile 2-seater. Others may observe that the S-6 Coyote 2-place can be built to operate within the limits of the Part 103 training exemption. But when RANS first talked about their single-place Stinger – the prototype model that was never marketed – the company had been going in another direction. In those days the apparent darling of the company was the S-16 Shekari that is more accurately described as competition for Van’s RV series than as an ultralight. RANS president Randy Schlitter was able to see that ultralights didn’t simply grow up and become “light aircraft.” And, since Schlitter wants a share of the ultralight community, the S-17 single-place Stinger was his 1999 entry to entice ultralight flyers to the RANS brand name.

Bautek Twister

By Dan Johnson || May 31, 2004 Leave a Comment

Rear view of the Twister

The Twister in flight

The Twister airframe with a clear view of the crossbar truss system.

Crossbar mid-section close-up.

The Twister swivel tip. Note the cable which routes around the pulley to pull up the tip.

The Twister wing tip.

Model of Bautek's safety pitch system.

When most Americans think of a large foreign glider manufacturer, they may be quick to name Moyes, Airwave, Aeros or even La Mouette. But most would fail to mention Bautek, Germany's main manufacturer. This oversight may be understandable since Bautek has spent little effort marketing in the U.S. They have been content to serve the large European market which has historically been of greater volume than we could claim, despite our larger population.
All that is changing. Bautek has a new competitive topless glider aptly named (as we shall see) the Twister. Its performance is good and some special engineering renders it most desirable in terms of safety. In addition, the strong dollar in relation to European currency makes the price attractive enough to interest those pilots looking for a top performing, safe topless glider.
I took delivery of the Twister at Monte Cucco, Italy where I flew it in the Pre-World meet. Then the factory graciously let me keep it for another two weeks of peripatetic flying in the Alps where I tested its mettle in non-competition mode. This report is the result of some 30 hours of airtime in widely varying conditions and regimens from light air scratching to high-wind racing.

BAUTEK'S BACKGROUND
Before we talk about the glider, let me fill you in on the company, Bautek. They have been in business since 1971, developing parts for airplanes and sailplanes. In 1981 they designed and produced their first hang glider, the Fafnir. This wing was followed by the Saphir, Zephir, Pamir (all three reviewed previously in Hang Gliding), Milan, Milan Racer, Sunrise, Astir and Twister. All of these gliders except the Milans and the Twister were bowsprit gliders now you recognize them!
The Bautek name comes from the German word bau which means construction and technik. The company principles are the Zimmer twins, Horst and Harold. Horst is the engineer; Harold is the business whiz. Bautek is near Trier, in the Moselle wine country of southwest Germany next to the Luxembourg border. The factory is a large new building constructed specially to build gliders efficiently.
GLIDER PERFORMANCE
Let us dispense with performance factors right away, for although performance is of utmost importance we have many other items of interest to report on the Twister.
My experience on the Twister indicated that it climbed extremely well. Both in the Pre-Worlds and later free flying (with as many as 50 gliders at Laragne, France) I was not outclimbed when I was sharing the same thermal patch. The Twister's thermal climbability is what I would claim to be its strong point.
At normal glide speeds I was also gliding with the tight comp gliders. I maintained the glider in stock configuration, so at higher speeds I could not keep up with the gliders with lowered sprogs. But if we compare the stock Twister to other stock gliders, I believe we would find equity.
The Twister handling is also one of its fine points. The glider is tuned without a lot of sail and batten tension, similar to the Laminar. This setup promotes good handling and the ability to slow down well in thermals. The VG system has lots of travel with three long pulls required to go full-tight. The result is the best of both worlds good loose VG handling and drum-tight maxed-out glide with a tight VG.
Harold told me they worked for a year to perfect the Twister's handling by altering tube flexibility, sail tension, tip twist, airfoil profiles, batten tension and crossbar holdback configuration. The glider has a curved down basetube to let you hang lower and a keel pylon to make your hang point higher. With all of these factors, Bautek believes they have found the best compromise of handling, performance and landing ease for the Twister.
One last point on performance: the Twister was flown this year by factory pilot Jobst Baeumer in the German Nationals. He won the meet against top pilots such as Bob Baier and World Champion Guido Gehrman.
THE BAUTEK FEATURES
Now comes the fun part, at least for us design buffs. But even pilots who don't know the difference between an upright and a downtube will find interest here, for some unique safety features are highlighted.
The Twister has an automatic pitch stability system which is a welcome feature on a topless glider. Here's how it works: If turbulence unloads your side flying wires, or if your glider is pitched nose down to the point the side wires off-load, the tip struts automatically twist upward. This action simulates reflex bridles (found on kingposted gliders) kicking in or an up elevator control on an airplane.
This automatic twist device, known as the Safety Pitch System, works with a lever attached to the side cables which is activated by a spring concealed inside the crossbar. When the side cables go slightly slack, the spring rotates the lever which pulls a cable routed to the tip struts and configures to tilt them upward. Careful testing has shown the system to work effectively at realistic flying speeds and weights.
Another system working in a similar manner is connected to the hang strap to activate the tail on Guggenmos' RCS. The Zimmers tried such a system, but felt that the side cables are more sensitive to potential pitchover events. You can see the Twister's tip twisting trick by rotating the glider's nose up and down in the wind. When the wings lift the twist goes down; when the nose is dropped so the side wires go slack, the twist increases.
The next item of interest is the crossbar itself. It is not carbon as is the crossbar of most topless gliders. The Zimmers checked with their sailplane manufacturer associates and found out how critical the construction and inspection of carbon was. They opted to make a crossbar out of aluminum using a truss system. A truss system consists of a main compression beam and a series of supports designed to keep the compression beam in column or handle tension loads. Most bridges that aren't suspended bridges are truss systems, for a truss is the lightest form of construction for a given load requirement.
The truss arrangement in the Twister consists of a couple sets of outriggers and cables that stiffen the crossbar much like the mast of a sailboat. The result is a crossbar just as strong and light as the cantilever carbon ones at less than half the price. In addition, this crossbar is easier to inspect for damage compared to a carbon spar and the Zimmers feel this is an important advantage when it comes to the resale of the glider.
Another interesting feature on the Twister is the upcurved plastic tips. These tips are similar to those seen on the Stealth, but developed independently. In fact, the Zimmers called on their friends at the Mercedes factory and used their wind tunnel. By carving wood tips and trying many different shapes they were able to come up with the minimum drag design.
Other features on the Twister include the nose zippers which free the Mylar at the nose so it doesn't get bent when packing up as it does on all other gliders. Next is the lower surface netting at the tip which relieves pressure and prevents downward inflation at the tip at high speeds (low angles of attack). This feature renders the glider more yaw stable. Tests have shown that closing one side makes the closed side create more drag and lag behind. We have already mentioned the basetube which is about one inch diameter for lower drag with a nice rubber grip and an internal cable for safety. Finally we should point out the aluminum keel which is tapered to look sexy and reduce drag. It also swings down like a kickstand to aid in setup if you so desire.
FLYING THE TWISTER
We have previously mentioned the twister's nice handling characteristics, but let us look at other factors. While free flying I put the glider through some standard tests. First I tried stalls, both with the VG on and off. In all configurations I couldn't get the glider to drop its nose as long as I started the stall from minimum sink speed. The glider would simply mush or go into falling leaf mode. What this means to flying is the glider may have less tendency to nose in after a landing flare, and may be less apt to rotate nose down if stalled in strong turbulence.
Another thing I tried was slipping turns and hands-off turns. The slipping diving mode was very controllable and predictable I like to use this feature for landing setup and it came in handy in an X-C flight in France when I chose to alight in a small wheat field along the Durance river.
By putting a glider in a coordinated bank and letting go, you can check for a glider's spiral stability. Most designs are slightly unstable which means that the bank angle increases. On the Twister the glider slowly leveled out which means that no high-siding is required in smooth thermals.
I found the twister to have lots of positive pitch bar pressure. In fact, it was too much for my taste when diving full-tilt to goal. The factory said the sprogs could be safely lowered to relieve some of this pitch pressure and this is one topless glider on which I'd be willing to do so.
Takeoffs and landings are straightforward on the Twister. I had no unusual experiences launching in either calm or strong conditions. The glider is relatively light (73.7 lbs 33.5 kg) for those light-wind launches. When landing you'll find the glider to slow admirably and the only awkward landings I produced were in turbulent conditions when I flared early.
SETUP AND OTHER DETAILS
The Twister setup is fairly conventional, so we'll only point out a few unique features. First is the sprog and tip strut setup. The sprogs usually fall in place and all you have to do is place a transverse batten (which engages the battens on either side of the sprog) in the slot at the end of the sprog, then zip up the under surface. The tip strut is similar: you push it in to slide over a swiveling (up and down) stud, pop on the transverse batten to hold it in and zip up.
The next interesting matter to note is the tip batten. There is no need to fumble inside the sail trying to locate the batten on a stud, for it is fixed to the leading edge and folds in its mid-span. To attach the batten you simply put the outside end in a loop then straighten the batten slightly past center.
The only criticism I have of the Twister setup is that the batten pocket openings are squared off rather than having one side forty-fived as is the standard nowadays. The 45 fold makes the initial batten insert easier. On the other hand, the lower surface battens were the second easiest in the business (Airwave's are the best with their forward retainer loop). The battens are held in with a flat elastic loop that is open and easy to catch with one finger, sight unseen.
Finally, I wish to mention the nose cone which is the only one I've ever found which I could put on every time cleanly without pulling the nose down. The nose zippers allow the Mylar inserts to stop closer to the nose than on other gliders, so the nose cone can be a bit smaller and it is perfectly shaped.
This nose cone detail is indicative of the attention to detail characteristic of Bautek's engineering on all their gliders. They make their own upright basetube junctions which are nicely rounded and faired in. The uprights come with a grip patch for those sweaty palm days. The rear haulback is a simple ring that loops over a small block with a recess for the cable thimble. All these little details serve to satisfy.
Perhaps the nicest detail is the sail. It is made in-house by Bautek and is very clean. The glider looks sleek indeed with its long smooth lines ending with the graceful tips. I had many pilots checking out my glider wherever I went. Internally the sail has three top to bottom straps and two ribs per side to hold the airfoil in shape (this is a safety factor for negative angles of attack as well).
Finally, the best news about the sail is that your choice of colors comes at no extra charge (Bautek maintains six leading edge and sixteen lower surface colors). In addition, you can get a sail with the Bautek wave pattern on the lower surface in your choice of colors at no extra charge. The upper surface sail comes with Dimension Polyant's Power LL cloth (you've seen it before it's the one with the black pinstripe).
In summary, I loved the Twister in almost every way. It is one topless glider I would like to own, if only because of the warm, safe feeling it affords. Of course, climbing above other gliders also piques the love interest. I would recommend this glider highly to pilots who want a fun, high-performing topless glider without the worries.
The best bit I have to report is the price: $5,000 which compares nicely to other topless gliders on the market. Bautek is actively seeking a U.S. distributor, so the gliders should become readily available real soon. Until then interested pilots should contact Bautek directly at:
Bautek has been in business a long time and no doubt will continue to be for long. Their dependability should allay the worries of any pilot concerned about parts and continued service. Check out their web page for more information.

Published in Hang Gliding Magazine

Empty weight	73.7 lbs
Gross weight	minimum 220 lbs, maximum 310 lbs
Wingspan	34.1 ft
Wing area	150 sq. ft
Aspect Ratio	7.7
Length	18.7 ft (long), 13.4 ft (short)
Max Speed	50 mph
Min Sink Speed	approx. 22 mph
Best Glide Speed	approx. 30 mph

When most Americans think of a large foreign glider manufacturer, they may be quick to name Moyes, Airwave, Aeros or even La Mouette. But most would fail to mention Bautek, Germany’s main manufacturer. This oversight may be understandable since Bautek has spent little effort marketing in the U.S. They have been content to serve the large European market which has historically been of greater volume than we could claim, despite our larger population. All that is changing. Bautek has a new competitive topless glider aptly named (as we shall see) the Twister. Its performance is good and some special engineering renders it most desirable in terms of safety. In addition, the strong dollar in relation to European currency makes the price attractive enough to interest those pilots looking for a top performing, safe topless glider. I took delivery of the Twister at Monte Cucco, Italy where I flew it in the Pre-World meet.

The First Two Ultralights with the New HKS Engine

By Dan Johnson || April 1, 2004 3 Comments

BRITISH TRAINER - Big UK trike maker Pegasus also sells this AX2000, a derivative of the Weedhopper. They equipped it with the HKS engine.

LESSON MACHINE - Flightstar partner Spark Lamontagne takes a youngster up for a lesson in the HKS-powered Flightstar II SL.

FOUR-STROKER - Flightstar installed the new HKS 700E on their Flightstar II SL model to give the Japanese engine its American debut in August '97.

POWER TEAM - In its coming-out party, the HPower company had this hard-working team comprised of (left to right, rear) Spark Lamontagne and Tom Peghiny, and (front) Ken Godin and Jonathan Carter.

SALES PITCH - HPower boss Tom Peghiny fielded hundreds of questions from visitors to his booth. He says the usual "question" was actually a statement of appreciation for offering the new powerplant.

TOTAL PACKAGE - The HKS engine is more complex than an equivalent 2-stroke engine, but you get the well-regarded reliability of a 4-stroke.

FIRST UP - Even before Flightstar debuted the HKS engine in America, Pegasus showed the powerplant in England on their AX2000 a couple months earlier.

LIFT OFF! - The confidence-inspiring 4-stroke engine helps bring a smile to the faces of students or passengers who go aloft with it.

FULLY CERTIFIED - In England, Pegasus went to the trouble of obtaining the difficult BCAR S certification for the AX2000. The curved tube at the left of the cockpit is the throttle, changed to conform to UK certification rules.

BIG CHANGE - If you look hard, you can tell this AX2000 derives from the venerable Weedhopper design. However, this plane has gone through so many changes it isn't any longer the Weedhopper.

TOP GUN - Bill Sherlock is a director of Pegasus and the proud operator of this HKS-powered AX2000 aircraft. The British company manufactures the 3-axis design.

NEW EMPENNAGE - Though it bears some resemblance to the Weedhopper's simple tail, this one features extra strength and aerodynamic controls like the in-flight trim seen on the right elevator.

So, Why Not Stick With Rotax?

It isn't often I can do "scouting party" duty on engines. Powerplants aren't normally my focus. They
are a necessity for flight, but they aren't my main attraction. A great many pilots I've met appear to be just the reverse: They are extremely interested in engines.
I enjoyed the chance to fly behind the first European and first American installations of the new 60-hp HKS 700E 4-stroke from Japan's HKS Company Ltd. With that in mind, this pilot's report is rather different. We'll look at this new engine on two different aircraft.
As all Ultralight Flying! readers know, Rotax has enjoyed great success for more than a decade as an ultralight engine supplier. After dominating the 2-stroke market, Rotax introduced the 81-hp Rotax 912 4-stroke, which has become a popular powerplant choice for sport aviation aircraft.
Is a 4-Stroke Better?

All 4-stroke engine manufacturers trumpet their advantages over 2-strokes: lower fuel consumption, quieter operation, longer time between overhaul, and reliability.
Offsetting these pluses are: increased weight, complexity and cost. Nonetheless, 4-strokes are widely believed to offer greater reliability, and this alone causes some pilots to prefer them. Some experts protest, insisting that a well-maintained 2-stroke will run hour for hour with a similarly maintained 4-stroke. Note: this is not an equal comparison of engines. Much more information is available to help you decide which engine is right for you.
"Rotax 2-strokes have been unfairly blamed for poor or unengineered installations or poor maintenance," says Tom Peghiny, president of HPower, the U.S. importer of the HKS 700E engine. He agrees with many users that the Rotax 503 is one of the best engines available for light aircraft, and that, properly serviced, it can last a very long time. He should know. His company flight school 503-equipped Flightstar has been through three overhauls - that's a lot of hours!

Nonetheless, you can't deny the appeal of the 4-stroke power-
plants, and with it the potential for a competitor to the 65-hp Rotax 582 2-stroker.
Japanese Engine

A couple decades back, Volkswagen sold a lot of cars in the U.S. auto market. Beetles were everywhere; they even became hip. Then came the Japanese. Today, older VW Bugs are increasingly scarce (a new "VW Bug" is being introduced this year). Japan even challenges Detroit.
Given that earlier scenario, Rotax might be concerned about the arrival of the 60-hp HKS 700E, a new horizontally opposed 2-cylinder 4-stroke engine designed expressly for sport aviation, from "Japan Inc."
Helping to introduce the HKS brand is HPower Ltd., a new company formed by the principals at Flightstar Sportplanes. Though unknown to most Americans, the Japanese firm is already "a world leader in high-performance engines and components," says HPower's Peghiny.

For more technically-aware readers, other enticements come with this advanced powerplant. The 700E features a hydraulic valve train operated by a single cam with cylinder-encased pushrods. And thanks to a dry sump lubrication system, either a tractor or pusher installation can be performed. HPower says inverted installations are not approved.
By example, the Japanese penchant for quality is seen through a full factory break-in procedure, which saves the builder such a chore. In their Shizuoka, Japan plant, HKS puts 11¼2 hours on each 700E before it ships.
HKS is a technology development company known in all forms of motorsports and the automotive after-market business. The 20-year-old company has a large and impressive facility employing 400 workers. Bombardier-Rotax is far larger, but HKS is clearly able to mount a serious challenge to the Austrian giant.

Since Japanese engines have earned the respect of those in the know, the ensuing battle for market share could be interesting. More importantly, this provides ultralight enthusiasts with more choices. Choice is good.
Flightstar and the HKS
In-flight aboard a Flightstar II SL equipped with the 700E, you can operate at 4,500 rpm and raise the nose without throttle change. With most 2-stroke engines, you would quickly hear the prop load up and the engine labor. Behind the HKS, no such loading was perceptible right up to stall, thanks to a flatter torque curve.

At 21¼2 gallons per hour fuel use, pilots will also find something to like in the HKS: much lower operating costs - and no oil mixing!
Fully-equipped with oil tank, electric starter and custom stainless steel exhaust system, the HKS 700E weighs in at a relatively trim 116 pounds. Some automotive conversion engines are said to weigh significantly more.
"In addition, the engine's small size (16 by 24 inches) will package well in many existing aircraft installations and cowlings," Peghiny told me while we flew along in relative quiet compared to Flightstar's more common 50-hp Rotax 503. To assure better fitting, HPower has been in close conversation with many ultralight manufacturers in the effort to refine the installation.

In many ways, the Flightstar is the same aircraft as it is with the Rotax 503. You can, however, easily sense the broader torque curve, even if you think you don't normally observe such things.
In the Flightstar, I was able to maintain altitude down below 4,000 rpm. At this setting and given a lower overall noise output, the HKS appeared merely to be purring. Anyone would enjoy the low-noise, low-vibration combination, I think.
The system is more complex than a 503 installation, but

it is roughly on par with an electric start 65-hp Rotax 582. It appears less complicated than an 81-hp Rotax 912, and is certainly simpler than a 115-hp Rotax 914 Turbo installation.
From a pilot's standpoint, the engine requires less work than a liquid-cooled Rotax 582 where, for example, you should assure sufficient water temperature before takeoff. In flight, interacting with the engine is similar to the 582.
Compared to a 503 installation, the HKS brings a power boost, so you may see a couple miles an hour more speed, but possibly not as much increase in climb, reports Mike Kern of HY-TEK Hurricane, who mounted a 700E on one of his Hurricanes. The extra weight - over a 503 with pull starter - uses up some of the added power the HKS engine offers.

Compared more favorably to the 582 it truly aims at, the 700E has a few less horses and a few extra pounds. Naturally, this means it is not an identical replacement. Yet that is precisely the point. HKS is supposedto be a different engine experience. It is, and I liked it. My sense of hearing liked it a lot.
Britain's AX2000
Yes, I know it looks something like a Weedhopper. Matter of fact, those of you who thought so are exactly right. The AX2000 and its predecessor, the AX3, are derived from the original Weedhopper. In truth, more than one company supplies Weedhopper derivations. The Europeans, especially the French, seem to have embraced the Weedhopper even as it lost its dominant position in the U.S.

A French company called Ultralair sold the design rights, and today the aircraft is available under the umbrella of Pegasus Aviation. Pegasus is one of the two largest microlight manufacturers in the United Kingdom. Until the AX3 and now AX2000, they produced only trikes. The 3-axis model is fully certified under the British microlight rule, which I've examined and found to be a tough regulation.

The AX3 meets current British regs which limit gross weight to 390 kilograms (860 pounds), but those rules may soon switch to the international microlight standard of 450 kilograms (992 pounds). Although some trike makers told me they may choose not to use the new weight - weight-shift control becomes more tiring when weight goes up that much - the AX2000 is developed precisely to the greater weight limit. In fact, until the new rule becomes effective at home, the AX2000 is sold for export only. All this makes the AX2000 a ripe candidate for the HKS engine.
I've also flown the single-place Weedhopper and can say this: The two aircraft may look vaguely alike and share a common design heritage, but that's where it ends. These are very different machines. Despite the many modifications, the John Chotia-designed Weedhopper wing remains speedier than you might expect. It worked very well with the steady pull of the HKS.

Both the Flightstar II SL and the AX2000 cruised quite comfortably at 60 to 70 mph. Obviously, different designs will perform differently with the same HKS engine doing the work.
In a very ultralight turn of fact, I perceived that both planes performed well at low power settings. The HKS is marvelously quiet and smooth, and both the Flightstar II SL and AX2000 flew nicely at ultralight speeds, down into the 50s. I enjoyed the sensation of ultralight-style flight with the added comfort of a 4-stroke engine. I think a lot of pilots may feel similarly.
Good Timing

Certainly the ultralight community of today is ripe for the introduction of the HKS 700E. Many school operators flying Part 103 training exemption 2-seaters would enjoy the long overhaul cycle and reduced operating cost. Ultralight designs which use the Rotax 503, 582 or even 618 engines may prefer the 4-stroke rhythm enough to select HKS.
I can foresee HKS grabbing a fair piece of the market. Customers are embracing the concept and HPower personnel - the same as the Flightstar staff - have earned a reputation for superior service. Put it together, and you may see an HKS near you soon.
On whole, I enjoyed flying both the Flightstar II SL and the AX2000 with the HKS engine. Flightstar had more time to refine the mount by the time I flew it, but both aircraft were confidence-inspiring as the 700E purred along. I enjoy flight with 2-stroke engines; I believe they do a fine job. But even I was sorely tempted by the smooth response from Japan and HPower.

Published in Light Sport and Ultralight Flying

Gross weight	103 pounds
Exhaust system weight	7 pounds
Oil tank/cooler weight	6 pounds
Total Installed weight	116 pounds
Displacement	680cc (42 cubic inches)
Bore	85 mm
Stroke	60 mm
Gearbox ratio	2.58-to-1 or 3.52-to-1
Compression ratio	11.3-to-1
Fuel	Autogas, unleaded premium
Ignition	Dual CDI
Time Between Overhaul	500 hours (Initial inspection)
Power	60 hp at 6,200 rpm
Torque	58 foot pounds
Fuel Consumption	2.6 gph at 75% power

Design

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

Pros - All-new 4-stroke, twin-cylinder horizontally opposed powerplant from Japan. Complete package with technical support during installation. Technically advanced engine product which includes a prop-speed reduction unit. Fitting is in progress for several designs.

Cons - Only available in 60-horse configuration at this time, though a "half-HKS" has been pondered, as has a 4-cylinder model with 120 horsepower. Four-stroke engines have more parts to maintain and this pushes up the purchase price.

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 - The 700E comes standard with prop-speed reduction unit, electric start and external oil tank and cooler. It features dual carburetors and ignition is dual CDI. Exhaust is stainless steel. Air-cooling suffices for cylinders, while heads are oil-cooled.

Cons - More systems means more pilot work, although the Rotax 582 it competes with requires attention to a liquid-cooling system and radiators.

Cockpit/Cabin

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

Pros - A large diameter, integral flywheel dampens torsional vibration. Though more complex, the 700E installed on either a Flightstar or AX2000 in tractor configuration did not obscure vision more than a 503 would have.

Cons - The engine itself makes a compact installation, but its peripheral items such as muffler and oil cooler make the engine appear busier than a Rotax 582 or certainly a 503.

Ground Handling

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

Pros - Start it up, taxi out - with minimal waiting required, you can be flying quickly with the air-cooled HKS engine. The 700E lacks the temperature sensitivity of some engines. Nickel-coated cylinders are said to help this.

Cons - The 700E lacks the quick spin up of a 2-stroke engine, so you must anticipate power needs sooner (though the difference is very minor on light aircraft).

Takeoff/Landing

Qualities; Efficiency; Ease; Comparative values.

Pros - While the 700E may yield a slightly longer spool-up than a 2-stroke engine, the torque will make itself felt. Climb didn't seem to give the HKS any extra workout in either the Flightstar II SL or AX2000.

Cons - Quick additions of throttle may not deliver power as quickly as some 2-stroke engines; you must plan ahead a little bit longer (the same as when flying heavier aircraft in general).

Control

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

Pros - No need to worry about oil mixtures or water temperatures. No additional pilot controls needed to operate the 700E.

Cons - No negatives.

Performance

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

Pros - HKS 700E compares well to the Rotax 582 (which has 5 more horsepower) and is substantially more powerful than either a single- or dual-carb Rotax 503 it might also replace. Some top speed increase likely compared to the 503.

Cons - Adds 6 pounds compared to a 582-equipped airplane, or nearly 30 to a 503 aircraft, so climb increase may not be the same as expected when comparing horsepower figures.

Stability

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

Pros - Four-stroke engines may reward their buyers the most when flying cross-country across unfamiliar territory (you should always have a safe place to land within gliding distance). Greater fuel economy can also aid safe flying.

Cons - Installations of different engines require operators to perform new weight and balance calculations. Overlooking this could bring grave consequences; always redo weight and balance after any equipment addition.

Overall

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

Pros - Marketing in North America by HPower Ltd., whose staff (same as Flightstar Sportplanes) enjoys an excellent service reputation. Buying is easy and service is great. HPower is working with many airframe builders to fit the HKS engine; several are ready and flying now.

Cons - Some aircraft aren't served by the 700E (yet); Part 103 ultralights don't need this power, weight, cost or complexity. Not all aircraft that are appropriate have been fitted yet. New installations take time.

It isn’t often I can do “scouting party” duty on engines. Powerplants aren’t normally my focus. They are a necessity for flight, but they aren’t my main attraction. A great many pilots I’ve met appear to be just the reverse: They are extremely interested in engines. I enjoyed the chance to fly behind the first European and first American installations of the new 60-hp HKS 700E 4-stroke from Japan’s HKS Company Ltd. With that in mind, this pilot’s report is rather different. We’ll look at this new engine on two different aircraft. As all Ultralight Flying! readers know, Rotax has enjoyed great success for more than a decade as an ultralight engine supplier. After dominating the 2-stroke market, Rotax introduced the 81-hp Rotax 912 4-stroke, which has become a popular powerplant choice for sport aviation aircraft. Is a 4-Stroke Better? All 4-stroke engine manufacturers trumpet their advantages over 2-strokes: lower fuel consumption, quieter operation, longer time between overhaul, and reliability.

Hurricane Company – Hurricane

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

You can't find as many bargains in ultralight flying as you once could. Increasing sophistication of ultralights has, with economic factors, driven up prices. The Hurricane offers 1994 pilots a good deal, however, with prices in the $7,000 range for a complete, bolt-together kit. These days, that's one great price!
The Hurricane is a derivative design, owing its shape to aircraft like the Avenger, Phantom, and Mirage. Company owner Don Eccker has made numerous changes to the plane and a modern Hurricane has become its own airplane. Eccker was long associated with the popular Avenger which eventually left the market. He filled the gap with his Hurricane.
Eccker and his staff reveal a fine attention to detail coupled with a love of flying. This shows readily in the Hurricane. The plane boasts very responsive handling which still imparts a feeling of solidness. Performance is good enough that Eccker performs exciting aerobatics with great competency. Hurricanes have a racy look, thanks to Eccker's personalized touches.
The Hurricane is a hotter design, for those pilots who have a few hours in the logbook flying more docile machines. Using full span flaps and +8, -5G load capability, you get snappy handling, performance, and strength that don't agree with the plane's low pricetag. That you can build a Hurricane in 60-80 honest hours is a great plus.
Full Review in Sep. '92

You can’t find as many bargains in ultralight flying as you once could. Increasing sophistication of ultralights has, with economic factors, driven up prices. The Hurricane offers 1994 pilots a good deal, however, with prices in the $7,000 range for a complete, bolt-together kit. These days, that’s one great price! The Hurricane is a derivative design, owing its shape to aircraft like the Avenger, Phantom, and Mirage. Company owner Don Eccker has made numerous changes to the plane and a modern Hurricane has become its own airplane. Eccker was long associated with the popular Avenger which eventually left the market. He filled the gap with his Hurricane. Eccker and his staff reveal a fine attention to detail coupled with a love of flying. This shows readily in the Hurricane. The plane boasts very responsive handling which still imparts a feeling of solidness. Performance is good enough that Eccker performs exciting aerobatics with great competency.

North Wing Design — Apache

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 2 Comments

Everybody knows that trikes are composed of a chassis and a wing. Many companies specialize in one or the other for good reason; the two manufacturing skills are quite different. For years North Wing Design owner, Kamron Blevins, has built the wings that lift many trikes. Now his Washington state based company does it all.
A couple years ago the company introduced their Maverick trike, notable for its clean, simple, white chassis and unusually strut-braced delta wing. Later Blevins introduced his ATF model, a simplified and even lighter chassis which can connect to a conventional hang glider wing. Remaining busy, by spring of 2000 he offered the two-seat Apache model. In every case, of course, the trikes uses the company-produced wing.
Beginning in the days when he supplied trike chassis makers with wings until he began to offer the whole trike aircraft, Cameron has clearly been listening to customers. From my inspection he has incorporated many features that trike buyers have sought over the years. For example, a common complaint of trike passengers is that the mast which rises directly behind them transmits vibration whenever their helmet touches it. Using a split mast construction Apache avoids this problem. In addition Apache has comfortably padded seats with sidewalls, nose wheel suspension, stash bags, rear wheel steering, and instructor bars (control bar extensions the allow a rear seated instructor to help his or her student).
If Apache is more trike than you need you may find true happiness with either single seat model and prices start below $8,000.

ASAP — Beaver

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 4 Comments

A decade ago, the popular Canadian ultralights the Beaver and Chinook appear to be in danger of disappearing. Fortunately that's no longer the case thanks to the Holomis family and their purchase of these two classic Canadian designs. Even better, during the last 10 years the company has made improvements to the design while leaving alone their basic shape and appeal. A "Plus" added to the name is the simple indicator that means many small improvements.
With a thriving family machine shop operation providing a foundation, the company makes good use of its engineering and fabrication capabilities to support the airplane business. This synergy is appreciated by anyone buying the aircraft in the last decade. It gives Aircraft Sales and Parts (ASAP) staying power that assures customes.
While both the ultralights have a substantial following is (the Beaver has sold in the thousands by itself), the Chinook has become my favorite of the two thanks to its agile handling and spectacular visibility. Both are tandem aircraft and both will accommodate large occupants, but the Chinook is the most spacious.
We can also expect to see some new engines on these aircraft thanks to the company's involvement in the Zanzottera powerplant which has won favor with many designers thanks to its relatively low weight. In addition ASAP also sells the four stroke HKS as well as a line of Rotax engines. With the Chinook airframe priced at only $8,500 our neighbors to the north can help you get in the sky for a modest amount of money.

A decade ago, the popular Canadian ultralights the Beaver and Chinook appear to be in danger of disappearing. Fortunately that’s no longer the case thanks to the Holomis family and their purchase of these two classic Canadian designs. Even better, during the last 10 years the company has made improvements to the design while leaving alone their basic shape and appeal. A “Plus” added to the name is the simple indicator that means many small improvements. With a thriving family machine shop operation providing a foundation, the company makes good use of its engineering and fabrication capabilities to support the airplane business. This synergy is appreciated by anyone buying the aircraft in the last decade. It gives Aircraft Sales and Parts (ASAP) staying power that assures customes. While both the ultralights have a substantial following is (the Beaver has sold in the thousands by itself), the Chinook has become my favorite of the two thanks to its agile handling and spectacular visibility.

Interplane Aircraft — Skyboy UL

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

Easily one of the most fascinating airplanes to appear and show well as the airshows of 1999 was the east European-built Skyboy, sold in this country by Interplane. In truth it's not only sold here by this outfit, Interplane is the name of the company building these aircraft in the Czech Republic. It may not be of American heritage but from what I could tell it quickened the heart of Yankee pilots.
Under the direction of Jaroslav Dostal, a veteran of the LET Aircraft Company which builds 19- and 40-passenger commuters, a group of talented designers created several sport aircraft of which Skyboy is one. It's abundantly clear these men knew their job as one examines the workmanship on the fully factory-built Skyboy being marketed to American ultralight trainers. Yet the shapely exterior is not the whole story.
As you open the door of the Interplane Skyboy you see a nicely finished interior that invites your entrance. Fortunately, gaining entry is easy with doors which open widely, extend up high above your head, and remain out of the way thanks to a gas piston. As you seat yourself, the sensation is that of laying in a reclining chair. It's spacious which also helps in the training environment that Interplane is trying to create.
With its standard Rotax 582 pushing it aloft students will discover very cooperative handling. Skyboy handles lightly but the control response has been dampened to facilitate novice pilot capabilities. Instruction in the Skyboy should be a pleasant experience.

Easily one of the most fascinating airplanes to appear and show well as the airshows of 1999 was the east European-built Skyboy, sold in this country by Interplane. In truth it’s not only sold here by this outfit, Interplane is the name of the company building these aircraft in the Czech Republic. It may not be of American heritage but from what I could tell it quickened the heart of Yankee pilots. Under the direction of Jaroslav Dostal, a veteran of the LET Aircraft Company which builds 19- and 40-passenger commuters, a group of talented designers created several sport aircraft of which Skyboy is one. It’s abundantly clear these men knew their job as one examines the workmanship on the fully factory-built Skyboy being marketed to American ultralight trainers. Yet the shapely exterior is not the whole story. As you open the door of the Interplane Skyboy you see a nicely finished interior that invites your entrance.

Phantom Aircraft — Phantom X1-e

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 4 Comments

While Phantoms have always been a source of satisfaction to its owners the design has suffered through numerous owners... but not any more! These days Phantom Aircraft, based in Kalamazoo, Michigan is operated by Pat Schulthies who lends his steady hand to the long established brand.
Dating to the beginning of the ultralight movement in the early 1980s the new X1-E model also advances the design into the new millennium. In those young days of ultralight flying Phantom was considered a high performing aircraft with snappy handling. Today such a description may fit other brands but Phantom hasn't lost its edge.
For those that may be hesitant about building their own aircraft Phantom may set you at ease. Formally a teacher, Shulthies had his entire school participate in building the now famous "Child's Play" Phantom. In the end 130 kids had actually worked on building this ultralight and while they did a better job than I could, you should be able to meet the challenge.
Built the more open X-1 carefully and you'll find a plane which can qualify under part 103 (the X1-e will require N-numbers). Perhaps the best part is that Phantom Aircraft Company can sell you an aircraft for under $10,000 (X-1 model). This modest amount of money will actually buy all the bits and pieces you need to get airborne, engine and prop included. Naturally if you want extra features like the full enclosure or other choices from a long list of options you will end up paying a little more.

While Phantoms have always been a source of satisfaction to its owners the design has suffered through numerous owners… but not any more! These days Phantom Aircraft, based in Kalamazoo, Michigan is operated by Pat Schulthies who lends his steady hand to the long established brand. Dating to the beginning of the ultralight movement in the early 1980s the new X1-E model also advances the design into the new millennium. In those young days of ultralight flying Phantom was considered a high performing aircraft with snappy handling. Today such a description may fit other brands but Phantom hasn’t lost its edge. For those that may be hesitant about building their own aircraft Phantom may set you at ease. Formally a teacher, Shulthies had his entire school participate in building the now famous “Child’s Play” Phantom. In the end 130 kids had actually worked on building this ultralight and while they did a better job than I could, you should be able to meet the challenge.

Quicksilver Manufacturing — Sport IIS

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

The Quicksilver Sport IIS has been transformed from a cable braced ultralight to a strut braced model. Although this simple flying machine is one of the most successful aircraft ever built, the California company managed to make the new model even more appealing as it heads into a third decade of production.
The most noticeable change to the new ultralight are the wing struts that completely replace the wing's upper surface cable rigging. Now the upper surface is free of obstructions to a smooth airflow and has a cleaner appearance. Other changes are more subtle but even with extensive tubular reinforcement the IIS weighs 430 pounds empty, well under the exemption weight limit. With its large 170 square foot wing the newest Quicksilver feels like the ultralight the public expects. This image and its comfortable flying charactertistics jointly account for it being the most popular training ultralight in the world.
Experienced pilots from all segments of aviation in many countries have come to love the Quicksilver. Now they can purchase one with further refinement which maintains the company's reputation for thorough engineering and quality manufacturing. The single surface Sprint line and double surfaced Sport models are each available in one and two place versions.
In addition to being particularly well proven Quicksilver Manufacturing offers the industry's most extensive support network, with many dealers stocking parts and having broad knowledge needed to support owners. From my perspective you you just can't go wrong with the Quicksilver.

Aeros/Sabre Aircraft — Venture 500

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

Richard Helms has been one of the stalwarts in the trike development among American companies. Enjoying a positive change in market share (by many expert opinions), trikes are finding customers all over the country. It may be news to you but Helms has been facing this demand for years. With some 300 machines in the field, Sabre may be the leading American brand.
The Sabre stacks up well against the more elaborate machines from Europe. Across the Atlantic, trikes got expensive and complex as they searched for more buyers. Helms learned that Americans often admire simplicity and he built to this goal.
However, some buyers want more feature laden aircraft. Realizing the potential for the growing light aircraft industry in the eastern European countries, Helms went overseas to cut a deal with Aeros of the Ukraine. In the summer of 1999, Sabre introduced the new Venture trike. With an airframe that makes extensive use of Titanium and a sleek fiberglass fairing, the two-place Venture is a veritable showplace for numerous beautifully hand machined parts.
Venture 500 uses the Rotax 503 while the 600 comes with the 582 engine. In other ways the two models are the same but they come very well equipped. Standard gear includes full instrumentation, wheel pants, shoulder harnesses, composite prop, and large capacity fuel tank. It is offered with either the Stranger 15 wing Sabre has sold for some time or the new Stream 16 wing. For under $10,000, this two seater trike represents an excellent value.

Richard Helms has been one of the stalwarts in the trike development among American companies. Enjoying a positive change in market share (by many expert opinions), trikes are finding customers all over the country. It may be news to you but Helms has been facing this demand for years. With some 300 machines in the field, Sabre may be the leading American brand. The Sabre stacks up well against the more elaborate machines from Europe. Across the Atlantic, trikes got expensive and complex as they searched for more buyers. Helms learned that Americans often admire simplicity and he built to this goal. However, some buyers want more feature laden aircraft. Realizing the potential for the growing light aircraft industry in the eastern European countries, Helms went overseas to cut a deal with Aeros of the Ukraine. In the summer of 1999, Sabre introduced the new Venture trike. With an airframe that makes extensive use of Titanium and a sleek fiberglass fairing, the two-place Venture is a veritable showplace for numerous beautifully hand machined parts.

New Kolb Aircraft — Mk III + 912 Engine

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

The New Aircraft Kolb Company gets the new name for a good reason: it has new owners, Bruce Chesnut and Brian Blackwood. These successful businessmen from Kentucky bought the company that produced the ultralights they've flown for years. Under its third owner, Kolb appears well poised to remain the prolific supplier it has long been. Following Homer Kolb and Dennis Sounder, Chesnut and Blackwood have a hard act to follow, but they seem well suited to the task.
After acquiring the prestigious name, the new owners didn't alter the aircraft or their characteristics. Why mess with success? However, to maintain the Kolb tradition they'll have to keep innovating. Dennis Souder did very well at this after he took over from Homer and he remains a consultant so the new owners benefit from his long insight to the ultralight community.
However, Brian Blackwood created his own personal Mark III. He installed the Rotax 912 (80 horsepower engine), and didn't skimp on the good stuff. His aircraft has dual joysticks - the original used a center stick - and all the essential instrumentation. Though I've always liked the sling-style seat of the Kolb line, I admired the appearance of the fully upholstered seats. With full skylight overhead, visibility is great even in steep turns and through the "glass" I was reassured seeing an emergency parachute.
From my initial contact with the The New Aircraft Kolb Company, it appears they should do well at preserving the Kolb tradition that has served that brand so well.

ASAP — Chinook Plus 2

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

Long one of Canada's best loved ultralights, the Chinook - formerly designed and built by Birdman - is another of the country's designs saved by the Holomis family when they went acquiring ultralight aircraft companies to complement their successful machining enterprise in British Columbia.

A simple design with lines unlike any other ultralight I've flown, the aircraft has pleasing characteristics that most pilot will enjoy. Larger aviators especially will like the enormous cabin of the Chinook. And like other Canadian designs, the Chinook's sturdy triangulated construction allows it to operate as a bush plane from almost any open space. Consequently, ASAP likes to show Chinooks with tundra tires or floats, both of which add to the rugged good looks.
The wide open cabin is surrounded by well supported clear Lexan giving you a panoramic view from either seat. Tandem aircraft often cramp the aft seat and don't give it the best visibility, but Chinook sets a new standard. Your passenger or student will also enjoy plenty of room; a set of dual controls means the Chinook can easily be used for training flight.

After the ASAP company took over production they made numerous refinements that earn the name Chinook Plus 2, and those who have seen the older, simpler Chinooks need to reexamine the current model.
Flight characteristics of the old Chinook were largely preserved as the machine made the transition from simple single seater to the feature laden two seaters of today. A versatile design, Chinook endures for many good reasons.

Long one of Canada’s best loved ultralights, the Chinook – formerly designed and built by Birdman – is another of the country’s designs saved by the Holomis family when they went acquiring ultralight aircraft companies to complement their successful machining enterprise in British Columbia. A simple design with lines unlike any other ultralight I’ve flown, the aircraft has pleasing characteristics that most pilot will enjoy. Larger aviators especially will like the enormous cabin of the Chinook. And like other Canadian designs, the Chinook’s sturdy triangulated construction allows it to operate as a bush plane from almost any open space. Consequently, ASAP likes to show Chinooks with tundra tires or floats, both of which add to the rugged good looks. The wide open cabin is surrounded by well supported clear Lexan giving you a panoramic view from either seat. Tandem aircraft often cramp the aft seat and don’t give it the best visibility, but Chinook sets a new standard.

Quicksilver Manufacturing — GT400

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

One of the best regarded light aircraft on the market is the GT400 from newly reorganized and revitalized Quicksilver. The longtime manufacturer of ultralights has new ownership and good things are happening. Fortunately, the Southern California leader stuck with their successful models.
According to many who have flown it, the GT400 is one of the best flying single seat aircraft you can buy. To beginners, it is predictable and stable with qualities that allow a new pilot to progress with confidence. To old timers, the GT400 has such refined characteristics that it can please those with many hours logged.
Using a control yoke rather than a joystick, GT400 emulates certified aircraft yet for all its sophistication, the design does not lose any of the fun side that makes ultralights so enjoyable. Handling is smooth but responsive. Performance is substantial but not scary. And its stability profile sets a standard for light aircraft. This tri-gear aircraft sits neatly on all three wheels even when unoccupied making entry and exit simple.
Powered with either the Rotax 447 or 503 engine, the GT400 comes well equipped with flaps, nosewheel brake, basic instruments, and shoulder harness. You can have a choice of colors on its sewn Dacron wings and tail.
You sit out in front of the wing and your world is arranged in a spectacular view yet the strength and long, safe history of the design make the sensation secure. In the last analysis, though, it is the exceptional flight qualities that endears owners to their GT400 aircraft.

Buckeye trikes — B2K Endeavor

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

You have to hand it to Buckeye. These guys and gals work exceptionally hard to refine their line of ultralight aircraft to a trend-setting state of the art. Complementing their award-winning series of powered parachutes, Buckeye has now added their new Endeavor trike.
A couple years back, it was Buckeye's single place Brat that grabbed attention for the Indiana operation. The purple airframe Brat represented a first among powered parachute producers to apply their experience to a related but different form of ultralight flight. Brat resembled the Cosmos Samba trike and offered a simple switch to powered parachute so owners could go both ways.
Last year they refined the Brat to a two seat, more extensive aircraft. In the process, the quick switch to powered parachute became more elaborate. Now the Endeavor appears as a fully developed two seat aircraft that focuses on being a trike ultralight. Fortunately it shares the extreme attention to detail that characterizes the entire Buckeye line of ultralight flying machines.
Look closely and you can see the exquisite sense of hardware from the hard-working, family-based corporation. It is quickly obvious they know how to build nice hardware and their great success in powered parachutes gives them clout with wing makers, many of whom solicit the company's business.
Endeavor now appears ready to enter the trike market in a significant way. Earning their wings honestly with a full development cycle Buckeye appears to have convincingly taken Endeavor to the level of slick European trike builders.

Flightstar Inc. — Flightstar II SL Tailback

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

"New & Improved" boasts the advertising for the Flightstar IISL as it was introduced at the start of the 1999 season. Indeed, the statement proved to be more than a catchy advertising slogan. The already-popular ultralight from the Connecticut company managed to go one better than earlier models.
A series of changes subtly advanced the state of the art for one of America's best ultralights. A new cabin fairing was cunningly reshaped to combine smoothly with a new, curvier windscreen. The aft-cabin fabric fairing was made leaner and smaller yet more efficient. And a new engine cowling improved cooling for the Rotax 503 engine installation.
The combination of front and rear fairing harmonized to bring smoother touchdowns eliminating the one nagging challenge I'd found in the older IISL. Making consistently smooth landing roundouts is now child's play. Builders will also appreciate the easier fit of the new fiberglass parts and shipping is more compact (therefore cheaper) than ever due to the change.
The new windscreen improves visibility while allowing a full enclosure for those in cooler climates (becoming the IISC, for "Sport Cabin"). While you stay warmer, though, the engine runs comfortably cool thanks to the cleverly designed SuperCowl that provides a smooth inlet and exit ramp for air coaxed past both cylinder heads.
The physical changes of the improved IISL are backed up with quick delivery and a customer service record that any buyer would love. Plus it's hard to argue with 1,000 flying models and an excellent safety record.

“New & Improved” boasts the advertising for the Flightstar IISL as it was introduced at the start of the 1999 season. Indeed, the statement proved to be more than a catchy advertising slogan. The already-popular ultralight from the Connecticut company managed to go one better than earlier models. A series of changes subtly advanced the state of the art for one of America’s best ultralights. A new cabin fairing was cunningly reshaped to combine smoothly with a new, curvier windscreen. The aft-cabin fabric fairing was made leaner and smaller yet more efficient. And a new engine cowling improved cooling for the Rotax 503 engine installation. The combination of front and rear fairing harmonized to bring smoother touchdowns eliminating the one nagging challenge I’d found in the older IISL. Making consistently smooth landing roundouts is now child’s play. Builders will also appreciate the easier fit of the new fiberglass parts and shipping is more compact (therefore cheaper) than ever due to the change.

Flightstar Inc. — Flightstar II + HKS Engine

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

Daring to take on deeply entrenched Rotax, Flightstar/H-Power has introduced the first light aviation four-stroke engine to see broad acceptance. Joined with their smoothly contoured Flightstar II, you can have a deluxe ultralight or lightplane that will provide years of flying enjoyment.
While two strokes do the job for most ultralight enthusiasts, the four stroke 700E engine from HKS of Japan offer assurances some pilots demand. With its particular strength of mid-range torque, the HKS engine brings interesting differences. Pull up the nose while revolutions are set in the 4000s and the HKS will haul the Flightstar II aloft with no evidence of prop loading common among two stroke engines.
Flightstar still sells lots of their very popular IISL models, but on this lighter aircraft, they recommend the Rotax 503. However, now that the same company has adapted the stronger HKS engine, sales are soaring for their Flightstar II with its beautifully formed all-fiberglass cockpit enclosure. The slight increase in empty weight is easily lifted by the 700E.
Designer Tom Peghiny and partner Spark LaMontange make sure buyers of either Flightstar or HKS will get service to please even the most demanding buyer. Kits shipped under license from Florida giant Leza-Lockwood get you a 100%-complete kit in less than a week.
Long admired Flightstar aircraft quality joins with world respected Japanese engine expertise to bring a fun flying machine that can be assembled quickly thanks to a well-executed kit. All that remains is the easy flying nature. No wonder nearly 1,000 are flying around the globe.

Para-Ski International — Para-Ski

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 Leave a Comment

You get four vehicles in one when you choose the powered parachute called Para-Ski. The name comes from the fact that you can swap wheels for skiis. With the correct selection this will permit zooming around - without a wing - on either water or snow, giving Para-Ski year 'round thrills.
What interests pilots, of course, is the ability to install a powered parachute and go aloft. But even in this airborne environment, Para-Ski offers more versatility. You can exchange the bag wing for a rag wing and, using some changed mount hardware, the Para-Ski become a trike ultralight as well.
Para-Ski is just full of differences, for example, its use of four wheels versus the more typical tri-gear favored by most other power parachute builders. Para-Ski feels this gives the machine more stability during takeoffs and landings and sure enough, when the canopy pulls to one side, I've seen company pilots keep the machine tracking straight on only two wheels (a tough maneuver with a three-wheeled model).
In addition, Para-Ski has a hand steering bar that coordinates with foot pedals to steer you under canopy. And a rudder immediately aft of the prop assures more control during many phases of operation. To understand it all, I recommend their video which demonstrates all the seasons of Para-Ski.
Available with one or two seats (VX or XS models), the tandem seat flips up for storage of your canopy wing while you care to zip around at ground level. Sold fully assembled, you may find a lot to like with Para-Ski.

Flying K Enterprises — Sky Raider

By Dan Johnson || March 30, 2004 9 Comments

"What took 'em so long," is the usual comment when one sees the Sky Raider for the first time. Understandably, many viewers incorrectly think they see a single place Kitfox. In fact, the Schraeder brothers used their experience at working for both the Kitfox and Avid Flyer builders when they introduced their single place Sky Raider.
The tiny little machine, from the same airfield as the two larger airplane companies, has made its mark successfully reaching 100 sales in a couple years. Sky Raider clearly answers the request of many who were enthusiastic about the Kitfox or Avid but who wanted a lightweight single seater. You need wait no longer.
Even with a 447 Rotax to give it loads of power, you can build the Sky Raider into a 103-compliant ultralight assuming you consider the weight of components you want to add. Keep it simple and you'll be delighted with a highly responsive lightweight performer. You can also build with the Rotax 277 if one is available and it'll still fly beautifully.
The little Sky Raider, which is quite roomy inside, has the very popular folding wings that Kitfox and Avid first made commonplace. But it uses different wing controls that ultralight enthusiasts will understand and appreciate. Slotted flaps and ailerons assure plenty of control but with steady flying qualities than any fun flyer will love. Brakes, a fiberglass cowling, steerable tailwheel, and a legal five-gallon gas tank round out this dandy little bird. Best of all, perhaps, is the price tag of $8,500 before engine.

“What took ’em so long,” is the usual comment when one sees the Sky Raider for the first time. Understandably, many viewers incorrectly think they see a single place Kitfox. In fact, the Schraeder brothers used their experience at working for both the Kitfox and Avid Flyer builders when they introduced their single place Sky Raider. The tiny little machine, from the same airfield as the two larger airplane companies, has made its mark successfully reaching 100 sales in a couple years. Sky Raider clearly answers the request of many who were enthusiastic about the Kitfox or Avid but who wanted a lightweight single seater. You need wait no longer. Even with a 447 Rotax to give it loads of power, you can build the Sky Raider into a 103-compliant ultralight assuming you consider the weight of components you want to add. Keep it simple and you’ll be delighted with a highly responsive lightweight performer.

« Previous Page
1
…
5
6
7
8
9
…
14
Next Page »