Bulldog/Pup

[micromalc]

Hi All,
I'm thinking of doing some flying in either a Bulldog or Pup in the near future. So, anyone out there wish to "wax poetic" and tell me how great they are and conversely anyone want to tell me they are "a load of old tat".Keen to hear your views. Thanks

[richatom]

I have about 100 hours in Bulldog and 5 in Pup.

The Bulldog was built as a military training and counter-insurgency aircraft so it is very strongly built and very spacious inside so as to accommodate fully parachuted and helmeted pilots. Everything is big and solid compared to typical GA civilian aircraft. The downside of all that cockpit space and overbuild is weight and drag, which makes the Bulldog quite slow.

Bulldog is a very nice handling aircraft, very predictable stalls with loads of buffet, and easy basic aerobatics. There is an above average amount of disymetry in aerobatics partly as they had to add a very large ventral strake after testing, so the effect of propwash is quite pronounced, and partly because the metal constant speed prop is heavy. Spins and wingovers to the left are a doddle, but trickier to the right. The reason they had to add the large ventral strakes is because without them it would suddenly tighten the spin after a few turns. Even with the strakes, spins were limited to eight turns. I am not sure that any of the still flying Bulldogs are permitted to do aeros because of the wing spar nearing the end of its useful life.

It was an absolute brick on finals with full flaps - great fun to land as it just did not float about like most GA aircraft. It was more like landing a big plane.

The Pup was like an emasculated version - still quite a sweet handling plane but not the same solidity as the Bulldog.

[Bandit650]

I learned to fly on the RAF Bulldog in the UAS. They're fantastic. Very responsive, aerobatic, yet stable enough to provide a sensible training/PPL platform. Variable pitch props = better performance and economy, superb visibility from the cockpit, and of course it's stick control! I flew one again last year at Kemble and it immediately struck me how nimble and sporty the Bulldog felt compared to the usual spam can.

So, a fantastic little aeroplane in my book, a nice blend of all the best aspects you could wish for in a light aircraft.:ok:

[XL319]

Anyone know any shares in a Bulldog? This is one share I would be very interested in

[Blink182]

You could try on "that other forum "

several prolific posters on there fly the 'dawgs...........

['India-Mike]

For me the best of the family has to be the Pup 1. Might be gutless and effectively a single seater with any more than 10 gallons of fuel but the handling is absolutely wonderful. Best way to describe it is that it's a nosewheel Chipmunk....

Forgot to say that having been a Bulldog fan, it fell down my list once I'd had a go in the Grob Heron. It fell even further once I had a go in the Tutor. And that's notwithstanding the latter two's rolling performance relative to the Bulldog. But the Pup 1 hasn't fallen in my estimation at all.

[foxmoth]

Pup100 - Nice handling, only 2 seats but vastly underpowered for aeros
Pup150 - Still a little underpowered, lovely to fly and will take 3 adults (or 4 light ones if you only want to go once round the circuit!) or 2 adults and a couple of small kids (I am involved in a possible group at Popham or Goodwood - PM me if interested).
Bulldog - a lot more power but a heavier aircraft, gives it a more solid feel than the Pup.
Whichever you fly I am sure you will enjoy it much more than a Piper or Cessna, just allow a lot of height if it is the Pup100.:O

[micromalc]

thanks all...it looks like its going to be a pup150 because i can fly with my wife and daughter and still do my "gentlemens aerobatics".

[Oldpilot55]

You will not be disappointed, a sweet handling little plane.

[Them thar hills]

MM

Don't have too many pies, they're only stressed to +4.4 and -1.76
(classed as semi aerobatic , except no-one told the aircraft !)
Excellent crosswind machine, all 25 kts-worth.
Very strong, I know someone who flew into a cloud-covered hilltop in a Pup 100, and he lived to tell the tale.
tth

[Fake Sealion]

thanks all...it looks like its going to be a pup150 because i can fly with my wife and daughter and still do my "gentlemens aerobatics".


This may be possible in a Bulldog!

Seem to recall there have been some modified versions with a third seat fitted in the "baggage area" - not sure if they are cleared for aeros though!!

Any comments?

[XL319]

Blink182....which other forum?

['India-Mike]

The model 101's certainly have a third seat. Don't know if it's approved for use in the UK though. There are a few 101's on the UK register - perhaps their owners know.

There's a 120 at my club with the third seat, but it's an ex-factory demonstrator with all sorts of non-standard things about it I believe. I don't think the group are allowed to fill the third seat. It looks as though you'd have to be a double-jointed midget gymnast to use it anyway.

[foxmoth]

Pup 100 has 2 seats, 150 has 4 but weight limits mean you can only really use them all if 2 are small kids or you have light adults and reduce fuel, Bulldog has 2 or 3 seats depending on where they come from (ex RAF = 2, ex Swedish/SA normally 3). All the aircraft can be aerobatted 2 up (though obviously check W&B) but not with more in, though some Bulldogs may be close to their fatigue life for aeros. Some 150s have weights that go on the tail to help bring the C of G back for aeros.
As for my comments earlier about lack of power, it must be realised that no aerobatic machine can have too much power.:}

[Blink182]

XL319

PM sent !

[Contacttower]

Bulldog is an excellent plane...nice snappy push rod ailerons with a quick roll rate. It's also a really solid plane...a cut above the GA usual in terms of build quality. :ok:

Also max demo xw is 35kts!

[Lunchmaster]

I'd love a Bulldog share. Have been looking into a Pup 150 share at almost £6,500 and have flown both that and the 'Dog. Both lovely flying aircraft and the fact that they have a stick rather than yoke just feels great. Also flew some aeros in the 'Dog which were good fun.

There is a Bulldog currently for sale at a shade under £32k but the fatigue index is 99 - I understand it can only go up to 114 before a major modification on the main spar is needed. How many hours it takes to get there obviously depends on how much it's aerobatted. Someone on here or the other forum can probably provide more detail on that.

Drop me a pm if there's a possibility of a group forming. I've done most of my flying from Panshanger so anywhere around north east London, Herts, Essex etc would suit. I love those aircraft.

Lunchmaster

[18greens]

An Fi of 99 can mean loads of flying left. Someone will correct me but the 114 related to 5000hours with plenty aeros. If the areos are limited the FI hardly clocks up at all.

If you are thinking of flying Bulldogs or Pups in the East London area try the Skysport bunch at North Weald.

[englishal]

I think AndyR who owns a Bulldog said that he bought his with FI of about 88 which was good for about 1200 hrs of aerobating......I'm sure he'll be along soon.

I'd love a Bulldog...nice to fly, roomy for two, easy to fly etc.....But this damn FI. Most of them are approaching life and the mod is rumoured to cost from £15,000 to £30,000 which will then bring the FI to 200.....

I think I'd offer £20-£25K for a good example......;)

[XL319]

My UAS days were spent on the Bulldog....happy days :O The memories:D

[llanfairpg]

Can anyone advise if there are any spares/maintenance problems with the Pups?

Is there the same spar limit as on the Bulldog?

[Mandator]

Last year EASA orphaned the Pup but talk to the guys at DH Support who can give you the gen - see www.dhsupport.com or mail to [email protected]

['India-Mike]

Mandator's quite right about EASA and the Pup. What this means is that you can now only get an EASA Restricted Category C of A for the aeroplane, with all that means.

The two-page letter to owners from CAA last year explaining this change was a masterpiece of meaningless gobble-de-gook.

And the wing life issue with the Bulldog is not pertinent to the Pups. The Pup and Bulldog club are also a good source of info on the type.

[llanfairpg]

Thank you

What does restricted C of A mean, what are you restricted too or by, would that prevent instruction for the grant/renewal of a licence or rating for instance?

Why is it that everything originating from Europe is difficult to understand and seems to have no practical reason or am I missing something?

['India-Mike]

llanfairpg

Where to begin.....? As I said the CAA letter is truly awful. I've made my own judgement based on the following:

Pups 1-3 no longer Annexe 2. Now EASA. (Strange that Bulldogs, Chipmunks etc weren't 'taken' as well)

DHSL no longer in a position to offer airworthiness support (I suppose they have to support an 'exposition' to EASA as well as CAA instead of just the CAA as previously - costly)

No airworthiness support=>restricted use

I lost the ability to hire mine out when the GR24 provision on engine calendar time since overhaul hit in March 2006. I'm so glad I grounded it then rather than spend 12k on an overhaul for an aeroplane that months later was going to get stuffed with a useless euro C of A

As a shareholder in two Chipmunks I dread the same euro-cr@p happening to them. It'll come I'm sure. EASA's not about airworthiness. It's about politics.

Apologies to DHSL acquaintances if I've misrepresented them.

[llanfairpg]

Unbelievable

[Flyingplanner]

Fatigue life and the Bulldog is an imortant issue to all Bulldog owners. I am in a group that operates an ex Hong Kong Bulldog that has now been operating on the UK register for nearly 20 years. This aircraft has never had a fatigue meter installed (unlike the RAF ones) and has almost reached its 5,000 hour operational life.

However, we have detailed records of its flying activities and have an agreement with the CAA that we can pursue a mod that will allow an FI calculation to be agreed based on the flying data and then install a fatigue meter.
The good news is that the original 114 FI/5000 hours was based on a calculation of 43.8 hrs per 1FI. In RAF service this turned out to be about 78:1. DHSL calculate that in civilian use aircraft are indicating some 470 hrs per FI (seeBulldog Service letter BDG/1/2004.
Obviously the actual FI per hour will depend on the type of use but as long as the aircraft is used in a predominantly non aerobatic way there is plenty of life in the 'old dog' yet.

In maintenance terms our experience is that part availability is not a problem, the engine is a Lycoming, prop Hartzell, we have replaced the brake system to Cleveland. The value of a Bulldog will depend not just on its fatigue life, remaining engine life (an exchange engine is £20k) but also the avionics and instrumentation fit.

My view is that it is extremely unlikely that anyone will undertake the mod to extend the 114 FI in the near future

[Mandator]

India-Mike: If you are in contact with DHSL then give them a call and ask them about the actual effects of that Restricted CofA. I think you will find that it is restricted in name but not in what you can do with the aeroplane.