ct?

ok...if walt disney were to design an airplane this would be it.

presently, i'm hoping a lot of y'all buy these so i can get one used in
a couple of years cheap.

if it really delivers those performance numbers and is sport rated then
this could be a lot of fun.

dan

"houstondan" wrote in message
oups.com...

ok...if walt disney were to design an airplane this would be it.

presently, i'm hoping a lot of y'all buy these so i can get one used in
a couple of years cheap.

if it really delivers those performance numbers and is sport rated then
this could be a lot of fun.

dan


You shouldn't post late at night.

"houstondan" wrote in message
oups.com...
ok...if walt disney were to design an airplane this would be it.

presently, i'm hoping a lot of y'all buy these so i can get one used in
a couple of years cheap.

if it really delivers those performance numbers and is sport rated then
this could be a lot of fun.

dan


You have excellent taste. From what I have seen, this looks like a killer
design. Problem is, I haven't seen enough.

I have reservations about the engine and the wing construction.

Do you know if someone is going to build a reasonable Rotax support system
in this country? Can you find a Rotax trained AP in your area?

Does anyone know the strength of the wing? It doesn't sound all that strong
from what I have read. Is the wing easily replaced, repaired, or inspected.
I just have a problem with a foam core construction outside of the
experimental world.

what got me interested was a segment on "wings" about the ct at oshkosh
04 and a piece in this months "flying" where they seem to like it a
lot. good point about rotax but there's a lot of them pushing (or
pulling) ultralights around here and somebody has got to be fixin 'em.

people with bad attitudes notwithstanding, it appears that the next
couple of years should be very interesting in terms of light sport
aircraft.

and i still think the ct looks like it was designed by disney.

dan

The people fixing those planes are the owners. I think that if you move a
plane like the CT to the owner maintained category you could see a value
loss. Only time will tell though.




"houstondan" wrote in message
oups.com...
what got me interested was a segment on "wings" about the ct at oshkosh
04 and a piece in this months "flying" where they seem to like it a
lot. good point about rotax but there's a lot of them pushing (or
pulling) ultralights around here and somebody has got to be fixin 'em.

people with bad attitudes notwithstanding, it appears that the next
couple of years should be very interesting in terms of light sport
aircraft.

and i still think the ct looks like it was designed by disney.

dan

Relative to somebody's question, the big shop on our small field (San
Carlos, California) is an official Rotax repair site. (Per the sign on
their hangar.)

Don

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"houstondan" wrote...

ok...if walt disney were to design an airplane this would be it.
presently, i'm hoping a lot of y'all buy these so i can get one used in
a couple of years cheap.
if it really delivers those performance numbers and is sport rated then
this could be a lot of fun.

You shouldn't post late at night.

http://www.fly-flightstar.com/pages/ct.htm

You have excellent taste. From what I have seen, this looks like a
killer
design. Problem is, I haven't seen enough.

I have reservations about the engine and the wing construction.

Do you know if someone is going to build a reasonable Rotax support
system
in this country? Can you find a Rotax trained AP in your area?

Does anyone know the strength of the wing? It doesn't sound all that
strong
from what I have read. Is the wing easily replaced, repaired, or
inspected.
I just have a problem with a foam core construction outside of the
experimental world.

I can't comment on the integrity of this design. However, there is
another plane out there that looks remarkably like this one, but has
struts (and the wings fold as well). It is called the Remos G3, and you
can check it out at www.rlsa.us/remos.htm. It would definitely be on my
short list if I were in the market for a LSA.

David Johnson

verrry interesting. looks like the same bird ok except that, as you
mentioned, they configured it a little differently what with the struts
and folding wings. interior is somewhat different. is the sitting angle
the same as in the ct? this one looks more
in repose".

without looking up euro/dollar conversion, looks about 1/3 more
expensive than the ct but with some really cool features. folds into a
glider box? saves me 250$/month hanger....maybe?? i'm really interested
to see what other light sport craft get certified in the next little
while. very cool time to be in the market.

dan

wrote)
I can't comment on the integrity of this design. However, there is
another plane out there that looks remarkably like this one, but has
struts (and the wings fold as well). It is called the Remos G3, and you
can check it out at www.rlsa.us/remos.htm. It would definitely be on my
short list if I were in the market for a LSA.


Do many people tie-down their planes this way?
http://www.rlsa.us/REMOSphotos/donau/donau55-m.jpg
(From the Remos G3 website)


Montblack