Survey question for Superstol buyers
-
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:30 pm
Survey question for Superstol buyers
Hello everyone. Just a little market research here. If the Superstol buyers would be so kind to share some insight into their decision to purchase a Superstol. Please just say a couple qualities or rather the main reason for purchasing, upgrading or converting. What is it to you that makes the new Superstol better than other airplanes, even the Highlander for that matter....Such as:
The overall look of the aircraft? Explain, tough or modern or etc.
The cruise speed? Which is?
The ability to fly really slow? Explain intended use.
The ability to land anywhere? Explain intended operation.
For Safety? Again intended operation?...family hauling, kids, etc?
Resale Value? Worth more than a highlander, kitfox, etc?
Latest and Greatest? Just gotta have it?
Other reasons? Anything not mentioned above.
thanks guys
Chris
The overall look of the aircraft? Explain, tough or modern or etc.
The cruise speed? Which is?
The ability to fly really slow? Explain intended use.
The ability to land anywhere? Explain intended operation.
For Safety? Again intended operation?...family hauling, kids, etc?
Resale Value? Worth more than a highlander, kitfox, etc?
Latest and Greatest? Just gotta have it?
Other reasons? Anything not mentioned above.
thanks guys
Chris
-
- New Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2013 9:33 pm
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
I don't know that you will learn a lot... most of it you can guess and have done..
Those that buy because its the latest and greatest are hardly likely to say as much...
The cruise speed is likely to be around 100mph give or take.. not a reason for or against particularly
I like the looks of the plane... its designed to be a low and slow, STOL aircraft and in the LSA/Experimental area it is a standout compared to other options.. in terms of performance and value..
I always liked the highlander, but I was sold with the Superstol (kit here later this year) because of its better STOL performance... and I can't afford a helicopter..
I am a fisherman and a hunter and intend to use it for mountain and backcountry flying..
Safety looks good, seemingly well constructed, stall speed really really slow and predictable...
Resale... none yet sold 2nd hand, I would assume more than a standard Highlander.. I would anticipate getting kit and engine costs back out of it until its done a lot of work.. There should be pretty high demand until the factory catches up with the orders.. and the kit builds get finished and into the air...which is likely to be some time away...
If I was a flat land aviator without rough and short strip intentions, the ordinary Highlander would have been more likely given the additional cost of the SS. Personally I don't see a lot of point unless you have those uses in mind..
Those that buy because its the latest and greatest are hardly likely to say as much...
The cruise speed is likely to be around 100mph give or take.. not a reason for or against particularly
I like the looks of the plane... its designed to be a low and slow, STOL aircraft and in the LSA/Experimental area it is a standout compared to other options.. in terms of performance and value..
I always liked the highlander, but I was sold with the Superstol (kit here later this year) because of its better STOL performance... and I can't afford a helicopter..
I am a fisherman and a hunter and intend to use it for mountain and backcountry flying..
Safety looks good, seemingly well constructed, stall speed really really slow and predictable...
Resale... none yet sold 2nd hand, I would assume more than a standard Highlander.. I would anticipate getting kit and engine costs back out of it until its done a lot of work.. There should be pretty high demand until the factory catches up with the orders.. and the kit builds get finished and into the air...which is likely to be some time away...
If I was a flat land aviator without rough and short strip intentions, the ordinary Highlander would have been more likely given the additional cost of the SS. Personally I don't see a lot of point unless you have those uses in mind..
- stede52
- Premium Member
- Posts: 1066
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:40 am
- Location: Carnation, WA
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
Chris,
Syd has a point, not sure what you can learn about an airplane that has no performance history. These kinds of “Market Research” questions are too specific for just curiosity sake and it just seems a little odd coming from someone who doesn’t own a Highlander or fly taildraggers. Are you planning a new airplane for your tailwheel? Just curious.
Syd has a point, not sure what you can learn about an airplane that has no performance history. These kinds of “Market Research” questions are too specific for just curiosity sake and it just seems a little odd coming from someone who doesn’t own a Highlander or fly taildraggers. Are you planning a new airplane for your tailwheel? Just curious.
Steve D N419LD
-
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:30 pm
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
Syd,
First of all, thanks for the honest and descriptive reply. I really appreciate it. The Superstol and Highlander are hands down the planes to beat right now with so many of the qualities that guys seem to looking for these days. I hope others chime in and explain their "personal" reason why the SuperStol excites them.
Steve,
Im not trying to learn about the Superstol, Im trying to learn what gets people so excited about the Superstol. As a guy who offers aftermarket aviation products, its wise to know not only what others want, but why they want it.
Chris
First of all, thanks for the honest and descriptive reply. I really appreciate it. The Superstol and Highlander are hands down the planes to beat right now with so many of the qualities that guys seem to looking for these days. I hope others chime in and explain their "personal" reason why the SuperStol excites them.
Steve,
Im not trying to learn about the Superstol, Im trying to learn what gets people so excited about the Superstol. As a guy who offers aftermarket aviation products, its wise to know not only what others want, but why they want it.
Chris
-
- New Member
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 8:10 am
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
1. Folding wings.
2. Can land almost anywhere.
3. Easy to build.
4. Very safe (If the engine quits, see #2)
5. Economical low & slow flight
6. LSA
7. 2 passenger with good payload
8. Easy to repair (tube frame, cloth)
9. Unique (at least for awhile)
(another) Chris
2. Can land almost anywhere.
3. Easy to build.
4. Very safe (If the engine quits, see #2)
5. Economical low & slow flight
6. LSA
7. 2 passenger with good payload
8. Easy to repair (tube frame, cloth)
9. Unique (at least for awhile)
(another) Chris
- FlyerChief
- Veteran Member
- Posts: 290
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:53 pm
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
For those of us that are building or have already built Highlanders, the SuperSTOL looked like an interesting conversion, but...
With the possible exception of #9, you just described a Highlander too. (But still unique in its own right in the LSA world.)
If you consider #2 as a SuperSTOL virtue, remember that the Highlander is lighter and will likely get back out of those same spots easier. (Quicker off the ground than the SuperSTOL... according to Troy.)
The Highlander is a better float plane. (less weight = more payload)
The advantage of the SuperSTOL is the high angle of attack on landings, because of the slats, Fowler flaps and larger tail feathers, all of which require the large shock absorber landing gear. This advantage is lost (or dramatically reduced) on the water, where at SuperSTOL landing would be a quick way to turn the aircraft into a submarine. I don't believe there is a set of floats on the market that would withstand repeated landings for which the SuperSTOL is quickly becoming famous. You would still have to do a traditional flare for a float landing, so the SuperSTOL advantage is lost... IMHO.
Simply put, the Highlander is probably a better float plane! ...also IHMO.
So other than a perceived "Cool" factor and a possible higher cruise speed, I still don't see paying the difference to get a SuperSTOL conversion.
Regardless of Chris' intentions by doing a marketing survey on the forum, he has raised an interesting point here...
There must be some other reasons the SuperSTOL is such a great seller... what are they?
Regards,
Dan
Highlander #241
90% done... 90% to go!
With the possible exception of #9, you just described a Highlander too. (But still unique in its own right in the LSA world.)
If you consider #2 as a SuperSTOL virtue, remember that the Highlander is lighter and will likely get back out of those same spots easier. (Quicker off the ground than the SuperSTOL... according to Troy.)
The Highlander is a better float plane. (less weight = more payload)
The advantage of the SuperSTOL is the high angle of attack on landings, because of the slats, Fowler flaps and larger tail feathers, all of which require the large shock absorber landing gear. This advantage is lost (or dramatically reduced) on the water, where at SuperSTOL landing would be a quick way to turn the aircraft into a submarine. I don't believe there is a set of floats on the market that would withstand repeated landings for which the SuperSTOL is quickly becoming famous. You would still have to do a traditional flare for a float landing, so the SuperSTOL advantage is lost... IMHO.
Simply put, the Highlander is probably a better float plane! ...also IHMO.
So other than a perceived "Cool" factor and a possible higher cruise speed, I still don't see paying the difference to get a SuperSTOL conversion.
Regardless of Chris' intentions by doing a marketing survey on the forum, he has raised an interesting point here...
There must be some other reasons the SuperSTOL is such a great seller... what are they?
Regards,
Dan
Highlander #241
90% done... 90% to go!
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. ~Henry Ford
-
- Veteran Member
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 7:54 pm
- Location: Newark, Ohio
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
I'm with you on this one, Dan. I've got to say, I am simply not a fan of the SuperSTOL. ( okay.... I can hear the gasps from the audience). It looks like a Storch. It may be perfect for those that need to land on a postage stamp, but I'm not sure how well it will perform in the hands of someone other than Troy or Steve. I would be worried about breaking something. I would not be interested in "upgrading" to a SuperSTOL from my standard Highlander (still in the box), even at no additional cost. I certainly understand that I am in the minority.
Max Rentz
Newark, Ohio
Newark, Ohio
-
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:30 pm
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
Ok, even though I asked the question, I'll throw out my answer to keep things rolling.
Being an aircraft designer/builder with 7 scratch-built aircraft under my belt (with intentions to build more), plus working on all different types, working for composite and aircraft factories including Just aircraft, I'd have to say that for me, even though I've seen a bunch of stuff, I still get a little giddy watching the Superstol smack into the ground and then just drive away. So for me, if I wanted a resilient aircraft at the expense of some other things, like flyerchief mentionened, that'd be why.
Chris
Being an aircraft designer/builder with 7 scratch-built aircraft under my belt (with intentions to build more), plus working on all different types, working for composite and aircraft factories including Just aircraft, I'd have to say that for me, even though I've seen a bunch of stuff, I still get a little giddy watching the Superstol smack into the ground and then just drive away. So for me, if I wanted a resilient aircraft at the expense of some other things, like flyerchief mentionened, that'd be why.
Chris
- kenryan
- Veteran Member
- Posts: 342
- Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: anchorage, ak
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
With the SuperSTOL any hidden rocks or logs or holes suddenly become less menacing. Could easily be the difference between flying out or helicoptering out. Not only can it take more pounding, the rollout is considerably shortened, lessening the chance of hitting something.
Super Stol Kit #299
-
- New Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2013 9:33 pm
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
Pretty sure its not compulsory to like it...
The design for the SS was mostly about reducing flying speed... you can hardly say that hasn't been achieved. The only way to do that is to increase wing size, hence added weight and complexity ... The gear can soak up landings at 800-900fps descent.
The standard highlander spec as listed is 36mph stall with flaps, and 40 clean. Troy is getting down to the low 20's under a controlled descent without stall in the SS. That is significant.
Given that the SS is just a highlander with the additions as above, what else would you expect to be different? It appears to have been a major improvement in low speed performance, the ability to soak up impact and deal with rough terrain and the extra safety that comes with that.
Everythings a compromise. There is a bonus with slightly better cruise. Whether its worth the difference in cost/weight is a personal decision based on the intended use.
The design for the SS was mostly about reducing flying speed... you can hardly say that hasn't been achieved. The only way to do that is to increase wing size, hence added weight and complexity ... The gear can soak up landings at 800-900fps descent.
The standard highlander spec as listed is 36mph stall with flaps, and 40 clean. Troy is getting down to the low 20's under a controlled descent without stall in the SS. That is significant.
Given that the SS is just a highlander with the additions as above, what else would you expect to be different? It appears to have been a major improvement in low speed performance, the ability to soak up impact and deal with rough terrain and the extra safety that comes with that.
Everythings a compromise. There is a bonus with slightly better cruise. Whether its worth the difference in cost/weight is a personal decision based on the intended use.
-
- New Member
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:22 am
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
If shorter landing distance and slower speed,, along with a cruise of 100mph is the appeal of the SS, I bet you guys would love the Rotorway helicopter. 0 landing distance and still 100mph + cruse! Cost less than a SS too.bluemax wrote:I'm with you on this one, Dan. I've got to say, I am simply not a fan of the SuperSTOL. ( okay.... I can hear the gasps from the audience). It looks like a Storch. It may be perfect for those that need to land on a postage stamp, but I'm not sure how well it will perform in the hands of someone other than Troy or Steve. I would be worried about breaking something. I would not be interested in "upgrading" to a SuperSTOL from my standard Highlander (still in the box), even at no additional cost. I certainly understand that I am in the minority.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- danerazz
- Veteran Member
- Posts: 1240
- Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 9:33 pm
- Location: Bangor
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
A helicopter with what is basically a WV engine is not my cup-o-tea. A helicycle would be though...
Dane
Paralysis by analysis
#242
Paralysis by analysis
#242
- FlyerChief
- Veteran Member
- Posts: 290
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:53 pm
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
Almost twice the fuel consumption and less than half the range... no thanks!If shorter landing distance and slower speed,, along with a cruise of 100mph is the appeal of the SS, I bet you guys would love the Rotorway helicopter. 0 landing distance and still 100mph + cruse! Cost less than a SS too.
I also don't like travelling in anything where the wings go faster than the fuselage.
Dan
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. ~Henry Ford
-
- New Member
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:22 am
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
I like the Highlander better, don't get me wrong, but what you say is just incorrect. 200 miles at cruse and about 8 gal an hr. That's just a little more. Helicopter rule!FlyerChief wrote:Almost twice the fuel consumption and less than half the range... no thanks!If shorter landing distance and slower speed,, along with a cruise of 100mph is the appeal of the SS, I bet you guys would love the Rotorway helicopter. 0 landing distance and still 100mph + cruse! Cost less than a SS too.
I also don't like travelling in anything where the wings go faster than the fuselage.
Dan
-
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:30 pm
Re: Survey question for Superstol buyers
Did I miss something?
Isn't 200m and 8gph almost exactly half the range and twice the burn of what the Highlander will do?
And besides, try loading some cargo into that heli. Just paying to get your chopper license will negate any money saving on buying that. Helicopters do rule when it comes to spot landing, but at what expense? Kinda everyone's whole point here.
It appears that to most of the SS guys so far, being able to spot land is very important and worth some trade offs I guess.
I know there's a bunch of SS guys on here. I figured you guys would have been more forthcoming.
Chris
Isn't 200m and 8gph almost exactly half the range and twice the burn of what the Highlander will do?
And besides, try loading some cargo into that heli. Just paying to get your chopper license will negate any money saving on buying that. Helicopters do rule when it comes to spot landing, but at what expense? Kinda everyone's whole point here.
It appears that to most of the SS guys so far, being able to spot land is very important and worth some trade offs I guess.
I know there's a bunch of SS guys on here. I figured you guys would have been more forthcoming.
Chris