Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Rotax and Continental comparison

I'll probably use a Rotax on my next project, they ARE more efficient. And they weigh less, giving a better useful load.

BONUS!!

 

But I can see why the existing FBO infrastructure and the mechanics familiarity with the engine gives Continental an advantage in the mainstream training environment.

 

MY prediction: 

Cessna will sell enough 162's to FBO's  all over the country to spark greater interest in the Sport Planse (LSA'S).

Rotax will sell enough engines to get the A&P's at the FBO's interested in getting Rotax training/certification.

With Rotax tech's at all the Cessna training centers, Cessna will introduce a Rotax powered 162 with "improved payload capacity"!!!

 

Rick

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Helen Woods

To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 6:31 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: forminganLSAFlyingClub.

 

For pattern work ops, we consitantly see about 3 gph for our 912ULS engines.  Closer to 5 for xcountry though.

 

Helen


Nov 10, 2009 09:24:27 AM, Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com wrote:

Actually, the fuel burn is 4.9 gal/hr on the 912s and 6.3 gal/hr for the 0-200.  Not anywhere near "half".

But I'm sure both planes will work for their intended purpose... different wings for different things!

 

Rick

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Helen Woods

To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 6:06 PM

Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: forminganLSAFlyingClub.

 

It certainly isn't as much as we might like but since the Rotax burns
about half as much fuel per hour as the O200 it's still more useful load
than the Cessna. We also aren't using this plane for primary training
where cross country and visiting other airports is required which ups
both ones flight duration and hourly fuel burn. Instead we are just
splashing around in local waterways (Our airport is located on an island
so water is quite close.)

Helen

Rick Pitcher wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Helen Woods
> To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 7:08 AM
> Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: forminganLSAFlyingClub.
>
>
>
>
>> Yes. 1430. The LSX version has quite a few engineering changes too
>> over earlier models that allow the plane to safely achieve that new
>> number. We're expecting a useful load of about 500lbs.
>>
>> Helen
>>
>
> About the same as the new C-162.
> Will that work OK for training?
>
> Rick
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

---

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.702 / Virus Database: 270.14.57/2492 - Release Date: 11/09/09 04:11:00

---

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.704 / Virus Database: 270.14.60/2495 - Release Date: 11/10/09 11:56:00

__._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___