Aerobatic tourer... suggestions?
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
From: in France, but I travel a lot...
Aerobatic tourer... suggestions?
Hi everybody,
after rejecting the consideration of purchasing an advanced microlight (too far from my needs), I am now selecting an aircraft based on its touring/aerobatic capabilities.
I have shortlisted three candidates which would match my needs: Grob 115, Zlin 242 and Slingsby Firefly.
Next criteria will be the economy of use... therefore I am asking if somebody has direct experience of managing such aircrafts: in spite of a very attractive purchasing price I don't want to be killed by maintenance costs... so any suggestions will be welcome....
Thanks in advance,
Nick
after rejecting the consideration of purchasing an advanced microlight (too far from my needs), I am now selecting an aircraft based on its touring/aerobatic capabilities.
I have shortlisted three candidates which would match my needs: Grob 115, Zlin 242 and Slingsby Firefly.
Next criteria will be the economy of use... therefore I am asking if somebody has direct experience of managing such aircrafts: in spite of a very attractive purchasing price I don't want to be killed by maintenance costs... so any suggestions will be welcome....
Thanks in advance,
Nick
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
The Slingsby Firefly comes in at least a,b,c, m160,m200 and m260 versions. The A is wood with around 115hp and fixed pitch prop, the m260 is composite with 260 hp and vp prop. I used to own an “a” have competed in an m160 and flown the m260. The cost of operation will vary hugely!
Rod1
Rod1
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2000
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 14,479
Likes: 178
From: UK
Have a look also at the Bulldog, they've become reasonably inexpensive and are well supported from within the UK community. It's a gorgeous aeroplane to fly, with fairly reasonable legs and quite a comfortable cockpit.
A friend who has a T67 seems to have significant issues with regular service bulletins and very slow supply of parts, but loves the aeroplane when he's flying it. Statistically the small engined aeroplanes do not have a good safety record, but the military spec (M200 and M260) variants are very good in civil use.
I haven't dealt with the G115 but have dealt with other Grob aircraft in the past. Their product support was always excellent.
All I really know about the Zlin is how ugly it is!
G
A friend who has a T67 seems to have significant issues with regular service bulletins and very slow supply of parts, but loves the aeroplane when he's flying it. Statistically the small engined aeroplanes do not have a good safety record, but the military spec (M200 and M260) variants are very good in civil use.
I haven't dealt with the G115 but have dealt with other Grob aircraft in the past. Their product support was always excellent.
All I really know about the Zlin is how ugly it is!
G
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
From: Amsterdam
Touring and aerobatics are, to an extent, mutually exclusive. The intermediate and higher aerobatics capable aircraft (such as the Extra 300, Cap 21 and similar) are virtually all very specialized airframes with not a lot of baggage space, and limited range. Not to mention the cost of touring in a 300-HP airplane.
So you will have to compromise. I fly the Robin R2160 a lot for both purposes. It does reasonable aerobatics up to Standard level, has almost four hours endurance @ 110 knots IAS, a reasonably comfortable and roomy cockpit and a baggage compartment that takes 30 kg easily. Two adults with baggage and full fuel and it's exactly on MTOW. It's also a rugged airframe with not a lot of issues, as far as I can see. I am given to understand that the GeneralAvia F22 or Slingsby Firefly are more or less equal in capabilities. (And as I understand, the Fireflies that are currently on sale en-masse are ex-military, with full inverted flight capability.)
Slightly higher up the aerobatics scale is the Cap 10. Capable of Intermediate aerobatics, and still about four hours endurance with reasonable baggage space. But that one is probably more maintenance intensive and spare parts availability might be an issue.
Oh, and what about the Yak-52? Capable of Intermediate+ aerobatics, and good range for touring too. Plus the 'wow' factor of arriving in something ex-Soviet. The noise alone will send shivers down your spine. But you've got to have big pockets to fly it.
So you will have to compromise. I fly the Robin R2160 a lot for both purposes. It does reasonable aerobatics up to Standard level, has almost four hours endurance @ 110 knots IAS, a reasonably comfortable and roomy cockpit and a baggage compartment that takes 30 kg easily. Two adults with baggage and full fuel and it's exactly on MTOW. It's also a rugged airframe with not a lot of issues, as far as I can see. I am given to understand that the GeneralAvia F22 or Slingsby Firefly are more or less equal in capabilities. (And as I understand, the Fireflies that are currently on sale en-masse are ex-military, with full inverted flight capability.)
Slightly higher up the aerobatics scale is the Cap 10. Capable of Intermediate aerobatics, and still about four hours endurance with reasonable baggage space. But that one is probably more maintenance intensive and spare parts availability might be an issue.
Oh, and what about the Yak-52? Capable of Intermediate+ aerobatics, and good range for touring too. Plus the 'wow' factor of arriving in something ex-Soviet. The noise alone will send shivers down your spine. But you've got to have big pockets to fly it.
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 2
From: UK
The Yak 52 is very capable aerobatically and lovely to fly. It oozes character and sounds the business (from out side - to the pilot it sounds like a bag of spanners in a washing machine!). But they are very thirsty and not efficient long distance machines.
The Yak 18T is the compromise machine - same engine as the '52 but 4 seats while remaining aerobatic! This one I haven't flown, so can't comment further.
The Yak 18T is the compromise machine - same engine as the '52 but 4 seats while remaining aerobatic! This one I haven't flown, so can't comment further.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
Zio Nick did not list any permit machines and is not UK based but the obvious aircraft is the RV, in either RV7 or RV8 versions. More aerobatic and bettor touring machines than the T67 with much lower running costs.
Rod1
Rod1
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 927
Likes: 1
From: Sth Bucks UK
Talk about a good looking machine!
Hard to believe it was designed in 1959 isn't it?
Yak18T is a rugged and aerobatic aeroplane but running costs would put me off.
Citabria is a nice plane but a bit on the slow side for touring IMHO.
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,807
Likes: 10
From: Ansião (PT)
I'm surprised the Extra 330 LT wasn't mentioned yet - it was conceived exactly as a compromise between "acro" and "touring".
Extra Aircraft
Extra Aircraft
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
From: 75N 16E
How much money do you have?
How many people do you want to carry?
I like the Bulldog myself and you can pick one up for £25k these days....I am almost tempted.....Beagle Pup maybe if you just want to do the odd loop and roll?
How many people do you want to carry?
I like the Bulldog myself and you can pick one up for £25k these days....I am almost tempted.....Beagle Pup maybe if you just want to do the odd loop and roll?
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
From: in France, but I travel a lot...
Wow! This morning I could not imagine that I would have received so many answers in such a short time... thanks guys!
As former military pilot I have logged more than 150 hours on the SF 260: it's a wonderful machine, but very much expensive, both to purchase and to run as a private person: I believe Aermacchi is keeping the prices artificially high to keep up just with the military clients.
My plane will be based in Belgium so I started to look at what is around here.
I heard about the accidents with the civilian Slingsby's and indeed my interest would go to the M260, but I got infos from a colleague who is flying it in Belgium that he is almost killed by the maintenance costs....
I am going to have a look at the Bulldog and the Vans: maybe it's the right time for me to pay a vist to UK...
Yaks are indeed lovely, but running costs are amazing.... if they're grounded for engine issues, for example, sometimes it's cheaper to buy a new one...
As former military pilot I have logged more than 150 hours on the SF 260: it's a wonderful machine, but very much expensive, both to purchase and to run as a private person: I believe Aermacchi is keeping the prices artificially high to keep up just with the military clients.
My plane will be based in Belgium so I started to look at what is around here.
I heard about the accidents with the civilian Slingsby's and indeed my interest would go to the M260, but I got infos from a colleague who is flying it in Belgium that he is almost killed by the maintenance costs....
I am going to have a look at the Bulldog and the Vans: maybe it's the right time for me to pay a vist to UK...
Yaks are indeed lovely, but running costs are amazing.... if they're grounded for engine issues, for example, sometimes it's cheaper to buy a new one...
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
From: UK
The RV series would definitely tick all of your boxes. They're very capable, very well designed aeroplanes from what I've seen. Not cheap to buy, but not too hard on maintenance on the UK LAA Permit to Fly.
Saying that, the Falco F8 is definitely one sexy machine, beautifully harmonised and light, and goes like hot snot, but not so good for competition just because it's fast and slippery. I'm personally more involved in Pitts flying, which is horrible for touring, but much cheaper than the RV and totally fun to fly.
Good luck!
Saying that, the Falco F8 is definitely one sexy machine, beautifully harmonised and light, and goes like hot snot, but not so good for competition just because it's fast and slippery. I'm personally more involved in Pitts flying, which is horrible for touring, but much cheaper than the RV and totally fun to fly.
Good luck!
