New LSA Launched at Airventure 2025

[Thruster88]

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

Each to his own.

 

I see them as an unfortunate throw back, featuring most, if not all, of the deficiencies of aircarft from a bygone area.

 

I see the aesthetic appeal, that for some, overrides all the deficiencies.

 

Ultimately a rich persons fantasi toy, akin to having a very expensive, totally impractical, sports car - At least the modern sports car would likely be comfortable, require comparatively minimal maintenance and have safe handling characteristics.

 

IF it was from the erra it emulates, there would be some value in its vintage status  but a repo????😈

900 mile delivery flight used only 12 us gal(45l), surely that is something you must really like. Did you see the wings fold easily and 5 will fit in a small T hangar.  

[skippydiesel]

As I said -Each To His Own.

 

We are not talking about practicalities with this aircraft - its in a similar (for the pedantic that does not mean the same) category as old men dressing up in leather and purchasing a reproduction/any motorcycle -  its a bit sad but "good-on-em!!" - not my thing😈

[facthunter]

Absolute BS Skip.  It performs WELL. You constantly SHOW what you don't know. I have nightmares at night Dreaming I've been assigned as your  Flying Instructor.  We  are Limited by AUW and stall speed. and cost. Our Performance envelope is restricted.. by many inherent factors.

   Just WHAT  IS your "Thing". Talking endlessly about getting things cheap. Emotionally Blackmailing people into responding to your Propositions and then Putting Them in a Box of your creation to neutralise the Value of an Opposing opinion. to yours. It's JUST NOT Worth the effort Skip.  Nev

[skippydiesel]

3 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

900 mile delivery flight used only 12 us gal(45l), surely that is something you must really like. Did you see the wings fold easily and 5 will fit in a small T hangar.  

The performance in miles/galans looks quite impressive, until converted to what I am more familiar with

 

782 Nm @ about 26L/hr (for the pedantic "about" means I am guessing).

 

By the time you arrive, after flying some 8 hrs, you will be close to a basket case (in fine weather) in that open cockpit.

 

Then you have to land the bugger, loosing sight of the runway, in the flair and role out - no wonder the pilot stood it on its nose. Oh! sorry, the excuse was he was a tad fast over the fence - my bad!

 

I do like the wing fold very much, wish I has it, but then this feature (or similar) is available on several  fully enclosed  1-2 seat aircraft that are far more fuel efficient / speedy, that are likly to be easier / less costly to maintain and land.

 

Of course it's not about efficiency / maintenance /flight characteristics or any of the mundane parameters that I may apply, it's about THE LOOK!

😈

[facthunter]

How would YOU Really KNOW? You are fixated and your needle is stuck. The MARKET will decide and we are the better for things like this Being available. You are Just a Chronic Knocker.. continuing to display your Ignorance publicly. There's DOers and Knockers. Nev

[Blueadventures]

16 minutes ago, facthunter said:

How would YOU Really KNOW? You are fixated and your needle is stuck. The MARKET will decide and we are the better for things like this Being available. You are Just a Chronic Knocker.. continuing to display your Ignorance publicly. There's DOers and Knockers. Nev

Agree, who wants to tell him to recheck his math? It's about as good as his comment substance.

[facthunter]

Yeah. FACTS can sure Muck up a Good Story. Nev

[facthunter]

 A C-180 has pretty ordinary forward Vision till you get the Tail up.. 

[onetrack]

Quote

782 Nm @ about 26L/hr (for the pedantic "about" means I am guessing).

Well, Skippy - at least you did admit you were guessing. 2.2 U.S. gallons/hr is 8.327L/hr. A bit of a difference to your "guess". Yes, 782 Nm is 900 statute miles, so you got that right.

 

I would have to opine that 8 hrs in the cockpit of any small aircraft would be very tiring. However, no-one has specifically stated that any pilot has spent 8 hrs non-stop at the controls of a Spirit SE-1.

And the reason is - the SE–1 has a no-reserve range of 4 hours and 400 miles (640 km). So, there were obviously two stops on the delivery flight. 

 

Let's just examine the reasons for the effusive response to the appearance of the SE-1.

 

1. This is a company that is actually delivering a completely new-design recreational aircraft - not video promises with slick imaging, and no production for a decade - if at all.

2. It's tiny. I saw someone ask, "When do they bring out the adult-sized version?". Maybe that was you. It's tiny by design, and to fulfil the companys aim of filling a gap in the market for a cheap, fun little aeroplane.

3. It may be open cockpit - but that's all part of the fun of cheap recreational flying, isn't it? It's a snug cockpit, so you're not going to be blasted in your face mercilessly, for 8 hrs, with a 120kt wind blast.

I've flown in a R22 with no doors, and that WAS uncomfortable - especially when no-one advises you that the trip is going to be doorless.

4. The cockpit IS snug. But it's 25 inches (635mm) wide. That's 5 inches (127mm) wider than either the pilot or the passenger gets in a C172. It's a full 8 inches (203mm) wider than the average budget airline economy seat. 

5. The polished finish is not only to promote a "vintage" look - it saves weight, thanks to no paint, it keeps costs down, and it's slippery.

6. It's an aircraft designed to appeal to pilots who just want to go for a casual fly at lower speeds, lower cost, and with a "fun factor". It doesn't equate to a noisy, rough-riding Harley-Davidson.

7. The interest and demand for this little beast is quite substantial, and it fills the gap in recreational flying that the Morris Mini-Minor did in motoring. A product that is cheap, tiny, and ideal for a lot of people, who have no need to go hundreds of miles in one flight at high speed, and to endure high running costs, accordingly.

 

Meet the Spirit SE-1, the retro light sport aircraft turning heads

AEROSPACEGLOBALNEWS.COM

---

Introducing the SE-1: Spirit Engineering’s new “shiny” single-seat light sports aircraft from Colorado

 

Edited Friday at 07:18 AM by onetrack

[onetrack]

Quote

900 mile delivery flight used only 12 us gal(45l)

Thruster, do you have any confirmation of this fuel consumption figure? Seems like it's a figure that defeats physics. The quoted fuel consumption figure has been 2.2 US gallons/hr, the quoted aircraft speed is reported as 100mph - that means, approximately 9 hrs flying, on just 12 gallons? That's just 1.33 US gallons/hr.

 

I was having trouble believing the quoted fuel consumption of 2.2 U.S. gallons/hr, but then I realised their V-twin engine is only 1288cc and 42HP. However, 1.33 U.S. gallons/hr seems to be stretching the bounds of credibility.

[Thruster88]

That's what was quoted in the article, they may have forgotten to refuel at the end. They also mentioned a tail wind. No different to stories of people towing their 3t caravan and only using 10l/100km.

 

Petrol engines burn about 24lph per 100 continuous hp. Cruise @ 50% power of 42hp = 21hp = 5lph = 1.33usgph.

Edited Friday at 08:04 AM by Thruster88

[onetrack]

Do you really think they got to cruise speed and kept it up, on only 21HP? Seems like a major and constant tailwind would have been a factor in the delivery flight.

[facthunter]

It doesn't look very draggy and is very Light. My wife's zero turn Mower is a V twin  OHV two barrel Carburetter engine of 24.5 HP and it works Hard in Long grass and doesn't use a Lot of fuel. Also Air cooled Motors run at hotter More thermally efficient Temperatures That engine would be just loafing at 21 Hp. It depends on the L/D of the aeroplane and how good the Prop is at making thrust. Direct drive Means Maximum efficiency. Gears use more power than a chain, but nothing is best of all. IF it was a glider it would stay in the air with very little Power.  Nev

[skippydiesel]

Interesting - there does seem to be one or two others, who have doubts about this lovely retro art work, its performance (?) & practicality (?).

 

They may not be quit as vocal, as the mouth from The Oaks but then I am the one who calls out the gimmicks, faith operators , et al  and does the "pack love to howl."

 

Take me task, in 10 years, when the SE-1 is as common as a Jab - one in every hanger - Not going to happen!

 

Seems to me , that most light aircraft pilots, love the idea of a single seater, tail wheel aircraft, that just looks great. There are a few around, never big sellers - what do the people  purchase, in the cold light of day - a Jab (or similar) why because your SE-1 is a fantasy. Fantasys are wonderful, very few are willing to pay for one, even fewer will do much flying in one (hanger Queen). 😈

[Marty_d]

"in the cold light of day", I'd ask what proportion of time your passenger seat has a bum in it?

I love riding my motorbike and 90%+ of the time it's solo.

Looking forward to flying my plane when it's finished, and willing to bet it's similar.

[skippydiesel]

10 hours ago, Marty_d said:

"in the cold light of day", I'd ask what proportion of time your passenger seat has a bum in it?

I love riding my motorbike and 90%+ of the time it's solo.

Looking forward to flying my plane when it's finished, and willing to bet it's similar.

I agree with you - I have fantasised about several single seat aircraft, even gone down the investigation/pricing rout but in the end , like most, have purchased a two seat.

 

While the second seat rarely has a "pax" it does give space for navigation stuff, inflight refreshments, etc Then there is that rare "pax" that I enjoy taking up. I think the appropriate word for a two seat would be flexibility.

 

You may enjoy your solo rides on the bike but I bet you have a car. Most pilot / owners have but one aircraft that must meet as many of their expectations as possible.

 

That I rarely have a "pax" doesn't change the sales figures for solo aircraft.

 

As often commented on - what you fly is an individual choice. Most choose two seats (or more)😈

[facthunter]

You say "each to his own' and then rat on forever trying to make this Plane out to be everything wrong in every respect.. Very light plane can mean very small engine. The whole thing is a concept and I think it's BRILLIANT. How about  giving it credit? What design have YOU Produced?  Stop just being a KNOCKER. They are a dime a dozen.. Nev

[T510]

You are the perfect example of the Dunning Kruger effect Skip.

 

In a world were recreational aviation is in decline, companies like Spirit Engineering should be celebrated. Not only have they designed their own engine and airframe, they are keeping the cost down and have delivered 18 aircraft, all in a 10 year timeframe.

 

What have you done for aviation apart from sow negativity at every opportunity - you must be great fun at parties

 

 

[skippydiesel]

41 minutes ago, T510 said:

You are the perfect example of the Dunning Kruger effect Skip.

 

In a world were recreational aviation is in decline, companies like Spirit Engineering should be celebrated. Not only have they designed their own engine and airframe, they are keeping the cost down and have delivered 18 aircraft, all in a 10 year timeframe.

 

What have you done for aviation apart from sow negativity at every opportunity - you must be great fun at parties

 

My opposition is not actually to SE-1 per say, its to the over the top hysterical claims, by those on this & other Forums, who would seem to value the LOOK over all else.

 

As I have said but will repeat for your benefit:

This is an art work of an aircraft - even I can see how attractive looking it is.

Its performance is modest, by any standard. Nothing wrong with modest but lets not get to carried away with its "fast" appearance.

Its construction & finish (particularly if left as is) will be expensive to maintain. I own a metal aircraft.

Its design is unpractical :

• tail wheel, that may carry very little weight, making nose overs & 180's more likly
• open cockpit, not the best for inclement weather & long flights. Any sort of paper document likly unusable
• seating position, rendering all but the tallest pilot without a forward view, in the landing flair/role out (& possibly on final)
• single seat, no possibility of accommodating that rare pax

"In a world were recreational aviation is in decline,"

 

Unfortunatly true. I suspect the reasons have more to do with the wealth & diversity of opportunities of our young, that far exceeds what most of us grew up with, and the change in social dynamic - almost everything can be had without significant commitment

 

"What have you done for aviation apart from sow negativity at every opportunity."

 

Good question. Let me see;

• I take every opportunity to offer TIF's especially to the young - not many take the opportunity.
• I promote aviator as a career, particularly to young women - not many see this as viable future for them.
• I volunteer my services at my local airfield - mostly mowing.
• I patronise various aircraft services. 
• On this Forum, I try to come up with topics for debate, offer advice, results of my research into alternative sources for service items, keep debates going by presenting an alternative perspective.

So what do you do, besides make derogatory personal comments about a person you don't know???

 

"you must be great fun at parties"

 

"The Dunning-Kruger effect" a cognitive bias where individuals with limited knowledge or competence in a particular domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence. Due to a lack of metacognitive ability, these individuals cannot recognize their own deficiencies, leading to misplaced confidence. Conversely, experts may underestimate their own competence relative to others. 

 

Do you think you might owe me an apology?😈

[FlyBoy1960]

19 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

in the flair and role out 

It's ROLL out, not ROLE out.   

 

It's FLARE, not FLAIR.   💯

 

(Flyboy - The grammar Nazi)

[facthunter]

SOMEBODY HAS To DO IT.  FLARE (arrest descent) Touchdown and Ground Roll describes it. There is also the 3 Pointer or a wheel IT on, "wheeler" technique. for tail wheel aircraft. 2 distinctly different techniques, best decided on BEFORE you get there.  Nev

[skippydiesel]

53 minutes ago, FlyBoy1960 said:

It's ROLL out, not ROLE out.   

 

It's FLARE, not FLAIR.   💯

 

(Flyboy - The grammar Nazi)

Good on yah! Focus on the imperfection of my spelling (a admitted & well known failure)& ignore the message😈

[facthunter]

What IS your Message other than' this New Plane has Nothing going for it? ' and you won't SHUT UP about it. .You dish plenty  out. Learn to take a bit BACK. Anyone else would read the Mood and give it a rest.  Nev

[Blueadventures]

2 minutes ago, facthunter said:

What IS your Message other than' this New Plane has Nothing going for it? ' and you won't SHUT UP about it. .You dish plenty  out. Learn to take a bit BACK. Anyone else would read the Mood and give it a rest.  Nev

Agree, I feel like giving his numerous / consistent negative posts that detract from the spirit of this wonderful forum the attached message.

[facthunter]

Not sure being as BAD is the answer. Nev