Maybe Sport Pilot??

cleared4theoption

cleared4theoption

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
May 6, 2010
Messages
363
Location
Flowery Branch, GA
Display Name
Display name:
Jeremy
So, I am thinking of getting my sport for now, and adding my PPL later. I already have 18 hours (all of it except .5 dual). Of course that was all in a C172 and it was two years ago. Seems all I would need is to take a few flights to get back into it an re-solo (I soloed at 18 hours before but it's been two years) Then I just need to complete the 2-hours of X-country training, do my solo cross country and train for the test.
A few questions...
If I make sure my solo x-country meets the PPL requirements, then all I really have to do to meet the PPL over all requirements is do night flight and towered airports down the road and I can add on a PPL...does that sound close to right?
Also, the only place close by that does LSA is Lanier, and they have the skycather. According to a quick wikki look up...with full fuel it only holds 342lbs usefull. I plan on slimming down to 225-230...but that still means my instructor would need to weigh 112 lbs (not likely). Is it common to fly them for dual at less than full fuel for weight considerations??
Finally, would it matter that 18 hours of my training will have been done in a C172 instead of the LSA??

Thanks.
 
Assuming you get your training done by a "real" CFI, it should all count.

Full fuel is not required - if you were to fly a larger aircraft, it is not unusual to trade fuel for cabin load. How much fuel does the Skycatcher hold? You want to take off with at least a couple hours - how much does that leave you for an instructor?

The training in the 172 should count towards the required hours (I think), but if it's been a couple years, you may need to get back up to speed anyhow. The whole 20 hour thing seems pretty unrealistic to me for someone starting from scratch - you still have to learn to fly the airplane, and it takes just as long in an LSA as anything else.
 
I think it's Advanced Aviation, at KLZU, that has a Flight Design CTSW leased back to them. The owner is one of their instructors. You'll see the plane sitting by the gate when you come down on Saturday. According to Wikipedia, the useful load would be 341 lb, which I can't see as being right. You'll probably get a chance to talk to Michael, the owner, as he will probably be flying YEs on Sat. I'd check with him on the weights rather than take Wikipedia at its word.

The Flight School of Gwinnett has a Zenith Zodiac, though the useful load isn't a whole lot, and the instructor told me that we'd have to go without full fuel (with me (230) and him the limit would be 10 gal), so no dual XC. I suggested using the 150 for dual XC, and he said it would be possible, but cost more for the crossover training.

Your prior training would count toward SP. If you had been studying SP, and using a SPI instead of a CFI, the dual time would not count (from what I understand through discussion), but since you were studying PP, you should be fine. Make your XC long enough to count for PPL, and you've got that covered.

For someone who started going for SP, using a SPI, opinions vary, since the dual doesn't count. My personal feeling, though, is that even that shouldn't really matter, since adding the dual time required for instrument and night, you would very likely meet the minimum requirements for dual with a CFI anyway.

<EDIT>
For the CTSW (http://www.flight-design-southeast.com/CTsw.htm)
Empty Weight:649 Pounds
Gross Weight:1,320 Pounds

That gives you 671 lb useful load.

Why don't I trust Wikipedia?
 
Last edited:
At FS of Gwinnett, their Zodiac goes for $95 wet, where their 150 goes for $80, if I remember right.

The CTSW goes for $115 if I remember right. BTW, neither of these schools has their LSA listed on their websites - go figure.

At Lanier, the Skycatcher is $144, $134, or $124, depending on whether you walk-in, are a member, or prepay.
 
Well, based on what I read on Wikki about that CTSW looks like 1323 max gross -701(empty weight) -126(full fuel) -35(for 5 quarts of oil-just a guess) leaves 461 for bags and passengers...seems better than the sky catcher...and at 115$ an hour verses 124$ pre-pay at Lanier...might be do-able
 
My main goal with this would be a cheaper way just to get up and start flying...my eventual goal will be PPL. I just have the bug and want to fly. I figure the only real difference is I can only carry one passenger and can't fly at night...i probably wouldn't want to carry any passengers any way until I had built more time, and, although night flight is cool...it's a trade I would be willing to make. And if I train at LZU that (plus the other time I've already logged at LZU) would get me signed off for class C and D airports. I guess i will talk with someone on Saturday and do some comparisons. If it really seems like it will save me a decent amount of money I might go for it.
 
i was once told that many who go this route just stop at sport -- just do it and go all the way!
 
raider said:
i was once told that many who go this route just stop at sport -- just do it and go all the way!
Click to expand...
I plan on going all the way...but here are my options..
It seems like I have enough money right now to do the sport...but do to other financial issues...not enough to go all the way to PPL...probably won't have enough to do that until this time next year..
So either get the sport now, and be able to fly this year and add the PPL next year or maybe even after that
Or...not fly at all until next year or after that...
I prefer the idea of flying now:D
 
cleared4theoption said:
Well, based on what I read on Wikki about that CTSW looks like 1323 max gross...
Click to expand...
1320 is the limit for LSA certificated aircraft, unless they are equipped with floats, then it is 1430. Don't trust Wikipedia...

cleared4theoption said:
My main goal with this would be a cheaper way just to get up and start flying...my eventual goal will be PPL. I just have the bug and want to fly. I figure the only real difference is I can only carry one passenger and can't fly at night...i probably wouldn't want to carry any passengers any way until I had built more time, and, although night flight is cool...it's a trade I would be willing to make. And if I train at LZU that (plus the other time I've already logged at LZU) would get me signed off for class C and D airports. I guess i will talk with someone on Saturday and do some comparisons. If it really seems like it will save me a decent amount of money I might go for it.
Click to expand...

I'm with you all the way. I would love to fly, but I just bought a house, and right now the money is going into fixing it up (wife happiness factor). If I had a way I could get into the sky right now, I'd be doing it. ;)

Also - as far as instructor rates, IIRC I heard Michael saying that Advanced charges $40-$65 for instructors, and he's the most expensive (he's retired, too, and doing this for fun, IIRC). Also, I don't know how serious he was when I asked, but one day I asked if I could buy a 1% share of the plane, and he said yes. ;)

Another thing - there are a few of us in the chapter who would like to see a flying club spinoff from the chapter, and there is a committee (I'm on it) but we haven't had the chance to get together yet. My personal desires for a club airplane are:
  1. LSA - this will get the most possible number of people qualified to use the plane.
  2. The best possible useful load that we can get in an LSA - because we're not all lightweights anymore.
  3. The LSA with the best cruise speed that we can get with the max useful load - so that it can be used not only for flying around, but for going somewhere. Get the most use out of it that we can.
  4. Enough instruments to get someone through instrument training - even though it can't fly in IMC, it could be used for the training. This requirement goes back to getting the maximum use and benefit from the plane.
I don't know what the other guys on the committee want in a plane (I've heard one suggest a 172, and one suggested a Cub), but these are the characteristics I'd like to see.
 
cleared4theoption said:
Is it common to fly them for dual at less than full fuel for weight considerations??
Click to expand...
It is common in all Cessna trainers. Skycatcher's useful load is about between 150 and 152. When I checked out in a 150M, we had to offload down to 13 gallons. You only fly your longer XC solo. I only had to fly a little hop with CFI, so he could see how I verify checkpoints and use VOR. You should be able to make a 150 nm loop in a 162 even without refueling.
 
FYI, no Zodiac at the Flight School of Gwinnett anymore. Go to Advanced and train in the Flight Design if you want to do SP. You'll also end up with the airspace endorsement since you'll fly out of towered field.
 
Go get your SP. It might be all you ever want. the bigger airplanes get the more boring they are.
 
cleared4theoption said:
I plan on going all the way...but here are my options..
It seems like I have enough money right now to do the sport...but do to other financial issues...not enough to go all the way to PPL...probably won't have enough to do that until this time next year..
So either get the sport now, and be able to fly this year and add the PPL next year or maybe even after that
Or...not fly at all until next year or after that...
I prefer the idea of flying now:D
Click to expand...

At some point, even going for your PPL, you will be signed off solo for the practice area and some of the local fields, to fly whenever you want. I think taking a year to get it done isn't necessarily a bad thing. You just can't take passengers, or go night flying. Cross countries usually aren't an issue either, they just need to be individually signed off.
 
Atlanta Light Sport Aviation at McCollum (KRYY) has the largest light sport rental fleet in the area. They've got a Sky Arrow 600, FK 9 MK IV, and FK 9 ELA, and a an FA-04 Peregrine. The FK 9 ELA has a BRS and a true useful load of 540LB. It is equipped with Dynon 100 / 120 EFIS/EMS and Garmin 696. It flies very well. It rents for $120/hour wet and instructors are $40-45/hour. Good instructors with a 100% success rate on checkrides so far.

Look at the actual useful load of the N number you are planning to fly. I haven't seen a CT that has the advertised empty weight/useful load. You'll also like the way the FK flies better than the CT if you ever get a chance to compare.

The website rates are a little out of date. The field is close to I-75, and you'll get a class D sign off. Check them out.

http://www.atlantalightsportaviation.com/Sales-rentals.html
 
cleared4theoption said:
I plan on going all the way...but here are my options..
It seems like I have enough money right now to do the sport...but do to other financial issues...not enough to go all the way to PPL...probably won't have enough to do that until this time next year..
So either get the sport now, and be able to fly this year and add the PPL next year or maybe even after that
Or...not fly at all until next year or after that...
I prefer the idea of flying now:D
Click to expand...

That's exactly the thinking I went through. I ultimately decided to go sport, and in the next two to three weeks, I'm working towards my private. I definitely made the right choice for me, and it sounds like it very well could be for you.
 
I know two pilots personally who did Sport prior to getting the full Private. They both say they have no regrets.
 
cleared4theoption said:
If I make sure my solo x-country meets the PPL requirements, then all I really have to do to meet the PPL over all requirements is do night flight and towered airports down the road and I can add on a PPL...does that sound close to right?
Click to expand...
Close. Three hours of night, three hours of instruments, and three hours of test prep (some of which can be combined, like hood time on your test prep or doing the required night dual XC) for starters as well as 10 takeoffs and landings at night dual and 3 at a towered airport solo. In addition, the PP requires 10 hours of solo including 5 hours of solo XC compared to 5 hours of solo and 2 hours of solo XC, as well as the long solo XC, so you'll probably have to do at least one more solo XC plus maybe some more local solo.

Finally, would it matter that 18 hours of my training will have been done in a C172 instead of the LSA??
Click to expand...
No, but any training you do in an LSA will have to be with a CFI-ASE rather than a CFI-SP to count for the PP training requirements.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Close. Three hours of night, three hours of instruments, and three hours of test prep (some of which can be combined, like hood time on your test prep or doing the required night dual XC) for starters as well as 10 takeoffs and landings at night dual and 3 at a towered airport solo. In addition, the PP requires 10 hours of solo including 5 hours of solo XC compared to 5 hours of solo and 2 hours of solo XC, as well as the long solo XC, so you'll probably have to do at least one more solo XC plus maybe some more local solo.

No, but any training you do in an LSA will have to be with a CFI-ASE rather than a CFI-SP to count for the PP training requirements.
Click to expand...

If a Sport Pilot came to you for PPL training, how many hours of dual instruction could the student expect( assuming all dual instruction received for the Sport rating could count)?
 
vintage cessna said:
If a Sport Pilot came to you for PPL training, how many hours of dual instruction could the student expect( assuming all dual instruction received for the Sport rating could count)?
Click to expand...
Can't say until I examine their logbook and fly with them. Also depends on whether they're changing planes for the PP training.

But assuming they have the SP mins of 20 total, 15 dual (2 dual XC but over 50nm), 5 solo (2 solo XC but over 50nm), and we're doing it all in the LSA they've been flying so there are no transition issues, and they're fully proficient on all the maneuvers and tasks from SP, we're going to have to add at least the following:

5 total dual
1 dual XC (will get covered on the night XC)
3 night including a night XC over 100nm and 10 t/o's and ldgs
3 instrument (some during night, some during test prep)
3 test prep

We'll also have to do some dual at a tower-controlled airport before I can allow the trainee to get the three solo t/o's and ldg's at a tower-controlled airport.

Put it all together, and I think it's probably going to be at least 10 hours of dual, not including the evaluation flight up front.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Go get your SP. It might be all you ever want. the bigger airplanes get the more boring they are.
Click to expand...

So true. I don't think enough prospective pilots really give enough thought about what they really want from flying before sinking a lot of money into what for most people will be a hobby.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Go get your SP. It might be all you ever want. the bigger airplanes get the more boring they are.
Click to expand...

I can tell you that the Tecnam Eaglets are real hoots to fly. I've flown a 172 a few times, and it doesn't come close to the the sheer pleasure of flying an Eaglet.
 
Like a silly fool, I bought a new CTSW and then started Sport Pilot lessons. The quality of instruction was not good and the DPE was also the owner of the flight school, leading me to believe that he had a financial incentive to drag out the lessons as long as possible. It did not work out. My hangermate, who is also a CFII and a Southwest captain said that if I passed the medical, passed the knowledge test and installed an HSI, he would get me through my PP oral and checkride. He did and I did. He's now on my "free charts and electronics repair for life" program.

Anyway, Sport Pilot was not for me, even though I fly a sport pilot plane. I occasionally enjoy the extra privileges and I think there was no comparison with the training.

Finally, the CTSW is not a good trainer. It is a wonderful aircraft, but landing it on hot gusty days is a handful, especially flying solo. Figure an extra 10 hours instruction over what a more docile aircraft will take.
 
I learned to fly in Colorado in 152s where we had density altitudes pushing into the 8000+ range.
Not filling the tanks while flying with two people was quite common. We'd usually take 3 gallons a side in between lessons. Solo wasn't usually too much of a problem. I remember that for my check ride, my weight plus the examiner plus full fuel (the plane had been topped) would have put us over except Cessna gives you 5 pounds for start/taxi burn.
 
Thanks for all the replies. I have a question about the fuel. Let's say I reserve the plane for dual and I show up and the plane has too much fuel. Is there a process for off-loading fuel? Do they store it for later use?
 
cleared4theoption said:
Thanks for all the replies. I have a question about the fuel. Let's say I reserve the plane for dual and I show up and the plane has too much fuel. Is there a process for off-loading fuel? Do they store it for later use?
Click to expand...

I would bet most flight schools with LSA never fill the tanks. :wink2:
 
Old Geek said:
Finally, the CTSW is not a good trainer. It is a wonderful aircraft, but landing it on hot gusty days is a handful, especially flying solo. Figure an extra 10 hours instruction over what a more docile aircraft will take.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Very poor control harmonization, poor rudder force gradient, and very difficult in crosswinds. In addition, the main landing gear structure has some real weak points which are easy to damage with a landing that wouldn't break a sweat on a Cessna 150. I'm told they fixed a lot of that on the CTls, but I've not flown that model yet.
 
cleared4theoption said:
Thanks for all the replies. I have a question about the fuel. Let's say I reserve the plane for dual and I show up and the plane has too much fuel. Is there a process for off-loading fuel? Do they store it for later use?
Click to expand...
That's all possible, but pretty much up to the flight school. There are potential contamination issues with offloading fuel and then putting it back in the plane. A good flight school anticipates this by not refueling above a point allowing its students to fly with its instructors, and then fueling up further immediately before a flight that requires more fuel.
 
Ron Levy said:
Agreed. Very poor control harmonization, poor rudder force gradient, and very difficult in crosswinds. In addition, the main landing gear structure has some real weak points which are easy to damage with a landing that wouldn't break a sweat on a Cessna 150. I'm told they fixed a lot of that on the CTls, but I've not flown that model yet.
Click to expand...

I don't know if I'd be quite that negative about it :rolleyes2:

I haven't damaged the landing gear in well over 1000 student landings. I don't know about the other points except that I took 6 hours of instruction in a 152 and it felt like driving a milk truck compared to the CT. I didn't like it at all. I can fly most of the PTS to commercial standards in the CT, so I know it is possible to train in one. It's just harder.
 
Old Geek said:
I don't know if I'd be quite that negative about it :rolleyes2:
Click to expand...
I've given about 30 hours of training in one, and I'm quite certain about my negativism. Sorry if I'm kicking your puppy, but my experience tells me this puppy bites and pees on the rug. :D
 
cleared4theoption said:
Yes
Just have to do extra training on tower communications...but then you are endorsed to fly to any towered or untowered field.
Click to expand...
Not all of them -- you need additional endorsements for Class B and Class C if the towered airport where you did that training is only Class D.
 
Ron Levy said:
I've given about 30 hours of training in one, and I'm quite certain about my negativism. Sorry if I'm kicking your puppy, but my experience tells me this puppy bites and pees on the rug. :D
Click to expand...

When the LSA category was approved, the CTSW became a trainer by default as it was one of the few models that was readily available. It is NOT optimized for that role, but is a great plane in the hands of a skilled pilot.

I haven't flown either one, but the consensus I've heard is that the longer fuselage and new main gear on the CTLS made that airplane a lot more appropriate for student training. That was also the message Flight Design repeated ad nauseum when the LS was introduced.
 
cleared4theoption said:
Let's say I reserve the plane for dual and I show up and the plane has too much fuel. Is there a process for off-loading fuel? Do they store it for later use?
Click to expand...
Interesting question. The FBO that rents LSA nearby never re-fuel again. I think in part it is because autogas is easy to utilize: it just ends in the truck of the school's owner. Unfortunately, dumping 100LL into a car is going to ruin the catalitic converter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top