As we have three 701s and three Savannahs at our airfield, we’re in a good position to compare the two aircraft. We fly them really intensively, especially practicing STOL Ops and out-field landings, as well as considerable cross-country cruising in company, so we can compare performance directly. We assembled two Savannahs in my workshop, and all three 701s have had extensive rebuilds here (one of them was purchased as an insurance write-off, and another had suffered extensive damage before we bought it), so we know their construction very well – a whole lot of rivet stems been on this floor. The Savannah kit is very well detailed, and all the CNC made parts fit amazingly well.

• Icp Savannah Construction Manuale
• Savannah Construction Houston Tx
• Savannah Construction And Preservation

Only a few extrusions that have been drilled by hand are annoyingly half a hole off. The instructions are pathetic, and it’s not just language translation, they’re poorly compiled. Lots of rivets need to be drilled out later because the instructions didn’t warn to leave them open until fitted up to something else later.

There’s a great opportunity here for someone to make a good DVD showing the process in better detail. Despite all that, a first time builder here logged 400hrs to completion, ready to fly – but he’s a speedy worker in whatever he does. Those glide figures are all at power off prop stopped between 3000 and 2000 ft QNH, 22-25ºC., with approx. 380kg (840lb) weight. Not many flyers or manufacturers quote glide figures with prop stopped, but we’ve found that it’s the only way to get dependable comparisons – variations in idle speed make too much difference for comparisons.

(I.C.P.’s listing in my assembly manual of a G/R of 12:1 for the Savannah with slats would be possible only with a lot of help from the prop!) But if the engine does stop some day and you have to do a dead-stick landing, it will be the real flying characteristics that you will have to deal with. The end result of all these figures is that the Savannah lands much slower and more gently, with more control at idle power, just what you need for STOL Ops. The actual G/R (ie- lift/drag ratio) at landing speed will determine how gentle is that critical transition from flare to touch-down. The increased lift of the longer wing, and lack of drag from slats, make that transition far more gentle and forgiving in the Savannah. Once in ground effect, the Savannah actually tends to float on and on – the 701 never did that. I haven’t measured landing distances, but do have a very good real life comparison. At our home airfield, the runway has a taxiway entrance 50 metres from the threshold.

Icp Savannah Construction Manuale

The runway is quite downhill at this point, and the surface is grass and loose dirt, so braking traction is poor. I’ve always been able to land my Savannah in this area and turn off to the taxiway. In his original 701, Hans tried and tried to be able to do that but just couldn’t, much to his annoyance. Now that he’s extended his wings he can do it as well, and is very satisfied! The difference in horizontal stabilizers is really interesting. That unique horizontal stabilizer with its inverted airfoil on the 701 looks great in theory, and works well enough with power on, but can’t flare to a high AoA at idle power. This is a problem that has plagued 701 flyers for a long time.

There is a fix for this lack of elevator authority on the 701 – see page. With its symmetrical horizontal stab and the larger elevator, the Savannah can pull a high AoA even in a power-off situation.

That all-flying rudder on the 701 is very powerful at all speeds – great for magnificent slips and balancing the wing at ‘mush’ speed. With all that dihedral, that rudder is needed in all turns. The Savannah pretty much loses all rudder effect at 30 kts idle power – fortunately the ailerons are effective at any speed and bring very little adverse drag. But there are times that I would like to have that all-flying rudder on my Savannah for those slow manoeuvres and strong x-winds.

Savannah Construction Houston Tx

At cruise the lateral stability of the 701 is quite adequate, but in the Savannah it’s excellent – I regularly cruise for many hours at a time without touching the stick – just a bit of rudder and the electric trim. Much is made of the engineering superiority of the 701, and casting doubts on the engineering of the Savannah. I’m not qualified to assess that aspect technically, but they both seem to me to be very robust aircraft.

Savannah Construction And Preservation

Lots of Savannahs flying for 1000s of hours already, and in some pretty rough conditions, with no problems. That failure with a Savannah in Norway is very much over-blown. Even a 701 tied down such that it had those very high loads jerking sideways on the strut fittings could have caused flexing, and then to have forcefully straightened such a high-stressed aluminum fitting after it had been bent is asking for failure. But with the longer wing on the 701, and VGs instead of slats, they are pretty much equal. 'Jeep' Analagy I reckon that a good analagy with vehicles, is that the 701 is like an original Willys WW2 Jeep, while the Savannah is a more recent Suzuki 4wd.

The Jeep was the inspiration, but Suzuki has considerably improved it. I've had a fair bit of experience with both vehicles, and find that the Suzuki 4wd is better off-road, and very much better on the road than the Willys. Just as the Savannah is a bit better at STOL and very much better at cruise.