Sunday, December 26, 2010

Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group High Useful Load LSA Aircraft Models



You have the wrong one, but it is true I know vary little about part 23 craft which you were wiened on. As you know LSA are NOT part 23, certificated craft.  I have built, and helped build many others, but have only been in recreational since year 2000. You certainly have more experience than I do. Was that your concern?

Personal attacks only belittle the people doing them and I hope they stop.

Sent via DROID X on Verizon Wireless


-----Original message-----
From: Rick Pitcher <lightflyer@adelphia.net>
To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, Dec 27, 2010 02:50:11 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group High Useful Load LSA Aircraft Models

Hi Gary.
Yeah, I think we DO know what you fly. You have mentioned your AeroTech and Rotax many times. I have seen the plane, and you DO have a right to be proud of her. She's a  very nice brand-new store-bought airplane.
But we also know that she's your first airplane. Your "first love". And of course she's perfect in every way ;)
 
But as list moderator, if you'd like to hold down on the rants, you might keep in mind that OTHER people also love their machines.  No need to berate other planes, or engines, designs, or building materials. If you stay with this long enough, you might learn to appreciate the vast spectrum of equipment we have to choose from.
 
Rick,
(on airplane #8 over 35 years, and still looking for the next "pretty girl" to steal my heart :)
 
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2010 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group High Useful Load LSA Aircraft Models

Not to get personal about it on the group here, most have no idea what I have.

Sent via DROID X on Verizon Wireless


-----Original message-----
From: Rick Pitcher <lightflyer@adelphia.net>
To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, Dec 26, 2010 18:44:13 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group High Useful Load LSA Aircraft Models

Yes Helen, I think you got it right. They ALL seem to advertise more than
they can deliver.

But I was really hoping to encourgae Gary to look at the data he has and see
if MAYBE he is just a little biased. It seems like if he's wildly enamored
with HIS aircraft choice, and always finds fault with anybody else's choice.
When the moderator is biased against anything other than his own favorite
choice, that's a sure-fire way to squelch any real discussions and people
will leave the group if THEIR favorite choice is constantly being poo-poo'd
by the moderator.

I thought this was a forum for ALL light-sport aircraft. ?

Rick


----- Original Message -----
From: "Helen Woods"
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2010 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group High Useful Load LSA Aircraft
Models


> Oh its certainly out there. I know about the Paradise because they
> showed up here at the flight school to do a demo for us. I was
> impressed and familiar with the plane from reading their web site. Well
> when I met the salesman man, he started handling me his brochures and
> I'm sure was about to show me the vanity mirror when I walked past him,
> climbed into the plane and pulled out the W&B. Surprise, surprise.
> Almost 100 pounds less than advertised. I turned around and asked him
> about this only to watch a wonderful demonstration of hemming and hawing.
>
> The old Check (sp?) Airworks company I think took the cake on this
> though. We had had a SportCruiser on the line for a while and as you'll
> note I was a bit appaluled at some of the company's advertising
> practices. (I noticed that Piper has finally corrected the numbers on
> their web site instead of just quoting the previously published ones as
> they did in their initial press release.) They advertised 600lbs of
> useful load. They advertised their giant baggage area and wing lockers
> and giant man size seats with the 600lb useful load to convince you that
> this was a true "large man" plane. Funny thing was though, at shows,
> they would never let you get into the plane. Instead they had a cockpit
> mock up with stairs on the side to let large customers waddle up into
> the plane and try out the giant seats. Well the reasoning was simple.
> In addition to the actual plane having only 520-525lbs of useful load,
> the whole plane would tip over if a giant man tried to climb in via the
> step on the back of the plane! Giant men also did not have the
> flexibility to reach the grab bar in the center of the plane to support
> them when getting into the plane and instead would grab the backs of
> the seats. Our seat back were broken within 300 hours.
>
> With the change in US leadership, Tecnam has gotten into this game too.
> The new brochures they have on their web page sport an extra 25lbs on
> their Sierra, 50lbs on their Eagles, and more than 100lbs on their
> P2010! Tecnams are still great planes though IMHO. Just contact me
> though if you really want to know the useful load.
>
> I honestly think a better discussion topic than "who advertises false
> numbers" would be "who advertises accurate numbers." I think it safe to
> assume that most people in this industry have inflated their numbers
> unless proven otherwise.
>
> Helen
>
> On 12/26/2010 12:53 PM, Rick Pitcher wrote:
>> I kinda figured you meant composite, and yes, rag-wings are lighter.
>>
>> But I would like to see the "baloney" that Gary says comes from the
>> "all-metal" camps. I haven't seen it myself, but I'm sure if
>> moderator-Gary
>> posts it as fact he must have some data to back it up. THAT will be
>> interesting!
>>
>> Hope your cold gets better Helen,
>> Rick
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Helen Woods"
>> To:
>> Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2010 9:36 AM
>> Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group High Useful Load LSA
>> Aircraft
>> Models
>>
>>
>>
>>> Oh, that should have been metal or composite... I think this head cold
>>> has gotten the better of be this morning! Gary's right though that
>>> Rotax rag-wings out there tend to have a good useful load.
>>>
>>> Helen
>>>
>>> On 12/26/2010 12:34 PM, Helen Woods wrote:
>>>
>>>> Metal or aluminum, either can be built heavy or light. Tecnam and
>>>> Remos
>>>> have proven that.
>>>>
>>>> As a general rule though, anything with a O200 or amphibious floats is
>>>> going to be heavy. As Gary mentions, a lot also has to do with what
>>>> weight the plane was originally designed for. I though Cirrus was
>>>> really on to something with their LSA as they bought a microlight that
>>>> was rated for 1250 and was going to get an extra 70lbs out of going
>>>> LSA. The current SportStar gets its good useful load from such a
>>>> conversion.
>>>>
>>>> Helen
>>>>
>>>> On 12/26/2010 12:16 PM, Rick Pitcher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: Gary Orpe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> That is a great point Helen. A real W&B sheet is in every plane
>>>>>> legally.
>>>>>> And there is a lot of bologna out there as well. Especially in the
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> metal camps.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Now THAT is interesting. Nice change from the rants of late. Thanks
>>>>> Gary.
>>>>> So tell us, which all-metal airplanes have you found that are full of
>>>>> baloney? Maybe some links to their specifications page would be nice.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know there are some big advantages in owning and maintaining
>>>>> aluminum
>>>>> airplanes as opposed to rag-and-tube or composite aircraft, mostly
>>>>> having to
>>>>> do with the ability to keep the planes out in the elements year
>>>>> around.
>>>>> And
>>>>> if you DO happen to damage your aluminum plane, there are mechanics in
>>>>> every
>>>>> airport that have years of experience with aluminum airplanes. It
>>>>> really
>>>>> is
>>>>> an easy material to work with.
>>>>> But I'd love to hear what your research has shown about the baloney in
>>>>> the
>>>>> "all metal camps".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----
>>> No virus found in this message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 1435/3338 - Release Date: 12/25/10
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 1435/3340 - Release Date: 12/26/10
>



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 1435/3340 - Release Date: 12/26/10



__._,_.___


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

__,_._,___
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)