Cessna Aerobat what dya think?

[Established Localiser]

Fancy buying a Cessna Aerobat, read up on them and they seem easy to maintain and a good first Aircraft to start Aerobatics in.
Searching on the forums there seems to be a lot of people not too impressed with them .
If not an Aerobat for £20k ish what else is there to choose from?
I have plenty of hours in C150/C152's and they are simple and safe , an Aerobat seems a little more exciting though. Are there any pitfalls to keep an eye out for?
Any thoughts?
EL :confused:

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

If it floats yer boat..... but if you've £20K to spend, try some aeroplanes with decent handling before buying the Cessna.

It is aerobatic, but the C150 was never designed as an aerobatic machine so the Aerobat isn't really in its element when being aerobatted.

But if you can aerobat one well, you'll be a star in something nice to handle. :)

[davidatter708]

Done aeros in a 152 aerobat came 3rd in competition its a club aircraft we have 2. ONly trouble doing aeros in them is they loose quite a bit of height so u cant do too long a routine oh and they dont do inverted or knife edge :}.
Good fun to learn the basics.
David

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

But if you can aerobat one well, you'll be a star in something nice to handle.

Once you stop mopping oil off the inside of the donk cowling, you know you are getting close to adequate. That said, a shed is still a shed.

[Dan Winterland]

Yuk! Look for a real aeroplane.

[sternone]

Get a used http://www.extraaircraft.com/ :-)

[Rod1]

If you are serious about aerobatics, get your flying up to standard and get a Pits. It will not cost you 20k and it is a proper aerobatic machine. If you want two seats and something with good handling and mild aerobatics have a look for a Pup, but you would be better off getting a share in something more capable like a Chippy or a Robin 2160.

Rod1

[djpil]

Aerobat is a great little aerobatic trainer. Problem with buying one is that the addiction to aerobatics probably means that you'll get sick of it before long. There are definitely better aerobatic airplanes around but if you want a two seater then hard to beat the price.
Oil not just on the inside of the cowl - quality of rolls can be measured by which external parts have oil on them.

[foxmoth]

Aerobat is a great little aerobatic trainer.

?
I really cannot agree with this one.:mad:

[davidatter708]

Oil generally ends up on undercarridge legs and front elevator so getting out u get it on ur trousers opushing it back u get it on ur hands
david

[BRL]

David is the Y key not working on your keyboard????? :hmm:

[Noah Zark.]

Have seen the CFI of the Merlin Flying club at Hucknall perform a stunning aerobatic sequence more than once in an Aerobat. I would imagine that if you could achieve anything close to his standard in a 'bat, you would be very competant, and very satisfied with yourself.

[strake]

<Have seen the CFI of the Merlin Flying club at Hucknall perform a stunning aerobatic sequence more than once in an Aerobat. I would imagine that if you could achieve anything close to his standard in a 'bat, you would be very competant, and very satisfied with yourself.>

I agree. My old CFI could throw one around most impressively..well, to me anyway....

I think it's like the F1 guys driving Clarkson's Liana (Sp?).. hardly performance cars but in the hands of someone who knew what they were doing......

£20K sounds about right for a nice example and you'll sell it in a couple of years for £20K as well.

[davidatter708]

Y is working perfectly I am just a lousy typer and cant be bothered to type you. My CFI who I learnt with also can chuck one about very well, im getting there.
David

[eharding]

If you're serious about aerobatics, don't even think of buying an Aerobat. Rent one instead, and after a few hours realise why you're so happy about saving your £20K...which you can then go and invest in a Pitts.

The general demenour on the competition judging line when confronted with an Aerobat seems to be an initial feeling of goodwill towards the pilot eccentric enough to try and punt the thing round a Standard sequence which rapidly evaporates as said pilot (sweating buckets) takes a 5 minute free break between every other figure to gain enough height to carry on.

[Tiger_ Moth]

Cessna aerobat just seems like a bit of an oxymoron to me!

[foxmoth]

You can do a half decent sequence in an Aerobat but the question you have to ask is "is it fun?", (OK I will admit, given nothing else to do it in it is - but sooooo much more so in most other aero machines:ok:).:}

[Established Localiser]

Thanks for the replies , I have not done any serious Aeros and fancied owning my first Plane outright and it being something I could Aero in.
I have a share in an Archer at the moment and have no intention of getting rid of the share.
The draw to the C150 Aerobat was easy servicing and a good starter for introduction to Aeros, I am familiar with the
C150/152 ,
I would love a Pitts , however I do think it is too far a step up for me at the moment maybe if I really take to Aeros I will consider one in the future !!
EL

[Speed Twelve]

I'll echo much of what has been said here: Don't do it!

The 150/152 Aerobat is an easy-to-fly training spamcan that just happens to be strong enough to be cleared for 'aerobatics'. It's grossly underpowered, every manouevre is an exercise in energy-management. It doesn't do inverted; the donk stops as soon as 0g or less is applied. It has the control feel of a London bus, with little feedback and far too much slop in pitch and roll authority. The doors tend to burst open due to torsional flexing when you are halfway round a roll, and to cap it all I never found the harness to be particularly good at restraining pilot in seat.

Don't get me wrong, it's a piece of cake to do basic stuff in; you could train a chimp to loop, barrel roll or stall-turn it, so forgiving is the handling, but don't expect it to be in any way rewarding. I had nearly 2000 hrs instructing on the things before I saw the light and started flying Chipmunks and Slingsby M Fireflys. Now those are more fun, the Bulldog too.

Get yourself into one of the above, or better still a CAP 10 or Pitts.

Buying a Cessna to do aeros is like using a Nissan Micra as a trackday car: it'll go round, but what's the point?

[davidatter708]

I know which id go for if I had 20k lying around I do but thats for a house. An extra 200 perhaps or anything fully aerobatic with 2 seats you have to be able top show off to mates BUT NOT A SPAMCAN. You will get bored after a couple of hours and you can only learn so much in the aerobatic ways.
David

[Established Localiser]

Ok Thanks for the comments once again.
What then is the best 2 seat Aero for around £20,000-£25,000 then?
Im Stuck !!
EL :ugh:

[eharding]

£5-£10K on a share in something half decent - shares in Yaks, Pitts's, Eagles etc can be easily had for that sort money - and the remaining £15-£20K on flying the thing.

[foxmoth]

I have a share in an Archer at the moment and have no intention of getting rid of the share.

It would be better to own a tourer and have shares in a decent aero machine, aerobatics tend to be short local flights so very little availability problems whereas touring machines you sometimes want for days at a time and so can be more problematic for access. Good, not too expensive 2 seat aeros machines to start on include, Beagle Pup (150 not the 100), Robin 2160, Chippie.

[BeechNut]

Interesting thread. I own an aerobatic Beech Sundowner 180. Yes, they made them. Cleared for loops, spins, split-S, immelmans, aileron rolls, barrel rolls, snap rolls. Very quick on the ailerons. Not bad really for a 2450 lb tourer. If you can find one, I'd recommend it. Not much more of an aerobat than a C150 aerobat, but with an honest 115 knot cruise and 4 places, it is a great family tourer. At aerobatic weight (2030 lbs) with only 2 on board and light in fuel, the 180 hp Lycoming can climb sharply at 1000 ft/min.

The only problem, they were exceedingly rare. I happened to get my hands on one! I have thought of trading down to a C150 as I no longer need 4 seats that often, and would like to save on fuel, and still have a bit of fun. But at the end of the day I decided to keep the Beech.

If you're looking at 2-seat aerobatic machines, you could also consider a Citabria or Champ. I also heard that clipped-wing Cubs with 100 hp Continentals are pretty good as well. A buddy has a 115 hp Citabria and he seems to have loads of fun with it.

[Gipsy Queen]

Good advice, Foxmoth.

I cannot see how any high wing monoplane can be much good at aeros. I never met one that was and if there is one out there, the C150 most certainly is not it. Frankly, I have had more fun in a BN2 which barrel rolls (empty) quite nicely.

Sadly the days when you could pick up a DHC1 for little more than the cost of the inner wing bay mod have long gone but I would echo your sentiments here - if finances will run to a share in an aircraft which has the best harmonised controls of any I have met in nearly 60 years of flying and is truly delightful in every respect (apart from flat spins), get a Chippie. Quite magical. :ok:

[effortless]

It has been a while since I did any aeros but I have to echo Gipsy: if finances will run to a share in an aircraft which has the best harmonised controls of any I have met in nearly 60 years of flying and is truly delightful in every respect I have only been flying for fifty years but My happiest times were in a chippy. Not as snappy as a Yak or Extra by any means but a truly satisfying kite. AND it smells like a real aeroplane. :ok:

[davidatter708]

Back of pilot magazine jet provost mk3 fully aerobatic and a jet :} at 26500

[SlipSlider]

Beechnut wrote:
you could also consider a ........ Champ

While Champs undoubtedly have their good points, they are definitely NOT aerobatic in the UK.

Slip
(Champ owner :) )

[checkpointcharlie]

EL
Seems like the 'have nots' are mounting up !
Just a couple of views on the Aerobat for what it's worth. In the States the aircraft is used as an ab initio trainer for aeros, as well as the Citabria and Super Decathlon. Its not a spectacular aeroplane and it doesn't do aerobatics that well but have you ever heard of one falling to pieces in mid air or that they are difficult to maintain ? What about expensive to run or hard to land ? How about difficult to recover from a spin ?
I own a Super Decathlon which too received a fair amount of derisory comments before people flew it and saw the light !! As always with aerobatics there are a lot of armchair experts out there who can't wait to share their opinion however one of the only times I saw a crowd silenced by an aerobatic display was at Old Warden by a chap in an Aerobat who sparkled and didn't lose height.
I did my aerobatic instructors rating in the 152 Aerobat rather than the Decathlon because it taught me so much about energy management and proper control harmonisation. Its also more importantly a hoot. Most aeroclub Aerobats are dogs as is most of the uk hire fleet so try to fly a good one to get a fair comparison.
Finally the British Aerobatic Association has a Cessna trophy and look at what won one of the beginners comps recently.
Finally if you don't think they are fun try this in your Chipmunk or Bulldog !http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laPklVfCdAI or have a look at www.aceaerobaticschool.com.
Good Luck. CPC:ok:

[eharding]

Finally the British Aerobatic Association has a Cessna trophy and look at what won one of the beginners comps recently.


That being said, the Cessna trophy wasn't even contested 2002-2004, and was awarded on the basis of one sequence in 2005, and two in 2006... :E

http://www.aerobatics.org.uk/points/points.htm

[evansb]

Further to checkpointcharlie's Decathlon comments, here is a 8KCAB Super Decathlon listed for $60,000 USD in California. Better examples are asking $74,900 USD.
Make sure all AD's are complied with, and ask how many times it has been ground-looped, not if it has been ground-looped. You'll likely get a more honest response.

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/superDecathlon.jpg

[foxmoth]

there are a lot of armchair experts out there who can't wait to share their opinion
As a current aerobatic instructor who has flown many aero machines including the 152 and dH82a (try that if you want to learn energy management) I hardly think armchair expert is fair, and the same probably applies to many others that have replied here. We were asked for opinions and have given them, don't knock people just because their opinion is different from your own:mad:

[checkpointcharlie]

Sorry Fox Moth no offence meant. Obviously you are extremely well qualified to comment and I think being a professional you know how wide of the mark some peoples opinions can be !
Mind you Airbus drivers always were sensitive !!:ok:

[BeechNut]

Finally if you don't think they are fun try this in your Chipmunk or Bulldog !http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laPklVfCdAI

Yikes. That's some spin. The POH in my Sundowner says that "spin recovery beyond 6 turns has not been demonstrated"...if you make to 6 turns...it tends to degrade into a spiral dive. I understand beyond 6 turns, it goes flat. I'm no aerobatics expert, best I've ever done is spin and loop it.

Beech

[foxmoth]

Mind you Airbus drivers always were sensitive !!

A few thousand hours on B757/767 as well.:}

[eharding]

Back of pilot magazine jet provost mk3 fully aerobatic and a jet at 26500


Has the CAA removed the 'No Aerobatics' restriction on JPs then?


Not as snappy as a Yak or Extra by any means but a truly satisfying kite. AND it smells like a real aeroplane


It's been nearly 25 years since I was in an (AEF) Chippie, but the abiding memory was the smell of vomit (not my own, but it's an accumulative aroma which tends to induce more of the same, if you get my drift). Do they still all whiff of chunder, or was that just a 1980's thing?

[Gipsy Queen]

Vomit? Well, occasionally, I suppose, but that malodorous condition can be found in pretty well any aircraft that has not properly been washed out. Perhaps more noticeable in a Chipmunk due to the canopy - I suspect many more people were sick in its predecessor (DH82a) but less noticeably so due to the natural ventilation afforded by the open cockpits. Having a passenger on board while you practise recovery from unusual attitudes on instruments is guaranteed to produce something unpleasant.

My olfactorial memories are of leather, sweat and Brylcreme. But I'm from a different age when you had to do a couple of low passes in your DH89 or Lockheed Lodestar to move the dinosaurs off the landing strip. Happy days!

Incidentally, why has nobody mentioned the Stampe? It had a better rate of roll than the Tigger, didn't have those damned slats and was nicer to fly. But if you want a lesson in energy management, have a go in the Fournier RF4 . . . .

[effortless]

But if you want a lesson in energy management, have a go in the Fournier RF4 . . . . Oh I had quite forgotten.... shere bliss. Uncomplicated and so much more agile than the poor old Slingsby, or was it just me? We used to get regular visits from France by Fourniers so they can cross the channel if you want.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

I've been Chippying for a few decades now and I love that aeroplane. But cheap to run they ain't. Our's has always been a big group which keeps the costs down, and not being a tourer a big group works well with availability, too.

However, for aerobatic bangs per buck, a Yak 52 share would be better. Or for a cheaper alternative to the Chippy, still with 2 seats but without the vintage charm and character, the T67 is OK.

[Gipsy Queen]

Incidentally, I have just watched the 152 doing 60 turns - see link above.

Something seems not quite right here. I would have expected some camera shake at the stall but was not able to detect any. Why does the girl's hair not lift at entry to the spin or otherwise make much movement? The sequence seems to have been initiated at 14,000 feet (will one of these climb that high?) and whilst the altimeter appears to unwind with some predictability, other flight instruments can't be checked as the yoke is in the way - I would have expected it to have been pulled much further aft. And why full left aerleron in a spin anyway?

And has anyone noticed the rotating ground? The aircraft's vertical axis of descent is extraordinarly concentric. Looks a bit computer-generated to me . .

Others may find more inconsistencies; I'm getting a whiff of hay here. ;)

And no, I would not wish to attempt this in a Chipmunk. There used to be a widely-circulated theory that if you opened the canopy and stood up, the change in airflow would get the a/c out of the flat condition which it had a propensity to adopt after a few turns. Never met anyone (living) who had tried it though!

[smarthawke]

To stray away from the expensive exotica and back to EL's original question...

Surely a good first plane to buy is a 150/152 Aerobat? You can buy one outright for reasonable money, parts are plentiful and reasonably cheap and can have them maintained almost anywhere.

Okay, they may not be the most exciting (and not any more exciting to the touch than a standard 150/152) but does it fit the mission requirement?! You can park them outside, fly them IMC, stick loads of cr@p in the back and fly with a passenger whilst operating out of reasonably sized (500m) strips quite happily.

As for pitfalls and differences, the Aerobats are exactly the same airframe but for stronger wing spars, bigger wing struts and beefed up tailplane spars. Some 150s (the FRA 150 L/M/N) had a RR O-240 130hp engine which is 30% more power than a standard 150 and 15% more power than a 152's O-235 Lycoming.

You a pay a bit more for an Aerobat over a standard machine but get it back when you come to sell it on.

I speak as an engineer with a lot of experience working on and flying 150s and 152s. Of course, when the RV-6 gets clearance for aeros in the UK.....

[Clarie]

Remember aircraft ownership is often a compromise, because we can't all afford an aircraft for every occasion. Pitts are great for aeros, but try taking more than a few toiletries and a credit card on a trip, and they really shouldn't be left out if you have to fly anywhere. The ones I've flown had nice hard seats for aeros, but were pretty uncomfortable. The insurance is high too because people tend to prang them. (Try finding one with no accident history). You'd also be nervous putting one on line or letting your friends borrow/hire it from you, whereas you probably wouldn't be worried about anyone flying an Aerobat.

Remember all of the costs. If you get anything with a wobbly prop that means more maintenance. The more powerful it is, the more your fuel costs will be.

So in that light, there's nothing wrong with an Aerobat! Of course they won't perform like a Pitts, but you can still have a bit of fun, and hire something more aerobatic when you feel like it. It may be cheaper to hire something more capable every now and then, rather than owning something with higher maintenance and insurance costs.

A Citabria, Pup or Airtourer would also fit the bill. Personally, I'd prefer a Pup or Airtourer because the handling is nicer. Airtourers roll well (not much wing!) whereas longer winged Citabrias need a bit of muscle.

Remember too, when the engine overhaul comes up you could always put a bigger engine in to boost the performance.

[sir.pratt]

Yikes. That's some spin.
a spin with full left aileron?

[smarthawke]

One other point about the Aerobat which I think is important for any flying, it comes with a substantial 4 point harness.

Pups are nice but being British are expensive to maintain and parts aren't exactly plentiful! Citabrias etc will end up having to be recovered at some stage so again the maintenance costs are potentially much higher than a 150/152.

Clarie, excellent point made about aeroplanes being a compromise. As for re-engining with a more powerful motor, not really an option on a UK machine that you want to aerobat. There are US STCs for putting 160/180hp engines in a 152 - go up well but....! The most powerful 152 Aerobat was the Sparrowhawk with a 125hp version of the O-235. Not sure if there are any on the UK reg.

[djpil]

a spin with full left aileron?
I haven't seen that video so I'm guessing why you made that comment. The effect of aileron in the Cessna, once the spin is fully developed, is different than some other types. (One of the dangers of generalising about spin characteristics and recovery techniques.)
To add to comments by smarthawke and others. The Airtourer T6 is a nice variant of the type but if you want to do a more classical spin or if you like stall turns then its not very pleasant.
Citabria roll forces can be improved a lot with spades.

[davidatter708]

The aileron is to keep it spining otherwise it would just stop they dont like it after a few they normally stop
david

[Gipsy Queen]

Glad somone remembers the Victa/Glos Airtourer.

This was quite a pleasant kite but inclined to bring on incipient sciatica due to the cold draft whistling up the central tunnel and shooting up your right sleeve. But with respect to re-engineing with something more powerful, remember that more powerful generally means heavier too.

As far as I am able to remember, the Airtourer came with 110hp as standard. There was a more powerful version (150hp?) but the handling of this was not as nice as the basic version due to the increased engine weight/higher polar moments of inertia.

[Clarie]

The Airtourer was originally made with a 100hp Continental, then a 115hp Lycoming. Later models were 150hp fixed pitch and 150hp constant speed. However they've been been converted up to at least 180hp constant speed, and then of course the military trainer version CT/4 was 200hp+. The CT/4 is coming out again, now with a glass cockpit and a 300hp Lycoming.

I've flown the 115 and 160. Lovely light handling, easy to fly, great visibility, good roll rate, wider cabin than 150s/152s, and strongly built. A New Zealander flew a 115hp one around the world in 1969, the smallest aircraft at the time to complete such a feat.

[Gipsy Queen]

Thank you, Clarie, for refreshing my memory - I haven't seen an Airtourer for years.

I had about 100 hours on the type, nearly all of it instructing and all of it enjoyable. I never had any qualms with stall turns or spins but any sort of hammerhead was a very definite no-no. I imagine that with 200hp and an inverted system, it might have been quite a performaer.

I had a student who thought that the aircraft was just a marketing device for the Victa Lawnmower Company since one of these products was necessary to cut the strip immediately before take-off. 100hp and those little wheels could make things a bit marginal on grass.

Pleased to hear of its re-introduction - I hope it succeeds for it was an excellent trainer which taught people to fly as opposed to the just-attain-a-licence characteristics of the ubiquitous spamcan.

[Big Pistons Forever]

When I did my instructor rating the school had a C 150 Aerobat. My (ex military instructor insisted that all FI's do a full set of unusul attitude recoveries before he would sign them off. This wetted my interest and I went on to get an Aerobatic Instructor rating in addition to my aeroplane instructor rating (a requirement to teach aerobatics in Canada). I subsequently did quite a bit of aerobatic instruction and the more I did the less I liked the C 150.
This was due to a number of reasons including
1) You can't properly see out of it. 90 % of good aerobatics is seeing exactly where the airplane is in relation to the ground and then being able to discern the path it is following.
2) It has such sloppy and in effective controls there is no room to learn any finesse as every manoever requires full application of every control to get anything to happen
3) The 100 hp models ( the only one I ever flew ) is terribly under powered. Energy management is all fine and dandy but on a hot day you will spend 50 % of your time climbing back to the safe altitude.... at 200 fpm....even when you do the manoevers right.
4) The airplane has a reputation of being harmless but it will easily exceed the (low) redline on a vertical down line.
5) I wore a parachute, but realistically I think it would be almost impossible to actually get out of it in an extremis situation.
I think an abmirable use of the C 150 aerobat is to introduce pilots to unusual attitudes and the recovery thereof which IMO should be mandatory for all licenses above the PPL. If you are going to buy your own machine get a proper airplane. I currently enjoy gentleman aerobatics in my Nanchang CJ6 and also found the Chipmunk a delightful machine. Personnally I think the Pitts is too much of a one trick pony. It is an amazing aerobatic machine but unless you want to pursue competitaive aerobatics, it is overkill.

[HappyJack260]

Interesting thread. Perhaps the question should be - why do you want to own. I used to fly a Pitts registered VH-FFF, because, said the owner, "if it flies, floats or f***s, it's cheaper to rent than buy.

You have to be doing about 150 hours a year to make it cheaper to buy than rent. I own a Pitts S-2C and fly about 25 hours a year. It gets to 3000' in about 2 minutes from starting teh take-off roll, and I can fly aeros over the field, so a 40 minute flight is a pretty good workout.

For aeros, I'd suggest, either rent or share - or find a way to defray the cost. Mine's on-line with a flying school http://www.airborne-aviation.com.auwhich does about 8 hours for every hour I do - so it keeps my costs down pretty close to the direct costs. In your position I'd either go the group share route or keep renting until I got to a level where it was hard to progress in what I could rent.

A Chippy is delightful, but for the money (running costs money, that is) I'd rather get the extra performance of a Yak-52. Robin-2160 isn't bad and makes a reasonable 2-seat tourer - the airborne equivalent to a Mazda MX-5, perhaps.

Have a look at the British Aerobatic association website - there are usually a few shares for sale. If I was coming back to the Uk, I think I'd buy a share in that Extra 300L at Shoreham I saw a while ago. I think there's also a fairly active Yak group run by Jez Hopkinson at Stapleford Tawney.

But please don't go with the Cessna 150. You'll be getting close to its capabilities after too few hours. At least with a Pitts or similar, even if you feel you're the master in the air, it'll still keep you on your toes for a landing - ven with dozens of hours...which is half the fun!