Cessna's new LSA: "Skycatcher"

In rec.aviation.piloting Al G wrote:
"Morgans" wrote in message

Is anyone else having a problem of posts repeating themselves a few
days after the original post?

I'm getting it too. nntp.charter.net

Charter appears to have outsourced its news service to Highwinds Media.
Cox (another cable TV company and my ISP) used to run its own news
servers, but also outsourced to Highwinds a while back. You could tell
when that happened because the news service started to suck. I (and
other Cox customers) have been seeing the same thing over the past few
days: missing posts, and old posts showing up again.

Highwinds appears to optimize for the porn and warez downloaders at
the expense of making text groups work correctly. You can complain to
Charter, but if they're anything like Cox, nobody on the first-level
support desk has even heard of Usenet.

The solution is probably a third-party news service that isn't a
tentacle of or reseller of Highwinds. I haven't (yet) been annoyed
enough to make the switch.

Matt Roberds

wrote in message
...
The solution is probably a third-party news service that isn't a
tentacle of or reseller of Highwinds. I haven't (yet) been annoyed
enough to make the switch.

Worldnet (att.net) still has an excellent news server. I keep waiting for
it to suck or (worse) disappear, but not yet.

Vaughn

On Jul 24, 5:48 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
Phil wrote:
On Jul 23, 7:13 pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"Scott Skylane" wrote

Don't knock the O-200 quite so fast. The 162 is getting the "D" model engine,
the Type Spec of which hasn't even been issued, yet. I would be surprised if
Continental doesn't incorporate some improvements to the cylinder design. As
a rugged, easy-to-maintain light aircraft powerplant, I personally think they
made a good choice.
I agree, most completely!

The fact that it has the O-200 would make me buy it, rather than the Rotax
powered LSA's.

Anyone know what a weight comparison would be for a firewall forward
installation of a 200 vs. a 912?
--
Jim in NC

I don't know what the firewall-forward weights would be, but the basic
dry weight of the Rotax is 132 lbs versus 170 lbs for the Continental.

It is pretty disingenuous to compare the dry weight of a liquid cooled
engine against an air cooled engine. What is the operational weight of
the Rotax?

Matt- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The engine manufacturers don't report operational weights. They list
dry weights in their specifications. But I did discover that the
Rotax 912 uses 4.4 quarts of coolant. I would guess that is around 10
pounds worth of coolant. Plus you would need to add the weight of a
radiator and hoses, so let's say that is another 10 pounds.

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Ken Finney" wrote
And the O-200 model "D" should have "at least a 25 pound weight
reduction" over previous models.

Really?

What do you think they are planning to do, to lighten it up that much? (or
any)


I'd expect some tighter tolerance machinings and castings, electronic
ignition versus magnetos, and higher-tech starter and alternator.

Supposedly Cessna took orders for 400 Skythings by the close of
business at Oshkosh. I wonder if that equals all other LSAs to date?

Speaking of bloat and high prices, Cub Crafters is offering a Cub
Sport (whatever) at about $120,000. And Legend Aircraft is offering a
Cub with AUTOPILOT.

Yes, it's a wonderful thing how LSA has brought flying back to its
essentials.

Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
forthcoming from HarperCollins www.flyingtigersbook.com

I love the manual flaps on my 1964 Cessna 172E. Much better than the
electric.

Al
1964 Skyhawk
KSFF

Ron Wanttaja wrote:


Nothing ground-breaking, not even for Cessna. 150s had mechanical flaps until
the late '60s.

Ron Wanttaja

"Ken Finney" wrote in message ...

"Morgans" wrote in message ...

"Ken Finney" wrote
And the O-200 model "D" should have "at least a 25 pound weight reduction" over previous models.

Really?

What do you think they are planning to do, to lighten it up that much? (or any)


I'd expect some tighter tolerance machinings and castings, electronic ignition versus magnetos, and higher-tech
starter and alternator.



Yes, it has no mags, and is FADEC.

Is the New SkyCatcher engine set up for 100LL only or will buyers
have the option of an auto gas version???

Have a good day and stay out of the trees!
See ya on Sport Aircraft group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/







Jim Logajan wrote:
For those who haven't seen this, Cessna has provided lots more detail on
its LSA entry:

http://www.cessnaskycatcher.com/

Fancy brochu

http://www.cessnaskycatcher.com/imag...ni_bro_web.pdf

Order form with pricing (for first 1000):

http://www.cessnaskycatcher.com/imag...final_0721.pdf

"Blueskies" wrote

Yes, it has no mags, and is FADEC.

I still don't see those changes adding up to 25 pounds.

I will be surprised if we see it 10 pounds lighter.
--
Jim in NC

Phil wrote:
On Jul 24, 5:48 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
Phil wrote:
On Jul 23, 7:13 pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"Scott Skylane" wrote
Don't knock the O-200 quite so fast. The 162 is getting the "D" model engine,
the Type Spec of which hasn't even been issued, yet. I would be surprised if
Continental doesn't incorporate some improvements to the cylinder design. As
a rugged, easy-to-maintain light aircraft powerplant, I personally think they
made a good choice.
I agree, most completely!
The fact that it has the O-200 would make me buy it, rather than the Rotax
powered LSA's.
Anyone know what a weight comparison would be for a firewall forward
installation of a 200 vs. a 912?
--
Jim in NC
I don't know what the firewall-forward weights would be, but the basic
dry weight of the Rotax is 132 lbs versus 170 lbs for the Continental.
It is pretty disingenuous to compare the dry weight of a liquid cooled
engine against an air cooled engine. What is the operational weight of
the Rotax?

Matt- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The engine manufacturers don't report operational weights. They list
dry weights in their specifications. But I did discover that the
Rotax 912 uses 4.4 quarts of coolant. I would guess that is around 10
pounds worth of coolant. Plus you would need to add the weight of a
radiator and hoses, so let's say that is another 10 pounds.

I would list dry weight also if I was selling a liquid cooled engine! I
suspect that your estimate is pretty close. This changes the weight
comparison quite dramatically. The Rotax may well still be lighter, but
152 compared to 170 isn't nearly as dramatic as 132 compared to 170.
I'll bet that when both are operationally ready the weight difference is
minor.

Matt