|
|
Post by stu on May 15, 2008 13:02:29 GMT 12
Having just discovered that our resident North Shore based ex-RAAF CT4, ZK CTA ( www.airliners.net/photo/New-Zealand-CT-4A/0154982/M/), is only marginally more expensive per hour to fly than the Robin and is available for use by club members, I'm seriously considering a type rating at some stage - providing I don't screw up my flwop again on Saturday  . My question is to those forumites who have flown, or still do fly, CT4s and is probably a bit vague but I'm kind of after an overall impression of whether it's worth spending the time and money on it. What are they like to fly (considering my current mount is a whopping 118hp)? Any nasty habits that make them unpleasant or could turn around and bite you on the bum etc .... Personally I'm saying let me at it with all the enthusiasm of a kid in a candy store while my more financially sane and level headed wife is more of the "that's nice dear but what about the new clutch for your car?" common sense approach. Cheers, Stu. |
|
|
|
Post by sniff on May 15, 2008 19:01:18 GMT 12
If you like aerobatics, go for it.
Just dont get into a spin, thats the CT4's bite.
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on May 15, 2008 19:07:13 GMT 12
Would it be the same with the E models the military currently operate. Ok it is the same frame but different engine, just wondering would the extra HP help or weight at the front. Just thinking if it was heavier at the front, woudn't it make it worse in a nose down spin.
|
|
|
|
Post by sniff on May 15, 2008 19:36:54 GMT 12
Very similar to the CT4B, as I remember it, but a very basic trainer for the RAAF, limited Instrument capability, etc
|
|
|
|
Post by stu on May 15, 2008 21:11:56 GMT 12
If you like aerobatics, go for it. Just dont get into a spin, thats the CT4's bite. Thanks for that ... still very keen on the idea, just have to see how things pan out in the next few days and do some number crunching  |
|
|
|
Post by hardyakka on May 17, 2008 19:33:56 GMT 12
I have ratings in the 150HP Airtourer and the 300HP CT4E. Haven't flown a "B" or an "A". You will probably find it quite similar to a Robin in handling techniques, it will just accelerate a wee bit better on take-off. Keep your speed up on finals and fly it onto the ground (no big-fully-stalled-flare-to-land).
For me, the aerobatic capability would be a significant factor in converting to type. As an aside, I have flown the Alpha Robin 2160 and the aerobatic capabilities are pretty similar to the Airtourer T-6.
I think you'll find you have no troubles converting to the CT4 from a Robin. The deciding factor will be whether you want to do aerobatics.
Spinning a CT4 takes a fair bit of doing, but they do wind up pretty quickly when you get them there (I personally don't go too much further once the spin is fully developed)
You will find the nose very heavy when inverted, so wind on a couple of notches of nose down trim before turning it over. Other than that I haven't found any big "gotchas".
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
Post by stu on May 17, 2008 23:14:35 GMT 12
Big help, thanks. Learned to do wing overs in the Robin today and did about 4 in a row ..... appetite for a CT4 well and truly whetted now unfortunately the finances are a bit thin for a wee while to the tune of "keeping current in the Robin only"  Plenty of time though Cheers, Stu. |
|
dp63
Leading Aircraftman
Posts: 1
|
Post by dp63 on May 25, 2008 20:41:18 GMT 12
Just did my type rating in CTA today, and my recommendation would be definitely to go for it if you can afford the increased hourly rate - it is a great aircraft to fly. In addition to the aeros, CTA will cruise 10-15kn faster than a Robin, so you need to factor that into the cost differential if you are flying cross country. (ie while it is more expensive, your engine run times for the same distance will be shorter)
In respect of the spin comment above, I'm not so sure - CTA was really reluctant to even drop a wing in a landing config stall, and the instructors who have flown it tell me that it is a lot easier to recover than the Slingsby - more like a Cessna 152 ie let go of the controls and it will break the spin.
However, as a side issue if you are looking for the next thing to do I would highly recommend doing an aeros rating, and then you can get full enjoyment of CTA (and TZX)
WRT to the comments about the bigger engine in the CT4E, I believe the redesign included moving the CofG to account for that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Radialicious on May 25, 2008 21:40:23 GMT 12
Go for the CT4! I flew the RNZAF's CT4E and it was (now) a delightful machine. It was never tooooo enjoyable to fly for the reason that, a, there was an instructor next to me and b, when the instructor wasn't next to me, there was always the pressure that on the next flight he would be back and would want to see all my improvements.
At least try her!
I had flown a Nanchang for 4 years before the CT4. I thought the Nanchang was the smoothest, crisp-est etc etc in the whole wide world. Half way through my Wings course, I flew the Nanchang home from Wanaka airshow and it felt as sloppy as a jelly plane with rubber wingspars. The CT4 is well worth a look and I'd be keen to read your response.
PS the Nanchang is by far the most responsive, sweetest, most balanced, smoothest rubbery jelly plane I have ever flown.
|
|
|
|
Post by stu on May 26, 2008 9:56:06 GMT 12
O.K.... I'm sold on the idea Unfortunately the flying budget has taken a bit of a hit as the cost of the aforementioned Suby clutch replacement, some new tyres and some more home renovations will be emptying the the bank account for a wee while At the moment I'm thinking that the car will end up on trade me soon (anyone want to buy a WRX? It's got a horizontally opposed engine so you could pretend it's a plane) and be replaced by something cheap with the difference going into flying. Thanks all for the CT4 info. Cheers, Stu. |
|
.
