Need Help On Purchasing a CT

[Jean]

I will try to explain to the best of my knowledge and without prejudice. 

 

I like this saying:  We can't change the past but can certainly try to change the future!
 

Please remember I am turning to you since I am not well experienced or knowledgeable in and these matters. Also I have never flown in this category.

 

I was looking to purchase a 120 knots+, BRS equipped, 2 seater+, easy maintenance, reliable, winter heat and car gas engine under $ 100,000.00

 

I am now involved in possibly purchasing one of many available CTs either in the USA or Canada. Tried reaching out a few times to Flight Design USA without success. 

 

Does anyone know if the company is doing well especially with this Covid-19? 

 

It's probably putting a lot more financial strain since I read the company was already not doing good. I can only assume that is why I am not getting any response. I am also asking them to explain their financial situation and their plans since their future support is very important in my decision-making of a possible purchase.

 

The more I move forward on doing my due diligence, the more I am finding many more possible important issues I need to address.

 

Do they have their own database on accidents and fatalities with the final official reports? The site below, which is self-reporting, indicates 122 occurrences with 21 fatalities?

 

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/type/FDCT/1

 

 

Can anyone send me the link where I can find the annual and any other periodic inspection lists for all the CTs ? 

 

Here are a few examples I am wondering if there were any improvements found. Upon talking to an AME, there had seemed to be issues with inspections or changing the fuel carrying lines when due. Supposable there were not enough access points and some were very hard to change. He also noted he wasn't impressed with some of their manuals which compared to assembling manuals for IKEA.

 

 

 

 I found this ad below which is still active, for a CTSW  ser # 05-06-07 registration C-ITSA .  I have to say I now understand why there is not much info: 

 

I have a share (1/3 partnership) for sale on a CT Design (2005) with a Rotax 912S. The aircraft is based at Carp hangar 5.. Don’t hesitate to contact me (705.305.2524) if you want more information.

 

https://www.kijiji.ca/v-cars-other/ottawa/aircraft-for-sale/1534571164

 

 

 

Upon my 1st meeting for a visual quick inspection,  I noticed that the BRS, which is one of many important features I was looking for on the CTs, was due very soon and thought it was a must. I think I now understand, many pilots think it really doesn't have to be done in Canada. Many Canadian CT owners explain AME's can simply sign off as Non-Serviceable after the expiry date. Please clarify.

 

I also discovered all 3 owners have been trying to get their fairly new overhauled engine vibrations issue resolved without success. Supposedly almost everything in front of the firewall is almost like new and upon reinspections, all the people that worked on the plane still can't pinpoint the issue. I think they had originally decided to recently overhaul their engine partly for the same issue. I understood they will now try to see if it's an exhaust issue. Any other suggestions?

 

I found the autopilot, engine preheater and landing light are not functional. The compass needs a good adjustment. The fuel amount lines are visually hard to make out. 

 

As an example, can an owner in this category change an engine preheater with another kind? 

 

Please confirm what needs to be done under Canadian regulations to be able to substitute any of the equipment that originally came with the CT. 

 

And where would I be able to find the list of equipment that originally came from the manufacturer?

 

Do you have any partnership agreement examples since, we all agreed, the one they have is not appropriate and out of date for their situation? Please note the reserve was recently supposedly emptied partly due to the engine and prop overhaul etc.

 

The dealings started well but among other things, these issues caused us many frustrations and some disagreements which are, unfortunately, breaking the relationship that I was trying to build, as a new possible partner.  I don't want to buy into so many unsolved problems etc. 

 

It questions what else needs attention. Maybe they are approaching the sale of this partnership the wrong way? I also understand many airplane snags are not to be considered serious but I find it very hard to put a price on it. As a seller, even if you can't sell a perfect airplane, would personally fix most of these issues to get a better price and more trust from the new buyer. Especially in a new partnership with no actual experience dealing with any of them.

 

 

I did not yet see the annual inspections lists on C-ITSA nor fully inspected the logbooks. I am strongly suggested approaching a purchase of this category much differently due to the increased chances of possible issues since owners are not obligated nor under the same strict rules compared to certified. I think I am now getting a much bigger picture of this and personally was not expecting all these challenges since I thought C-ITSA was almost immaculate.  

 

 

Now I'm very glad I didn't yet spend money on a pre-purchase inspection with all these issues that need to be addressed. I now understand how important it is to start with an initial meeting with all the owners to inspect and discuss the airplane. logs etc. while taking good notes. He said she said...

 

You never know, they might be able to fix all of these issues, hopefully soon enough. It makes me question, what else needs attention? I assume the partnership is now probably in a bad situation since a partner wants to sell with these issues not resolved and more money needs to be spent. I guess no one in a partnership would want to say much to a new potential buyer since it could break the existing relationship! 

 

 I also now understood to be more careful since pre-purchase inspections in this category do not have as many legal ramifications as certified.

 

I think because of all of these findings and expecting important issues to be fixed before closing, the seller backed out. I am now refused a test ride by another partner probably also because of the engine issues. Knowing I never tried this LSA,  a test ride is necessary even if some pilots decide to buy a CT without trying one first. Due to the COVID-19 and travel restrictions, I would prefer to try one in my area, before making a purchase. 

 

Can you also help me with the blue book values of C-ITSA with and without all its issues? 

Until now, this experience is not going very well and getting the impression this due diligence process is going to be an unforgettable experience. But determined to get a good safe plane.

 

Some areas I would fly have a high level of unexpected crosswinds etc. What do you think about its handling and safety on this LSA?

 

I am still looking at another CT far from my area and would appreciate it if you could give any comments or suggestions for future dealings. I am impressed by the CT specs and safety when comparing to other companies and designs.  

 

 

 

Thank you for any help or suggestions you can give me.

 

Thank You

 

Jean Lacroix

 

[okent]

Jean, welcome to the site.

That was quite an email, I will see if I can address some of your questions.  These are all my own opinions, not saying they are right or wrong.

 

Flight Design is a solid company and I have no concerns.  I am in Tulsa and the largest dealer in FD aircraft is Airtime Aviation, which is where I got my plane.  They are happy and excited about the company and the new F2.  Lots of new stuff coming and the support from FD has been very good in my opinion.

 

The plane you are looking at makes me nervous.  A lot wrong and no detail I could find in the listing.  I'm talking about total airframe hours and engine hours for starters.  Unless you have a good mechanic and avionics shop that is local I would not take on this project.  Look for another airplane.

 

The CT series will make you fly the airplane.  What I mean by that is it will not fly like a 172.  I have time in both and the 172 handles like a station wagon and the CT like a motorcycle.  My CT is a rudder driven plane.  I can fly the 172 with minimal rudder input.  This was obvious this summer when I got my tailwheel endorsement in Idaho with my buddy.  He learned in a 172/182 and I learned in my CT.  It took him 2x as long to get the tailwheel endorsement because of the habits developed in the Cessna.  I felt comfortable very early in the tailwheel.  You will need to fly the airplane even after you touch down in a crosswind.  All lightsport aircraft have a reputation for being, well, light.  That makes them more responsive, which I like, but you can't be asleep at the stick or you will get behind the airplane.  As with all things, learn the airplane and fly as much as you can and  be smart about when to fly.

 

I have time in a Kitfox S7, Diamond DA20, Cessna 172, 182, 310, Robinson R44 and the CT is the plane I own to fly as a local and cross country airplane.  Rotax is a great engine and cheap to fly.  I've flown mine to Oshkosh and Destin Florida and never once thought the airplane wasn't fun to fly.

 

I hope that helps.

 

 

[ct9000]

Further comment, Rotax engines are the world standard for light sports aircraft but you will need a mechanic that is trained on Rotax. The engine vibration you mentioned is most likely just a carb balance adjustment. The average cont./lyc. mechanic does not seem to understand these higher tech engines and seem to refuse to read the manuals. Things like the fuel sight tubes are normally done during maintenance wing pull and are no big deal if you follow the maintenance manual.

[Tom Baker]

Please understand that Flight Design USA is a vary small operation, and they can be hard to get ahold of sometimes.

Like myself most here are in the US, and not really familiar with the Canadian regulations.

[AGLyme]

... and yet, FD is far superior than the vast majority of the other GA OEM’s out there... One of the major reasons why I bought a FD.  
 

The service, comparatively, is excellent.  I am including FD’s service center in the Northeast, Tom’s shop in the Midwest and Roger’s in the West.  

I am excited about the F2 because the press is giving it a thumbs up.  Which will extend FD’s legacy well into the future.

[CTDan]

I flew a Cirrus for 18 years before looking at the CTSW to lower flying costs... 

I recently sold my Cirrus & purchased a 2006 in similar condition to the one you are describing. It’s at Tom Bakers shop now getting everything fixed up. Im really glad these planes are considered to be inexpensive to maintain & operate... Although my short period of ownership doesn’t reflect those qualities, if this had been a Cirrus, and had the same issues, I’d be in trouble. 

Getting a pre-buy was going to be very difficult since the seller would only agree to having it done on his field, & I elected to skip the pre-buy after having a conversation with the company that did the last annual. They didn’t specialize in Flight Design, but they were reputable, so I didn’t worry much about it. 

That was a mistake. 

Once Tom is done with my plane I know I’ll have a fun, inexpensive, neat little plane... but I also know that I’ll, most likely, have more in it than I can sell it for. 

If I could do it over again, I’d have tried to get Tom, or another FD specialist, to fly out & take a look. It would have saved me some heartache. 
 

My suggestion... get an expert (like Tom) to look it over before you close, and if you have a bad feeling about the plane, walk away now.

I’d also add that, even though I’m complaining about cost (that I could have avoided), there isn’t another plane in this price range that I’d suggest over the FD. I spent more $$ on my Cirrus over the last 5 years of ownership than I will have in this plane. 

Best of luck with your search,

Dan

 

[Duane Jefts]

I see a lot of CTs come through Rogers shop in Tucson that have been maintained by A&Ps. It’s amazing at how many discrepancies they have. I thinking having real CT maintenance folks names in the logbook is important. Also pre buy done by a CT maint guy  might save a lot of heartache in the long run.

[CTDan]

54 minutes ago, Duane Jefts said:

I see a lot of CTs come through Rogers shop in Tucson that have been maintained by A&Ps. It’s amazing at how many discrepancies they have. I thinking having real CT maintenance folks names in the logbook is important. Also pre buy done by a CT maint guy  might save a lot of heartache in the long run.

 

[Andy A]

The CT is a great little airplane if it serves your mission.  Just keep in mind, you are going to have expensive annual inspections every 5 and/or 6 years.  My 2014 CTLSi was due for the rubber replacement last year.  The total cost for that annual inspection, wing spar inspection and rubber replacement was about $5,200, with no major issues.  The parachute repack is due this year at the annual inspection.  I am assuming that's going to be another $3,000 to $4,000 annual inspection/parachute repack.  After that, I'll be back "inexpensive" annuals until the next 5 year rubber replacement is due.      

[Duane Jefts]

One simple check you should do is check the “G” meter. Most folks don’t think about resetting after hard landing.

[Bill3558]

4 hours ago, Andy A said:

The CT is a great little airplane if it serves your mission.  Just keep in mind, you are going to have expensive annual inspections every 5 and/or 6 years.  My 2014 CTLSi was due for the rubber replacement last year.  The total cost for that annual inspection, wing spar inspection and rubber replacement was about $5,200, with no major issues.  The parachute repack is due this year at the annual inspection.  I am assuming that's going to be another $3,000 to $4,000 annual inspection/parachute repack.  After that, I'll be back "inexpensive" annuals until the next 5 year rubber replacement is due.      

Wing spar inspection? Got a link for that?  I couldn’t find anything on FD website.  I recently had an annual, it never came up. 

[GrassStripFlyBoy]

39 minutes ago, Bill3558 said:

Wing spar inspection? Got a link for that?  I couldn’t find anything on FD website.  I recently had an annual, it never came up. 

See page 3-7 (section 3.6 Wings) in the maintenance manual, this is required at 600 hour, or two year timing, intervals.

[Bill3558]

Thanks.  I’ll look into it. 

[CTDan]

You said “I was looking to purchase a 120 knots+, BRS equipped, 2 seater+, easy maintenance, reliable, winter heat and car gas engine under $ 100,000.00”.....

I didn’t do a lot of research before buying my CTSW, so please excuse my lack of knowledge. I thought Flight Design was about the only plane that would meet those specs... I’d be interested to know what other aircraft you considered.?

[okent]

On 11/30/2020 at 11:10 AM, Andy A said:

The CT is a great little airplane if it serves your mission.  Just keep in mind, you are going to have expensive annual inspections every 5 and/or 6 years.  My 2014 CTLSi was due for the rubber replacement last year.  The total cost for that annual inspection, wing spar inspection and rubber replacement was about $5,200, with no major issues.  The parachute repack is due this year at the annual inspection.  I am assuming that's going to be another $3,000 to $4,000 annual inspection/parachute repack.  After that, I'll be back "inexpensive" annuals until the next 5 year rubber replacement is due.      

Andy, I think this is an important point.  I went back and forth between the CT with 2 seats vs a SR20 with 4.  One thing that helped make the decision was a conversation with a friend and former Cirrus owner.  He said the day he decided to sell his SR20 was when his last annual cost him $32,000.  They do cost more to maintain but to me the cost-benefit is worth it.  Modern, parachute, reliable, sips gas, relatively fast, roomy...

[andyb]

3 hours ago, okent said:

Andy, I think this is an important point.  I went back and forth between the CT with 2 seats vs a SR20 with 4.  One thing that helped make the decision was a conversation with a friend and former Cirrus owner.  He said the day he decided to sell his SR20 was when his last annual cost him $32,000.  They do cost more to maintain but to me the cost-benefit is worth it.  Modern, parachute, reliable, sips gas, relatively fast, roomy...

I owned an SR20 for about 10 years, and an SR22 for about 6.  Loved both planes.

Cost-wise, all-in other than the cost of the plane itself, the Cirrus's cost 5 to 10 times as much to fly and maintain, compared to my CTLSi.  That wasn't the reason I switched to the CT, but it's nice nonetheless.

Andy

[CTDan]

I owned #1232, a 2002 SR20. Purchased it new & sold it last September. 
I really miss that plane. It is a lot more plane than the CTSW I bought. 
 

Even if I wanted to go back to the Cirrus, Im not sure I could replace my SR20.  I had owned it from birth & meticulously maintained it & upgraded it. 
 

However, I have access to another plane that is a lot better for travel than either plane. With that in mind, the CT is a lot of fun for putting around, & it’s MUCH less expensive to operate than the SR20. The maintenance cost on my SR20 would have allowed me to buy my CT every 5 years & then throw it away. 
 

Also, I don’t think you’ll find an SR20 under 100k unless the engine is run out & in need of repair. A io-360es is about 60k installed. 
 

If you do decide to go SR20.... Be sure it has the STec 55 autopilot & not the STec30. 
You can upgrade the 55 fairly reasonably, but the 30 is quite expensive to swap over to a DFC90. 

If you’d like to talk Cirrus, send me a message & I’d be happy to walk you through the good & the bad.  Also, join COPA!!... You’ll save your subscription cost many times over, every year  

 

[okent]

CTDan, sorry for the thread drift but what is the travel plane?