SF260

J

jeremyk13

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jan 15, 2016
Messages
52
Display Name
Display name:
jeremyk13
Does anyone have experience in the SF260? I've searched the forum and have seen a few posts suggesting it's a good plane, but nothing too detailed as far as personal experience.

I'm looking at the plane for both solo/one-passenger xc's and aerobatics. I'm fairly low time at 200 hours, but have primarily been flying solo xc's for work. I have 4 hours of aerobatics and obviously would be seeking an instructor for the SF260 (which I'm pretty sure the insurance would require anyways).

Any PIREPs? Anything specific to look for in a pre-buy? Any nuances to flying the plane that would be good to know upfront?
 
Good flying a/c, but can bite you if you get behind it. Until you have a few hours in one, it will feel like it's a very twitchy airplane. It's not, the control force requirements are very low. You can loop and roll it with little more than small wrist movements. Fun to loop, roll and do hammerheads in. I've got nearly as much time upside sown in them as right side up....:p

I haven't played with one in about 20 years now. I used to work on them at Fox51 Ltd, when we were the SIAI rep for the civilian world. Mil-Spec airplane, so everything is MS/AN, US available, other than air frame specific parts. I don't know who the current rep is offhand, but I would start with the guys at Air Combat USA.
 
Why it though? Unless there's some sentimental reason behind it, there's nothing spectacular about the SF260 in terms of aerobatic capabilities. It's just a bigger acro airplane, a la TB-30 Epsilon, T-34/F33C, PA-28R-300 Pillán, Yak-52 et al ad nauseam. Aka Aerobatic capability that can be easily be replicated in other airplanes with XC usable range and seating comfort at a lower acquisition cost. To be fair, all the examples I've cited in this paragraph are equally hen's teeth. Personally, I would probably go with an RV-6/7/8/14, Harmon Rocket or the like. Cheaper and more inventory.

Good luck.
 
Thanks for the feedback so far. Based on the Davisson write up, it looks like I might need to do some additional research on the nose gear.

As for the "why", it pretty much comes down to wanting a plane that can handle the typical xc mission (range, speed, IFR, prefer higher wing loading) along with the ability to get an inverted perspective in the local area. The RV's would probably fit the profile as well, but I'm (irrationally?) not wanting to purchase an amateur-built plane.
 
jeremyk13 said:
Thanks for the feedback so far. Based on the Davisson write up, it looks like I might need to do some additional research on the nose gear.

As for the "why", it pretty much comes down to wanting a plane that can handle the typical xc mission (range, speed, IFR, prefer higher wing loading) along with the ability to get an inverted perspective in the local area. The RV's would probably fit the profile as well, but I'm (irrationally?) not wanting to purchase an amateur-built plane.
Click to expand...

It's all good, it's a hobby after all. No need to justify it as long as you can afford it. Don't forget to post pictures if and when you find one of these rare finds!
 
Jeremy: There have been quite a few changes in the gear system since that airplane was built. There were less than about 30 of the A's built. I don't remember having any issues with the B, C, D, E and W's that I worked on. Rig it per the book and do the maintenance and it never gave us any issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top