Pulsar XP Comments please

G-SQUO · Post by **G-SQUO** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:02 pm

Hi and Happy New Year to you all!
I have my eye on a Pulsar XP (nosewheel variant) and would like to hear of all the good and bad points regarding this aircraft before I decide to make a viewing.
How do they perform on grass, useful load, known mechanical or airframe weaknesses etc...
Your comments are very valuable
Thanks in anticipation
Paul

John Price · Post by **John Price** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:46 pm

Send a PM to Captain Pulsar he's the chap for an unbiased view.

John.

Captain Pulsar · Post by **Captain Pulsar** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:02 am

Absolutely old boy, completely unbiased, that's me.
G-SQUO
I've operated my 60hp Pulsar from 400 metres of grass for over 300 landings, often at max AUW, nothings fallen off yet. The nosewheel is not suitable for totally unprepared surfaces, but I've not had any problems at all, and we do have a few bumps and our fair share of mud at Deanland.

Good bits:
Fantastic aeroplane, fast, cheap to run, snappy looks, comfy, 40+mpg at 100kts. Range with full tanks, 450 miles +. De riggable in 10 minutes, (15-20 minutes if you have wing tanks which an XP will have). Its still the best handling aircraft I've flown.

Bad bits:
If you are over 6 feet tall make sure you fit in it with the canopy closed, seat heights vary according to how it was built.
Engine issues, only those that are common to Rotax powerplants. On the early XP's have a bed mount engine, later ones are firewall mount.
Check the wing tanks thoroughly for any leaking. Escaped fuel can damage wing ribs.
If you are planning to import one from the US it will need a few mods (minor jobs really) to get a UK permit.
I'm not aware of any airframe issues. Only the Pulsar mk1 and mk3 are currently approved. The mk2 and SP100 are not because no one's imported one into the UK yet.

Overall, highly recommended, I've been flying mine for 10 years and plan to continue for many more.
Get an hour in with someone else before going solo, its actually very easy to fly, but is a little different from most types.

PM me if you want to know more.

Rod1 · Post by **Rod1** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:10 am

I have had a look at the Captains Pulsar and it is a very nice aircraft.

Rod1

Captain Pulsar · Post by **Captain Pulsar** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:02 pm

Cheers Rod1,
Thats another cup of tea I owe you. Weather permitting we should have more BB fly outs this year. Plastic planes are best!

Post by **John Dean** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:13 pm

Mmmm....

Nice as your Pulsar is Captain (and it is very nice), everyone knows "Bent Wings are Best."

Rod1 · Post by **Rod1** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:41 pm

“Bent Wings are Best."

That’s what I have been doing wrong! I always thought you were supposed to avoid bending the wings.

Rod1

jamie_duff · Post by **jamie_duff** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:42 pm

Rod1 wrote:“Bent Wings are Best."

That’s what I have been doing wrong! I always thought you were supposed to avoid bending the wings.

Rod1

Unless you're on an aircraft carrier of course

WBerry · Post by **WBerry** » Sat May 24, 2008 8:38 pm

Hi All,
I'm looking at acquiring an a/c and the Aero Designs Pulsar looks almost too good to be true. Great looks, superb performance, and a reasonable price.

Whats the catch?

I beleive there's no UK distributor, is it OK to get parts for, etc.

Captain Pulsar · Post by **Captain Pulsar** » Sun May 25, 2008 11:37 am

There's no catch, it really is a fantastic aircraft.
Airframe parts are generally available from the current US factory. All engine parts of course being Rotax are available in the UK no problem.

WBerry, you have a PM.

J.C. · Post by **J.C.** » Tue May 27, 2008 8:21 pm

If plastic wings are best,or wooden ones,why oh why are there so many of those awfull slabs of aluminium flying around attached to RV fusalages??????

Captain Pulsar · Post by **Captain Pulsar** » Wed May 28, 2008 9:37 am

I guess its because metal is cheap to fabricate. Composite is a newer technology as well. Its changing though, even Cessna are doing the composite thing now.

Mostly though, composite aircraft can only be flown by good looking, erudite folk who are all top class pilots, whereas the metal aeroplanes are flown by ugly people who are rubbish pilots.

Next time you go to a flyin, you'll see all the handsome folk flying wood or composite. No seriously, its true!

mikehallam · Post by **mikehallam** » Wed May 28, 2008 10:55 am

So where in your beauty contest does that put us Ali tube, pop rivets and Dacron wearers ?

Dave Hall · Post by **Dave Hall** » Wed May 28, 2008 1:00 pm

On a practical point, if your climate can go from -40 to +110F, with humidity variations to match, I guess it is some help not to have to control temp and humidity in the garage for the glues and resins used for wood and composite builds.

For commercial manufacture, the sums add up differently.

Bill McCarthy · Post by **Bill McCarthy** » Wed May 28, 2008 4:15 pm

Mike,
It means that you can only go to the ugly bugs ball !!