This is a post I put together some time ago, you will see that the PiperSport (SC) is the heaviest aircraft but has a much lower wing loading than the comparison machines;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparing aircraft numbers is an interesting pastime and can be useful to sort the facts from the fiction. The Sportcruiser was designed to meet the US LSA cat, but most of the SC aircraft in the UK are flying based on compliance with CS-VLA. If we compare the SC with other VLA machines we get some interesting results;
The aircraft is very light (~380kgs Empty mass, 600kgs MAUW)
Compared with a 152 (1950s tec) it is light, compared with the modern VLA designs it is very heavy. This is probably due to the use of traditional metal construction. Some comparisons;
SC 380kg
Pioneer 300 305kg
MCR01 Club 250kg
All three use the same Rotax 912 100hp engine, so the power to weight ratio is very different, which of course has a big impact on performance;
SC Cruise 105 kts ~ 18 lts/hr
Pioneer Cruise 135 kts ~ 18.5 lts/hr
MCR01 Club Cruise 138 kts ~ 18.5 lts/hr
So the aircraft is about 40% slower. This of course will mean you need a lot more fuel to travel the same distance, so can the CS carry the extra fuel?
SC 120L
Pioneer 80L
MCR01 80L
So the lack of speed can be compensated by fuel capacity, but can it lift the weight?
SC 220kg
Pioneer 201kg
MCR01 Club 240kg
Certainly any advantage of the fuel capacity is seriously compromised by the speed / load equation. How Comfortable? The SC is a much bigger aircraft than the others, so what about cockpit width?
SC 46.5
Pionear 41.3
MCR01 44.5
A clear win for the SC, but there is another issue with how Comfortable an aircraft is. How much do you get bounced around on an average UK summers day? This is not just about weight; it is also about wing area;
CS 13.2 Msq
Pioneer 10 Msq
MCR01 6.5 Msq
The key issue being wing loading;
CS 45 kg/sq
Pioneer 56 kg/sq
MCR01 75 kg/sq
Of all the aircraft above, the SC is the most likely to have to slow down in turbulence, but does the large wing give it an advantage in stall speed?
SC 38kn
Pioneer 44kn
MCR01 42kn
So a clear win for the SC, which should allow it to use a bit less runway; I cannot find a full set of figures on that, but it is almost certainly true.
Crosswind limit?
CS Anyone?
Pioneer 20kn
MCR 20Kn
Rate of Climb?
CD 1200 fpm
Pioneer 1500 fpm
MCR01 1600 fpm
Certification limitations?
All the above are VFR only no hire allowed. All are working on factory built aircraft certification with an eye on the training and private owner market, but the VFR restriction will stay. The CS is at least six months ahead of the mcr01 on this and I have no up to date Info on the Pioneer.
Conclusion
Unless you are talking solely of replacing the 152 fleet, the CS should be compared with other similar aircraft, which are available in Europe. My analysis is incomplete, and only covers aircraft, which I had figures to hand. Personally I would find the speed issue with the SC an impossible pill to swallow. I often fly 2 / 3 two hour legs in a day when I am in serious touring mode. The 40% increase required for the SC would make this impractical, even if I could carry the fuel. For the training market, an all-metal aircraft must look much less of a risk than the others, and the Piper name will win a lot of orders. If anybody would like to take the above, add in the Skycatcher and fill in some of the gaps, there would be an excellent basis for a magazine article.
Rod1