LSA flying in Germany

[rcsa]

I may be relocating from Africa to Germany, near Cologne/Koln in the coming months - or at least spending a lot time there. I've been trying to find out about the GA scene there, and specifically LSA flying, but there seems to be a black hole on the internet on this topic.

I have a lapsed Zimbabwe PPL with a couple of hundred hours, though I have flown with mates quite often since I last did a flight test. Last month I took a 172 out with an instructor and he reckoned it would take no more than 10 hours to get back to scratch.

Do any Prunes fly LSA in Germany? What's the deal there? Flying clubs? LSA ownership or syndicate ownership?

All advice welcome.

Best regards, Rob

[Genghis the Engineer]

The LSA category does exist in Europe, but is not much used.

In Germany look up "Ultralights". The majority of aircraft classed as Ultralights in Germany are what you'd recognise as LSA, and there's a wide variety of excellent aircraft and a well managed national structure for flying them.

G

[Jan Olieslagers]

As far as I know, LSA is not a big success in Germany - no more than in the rest of Europe. You could perhaps try asking at ulforum.de, most messages are in German there but you will get some kind of reply.

As far as I know, syndicates are mostly a UK phenomenon, on the Continent I see only few. And as LSA's are rather rare here, few clubs operate one. Here in BE some clubs own typical LSA craft, but have them registered as "aircraft" i.e. to be flown with a PPL.

On the other hand, 3-axis ultralights are getting more and more sophisticated, especially in Germany. Depending on the kind of flying you intend to do, an ultralight might be your choice: there are lots of clubs, around Köln, and even co-ownership might be found.


Good luck!

[EDMJ]

LSA's are indeed quite rare in Germany, as they are quite expensive. Flying them requires a full PPL or LAPL(A).

You first need to ascertain to which extent your lapsed Zimbabwean PPL can count towards any form of license in Germany. The Germany CAA, the Luftfahrtbundesamt, would be your port of call in this respect, I suspect.

Flying a German Ultralight requires a different license, the so-called SPL (Sport Pilot's Licence). If you have a valid - German! - PPL or LAPL(A) you can acquire one with conversion training. It's issued by any of two associations; DULV or DAeC. While German Ultralights are sold in many other countries as LSA, they do differ in one important aspect, and that's the MTOW which is limited to 472.5 kg.

Syndicates are fairly rare in Germany, flying clubs are quite widespread though.

[The Ancient Geek]

First get your Zimbabwe licence revalidated, A valid and current foreign licence and a minimum of 100 hours buys you an EASA PPL.
Without a valid licence your lapsed licence experience is worthless to EASA and you basically have to start again.

[rcsa]

Excellent advice, all - thank you very much. So 1) get my Zim PPL revalidated, 2) find a club near Koln,3) convert to an EASA PPL, 4) convert to a SPL, 5) go flying.

Vielen Dank. Bis gleich.

[lederhosen]

I can confirm that getting a sport pilot licence is pretty straightforward on the basis of another licence. I can recommend the Dülv who are very friendly and are like a club for promoting ultra light flying. You do need to take a test on pyrotechnics (simple) as all ultralights have a safety chute to benefit from higher max take off weight. Many aeroclubs have an ultralight section as it is much cheaper than ppl flying. The only real limitation is if you are a big chap you are a bit limited who you can take with you.

[rcsa]

Hmm. Yes well I am a big chap. 1.92 and 94Kg. But I have a perfectly petite partner, so (once I'm qualified) our combined weight should leave enough for a toothbrush and a bit of fuel...

The problem will be finding a pocket-sized instructor to fly with while I'm getting licensed, I guess.

[Genghis the Engineer]

The highest performance German ultralights allow 77kg each and half an hour's fuel.

G

[lederhosen]

One of the salesmen at Friedrichshafen Aero a couple of years ago was muttering something about being able to use average weights (as we do of course in airline flying). I was a bit sceptical, but given that 475 kg is a paper number which has nothing to do with the capability of the aircraft eg Pipistrel under different jurisdictions has much higher max take off weights, I wonder if anyone else has given this one any thought? The autogyro world recently saw a big jump in mtow at least in Germany, which made a lot of sense, but seemed a bit unfair on fixed wing ultralights.

[rcsa]

"The highest performance German ultralights allow 77kg each and half an hour's fuel".

Genghis - sorry. I'm being a bit of a dumkopf. Could you explain that, please?

154kg + 6kg (?) = 160kg. MTOW is 450kg + the ballistic 'chute. Surely there are two seat ultralight aircraft out there that weigh less than 290kg empty?

Thanks. R

[bookmark]

Surely there are two seat ultralight aircraft out there that weigh less than 290kg empty?

Thanks. R

not so sure, afaik;

my savannah weights 284 kg and, so to speak, it's not the heaviest around;
a couple of ctsw next to me are more than 300kg (and knowing the owners and their "optionals" lists, I'm not sure what "more than 300" exactly means)

ciao
marco

[Genghis the Engineer]

This is a German fudge unfortunately as they keep chasing higher performance aeroplanes and apparently all think that they weigh the same as Hanna Reich in her prime.

Light aircraft regulations (and microlight regulations here in Britain) require that an aircraft can't exceed MTOW with at least 86kg per seat and fuel for one hour at max continuous power.

Mostly the Germans do aviation quite well - but in this specific aspect they are living in a strange fantasy world all of their own.

Yes, lighter aircraft with better payloads do exist - just not at the high performance end.

It's not necessary either. Microlights in the same class in the UK - CTs and EV97s for example typically come in around 265kg without a chute and around 272kg with one.

G

[lederhosen]

Nearly 1500 C42 Ikarus have been built in this category and with an empty weight of 279 kg and two 86 kg guys on board it has fuel for a couple of hours. It is not the prettiest of aircraft but it gets the job done. Genghis is right there are a lot of high performance machines which are effectively single seaters. I am not sure I am comfortable with some blanket decision that ultralights have to carry two people or should only be flown short distances. The idea is to make things simple, safe and unbureaucratic, sadly not easy in aviation. If the rules stop you adding equipment that makes you safer that does not make sense.

[UltraleichtFlieger]

I agree with Lederhosen. If you already have an license, like you have, your good to go!
Any ICAO-license will allow you to convert straight to a German UL-license. In Germany it is called SPL-F (Sportpiloten Lizenz -beiblatt F)
I have done the conversion with my FAA-PPL and it took me 1 day at the flight school. All I had to do was getting a medical and 3written exams
(Human Performance, Air Law and Pyrotechnic . Since a german reg Ultraleicht is equipped with a ballistic recovery system (parachute) you also have to do Pyrotechnics because of the solid-fuel rocket system .

US-PPL, Umschreibung US-PPL in UL-Lizenz (SPL) (http://us-ppl.de/Umschreibung-US-PPL-in-UL-Lizenz-SPL/)

Happy landings!

[Genghis the Engineer]

If the rules stop you adding equipment that makes you safer that does not make sense.

Except that pilots do have a long track record of claiming that everything they ever wanted to fit, up to and including the kitchen sink, is making them safer. All the while reducing structural margins and pushing pilot workload up.

There's virtually no history of any of these devices - apart from ballistic parachutes - actually saving lives. There's massive history to say that the safest aeroplane in the world is the one with a well trained pilot in it who knows their aeroplane well.

Also the majority of the lives saved by Ballastic parachutes have started with pilots f****ing up and getting out of their depth in the first place. In the UK, where the same aircraft are flown lighter, we have less accidents than Germany, and very few where a BRS would have helped.

G

[lederhosen]

Interesting data Genghis, is that accidents per flight hour or total? I would argue that reducing the cost of flying allows people to fly more, more currency making for safer pilots. The idea that lighter aircraft are somehow safer does not seem intuitive other than perhaps because you cannot use them for much. The BBC recently ran an article singing the praises of the C172. When you look at the price of this aircraft new then you can understand why flying aircraft that require a ppl is becoming more and more marginalised. I am in a syndicate with an IFR single and tow two seater gliders with the club's C42 when my employer is not paying me to fly. So I think I have a reasonably balanced view (chip on both shoulders maybe��).

[Jan Olieslagers]

The idea that lighter aircraft are somehow safer does not seem intuitiveAt the same speed, a lighter aircraft holds less kinetic energy, so it will do less damage on crashing. The whole concept of ultralight regulation is to keep kinetic energy down so as to minimise damage at impact - whence also the stall speed limitation.

But this is about safety of third parties, not about the safety of occupants. Actually I suspect the basic reasoning to be that, if accidents are likely to harm the pilot most of all, said pilot will think twice about behaving carefully, both in piloting and in maintenance.

[EDMJ]

This is a German fudge unfortunately as they keep chasing higher performance aeroplanes...

Mostly the Germans do aviation quite well - but in this specific aspect they are living in a strange fantasy world all of their own.


It's not only a German "thing"; at least Italy, the Netherlands and France spring to mind as having the same or similar MTOW requirements.

The root of the problem lies in an inept formulation of the legislation, which manufacturers have simply exploited right up to the boundaries. Many of the very dubious designs, if you like, are actually not only German, but also Czech or Italian (how do the fancy Tecnam RG models fare with respect to these requirements....?)

In the UK, where the same aircraft are flown lighter, we have less accidents than Germany, and very few where a BRS would have helped.


If you want to compare microlight accident statistics between Germany and the UK, you'd need to take into account the number of aircraft and the hours flown to get a valid comparison. German pilots "flee" to microlight flying due to the amount of restrictions on "normal" GA flying; restrictions which you to a large extent don't find in the UK (e.g. flying under LAA auspices, the liberal use of farm strips). I'm pretty sure that you won't find as many microlights in the UK as in Germany.

Off the top of my head, I can think of three accidents where the BRS saved a German microlight pilot's life: A RANS S6 (I think; it's on Youtube) colliding with the tow cable of a glider tug in France; an FK14 entering IMC near Cologne, and a weight-shift microlight which came apart in the air in Bavaria many years ago (I saw it happen).

In Germany, BRS is mandatory as a compensation for the relaxed certification requirements for microlights. I like it, feel comfortable knowing it's there, and if it saves a life, whether due to pilot or structural error, that's great!

As a concession, the MTOW was raised in Germany to 472.5 kg.

Hmm. Yes well I am a big chap. 1.92 and 94Kg. But I have a perfectly petite partner, so (once I'm qualified) our combined weight should leave enough for a toothbrush and a bit of fuel...

The problem will be finding a pocket-sized instructor to fly with while I'm getting licensed, I guess.

The reality is as follows: In 99.9% of all flights two-up in a German microlight, you'll be above the legal MTOW (structurally and aerodynamically you'll usually be OK; as far as the BRS is concerned I don't know). As long as you're not PIC, the blame will not be on you if something happens. Personally, when I'm PIC, I'll either fly alone or only take one of my children or a very petite passenger. I have no intentions of attempting to fight the insurance company afterwards, if something happens, even if exceeded legal MTOW had no bearing on whatever happened. In your case, it's your decision.

... and apparently all think that they weigh the same as Hanna Reich in her prime.


It's Hanna Reitsch, but this notwithstanding there's no need to use a historical person of more than dubious political convictions as reference - who nobody nowadays knows anyway - to get your message across...

[Genghis the Engineer]

Apologies for the misspelling, but anybody who has read much aviation history certainly knows of Ms Reitsch's accomplishments as a pilot, and slight build. Her unpleasant politics should not diminish her significance as a pilot.

I don't have current statistics to hand, but German microlight fatalities used to be around twice the UK per flying hour. Both have got much better over the last decade - but I don't know in what proportions.

G

[rcsa]

Thanks again, all, for very useful commentary and suggestions. My companion is under 50kg, so our combined weight + fuel for a couple of hours (and a toothbrush) should be within limits.

But basically is sounds as though the manufactures push the limits of performance and weight, and leave it up to the PF to make a decision on the 'limits'. That's certainly not an ideal situation - but I guess makes sense for the a/c manufacturers, given the more generous (realistic) MTOW limits in other territories.

I've flown in a Savannah a few times in Zim; and I had already clocked the Ikarus as 'one to watch'. I guess the next step is to get my Zim PPL back, and go from there.

[rcsa]

Aircool - check your PM

[mary meagher]

Lederhosen, that looks like fun...towing gliders with a microlite! I used to tow gliders with a PA18, and it was equipped with a 150 hp engine, had two seats in tandem, and could pull up nearly everything if there was enough headwind and the day wasn't too hot!

The C42 must be much more economical....I've sent you a private message, by the way.