Author Topic: It's time to quit playing..... (Read 431 times)

Swoop · « **on:** February 12, 2001, 03:54:00 AM »

Nope, I dont mean Im leaving AH ("Aw" says CavemanJ

). I mean it's time to stop playing at it and do it for real. I wanna fly.

Since I live within sight of Schipol Airport near Amsterdam, I figure there's bound to be a light aircraft flight school around here somewhere.....all I gotta do is find it.

Last time I took the boat home to Britain there were a couple of Dutch bikers on the ferry as well. We got chatting (cos I was riding an R6) and it turns out both these guys are pilots, one of them being a pilot instructor. Isn't it funny how aviators will talk about flying for 4 hours without a break

, ok maybe a 30 minute break to talk about bikes instead.

Anyway, I figure I'll email this instructor fella and see if he knows where to go......

Now my question is for all you real aviators out there.......what's the crack then lads? What's involved here?

Swoop
(hopefully swooping for real soon)

TheWobble · « **Reply #1 on:** February 12, 2001, 04:09:00 AM »

A good low price aircraft to look into if ya want to purchase one is a S-10 Sakota

SPECIFICATIONS 65 HP 80 HP/100 HP
Wing Span 24.0 ft 24.0 ft
Area 95.0 sq ft. 95.0 sq ft
Mean Chord 4 ft 2 in 4 ft 2 in
Aspect. 4.23:1 4.23:1
Length. 17 ft 10 in 17 ft 10 in
Height 4 ft 10 in 4 ft 10 in
Cockpit Width 39.75 in. 39.75 in
Headroom. 38 in 38 in
Legroom 42 in 42 in
Number of Seats. 2 2
Doors 2 2
Landing Gear* F/TD F/TD
Baggage Volume 8 cu ft 8 cu ft
Baggage Capacity. 30 lbs 30 lbs
Auxiliary Baggage Volume n/a. n/a
Auxiliary Baggage Capacity n/a. n/a
Fuel Capacity 18 gal US 18 gal US

POWER PLANT 582 912/912S
Engine. Rotax 582. Rotax 912/Rotax 912S
Output. 65 hp. 80 hp/100 hp
Oil Capacity. 2.5 qts. 3.0 qts
Coolant Capacity. 4.4 qts. 4.4 qts
Propeller Diameter 68 in to 70 in. 68 in to 70 in
Propeller Type. Wood Wood
Gear Reduction. 1:2.58 1:2.27/1:2.43
Fuel G.P.H. 5.75 gal @ 85% 4.1/4.5 gal @ 80%

PERFORMANCE
Take Off Roll. 300 ft. 325 ft/310 ft
Rate of Climb 800 fpm. 900 fpm/1200 fpm
Service Ceiling 12,500 ft 14,000 ft/14,500 ft
Cruise 110 mph 120 mph/125 mph
VNE. 130 mph 130 mph
Stall Clean. 45 mph 48 mph
Stall Flaps. 41 mph 44 mph
Roll Rate. 100° /sec 100° /sec
Glide Ratio 7:1. 7:1
Landing Roll 400 ft. 400 ft
Endurance. 3.1 hrs. 4.4 hrs/4 hrs
Range. 341 miles 528/520 miles

WEIGHTS AND LOADINGS
Gross Weight 960 lbs 1010 lbs
Empty Weight 460 lbs 510 lbs
Useful Load. 500 lbs 500 lbs
Wing Loading 10.1 lbs. 10.6 lbs
Power Loading 14.7 lbs. 12.6 lbs
Limit Load Factors** +4 -1.5 +4 -1.5

It cost about 15,000 American which is pretty darn cheap for a plane IMO.

StSanta · « **Reply #2 on:** February 12, 2001, 07:23:00 AM »

Real flying is done without engines :9.

------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
"If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up space"

-lynx- · « **Reply #3 on:** February 12, 2001, 11:19:00 AM »

Swoop - the real deal here is that you book into one of the American flight schools that train under the European rules, go there for 4 weeks, pay $3,500-odd and come back home with your PPL (accomodation included).

Other ways are extortionately expensive and due to our weather are a pain in the a** to complete.

Maverick · « **Reply #4 on:** February 12, 2001, 01:54:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by -lynx-:
Swoop - the real deal here is that you book into one of the American flight schools that train under the European rules, go there for 4 weeks, pay $3,500-odd and come back home with your PPL (accomodation included).

Other ways are extortionately expensive and due to our weather are a pain in the a** to complete.

paintmaw · « **Reply #5 on:** February 12, 2001, 02:34:00 PM »

if you want the freedom of flight without all the restrictions and regulations , go ultralight . check out the Kolb , you will save alot of cash and fly when ya want

Daff · « **Reply #6 on:** February 12, 2001, 03:09:00 PM »

The deal is a lot of hard work and commitment...but the rewards are very much worth it.
The USA/Europe argument is also worth considering. Yes, you can do it 25% cheaper in the US, but will you be as safe?.
In the US (Usually Florida), you'll learn to fly in pretty much perfect weather, very good and efficient ATC's and you're in for a shock when you get back home, especially the weather. (It rained on the downwind leg,when I did my first solo). I flew in crap with my instructor, I still wouldnt go up in on my own.
If you do go the US, do go up with a local instructor for 4-5 hours when you get back.
The disadvantages of doing it in Europe (besides the price), is that it can be hard to get regular lessons due to weather, making you have to repeat some of the lessons and again increasing the price.
OTOH, you get all the local knowledge that will make it an awful lot more comfortable to just go up for a hop, as you've already spent 40+ hours around that area.
If you do it in Europe, talk to as many schools/clubs as possible. Stay away from the bigger schools. Often their instructors are just people building hours for their ATPL, with very little concept or interest in general aviation. It is worth paying more for the guy who's got a keen interest in GA than one trying to teach you to fly a Cessna like a 747.
Get the theory-exams out of the way as soon as possible and dont leave it to the last moment (like me

). I dont know when you last when to school, but for me it was hard to have to "study" again. (And it had only been 9 years since I left college).
Aim to fly (if you do it in Europe) 3 times a month (more if you can afford it and find the time). 2 weeks between each lesson is about the max where you dont have to backtrack too much over stuff from last lesson (And you're bound to cancel about 1 lesson a month anyway, due to weather).
Finally, go do it!. It'll be the best decision you'll ever made

Daff

------------------
CO, 56th Fighter Group
"This is Yardstick. Follow me"

john9001 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 12, 2001, 03:09:00 PM »

fly a real plane, even a cessna 152 trainer is a rush

-lynx- · « **Reply #8 on:** February 13, 2001, 05:47:00 AM »

OK, Daff you have a point there. But I have 40 hours of P1 in a 3-axis microlight. I don't need them to teach me to fly, I just need a PPL(A)

.

Disagree completely on the ATC - it's a bigger shock to come in from a "farm strip" into an airport with any form of ATC. People simply have no clue - scary stuff if you are in a circuit at the same time. Especially if it's one of those "seat-of-the-pants-we-don't-need-no-stinkin'-radios" types

. Having learnt at Kemble I can fly to different airfields with no probs whether they have ATC or not.

For many it boils down to time/money factor. At £95-125/hour you're looking at 5 grand + by the time you're done with flying/exams etc. And a year of no weekends. The States offer you your licence in 4 weeks for half the price - thank you guys, I'll take it

. If you that keen on local training/spending money - book yourself airobatics lessons at your local airfield, you'll learn more. BTW - you won't (shouldn't have been!!!

) allowed solo without your Air Law exam

. And the whole thing has to be done within a tight timeframe - exams have their "sell by" date.

As for Cessnas and such like - two words for you guys: Jabiru and CT. Both are 2-seater microlights, both knock the socks off Cessnas in term of performance, costs etc. I've just bought a share in a CT - delivery in March

.

This baby with Rotax-912S cruises at 133kts/155mph (75% power; flaps: -8 degrees, cruise setting) and is good to go for ~1,000 miles.
www.flightdesign.com

Paintaw - maybe in Florida and suchlike places... I landed my AX3 in 25kts crosswind and driving rain once - that was not something I'd like to do again. The weather in England changes very quickly and usually from bad to worse

. Modern ultra/microlights are way better "prepared" for it but sometimes you just have to have the sheer weight to stay on tarmac...

[This message has been edited by -lynx- (edited 02-13-2001).]

TheWobble · « **Reply #9 on:** February 13, 2001, 06:17:00 AM »

CT-M

That must be the UGLIEST plane I have ever seen.
The sakota has the 912s option, 125 cruise speed, costs less and doesent look like......THAT.

S-10 Sakota

[This message has been edited by TheWobble (edited 02-13-2001).]

[This message has been edited by TheWobble (edited 02-13-2001).]

-lynx- · « **Reply #10 on:** February 13, 2001, 07:29:00 AM »

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"...

[This message has been edited by -lynx- (edited 02-13-2001).]

TheWobble · « **Reply #11 on:** February 13, 2001, 07:43:00 AM »

Who "beholds" that thing? Ray Charles?

-lynx- · « **Reply #12 on:** February 13, 2001, 10:31:00 AM »

Wobble - let's just not go there, OK?

It is the fabric covered wings and controls there if I'm not mistaken? And it is 125mph you quoting there, not knots, right?

S-10 is a fine looking flying machine but it's from somewhat different generation than CT. I also know that it's not certified by the CAA which cuts it off for many people over here.