Your favourite aerobatic training aircraft?
Cool as a moosp
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your favourite aerobatic training aircraft?
I'm a little off bandwidth here but let me explain.
The Hong Kong Aviation Club is looking to buy an aerobatic training aircraft. T'commitee has short listed three aircraft from which the members shall make their choice. They are;
Robin R2160
Zlin 242L
Slingsby T67
As the choice seems somewhat limited, and not all of the members are named Hobson, I wondered what other aircraft you folks that know would suggest, given the usual constraints of an aviation club.
Such constraints as,
1) Moderate pilot experience levels, but a desire to improve to higher levels.
2) Adequate, but not bottomless pockets.
3) Moderate engineering cover, such that complex composites may be beyond the engineers remit.
4) Tail wheel versus nose wheel.
5) New versus used.
Any advice or direction would be welcome from this member of the club who would like to vote in the poll but is not up on the knowledege of the best equipment around.
The Hong Kong Aviation Club is looking to buy an aerobatic training aircraft. T'commitee has short listed three aircraft from which the members shall make their choice. They are;
Robin R2160
Zlin 242L
Slingsby T67
As the choice seems somewhat limited, and not all of the members are named Hobson, I wondered what other aircraft you folks that know would suggest, given the usual constraints of an aviation club.
Such constraints as,
1) Moderate pilot experience levels, but a desire to improve to higher levels.
2) Adequate, but not bottomless pockets.
3) Moderate engineering cover, such that complex composites may be beyond the engineers remit.
4) Tail wheel versus nose wheel.
5) New versus used.
Any advice or direction would be welcome from this member of the club who would like to vote in the poll but is not up on the knowledege of the best equipment around.
For club use the choice is very limited: T67C/M are OK but Z242s and R2160s are very limited - what you need is a Bulldog.
It just so happens that G-BULL (known as HKG5 when it was previously resident in Hong Kong) is for sale with about 3800 airframe hours, a recently zero timed engine, dual panel, VOR/ADF/DME/TXPDR - it even still has the Hong Kong "livery".
PM me for more details.
Edit: (BTW, ferrying to Hong Kong would not be a problem)
HFD
It just so happens that G-BULL (known as HKG5 when it was previously resident in Hong Kong) is for sale with about 3800 airframe hours, a recently zero timed engine, dual panel, VOR/ADF/DME/TXPDR - it even still has the Hong Kong "livery".
PM me for more details.
Edit: (BTW, ferrying to Hong Kong would not be a problem)
HFD
Last edited by hugh flung_dung; 8th Jun 2006 at 17:23.
Northern Monkey
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Newcastle, England
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by moosp
I'm a little off bandwidth here but let me explain.
The Hong Kong Aviation Club is looking to buy an aerobatic training aircraft. T'commitee has short listed three aircraft from which the members shall make their choice. They are;
Robin R2160
Zlin 242L
Slingsby T67
As the choice seems somewhat limited, and not all of the members are named Hobson, I wondered what other aircraft you folks that know would suggest, given the usual constraints of an aviation club.
Such constraints as,
1) Moderate pilot experience levels, but a desire to improve to higher levels.
2) Adequate, but not bottomless pockets.
3) Moderate engineering cover, such that complex composites may be beyond the engineers remit.
4) Tail wheel versus nose wheel.
5) New versus used.
Any advice or direction would be welcome from this member of the club who would like to vote in the poll but is not up on the knowledege of the best equipment around.
The Hong Kong Aviation Club is looking to buy an aerobatic training aircraft. T'commitee has short listed three aircraft from which the members shall make their choice. They are;
Robin R2160
Zlin 242L
Slingsby T67
As the choice seems somewhat limited, and not all of the members are named Hobson, I wondered what other aircraft you folks that know would suggest, given the usual constraints of an aviation club.
Such constraints as,
1) Moderate pilot experience levels, but a desire to improve to higher levels.
2) Adequate, but not bottomless pockets.
3) Moderate engineering cover, such that complex composites may be beyond the engineers remit.
4) Tail wheel versus nose wheel.
5) New versus used.
Any advice or direction would be welcome from this member of the club who would like to vote in the poll but is not up on the knowledege of the best equipment around.
Robin 2160 - I didnt like the way the engine splutters if you have -ve G for more than about 2 seconds. Odd yoke made into a stick controls.
One other a/c to throw into the pot. How about at Cap10. not the B model with more ADs than you can shake a stick at, but a remanufactured one, with the carbon fibre spar. A really nice aircraft to fly, a lot more aerobatically capable than the firefly or robin, but a taildragger, so a little more difficult to land. Doesnt handle crosswinds as well as the first 2, but Im not sure how many runways you have, so I don't know how much of an impact this will have.
NB
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the old american favourite, the Decathalon. Nice benign handling good power and a taildragger for those conversions. A bit more sprightly than the T67. The bulldog is a worthy contender with similar performance to the T67 (700fpm as I recall). A 260hp T67 is quite sporty.
The CAP10 is a good tip. What about a yak 52, cheap and reliable.
And theres the cessna 150 aerobat, anyone should be able to maintain that.
The CAP10 is a good tip. What about a yak 52, cheap and reliable.
And theres the cessna 150 aerobat, anyone should be able to maintain that.
All T67s have woeful roll rates! The glider wing is a big disadvantage if you wish to teach anything involving rolling with aileron; watch any T67 display and you'll see plenty of looping and flick manoeuvres, but little in the way of 'classic' rolling manoeuvres.
Of your 3, both Robin 2160i or Zlin 242 have good reputations!
Of your 3, both Robin 2160i or Zlin 242 have good reputations!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably no real 'best' answer but at the end of the day what one would consider for a training aircraft boils down to personal preferences. Only real rules I would apply is it has to have a stick and it has to have a tailwheel. For training purposes you would want a constant speed prop as it makes like so much easier and probably safer for those who are only flying for fun. Then what sort of wings do you want? For me, you cannot beat a biplane, and for style it has to be open cockpit, you have to consider the impression you want to make on the ladies when you take them for a spin. Then what sort of power, an overpowered beast like a Pitts may be an absolute delight to roll, but that big engine also makes it easier to power out of mistakes. A lower powered machine means you have to fly the manouvers properly so makes you a better aerobatic pilot.
So, for a basic trainer that fits the above and will be well thought of when competing at the lower levels, a Great Lakes is a good choice. Quite cheap too, and not too tricky to land so it's not always in the shop after some weekend warrior takes it out. Nothing wrong with other suggestions above, just another option to think about.
So, for a basic trainer that fits the above and will be well thought of when competing at the lower levels, a Great Lakes is a good choice. Quite cheap too, and not too tricky to land so it's not always in the shop after some weekend warrior takes it out. Nothing wrong with other suggestions above, just another option to think about.
Last edited by slim_slag; 8th Jun 2006 at 08:48.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would also go with the Cap10, nice capable aircraft. Not sure about SSs thing with CS props, yes it can make things easier but it is also a good thing for people to learn on a fixed pitch aircraft so that they learn how to control the power in manouvers - depends a bit if they are just going to fly the same aircraft all the time or if they will fly others with Fixed pitch after - easy to go Fixed to CS, going the other way is when you can easily get an over reved engine.
Last edited by foxmoth; 8th Jun 2006 at 18:59.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cap 10 for me any day of the week. (As long as all AD's have been complied with....)
Of your list, probably the Robin, though their build quality is atrocious, I've never flown a zlin, though I've heard good reports.
T67, comments the same as others before. A nice machine, but nothing particularily special. It's qualities are also dependant on which engine you have fitted.
A tail dragger would always be my first choice even for students. (It is convential gear after all!) It gives the club an added dimension for training and hire.
For a basic to intermediate aero's trainer, I would use a fixed pitch prop as well, for the reasons outlined by foxmoth.
A CAP10 will do all you want and more plus it is an absolute delight to fly. Definately one of my top 5 a/c.
Of your list, probably the Robin, though their build quality is atrocious, I've never flown a zlin, though I've heard good reports.
T67, comments the same as others before. A nice machine, but nothing particularily special. It's qualities are also dependant on which engine you have fitted.
A tail dragger would always be my first choice even for students. (It is convential gear after all!) It gives the club an added dimension for training and hire.
For a basic to intermediate aero's trainer, I would use a fixed pitch prop as well, for the reasons outlined by foxmoth.
A CAP10 will do all you want and more plus it is an absolute delight to fly. Definately one of my top 5 a/c.
Cool as a moosp
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you all for your replies.
The CAP 10 sounds a good idea, and we have had a privately owned one here for a while, which was very popular. Unfortunately there is a strong aversion to tail wheel amongst the committee. We do have a crosswind situation but no more than many places, but I do like the added dimension for a club of being able to teach and experience tailwheel.
Yak, lovely but big first registration problems here. We might look at a Nanchang from next door...
Decathlon and Great Lakes are good left field ideas too.
I guess what the world needs is a new-build, moderate performance, agile aerobatices trainer, which can be used as a lead in to the more exotic competition machines.
The CAP 10 sounds a good idea, and we have had a privately owned one here for a while, which was very popular. Unfortunately there is a strong aversion to tail wheel amongst the committee. We do have a crosswind situation but no more than many places, but I do like the added dimension for a club of being able to teach and experience tailwheel.
Yak, lovely but big first registration problems here. We might look at a Nanchang from next door...
Decathlon and Great Lakes are good left field ideas too.
I guess what the world needs is a new-build, moderate performance, agile aerobatices trainer, which can be used as a lead in to the more exotic competition machines.
I've flown all three of your prospective aircraft. Here are my thoughts.....
T67: Not an ideal aerobatic aircraft as you have probably realised from flying the current club T67. You need the more powerful versions to get the best out of the airframe. I never liked it much.
R2160: Delightful handling but again a bit limited due to low power. Will struggle a bit in HK's hot climate.
Z242: A well made airframe but a bit heavy for it's 200HP. But it feels right and is superior to the Bulldog which it looks like. Aerobats well thanks to it's Zlin heritage.
Others....
Bulldog: Expensive to maintain, heavy and could do with more power. But a reasonable aerobatic aircraft. I flew them in the RAF and was never a big fan. I much preferred the Chipmunk which it replaced.
CAP10: Lovely aircraft, my favourite of the lot. However, it's god a wood wing with fabric covering which will suffer in HK's heat and humidity. Also it's a taildragger and the possibility of it being bent by a pilot who's a bit short of currency (a real problem with the HKAC I gather) will be a hanicap.
Cessena Aerobat: Horrid - don't consider it!
And as for the C6. Yes! I haven't flown one but know people who have and they love it. Better than a Yak and should be cheap to maintain. But heavy on the gas. And if you leave it in PLA colours, they may not realise it's a club aircraft and won't stop you flying so much!
I will join the club myself if you get one!
T67: Not an ideal aerobatic aircraft as you have probably realised from flying the current club T67. You need the more powerful versions to get the best out of the airframe. I never liked it much.
R2160: Delightful handling but again a bit limited due to low power. Will struggle a bit in HK's hot climate.
Z242: A well made airframe but a bit heavy for it's 200HP. But it feels right and is superior to the Bulldog which it looks like. Aerobats well thanks to it's Zlin heritage.
Others....
Bulldog: Expensive to maintain, heavy and could do with more power. But a reasonable aerobatic aircraft. I flew them in the RAF and was never a big fan. I much preferred the Chipmunk which it replaced.
CAP10: Lovely aircraft, my favourite of the lot. However, it's god a wood wing with fabric covering which will suffer in HK's heat and humidity. Also it's a taildragger and the possibility of it being bent by a pilot who's a bit short of currency (a real problem with the HKAC I gather) will be a hanicap.
Cessena Aerobat: Horrid - don't consider it!
And as for the C6. Yes! I haven't flown one but know people who have and they love it. Better than a Yak and should be cheap to maintain. But heavy on the gas. And if you leave it in PLA colours, they may not realise it's a club aircraft and won't stop you flying so much!
I will join the club myself if you get one!
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Age: 61
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T67M-260 - superb aerobatic trainer, will get to 10000 ft in 10 mins, if you get an ex-JEFTS machine it will be fully IFR kitted so you can fly your sequence then an ILS back in. You can get them with aircon (Royal Jordanian AF has them) and they have a useful 25 kt crosswind limit and will handle a lot more - or so I'm told. Roll rate is not lightning fast but not as bad as BEagle would have you think 
- he's just an old Bulldog man.
Do get the 260 though, the rest won't cut it at HK.
- he's just an old Bulldog man.Do get the 260 though, the rest won't cut it at HK.
Cool as a moosp
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is great stuff guys, many thanks.
I have now received a missive from the club saying that the 2160 has a variable pitch prop so they will not entertain it, and have reduced the option to the other two.
Is the variable pitch prop standard on the 2160 i ? And if so, would that put you off for a club aircraft? I personally feel that the complexity is good to have, to help develop skills in the club. The last variable I flew was a Mooney in Oz a couple of years ago and I do not think that VP would be too much of a challenge for the PPL pilots we have in the club.
I spent an interesting conversation yesterday with a UK instructor/examiner who has flown many aerobatic types and he felt that the 2160 i (emphasis on the "i" for injection to prevent Ninjabill's negative G point) would make a good machine, especially if it was the New Zealand build job. No longer the Robin, but now the Alpha, it looks a neat machine. The Alpha 160AI has a fixed pitch prop.
Thanks again for your inputs
I have now received a missive from the club saying that the 2160 has a variable pitch prop so they will not entertain it, and have reduced the option to the other two.
Is the variable pitch prop standard on the 2160 i ? And if so, would that put you off for a club aircraft? I personally feel that the complexity is good to have, to help develop skills in the club. The last variable I flew was a Mooney in Oz a couple of years ago and I do not think that VP would be too much of a challenge for the PPL pilots we have in the club.
I spent an interesting conversation yesterday with a UK instructor/examiner who has flown many aerobatic types and he felt that the 2160 i (emphasis on the "i" for injection to prevent Ninjabill's negative G point) would make a good machine, especially if it was the New Zealand build job. No longer the Robin, but now the Alpha, it looks a neat machine. The Alpha 160AI has a fixed pitch prop.
Thanks again for your inputs
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Port Headland
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tough and easy to maintain
CT/4E Airtrainer
The CT/4E at a glance
Seating for 2, with an optional third seat.
Side by side real time instruction and feedback
Max Takeoff 2,600lbs, empty 1,750lb
Cruise @ 150kt
Textron Lycoming, 300hp AEIO 540 piston engine
Rate of climb 1,830 ft/min
Side by side real time instruction and feedback
Max Takeoff 2,600lbs, empty 1,750lb
Cruise @ 150kt
Textron Lycoming, 300hp AEIO 540 piston engine
Rate of climb 1,830 ft/min
The CT/4 range combines powerful performance with outstanding flight control and dynamics, to create a highly capable aerobatic aircraft. Used for pilot screening right through to advanced flight training, they are also sought after for aerobatic and precision flying displays. The all metal construction and rugged design, ensure they withstand the daily rigours of training without compromising costs or performance
And how much is a CT4/E????!!! Can afford a squadron of some of the other types mentioned here for the price. As for the Yak/Nanchang comments, my 2 cents, the Yak52 is a much better aerobatic aircraft. If you are looking for a warbird style cruising machine then the CJ6 is fine. For serious aeros the Yak leaves it for dead.
However, I would question the viability (local production aside for the Nanchang) for either type in club usage unless flown regularly.
The Decathlon should be a serious consideration, great fun aircraft and capable aeros mount, with the added benefit of a tailwheel.
ASW28
However, I would question the viability (local production aside for the Nanchang) for either type in club usage unless flown regularly.
The Decathlon should be a serious consideration, great fun aircraft and capable aeros mount, with the added benefit of a tailwheel.
ASW28
Why are they worried about a VP prop? It (almost) eliminates the risk of an expensive overspeed, leads to easier aeros and gives better takeoff performance - all for just a small increase in complexity. Is it fear of the unknown?
When we were looking for an aerobatic aircraft for club use I looked at all the certified types, this list is based on memory so I may have missed a couple:
If you don't need a certified aircraft then there is a much wider choice including all the homebuilts (RVs, Acrosport, Starduster, Eagle, etc) and ex-mil (CJ6, YAK52, etc) but concerns about maintenance or fuel consumption may rule these out for club use.
HTH
HFD
When we were looking for an aerobatic aircraft for club use I looked at all the certified types, this list is based on memory so I may have missed a couple:
- Cessna Aerobat - cheap but dreadful to fly and fixed pitch
- Z242 - nice but they had operational limitations at the time
- T67C/M - nice, slowish roll rate
- R2160 - didn't like it, fixed pitch and I don't think it was approved for flicks
- Cap10 - very nice and able but fixed pitch and doubts about survivability in club usage: stepping on flaps, wood/fabric, gear attaching to spar
- Decathlon - able but it's just not the same with the wing on top in aeros, especially from the back seat
- Bulldog - nice handling, wide appeal, metal and a good all round compromise
- Pitts - very able and precise handling but doubts about survivability in club use because of the landing "challenge"
- Extra - too expensive and too big a step
If you don't need a certified aircraft then there is a much wider choice including all the homebuilts (RVs, Acrosport, Starduster, Eagle, etc) and ex-mil (CJ6, YAK52, etc) but concerns about maintenance or fuel consumption may rule these out for club use.
HTH
HFD