Sling high wing

Salty

Salty

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
13,433
Location
FL
Display Name
Display name:
Salty
I think it is going to sell like hotcakes. Rv-15 not withstanding, a 172 like 4 seat experimental with a rotax engine that can burn mo gas.

367568AF-40A2-4E40-9B17-33EA6036202D.jpeg
 
Impressive machines but the high wing looks odd to me, like a photoshop job. The low wing looks more natural.
 
I think it looks lovely without a strut, but I am curious how you're meant to fuel the damn thing if you haven't bought a little stepladder with you.
 
We (RV-10 + RV-7A) stopped for fuel on our way back from OSH and bumped into a guy in a low-wing Sling that was heading to an airport neighboring ours. He took off two planes ahead of us. I was in the -10 and had to pull power back a bit to keep from running away from the -7A. We caught up to and passed him in the climb up to 11,500. I kept watching him on ADSB and once we all got leveled off, he stayed pretty much in-step with the RV-7A speeds we were flying (~160 KTAS). I was impressed. No idea if he was running wide open or if he was economy cruise or whatever, but we didn't run off and leave him. In fact, I think he took a different route around some weather we all had to get around and ended up cutting the corner and beating us home by a few minutes.
 
Old knees sure do like High Wings.

That isn't a plane, it's functional art. Gorgeous.
 
What i find amazing is, JP’s tail dragger and Linda’s conventional were built in SA, had the phase one flown off and departed to OSH. The third Sling HW, is the first production demo and has some time on it. I was so impressed by the 2009 around the world flight of the Sling 2, that Mike Blyth (designer) and James Pitman made, that when it came time to decide between the RV-12 and the Sling2, I took a leap of faith and went Sling. I think I made a good choice. Both A/c are excellent IMO, can’t really go wrong with either.
 
I really wanted to see these but they were not there when I was there earlier in the week. Can anyone give your impressions of sitting inside them, with two adults is the shoulder room good? or does it feel narrow like a Mooney ?

I've read that the Sling TSi had a GC problem (especially with the parachute, it made it too far rearward) that the only way to utilize the Useful load was to put all the weight up front...
I heard they _might_ have fixed the GC balance with the High Wing, but I cannot find any info on this. I can only find the marketing information, There's not enough completed planes to really get an idea of Useful load and CG?

Anybody got any insight or heard any info from the Sling folks there ? (on the W&B "issues") ?
 
C-1 PILOT said:
What Bugs?
Click to expand...
Some wing changes (slats on the outer portion of the wing), better composites, and a better cowling like JP has on his plane. JP said he estimates around 1300lb useful load and that he saw 145ktas. He’s changing to a different prop, too.
 
It’ll outfly a 172. I’ll wait until used ones are available. I’ll let someone else have the joy of long hours in the shop.
 
CaptainXap said:
I think it looks lovely without a strut, but I am curious how you're meant to fuel the damn thing if you haven't bought a little stepladder with you.
Click to expand...
The same way every 182 owner fuels their high wing aircraft: with a ladder. I've never seen an aircraft fueling station without a folding ladder. That said, most 182 owners carry a one or two step ladder with them for checking fuel.

Even when I flew 172s, I never tried to fuel them while standing on the step and strut...a little too precarious.
 
Brad Z said:
Even when I flew 172s, I never tried to fuel them while standing on the step and strut...a little too precarious.
Click to expand...
I have, but I climbed up first and then had a helper pass me the pump handle.

The 162 has the strut behind the door, so there's no steps. I've checked fuel by opening the door, and standing on the sill. The Sling High Wing looks like the sill might be far enough in front of the wing to do the same, if you can get the door open wide enough.
 
I’ve been searching online for any W&B info on the High wing kits, or better yet how the first 3 constructed aircraft weighed. worried about the W&B CG, is all that load really usable or have an Aft CG problem like the TSi ???
 
Really like what the Sling and Vans guys are doing, the whole EA world is really impressive. Velocity included with their six-seater
 
The Slings are nice but too small for me as is the new RV-15. The new CompAir 6.2 is what’s got my interest. We’re gonna swing by their office on our way to the beach for Labor Day. We actually checked out their operation 20years ago when they were at Merritt Island as I was seriously interested in the CompAir 6 before Van’s came out with the RV-10. We somehow missed them this year at both Sun’n Fun and Oshkosh but now they’re on my radar.
 
tsts4 said:
The new CompAir 6.2 is what’s got my interest. We’re gonna swing by their office on our way to the beach for Labor Day.
Click to expand...

Hadn't paid any attention to Compair in a long time. Their prior aircraft were as ugly as a pair of bowling shoes. But the 6.2 looks like a high wing Malibu - not bad.
 
tsts4 said:
The Slings are nice but too small for me as is the new RV-15. The new CompAir 6.2 is what’s got my interest. We’re gonna swing by their office on our way to the beach for Labor Day. We actually checked out their operation 20years ago when they were at Merritt Island as I was seriously interested in the CompAir 6 before Van’s came out with the RV-10. We somehow missed them this year at both Sun’n Fun and Oshkosh but now they’re on my radar.
Click to expand...
CompAir is still a thing?? They always interested me but never seemed to have staying power. I like the bearhawk 5 too.
 
Grum.Man said:
CompAir is still a thing?? They always interested me but never seemed to have staying power. I like the bearhawk 5 too.
Click to expand...

I was very interested in the Bearhawk 5 and did a lot of research on it, but I'm not interested in a taildragger and access to the main passenger seats is a bit of a kabuki dance. Chances are I'll end up staying with my 10 since it's a good, solid plane and it's paid for. The new CompAir is intriguing and checks all the boxes I'm looking for (basically a new C-206) but they are estimating $300K to $400K for a finished plane and of course the prototype hasn't even flown yet. I'll continue to watch them and see where they go.
 
Murphy seems to be developing a tricycle gear Moose. I dream about the 6-seaters because I know I could fill the seats often... But I'm still making ultralight money. LOL
That Compair 6.2 looks cool
 
farangutan said:
Murphy seems to be developing a tricycle gear Moose. I dream about the 6-seaters because I know I could fill the seats often... But I'm still making ultralight money. LOL
That Compair 6.2 looks cool
Click to expand...

We ended up sitting right next to a Murphy Moose one afternoon watching the airshow. I didn't even know what it was at the time, but it looked cool. Taildragger... High wing... Radial engine.. All the right components. Then I did some research on it - 150mph with 350hp engine on an airfame that small!? Yikes! I would assume it can fly out of anywhere, but man... It's going to cost an arm and a leg to do the kind of cross-country'ing that I do.
 
CJones said:
We ended up sitting right next to a Murphy Moose one afternoon watching the airshow. I didn't even know what it was at the time, but it looked cool. Taildragger... High wing... Radial engine.. All the right components. Then I did some research on it - 150mph with 350hp engine on an airfame that small!? Yikes! I would assume it can fly out of anywhere, but man... It's going to cost an arm and a leg to do the kind of cross-country'ing that I do.
Click to expand...

I looked at the Moose and the SR2500 Super Rebel which is basically the IO-540 version of the Moose. Conversed with a few builders and they are nice planes but not near as easy to build as RV's --easily 3000+ hrs according to the guys I talked to whom I believe to be honest brokers. This was all a couple of years ago now and at the time the company owner was trying to sell leaving the futute viabilty of the company somewhat in questions. Looking at their website today, it would appear he found a buyer and some Chinese company now owns them. Can't say whether that's good or bad as far as company longevity--only time will tell I suppose.
 
There's the Murphy Radical. It's a step up from the Elite, which met my mission requirements a lot better. It's somewhere between the Elite and the Moose/Super Rebel.
 
Too old to start a build project,also too cheap.I’ll stay in the used market for now .
 
ChopAndDrop said:
I've read that the Sling TSi had a GC problem (especially with the parachute, it made it too far rearward) that the only way to utilize the Useful load was to put all the weight up front...
I heard they _might_ have fixed the GC balance with the High Wing, but I cannot find any info on this. I can only find the marketing information, There's not enough completed planes to really get an idea of Useful load and CG?

Anybody got any insight or heard any info from the Sling folks there ? (on the W&B "issues") ?
Click to expand...

interesting. Appears true.

https://slingtsi.org/custom-battery-box-to-alleviate-c-g-problems
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top