Cessna developing new LSA

Cessna is working on a LSA to be unveiled at Oshkosh this year. It
kinda sounds like a modern 152. If this enters production it would help
legitimize the LSA segment (not that it needed it). Between this plane
and the "Cirrus Killer" and a new jet sized below the Mustang, the
Cessna product planning crew must be working overtime these days...

Here's a link to the company press release:

http://www.cessna.com/news/article.c...5rb0IwV1R6VtDK

Cessna is working on a LSA to be unveiled at Oshkosh this year. It
kinda sounds like a modern 152. If this enters production it would help
legitimize the LSA segment

Cool. But if you've flown the "CT", you know that the "modern 152" is
already on the market, brand new, for less than $90K.
http://www.flightdesignusa.com/

I flew it a couple of weeks ago, and am now counting the days until my kids
are grown and I can justify buying a 2-seater. It is a really fun plane to
fly -- and, being made entirely from carbon-fiber -- it feels like a "real"
plane, not a glorified ultra-light like so many current LSAs.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote

Cool. But if you've flown the "CT", you know that the "modern 152" is
already on the market, brand new, for less than $90K.
http://www.flightdesignusa.com/

Nah. Bad mistake. It still uses a Rotax, which "I" will avoid like the
plague.

I flew it a couple of weeks ago, and am now counting the days until my
kids are grown and I can justify buying a 2-seater. It is a really fun
plane to fly -- and, being made entirely from carbon-fiber -- it feels
like a "real" plane, not a glorified ultra-light like so many current
LSAs.

Put a O-200 in it, and you might have something.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in
:


"Jay Honeck" wrote

Cool. But if you've flown the "CT", you know that the "modern 152"
is already on the market, brand new, for less than $90K.
http://www.flightdesignusa.com/

Nah. Bad mistake. It still uses a Rotax, which "I" will avoid like
the plague.

I flew it a couple of weeks ago, and am now counting the days until
my kids are grown and I can justify buying a 2-seater. It is a
really fun plane to fly -- and, being made entirely from carbon-fiber
-- it feels like a "real" plane, not a glorified ultra-light like so
many current LSAs.

Put a O-200 in it, and you might have something.


There is nothing wrong with the Rotax, but you CAN get an LSA with an
0-200; the 601XL from AMD. --
-- ET :-)

"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

"ET" wrote in message
...
"Morgans" wrote in
:


"Jay Honeck" wrote

Cool. But if you've flown the "CT", you know that the "modern 152"
is already on the market, brand new, for less than $90K.
http://www.flightdesignusa.com/

Nah. Bad mistake. It still uses a Rotax, which "I" will avoid like
the plague.

I flew it a couple of weeks ago, and am now counting the days until
my kids are grown and I can justify buying a 2-seater. It is a
really fun plane to fly -- and, being made entirely from carbon-fiber
-- it feels like a "real" plane, not a glorified ultra-light like so
many current LSAs.

Put a O-200 in it, and you might have something.


There is nothing wrong with the Rotax, but you CAN get an LSA with an
0-200; the 601XL from AMD. --

And the Champ from Americam Champion. The unugly alternative.


-- ET :-)

"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

Nah. Bad mistake. It still uses a Rotax, which "I" will avoid like the
plague.

Why? It started easily, ran very smoothly, and sipped gas.

What's wrong with Rotax?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
newsjVhg.22591$1i1.13638@attbi_s72...
Nah. Bad mistake. It still uses a Rotax, which "I" will avoid like the
plague.

Why? It started easily, ran very smoothly, and sipped gas.

What's wrong with Rotax?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


There is a reason pilots that fly Rotax power are usually nicknamed 'Dead
Stick.'

There is a reason pilots that fly Rotax power are usually nicknamed 'Dead
Stick.'

A former co-worker and hangar neighbor had two engine failures in his Rotax
powered Rans S-10. He only survived one of them, though..

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?...LA268& akey=1

On 2006-06-08, Dave Stadt wrote:
There is a reason pilots that fly Rotax power are usually nicknamed 'Dead
Stick.'

That's really a problem inherent to all two-strokes though. The four
stroke Rotaxes seem perfectly reliable. The Europa crowd around here
seem to get on very well with the 912 and 914S for a power plant - seems
just as reliable as a Lycontisauraus Rex (and uses less fuel).

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

You must be thinking of 2 stroke rotax's. The 4 strokes are very
reliable. Lots of 2 strokes of different makes deadstick, mostly due to
old fuel.