need help selecting a 2 place SLA

Hey ken, we need more info. What price range, how you plan to use it, hangering, tailwheel or nosewheel. In the 20 to 25k range a Taylorcraft, Luscomb or Ercoupe would about as economical as buying and building a new 2 stroke powered, ultralight style 2 place and you won't take a loss when you sell it. The ultralight types are a ball to fly though. It just depends on what type flying you plan on doing. James Thomas

James Thank for the info... I appreciate the reply.

 We were originally looking @ the Challenger II, but are slowly finding others that are appealing.  Rans S12, Kolb - Mark III,

I recently read some bad reviews on the Challengers flying charictoristics.... So we were seeking advise..

Thanks again !!!.

Hey Ken, I'll probably draw fire but here's my opinion anyway. The Challenger has a small tail but there's a good fix. Most have a outside vertical fin (for lack of a better word) added to the outside of the horizonal stabilizer. Some builders build a larger vertical. I've flown 2, Challenger II's, one with the add-on fins and the other without. Both flew and handeled well. The one without had no doors and that's usually where the fins are needed. The CGS Hawk 2 place is a fine handling and performing plane. They're much nicer when Stits is used to cover with lexan doors instead of the stock Dacron and zipper doors. They'll perform ok with a 503 but a 582 would give you better performance. Kolbs are good performers. A Mark III would also need a 582 or equivalent. This is where it gets sticky. I've only flown in one S12. It has a Rotax 912S and the owner had just recently bought it when I flew with him. Once airborn, he handed control over to me. I could never find that sweet spot to trim it in level flight. It was either climbing or diving and the owner had the same problem. I don't know if all S12's have this problem but this one was severe, I mean either climbing a 300 feet per minute or diving at 300.  I can't say anything but good about the Hawk. I've had a Stits covered one since 1996. There are other good planes out there. There are a lot of 582 powered Kitfoxes out there. They perform good, have side by side seating and the engine's out front. I have a Model IV Speedster/912 I hope to finish by spring so that was my choice. Good luck, James Thomas

James,

Thank You once again for the added info... Its very helpful as new member.. Thank You again.

See this thread

http://www.oshkosh365.org/ok365_DiscussionBoardTopic.aspx?id=1235&boardid=147&forumid=520&topicid=3230

JIm

Ken, There are 2 views currently operarting in the ELSA world.  True ELSA and the transitioned ones.

True ELSA come from kitting an SLSA.  They need to be built exactly like the factory version. There is an extensive manual to follow. (another reason that there are few in the US market).  The chance of finding a used True ELSA is pretty slim as they are just getting built.

Transitioned ELSA are the former ULs that did not meet the part 103 catagory.   They do indeed come in a variety of flavors and if you look up UL aircraft you will see a rainbow of other than fixed wing aircraft.   The obvious ones are the 2 seat trainers. 

That said there are dozens of aircraft designs that could fall into the catagory.  A recient thread posted ELSA at  6630 as of the first of 09 and 1327 SLSA.   As you can imagion the SLSA number will jump a good amount.  The ELSA number will go to 6700.  Of that number 99+% are trsnsitioned ULs.

As you many already know there are passioate owners at every design.   A great way to choose a design is to go to major fly-ins/shows.

Jim's comments on the different paths to ELSA certification are spot-on.  Also be aware that two seemingly similar aircraft may have different certifications.  Many Challenger IIs are certificated as amateur-built, while many others were converted from "fat" ultralight to ELSA.  This is true of many of the other designs being discussed here as well, such as Kolb, Rans, etc.  Any of these can be flown by sport pilots, but there is a difference when it comes to being the second owner.

If you purchase an already-flying example that is certificated as ELSA, you as the owner will be able to take the 16 hour course and become the LSA repairman with an inspection rating.  This will allow you to perform the condition inspection each year on the ELSA that you own.  You do not have to be the builder of the ELSA in order to take the course and become the repairman.  You simply have to be the owner.  For amateur-built aircraft, only the original primary builder is eligible to become the repairman.  So if you purchase an amateur-built example you will need to either have the original builder continue to perform the condition inspections (assuming that person holds the repairman certificate and is willing to perform the inspections) or you'll have to have an A&P mechanic perform the inspections.  You as the second (or subsequent) owner cannot become eligible for the repairman certificate for an amateur-built aircraft you did not build.

This may or may not be an issue for you, but just be aware that there is a difference in the certification of some of these aircraft.  Two seemingly identical aircraft may not in fact be identical.

Joe,

Happy Thanks giving to you and your family as well. 

  First off Thank you for your response and advise.

I am looking closer at the Exclibur II.   Excalibur.com  (very similar to the challenger)  it fits best with the profile I am looking for.

  I would be the original builder. utilizing the factory specs and guidelines.  how then do I go about getting the aircraft certified.

Yes I am green to the EAA world.... but very eager to be involved for a long time.

Any and all advise is appreciated!   thank for taking the time to help.

Ken - I too looked hard at the Excalibur.  I think it is a very good airplane.  I, however, decided to build a Sonex.  It is virtually the same cost , I completed in 620 hours which is more than the Excalibur but it is a 2 place LSA that cruises at 130MPH.  It , of course, requires a longer runway.  It all depends on what you want out of the airplane.  If you are going to fly solo and stay near the patch, the Excalibur is a very good choice.  If you want to carry 2 and go a little faster and farther, there are better choices.

Jst my 2 cents for whatever it is worth.

There are any number of homebuilt aircraft that fit into the Light Sport class of aircraft. The nice thing about building your own homebuilt that meets the LSA requirments is you can do all your own repairs and mantance after it's done and you can make changes to make it the way you want it to be...  With an ELSA it is my understanding that you have to keep it as it was certfied by the FAA.

At this time a friend and I are working on a small two place Biplane that looks a lot like the Sorrell SNS-2 Guppy. We are both over 50 and don't see us doing much more then island hopping to the mainland for a costco run... Rich has his privet ticket but all he wants to do is just fly for the enjoyment of flying and I'm the same way. So 85 to 100 is fine for cruse speed.

I would suggest get your LS ticket and then fly the planes you want to build, if you can a couple of each model so you have a wider field of aircraft to judge from.

Kristine

Joe:

If you buy a Quick Silver with an Amateur Built airworthiness certificate, can you change it to E-LSA?

No.  ELSA was for 2 purposes:

1.  Convert existing "fat" "ultralights" to something legal to fly after they otherwise became lawn ornaments.  As they said about 6600 aircraft went through this process.  It is no longer available.  (I know that when it was available a few, very few otherwise E-AB plane builders decided to certificate their planes this way.)

2.  Building a replica of an SLSA certified aircraft.  As in, an exact copy, no deviations allowed (including nits like the switches, type of radio & instruments - everything exact same).  This isn't available for all "kit planes" either - it can only be a kit that is a replica of the SLSA aircraft that the manufacturer has certified.  So if the type you are considering isn't offering ready-to-fly SLSA's, there won't be any ELSA's of that type either.  (Well, I guess technically there could be, if they decided not to sell any more SLSA's - kind of sounds like RANS S-19 might go that way - they're building 5 SLSA's for sale, but I got the impression they can't sell them for high enough price for ready-to-fly production to continue.)

But buying an E-AB (Experimental Amateur Built) isn't a bad deal at all.

You can:  Do ALL of the maintenance yourself.  Make ANY changes you want or need to.  Replace radios, upgrade the instruments, whatever.  If you replace something major like the prop or engine, the operating limitations issued with the airworthiness certificate have instructions on how to put it back into "Phase I" (flight test) for 5 hours of no passengers, then it's free to be used again with passengers.

The ONLY thing you can't do is sign for the annual condition inspection.  You can DO all the work to prepare the plane for the inspection (pull all the cover plates, fairings, cowlings, seat, etc. that needs to be pulled out), have the A&P come over for an hour and look it over, then you can put all that stuff back together.  So it's not like you have to send your plane to the FBO for days and pay dozens of hours of mechanic's time each year. 

As a builder of an E-AB aircraft, I actually WANT this restriction.  So that if/when I decide to sell my plane, an A&P HAS TO look it over each year.  I probably wouldn't even want to build an ELSA - that some hotshot might buy, take a weekend class and then be able to sign off?  Not a great deal to me.

Hello Ken.  I scanned the replies to date - lots of good information.  I will add about the CGS Hawk, which I have over 500 hours flying.  Began flying Cessna 150's, then 172's.  Discovered the world of very small planes at Oshkosh in 1999.  My reaction -- that's what I want!  Low and slow flying for fun, mostly close to home.  I researched and got demo rides for two years.  Settled on the Hawk for these reasons:  easy to fly; hard to stall; strong roll-cage protects pilot; very good control authority at low speeds; fly with doors on or off; handles better in some wind than most ultralights; inexpensive to own and operate.  I have evaluated Hawks for others, flown them cross-country, and completed and test-flew one.  I would be glad to answer any questions you have.    Steve

Angel,

You cannot change the certification of the Amateur-Built aircraft.  The certification will remain amateur-built, but since the aircraft meets the definition of a light-sport aircraft is is eligible to be flown by sport pilots.

A tiny but important comment RE ELSA (true ELSA)

Although the ELSA has to be exactly built to the SLSA for airworthiness inspection it reverts back to the Experimental status and changes can be made thereafter.  The feeling that there is no creativity in ELSA is only temporary.

There was an excellent pilot report in KitPlanes (2007 or 2008) about the Excalibur .

The two things that stick with me about that article were:

1) The owner of the Excalibur company went to work for the Challenger Company for the purpose of learning how they do things so as to more easily compete against them.  Isn't that industrial espionage? That didn't seem like ethical conduct to me.

 2) According to KitPlanes, the Excalibur had several shortcomings and didn't fly as well as the Challenger.

I suggest reading that article as a part of your evaluation.  My mind isn't a good with details as it used to be, but I'm pretty sure that I have accurately protrayed the article.

I noted that you are just learning to fly and thought I should share an experience with you of a person that flys and ventured into the LSA world. I am 69 and always flown single engine standard cat aircraft. I bought a KOLB II. I flew it and was very surprised at the poor glide ratio. I come to find that most of these type aircraft have high drag characteristics and come down quickly without power. On the other hand, the cubs, champs, etc are cleaner airframes and give you much better glide ratios. This is important to me when flying over forest or any situation when altitude is low. If the engine quits, the KOLB would come down like a rock. I probably found out what most people in that world know---but seems to be rarely discussed and I did not research enough. So, I would suggest getting as many test rides as possible in your research and match your aircraft to your flying needs. As a entry level pilot, costs may be very important---but not at the expense of safety.

As for me---I sold the KOLB and bought a Legends Cub. I am very pleased!

In reponse to Bill Barker and the article about the Excalibur, I remembered reading the same article but I couldn't remember where I read it. The Challenger is a hard plane to improve on. I would rate it right at the top of the class in its type. A short wing version will outperform a J3 (if its built right) and is a leap ahead of almost all, of  what we consider ultralight style light planes.  James Thomas

James Thomas,  can you comment on the glide ratio of the Challenger II?  I recall that it is a tandem seat arrangement, and some what faired for some drag reduction?

Thanks!