2012 CTLS for sale: I will pay $250 to anyone who refers the person that purchases 113WT!

[AZAV8OR]

The bottom line is that I just prefer the experience of a heavier airplane (just opposite of Corey!). I'm going to refurb a Piper Archer, which is what I owned before the money-sucking Cirrus. The Archer is essentially the Camry of the sky; lots of them out there, parts aplenty, almost any A&P will work on it, etc. Yes, I'm giving up 5GPH mogas, yes, I'm giving up the chute; but after much internal analysis, I am at peace with my decision.

 

That said, I'm going to enjoy bringing another Archer back from the brink. I'm looking for a project airplane with a good engine and good autopilot. All else will go: paint, interior, panel. I intend to install an Aspen Pro 1000 PFD, an ADB-B xponder, Garmin navigator (likely 430W), a JPI flat panel engine monitor and a panel mount iPad for Foreflight. While not the beautiful Dynon Skyviews I have in the CT, it will still be cool and fully instrument capable.

 

I would like to thank all of you that responded to this post with encouraging, "you might not have to sell it" advice. I wanted to set the record straight regarding my logic.

 

[AZAV8OR]

So, who wants to earn the $250?

[AZAV8OR]

Kevin - When I saw you Sunday you didn't mention the sale.  Must have been a spur of the moment thing.  Sorry to hear your moving on.

 

In the meantime if you want to fly together sometime, I may be able to help you adjust to the CT.  In any case come on down to Tucson.  We have good food here.

It wasn't a spur of the moment thing, but that was the day that I made the final decision. I was using my friend Craig (who you met) as a sounding board. We must have walked around CHD 3 times while we bounced my brain around. You can count on seeing me at RYN as soon as I have an airplane to fly or when I bum a ride. Please call me when you plan to be up here again; I'd enjoy more conversation. 602-920-5400.

[FastEddieB]

That is one of my issues. I look outside, reference inside. I could never seem to get the picture of coordinated flight while maneuvering.

I think panels 1 & 2 exemplify that things can look quite normal on the road to disaster:

 

[FlyingMonkey]

So, who wants to earn the $250?

 

Posted to my Facebook page, so fingers crossed.  

 

Hope you get it sold quickly for the price you want, even if I don't get a cut.

[AZAV8OR]

Posted to my Facebook page, so fingers crossed.  

 

Hope you get it sold quickly for the price you want, even if I don't get a cut.

Thanks. I'm about to find out what the market is like. I took a serious pounding when I finally sold the Cirrus after 8 months!

[Runtoeat]

Interesting about "feeling" the yaw.  My friend often coaches me during our flights together.  Like you guys with many years of experience, he will keep his gaze out the front and tell me: "you're slipping".  Without looking at any of the gages, he feels that I'm not flying coordinated, or he may tell by looking at the nose and how this is traveling across the ground.  Most times, unless I'm really not coordinated in a turn, I don't feel a moderate slip.  I've tried to, but can't.  What I can do though is to see if my nose is sliding over terrain below.  This keeps the ball pretty much centered for me, along with an occasional glance at the ball, as Corey mentions.  What one learns pretty fast when flying the CT is that the turns need to be lead with opposite rudder due to the adverse yaw.

[FastEddieB]

What one learns pretty fast when flying the CT is that the turns need to be lead with opposite rudder due to the adverse yaw.

Opposite rudder?

[FlyingMonkey]

Opposite rudder?

 

[FlyingMonkey]

As far as feeling the coordination on the CT, I think the sight picture makes it harder.  In most airplanes you can see the nose or spinner out front, in the CT the cowl slopes away and you have no reference to relate to ground objects.  As a result you have to relate ground references to your direction of travel, which is harder and takes a little time.

 

Also agree on the "feel" thing.  The pilot doesn't feel a lot of yaw force.  If I'm in a full slip I will feel a bit of side force, but in common slightly uncoordinated flight, it's really hard to tell without referencing the ball.

[Cluemeister]

I love that popcorn emoji.  Makes me laugh every time.

[gbigs]

Interesting about "feeling" the yaw.  My friend often coaches me during our flights together.  Like you guys with many years of experience, he will keep his gaze out the front and tell me: "you're slipping".  Without looking at any of the gages, he feels that I'm not flying coordinated, or he may tell by looking at the nose and how this is traveling across the ground.  Most times, unless I'm really not coordinated in a turn, I don't feel a moderate slip.  I've tried to, but can't.  What I can do though is to see if my nose is sliding over terrain below.  This keeps the ball pretty much centered for me, along with an occasional glance at the ball, as Corey mentions.  What one learns pretty fast when flying the CT is that the turns need to be lead with opposite rudder due to the adverse yaw.

 

Your butt follows the ball.  Just as you step on the ball you also step on your butt.   The nose is opposite the ball if skidding or slipping, centered if coordinated.  Here is a good article on it:   http://flighttraining.aopa.org/magazine/2010/November/sitthere.html

[AZAV8OR]

The bounty had been raised! $1000 to the person that refers the successful purchaser!

 

That's $1000 toward your ADS- B upgrade!

[tespn]

There is a guy looking to trade his 182 on the forum now if you have any interest.  Best of luck. 

 

I learned to fly in the CTLS and then bought one.  I've rarely flown other planes (CTSW, 172, Warrior, GrumenTiger, RV10, RV7, Varga) but I am always amazed at how easy they all are to fly compared to the CT!  That said, I'm comfortable in mine now having done about 600 landings and flying it a few hundred hours in the first year.  I didn't realize how much rudder I was using until I flew a CTSW and skidded it through the first couple turns.  My plane requires a bit of right rudder trim to fly level and when you reduce the throttle for base and final it requires significant left rudder to be coordinated.  If I was having trouble with the ball, I would be adding in a little left rudder trim on the downwind leg and that could really help. 

[AZAV8OR]

There is a guy looking to trade his 182 on the forum now if you have any interest.  Best of luck. 

 

I learned to fly in the CTLS and then bought one.  I've rarely flown other planes (CTSW, 172, Warrior, GrumenTiger, RV10, RV7, Varga) but I am always amazed at how easy they all are to fly compared to the CT!  That said, I'm comfortable in mine now having done about 600 landings and flying it a few hundred hours in the first year.  I didn't realize how much rudder I was using until I flew a CTSW and skidded it through the first couple turns.  My plane requires a bit of right rudder trim to fly level and when you reduce the throttle for base and final it requires significant left rudder to be coordinated.  If I was having trouble with the ball, I would be adding in a little left rudder trim on the downwind leg and that could really help. 

I saw it, thanks. I've got an Archer in pre-buy.

[andyb]

There is a guy looking to trade his 182 on the forum now if you have any interest.  Best of luck. 

 

I learned to fly in the CTLS and then bought one.  I've rarely flown other planes (CTSW, 172, Warrior, GrumenTiger, RV10, RV7, Varga) but I am always amazed at how easy they all are to fly compared to the CT!  That said, I'm comfortable in mine now having done about 600 landings and flying it a few hundred hours in the first year.  I didn't realize how much rudder I was using until I flew a CTSW and skidded it through the first couple turns.  My plane requires a bit of right rudder trim to fly level and when you reduce the throttle for base and final it requires significant left rudder to be coordinated.  If I was having trouble with the ball, I would be adding in a little left rudder trim on the downwind leg and that could really help. 

In what respects to you think the other planes are easier to fly than the CTLS?  I'm not saying that I necessarily disagree with you, but I'm curious about your thoughts.

 

Thanks,

Andy

[Cluemeister]

I would also be very interested to hear more detail.  Thanks!

[Anticept]

CTs are very stick and rudder. It does make them more difficult than any other aircraft that I've flown so far. The piper tomahawk is probably the other one that was difficult, but not as difficult as a CT.

 

As a consequence though, it's incredibly easy to get used to a new aircraft.

 

That, and I much prefer feeling like I'm flying the airplane, than just sitting there pushing buttons. I don't know about anyone else, but as much money as it costs, why anyone would want a plane that flies like it's on rails is beyond me (from a hobby point of view).

[gbigs]

CTs are very stick and rudder. It does make them more difficult than any other aircraft that I've flown so far. The piper tomahawk is probably the other one that was difficult, but not as difficult as a CT.

 

As a consequence though, it's incredibly easy to get used to a new aircraft.

 

That, and I much prefer feeling like I'm flying the airplane, than just sitting there pushing buttons. I don't know about anyone else, but as much money as it costs, why anyone would want a plane that flies like it's on rails is beyond me (from a hobby point of view).

 

Some of us fly for the transportation aspect.  Less load on a cross-country the better. Travel without restrictions. 

 

Landing the Cirrus is seemingly easier, but the plane crosses the numbers at 20% power and 85 KIAS so the runway gets used up more quickly.   The Cirrus also uses toe brakes so takeoff and landing is trickier.  And is a big low wing so ground effect allows a much easier transition from round-out to touchdown.

 

The FD CT can make the entire approach on idle throttle.  But the FD CT is more prone to cross winds. 

[Scott Lee]

I agree with Anticept - I did my initial training in a newer Cessna 172 w/G1000 screens and pretty much had consistent landings after two weeks in an accelerated program.  However it has been a challenge in the CT which I've owned about 9 months and have about 200 landings and am finally getting the hang of it.  So I agree the CT is more difficult at least when compared to the 172.  The 172 is a flying brick by comparison and it easily takes muffed landings.  The hardest thing for me to get used to is having to get so low before rounding out that I feel like I'm about to crash.  Plus the CT is like a kite in the wind compared to a 172.  But once you get the hang of it I find it to be a LOT more fun.  I like the C172 trim wheel better but love having rudder trim in the CT.

[tespn]

I'm certainly not an expert and my comments were simply to highlight it took me some time to feel really comfortable in my CTLS. I think my perceived differences are generally related to the weight of the aircraft.  I find my CTLS to be easily tossed around compared to the other planes and the plane responds pretty quickly to control input making it easy to "chase" the centerline on crosswind approaches.  Sometimes, I add ballast when flying solo in windy conditions and find that makes the airplane much easier for me to control.  Other than the CTSW and a Searey (once each), I haven't flown any other light sports and I would assume them to be similar on windy days.

 

I have flown my CTLS on a number of cross countries and the avionics package and "button pushing" Corey referred to above is a welcome aspect when covering a few hundred NM or more.  Total CTLS package is very good.  Windy days aren't nearly as enjoyable as calmer days.  All that said ... I wouldn't trade for a 172 and the added hassle to get a medical.

[Anticept]

Some of us fly for the transportation aspect.  Less load on a cross-country the better. Travel without restrictions. 

 

Landing the Cirrus is seemingly easier, but the plane crosses the numbers at 20% power and 85 KIAS so the runway gets used up more quickly.   The Cirrus also uses toe brakes so takeoff and landing is trickier.  And is a big low wing so ground effect allows a much easier transition from round-out to touchdown.

 

The FD CT can make the entire approach on idle throttle.  But the FD CT is more prone to cross winds.

I'm certainly not an expert and my comments were simply to highlight it took me some time to feel really comfortable in my CTLS. I think my perceived differences are generally related to the weight of the aircraft.  I find my CTLS to be easily tossed around compared to the other planes and the plane responds pretty quickly to control input making it easy to "chase" the centerline on crosswind approaches.  Sometimes, I add ballast when flying solo in windy conditions and find that makes the airplane much easier for me to control.  Other than the CTSW and a Searey (once each), I haven't flown any other light sports and I would assume them to be similar on windy days.

 

I have flown my CTLS on a number of cross countries and the avionics package and "button pushing" Corey referred to above is a welcome aspect when covering a few hundred NM or more.  Total CTLS package is very good.  Windy days aren't nearly as enjoyable as calmer days.  All that said ... I wouldn't trade for a 172 and the added hassle to get a medical.

This is why I specified hobby point of view. I completely understand and agree with the transportation viewpoint. Although personally I like the journey as much as the destination, so it's not much of a difference to me

[FastEddieB]

Landing the Cirrus is seemingly easier, but the plane crosses the numbers at 20% power and 85 KIAS so the runway gets used up more quickly.

Are they teaching 85 kts now? 85 kts seems way fast for final. I based my SR22 at Hollywood N Perry for a long time with runways just over 3,000'. I routinely turned off midfield.

 

My POH called for landings power on or off, and I found power off landings easier and shorter.

 

The Cirrus also uses toe brakes so takeoff and landing is trickier.

 

Most planes use toe brakes, and there's nothing "tricky" about them.

[gbigs]

Are they teaching 85 kts now? 85 kts seems way fast for final. I based my SR22 at Hollywood N Perry for a long time with runways just over 3,000'. I routinely turned off midfield.

 

 

Most planes use toe brakes, and there's nothing tricky about them.

 

Well, I have the new turbo and it has a gross weight of 3600 lbs.  The full flaps landing speed  is 80 to 85...and full flaps are required in cross winds.  The 50% flaps are 85 to 90...the 0% flaps are 90 to 95. 

 

I know most planes have toe brakes but they are new to me.  After using the hand brake and steerable nose wheel for so long I found the toe brake/castoring nose wheel takeoffs and landings to be the hardest part of transitioning to the plane.

[FastEddieB]

Understood. My SR22 called for 77kias for a short field, and I found anything much over 80kias led to a lot of floating.

 

I don't have a POH for the SR22T. I'll take your word for it the speeds are higher.*

 

And, yes, Cirrus calls for full flaps on ALL landings. The only exception I can think of is training for a flap failure.

 

As an aside, still looking for you over on COPA. When you do join, please let me know your screen name there.

 

*edited to add: I found the SR22T POH here: http://sierraskyport.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/SR22T-G5-POH-Cirrus-Perspective.pdf

 

And you're correct - it says 80-85kias on final. Just bear in mind that's at max gross - I'd tend to lean towards the slow end of that range when light.