Most generous payload capability for a S-LSA?

F

Frank

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
158
Location
Annapolis, MD
Display Name
Display name:
Frank
I weigh a little much for most LSAs. I would like to know which real world numbers exist for full fuel payload, and what LSA has the most generous legal real world payload. I know the Zlin Savage has one configuration open to the breeze, that appears to have a relatively high useful load, but I would prefer enclosed aircraft.
 
The Distar Lambada is an S-LSA motorglider with 695 lbs useful load, 539 lbs payload full fuel (more useful load than the Zlin Savage and it's enclosed). I can't speak to comfort for a larger guy. Of course, depending on why you are interested in LSAs and your budget, standard category (or experimental) motorgliders will offer more useful load, better performance, and with a glider private rating, the ability to fly at night, at higher altitudes, for business, etc.
 
"Unofficially" The Jabiru J-230....but you'll be over gross.

Jabiru J230/J430 Amateur Built Kitplanes
The Jabiru J230 (2 seats) and the Jabiru J430 (4 seats) aircraft have been developed as touring aircraft. They have a wide cockpit, high cabin and ample leg room. The Jabiru J230 has a big baggage compartment in the back whereas the Jabiru J430 has 2 rear seats.
Click to expand...
 
Remos GX has a 650lb useful load, 520 with full fuel. In Europe it is allowed a 1580lb gross. My Dad's Gx is going up for sale. Don
 
Trust but verify is the word if you really need the useful load. There are many brochures out there that don't match the equipment list and weight of the airplane as it sits on the apron.
 
A few of the planes listed above have a useful load GREATER than the empty weight. That used to be the realm of powered parachutes and trikes.
 
I decided early-on that I had to factor in airspeed at cruise as well. An airplane that's light, but burns 5 gallons an hour at 90 knots is not as versatile as one that is slightly heavier and burns 5 gallons an hour at 115 knots.
 
Hello from a fellow fat pilot. I gave the matter some research.

Among reasonable S-LSAs that can be gotten new (somewhat), Dova Skylark, Allegro, Remos GX basically tie for the honours at around 630-650 lbs useful load. Since Dova is not a popular design, and I have doubts about Allegro, I would say GX is the realistic option, however, there's a catch.

At some point Remos decided to go broke by lightening up the airframe. They took a common GX and swapped everything out for carbon fiber. The result is the current-production "GX eLITE" (used to be called "GX NXT") that can be configured for 657 lbs useful, beating out the long-time absolute champion DV-1. And the catch? The price. It's north of $120k. When Remos started shaving pounds and adding dollars, sales tanked.

As great as RV-12 is, and despite the recent mega-hype as the savior or S-LSA, it does not even come close to those records. I would say, 580 lbs is realistic for it.

Here's my somewhat obsolete useful load sampler that includes both advertised loads and real loads of actual airplanes:

Allegro 2007: ........ 673 lbs book, 682 lbs advertised 2012
Dova Skylark DV-1: ... 643 lbs advertised on 2010 model sold by SkyView
Remos GX: ............ 615 lbs book, 631 lbs real on N28GX (no BRS), 650 lbs book on a 2010 stripper before LiTE.
Evektor SportStar: ... 640 lbs book
RANS S-6LS: .......... 620 lbs book
Alto: ................ 610 lbs advertised
Aerotrek A-240: ...... 596 lbs
Allegro 2000: ........ 594 lbs real on Frank's airplane
P92 Eaglet: .......... 590 lbs book
CTSW: ................ 574 lbs
X-Air LS: ............ 574 lbs book
CTLS: ................ 550 lbs book, 505 lbs real on N505MA
P2002 Seirra: ........ 540 lbs book
Cessna 162: .......... 481 lbs book, 426 lbs on N60020?
Sky Arrow: ........... 453 lbs on EddieB's N467SA (bumped for E-LSA?)
ACA 7EC Champ: ....... 395 lbs == disqualifying as an LSA for ASTM

BTW, I weigh 230 lbs. One thing to look out is the maximum pilot weight or seat weight. Fk-9 had a limit somewhere near, like 240 lbs.
 
Last edited:
The highest useful load I've seen, at least in book value, is the Just Aircraft Highlander at 705 lbs. I'm sure YMMV depending on panel, options and build differences between individual aircraft.
 
Remember also that if you have a huge useful load, you have to have someplace to put all that stuff. A 2007 Allegro has a huge useful load, but a tiny baggage space limited to 22lb I believe. So unless you are hauling two fatties, you really can't use all that weight anywhere except the seats.

My CTSW has a lower useful at 585lb, but I can take people up to 260lb each (seat weight limit), up to 34gal fuel, and up to 110lb baggage. Good load that is VERY flexible. If it's just me I can take full fuel that will get me 800+ miles and 110lb of bags (plus another 70lb in the seat). Me and the wife can use 24gal and 70lb of baggage, plenty for a trip up to a week or so and still giving ~450 miles range with an hour reserve fuel. Me and a heavy friend, I can still take 24-30gal fuel and no bags for day trips.

My only point is don't just look at the useful load, look at where you can put how much in each location as well.
 
Last edited:
bullwinkle said:
Remember also that if you have a huge useful load, you have to have someplace to put all that stuff. A 2007 Allegro has a huge useful load, but a tiny baggage space limited to 22lb I believe. So unless you are hauling two fatties, you really can't use all that weight anywhere except the seats.

My CTSW has a lower useful at 585lb, but I can take people up to 260lb each (seat weight limit), up to 34gal fuel, and up to 110lb baggage. Good load that is VERY flexible. If it's just me I can take full fuel that will get me 800+ miles and 110lb of bags (plus another 70lb in the seat). Me and the wife can use 24gal and 70lb of baggage, plenty for a trip up to a week or so and still giving ~450 miles range with an hour reserve fuel. Me and a heavy friend, I can still take 24-30gal fuel and no bags for day trips.

My only point is don't just look at the useful load, look at where you can put how much in each location as well.
Click to expand...
Yep, but check out that Highlander. Big storage area, 32 cubic feet, and a wide cabin. Seems like a nice hunting or fishing trip ride. The tradeoff is that it will take a while to get where your going.
 
bullwinkle said:
Remember also that if you have a huge useful load, you have to have someplace to put all that stuff. A 2007 Allegro has a huge useful load, but a tiny baggage space limited to 22lb I believe. So unless you are hauling two fatties, you really can't use all that weight anywhere except the seats.
...
My only point is don't just look at the useful load, look at where you can put how much in each location as well.
Click to expand...

And that is why the Bristell has wing lockers in each wing!

www.Bristell.com

Jim
 
Kiddo's Driver said:
And that is why the Bristell has wing lockers in each wing!
Click to expand...
Milan Bristela's previous design, SportCruiser, has the same lockers.

If you want the space, Jabiru J-230 cannot be beat. I think the only one coming close is RANS S-7.
 
jhausch said:
"Unofficially" The Jabiru J-230....but you'll be over gross.
Click to expand...

Yes... It's identical to the Jabiru J-430 four seater with the rear seat removed to make it LSA legal. The J-430 has a max takeoff weight of about 1600 pounds and that works out to a useful load of about 800 pounds. So engineering-wise the J-250 has a payload way over any other LSA. There are about 30 J-230s registered not as LSAs but as experimental amateur built, and they as best I can find out have max take off weights well over the LSA limit of 1320 (1600 pounds per one source) and a correspondingly high useful load. And, as one post indicated, useful load is not terribly useful if there's either no baggage space or a minimal weight limit spect on the baggage space. The J230 shines in that respect with massive baggage space behind the pilot and robust weight limit in that space.
 
Let’s see. What’s the weakest plane out there because I’m really heavy? Lol

seriously though, with the rules as they are now light sport is not for heavy people.
 
Oh, and I’m not laughing at your dilemma, or your question, I’m laughing at the “safety” created by the short sighted light sport rules. Light sports are terrible training aircraft.
 
Salty said:
Oh, and I’m not laughing at your dilemma, or your question, I’m laughing at the “safety” created by the short sighted light sport rules. Light sports are terrible training aircraft.
Click to expand...
Uh, *some* and I'd say that VERY much depends on the instructor, more than the aircraft. I'd start students in an Apollo Fox, Carbon Cub, Legend Cub, etc. without hesitation.
 
Hi Salty..

You wrote
"Let’s see. What’s the weakest plane out there because I’m really heavy? Lol

seriously though, with the rules as they are now light sport is not for heavy people"

I think the Cessna Skycatcher is the "winner" in least payload.... One of the reasons I guess it never took off (pardon the pun) and in turn one of the reasons Cessna discontinued it so soon.
 
skyranger2 said:
Hi Salty..

You wrote
"Let’s see. What’s the weakest plane out there because I’m really heavy? Lol

seriously though, with the rules as they are now light sport is not for heavy people"

I think the Cessna Skycatcher is the "winner" in least payload.... One of the reasons I guess it never took off (pardon the pun) and in turn one of the reasons Cessna discontinued it so soon.
Click to expand...
I think you may have missed my point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top