Sportcruiser Purchase
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steevo,
Follow your heart....The Sportcruiser is a great aircraft. I built and have owned mine for the past 4years, toured around Europe in it and it is great.
It is not perfect...In 30years of flying I have found all aircraft are a compromise. They all have faults and issues peculiar to their breed.
Personally I wouldn't want one that hadn't got a VP or CS Prop. It makes a massive difference to climb and cruise.
They handle crosswinds fine..dependant on your experience of course like all aircraft but I have landed in 20knots at 90 degrees without too much drama.
As others have said, avoid any that have been used for training, and again personally I would want one that had been a sole owner machine...one careful pilot etc. Group aircraft generally are not really cared for in the same way in my experience.
You could keep it outside, but personally I wouldn't.
Check if on EASA Permit or LAA Permit. Whilst both are the same aircraft it will be cheaper to maintain on a LAA permit. (DIY, with Inspector sign off)
Enjoy
.
Follow your heart....The Sportcruiser is a great aircraft. I built and have owned mine for the past 4years, toured around Europe in it and it is great.
It is not perfect...In 30years of flying I have found all aircraft are a compromise. They all have faults and issues peculiar to their breed.
Personally I wouldn't want one that hadn't got a VP or CS Prop. It makes a massive difference to climb and cruise.
They handle crosswinds fine..dependant on your experience of course like all aircraft but I have landed in 20knots at 90 degrees without too much drama.
As others have said, avoid any that have been used for training, and again personally I would want one that had been a sole owner machine...one careful pilot etc. Group aircraft generally are not really cared for in the same way in my experience.
You could keep it outside, but personally I wouldn't.
Check if on EASA Permit or LAA Permit. Whilst both are the same aircraft it will be cheaper to maintain on a LAA permit. (DIY, with Inspector sign off)
Enjoy
.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Glens o' Angus by way of LA
Age: 60
Posts: 1,975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps if I may share my experience with aircraft ownership and operation it could be of help. I purchased an aircraft in the same price range and for similar use as you are now contemplating and am also a VFR duffer with no ambitions of becoming the next Chuck Yeager, but am totally addicted to flying.
Firstly I have no opinion on the Sport Cruiser (I don’t even know what it is) but think that whatever make/model you decide on, you do not under any circumstances want to have it parked up outside. Apart from the obvious weather related issues a good part of aircraft ownership is what I call the “faffing around factor” nothing gives me greater pleasure on days when I can’t fly due to weather, or escaping a couples day out with the other half’s mate and her prat boyfriend, or even on those long dark winter nights I love to whittle away hours and even days faffing around in the hangar doing minor cosmetic fixes, cleaning, checking, routine servicing, and simulating flying and doing stuff like running my emergency procedures and fully understanding the aircraft systems and avionics etc. Now I don’t go as far as sitting left seat moving the yoke and making engine noises but I am damned close!
If hangar space is not available at your local strip, find it further afield until you can secure a space locally. I would not own an airplane if I could not have it inside especially here in the UK and not one that’s worth 60 grand, it would be a damn shame to have a nice piece of highly personal kit sitting outside. To me the flying part accounts for about 75% of the buzz of aircraft ownership, the rest is as described above, and can for the most part only be really done and enjoyable when its inside with your tools, manuals, spares, filters, oil and all the rest of the **** you are going to need at hand.
I also didn't know whether my anticipated flying hours would justify buying over renting and like you, I assume are fortunate enough to not really care if it does. I'm doing about 100 hours a year now which would justify it anyway, I doubt I would be doing those hours if I was renting. If all you want to do is fly then renting is probably the way to go (and also gives you model flexibility) if you want the full aircraft experience, buy and put it in a hangar.
Bottom line, aircraft ownership/flying is an expensive endeavour, if you are committed to doing it and you can afford it, do it right and buy it and baby it.
Good luck and remember, opinions are like arseholes, everybody’s got one.
Firstly I have no opinion on the Sport Cruiser (I don’t even know what it is) but think that whatever make/model you decide on, you do not under any circumstances want to have it parked up outside. Apart from the obvious weather related issues a good part of aircraft ownership is what I call the “faffing around factor” nothing gives me greater pleasure on days when I can’t fly due to weather, or escaping a couples day out with the other half’s mate and her prat boyfriend, or even on those long dark winter nights I love to whittle away hours and even days faffing around in the hangar doing minor cosmetic fixes, cleaning, checking, routine servicing, and simulating flying and doing stuff like running my emergency procedures and fully understanding the aircraft systems and avionics etc. Now I don’t go as far as sitting left seat moving the yoke and making engine noises but I am damned close!
If hangar space is not available at your local strip, find it further afield until you can secure a space locally. I would not own an airplane if I could not have it inside especially here in the UK and not one that’s worth 60 grand, it would be a damn shame to have a nice piece of highly personal kit sitting outside. To me the flying part accounts for about 75% of the buzz of aircraft ownership, the rest is as described above, and can for the most part only be really done and enjoyable when its inside with your tools, manuals, spares, filters, oil and all the rest of the **** you are going to need at hand.
I also didn't know whether my anticipated flying hours would justify buying over renting and like you, I assume are fortunate enough to not really care if it does. I'm doing about 100 hours a year now which would justify it anyway, I doubt I would be doing those hours if I was renting. If all you want to do is fly then renting is probably the way to go (and also gives you model flexibility) if you want the full aircraft experience, buy and put it in a hangar.
Bottom line, aircraft ownership/flying is an expensive endeavour, if you are committed to doing it and you can afford it, do it right and buy it and baby it.
Good luck and remember, opinions are like arseholes, everybody’s got one.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wickford
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you all for your comments.
A few comments that have been made are absolutely correct about not buying the first aircraft I see and also looking at shares.
My first thoughts were to become part of a syndicate but upon investigation I was finding this difficult. A lot of the syndicates would not even consider me due to my low hours and experience. Some said they would only accept people with a minimum of 300 hours P1 time. To build up that sort of time on a rental aircraft would cost me upwards of £30k. Even the C152s at my airfield are rented out for over £100 per hour and even if I was prepared to pay that, I wouldn't always get the slots I wanted or be able to do the type of trips (like keeping the aircraft all weekend) I plan doing.
The Sportcruiser did strike my eye the first time I saw one many months ago and from doing the research that I have it strikes me as a reasonable aircraft to have in terms of how it performs, running costs etc (reasonable in aviation terms I mean). I have only been in one for around 20 mins but even that 20 mins I felt that it was the aircraft for me. I am sure that there are many aircrafts that would suit me that I have never heard of or seen so I am really just starting out on the journey here. Apart from the initial expense of buying it, it seems I am not going to be able to do the sort of flying I want at much more reasonable costs but I want to go in to this with my eyes fully open as it's a very expensive mistake to make.
I know the depreciation on aircraft is large but I don't think I would be any worse off if I was renting or in a group when I weigh up the costs. With renting I would be doing far less hours and not have the flexibility. With a group share it looks as if it will be a little bit difficult to get with my current experience or I would have to travel a fair distance to use the aircraft.
I could start my own group but to be honest, if I had bought a good aircraft and got it how I wanted it, then I wouldn't really want to give it to someone else to fly very often.
A few comments that have been made are absolutely correct about not buying the first aircraft I see and also looking at shares.
My first thoughts were to become part of a syndicate but upon investigation I was finding this difficult. A lot of the syndicates would not even consider me due to my low hours and experience. Some said they would only accept people with a minimum of 300 hours P1 time. To build up that sort of time on a rental aircraft would cost me upwards of £30k. Even the C152s at my airfield are rented out for over £100 per hour and even if I was prepared to pay that, I wouldn't always get the slots I wanted or be able to do the type of trips (like keeping the aircraft all weekend) I plan doing.
The Sportcruiser did strike my eye the first time I saw one many months ago and from doing the research that I have it strikes me as a reasonable aircraft to have in terms of how it performs, running costs etc (reasonable in aviation terms I mean). I have only been in one for around 20 mins but even that 20 mins I felt that it was the aircraft for me. I am sure that there are many aircrafts that would suit me that I have never heard of or seen so I am really just starting out on the journey here. Apart from the initial expense of buying it, it seems I am not going to be able to do the sort of flying I want at much more reasonable costs but I want to go in to this with my eyes fully open as it's a very expensive mistake to make.
I know the depreciation on aircraft is large but I don't think I would be any worse off if I was renting or in a group when I weigh up the costs. With renting I would be doing far less hours and not have the flexibility. With a group share it looks as if it will be a little bit difficult to get with my current experience or I would have to travel a fair distance to use the aircraft.
I could start my own group but to be honest, if I had bought a good aircraft and got it how I wanted it, then I wouldn't really want to give it to someone else to fly very often.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steevo25
It is interesting that you say "even the C152's at the local airfields rent for over £100/ hour "
The C152 is likely to be flying long after the Sports cruisers are long forgotten.
At the moment the first of my C152's is in on the Cessna SID's checks and it has less pulled rivets having flown 13,000 hours than two Sport cruisers that I have seen that both have less than 400 hours on the clock.
It is clear that the sport cruiser is a reasonable one owner aircraft but it is not robust enough to be used as a group aircraft or a trainer. The cost of maintenance and parts would wreck any business. That is why all the established training organizations are investing money in doing the SID's checks on their C152's and looking forward to the next 15,000 hours of flying.
My guess is that most sport cruisers won't see more than the life of the Rotax bolted to the front.
The C152 is likely to be flying long after the Sports cruisers are long forgotten.
At the moment the first of my C152's is in on the Cessna SID's checks and it has less pulled rivets having flown 13,000 hours than two Sport cruisers that I have seen that both have less than 400 hours on the clock.
It is clear that the sport cruiser is a reasonable one owner aircraft but it is not robust enough to be used as a group aircraft or a trainer. The cost of maintenance and parts would wreck any business. That is why all the established training organizations are investing money in doing the SID's checks on their C152's and looking forward to the next 15,000 hours of flying.
My guess is that most sport cruisers won't see more than the life of the Rotax bolted to the front.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wickford
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I used the word 'even', I wasn't trying to suggest that the C152 was a low rate aircraft that is just old and rubbish. It served me all through my training and will always have a special place in my heart.
But even if I purchased a 152, the on-going costs are massive compared to that of a Sportcruiser not to mention about 50% more fuel at about 75% more per litre.
What I was trying to say was that in a cost perspective, about the cheapest aircraft I would be able to rent would be in that category that is still over £100 per hour wet. For 100 hundred hours per annum, that would equate to over £10k per year and even spending that would not allow me to use it when I wanted or the length of time I may need it for.
But even if I purchased a 152, the on-going costs are massive compared to that of a Sportcruiser not to mention about 50% more fuel at about 75% more per litre.
What I was trying to say was that in a cost perspective, about the cheapest aircraft I would be able to rent would be in that category that is still over £100 per hour wet. For 100 hundred hours per annum, that would equate to over £10k per year and even spending that would not allow me to use it when I wanted or the length of time I may need it for.
I bought a share in a Jodel DR1050 at the start of 1990, for £1600. I've still got the share. It's cost me > £77k over that time - (1400 + hours in it would be £74,000 at today's price. £50 per month today)
Wood/fabric so MUST be hangared, cruise at over 110kts, <25l/h mogas.
Much better load carrier, and rough field aircraft. Minimal avionics (radio +modeS) but I've done Inverness to Sligo in a one-er.
The more you've left to spend on flying the better.
Wood/fabric so MUST be hangared, cruise at over 110kts, <25l/h mogas.
Much better load carrier, and rough field aircraft. Minimal avionics (radio +modeS) but I've done Inverness to Sligo in a one-er.
The more you've left to spend on flying the better.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flybymike
On the face of it I would agree with you 300 hours P1 for an SEP is a long way over the top ( I regularly fly with first officers on a B738 who don't have much more flying time) however I think that the 300 hour restriction reflects the fragility of the new generation of (very) light aircraft, they are built down to a weight and therefore are much more easly damaged by even moderately poor handeling.
As I said above I have seen less pulled rivets on a 13,000 hour Cessna 152 that has spent it's life as a basic trainer than I have seen on two sub 400 hour sport cruisers. The very worrying thing is that the pulled rivets on the sport cruisers are in critical areas of the structure.......... The pulled rivets on the Cessna are not !
I can only see the very restrictive flying hour requirements as an attempt to guard against accidental damage of this type of aircraft.
As I said above I have seen less pulled rivets on a 13,000 hour Cessna 152 that has spent it's life as a basic trainer than I have seen on two sub 400 hour sport cruisers. The very worrying thing is that the pulled rivets on the sport cruisers are in critical areas of the structure.......... The pulled rivets on the Cessna are not !
I can only see the very restrictive flying hour requirements as an attempt to guard against accidental damage of this type of aircraft.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I built and have been flying an MCR01 Club for 8 years. This is a VLA class (SEP) aircraft with a MTOW of 490kg. I use her for long distance VFR touring (eg week round Europe 2 up ) and she is based on an unlicensed grass strip. Total number of structural issues – ZERO. I help look after a number of similar (VLA) aircraft in the local area and the total number of structural issues I have come across is ZERO. None of the aircraft are of predominantly metal construction and none are grouped.
The problem I have with the SC is the performance. My machine does 138kn TAS and is worth around £50k. If I was happy to travel at 100kn a Jodel 1050 will outperform a SC in all areas for a cost of around £23k (it is a 2+2). On a typical bumpy summers day the SC will have to slow down but the Jodel will not, so the performance difference is actually quite large. I would look at the Tecnam.
Rod1
The problem I have with the SC is the performance. My machine does 138kn TAS and is worth around £50k. If I was happy to travel at 100kn a Jodel 1050 will outperform a SC in all areas for a cost of around £23k (it is a 2+2). On a typical bumpy summers day the SC will have to slow down but the Jodel will not, so the performance difference is actually quite large. I would look at the Tecnam.
Rod1
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the face of it I would agree with you 300 hours P1 for an SEP is a long way over the top ( I regularly fly with first officers on a B738 who don't have much more flying time) however I think that the 300 hour restriction reflects the fragility of the new generation of (very) light aircraft, they are built down to a weight and therefore are much more easly damaged by even moderately poor handeling.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Auckland
Age: 43
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Steevo ..
Like you I have always liked the look & feel of the SC - I still very much do.
I have also been fortunate enough to have been taken for a spin in a Flight Design CTLS and a Tecnam P2008 - both which in my opinion may also be of interest to you, albeit that they are high wings.
Would recommend you at least just sitting in these to get a feel for them to compare. It's easy to fall in love at first sight, but always good to have another option to compare against .. Just to make sure.
My favourite is the CTLS, but I'm not as experienced as most on this forum and just my very personal preference.
Good luck
Vabsie
Like you I have always liked the look & feel of the SC - I still very much do.
I have also been fortunate enough to have been taken for a spin in a Flight Design CTLS and a Tecnam P2008 - both which in my opinion may also be of interest to you, albeit that they are high wings.
Would recommend you at least just sitting in these to get a feel for them to compare. It's easy to fall in love at first sight, but always good to have another option to compare against .. Just to make sure.
My favourite is the CTLS, but I'm not as experienced as most on this forum and just my very personal preference.
Good luck
Vabsie
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Auckland
Age: 43
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi A&C ..
I could try and write up a clever answer, but the truth is I am probably not qualified enough to give you an informed answer on the spinning habits of these types.
What I can say is that stalling in a CTLS (either a nose up power off or steep turn low speed) are practically non events (AT ALTITUDE) and recovery pretty much automatic if you just let go of everything.
Haven't done an actual spin in these sorry (as I do not own either and had limited time in them in demonstrators) - But spinning didn't seem to be on the menu for these aircraft for what we did - I'm sure we could have if we tried
Sorry I didn't mean to come across as being an expert on these types (I'm not) - just liked the feel of them in the same way Steevo likes the SC.
Also you know what PPRUNE can be like - if any of my descriptions are out by a nano I would in internet terms be tortured and punished for life by those who know more
Vabsie
I could try and write up a clever answer, but the truth is I am probably not qualified enough to give you an informed answer on the spinning habits of these types.
What I can say is that stalling in a CTLS (either a nose up power off or steep turn low speed) are practically non events (AT ALTITUDE) and recovery pretty much automatic if you just let go of everything.
Haven't done an actual spin in these sorry (as I do not own either and had limited time in them in demonstrators) - But spinning didn't seem to be on the menu for these aircraft for what we did - I'm sure we could have if we tried
Sorry I didn't mean to come across as being an expert on these types (I'm not) - just liked the feel of them in the same way Steevo likes the SC.
Also you know what PPRUNE can be like - if any of my descriptions are out by a nano I would in internet terms be tortured and punished for life by those who know more
Vabsie
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't comment on the CT or SC but the Tecnam stalls are a non-event, at least by my standards. The low wing P2002 will exercise you a little more than the P2008 or other high wing versions but, even then, things are very benign at all configurations and power settings I've tried. You can't legally spin any of them but my impression doing stalls, steep turns etc is that they fly very conventionally. I don't know how you'd really demonstrate aggressive stall behaviour from them but, then again, I've thought that about PA28s for years and lots of people learn to fly in the Pipers.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Surrey
Age: 67
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sportcruiser
I built and own a Sportcruiser and ave one of the new kits from China on order so am obviously a fan. I will sell the older one or form a group round it if I get the interest. Can't act me if you want a go.
Pete
07976 262833
Pete
07976 262833
