2006 CTSW Price reduced to $ 50k

[Flyingdriller]

1200 hrs , very good condition , can email pictures ,basic panel,no autopilot Mike 620 433 0141

[rhanson]

Nice ride HA.

 

If your buyer prefers MPH, I may

 

want to swap for your KIAS gauge.

 

RH

135CT

[FlyingMonkey]

Why would anyone prefer MPH in an airplane?  Just asking.  I suppose someone might, but I don't know why.

Many do. I'd say most experimentals are instrumented for MPH. There is not really much of an advantage of one over the other. All my friends' airplanes are in MPH, I have my 496 reporting in MPH so that we can compare ground speeds more easily.

[FlyingMonkey]

I don't see any advantage of one vs the other except consistency.

 

Agreed.  The one slight advantage of mph is that most people's brains are already calibrated in mph from driving cars, and instinctively know how far a statue mile is.  When I talk to my wife or other non-aviation folks in knots I get "how far is a knot again?" or "how many mph is that?"

 

I'd use mph in my CTSW, except that all the POH materials are in knots and I don't want to do any conversion in my head while flying.  After years of flying the CTSW in knots I could see a situation where I'm on final doing my normal approach at 52 and wondering why I am sinking so fast...   

[gbigs]

Many do. I'd say most experimentals are instrumented for MPH. There is not really much of an advantage of one over the other. All my friends' airplanes are in MPH, I have my 496 reporting in MPH so that we can compare ground speeds more easily.

 

The ops manuals are in kts (kn ICAO).  The FAR/AIM uses kts.  The written tests use kts.  Weather products use kts.  ATC uses kts and nm.  Mach 1 is 661.7 kts.  Kts and NM relate to Lat/Long which is used in navigation (1 min latitude at the equator).  Knots also coincide with every other standard measure for aviation, KTAS, KCAS, KIAS, KEAS.

 

Best to stick with knots, celsius, and barometric pressure either in MB or Inches.  Likewise it's best to learn and use Zulu time.

[Tom Baker]

Actually the knowledge test does slip MPH into some of the questions, or at least they used to. They wanted to make sure pilots knew how to convert between the two.

 

Prior to 1970 almost all of the small aircraft were delivered with airspeed indicators that were marked in MPH. Sometime in the mid 1970's they started doing dual indication instruments. My 1974 Piper Warrior has a dual instrument with MPH as the primary range.

[Mike Koerner]

gbigs,

Thanks for your comments. You made some good points favoring the use of knots especially with respect to operating manuals, winds, navigation and aviation standardization in general. A couple minor comments:

Mach number is very sensitive to temperature. The speed of sound at the sea-level standard day condition of 59F is 661.7 knots, but at altitude it is typically much faster because the outside air is colder. Also, Mach number is not defined in any particular units. It's a dimensionless ratio of speed over the speed of sound.

A nautical mile, now defined in meters, is very close to the average distance between minutes of latitude across the entire Earth, not just at the equator. In fact, at the equator a minute latitude is a little shorter, and at the poles a little longer, than a nautical mile. A nautical mile is also close (but not as close) to one minute of longitude at the equator. With respect ot longitude you do need to specify the location as the distance between minutes of longitude becomes significantly smaller as we move away from the equator, approaching zero at the poles.

Mike Koerner

[Cluemeister]

I find it interesting that we hear about LSA costs being too high on a regular basis.  Now I don't know the seller or this aircraft, but a decent 10 year old CTSW has a reduced  asking price of $50k.  That seems pretty reasonable.

 

So the question is where is the market on used LSA aircraft? And are people more interested in glass panels with a higher price or basic avionics at a lower price?

[Anticept]

However, for flight training, it's a must. People in large part drool over shiny.

[gbigs]

However, for flight training, it's a must. People in large part drool over shiny.

 

Our first flights were in a Zodiak with round gauges.  Being a Silicon Valley tech guy (and having once worked on a small contract at Garmin before I knew what they did for a living) I couldn't wait to get a glass panel.  But i found it odd that so many still preferred and wanted the round gauges.  To me the more information the better.  But we all know aviation is a personal thing and there are a million ways to get into the air and get back down again....

[FlyingMonkey]

Usually glass has better information density, lots of info in a small space. But there is something to be said for looking in one place, at one instrument, and getting the one piece of info you want. I like both, and don't have a strong preference.

[ct9000]

I agree about information density but the main advantage of glass panel is ease of use , there is no confusion in severe turbulence because the info is all in one picture . An example of this is to fly in IMC (training only) fixation on one instrument is always a major danger with conventional round dials . A glass panel does not have this problem . Go find a good instrument rated instructor and try a bit of IFR training . It is good stuff to train on this , I know we don't fly in cloud but good training might just save your life one day if this happens and your training is current . sorry to be off topic .

[gbigs]

It's not really more information if you have a GPS device.  The only additional info I can think of is wind direction and speed.  That's a useful thing.  It's just all the information in one place instead of a six pack arrangement plus GPS.

 

EDIT:  I think if someone learned to fly with glass, switching to individual guages might be confusing.  On the other hand, if you learned to fly with guages then flying with glass is simple.

 

EDIT2:  When I fly the SkyCatchers, I usually keep the right side G300 display on engine instruments and don't even use the G300 for navigation since I have an iPad with iFly GPS, Wing X Pro7, and FltPlan Go.  I prefer iFly GPS by the way.

 

On my current glass panel I have in-cockpit weather, synthetic moving map, integrated flight plans with visual reference in flight, terrain avoidance and color coding, highway in the sky, fully coupled autopilot, visual traffic targets and audio alarms TCAS/ADS-B, fuel management, crew alarms, virtual checklists, lean-of-peak visual queues, AoA meter, sectional and instrument plates, Geo-referenced plates, stored instrument procedures and STARs,  visual range estimates for fuel and descent, visual reference and audio alarms for airspaces and restricted airspaces, configurable V-speeds/ascent/descent modes with visual queues on screen, enhanced vision system (infrared camera display on PFD) for night flying/landing, and an integrated de-icing system which also displays on the MFD.

 

Those who have not seen glass before or are strictly round gauge experienced have a harder time adjusting to this flood of information....not the other way around.

[Tom Baker]

Unless the turbulence is too severe to read the digital readouts.

 

I'm not arguing against a glass panel.  I'm just saying in our simple LSA, it is of no real benefit versus round guages and an iPad.  The airplane listed for sale in this thread is as capable as any other LSA.  It looks like a nice airplane for somebody and I wouldn't be concerned that it doesn't have a glass panel.

You might want to do a weight comparison of glass to gauges to determine that there is no real benifit.

[Doug G.]

However, this forum is about LSA. Their glass panel is very simple.

 

Skycatcher, have you flown with Skyview?

[Doug G.]

Mission dependent, right?

There are a lot of things available on Skyview that you don't get from standard steamguages. AoA, wind direction and components, synthetic vision, DA, TAS, OAT, fuel consumption, weather, traffic, audible warnings for altitude, g force, etc., collision alerts, time and distance to next waypoint, customizable checklists, UTC and local time, etc., etc. Oh and the new versions exchange data with Foreflight via onboard Wi-Fi.

I am not dising those who use round gauges. But, you are right, I like the info I have at hand.

[Tom Baker]

But you also get a lot of that on an iPad and you don't need most of that when flying an LSA.  It's simply "nice to have" stuff.  LSA is daytime VFR.  You don't even need a radio if you stay out of B, C, or D airspace.

 

You are confusing airplanes with pilot limitations. Sport pilots are limited to daytime VFR. Light sport aircraft are not. A LSA can, depending on how and when its airworthiness certificate was issued can be flown at night and in instrument conditions.

[Tom Baker]

How many people on this forum fly their LSA IFR or at night?  Of course, many of these features might be more useful for IFR flight or night flight.  Are you saying the airplane listed for sale in this thread is not a good option for a possible buyer because it has no glass panel? 

 

I'm done arguing this.  I have made my point and there is no more to add.  Agree or don't.

 

You are the one who kept saying LSA is day VFR only, which is completely incorrect. I thought you of all people would want to know the facts, instead of continually disseminating incorrect information.

 

I fly my CTLS at night. I also use it for private pilot training if the student wants. There is a flight school in Iowa who did use theirs for instrument training, including flight in IMC. Flight Design used to advertise at fly ins that a CTLS could be used as an economical way to go from zero time to ATP. The airplane is simply more capable than the limits placed on a sport pilot.

 

I am not going to say that the airplane in this thread is not a good airplane, however most buyers of a CT want glass.

[Doug G.]

Hey, it is a personal preference thing. I only posted what I did to say that the info provided is more than round gauges can give you. Personally I like it, and there are times when I use it in ways that would not be possible with round gauges. For instance, when I am doing turn practice I start into the wind (yes you can figure this out with round gauges, just like figuring out DA is possible). I do this by looking at the wind indicator on the display.

 

Arguing about one over the other is as inane as arguing about which is the best plane in existence.

[Doug G.]

Reminds me of fling a Stearman at Week's museum in FL. The first thing the instructor in the aft cockpit said was, "You'll notice there isn't an artificial horizon, we use the real one." We used the brace wires to judge bank angle. What is gravy is open to interpretation.

[Tom Baker]

And I'm not arguing one over the other.  I'm simply saying for SPORT PILOT flying a few round gauges and an iPad is all we need.  The rest is gravy.

 

 I have over 1,000 hours of no electric, no radio, no GPS, and no iPad flying. I've never had an issue.

[Roger Lee]

Its because you're old. That hadn't invented those things yet.

[gbigs]

The issue is not old tech analog round gauges versus advanced digital glass panels.  A 1920 Model T can be driven down a road today.

 

It's about how you use the aircraft.

 

Patch flying in daytime VFR G/E airspace can be done with nothing more than a compass.  No radio, xpndr, ADS-B, or six-pack.

 

But if you will ever fly cross-country and  talk to ATC and/or be flying into a D/C/B airfield and/or fly over terrain then you will need and/or want as much safety equipment as you can afford which may/must include a radio, Mode C/S xpndr with alt encoder, moving map with terrain identification, altimeter/airspeed/attitude/turn/baro, flight planning, fuel management, autopilot and engine monitoring.

[frfly172]

I still enjoy flying some IMC To break through the clouds. But I also like fuel,efficiency, That was my main reason for not going LSA.