I saw very dated info on this airplane so wanted to start a new thread.

I'm in the market for a LSA and keep coming back to the AeroTrek A220. Or an A240 (because they're easier to find).

It has a Rotax 912ULS, STOL capabilities, a (self proclaimed) 120-130mph max cruise, a killer looking panel, and are under $95k brand new.

I've talked to Rob Rollison (AeroTrek dealer) and watched Dan Johnson's (among other) videos on the plane. I really can't find anything wrong with it. I know it is based off the Avid Flyer (like Kitfox). And I just think it's a beautiful plane.

I guess my question is: Does anyone have experience with the AeroTrek brand? Do they like it? Any downsides? I'm heading to the DeLand Aviation Show in November to see it in person. They used to be called AeroPro EuroFox until 2008 I believe (and still are in Europe).

I'm close to submitting the down-payment to get the production started. There's currently a 10 month wait time as they're being built in the Czech Republic. Maybe that's one of their downsides but anyone else's input would be appreciated! I've also found a used A240 that is in impeccable shape.

Lastly, anything I buy (new or used) will already be built. I do not intend on building my own. Look forward to y'alls input!

And to get ahead of any LSA preference questions, I'm wanting an LSA so my dad can fly with me again. He can no longer obtain a medical but has 2800 hours from 185s to Pilatus Porter's.

Thank you!!

It seems to be based largely on prior proven designs, and the pricing seems good. I'd knock a bit off that expected cruise speed though, but I do that with ANY manufacturer's claims.

I'vwe looked at them. Yes, very similar to the Eurofox, earlier Kitfox and Avid design. Nice looking LSA planes. I believe one of the members on this site has one, hopefully he'll chime in.

I looked at them quite a bit at SunNFun a few years ago, and again at OSH last time I was there. I really liked everything I saw. The build quality looks quite good, and the plane seems to be a relative "bargain" compared to other LSA. The seats were pretty comfortable, and the cabin width was quite nice (44"). Seemed like a comfortable place to spend time in cruise flight. Folding wings are cool, even if most buyers never use that feature. These appeared easy and quick enough to be useful in sharing hangar space to reduce costs. (Or as at least one guy does, to fit into an enclosed trailer pulled behind his RV. He and his wife and travel all over the US, taking their airplane with them for scenic flights. Very cool!)

At Sun-N-Fun, there was a customer hanging around who used them in his Light Sport Pilot training operations. He said they had switched to AeroTrek after a couple of years using other top selling LSA that simply did not hold up well in training operations. Two of the best-selling (and best known) aircraft seemed to continually be having issues with landing gear because of student pilots being "rough" on them. One of those airplanes spent almost 18 months (three separate instances) out of service while waiting for parts from overseas during the two years he used it for training. The third time he had to do a major repair to the gear, he sold the airplane and bought his first AeroTrek.

Since switching his entire "fleet" (3 planes) over to AeroTrek, he had been really impressed with their durability, and the students and renters seemed to really like flying them. There had been zero issues with the gear. He said they had well over 1000 hours on that first A220, and maybe 800 hours on the second A220. He later added an A240 for those pilots who preferred trikes, and it was his lowest-time plane, with about 500 hours on it. Seemed like a pretty good endorsement of the durability, since student pilots and renters are notoriously rough on airplanes. A lot of LSA don't stand up to training very well.

My only big concern at the time was the useful load. The airplane's GW is 1235, with a "standard empty weight" of 655, leaving a useful load of 580. Add ADS-B, larger wheels and tires, dual-puck brakes, and a few other accessories I wanted, and that useful load would be down to 540-ish. At the time, I was quite a bit heavier than I am today, and I would not have been able to fly with full fuel and a passenger. Probably not an issue for most people, and since I've lost a bunch of weight since then it might not be an issue for me today.

Sorry I'm late to the thread. I've had mine 14 months and have enjoyed it. No major issues.

I'll try to write more tomorrow. PM me if you'd like to talk.

Pierre

JP256 wrote:I looked at them quite a bit at SunNFun a few years ago, and again at OSH last time I was there. I really liked everything I saw. The build quality looks quite good, and the plane seems to be a relative "bargain" compared to other LSA. The seats were pretty comfortable, and the cabin width was quite nice (44"). Seemed like a comfortable place to spend time in cruise flight. Folding wings are cool, even if most buyers never use that feature. These appeared easy and quick enough to be useful in sharing hangar space to reduce costs. (Or as at least one guy does, to fit into an enclosed trailer pulled behind his RV. He and his wife and travel all over the US, taking their airplane with them for scenic flights. Very cool!)

At Sun-N-Fun, there was a customer hanging around who used them in his Light Sport Pilot training operations. He said they had switched to AeroTrek after a couple of years using other top selling LSA that simply did not hold up well in training operations. Two of the best-selling (and best known) aircraft seemed to continually be having issues with landing gear because of student pilots being "rough" on them. One of those airplanes spent almost 18 months (three separate instances) out of service while waiting for parts from overseas during the two years he used it for training. The third time he had to do a major repair to the gear, he sold the airplane and bought his first AeroTrek.

Since switching his entire "fleet" (3 planes) over to AeroTrek, he had been really impressed with their durability, and the students and renters seemed to really like flying them. There had been zero issues with the gear. He said they had well over 1000 hours on that first A220, and maybe 800 hours on the second A220. He later added an A240 for those pilots who preferred trikes, and it was his lowest-time plane, with about 500 hours on it. Seemed like a pretty good endorsement of the durability, since student pilots and renters are notoriously rough on airplanes. A lot of LSA don't stand up to training very well.

My only big concern at the time was the useful load. The airplane's GW is 1235, with a "standard empty weight" of 655, leaving a useful load of 580. Add ADS-B, larger wheels and tires, dual-puck brakes, and a few other accessories I wanted, and that useful load would be down to 540-ish. At the time, I was quite a bit heavier than I am today, and I would not have been able to fly with full fuel and a passenger. Probably not an issue for most people, and since I've lost a bunch of weight since then it might not be an issue for me today.

Could you post the name of that person who has 3 and rents them? I'd like to take a look at one and around all there seems to be are the 240. I'm currently looking for a plane to buy and the rep here in the states says the next one won't come until late September next year.

FrederickCaleb wrote:I saw very dated info on this airplane so wanted to start a new thread.

I'm in the market for a LSA and keep coming back to the AeroTrek A220. Or an A240 (because they're easier to find).

It has a Rotax 912ULS, STOL capabilities, a (self proclaimed) 120-130mph max cruise, a killer looking panel, and are under $95k brand new.

I've talked to Rob Rollison (AeroTrek dealer) and watched Dan Johnson's (among other) videos on the plane. I really can't find anything wrong with it. I know it is based off the Avid Flyer (like Kitfox). And I just think it's a beautiful plane.

I guess my question is: Does anyone have experience with the AeroTrek brand? Do they like it? Any downsides? I'm heading to the DeLand Aviation Show in November to see it in person. They used to be called AeroPro EuroFox until 2008 I believe (and still are in Europe).

I'm close to submitting the down-payment to get the production started. There's currently a 10 month wait time as they're being built in the Czech Republic. Maybe that's one of their downsides but anyone else's input would be appreciated! I've also found a used A240 that is in impeccable shape.
]

When did he say $95K? His ads all say $99,950 starting. He did tell me the next one arrives in September if I give him money today. That part I don't understand. If they're selling like that then there's no risk in ordering them and then when August comes and it's time to paint that one then you can ask someone who wants it to pay the deposit. Either way, check the price because it seems it went up since you last spoke with him.

Be sure it fits you and whoever might accompany you. Move the stick to the four corners with the right seat occupied. Unless you remove the right stick, the right seat can't be occupied by anyone with thick legs.

Also, at just under 6'2" and with an old hamstring injury, I start to get uncomfortable around 1:45-2:00 hours without landing to stretch. I know a 5'9" guy who can fly it over 3 hours comfortably.

Not specific to this make/model, be sure you grasp how such a light wing loading feels and handles, especially around mountains and wind. Compared to a 172 it feels like a kite. Lots of fun to fly, just feels turbulence.

Pietre

EastTexasPilot wrote:Could you post the name of that person who has 3 and rents them? I'd like to take a look at one and around all there seems to be are the 240. I'm currently looking for a plane to buy and the rep here in the states says the next one won't come until late September next year.

Wish I could, but it was several years ago (the year the tornado hit Sun-N-Fun), and I've slept since then. I believe that he was based in Florida, so that might be a starting point. Since I'm in Texas, I didn't ask for his card or make notes about his operation.

Pierre_R wrote:Not specific to this make/model, be sure you grasp how such a light wing loading feels and handles, especially around mountains and wind. Compared to a 172 it feels like a kite. Lots of fun to fly, just feels turbulence.

Pietre

That was something that initially concerned me when I was buying my current plane (E-LSA type RANS S-6ES Coyote). This one has just under 138 sq ft of wing area, so at 1320 lbs GW, the wing loading is pretty light (9.58 lbs/sq ft). But I've been pleasantly surprised by how well it handles our typical Texas summer turbulence. (Aw, who am I kidding, it's pretty much a year-round phenomenon around here...)

I also took some training in a SportCruiser (another LSA, but all-metal construction versus tube and fabric), and again, while you could certainly feel the turbulence, it was nowhere close to as bad as a lot of people make it out to be.

I would suggest you get some time in an LSA for yourself. Like many other things in aviation, there's no substitute for personal experience in forming your own judgements about them.

I am reviving this.

Can anyone shed some light on the slow flight characteristics on this thing? How are higher AoA landings? Nothing extreme, just trying to practice landing all slowed up and ready to squat, as W. Langewiesche puts it.

Seems to be a nice plane for the hobbyist aviator who doesn't have any very specific needs, but wants to go hop around from field to field in the back- and sidecountry. Well made, easy to fit in a small hangar, sorta fast and sorta slow.

What puts me a little off is what they say about putting VGs on it. I dont mind that the maker do not recommend it, but saying that the wing is just "so good" means very little to me. Sounds like a wing that might only like to fly in low AoA? Or do they just dont want the STOL crowd to go out and bent metal and break bones in their plane?

Varanger PM'd me to ask this question. Here were my replies:

Power-on, back of the curve approach is SOP for short field with the A220. Flaperons provide good controllability at low speed. Stall (below 40 MPH) is barely noticeable: slight nose bob.

I also mentioned that while I had installed VG's on two other airplanes ( a 182, and a 1959 150 tailwheel) I felt no desire to do so on the Aerotrek. Here my GF videoed my PM landing at Smiley Creek. Nothing super STOL, just a nice Aerotrek short-ish landing.

https://youtu.be/zPc8w37fRPI?feature=shared

Hey guys, I am new here and noticed this thread. I have an Aerotrek A240 that I have owned for about a year now. Love this airplane. I have my own private strip in Montana (MT68) that is just 1000 ft and at 5400 ft elevation. On 80 degree days I can still make it in and out with no problem. I have 21 inch tires on the mains and an 18 inch on the nose. A little overkill I know but it allows for a lot of mud and snow. Most folks won't give up their Aerotrek's. I tried to get a taildragger used but no one would let theirs go. I have been offered $30,000 more than I paid for my used 2011 model with 200 hours on it when I bought it but just can't seem to let it go. I have landed at just about every remote strip in Idaho in the last year and put 190 hours on it. Feel free to ask anything else about it.

Thanks for chiming in! It is high on my list, and I am looking to try flying one near me (Norway). I have heard so much good about it now, that I am curious about what its shortcomings might be?… How short would a field have to be for it to begin feeling sketchy to get in and out of?