Will it ever happen? Microlights
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2000
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 14,480
Likes: 178
From: UK
There is a lot of truth in that but while one can obviously fly anything unofficially in IMC when enroute, there is an issue with the build quality of these very lightweight planes: they tend to be rather flimsy and one would be pretty brave to be chucked around in IMC, perhaps collecting ice.
IFR certification is going to be really tough for most of them - even when it becomes legally possible.
IFR certification is going to be really tough for most of them - even when it becomes legally possible.
The main ones are:
- Lack of a certified engine (and thus subject to a maintenance regime assumed to substantially reduce risk of engine failures)
- Handling qualities not shown to comply with the requirements for flight in IMC
- Lack of duplication of primary flight instruments.
- Lack of a (certified) Attitude Indicator
- Lack of de-icing of the pitot
- Lack of a secondary static source
- Lack of certified navigation instruments allowing positional awareness out of sight of the surface. (In a microlight, even the compass normally hasn't been swung.)
You can make a case about anti/de-icing but in reality that could be made about most Cessnas and Pipers that can quite legitimately be flown in IMC.
G
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Staffordshire
So,
If i flew an Ikarus C42 that cant weight more than 450kg, there is 188kg useful load.
How much does fuel weigh for say 2 hours flight?
I am 17 stone, leaving 79kg for the passenger and fuel. My passenger would need to be a right skinny thing to make it flyable?
Matt
If i flew an Ikarus C42 that cant weight more than 450kg, there is 188kg useful load.
How much does fuel weigh for say 2 hours flight?
I am 17 stone, leaving 79kg for the passenger and fuel. My passenger would need to be a right skinny thing to make it flyable?
Matt
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
On a 100hp Rotax 74lb = 3hours (about 70% power)
You are quite right about the useful load of a micro. I would only go for a 3 axis micro if I had a licence restriction or a planning restriction on my home base. In all other cases you go VLA, which has the same running costs but much more useful load (in some cases it would be an identical aircraft but different paperwork)
If you take a SportCruiser VLA for example;
You could get yourself, your identical twin, 4 hours of fuel and some bags! And travel at 100kn
A VLA homebuilt can also have
a (certified) Attitude Indicator
de-icing of the pitot
a secondary static source
certified navigation instruments allowing positional awareness out of sight of the surface.
I have to say that my MCR has non of the above, but the uncertified kit I have fitted is vastly superior to any certified kit unless you are talking £30k plus just for the EFIS. It is however capable of short bursts of IMC in the unfortunate event that I get caught out by the weather.
Rod1
You are quite right about the useful load of a micro. I would only go for a 3 axis micro if I had a licence restriction or a planning restriction on my home base. In all other cases you go VLA, which has the same running costs but much more useful load (in some cases it would be an identical aircraft but different paperwork)
If you take a SportCruiser VLA for example;
You could get yourself, your identical twin, 4 hours of fuel and some bags! And travel at 100kn
A VLA homebuilt can also have
a (certified) Attitude Indicator
de-icing of the pitot
a secondary static source
certified navigation instruments allowing positional awareness out of sight of the surface.
I have to say that my MCR has non of the above, but the uncertified kit I have fitted is vastly superior to any certified kit unless you are talking £30k plus just for the EFIS. It is however capable of short bursts of IMC in the unfortunate event that I get caught out by the weather.
Rod1
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2000
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 14,480
Likes: 178
From: UK
VLA (more properly CS.VLA - or Certification Specification for Very Light Aeroplanes) is a set of rules for certifying light aircraft up to 750kg. (There are other rules that you'd have to comply with as well, to do with manufacture, maintenance and so-on, but VLA is the biggie.)
It allows aircraft to be certified for issue of a Certificate of Airworthiness, although with light touch, the PFA/LAA also use it for permit aircraft.
It has however certain limitations. The biggie is that a VLA aircraft is limited to day-VFR only, non-icing conditions (paragraph VLA.1559(b) if anybody wants to look it up).
So, I'm afraid that this gets you not very far. The FAA do have a set of published requirements to allow night and IMC use, but that's only valid for an N reg aircraft.
Ultimately, for night and IMC use, a new aircraft needs to be substantially certified to CS.23, which is a whole new ballgame of certification cost and complexity.
Could it be done for a microlight? Yes, there are a few individuals or organisations with the skillset and qualification to do this - I'm probably one of them. It'll take a couple of years, and a lot of money: so ultimately nobody will try, and it's much cheaper and easier to just buy a CofA aircraft and have the required licence.
G
It allows aircraft to be certified for issue of a Certificate of Airworthiness, although with light touch, the PFA/LAA also use it for permit aircraft.
It has however certain limitations. The biggie is that a VLA aircraft is limited to day-VFR only, non-icing conditions (paragraph VLA.1559(b) if anybody wants to look it up).
So, I'm afraid that this gets you not very far. The FAA do have a set of published requirements to allow night and IMC use, but that's only valid for an N reg aircraft.
Ultimately, for night and IMC use, a new aircraft needs to be substantially certified to CS.23, which is a whole new ballgame of certification cost and complexity.
Could it be done for a microlight? Yes, there are a few individuals or organisations with the skillset and qualification to do this - I'm probably one of them. It'll take a couple of years, and a lot of money: so ultimately nobody will try, and it's much cheaper and easier to just buy a CofA aircraft and have the required licence.
G
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
I don't think "certified" kit has any useful meaning if the airframe itself is not legal to fly in IMC.
Avionics certification means so little. I have a KFC225 certified autopilot (cost probably £40,000 although it was never successful in the retrofit market) which has several major design defects, causing regular failures right across its user base of several aircraft types. It seems that, in GA, there is little or no design quality review and any old junk can be TSOd.
If I was flying a "homebuilt/sports" type I would equip it for flight in IMC and not worry about the avionics being certified. Anyway, one can pick up a used Garmin 430/530 or something similar fairly cheaply, and you get the OBS mode for flying DIY approaches
It's the airframe I would worry about. I'd want excellent electrical protection and bonding together of all the bits - not just for lightning protection but for protection from a static buildup in normal flight in rain etc. A deiced pitot tube is absolutely essential because pitot icing is perfectly possible in VMC, below 0C. Even a decent quality radio is so important - every time I fly I hear some ATCO tearing his hair out because some plane has a crap radio, the pilot knows it perfectly well, but evidently nobody is going to do anything about it.
Avionics certification means so little. I have a KFC225 certified autopilot (cost probably £40,000 although it was never successful in the retrofit market) which has several major design defects, causing regular failures right across its user base of several aircraft types. It seems that, in GA, there is little or no design quality review and any old junk can be TSOd.
If I was flying a "homebuilt/sports" type I would equip it for flight in IMC and not worry about the avionics being certified. Anyway, one can pick up a used Garmin 430/530 or something similar fairly cheaply, and you get the OBS mode for flying DIY approaches
It's the airframe I would worry about. I'd want excellent electrical protection and bonding together of all the bits - not just for lightning protection but for protection from a static buildup in normal flight in rain etc. A deiced pitot tube is absolutely essential because pitot icing is perfectly possible in VMC, below 0C. Even a decent quality radio is so important - every time I fly I hear some ATCO tearing his hair out because some plane has a crap radio, the pilot knows it perfectly well, but evidently nobody is going to do anything about it.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
“So what are the extra regulations by going VLA instead of Microlight?”
Genghis the Engineer answered for one point of view. From the position of the owner of a home built VLA there is no difference and there is no extra cost (in my case) over a micro. My VLA has the same maintenance as its Micro equivalent; it has the same engine, the same fuselage, but smaller wings and a less complicated flap system. It also costs £5k less to buy the kit, can lift 50kg more and is 18kn faster.
Just one other point, when IO540 says they cannot fly (legally) in IMC, he means under European regulations. Under US regulations, identical machines to mine fly IFR/IMC all the time and the safety record is good. (You cannot operate a US registered home built in the UK for more than 30 days a year). It is probable that we will be able to fly home built aircraft in the same way in Europe eventually. Changes are being slowly brought in, but I am unsure how many IR pilots there will be who are qualified to fly them. The IMCR is set to die and the much-heralded new Euro qualification appears stalled. With less than 1% of European pilots with an IR (IO540 is one), the IFR capability of the airframe is academic especially for the “fly for fun” pilots like me.
Rod1
Genghis the Engineer answered for one point of view. From the position of the owner of a home built VLA there is no difference and there is no extra cost (in my case) over a micro. My VLA has the same maintenance as its Micro equivalent; it has the same engine, the same fuselage, but smaller wings and a less complicated flap system. It also costs £5k less to buy the kit, can lift 50kg more and is 18kn faster.
Just one other point, when IO540 says they cannot fly (legally) in IMC, he means under European regulations. Under US regulations, identical machines to mine fly IFR/IMC all the time and the safety record is good. (You cannot operate a US registered home built in the UK for more than 30 days a year). It is probable that we will be able to fly home built aircraft in the same way in Europe eventually. Changes are being slowly brought in, but I am unsure how many IR pilots there will be who are qualified to fly them. The IMCR is set to die and the much-heralded new Euro qualification appears stalled. With less than 1% of European pilots with an IR (IO540 is one), the IFR capability of the airframe is academic especially for the “fly for fun” pilots like me.
Rod1
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
The IMCR is set to die and the much-heralded new Euro qualification appears stalled.
With less than 1% of European pilots with an IR (IO540 is one), the IFR capability of the airframe is academic especially for the “fly for fun” pilots like me.
And if I was doing it (and like most instrument-capable pilots flying a well equipped aircraft I have done plenty of it) then I would want a plane which is actually safe. Enroute this practice is undetectable, but you don't want to get killed, and you don't want equipment to stop working due to static, etc.
The point is that the OP did ask about this so presumably he is after this capability - even if the alleged 99% are not (a figure which I am sure is wide of the mark but this sector of the market is popular due to the low operating cost, and most of the participants are in it because it's all they can afford, not because they just want to fly on perfect sunny days
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
From: Midlands
“and most of the participants are in it because it's all they can afford, not because they just want to fly on perfect sunny days”
Another interesting observation! I upgraded from a 1970’s fully airways equipped Spamcan worth £42k, to a brand new MCR which cost me £50k and is now worth nearer £60k. I get much better utility for my kind of flying. Of the other “fast glass” on my strip, most have made similar decisions. IO of course uses his aircraft for business and that requires a different approach.
Rod1
Another interesting observation! I upgraded from a 1970’s fully airways equipped Spamcan worth £42k, to a brand new MCR which cost me £50k and is now worth nearer £60k. I get much better utility for my kind of flying. Of the other “fast glass” on my strip, most have made similar decisions. IO of course uses his aircraft for business and that requires a different approach.
Rod1
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
Nowadays, Rod1, I do very little business flying and in any case it is very hard to do that, in the UK where the vast majority of runways have no instrument approach and are "closed" in anything below OVC010 or so.
The ability to go IFR has a great deal of value for long distance touring. The fact that most IFR flights are done in VMC and sunshine doesn't detract from this (it just makes the IR training look way OTT). The most valuable thing that IFR gives you is an implied whole-route clearance i.e. a guaranteed transit of all airspace (that is available for airway traffic) and an instrument approach if you want it. The general ability to fly in IMC is very handy too but, assuming you can climb above the general cloud, it is not half as handy as the whole-route IFR clearance and access to all airspace classes.
The times I spent the most time in IMC was when boring holes in UK Class G cloud at 2400ft under the LTMA, on the IMC Rating
The ability to go IFR has a great deal of value for long distance touring. The fact that most IFR flights are done in VMC and sunshine doesn't detract from this (it just makes the IR training look way OTT). The most valuable thing that IFR gives you is an implied whole-route clearance i.e. a guaranteed transit of all airspace (that is available for airway traffic) and an instrument approach if you want it. The general ability to fly in IMC is very handy too but, assuming you can climb above the general cloud, it is not half as handy as the whole-route IFR clearance and access to all airspace classes.
The times I spent the most time in IMC was when boring holes in UK Class G cloud at 2400ft under the LTMA, on the IMC Rating
