Ultralight Aircraft
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ultralight Aircraft
I've started looking at ultralights as a potentially cost effective way of getting my flying jollies. There just seems to be so many types and its difficult to evalute them all. A couple of questions for any "gurus" on this subject:
a) Who are the Cessnas and Pipers etc. of the ultralight world - i.e. tried, tested, solid designs etc. I'm looking for something that has been proven to be structurally sound, with passable handling qualities ...
b) Are there any publications that offer OBJECTIVE advice and reviews of the different types and manufacturers ?
Cheers
a) Who are the Cessnas and Pipers etc. of the ultralight world - i.e. tried, tested, solid designs etc. I'm looking for something that has been proven to be structurally sound, with passable handling qualities ...
b) Are there any publications that offer OBJECTIVE advice and reviews of the different types and manufacturers ?
Cheers
Cyclone AX3/2000 are robust and fun to fly, but not very fast. The structure is made out of triangular patterns to aid rigidity.
By the way, Europa is not very light, maybe not even ultralight; sure you didn't mean Eurostar?
By the way, Europa is not very light, maybe not even ultralight; sure you didn't mean Eurostar?
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the budget end, it is the AX3 or X'Air.
Mid value is Sky Ranger and Rans
Upper mid: Thruster & Medway SLA (new and very nice), both factory built. Jabiru also fits in here.
Top end: Eurostar, C42, CT2K. The Eurostar is the Daddy.
Europas don't make the microlight regs.
Mid value is Sky Ranger and Rans
Upper mid: Thruster & Medway SLA (new and very nice), both factory built. Jabiru also fits in here.
Top end: Eurostar, C42, CT2K. The Eurostar is the Daddy.
Europas don't make the microlight regs.
Oh Shazbat!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Leeds, UK
Age: 64
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm currently learning on an Ikarus C42. I tried a couple of trial flights on other GA types - a Cherokee & then a Robin 2160 (respectively OK & "Pretty Amazing") - then settled on learning on the Ikarus under an NPPL(M) ticket. I'm currently about 10 hours in and enjoying it.
I've used two different aircraft so far, both the 80hp C42, and they're robust & forgiving for my early attempts at this flying stuff and more importantly consistent in how they handle. The Rotax engine is also pretty easy to manage which makes life simpler. I'd certainly recommend learning on one.
Take a look at the C42 flight test write up on www.pilotweb.aero.
Good luck with your search
batninth
I've used two different aircraft so far, both the 80hp C42, and they're robust & forgiving for my early attempts at this flying stuff and more importantly consistent in how they handle. The Rotax engine is also pretty easy to manage which makes life simpler. I'd certainly recommend learning on one.
Take a look at the C42 flight test write up on www.pilotweb.aero.
Good luck with your search
batninth
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Brighton, East Sussex, UK
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd like to add to barshakers list:
At the budget end, it is the thruster, AX3 or X'Air.
Mid value is Sky Ranger and Rans with 2-stroke engines.
Upper mid: Sky Ranger, Rans and Thrusters with 4-stroke engines. Medway SLA, and the Jabiru.
Top end: Eurostar, C42, CT2K , Eurostar and with it's 750mile plus range and 185mph cruise the 912S MCR ULC (Ban-Bi) is the Daddy.
A good place to find out prices is www.afors.co.uk
Rans.
(Happy to be Mid value)
At the budget end, it is the thruster, AX3 or X'Air.
Mid value is Sky Ranger and Rans with 2-stroke engines.
Upper mid: Sky Ranger, Rans and Thrusters with 4-stroke engines. Medway SLA, and the Jabiru.
Top end: Eurostar, C42, CT2K , Eurostar and with it's 750mile plus range and 185mph cruise the 912S MCR ULC (Ban-Bi) is the Daddy.
A good place to find out prices is www.afors.co.uk
Rans.
(Happy to be Mid value)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies if I am insulting your intelligence.
Ultralight is a European term which is not used in the UK. We use microlight
If you have a group A license you cannot count hours flown in micros to your currency requirement. The best solution to this is to abandon the micro idea and go for a VLA. A VLA is often identical to a micro but has a higher takeoff weight. For example a Eurostar VLA is identical to a micro except it has an electric backup fuel pump and much better useful load. You can log hours in a VLA towards your group a currency as it is a group A aircraft.
Eurostar, Dyn Aero MCR01, Jab, Pioneer 300, CT42 are some examples, with speed range from 85 kn to 155 kn all on 80 – 100 hp.
Rod1
Ultralight is a European term which is not used in the UK. We use microlight
If you have a group A license you cannot count hours flown in micros to your currency requirement. The best solution to this is to abandon the micro idea and go for a VLA. A VLA is often identical to a micro but has a higher takeoff weight. For example a Eurostar VLA is identical to a micro except it has an electric backup fuel pump and much better useful load. You can log hours in a VLA towards your group a currency as it is a group A aircraft.
Eurostar, Dyn Aero MCR01, Jab, Pioneer 300, CT42 are some examples, with speed range from 85 kn to 155 kn all on 80 – 100 hp.
Rod1
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
You can't have a "factory-built" VLA since the PFA are only allowed to handle kit-built aircraft and the BMAA, while approved to process factory-built aircraft, can only handle microlights.
So, C42 Ikarus factory-built is a BMAA microlight, C42 Ikarus VLA iis a kit built and PFA.
Of course, that doesn't mean that there aren't "series-built" kits out there - where basically you are the second legal owner, although the CAA are doing their best to stamp this out. they suspect the first owners are , basically, building to order.
Very best wishes,
Colin
You can't have a "factory-built" VLA since the PFA are only allowed to handle kit-built aircraft and the BMAA, while approved to process factory-built aircraft, can only handle microlights.
So, C42 Ikarus factory-built is a BMAA microlight, C42 Ikarus VLA iis a kit built and PFA.
Of course, that doesn't mean that there aren't "series-built" kits out there - where basically you are the second legal owner, although the CAA are doing their best to stamp this out. they suspect the first owners are , basically, building to order.
Very best wishes,
Colin
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course, that doesn't mean that there aren't "series-built" kits out there - where basically you are the second legal owner, although the CAA are doing their best to stamp this out. they suspect the first owners are , basically, building to order
This may be a stupid question, but what is wrong with that?
The person building to order has probably built a number of them and is thus generally going to do a much better job.
This may be a stupid question, but what is wrong with that?
The person building to order has probably built a number of them and is thus generally going to do a much better job.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540
The PFA permit exception from full factory approval for construction is based on the premise that the builder is building on an amateur basis. Kits have to be 51% built by the amateur for his use and education (was 500 hours until recently).
Any aircraft, which can be proved to be built on a professional basis, becomes a garden ornament. The only exception is distributors building demonstration aircraft, which is allowed.
There have been cases of kit manufacturers flying in competed aircraft and falsifying the build records, but this has not happened, to the best of my knowledge, for some time.
Rod1
The PFA permit exception from full factory approval for construction is based on the premise that the builder is building on an amateur basis. Kits have to be 51% built by the amateur for his use and education (was 500 hours until recently).
Any aircraft, which can be proved to be built on a professional basis, becomes a garden ornament. The only exception is distributors building demonstration aircraft, which is allowed.
There have been cases of kit manufacturers flying in competed aircraft and falsifying the build records, but this has not happened, to the best of my knowledge, for some time.
Rod1
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Rod, can you get a CS-VLA version of the MCR range yet or do you still have to build it yourself?”
The PFA use CS-VLA as the design code for kit built VLA aircraft, so the code is used on both factory built and home built aircraft.
“You can't have a "factory-built" VLA since the PFA are only allowed to handle kit-built aircraft and the BMAA, while approved to process factory-built aircraft, can only handle microlights.”
It is true that the PFA cannot sanction a factory built VLA, but it is now approved to clear factory built microlights. The Tecnam P2002JF/JR is a C of A VLA, which is good, but you must maintain it using a licensed engineer cleared for the type.
It is unimportant if an aircraft is built in a factory, or in a garage, provided it has been inspected. There is no difference in the airworthiness requirements, it is just one is achieved by a regulated production facility and the other is achieved using the excellent PFA inspection system. If you are a group a pilot you are better off buying a VLA second hand with say 50 hours on it, than a Micro with much less useful load and no chance of counting the hours. The other advantage of the PFA system is you can maintain it yourself for a few £100 a year.
Rod1
(builder and owner of a VLA)
The PFA use CS-VLA as the design code for kit built VLA aircraft, so the code is used on both factory built and home built aircraft.
“You can't have a "factory-built" VLA since the PFA are only allowed to handle kit-built aircraft and the BMAA, while approved to process factory-built aircraft, can only handle microlights.”
It is true that the PFA cannot sanction a factory built VLA, but it is now approved to clear factory built microlights. The Tecnam P2002JF/JR is a C of A VLA, which is good, but you must maintain it using a licensed engineer cleared for the type.
It is unimportant if an aircraft is built in a factory, or in a garage, provided it has been inspected. There is no difference in the airworthiness requirements, it is just one is achieved by a regulated production facility and the other is achieved using the excellent PFA inspection system. If you are a group a pilot you are better off buying a VLA second hand with say 50 hours on it, than a Micro with much less useful load and no chance of counting the hours. The other advantage of the PFA system is you can maintain it yourself for a few £100 a year.
Rod1
(builder and owner of a VLA)
[/IMG]
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Rod1,
As you say - especially with the NPPL - there is, in many way, no real advantage in having a microlight version of many of these three-axis aircraft. The NPPL allows you a microlight-type cheap medical and light aircraft style loadings.
There are changes to the NPPL coming in - the regulatory impact assessment input time ends on April 2nd - which would allow any hours on one type of NPPL to count to reval another. Ie Microlight, Self-launched motor glider and Simple single engined aircraft.
However, none of these hours would really count towards a real JAR light aircraft licence! But they are just as fun.
And operating a permit to fly aircraft is far more affordable than a Tecnam on a CofA, which is what the original post was about.
ps. Although load is better on a PFA light aircraft version, the insurance is also more of a burden. The Zenair 601 as a light aircraft is costing one pal 900 a year for 3rd party, and the microlight version just 150 for another pal!
If you want to fly just one up, then you can have full tanks and luggage on the microlight version. It is just when you want to carry two people the microlight version is a bit difficult to be legal in.
Very best wishes, Colin
As you say - especially with the NPPL - there is, in many way, no real advantage in having a microlight version of many of these three-axis aircraft. The NPPL allows you a microlight-type cheap medical and light aircraft style loadings.
There are changes to the NPPL coming in - the regulatory impact assessment input time ends on April 2nd - which would allow any hours on one type of NPPL to count to reval another. Ie Microlight, Self-launched motor glider and Simple single engined aircraft.
However, none of these hours would really count towards a real JAR light aircraft licence! But they are just as fun.
And operating a permit to fly aircraft is far more affordable than a Tecnam on a CofA, which is what the original post was about.
ps. Although load is better on a PFA light aircraft version, the insurance is also more of a burden. The Zenair 601 as a light aircraft is costing one pal 900 a year for 3rd party, and the microlight version just 150 for another pal!
If you want to fly just one up, then you can have full tanks and luggage on the microlight version. It is just when you want to carry two people the microlight version is a bit difficult to be legal in.
Very best wishes, Colin
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As you say - especially with the NPPL - there is, in many way, no real advantage in having a microlight version of many of these three-axis aircraft. The NPPL allows you a microlight-type cheap medical and light aircraft style loadings.
one advantage as I see it, NPPL wise, is, you can fly to Europe with a microlight, but not in an SEP, / VLA
so same airplane, say Eurostar, under 450, no probs, fly to most of Europe
same machine, but not the microlight version, sure you can legally carry more weight, but with an NPPL your restricted to UK only, although I believe you can ask the CAA for permission to fly further,
one advantage as I see it, NPPL wise, is, you can fly to Europe with a microlight, but not in an SEP, / VLA
so same airplane, say Eurostar, under 450, no probs, fly to most of Europe
same machine, but not the microlight version, sure you can legally carry more weight, but with an NPPL your restricted to UK only, although I believe you can ask the CAA for permission to fly further,
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all the responses !
Barshifter : I had a fantastic flight in a flexwing trike a while back. It was by far the most exhilarating flying experience I've had. Unfortunately, after landing the instructor casually mentioned the steel plate holding his spine in place as a result of an accident in one. Kinda put me off
Barshifter : I had a fantastic flight in a flexwing trike a while back. It was by far the most exhilarating flying experience I've had. Unfortunately, after landing the instructor casually mentioned the steel plate holding his spine in place as a result of an accident in one. Kinda put me off
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: N England
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anxiouswannabe
Ive never landed one that hard.Accidents do happen but most can be avoided buy the survival training you recieve whilst training.Knowing when to fly and when to stay on the ground can play a big part in the outcome of your last landing of the day.Flexwings dont have the high wind capabilities of their 3 axis counterparts.Usually if you can handle them in winds on the ground then you will be ok in the air.
Ive never landed one that hard.Accidents do happen but most can be avoided buy the survival training you recieve whilst training.Knowing when to fly and when to stay on the ground can play a big part in the outcome of your last landing of the day.Flexwings dont have the high wind capabilities of their 3 axis counterparts.Usually if you can handle them in winds on the ground then you will be ok in the air.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rod1
You have explained the rules but that is a circular argument.
"I cannot drive up the M1 at more than 70 because the speed limit is 70...."
Am I right in suspecting the real reason for prohibiting "mass production" in the non-CofA scene is to limit the level of activity and thus support CAA CofA revenue?
I cannot see a rational argument as to why a flying machine like this cannot be factory built.
There is an argument that somebody who built his own plane is more entitled to kill himself in it than somebody who bought it from a factory, but that is a bit stretched. We all have a fundamental right to kill ourselves (accidentally) - otherwise there would be no mountain climbing, scuba diving, driving, walking, etc.
You have explained the rules but that is a circular argument.
"I cannot drive up the M1 at more than 70 because the speed limit is 70...."
Am I right in suspecting the real reason for prohibiting "mass production" in the non-CofA scene is to limit the level of activity and thus support CAA CofA revenue?
I cannot see a rational argument as to why a flying machine like this cannot be factory built.
There is an argument that somebody who built his own plane is more entitled to kill himself in it than somebody who bought it from a factory, but that is a bit stretched. We all have a fundamental right to kill ourselves (accidentally) - otherwise there would be no mountain climbing, scuba diving, driving, walking, etc.