Thread: What is it like???

Hi, my name is Chris...I am from Indianapolis, and I am a brand new (as of Jan.12th) Sport Pilot! I love your forum, it is so helpful and enlightening. I trained in an Evektor SportStar here in Indy and was planning on a flying club (fractional ownership). When I spotted a 2006 CTSW on ebay..."needs some work"... for the price of a flying club! Long story short, I am going to go to Michigan (unless there is one closer to home?) to start flying a CTSW while mine is being fixed.
My question is does the CT fly like a sportstar? The V numbers are similar...but from what I gather it requires more rudder than I am used to. Like the sportstar only needs it to taxi and slips...my feet feel useless. I have flown a Rans Coyote once and it was all rudder...the total other end of the spectrum. So is the CTSW somewhere in the middle?
I hope, I hope, and I hope!
Thanks...

I guess the amount of rudder one has to use plane to plane is relative, so I don't know quite how to respond. With the CT, you will need to use the rudder. From what I understand, all light sport aircraft need rudder control more than a Cessna, for example. I flew an Allegro 2000 before the CT, and the amount of rudder needed on each of those planes is about equal. I am confident that you will find it's no big deal before long.

I am curious to know how much work a 2006 CTsw needs.

I logged 30 hours of instruction in a Sportstar before my 2006 CTSW was delivered.

The Sportstar is a bit easier to fly. It's more forgiving of rudder technique and less sensitive to pitch in the flair. Don't be surprised if it takes you a few hours to start making good coordinated turns again. The CT is harder to land well. The Sportstar has a bit more drag and feels the ground effect better and is easier to plant on the runway. The Sportstar keeps a nice crisp feel all the way down to stall, and the CT seems to get a little loose and wallows around a bit below 60 knots. The early Sporstars with the 17 gallon tank in the fuseloge were very crisp in roll. The later ones with the tanks in the wings seemed to handle more like the CT. The CT has a rudder 'detent' feel at the center position and the Sportstar doesn't. This was a little disturbing to me at first.

Performance wise, the CT just stomps all over the Sportstar. I flew my CT in a flight of 2 with a Sportstar. My RPMS were about 4400-4500 and 90 knots and the Sportstar was at max cruise RPM. The CT will go a lot farther and faster than a Sportstar. I don't have anything to back it up, but I believe that a properly handled CT short-field landing will be shorter than the same with a Sportstar. Brakes are simpler in the CT and not so easy to abuse. Just be aware that you may have to pump them. The CT's engine cowl is all compound curves with no rivets so it's not easy for a beginner to line up the runway. I suggest putting a dot on the windscreen as a reference mark so you can sight along it when you turn to final.

Originally Posted by Jim Stewart

I logged 30 hours of instruction in a Sportstar before my 2006 CTSW was delivered.

The Sportstar is a bit easier to fly. ....

Performance wise, the CT just stomps all over the Sportstar.

I have to agree on both accounts. The Evektor is a better trainer but the CT is a better owner-airplane.

Doug