Me and a group of the girls were talking about flying last night and one of them said she'd been up in a microlight and thought of learning to fly one. Most of the rest thought she was mad.

I dont know for myself, I'd prefer something stronger around me when I'm up there. So, for those of you that don't fly microlights, what'd it take to get you to try?

MzF

somebody thin offering me a flight...

Me too. Especially in a weightshift. I'd really like to try that. Powered parachute too. They sound great fun for the weekend, especially considering that you can relatively easy take 'em home, or with you on vacation.

I've been looking into the three axis microlights but at 200-odd kilos and 450 kg MTOW their load capacity is just a tad too low. I mean, two adults and some three hours endurance is not asking much, is it?

An invitation. I'd love to have a flight in a weight shift. I don't think I'd be giving up my SEP flying, but I'd love to try it.

dp

Square Balls!

Running out of money...

Weightshifters are fun but I'd only go there either for a bit of fun occasionally or if i lost my class 2

If I rmember correctly, the average normal category Cessna or Piper or similar is certified to +3.8 and -1.5 normal load factors.

The UK microlight standard is +4 and -2.

Therefore, I believe that you will actually find the microlight is the stronger!!

Regards,

DFC

CAP 482 BCAR Section "S" type approval requires +4 & -2G minimum in-flight load capabilities. Static testing usually goes to +6 & -4G or more. How much stronger do you need?

DFC,

Perhaps the UK microlights are stressed for higher "G", but that does not make them "stronger" in all senses. If you were to collide with unwelcoming terrain, the more substantial fuselage structure and skin of an airplane would offer much greater occupant protection. To me that is an equally important "strong". You can nearly always control how many "G's" you're pulling, you may not always be able to control what you're going to hit!

Cheers, Pilot DAR

Well a pure straight CFIT will probably kill you no matter what you are in.

However, you need to remember that microilghts have very little momentum and that plays a big factor in the surviveability during accidents. Speaking from a 3 axis point of view, a microlight would come out well ahead of the average cessna or piper single in for example engine failure after take-off situations - the low stall speed and low momentum of the microlight coupled with the 4 or 5 point harness that most have plus minimal amounts of alluminium to hit you as it caves in.

Do you really think that the crappy inertia reel single shoulder strap which only locks properly 60% of the time is going to prevent your nose finding it's way into the internals of the altimeter should the Cessna or piper you are flying come to a very immediate stop?

There is much more to it than that of course but the more you check the more you will find that simple, slow low inertia aircraft well designed, well certified and well equipped from a safety point of view (4 or 5 point harness) wil win every time.

Overall, one can not discount a properly maintained and certified microlight on strength or safety grounds.

Regards,

DFC

I tried a weightshift once...what a disaster! Everything, but Everything! works the wrong way. Push left on the rudder bar while taxying and you turn RIGHT!
Push forward on the control bar in flight and you go UP! Move the control bar to the right in flight and you turn LEFT!
Lovely view however.

not all microlights are weight shift !, take a look at the Dynamic, out perform most spam cans, with more room also

There are microlights and there are microlights.

Some of them are so flimsy it's a wonder how it hangs together. Yes it may be stressed to +4G but then I am sure a hang glider will withstand +4G.

Others look a lot stronger. A 750kg one is likely to be a lot tougher than a 450kg one.

One could build a tremendously strong all-composite plane within 750kg MTOW. But it would be too expensive for the market.

I've done a great deal of mechanical engineering over the years and would never get inside the traditional English ones, e.g. a Thruster.

Here's a tip if you think everything is the wrong way round, in a weight shift.

Imagine you are the stick!!

Push yourself back ( you are the stick) the nose rises above the horizon
Pull yourself forward ( you are the stick) the nose drops below the horizon

You go left ( you are the stick ) the aircraft rolls left etc etc It works.

I first flew weight shift in 1977 in the South of France, before gaining my PPL.

Here is a pic of me in 1997 over Vic Falls, 20 years later. I now have fixed and rotory ratings but have always tried different experiences of flying from Gliders to Hot Air Balloons. All this from a love of being in the air.

As a teenager I started in parachuting, as it was the cheapest way into the skies, which is how I eventually got into aviation.



Doen't really matter what you fly as long as you enjoy it!

As a committed flyer of Cessna/Piper types, I was a bit hesitant about microlights until, in the course of my work, I was offered several flights in various types including flex-wing. I was very pleasantly surprised. Liked them all in fact, apart from one (can't remember which, it wasn't a flex-wing and it just seemed a bit light and slippery).

First microlight I tried after years of Cessna 150-ing was a Cyclone AX3. I was a bit dubious as to the integrity of the airframe but the pilot, Bill Sherlock, who was also the importer, went to pains to point out the tubular alloy structure consisted of triangles, hence although very light it was extremley rigid. The AX3 is 3 -axis, not very fast (about 60kt cruise one up) but it's great fun doing STOL operations. One day I taxied out with a wind at 30 deg to the runway gusting to about 25kt; I lined up diagonal to the runway, started easing the throttle open, and thought 'this is smooth', then realised I was already airborne before the ASI was reading at about 3/4 throttle - ground run must have been about 20ft! It was great for curving 'Spitfire type' approaches too, especially where it was necessary to avoid local NIMBY houses while landing on a marked runway; end of the downwind leg 500ft agl, partially shut the throttle, and when the threshold was below and just behind the trailing edge of the wing, start a rate 1/2 turn towards the runway.

As a JAR PPL(A) license holder with SEP and TMG ratings, the one thing that would help to make microlight's more desirable to me would be the ability to log hours towards keeping my license/ratings valid. Something that is not possible at present. Having flown in a Thruster, AX3 and a Pegasus CT2K I would agree that 3-axis microlights are 'proper little aeroplanes' so why can't we use these hours to revalidate?

I fly a fast pointy thing for a living, am involved in a Cherokee group and was offered a flight in a weightshift microlight by a friend of a friend.

Without doubt it was some of the best fun that you can have in the air. It's a bit like a flying motorcycle. If a Cherokee is a Ford Mondeo, then a flexwing microlight is a sporty motorcycle.

The only drawback for me is that you can't hire a microlight so you have to buy one (or a share in one) and I can't really afford any more toys

A frontal lobotomy?