Light Sport Aircraft survey

Paul kgyy wrote:

If I took this route, it would probably be driven by price, and I don't
think I would build. If I'm going to invest the time to build
something, I'd rather build something fast like a Velocity. If I could
get a new LSA aircraft for less than $75K, I'd consider a new one,
otherwise probably go with an oldie for which parts were still easily
available - maybe an ERcoupe so I could learn to do crosswind landings
with feet on the floor :-)



Paul,
You can certainly get a new LSA aircraft for that price. There are
several out there in that range. At the moment, I think thare are 3
types that are actually certified, more coming every week or so.

Following the conventions of this group, I won't mention the airplane I
sell or the prices. If you are interested, email me off the group and I
will send you details.

Regards,

Rick Pellicciotti
http://www.lightsportflying.com

("Rick Pellicciotti" wrote)
Following the conventions of this group, I won't mention the airplane I
sell or the prices. If you are interested, email me off the group and I
will send you details.


It's not spam (IMHO) if the post is requested ...it's hangar talk. g

Post your plane's link and tell us what's special about it - and don't
forget those prices ($$$$$). Many interested people here. Be prepared for
some, um, feedback :-)

Will it, and you, be at Oshkosh?


Montblack

"Montblack" wrote in message
...
("Rick Pellicciotti" wrote)
Following the conventions of this group, I won't mention the airplane I
sell or the prices. If you are interested, email me off the group and I
will send you details.


It's not spam (IMHO) if the post is requested ...it's hangar talk. g

Post your plane's link and tell us what's special about it - and don't
forget those prices ($$$$$). Many interested people here. Be prepared for
some, um, feedback :-)


Uh, I think he did in the original post.

("Allen" wrote)
Uh, I think he did in the original post.


You are correct.

I clicked his sig link the first time around and thought it was just an
industry info page - didn't investigate any further.

This time I went in: "Our subsidiary, LightSportFlying.com" ---- now I get
it.


Montblack

Montblack wrote:

("Rick Pellicciotti" wrote)

Following the conventions of this group, I won't mention the airplane
I sell or the prices. If you are interested, email me off the group
and I will send you details.



It's not spam (IMHO) if the post is requested ...it's hangar talk. g

Post your plane's link and tell us what's special about it - and don't
forget those prices ($$$$$). Many interested people here. Be prepared
for some, um, feedback :-)

Will it, and you, be at Oshkosh?


Montblack

Sorry to take so long to respond to your post. I have been in Romania,
at the factory, taking delivery of our first two aircraft. Yes, we will
be at Airventure, display #39 and we will also have an airplane in the
"Light Sport Aircraft Mall".

Our airplane is the "Festival", manufactured by Aerostar S.A. of
Romania. Aerostar is the same company that builds the famous Yak52 that
I am sure many of you have seen at airshows and aerobatic competitions.

Festival is all-metal, and has side-by-side seating for two people. The
cockpit is 42" wide. The standard engine is the Rotax 912ULS, 100hp.
The airplane has a lot of small features that we think are important to
the owner such as locking gas caps and canopy, seats that adjust easily
and a large baggage compartment. The airplane has built-in, structural
roll-over protection. A lot of airplanes with canopies do not have
that. The biggest thing that we have done is that we have worked with
Aerostar to "americanize" the airplane. All parts that are subject to
wearing out or breaking such as brakes, wheels , tires, instruments and
avionics are all of American manufacture and can be sourced readily from
the usual places.

Aerostar is JAR21 and ISO9000 certified. They do sub-contract work for
Boeing and Airbus. They have about 2100 employees. Absolutley great to
work with and they build great airplanes. In the course of doing the
structural tests as required by the ASTM standards, they actually tested
one airframe to destruction. The standard requires 150% load at 4g's.
The airplane did 182%.

More details on our website at http://www.lightsportflying.com
Constructive suggestions are more than welcome.

Rick

"Rick Pellicciotti" wrote

More details on our website at http://www.lightsportflying.com
Constructive suggestions are more than welcome.

Good looking plane. It should do well.

Want a suggestion? Offer it with something other than a Rotax or Jabaru,
even if it costs more. I'm just one person, but I won't buy anything with
either of those choices.
--
Jim in NC

Just out of curiosity, why do you dislike the Rotax?


"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Rick Pellicciotti" wrote

More details on our website at http://www.lightsportflying.com
Constructive suggestions are more than welcome.

Good looking plane. It should do well.

Want a suggestion? Offer it with something other than a Rotax or Jabaru,
even if it costs more. I'm just one person, but I won't buy anything
with
either of those choices.
--
Jim in NC

In article , Lakeview Bill wrote:
Just out of curiosity, why do you dislike the Rotax?

I would suspect lack of support from local GA facilities - the 4 stroke
Rotaxes and the Jabiru are not particularly common in the US so few
mechanics will be familiar with them. Other than that, they are decent
reliable engines.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Dylan Smith wrote:

In article , Lakeview Bill wrote:

Just out of curiosity, why do you dislike the Rotax?


I would suspect lack of support from local GA facilities - the 4 stroke
Rotaxes and the Jabiru are not particularly common in the US so few
mechanics will be familiar with them. Other than that, they are decent
reliable engines.


Those engines seem to have a bad reputation in the U.S. They are seen
as cheapo engines for people who can't afford "real" engines from cont
or lyc. One flight school I know of had diamond katanas with Rotax
engines and only got 900 hours out of them despite regular use. I don't
know how typical that is, but you often hear stories like that. Maybe
it's the Avgas we use over here (it certainly isn't good for small
continentals either, but like you said those can be fixed by just about
anyone). Not having owned or maintained an engine myself I don't know
but I do know their reputation is not good here. For example one of the
new companies (I think it was Liberty) was initially going to use a
Rotax and got no interest, changed to a Continental and now are taken
more seriously.

"Lakeview Bill" wrote in message
. ..
Just out of curiosity, why do you dislike the Rotax?

How shall I count the ways?

They require their oil, their oil filters, their everything. You pay dearly
for this.

They always have seemed to be temperamental. Everything has to be just
right, to be even close to reliable.

See above. If everything is not just right, they are not reliable. I know
the 912 and 914's are not 2 strokes, but what pieces the 2 strokes are. I
know, some will testify that they have never had a minute's problem, but
there are more out there that have. My gut, and my but says to not trust
them. I don't and I won't. Gut means a llot, to me.

They don't sound "manly" enough. Kinda like a sewing machine, compared to a
Harley. Airplanes are supposed to be "cool", and they aren't. :-)
--
Jim in NC