Seek input on buying a LSA

Chapel K.

Chapel K.

Pre-Flight
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
82
Location
KTOA / KLGB
Display Name
Display name:
Chapel
I’m considering purchasing a used Flight Design CTLS and would love your feedback/suggestions. My mission is primarily to fly for fun and keep my IFR/CPL skills sharp, with occasional trips from KTOA to KCCR (monthly visit of my child who lives in SF area) I'm drawn to the CTLS for its lower upfront cost, low fuel burn, and the ability to perform a self-annual inspection. (taking those 120 hour courses probably will keep me busy with learning stuff as well.) I plan to tie it down, using Bruce's UV-protective covers, without needing a hangar.

I like the modern avionics, BRS parachute, and low stall speed. While I know it’s more susceptible to turbulence, I plan to fly in the smoother air between 6-11am and 5-8pm whenever possible

Am I missing anything important or overlooking any considerations?
 
Chapel K. said:
Am I missing anything important or overlooking any considerations?
Click to expand...
Is this used CTLS an E-LSA or S-LSA? If it is E-LSA or you plan to go that route all you would need is the 16 hour LSRI class to perform the 12mo condition check as the "E" allows you perform all the mx. If it is an S-LSA or you prefer to keep it that way then you'll need the 120 hr LSRM class. Which if you go LSRM, keep a journal of all your LSRM work as that experience can be applied to the experience requirements for an A&P certificate.
 
To follow on the E-LSA / S-LSA comment -

E-LSA also opens you up for IFR. If you are new to the LSA world, you might want to read up on the E-LSA/S-LSA distinction a bit. As an S-LSA, you can’t make any changes to the aircraft without a letter of authorization from the manufacturer (which are generally not forthcoming).

Only complaint I’ve ever heard on the CTLS is that it is very difficult to do anything on the engine given the tight engine cowling.

Good luck!
 
Bell206 said:
Is this used CTLS an E-LSA or S-LSA? If it is E-LSA or you plan to go that route all you would need is the 16 hour LSRI class to perform the 12mo condition check as the "E" allows you perform all the mx. If it is an S-LSA or you prefer to keep it that way then you'll need the 120 hr LSRM class. Which if you go LSRM, keep a journal of all your LSRM work as that experience can be applied to the experience requirements for an A&P certificate.
Click to expand...
More than likely they are S-LSA, alas. I won't mind going through the 120 hours, but all those courses seem to be offered in East Coast... nothing in California. Will do more digging. Thanks
 
Chapel K. said:
More than likely they are S-LSA, alas. I won't mind going through the 120 hours, but all those courses seem to be offered in East Coast... nothing in California. Will do more digging. Thanks
Click to expand...
Converting a SLSA to ELSA is a simple paperwork exercise. The only drawback is that as an ELSA, it can no longer be used for commercial purposes like rental, flight instruction, etc. Might not matter to you but could affect resale value.
 
Dana said:
Converting a SLSA to ELSA is a simple paperwork exercise. The only drawback is that as an ELSA, it can no longer be used for commercial purposes like rental, flight instruction, etc. Might not matter to you but could affect resale value.
Click to expand...

Don't forget that the maintenance rules are stricter for an S-LSA than the typical TCd aircraft as well. I expect that eventually all the S-LSAs will become E-LSAs as they age, the manufacturers disappear or no longer support their aircraft, and as parts become difficult to find. Unless a person is instructing in their aircraft I think it makes more sense to make it an E-LSA now rather than wait.
 
mondtster said:
Don't forget that the maintenance rules are stricter for an S-LSA than the typical TCd aircraft as well. I expect that eventually all the S-LSAs will become E-LSAs as they age, the manufacturers disappear or no longer support their aircraft, and as parts become difficult to find. Unless a person is instructing in their aircraft I think it makes more sense to make it an E-LSA now rather than wait.
Click to expand...
Yeah, slsa always seemed like a trap to me. Certified on steroids due to the need for manufacturer approval of any changes.
 
Hi.

>>My mission is primarily to fly for fun and keep my IFR/CPL skills sharp,<<
There are no Flight designs that I know of that are IFR certified, but many have the equipment and data available, or you can add, to Practice.
There are some Evectors that are IFR certified / ready.

>>I'm drawn to the CTLS for its lower upfront cost, low fuel burn, and the ability to perform a self-annual inspection.<<
That is / was Not my experience, the SLSA / CTLS is one of the most expensive LSA to purchase and maintain.
If it's and SLSA you cannot do all your own maintenance, many of the items Have to be done by at least / minimum LSRM. You can get trained in AZ? Roger Lee?

>>I plan to tie it down, using Bruce's UV-protective covers, without needing a hangar.<<
That is something I would Not recommend, they are basically made of what I call compressed cheese. It is very unlikely that you will find one, even if 95% hangar tied down that does not already have tiny / small cracks in the paint.

>>I like the modern avionics, BRS parachute,..<<
Yes, you can get all that and if you look hard enough you can get one with the HDX displays, and the chute will cost you every 4-5 years ~$1000-4000

>> and low stall speed.<<
Not the most docile of LSAs, it feels more like the 152/172.

>>..more susceptible to turbulence<<
Yes, to some extent, but I do not think that is typically an issue. You can get used to it and learn to accept it.
If you want to push it, it can cruise around 110KIAS. But it can get noisy.
The Landing gets a lot of new pilots in trouble, they fly it way too slow and tend to do the flare like the heavier planes they are used to, and that is recipe for trouble, in particular in Xwind conditions.
You can directly email me if you want more details. Good luck.
 
If not already mentioned, there’s a forum specific to CT’s: https://www.ctflier.com/

Going E-LSA is highly recommended - one can perform any maintenance and parts substitution and modifications so long as such mods do not elevate it beyond LSA standards. Plus, the ability to perform the Annual Condition Inspections with a 2-day course. It’s a bit more than a “simple paperwork” change - the plane must be inspected by a DAR to ensure it’s currently in compliance with its original S-LSA certification and has never been modified to take it out of such compliance.

Good source for this sort of thing: Mike Huffman at: https://www.sportaviationspecialties.com/ He did my conversion in 2009 and provided the necessary LSRM-I training for my certificate.
 
Chapel K. said:
I’m considering purchasing a used Flight Design CTLS and would love your feedback/suggestions. My mission is primarily to fly for fun and keep my IFR/CPL skills sharp, with occasional trips from KTOA to KCCR (monthly visit of my child who lives in SF area) I'm drawn to the CTLS for its lower upfront cost, low fuel burn, and the ability to perform a self-annual inspection. (taking those 120 hour courses probably will keep me busy with learning stuff as well.) I plan to tie it down, using Bruce's UV-protective covers, without needing a hangar.

I like the modern avionics, BRS parachute, and low stall speed. While I know it’s more susceptible to turbulence, I plan to fly in the smoother air between 6-11am and 5-8pm whenever possible

Am I missing anything important or overlooking any considerations?
Click to expand...
Sounds like you have done your homework, I suggest you fly one before purchase.
 
I had a CTsw for a few years and absolutely loved it. Flew it from New York to Seattle and back (the return leg was done in 18 hours over a day and a half thanks to the autopilot).

Slowing the airplane down is critical to make good landings. Think “55” on short final.

Mine was maintained by two local shops. Never an issue for me.

If you’re only need two seats, this airplane is a great value. So much fun and insane mileage. I averaged about 23 mpg on trips.

Keeping it outside, well, I would only do that with the Bruce’s Covers for the whole plane. I saw one that was kept out in the sun without covers and it was horrific. Hope you can eventually find a hangar.

It does sound like you’ve done your homework though.
 
I wanted to update everyone on this chat about an incredible experience I had over the past weekend, made possible thanks to everyone's helpful input on this forum. Initially, I was looking to get a feel for the CTLS, but the suggestion from FastEddieB led me to discover ctflyer.com,where I found a nearby CT2K that I could fly. It turned out to be an invaluable opportunity to understand the CT series better.

From the moment we took off, the owner pilot was incredibly accommodating. He let me take the controls for most of the flight, allowing me to learn a lot about the aircraft's flight characteristics firsthand. The CT2K handled beautifully, and it was fascinating to experience the similarities it shares with the CTLS in terms of handling and performance.

During the landing, I noticed that the owner-pilot flew really low on the final approach, which made it easy to flare at a speed of 55 knots, and he landed all three wheels almost simultaneously. Observing his technique was very instructive and gave me valuable insights into handling the aircraft during landing.

After we landed, we had a great conversation about taking care of the plane and some of the tricks he has learned along the way. His insights into aircraft maintenance and care were incredibly helpful. It's not every day you meet someone with such a wealth of knowledge who's also willing to share it so openly.

I also want to thank Kent for sharing his firsthand experience with the CTsw. Your insights have been incredibly valuable as I continue my journey toward becoming a CT owner. And rest assured, I promise to buy Bruce's Covers for the whole plane before I get a hangar (which has a waitlist). It's great to know that such protective measures are available.

Additionally, I'd like to thank bluesideup for your straightforward feedback, which made me rethink some of the issues you brought up, like the storage of the "composite cheese" aircraft. Your advice has prompted me to consider important factors I hadn't fully appreciated before.

Again, thank you all for your support and advice. I'm grateful to be part of such a helpful community, and I look forward to sharing more experiences as I progress.
 
bluesideup said:
Hi.

>>My mission is primarily to fly for fun and keep my IFR/CPL skills sharp,<<
There are no Flight designs that I know of that are IFR certified, but many have the equipment and data available, or you can add, to Practice.
There are some Evectors that are IFR certified / ready.

>>I'm drawn to the CTLS for its lower upfront cost, low fuel burn, and the ability to perform a self-annual inspection.<<
That is / was Not my experience, the SLSA / CTLS is one of the most expensive LSA to purchase and maintain.
If it's and SLSA you cannot do all your own maintenance, many of the items Have to be done by at least / minimum LSRM. You can get trained in AZ? Roger Lee?

>>I plan to tie it down, using Bruce's UV-protective covers, without needing a hangar.<<
That is something I would Not recommend, they are basically made of what I call compressed cheese. It is very unlikely that you will find one, even if 95% hangar tied down that does not already have tiny / small cracks in the paint.

>>I like the modern avionics, BRS parachute,..<<
Yes, you can get all that and if you look hard enough you can get one with the HDX displays, and the chute will cost you every 4-5 years ~$1000-4000

>> and low stall speed.<<
Not the most docile of LSAs, it feels more like the 152/172.

>>..more susceptible to turbulence<<
Yes, to some extent, but I do not think that is typically an issue. You can get used to it and learn to accept it.
If you want to push it, it can cruise around 110KIAS. But it can get noisy.
The Landing gets a lot of new pilots in trouble, they fly it way too slow and tend to do the flare like the heavier planes they are used to, and that is recipe for trouble, in particular in Xwind conditions.
You can directly email me if you want more details. Good luck.
Click to expand...
I agree that installing a BRS on the CT can be quite expensive, especially considering its low stall speed of 39 knots—the BRS might seem like a questionable investment. However, it's important to consider peace of mind for everyone involved. As they say, "Happy wife, happy life," so sometimes I have to accommodate such concerns.

Also, like you pointed out, the CT2K I flew on Sunday, does have those small dimple-like dents on its wings, but it's worth noting that it has been hangared for over 18 years, which has helped preserve its condition. I will get hanger... I promise.

Regarding training, I am indeed looking into the Light Sport Repairman Maintenance (LSRM) course, the 15 or 16-day program. I haven't found any offerings on the West Coast yet; it seems Rainbow Aviation has withdrawn from California. I found contact information for Roger Lee and plan to call him tomorrow to see if he offers such courses. If you, or anyone, know of any LSRM courses available in CA or west side, please let me know.

Thanks!
 
mondtster said:
Don't forget that the maintenance rules are stricter for an S-LSA than the typical TCd aircraft as well. I expect that eventually all the S-LSAs will become E-LSAs as they age, the manufacturers disappear or no longer support their aircraft, and as parts become difficult to find. Unless a person is instructing in their aircraft I think it makes more sense to make it an E-LSA now rather than wait.
Click to expand...
Will study more about this. Very helpful point, really appreciated.
 
FastEddieB said:
If not already mentioned, there’s a forum specific to CT’s: https://www.ctflier.com/

Going E-LSA is highly recommended - one can perform any maintenance and parts substitution and modifications so long as such mods do not elevate it beyond LSA standards. Plus, the ability to perform the Annual Condition Inspections with a 2-day course. It’s a bit more than a “simple paperwork” change - the plane must be inspected by a DAR to ensure it’s currently in compliance with its original S-LSA certification and has never been modified to take it out of such compliance.

Good source for this sort of thing: Mike Huffman at: https://www.sportaviationspecialties.com/ He did my conversion in 2009 and provided the necessary LSRM-I training for my certificate.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the linke. Wrote to Mike asking about their future 15/16 day course, haven't heard back from him yet.
 
Some feedback I would add is that MOSAIC will probably change the maintenance aspect for LSA's a lot. As written the NPRM proposes to grandfather LSRM's. However that could change in the final rule, no guarantee. Also as written the NPRM would seem to suggest a lot more training will be required going forward, particularly for more complex aircraft. In general, maintenance seemed to be an afterthought in the MOSAIC NPRM and it's rumored that was due to pressure on the FAA to release the NPRM before maintenance was fleshed out. Because of that, my advice would be to get your LSRM sooner rather than later. The Rainbow Aviation LSRM course is excellent and I would recommend it for anyone, even if you don't plan on turning wrenches or we lose privileges as LSRM's.

One other aspect to consider on performing your own maintenance is whether you will have the time available. I obtained my LSRM and bought an ELSA RV-12. I performed my first condition inspection and while doing that performed the 5 year rubber replacement for the Rotax 912ULS. I DID save a substantial amount of money performing the maintenance myself. But I would guess all that work took at least 5X longer than if I had a shop or professional AMT perform the work. This was due to a lot of factors like having a day job, friend and family obligations, waiting for parts, etc. Also I haven't found parts to be much cheaper, if any, than they are for certified aircraft. You mentioned you don't have a hangar. Performing a condition inspection on the ramp would suck!

Good Luck and Blue Skies!
 
Chapel K. said:
During the landing, I noticed that the owner-pilot flew really low on the final approach, which made it easy to flare at a speed of 55 knots, and he landed all three wheels almost simultaneously. Observing his technique was very instructive...
Click to expand...
That sounds like poor piloting technique. The CT stalls at 35 knots; driving it onto the ground at 55 is a recipe for damaging the plane.
 
idahoflier said:
In general, maintenance seemed to be an afterthought in the MOSAIC NPRM
Click to expand...
FWIW: its my understanding the main reason for the MOSAIC comment period extension was due to the extensive changes proposed on the mx side. So its not so much an afterthought as these proposed revisions to Part 65 will completely change the narrative for light sport/TC mx if all go through.

The 2 biggest changes are the use of ACS standards for the LSRM rating and the switch from “class” to “category” types for aircraft. So with the proposed MOSAIC expansion to include more TC’d aircraft, there needs to be a path forward to maintain these additional TC aircraft and preserve the spirit of the light-sport concept.

My money is on, when finalized MOSAIC will provide a mx rating that will allow a separate LSRM rating to maintain any TC aircraft that falls under the light sport category. It will be as close to the “A&P Lite” a number of people have wished for but will not have the restrictions/issues found in the similar programs like the TCCA Owner Maintained program or the failed Primary Non-Commercial category tried here.

And for those who remember the FAA Part 66 attempt years ago that featured a tiered mx certification process, the MOSAIC path appears to use parts of that attempt plus possibly correct deficiencies from those other programs. However, any grandfathering of the LSRM would probably only apply to non-TC aircraft but may provide an easy route to the LSRM TC rating??

Regardless, I think it is definitely a move in the right direction. And when you add this move to the previous rewrite of Part 147 which now allows distance learning, I think the ability for more people to obtain specific maintenance certification for their specific aircraft category will take a giant leap forward.
 
Bell206 said:
My money is on, when finalized MOSAIC will provide a mx rating that will allow a separate LSRM rating to maintain any TC aircraft that falls under the light sport category. It will be as close to the “A&P Lite” a number of people have wished for but will not have the restrictions/issues found in the similar programs like the TCCA Owner Maintained program or the failed Primary Non-Commercial category tried here.
Click to expand...

I probably should have articulated that better, instead of "afterthought" I should have said "vague". It sounded like the FAA had ideas of where they want maintenance to go, but the NPRM didn't really articulate those ideas (at least to me). When you say "allow a separate LSRM rating to maintain any TC aircraft that falls under the light sport category", would you mean, for instance, a LSRM rating allowing the certificate holder to perform maintenance on a C172 covered under the new definition of a LSA? That would be an interesting development!
 
idahoflier said:
It sounded like the FAA had ideas of where they want maintenance to go, but the NPRM didn't really articulate those ideas (at least to me).
Click to expand...
In my opinion it did and rather precisely. Especially when you read the NPRM comments posted on the subject by various aviation trade groups and some light sport people. The interesting part was the LSA people and the trade groups wanted the same thing but for opposite safety reasons which was a bit strange.

And based on the NPRM proposed changes and those comments, it appears to me, and a few others, a new maintenance certification process is in the works to handle the expansion of TC aircraft operated as an LSA. However, will have to see the final as those trade groups have a lot of pull. But given the FAA history with Part 65 changes, my money is on the FAA.

idahoflier said:
for instance, a LSRM rating allowing the certificate holder to perform maintenance on a C172 covered under the new definition of a LSA?
Click to expand...
Yes. But I think the certificate will be integrated into the existing Part 65 certificate process. For example, we now have a mechanics certificate with airframe and powerplant ratings. So maybe it will be a mechanics certificate with a LSA-TC A&P ratings or a LSA-LS rating (i.e., current LSRM)?? To me the proposed Part 65 change to ACS standards AND from LSA aircraft “class” to LSA aircraft “category” points to the above scenario in my opinion.
 
Dana said:
That sounds like poor piloting technique. The CT stalls at 35 knots; driving it onto the ground at 55 is a recipe for damaging the plane.
Click to expand...

Agreed. “…all three wheels almost simultaneously…” IS poor technique in a CT. No reason not to hold it off until at or near stall speed with the nose held off as long as possible.
 
FastEddieB said:
Agreed. “…all three wheels almost simultaneously…” IS poor technique in a CT. No reason not to hold it off until at or near stall speed with the nose held off as long as possible.
Click to expand...
I asked the owner about the issue of all three wheels touching down simultaneously. He mentioned it might have something to do with the characteristics of the CT2K. He couldn’t hold the nose wheel up during landing and said that later models might have improved in this regard.

When I fly other LSAs like the SLG2 or Sling 2, I hold the nose wheel up as long as possible to reduce wear on the brake pads. However, according to the CT2K owner, this technique doesn’t work with the CT2K. Does anyone have experience with the CT2K and know if this is a common issue?
 
Dana said:
That sounds like poor piloting technique. The CT stalls at 35 knots; driving it onto the ground at 55 is a recipe for damaging the plane.
Click to expand...
His final approach speed was 55, but he later reduced the airspeed further to 40， I believe.
 
Chapel K. said:
Am I missing anything important or overlooking any considerations?
Click to expand...
Honestly, just make sure the erection you get from flying your own LSA plane won't bump into the yoke and interrupt safe flight.
 
Go to the CTFlyer forum all the info you need. They are fun airplanes .
 
frfly172 said:
Go to the CTFlyer forum all the info you need. They are fun airplanes .
Click to expand...
Yes！ I did visit that forum and people are supercool there. One of them allowed me to fly his CT 2K, not exactly a CTLS but close enough to give me an ideal of the CT planes. Thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top