Questions for Cessna and ultralight owners

[PilotDAR]

One of the local guys at the aerodrome I used to frequent, who was the consummate tinkerer, told me with great pride one day that he had now just passed 100 hours on his Kitfox without an engine failure. I tried to pretend happiness for him, while I reminded myself that the O-200 in my 150 had passed 3000 hours on condition with no problems. (It ran very well to 3700 hours, with only one non engine source problem, before I chose to overhaul it).

When I want to fly, I want to be confident that I can, and not worry about reliability, or having to tinker the plane before I fly it. And, I want to know that if the wind comes up, I can still get it down - at my intended destination - without worry.

[fleet16b]

This may have been pilot error or maybe not
Sad either way

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Pilot+ ... story.html

[Shiny Side Up]

The ultralight crowd was unfazed. Just another day. A
new prop appeared - I had to lock wire it on, no one
knew how to lock wire

I know right?

First, the ultralight crowd seems incredibly unfazed about stuff, even sometimes when people die. Its just another day at the park. Note to the wives out there, if you want to get rid of your husband, get him into ultralight flying. One way or another.

Second, I had to show someone how to lockwire a prop on once too. Well I also had to show him that there's a difference between lockwire and chicken wire too. I wasn't as nice to do it for him though, I didn't want to be that associated with that flying disaster. So I did an example, then cut my own work off so he could do it. I did maybe make the mistake of giving him a length of lockwire though.

[sigh]

Cessna or Ultralight... Good question.
It's easy to lump all Certified aircraft into one category, and all Ultralight into another.

Realistically, If you go and look at any two certified aircraft of any given make side by side, and look at more than the paint job, one can be 100% perfect, and the other can be ready to kill the pilot and his family at any time. The same holds true for ultralights, except there's only one passenger seat, and it makes a smaller crater in the ground.
Resale value of certified aircraft are no better than ultra-light. (taking into account inflation from the 1970's when the average certified plane on the used market was built)

The definition of an Advanced Ultralight is ANY aircraft that has a stall speed of 45mph or less, and a take off weight of 1232 lbs, and is propellor driven. Thats a pretty broad spectrum of aircraft, ranging from anything that resembles Wile-E-Coyote in his green batwing suit wearing a propellor beanie cap all the way to a full Carbon fibre/kevlar composite aircraft with a constant speed propellor, autopilot, full glass cockpit, ballistic chute (just like the Cirrus have, except not because it needs it to recover from a spin) retractable gear, and a cruise speed of well over what the average Cessna is capable of, at around a third of the fuel burn. Prices range from $15,000 for the "bat wing" new to $250,000 for a tricked out Composite job.

Someone saying they flew in an ultralight, it was dangerous, and they will never do it again" is like saying "I ate some bad food in a restaurant, and will never do it again" Which restaurant? what type of food? What country?


If the ultralight was built in the early 80's with a lawnmower engine, maybe you should consider moving on to something a little modern. Something new will probably be equipped with the Rotax 912is fuel injected engine, which has it's own onboard diagnostics system, burns less than 1/3 the amount of any other certified aircraft engine (the rotax is a certified engine too by the way) and will easily surpass 3000 hours before an overhaul. Yes, it revs at 5500 rpm, but so does your car. If you've ever flown behind a Rotax 912is, you'll see/hear/feel what modern technology has to offer to the aviation industry.(I've seen the 912uls go for 5000 hours before an overhaul, with no real reason to overhaul it at that).

Good maintenance goes a long way, and it's entirely up to the owner (you) to make sure it happens, certified or not.
I was hanging around a maintenance hangar where the "certified" Cherokee 140 was obviously pencil-whipped through at least 20 annuals before it came to this location, where the AME actually took off the inspection covers. There were ADs that weren't complied with from the 70's, the flaps were rigged to kill, the Carb was squirting fuel directly onto the exhaust, the exhaust had holes in it the size of my fist, bare wires, cracked door frame, no stop in the fuel selector to prevent accidental "off" position, Kinked/cracked oil cooler tubing, propellor over-torqued enough to stretch the prop bolts, control yokes cracked and ready to break off in flight, controls so stiff you would get a workout from doing a circuit, The #2 cylinder has been leaking exhaust so long that it cut a 1cm deep channel through the cylinder head at the exhaust flange, control cables rubbing on seized pulleys, carb heat cables dangling loose so the carb heat couldn't be shut off, tachometer out by 400rpm, fuel pressure gauge indicates in the green, with the fuel pump and engine off... the list goes on more than I care to type. The repairs on this plane will cost well over $25,000.00 and when it's all done, the plane will be worth, well, just over $25,000.00. Hows that for resale value?

Ultralights scare the crap out of me.

What about Certified aircraft? Would you blindly jump in the Cherokee mentioned above, or any other certified aircraft maintained by the previous AME and fly your family to the Bahamas?

They don't handle any wind well

Another generalization... I was at a fly in breakfast where only two aircraft ventured to land due to the high 25 gusting 35 90° crosswinds which scared all the other aircraft away. One was a R-44, and the other was a tail-wheel Pipistrel Virus like in the photo near the beginning of the thread. He greased the landing like there was no wind at all. I guess using the spoilers is kind of like cheating.

The other thing to consider is your investment
With an ultralight you will almost never get close to selling it for the same price you bought it for

I bought an advanced Ultra-light a few years ago, new, flew it for 230 hours, and sold it a year later for 4 G higher than the original purchase price. Aside from my fuel savings of $10350 compared with the fuel burn of a 172, and the fact I travelled 40% further per hour flown due to the higher cruise speed, I don't know how much better the resale could be.
(I sold it because I wanted another one just like it, with more options)
Maybe that one falls into the "almost never" category, but if you choose your "ultralight" model wisely, maintain it properly, and don't fly it like there's no tomorrow, you will live a long and happy life and chuckle to yourself when you arrive at the next fly-in and hear another "certified" pilot say ignorantly...
"Rotax? You wouldn't catch me dead flying behind a Ski-doo engine!"

[NunavutPA-12]

I flew my Advanced Ultralight Challenger, with a 50-horse 2-stroke engine, from Montreal to Edmonton in 2005. In 2006 it went from Edmonton to Kugluktuk (okay, with one mishap - but not related to the airplane at all). It never skipped a beat on those trips and has not since, either. 400 hours on that two-stroke engine now.

I also own an Amateur-built PA-12 (160-hp O320) which, admittedly, is a much more capable aircraft but requires more attention due to more complicated "systems". As one example; the engine, being a four-stroke has a lot more bits and pieces to fail than the two-stroke Rotax.

Properly maintained, I don't think there's a huge difference in the reliability between the two 'planes, but if I had to choose I'd look for an Amateur-built "certified clone". If you're the least bit handy (and can read!) the maintenance savings are HUGE.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I have been instructing for 27 years. Some of my PPL students went on to fly Ultra Lights. Every single one of them has had an engine failure, some more than once.

An earlier poster noted that you can't lump all ultra lights together and, yes that is a valid observation. However I would suggest that there are 2 groups of Ultra Lights

Very high end well built reliable and quite capable airplanes like the Pipistrele, which represents maybe 10% of the UL fleet and the other 90 %.

The 90 % airplanes have construction quality, engine reliability, and handling characteristics, significantly to dramatically below what you will find in a certified airplane.

I would also note that you can buy anywhere between 4 and 7 Cessna 150's for the price of one of the 10 % airplanes.

[SheriffPatGarrett]

The 150 or 140 on floats and wheel-skis will run you out of a lot of dollars...close to $100,000...never seen an amphib. Is there any?
Champs are great but most have wood spars...you trust a forty year old wooden spar that lived on the water?
A near new Challenger with a 582 on amphibs plus wheel-skis go for about $30,000
The Rotax is just as reliable if not more than the four strokes(nothing to break, huge bearings...etc...)
and you do your own maintenance...$0 versus $3,000 a year...

[Big Pistons Forever]

The 150 or 140 on floats and wheel-skis will run you out of a lot of dollars...close to $100,000

More like half that amount, or about the same as the last Challenger I saw advertised.

[SheriffPatGarrett]

Well, you need the 150 hp engine with the battery way back in the tail and extra large fuel tanks.
They want $45,000 for that one straight back, not even painted:

http://www.barnstormers.com/Cessna,%20C ... ifieds.htm
For amphibs, you'll have to get those Czech fancy floats and wheel skis...it'll likely cost as much as the plane...

No question, with the big flaps and the big engine, that would be quite the airplane, but not cheap
for a small plane...maybe better off with an Aeronca Sedan or a Cessna 170 late model with the 180 hp with a constant speed prop.
Aaand you still have to pay the big bucks every year for the annual...

That why I finally did settle for the Challenger.

[sigh]

comparing prices from a 60 year old C-150 to a new Pipistrel is like comparing a 1960's VW beetle rotting in a farmers back yard with a few parts missing to a 2015 Honda Accord sitting in the showroom.

[Shiny Side Up]

comparing prices from a 60 year old C-150 to a new Pipistrel is like comparing a 1960's VW beetle rotting in a farmers back yard with a few parts missing to a 2015 Honda Accord sitting in the showroom.

Pipstrels aren't that bad...

[Pop n Fresh]

Pipstrels aren't that bad...

[iflyforpie]

comparing prices from a 60 year old C-150 to a new Pipistrel is like comparing a 1960's VW beetle rotting in a farmers back yard with a few parts missing to a 2015 Honda Accord sitting in the showroom.

But that's the level of ultralight you will have to get to equal the 60 year old Cessna 150. A Challenger, Chinook, or Beaver ultralight sure doesn't... and they are still $50K.... over double the price of most 150s. The 150 I fly has an O-200 with a couple hundred hours on it.... there is no way a 5xx Rotax is better than it, and the 912 has a whole pile of liabilities in comparison.

The 150 will be good forever provided it is corrosion free and a little maintenance done... and you can even do it yourself if you wish.

We had a Challenger on amphibs at our field. Surprise... it crashed. It was repaired and flew again.. but the owner sold it and went on with his life.