It is a great price point. Is American General Aviation going to give away their market to the Europeans? Whatever happened to American innovation? Cessna and Piper must no longer have any interest in the average pilot rather concentrating only on business aviation and training?
Oh yes, it’s too late. The 915 iS has taken over AERO this year. The Sling TSi is hitting 155-167 knots true at altitude while burning 7.2 GPH all the while carrying 4 persons. And it handles beautifully! Now all of these manufacturers will make four seat part 23 compliant aircraft around $300K with the 915 iS and eventually take over. Just my thoughts.
Well piper came out with there new aircraft and still to this day only 1 door lol it’s a shame. people are going experimental and LSA and are very happy can’t wait for the gross weight increase
@@andrewmorris3479 light sport is getting ready to see major changes in the up coming rule change. Heavier planes, four seaters, 915 with constant speed prop allowed and slightly faster speed.
Few questions. Are the brakes engaged when you pull the power back to land? I know they are trying to keep it simple but a throttle/brake combo seems problematic as well as bad for training. Also, how many headset plugs are going to be ruined with the plug location on the arm rest? I know that it would make it easy to plug in, especially compared to early Cessnas. With my luck, I would put my arm back in cruise and bend the plugs on my A20.
Instead of asking how much the plane is, I have learned to asked, how xan I get someone else to pay for it. When I learned to answer that question, then what is cost is not as important.
And how much does this little jewel cost? I built my RV 7 for about $60,000. It's 2 or 3 times the performance. Not a big fan of rotax either. I know if they don't talk any performance payload speed take off Landing distance? You could buy a used 152 or 172 that would outperform this for a fraction of the cost.
Agreed, the craziest thing the market has done is convince people that 300K USD is reasonable for a 4 seat GA plane with 140 knot cruise speed. It's a bigger sham than 100K USD bachelors degrees in women's studies... The F2 shown here should fall in around the 100K mark, the F4 at 125K USD. All the old folks with pensions and trust funds are dying off. While could afford one of these F4s at the asking price, I just couldn't live with myself if I paid double for something on account of governmental collusion, red tape, and clever marketing tactics.
The F2 looks fantastic. I had two questions.... How does it handle on landings compared to the CTLS (any differences aerodynamically), and can the lightsport version be "converted" to the part 23 version once it becomes fully certified in the U.S.
The CT aircraft look exactly like the pipistrel Virus/Sinus aircraft, even to the wingtips, Pipistrel made these pre 2007, so I wonder who copied whom....
Model CTLSi GT 2020 with full fuel ( 34 gallons ) Useful load for personnel and baggage 296 lbs ( Qty 2 148 lb persons ) flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/ctlsi/specification/ and flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/ctlsi/ Model F2 with full fuel (34 gallons ) Useful load for personnel and baggage 336 lbs ( Qty 2 168 lb persons ) flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/specifications/ and flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/f2-information-2/ Model CTSI with full fuel (34 gallons ) Useful load for personnel and baggage 396 lbs ( Qty 2 198 lb persons) flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/ctsw-super/specifications/ and flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/ctsw-super/
@@TheLastDay-BobReese lol. They wish they were lottery winners. Of course, these people are pretty well off but it's more common than people think. Imagine this. There were close to 11 million millionaires in the US in 2018.
So, Flight Design wants to put a high revving, tedious oil check process Rotax engine in their future 4-place? PASS/NO WAY! It needs a more capable/powerful, conventional power-plant. Preferably diesel.
U.S. PATRIOT I have many hundreds of hours behind Rotax engines and find them bulletproof and economical. I can’t say the same for the “conventional” engines I fly behind. So you have to spin the prop a few times once a day to check the oil, it’s quick easy and accurate.
Also the problem with diesel is DEF, which is accidentally added by fuel companies on the tarmac which kills engines, the tear-down and replacement can be expensive... I'll stick to mogas, thanks
I doubt it's as simple as strapping a powerful engine and seeing the kts go up. The C4 was supposed to be powered by Continental and Thiertel engines, both were rated at 180 and 155 hp respectively but weighed considerably more than the Rotax 915 being used in the F4. The Continental 360 weighed 139 kgs and the Thiertel is even more while the Rotax is a mere 82 kgs. The C4 was expecting a cruise speed of 160 kts with Continental and 145 kts with Thiertel. Under the circumstances, Flight Design made the right choice by going with the underpowered Rotax since they're expecting a 160 kts cruising speed with it. The Rotax is FADEC so not only is it future proof, but far more efficient.
![ทุกครั้งที่หลับตา (Lucid Dream) - AYLA's [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4i1OBAQyv58/mqdefault.jpg)
300K. Good luck!
Always great!!!
Another great video once sped up to 1.5
We have two CTSW in our club) F2 has quite a poor front panel - it blocks visibility from the cockpit (tried at Aero)
Hope they can figure out the v speeds on this one. CTLS has way too many different v speeds that don't match up from POH to POH
Really looking forward to the F4. Given the large space at the back, will it be possible to accommodate a 3-seat rear arrangement like in the SR22?
It is a great price point. Is American General Aviation going to give away their market to the Europeans? Whatever happened to American innovation? Cessna and Piper must no longer have any interest in the average pilot rather concentrating only on business aviation and training?
Oh yes, it’s too late. The 915 iS has taken over AERO this year. The Sling TSi is hitting 155-167 knots true at altitude while burning 7.2 GPH all the while carrying 4 persons. And it handles beautifully! Now all of these manufacturers will make four seat part 23 compliant aircraft around $300K with the 915 iS and eventually take over. Just my thoughts.
Product Liability Insurance!!!!!!!!!!!! Lawyers!!! Crap juries!!!
Fully loaded F2 for $200 000, just above the CTL's price.
Well piper came out with there new aircraft and still to this day only 1 door lol it’s a shame. people are going experimental and LSA and are very happy can’t wait for the gross weight increase
@@andrewmorris3479 light sport is getting ready to see major changes in the up coming rule change. Heavier planes, four seaters, 915 with constant speed prop allowed and slightly faster speed.
Finally the 4 seater!!!
Few questions. Are the brakes engaged when you pull the power back to land? I know they are trying to keep it simple but a throttle/brake combo seems problematic as well as bad for training. Also, how many headset plugs are going to be ruined with the plug location on the arm rest? I know that it would make it easy to plug in, especially compared to early Cessnas. With my luck, I would put my arm back in cruise and bend the plugs on my A20.
Looks nice and the 4place under $300K is going to give the TECNAM P2010 some serious competition.
Instead of asking how much the plane is, I have learned to asked, how xan I get someone else to pay for it. When I learned to answer that question, then what is cost is not as important.
Say it one more time for the people in the back 🤣. You my friend have the right mindset.
And how much does this little jewel cost? I built my RV 7 for about $60,000. It's 2 or 3 times the performance. Not a big fan of rotax either. I know if they don't talk any performance payload speed take off Landing distance? You could buy a used 152 or 172 that would outperform this for a fraction of the cost.
Agreed, the craziest thing the market has done is convince people that 300K USD is reasonable for a 4 seat GA plane with 140 knot cruise speed. It's a bigger sham than 100K USD bachelors degrees in women's studies... The F2 shown here should fall in around the 100K mark, the F4 at 125K USD. All the old folks with pensions and trust funds are dying off. While could afford one of these F4s at the asking price, I just couldn't live with myself if I paid double for something on account of governmental collusion, red tape, and clever marketing tactics.
The F2 looks fantastic. I had two questions.... How does it handle on landings compared to the CTLS (any differences aerodynamically), and can the lightsport version be "converted" to the part 23 version once it becomes fully certified in the U.S.
Once an aircraft is light sport, it cannot be certified.
200k? That's a lot of money for a Rotax 912 two seater. Even worse 300k for the 915i turbo four seater version.
we like Peter and AVweb. Thanks for the video.
Can you NOT tilt your head back so the camera is NOT shooting an up nostril approach? Would be greatly appreciated! Thanks for the video!!!
Nope.
Hello from Ukraine, nice plane, when do you plan to make more space on the plane? because it is not convenient to do it)))
The CT aircraft look exactly like the pipistrel Virus/Sinus aircraft, even to the wingtips, Pipistrel made these pre 2007, so I wonder who copied whom....
What did piper just come out with?
Pilot 100. It's nothing special at all. It's just a bare bones archer.
Model CTLSi GT 2020 with full fuel ( 34 gallons ) Useful load for personnel and baggage 296 lbs ( Qty 2 148 lb persons ) flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/ctlsi/specification/ and flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/ctlsi/
Model F2 with full fuel (34 gallons ) Useful load for personnel and baggage 336 lbs ( Qty 2 168 lb persons ) flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/specifications/ and flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/f2-information-2/
Model CTSI with full fuel (34 gallons ) Useful load for personnel and baggage 396 lbs ( Qty 2 198 lb persons) flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/ctsw-super/specifications/ and flightdesignusa.com/aircraft/ctsw-super/
Nice airplane but who's going to spend $200K for a 2-place S-LSA weekend $100 hamburger hunter?
THE LAST DAY me, perhaps!
lots of people do
@@orouchard NOT me!
@@Ichibuns Yeah, lottery winners.
@@TheLastDay-BobReese lol. They wish they were lottery winners. Of course, these people are pretty well off but it's more common than people think. Imagine this. There were close to 11 million millionaires in the US in 2018.
I alt F4 after this video.
Stupid doors !? 🙄
I really dislike the doors!
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
พี่ปีกต้องยาวสั้นไม่เท่ากันในบางครั้งคือมันต้องรักษาการทรงตัว
So, Flight Design wants to put a high revving, tedious oil check process Rotax engine in their future 4-place? PASS/NO WAY! It needs a more capable/powerful, conventional power-plant. Preferably diesel.
U.S. PATRIOT I have many hundreds of hours behind Rotax engines and find them bulletproof and economical. I can’t say the same for the “conventional” engines I fly behind. So you have to spin the prop a few times once a day to check the oil, it’s quick easy and accurate.
Also the problem with diesel is DEF, which is accidentally added by fuel companies on the tarmac which kills engines, the tear-down and replacement can be expensive... I'll stick to mogas, thanks
I doubt it's as simple as strapping a powerful engine and seeing the kts go up. The C4 was supposed to be powered by Continental and Thiertel engines, both were rated at 180 and 155 hp respectively but weighed considerably more than the Rotax 915 being used in the F4. The Continental 360 weighed 139 kgs and the Thiertel is even more while the Rotax is a mere 82 kgs. The C4 was expecting a cruise speed of 160 kts with Continental and 145 kts with Thiertel. Under the circumstances, Flight Design made the right choice by going with the underpowered Rotax since they're expecting a 160 kts cruising speed with it. The Rotax is FADEC so not only is it future proof, but far more efficient.
Finally! The CT is hideous!
คือมันต้องทดลองหลายอย่างมากปีกยังไม่แน่ใจอาจจะต้องปีกยาวเหมือนเครื่องร่อนหรือปีกหนาก็ยังไม่รู้