Aeroprakt has announced the release of a brand new aircraft in its range – the A32.
The 600 kgs gross weight LSA-compliant 2-seat A32 will be built in limited numbers alongside the popular A22LS and A22L2 ‘Foxbat’ aircraft.
Bearing a strong family resemblance to the A22, the new aircraft has been in development for over three years, with particular attention to the aerodynamics of the airframe and ergonomics in the cabin. As a result, the cabin is spacious and quiet and the aircraft will happily cruise in the 110-115 knots range, without affecting its slow speed docile handling characteristics.
Full details will soon be on the Foxbat Australia website (which is being significantly re-designed) and I’m expecting an A32 demonstrator to arrive in Australia late in June. There will be a formal launch of the new aircraft in Australia, probably at Tyabb Airport, during July.
First customer deliveries of the A32 are expected later this year. Prices have not been finalised but will probably be around A$110,000 fly-away, including registration and GST.
One of my spies has sent me this somewhat blurry photo – the aircraft looks a bit like an A22 Foxbat but even through the blur it’s possible to see some marked differences – no little tailwheel, all-flying tailplane, different rear fuselage, windshield level with the top surface of the wing and maybe a different engine cowling…more to come when I have better photos.
When customers ask me about the Foxbat, the question I hear most is not ‘How fast?’, ‘How far?’ or ‘How much?’ but ‘What makes your Foxbat better than any other (or sometimes a specific) recreational/light sport aircraft?’ While I understand the reason for asking the question, it’s a bit like asking which is better: a pick-up/ute, a sports car or a sedan.
For example – a farmer/landowner wants a strong landing gear and good safe slow speed handling so they can take-off and land in small spaces on unprepared paddocks. Outright top speed is likely not a key decider. The aircraft needs to be robust and reliable, because it’s going to be used a lot, and down-time is potentially lost money. And it probably needs to be easy and safe to fly near to the ground. And quick and easy to fix if it breaks down or gets broken.
Another example: if you are a big person, you’ll need to be able to fit into the cabin – it’s a good job the Millennium Falcon had a roomy flight deck! And if you are heavy, you’ll need an aircraft that can carry you, a reasonable amount of fuel and probably a passenger. There are light sport aircraft on the market that can legally carry less than 200 kilos – that’s everything: pilot, passenger, baggage and fuel. Put two 90 kilo people on board, no bags, and that leaves you 20 kilos for fuel – about 28 litres, which will last about 75 minutes.
Then there are the speed freaks – as long as they can say it goes faster than yours, it’s the one for them. But to go fast in an aeroplane demands compromises – smaller cabins, so there’s less drag; landings are potentially faster, longer and trickier; and the airframe has to be stronger (read: heavier) to cope with rough air at higher speeds…reducing the load carrying capacity. As one famous old American flying ace commented: ‘Unless you’re going at least 50% faster than the others, after a very short time you won’t notice any difference’. And next month someone else will buy one just a bit faster.
So an important thing to think about, when deciding which aircraft, is what’s best for you – and be realistic! How often will you really fly it? Will you usually take a passenger with you or fly alone? How far will you really go on a typical flight? Are you really going to fly round Australia in it, one day? Will the aircraft really carry the weight you need it to? Why is speed important? Is getting there 10 minutes quicker, probably using more fuel, really that important?
Next, secondary safety. This ranges from the simple – eg how many bits stick out in the cabin to injure you during anything, from just getting into the aircraft, to a full-blown crash – to the complex – how the airframe will protect you (or not) if you hit something or end up inverted in a field.
Metal is well known to have excellent impact absorbing qualities; initially it bends rather than breaks and structures can be designed to reduce the G-forces acting during a crash. A common reaction from people who’ve experienced an accident in a metal airframe aircraft is ‘it all seemed so gentle, I just couldn’t believe the aircraft was a write off when I got out and looked at it’. That’s because the airframe did its job. However, if there’s corrosion in the airframe, it may not do its protecting job properly.
Wood is used much less in LSAs nowadays, although at least one of the most famous World War Two aircraft – the De Havilland Mosquito – had a wooden airframe. A well designed and built wooden aircraft should have good impact absorption although in some higher energy crashes, wood will break suddenly as it doesn’t bend as much as metal. It also depends how much of the airframe is glued, pegged or screwed together – believe it or not, a well-glued wooden airframe is stronger than one screwed together.
omposites are used extensively in LSAs. Some manufacturers will tell you their aircraft are ‘carbon fibre’ but in most cases – because of the sheer expense – this is used very sparingly only in high-stress areas. Most composite aircraft are mainly or wholly some sort of glass-fibre. As boat builders will tell you, getting consistent results when manufacturing with glass-fibre is a notoriously difficult process. As a result, the empty weights of the same model of LSA can vary substantially (
Probably the single most important factor in choosing an aircraft is safety – and it’s usually the most overlooked and under-rated aspect of an LSA.
But first – ergonomics
This can lead to bent or even collapsed nose legs. So some aircraft designers have stuck with (or even reverted to) castering nose wheels, steered by main wheel differential braking – either by feet or hands. This gives slightly trickier ground handling especially when it’s windy but reduces the chances of bent gear when landing cross wind. Castering nose wheels usually have a smaller turning circle than direct steering, a particular advantage when back-tracking and turning on narrow runways. There are advocates of both systems – try both and take your choice.
What about the stalling characteristics? Most LSAs stall very benignly, the nose goes down gently and rarely does a wing drop – something caused when one wing loses lift before the other, for a variety of reasons, but usually because the aircraft is being flown out of balance, with the slip ball not centred. Stalling with a wing drop is most dangerous when making that low-level turn onto final approach before landing. There are a few aircraft which can bite unexpectedly when stalled – if you are an experienced pilot and aware of what’s happening, prompt action can save you. But if the characteristic is particularly vicious and/or you are a low-time pilot, the chances are you won’t survive a finals turn stall with a wing drop. Check this aspect of the aircraft with someone familiar with the type and maybe even ask an instructor to take you up high and try stalling in turns.
