Cheetah Vs Bushbaby?

[Nick]

I'm interested in comparing the Cheetah XLS against the Bushbaby Explorer.

Both are local, 2 seater, kit aircraft. Both I understand can be registered as light planes or as microlites.

What are the significant differences, pros and cons of each, relative cost and so on?

Is it true that the Bushbaby is in essence a local Kitfox?

I'd probably be looking at putting in a Rotax 912S and registering as a light aircraft...any comments?

[Morph]

I have recently been though the same debate and chose the Bush Baby.

I have flown both with 912 engines and they have very similar performance. 85 to 95 mph cruise.

The Cheetah has a central joystick whereas the BB individual
BB has 100 liter wing tanks and the XLS 95 liter behind the seats

BB uses Ceconite/polyfiber type covering and the XLS Trylam

BB will take 500 hours to build and the XLS 150 hours

Kit cost excl engine and instruments BB R88K XLS R163K incl VAT

RTF costs 912S BB R340K XLS R362K incl VAT (prices are similar due to the faster build time of the Cheetah resulting in less labour costs)

The BB like the Kitfox are copies of the Avid FLyer. However since then the BB has undergone significant enhancements over the original design including width of cockpit.
The XLS is a copy of the french Skyranger although again some enhancements have taken place including cockpit width.

I chose the BB because
I wanted to build a plane and the kit price is far better than the Cheetah. But you need time to build it.
You get excellent support from both Monty at the factory and Boet Loubsher.
However it has taken me 6 months to build 400 hours and I am still not flying. The Cheetah would have been in the air long time ago, but not at the cost of R80K
Although the Trylam is extremely durable and functional I find it dull and ugly. I don't like the look of the aielerons, wings, fuse etc laced up like a boot. The flexibility of colours are limited. A nicely finished BB with a decent spray job surly looks so much better and the polyfibre has at least 25 years lifetime

[Big-D]

I don't even fly 3 axis (OK a bit) and I want a bushbaby after reading that

D

[Nick]

Excellent and helpful post Morph, much appreciated.

Any comments from you or anyone else about registering as a light plane vs microlite?

My thinking is that if it's only another 20 hrs training to get a PPL - 45 hrs for PPL vs 25 hrs min for MPL - rather go the PPL route. That also removes the weight issue with microlites, potential life insurance problems as a 'microlite pilot' and gives more flexibility to convert onto other types. Additionally it remove the issue of hoping for the new light sports category (part 62?) - which nobody seems to know when will be implemented.

Of course, when I grow-up I crave a Jab J430, but the BB seems a great place to start if you don't have R 550 + K to burn. It seems popular would seemingly make a good 2 up tourer with reasonable 'legs', a bush plane and hours builder. I'm also in Midrand and their base is less than an hour away by road.

What about fitting a Jab engine to the BB - for starters they don't sound quite so much like a weed eater!

[Mogas]

Further to Morph's
I have also flown both but have more time on the BB.
Cheetah has a lot more adverse yaw.
Cheetah has much heavier controls.
Cheetah is built a lot stronger but is also a lot heavier.
No surprises I prefer the BB:
BB controls a lot more harmonised though you still need to use rudder to maintain nice balanced turns, however this soon becomes instinctive.

[Morph]

What about fitting a Jab engine to the BB - for starters they don't sound quite so much like a weed eater!

Again a question I had. The problem with the Jab motors is they don't have a gearbox because they are low revving motors. This results in a limitation to the maximum prop length of 64inches

The Bush Baby requires a prop of 72 inches to clear the large frontal area.

As a result the Jab engine won't work. A Cheetah due to it's narrower sharper nose would be fine.

[Nick]

Interesting, looking at the build. BB charge about R 85 k for the build. If you do it yourself and it takes 600 hours, which seems realistic, that's R 142 per hour you are getting 'paid'. Not terrific by any means.

But then doing it, you get to do it!

This must be a huge life milestone and achievement that it's difficult to hang numbers on, a DIY task definitely a couple of notches up from putting up shelves and changing the oil, filter, plugs and brake pads on your own car. If I had a BB build under my belt, I'd feel really great.

[Mogas]

Nick, building your own BB is hugely satisfying. Mine took around 1200 logged hours to build But I must add that I did many things more than once and the help of this forum was not there in those days. I estimate the next one built to a similar standard will probably take me about 700-800 hours. It can be done to a high standard a lot quicker but I do enjoy tinkering and therefore am not in a hurry.

[Nick]

Thanks Mogas, there is no doubt that much of one's soul goes into this sort of project. I have tremendous respect for anyone that attempts such an undertaking.

That said...I'm going through mucho dilemmas here!

To share....Do I want to fly or get involved in a massive DIY project, which candidly, though it has huge appeal and much virtue, is tangential to my original objective... I don't have the answer yet.

Do I just wait and spend more on a 2 seater Jab, either build it myself - much more of a quick build than a BB ...or wait for a used Jab to come up. Or do I just be done with it and buy a built BB.

If I buy the 4 seater Jab J430/ 450, my... at this stage - ultimate objective; I have to buy factory built, so as to make it Com certifiable (kit planes are allegedly not), this is not because becoming a Com pilot is how I want to earn a living (I'm 46); but I'd like to have the option of getting a com licence 200 hrs or so down the track as a bit of side action, or/ and lending the plane to folks who have one. In fact, there is part of me that suspects that going the 'full Monty' Jab J430 option, may perversely, end up cheapest; if I can rent it out 20 hrs a month....I'm 5 mins from Grand Central, Midrand.

Just thought I'd share my ruminations 'out loud' for folks to add ...change...delete...or generally gob-off at!

[Boet]

Nick, you have a PM.

[Nick]

Boet wrote:

Nick, you have a PM.

I can't 'see' it. Can you resend to nickg @ good-solutions.com (remove spaces) please!

[Nick]

Morph wrote:

Again a question I had. The problem withthe Jab motors is they don't have a gearbox because they are low revving motors. This results in a limitation to the maximum prop length of 64inches

In my web 'travels' I notice that on the Jab Aus website, they list - under installation Packages - the Kitfox with the 3300 Jab engine (click here and select from the menu on the left - Installation Packages). Is the Kitfox that much different to the Bushbaby, or has one of us missed something (mindful that i know squat, it's probably me)?

I'm interested in the Jab engine because it sounds much better than the Rotax, has another 20 horses over the 912S and is direct drive, so simpler.

[Mogas]

IMHO the Jab engines, particularly the newer ones are an engineering marvel. Beautifully made.
However the fact remains that peak horsepower and torque are developed high in the RPM range in all of these types of engine, including Rotax. To make that power available in a direct drive engine a smaller diameter prop has to be used else the tips will go through the speed of sound and the prop becomes inefficient.
Rotax and many others have overcome this by fitting reduction drives, thus making their engines more versatile when it comes to prop choice.
Jabiru designed their engines for use in their airframes which are relatively low drag and fast. This type of airframe is more suited to higher revving smaller diameter props. Draggy slower airframes like the Kitfox require lower revving bigger props.
120hp in a Kitfox airframe is a huge power to weight ratio, there are many Kitfoxes flying on 50hp. So you will probably find that full use of the 120hp and all available torque is not used as the engine in this installation anyway.
Then there are the cooling issues: understand that Jab heads (hottest part) are 100% air cooled. Thats fine if you zoom round the sky ALL the time and you have your ducting perfect. Rotax have the coolest, lightest, cutest little head water jackets I ever saw!
I also went through all of this when researching a while ago and took a while to understand why all Kitfoxes/BBs etc. don't simply fit Jabs.

[Morph]

In my web 'travels' I notice that on the Jab Aus website, they list - under installation Packages - the Kitfox with the 3300 Jab engine.......Is the Kitfox that much different to the Bushbaby,

They are trying to sell engines, so they will mention engine mounts for any aircraft. The kitfox is similar in design to the Bush Baby and will also have the same problems with the small prop. The plane will fly but it won't be the most efficient installation.

I too am a Jabiru engine fan, they have come a long way and are now very reliable good aerie engines and finally they can run on Mogas as well. They are also more cost effective than the Rotax 912's. But unfortunately it was not to be.

[Barnstormer]

Gentleman

Hope somebody can help with this (these) question(s).

The BB is around 80-90k with no instruments, paint, engine and what else? Build time is estimated at 600 hours, but how long does it really take to build the plane?

The Cheetah is around 160k no engine, no paint needed and apparently does include instruments. This I have seen for myself on an invoice, where some extras were included, but I cannot remember the details. What is the build time really like? 250 hours or more?

If the BB takes more like 800 - 1000 hours to build and the Cheetah 400, that makes a huge difference. Maybe some guys who have completed their aircraft in the last 6 months can help us on this?

Now, also consider the following: You can see into the Cheetah wings and fuselage by simply undoing a zipper (Yip, most men know how to do that). This, to me, is an advantage because it is part of the pre-flight and I am sure that every single pipe is perfect, every nut is in place, every pulley is intact, every cable is as it is meant to be.

When flying the Raven where this is not possible, I'm always left wondering whether everything is really ok, because I have never seen how everything looks under the skin.

Have you ever looked at a secondhand aircraft, was interested, but wondered: How is the build quality and is everything still in place?

Also consider this: Both the BB and the Cheetah seem to have gone through improvements in the past years. Therefore I have spoken to both Cheetah and BB pilots who have complained about some characteristics of the planes and do not know that these have changed and improved on newer models.

I find choosing between the two aircraft very hard. Personally, I feel that when comparing the two the one is a soft skin naartjie and the other a hardskin naartjie. With the one having seed inside and the other not, only I don't know which one has seed and neither do I know if I want seed, or have a use for it.

The one has a welded tube frame (BB) and the other an aluminium frame which is bolted together (Cheetah). Both frames has their advantages, although I like the idea of knowing the bolt is properly fastened instead of hoping the welder was not thinking of his chick when welding. Also, should you have an incident, it is easier to unbolt and replace the aluminium piping.

Lastly I quite like the idea of pulling the sail of and simply replacing it instead of the other diy method if glueing it on, then doing some ironing, then putting the grey stuff on and lastly getting somebody to spray it. (Is that all?)

But hey, you know what? Some guys like taking on medium to long term projects and others prefer short term ones. Others prefer to pay more cash upfront and get on with it, while their buddies prefer to make an investment over time.

I'm somebody who would go for the shorter term project without paying too much for it. Therefore I would need to compare naartjie with naartjie. The only way to do this would be to get both suppliers to put their offerings on paper.

Elkgeval...

Hope I didn't step on any toes... hurt any animals... upset any retired assasins...

Currently, If I am to be convinced... Give it to me for free :D :D