Criteria

Kit build or plans
100% alloy structure and surfaces
800-1200 lbs useful load
150-300 horse
100+ cruise
Under 10gph at cruise
Sub 300ft capable

I've looked at the ch 801
The Murphy radical
Various Cessna
The superstol xl would be perfect if it we're skinned in aluminum.
The Murphy patrol is intriguing.

What do you folks own that fit the criteria and what do you hate about it? What do you love?

I'm not being lazy at all. Have been reading and searching non stop. Some "all aluminum" wings are still skinned in fabric. Lots of stuff to sift through. Lots of hours that could be spent punching holes and setting rivets. Don't mind having room for 4 but not required. Reason for alloy is this will be a Michigan bird and 100% hanger is not an option.

Thanks for all opinions and facts,
Mike

Dream Tundra?
Bushcaddy L164?

BTW that avatar is epic.

The bushcaddy looks a decent option. Will do some digging on it here after work.
Thanks for the info.
Avatar was a jacklinks jerky ad in a local hardware store. Epicness ruined? Lol

Msmithabr wrote:Epicness ruined? Lol

Well, my new avatar is a Merrick cat food bag graphic... "Game bird recipe."

Zzz wrote:

Msmithabr wrote:Epicness ruined? Lol

Well, my new avatar is a Merrick cat food bag graphic... "Game bird recipe."

Great minds I tell you

Rans S-21

asa wrote:Rans S-21

Yeah, what he said!

Jeredp wrote:

asa wrote:Rans S-21

Yeah, what he said!

I had not even heard of this plane in my searches. Excellent looking plane. Excellent price as well. That tops the list for now. Much research to do on these models. Thanks to all who have contributed. Keep them coming.

Thanks,
Mike

Did some research on the rans s21 outbound. Awesome looking plane. Love the cruise capability. Had a question that maybe someone will have an answer for. When looking at the specs , Titan vs 912, the plane actually loses range and stol performance with the larger engine. The range is understable I suppose. In a perfect world that would not be the case. But the roll? Does anyone know how they rate there take off distance at rans? Is this just no brake full power? Or do they brake it up and take off proper stol style and still end up in the 300ft range somewhere? Seems as though the larger engine is only good for 30mph on the cruise and you are punished almost everywhere else that matters if stol is your game. 30mph cruise increase is a very large jump and would be nice. Considering 4 cylinder turbo Yamaha power. In the 240hp range. While saving weight over the 180hp Titan. Anybody with a similar plane and power/weight ratio have any real world numbers? Stol and cruise? I'm sure engine package with turbo will be in the 190-210lb range depending on some factors.
Any info greatly appreciated. Email to sans would probably be appropriate. Just don't want to bog them down with questions until I'm a "right now" buyer. Sounds like busy folks over there.

Thanks,
Mike

That Rans 21 is an interesting plane...I really like the higher cruise speed. 1 observation and then 1 preference.

Observation - looking at the pictures - the tube frame looks like a small diameter tubing compared to other tube frame based planes I've looked at. Might be just the picture - but they don't look very "beefy"

Preference - For a plane like that - I would prefer a shocked based main landing gear - like on the Kitfox (its an option for the kitfox). Yes I realize its experimental and I could do whatever I wanted - but would really prefer it designed that way or an option so at least some engineering work had been done.

Msmithabr wrote:Did some research on the rans s21 outbound. Awesome looking plane. Love the cruise capability. Had a question that maybe someone will have an answer for. When looking at the specs , Titan vs 912, the plane actually loses range and stol performance with the larger engine. .

Thanks,
Mike

M:

Not sure that I am looking at the same specs as you? Looked on Rans website and takeoff roll is better and landing distance is about the same with the 180hp?? They are projecting empty weight goes up about 120lbs with the Titan (hard for me to believe that it is that much heavier than the Rotax???) and that with increased fuel consumption will translate into less distance, but I think the STOL capability is probably better or at least as good.

I talked to the RANS guys in OSH and there is not yet a flying S-21 with the Titan Engine, just the Rotax. So, as of now, it is speculation. They do have flying versions of the S-20 with both the Rotax and the Titan to compare to and considering the similarity of design, their numbers are probably pretty accurate. However, as yet, they haven't got a flying example.

I agree with you it sure seems to be a good combo of speed and short field capability. They seemed to think they would have a flying version of the S21 with a Titan later this year. Will watch that with interest.

Good luck with the search! L

Tubing on the Rans is not an issue. Don't ask me how I know.

These are the specs I was referring too. Downloadable PDF on there website.

M:

That is weird. When I log into Rans, this is what I get

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/6e941e_a391c0c96a5f4f35a720e06bccef3d91.pdf

At any rate, have a real hard time believing you won't pull out of the hole quicker with the Titan. Will be interested to watch the results of this plane as some are built.

Also will be interested to hear more about Yamaha engine. If you decide to go that direction, let us know how that works out.

Regards, L

I'm thinking they do the numbers at gross weight, which is 480lbs higher with the Titan from what I'm seeing. I've been wrong many times before though, so......

Hozer wrote:I'm thinking they do the numbers at gross weight, which is 480lbs higher with the Titan from what I'm seeing. I've been wrong many times before though, so......

That's what I was wondering. If that's the case then I believe the roll data.

I am pretty sure that Steve Henry competed at Oshkosh this year with a 4 cylinder Yamaha and a 40hp shot of giggle gas. That's 3rd and 4th party information. So maybe check with him if you are more curious than I am fast building a plane. At any rate if he was running the yammie he flew the plane to Oshkosh with a group of guys that have YouTube channels. Trent Palmer and a few others. Must make for a fairly reliable setup if you can hit it with nitrous and then fly it home. I'll keep folks posted when I get one in something that leaves the surface. Replaced a near 280 horse Polaris triple 2 stroke in a small boat with one. Then turbo. Thing has never missed a beat. Love the platform. In a sled the clutch takes most of the abuse when you go airborne and come down on the pipe. In a boat you are suppose to throttle that transition. And I am no offshore racing throttle man. Still haven't twisted anything up.

Be safe,
Mike

Mike,

I've been around a lot of yamaha sleds making that kind of power, and I would never have one that hot in an airplane. They are reliable enough for a sled but not an airplane. Sure, Steve Henry pushes it, but he can also dead stick land that airplane in something that I would probably shy away from with the blades turning. As Trent Palmer found out, you push it, stuff breaks.... like rods.

Don't forget the gearbox and prop. 240HP is going to put a lot of force on a gearbox and prop. I'm not sure I would trust the rotax gearbox at those power levels, and I'm not sure I would trust any other gearbox without some SERIOUS thought put into torsional vibration testing.

I think the Yamaha is reliable enough at 140-150hp with the rotax gear box, and a well performing setup, anything more than that, and you had better be an excellent TEST pilot.

Feel free to disagree, this is just a forum after all, and my opinion is worth what you paid, but I've looked into much of this, and there be dragons.

schu

Bearhawk and Bearhawk patrol have Al skinned wings and fabric fuselage. Both have useful load above 1000lb. Can be setup with a variety of cooling fans for fuel burn/performance requirements.

Yes I would never recommend anyone run a hot sled motor in a recreational plane. Was just giving the only info I have on the platform. At n/a power it's still very competitive with the turbo rotax in specs and weight. I can pull them out of sleds for under 2k with all the electronics. But like with anything else if you can part with the wallet you can make a bunch of power reliable. There is a difference in building an engine and simply boosting an engine. Still would not recommend anything over 220 unless, like you say, you are a hell of a pilot and your not giving a bunch of rides to folks. Modest turbo setup with a very thorough bottom end build would really put this platform head and shoulders above most "conversion" engines. Have no experience with the rotax box and such so can't speak to any reliability in the aircraft realm. Need to get Nissan off the info behind this monster. Probably no torque whatsoever.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.eng ... /7071.html