Dan’s RV is an experimental :)
Dan’s RV has an IO (?) 360 (320?) with 180 (160hp)?
It’s a great plane, very impressive, however not CS23 (and probably not Super 95 carfuel approved).
This thread obviously needs the context what the usecase for the airplane is (basic training, advanced training and touring). Not many planes available new fulfill this stretch!
In my opinion it’s incredible how slow the BR23 / 915iS actually is. Our WT9 NG with the same engine is about 25% to 30% faster at the same power settings / fuel flow. If you consider what this means in terms of drag, it’s almost unbelievable. VL3s are even a bit faster, but lack good slow flight abilities (which means no glider towing and no access to real short fields).
I have not flown the B23 but I have tried the UL version which I think is very similar in the cabin. I am very tall and I was suprised by the good comfort in the pilot seat. I have not experienced that in any similar aircraft. I think we must be careful to not compare apples with pears. This is a CS23 aircraft which can be used for flight training in an ATO or DTO. It is (soon?) also IFR capable which not many similar two seaters are. It should be compared to maybe the Tecnam P-Mentor instead of RVs, WT9s and VL3s.
It is expensive like all new airplanes. It can also carry a heavier load than most other aircraft in its class, but it also has a higher MTOW. I like it and would seriously consider it if my aeroclub could afford it.
Thomas_R wrote:
VL3s are even a bit faster, but lack good slow flight abilities
is that a fact or urban legend?
It’s been 15 years since I last flew the VL3, memories are fading away…
having said that, I don’t remember any nasty low speed behaviour
In my opinion it’s incredible how slow the BR23 / 915iS actually is. Our WT9 NG with the same engine is about 25% to 30% faster
How does the WT9 compare comfort wise?
Snoopy wrote:
How does the WT9 compare comfort wise?
If you reach your destination in half the time, the lack of comfort doesn’t matter 
Seriously – the Europa has a rather narrow cabin, which I fit into quite nicely with 1,83 m but certainly without the feeling of a specious cabin (especially with 2 POB), which for me is okay. OTOH I really enjoy the performance. But that’s just me and as you said, the Europa is no CS23 IFR-trainer and never will be. I was just pointing out, that the B 23 performance isn’t really impressive given power/fuel flow. For each his own – it’s all about mission profile…
I am very tall and I was suprised by the good comfort in the pilot seat. I have not experienced that in any similar aircraft. I think we must be careful to not compare apples with pears. This is a CS23 aircraft which can be used for flight training in an ATO or DTO. It is (soon?) also IFR capable which not many similar two seaters are. It should be compared to maybe the Tecnam P-Mentor instead of RVs, WT9s and VL3s.
Exactly what I mean!
aart wrote:
@Thomas_R that is indeed a big difference. Is yours the 600kg MTOM version and fixed gear, just to make sure we somewhat compare apples and oranges?
Of course not. Why would someone fly with a plane that has an aerodynamic anchor attached to it which produces drag also the time ;-).
It’s a WT9 600 RG NG. Good point though! Does anybody have the figures for the Bristell Turbo RG, so that we can compare properly?
Why would someone fly with a plane that has an aerodynamic anchor attached to it which produces drag also the time ;-).
Because of weight and complexity. I personally like retractable gear because it reminds me of airliners however for slow planes the benefits are questionable.
