Anticept Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 Oh, and while my last two planes were/are composite, composite has not yet meet the promose of lighter weight envisioned a few years back. Beech Starship comes to mind. And somehow my composite Sky Arrow porks out at over 850 lbs with no chute and minimal options. Where composite shines now is in ease of manufacture and more flexibility in form. Maybe weight in the future, but certainly not in the present. The problem isn't the composite. The problem is we keep trying to make planes that can do everything, so we load it and load it and load it with stuff. It's kind of like the boiling frog analogy: tiny changes keep making their way into the design and increasing the weight over the years, and when someone finally looks back, they say "when did we get so heavy?" When FD added the extra foot or so to the tail of the CTLS series, that added a good bit of weight, because we have to consider how to balance the extra weight and structure in the front somehow. In your example of the beech starship, that is a shining example of how to NOT do things. When they designed the plane, they had problems with worker training. It was so cutting edge, that they couldn't find people who could work with the material. Therefore, they had to build and overbuild critical areas, and even then, the poor construction technique still had problems, so they had to build it up even more! Also, the difference between then and now, is the research strides made in epoxy, as it's more tolerant now to extreme weather and chemicals. Strength to weight, composite still is extremely outstanding. But once we drop weight in the structure, people have a bad habit of trying to stuff other things into the design. People go heads over heels for fancy gadgets, for example, then wonder why their plane is so heavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 It's all relative. Oh, and while my last two planes were/are composite, composite has not yet meet the promose of lighter weight envisioned a few years back. Beech Starship comes to mind. And somehow my composite Sky Arrow porks out at over 850 lbs with no chute and minimal options. Where composite shines now is in ease of manufacture and more flexibility in form. Maybe weight in the future, but certainly not in the present. It depends on the composites used. For the same strength part, carbon fiber is lighter than metal, while fiberglass is actually heavier. But definitely it seems there is not a huge difference in weight or load carrying between, say, a Cirrus and a 182. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 For the same strength part, carbon fiber is lighter than metal, while fiberglass is actually heavier. Are you talking about in sandwich material, or by itself? Fiber-reinforced polymers don't get their strength by themselves, the strength comes from the combination of construction technique and proper sandwich materials. The moment you add something between two pieces of polymer, the strength DRAMATICALLY rises, for only a few percent increase in weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Cesnalis Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 Cirrus is already the carbon fiber advanced design leader in the 4-seat space knocking out Cessna and the others who are still making metal and rivet designs. Cirrus is fiberglass not carbon fiber. The TTX may not be competing with FD but it is an example of Cessna using 'advanced design' vs strut braced aluminum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Top Cat Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 The TTx is $800k. Has a monster 310HP Continental TSIO-550-C (1980s design) and a fuel burn of 20gph. Hardly a competitor with the Pipistrel (which is sleeker, faster, $500k and half that fuel burn, retractable titanium gear, can land off airport, has a hybrid and electric engine option) or FD (@$250k with a fraction of that fuel burn including Mogas, JetA, same range, wider cabin) offering. You might want to try doing a little homework yourself. "With built-in oxygen, 102-gallon fuel capacity, touch-screen glass avionics, and available satellite radios, the TTx is an exceptionally well-equipped flying machine. Its class-leading 235-knot maximum cruise speed sets it solidly above every other aircraft in its class." Thing is, the Cessna TTX is in a different class with a different mission. That is, it's NOT an LSA. If you want to own and fly one, then you're not a sport pilot, so you get yourself qualified in that higher pilot certification category and have at it. Personally, my days of getting anywhere super-fast are over. I'm more into enjoying the ride and being safe and comfortable. I'd buy the LSA that best suits those parameters for ME. The next guy will be different, and I'll enjoy his/her plane for what it is. I think it all gets pretty silly when you get into a pissing contest about who has the most composite materials and spoilers. Spoilers ? Seriously? One great thing I took away from the Sebring Expo was the wonderful quality builds of many airplanes. The Legend Cub, the Cub Crafters, Jabiru, FD and Tecnam products were truly things of beauty. Each with different missions within light sport. Moving On said it best…some LSAs are tube and fabric Cubs, Champs etc, and the other end of the scale are the FD CTLS, Tecnams etc which offer a different side of light sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 "I will fight no more, forever!" - Chief Joseph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 It often seems like CTLSi is much more enamored of the technology than the actual flying. He likes electronic, automated, well...everything. This seems more like a systems management approach to piloting, where as little time is spent hand-flying as possible, in favor of letting the avionics fly the airplane. If an airplane and its systems do not lend themselves to that style of flying, then it is ancient and of no use, while those that decrease actual piloting skill are "the future". It's interesting that while airlines are training pilots away from this systems management mindset for safety reasons, others flying smaller aircraft are rushing headlong toward it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrnflyr Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 Well, like I said, I don't post here very often as I've sold my CTLS. I have a big section in my heart for FD, the Gutman's and Roger/Tim as I think they are the best of the best. They were there when I had cancer and needed to fly with Sport Pilot privileges. I was simply asking a question if anybody has had actual experience in the new Tecnam P2008TC. That was all. I'm not wasting my time on thread drift and arguing about Cessna, etc. I guess I've figured out who all the threads were directed at now. Signing off for awhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandpiper Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 ............FD (@$250k with a fraction of that fuel burn including Mogas, JetA, same range, wider cabin) offering. I assume you refer to FD's C-4. Although I would love to see this sell for $250K, I have my doubts. Maybe the first one or two, but after that its gonna be a lot more. It always is. Hope I'm wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 Signing off for awhile. Well, if you've stuck around long enough to read this... ...allow me to strongly recommend the "ignore" function. Easy to implement and in my case has helped me lower my blood pressure. As long as certain people get quoted, one may still get exposed to aggravating snippets, but it's a whole lot better than getting drowned in the morass of the actual posts. Anyway, ignoring a single member has improved the experience here immensely. I'll leave it to you and others to guess which one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrnflyr Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 How do you ignore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 Click on your screen name, which should be near the upper right of this page. When you click on it you'll see choices in a drop down menu. One of those choices is "Manage ignore preferences". Select that and you should be able to put a given member on ignore. You will no longer see their posts unless you actively choose to. Good luck. I only have one member on ignore, and it does help the signal-to-noise ratio immensely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Koerner Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 Ed, I'm sorry but I don't think that's a good idea. Most of us who follow this forum do so to become more informed about CT aircraft and rotax engines - performance, maintenance, flight techniques and regulations. All levels of knowledge and experience are represented in the readership. If someone posts something that is incorrect (especially if its something dangerous) we need people who are knowledgeable and experienced, such as yourself, to correct them - both for the benefit of the original poster and for the benefit of others reading these posts, now and even years in the future (forum threads seem to live forever). If you don't have time to quote references or develop logical arguments, so be it. A simple "Thats wrong" would be better than nothing. Mike Koerner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 I agree with Mike. It's only words. It can't physically hurt you. You don't put the president on ignore or your wife. You simply tune out or correct. Words can only bother you IF you choose to allow them. Be bigger, not less than or equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 I agree with Mike. It's only words. It can't physically hurt you. You don't put the president on ignore or your wife. You simply tune out or correct. Words can only bother you IF you choose to allow them. Be bigger, not less than or equal. Divorce the wife and impeach the president!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 Mike,In general I agree.If it was just a matter of a newbie stating incorrect assumptions, and then being open to correction, that would be one thing. We've all been beginners at one point or another, and even the very experienced pilots here sometimes state something in error. As I've said before, the absolute best words I can ever type on a forum are "I stand corrected" - it means I learned something.But whether at a party or a forum, some people just exhibit personality traits I'd just as soon not have to deal with. Arrogance and condescension and self-righteousness and meanness are some that come to mind. As an example, who here would enjoy having their pick of aircraft referred to as "dung"? That's just rude.The fact that certain posts and attitudes get to me over time perhaps reflect a flaw or weakness in my personality. But regardless, I find certain posts aggravate me to the point I'd just as soon avoid them.As to the single individual I have on ignore, it's my second time around. I took him off ignore for the reasons you stated, but a specific series of posts led me to believe I would have a better time here without being exposed to his posts - and, at least for me, it works!But, as I said, I do absolutely get your point. As long as there's a "Quote" function I'll continue to see dribs and drabs from this individual, and I will speak up to correct obvious errors if others have not already picked up on them.In any case, I think selective filtering of members is better than outright banning. But one or two individuals do have the power to degrade the quality of a forum. The very fact that someone was about to leave this forum for that very reason and we're not discussing Tecnam's right now kind of proves my point. I'd rather see them selectively ignore than to drop out of the forum entirely.But That's Just Me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 "Divorce the wife and impeach the president!!!" Neither works well. It's too costly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak, Courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen. Winston Churchill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 The fact that certain posts and attitudes get to me over time perhaps reflect a flaw or weakness in my personality. But regardless, I find certain posts aggravate me to the point I'd just as soon avoid them. As to the single individual I have on ignore, it's my second time around. I took him off ignore for the reasons you stated, but a specific series of posts led me to believe I would have a better time here without being exposed to his posts - and, at least for me, it works! But, as I said, I do absolutely get your point. As long as there's a "Quote" function I'll continue to see dribs and drabs from this individual, and I will speak up to correct obvious errors if others have not already picked up on them. Ignoring a person instead of asking them to leave was tried in many forums. It usually ends up with people not wanting to participate anymore. It also leads to confusion: if two posts have conflicting info, and one person doesn't see the other's post before said confusion develops, now even more time had to be wasted on the subject to straighten the record. I post here and share experience voluntarily, but i am growing very weary. I have said person on ignore too, so i will see how it goes. Forums with branching threading is much more tolerant of these issues since you can collapse that section of replies (which spiral off like this ), but it can sometimes become more involved to find the information you want with heavy branching. As a side note, reddit has the upvote-downvote function. If someone has too much negative karma in that subreddit, it greatly restricts their posting ability, until it gets to the point where they are banned from posting unless a moderator overides. It works to a decent degree, but still periodically requires moderator intervention. A subreddit tried a "hands off" approach (it was supposed to be for one month), and the content became so bad that it was rescinded in less than a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 We've been here before. Probably better and more constructive to get back to a more fun enlightening aviation topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runtoeat Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 I think this forum will function best if it is self regulating with no censoring. Pilots are a discerning lot and we're good at picking and choosing what we read and what we respond to. Life's too short and there's always going to be an abundant number of unhappy persons that will try to suck others in and make just as unhappy. Just refrain from giving them the attention they crave. Now, back to what we're all here for, discussions about LSA'a and trying to figure out how to fly them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that the forum has been degraded because of this person. An inordinate amount of time is spent responding to this person's posts. It detracts from the important info the forum provides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Top Cat Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 "Divorce the wife and impeach the president!!!" Neither works well. It's too costly. An airline pilot would go to a downtown bar every couple of years, find the sexiest gal, load her up with drinks and then give her $25k in cash before going home. Apparently it was much simpler, and cheaper, then going through another divorce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralarcon Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 An airline pilot would go to a downtown bar every couple of years, find the sexiest gal, load her up with drinks and then give her $25k in cash before going home. Apparently it was much simpler, and cheaper, then going through another divorce. LOL, I know people who resemble that remark. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S3flyer Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 Back to the topic at hand. Interesting that that P2008 is certified in Europe to 630kg but I'm sure no one would ever fly over the 600kg limit in the states.... $215K is also getting pretty close to the $275K Part23 certified P2010. Takes a PP to fly the 2010 but you'd have a faster plane, with four seats and room/MTOW left for a bunch of cargo. Like many four seaters, you do have to trade fuel/cargo if you want to fill the 4th seat. Makes me very glad I took the plunge over 6 years ago when fully stacked LSA's were 'only' in the low 100's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.