Foot Launched Powered Aircraft (FLPAs) for the disabled?
Thread Starter
Foot Launched Powered Aircraft (FLPAs) for the disabled?
Chatting today to a former serviceman who flies paramotors, he told me about the uphill struggle that a disabled colleague, who wants to fly them, is facing with bureaucracy.
To give a bit of background, pilots of paramotors and powered hang gliders are exempted from needing a licence if their craft can be demonstrated to be foot launchable. Landing on wheels is acceptable, provided you can launch on foot. To this end a number of very light weight trikes are available, which are supported by the wing on the take off, thus allowing a running launch and a seated, rolling landing.
When the CAA were asked if a exception could be made so that lower limb amptutees could also use the trike for the take off, they said 'No'. They stated the pilot would need a microlight licence and would need to fly the craft as a Single Seat Deregulated (SSDR) microlight, thus adding considerable extra expense to the training process.
Would you not think that for the small number of people who would benefit from such an exemption, that the CAA could allow them to make a wheeled take off without the need for a licence?
A typical paramotor trike is shown below:
To give a bit of background, pilots of paramotors and powered hang gliders are exempted from needing a licence if their craft can be demonstrated to be foot launchable. Landing on wheels is acceptable, provided you can launch on foot. To this end a number of very light weight trikes are available, which are supported by the wing on the take off, thus allowing a running launch and a seated, rolling landing.
When the CAA were asked if a exception could be made so that lower limb amptutees could also use the trike for the take off, they said 'No'. They stated the pilot would need a microlight licence and would need to fly the craft as a Single Seat Deregulated (SSDR) microlight, thus adding considerable extra expense to the training process.
Would you not think that for the small number of people who would benefit from such an exemption, that the CAA could allow them to make a wheeled take off without the need for a licence?
A typical paramotor trike is shown below:
Last edited by Mechta; 6th Jul 2015 at 10:44. Reason: Spelling and grammar
Is it that the craft has to be foot launchable, or that the amputee has to be able to foot-launch?
According to the definition, a hang-glider is an aircraft that "is foot-launched". If you take that 'is' as being habitual, then arguably you don't have to foot launch every time. But from what you're saying, the CAA aren't taking that stance.
Disabled pilots have been openly wheel-launching hang-gliders for decades, and I know there are people doing aerotowing using dollies to help launch able-bodied pilots. I appreciate this is somewhat different as the aircraft are pure gliders and wouldn't be subject to a lot of regulation anyway. However, they would need registration and permit to fly/CofA if they were counted as gliders rather than hang-gliders.
From: Foot-Launched Powered Aircraft Now Covered Under The Air Navigation Order | CAA Newsroom | About the CAA
"Since 1996, powered hang-gliders and paragliders have operated in UK airspace under exemption from the Air Navigation Order (ANO). With effect from 20 August 2005, they are now defined in the ANO as 'self-propelled hang-gliders' and are subject to the same regulations as other gliders, regardless of whether they are flying powered or unpowered."
If your pilots have a sense of humour you could get lots of prosthetic limbs and convert them into wheels thus:
I think I'd go for about 6 feet per wheel though, and fix them at the ankle.
According to the definition, a hang-glider is an aircraft that "is foot-launched". If you take that 'is' as being habitual, then arguably you don't have to foot launch every time. But from what you're saying, the CAA aren't taking that stance.
Disabled pilots have been openly wheel-launching hang-gliders for decades, and I know there are people doing aerotowing using dollies to help launch able-bodied pilots. I appreciate this is somewhat different as the aircraft are pure gliders and wouldn't be subject to a lot of regulation anyway. However, they would need registration and permit to fly/CofA if they were counted as gliders rather than hang-gliders.
From: Foot-Launched Powered Aircraft Now Covered Under The Air Navigation Order | CAA Newsroom | About the CAA
"Since 1996, powered hang-gliders and paragliders have operated in UK airspace under exemption from the Air Navigation Order (ANO). With effect from 20 August 2005, they are now defined in the ANO as 'self-propelled hang-gliders' and are subject to the same regulations as other gliders, regardless of whether they are flying powered or unpowered."
If your pilots have a sense of humour you could get lots of prosthetic limbs and convert them into wheels thus:
I think I'd go for about 6 feet per wheel though, and fix them at the ankle.
You'd need to get a better mind than mine to comment, but to me it seems that:-
Leaving the disabled aside for a moment, if I built an aircraft that my chosen test pilot could 'foot launch' it then it is defined (and presumably certified) as capable of being foot launched and thus all pilots can fly it without a licence.
That would still be true if my test pilot was Usain Bolt and the likes of us couldn't even reach stalling speed.
Leaving the disabled aside for a moment, if I built an aircraft that my chosen test pilot could 'foot launch' it then it is defined (and presumably certified) as capable of being foot launched and thus all pilots can fly it without a licence.
That would still be true if my test pilot was Usain Bolt and the likes of us couldn't even reach stalling speed.
would need to fly the craft as a Single Seat Deregulated (SSDR) microlight, thus adding considerable extra expense to the training process.
So, basically, you're arguing that because somebody is already disabled, they're either tougher, or more expendable, so don't need teaching to fly properly?
(I actually do think that the CAA did give an exemption years ago and the BMAA should have a record of it, but it may have expired - but I'm still of the opinion that the person being discussed should bite the bullet and learn to fly properly, with an instructor, then he has no problem.)
G
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is another angle to this which may not be apparent.
Firstly I fully support any pilot disabled or disabled by illness being able to fly where they are considered to be safe to themselves and others on the ground.
We all can become ill or disabled if we are unlucky. It is the political will to accept disabled people in society which is the driving force! you only have to look at the success of the paralympics to see that.
But do certain disabilities mean that the pilot in a wind shear situation or takeoff situation has as much instant controllability as an able bodied person? If not should you accept that or look for another way ?
But here comes the crunch!! Other medical disabilities are not allowed! We only have to see the battles over stupid things like colour blindness and the lack of acceptance of various medical conditions and medications to see that allowing disabled people to fly when they can be seen not to properly control that aircraft could set a precedence with pilots banned from flying with illness disabilities
what is good for the goose is good for the gander principal
I support all pilots being able to fly whether disabled by accident or by illness where they are deemed safe to themselves and those on the ground. Where blind eyes are turned towards one group because it appears politically correct to do so is another matter
Pace
Firstly I fully support any pilot disabled or disabled by illness being able to fly where they are considered to be safe to themselves and others on the ground.
We all can become ill or disabled if we are unlucky. It is the political will to accept disabled people in society which is the driving force! you only have to look at the success of the paralympics to see that.
But do certain disabilities mean that the pilot in a wind shear situation or takeoff situation has as much instant controllability as an able bodied person? If not should you accept that or look for another way ?
But here comes the crunch!! Other medical disabilities are not allowed! We only have to see the battles over stupid things like colour blindness and the lack of acceptance of various medical conditions and medications to see that allowing disabled people to fly when they can be seen not to properly control that aircraft could set a precedence with pilots banned from flying with illness disabilities
what is good for the goose is good for the gander principal
I support all pilots being able to fly whether disabled by accident or by illness where they are deemed safe to themselves and those on the ground. Where blind eyes are turned towards one group because it appears politically correct to do so is another matter
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 5th Jul 2015 at 09:26.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd like to respectfully disagree with Ghengis on this one. The suggestion that training is a fix kind of misses the point(With apologies to G if I have misunderstood his point). I totally agree that training will make pilots of these machines safer and more capable, but the issue the OP raised is more about leveling the playing field so we can be inclusive in our embracing of risk.
If a person without the use of their legs but otherwise capable and fit is barred from flying foot launched aircraft its not because they lack the skill, they simply lack the meat undercarriage required by current legislation. In this case I think an exemption is appropriate, perhaps with some sort of test to ensure the person in question can extricate themselves from the machine they are flying without aid.
Perhaps the solution lies in making wheelchairs that have suitable attachment points for a paraglider wing and a motor, the wheelchair being in the real world for all intents and purposes a leg substitute. (This is only partially a tongue in cheek suggestion!)
If a person without the use of their legs but otherwise capable and fit is barred from flying foot launched aircraft its not because they lack the skill, they simply lack the meat undercarriage required by current legislation. In this case I think an exemption is appropriate, perhaps with some sort of test to ensure the person in question can extricate themselves from the machine they are flying without aid.
Perhaps the solution lies in making wheelchairs that have suitable attachment points for a paraglider wing and a motor, the wheelchair being in the real world for all intents and purposes a leg substitute. (This is only partially a tongue in cheek suggestion!)
Thread Starter
Thanks for all the replies so far.
FleetFlyer, this is precisely what I am talking about:
By calling for the aircraft to be foot-launchable, the CAA were effectively placing a maximum limit on take off and landing speed. This is reasonable and understandable given what they were trying to achieve; namely, excluding lightweight paramotors and powered hang gliders from Section S, registration and so on. At the time most prospective pilots were existing paraglider or hang glider pilots, although there are now schools which teach FLPA flying from scratch.
The appropriate training environment already exists within BHPA schools and clubs, so Gengis's concerns can be allayed.
Pace makes a good point about how far we should go to accommodate different disabilities. The hazard to other air users and third parties should be the judgement criteria. In the wind shear example a tighter weather limitation may be appropriate if the pilot has limited strength.
We all fly with 'disabilities' of some sort, whether it be lack of experience, less strength and stamina than some other pilot or simply the need to fly with ballast to meet a C of G requirement (I wish!).
What I find galling is that a craft, which from the moment it leaves the ground, is exactly the same to fly and land whether the pilot has a lower limb disability or not, is restricted to the able-bodied simply due to the interpretation of a rule about the few seconds of takeoff run.
FleetFlyer, this is precisely what I am talking about:
If a person without the use of their legs but otherwise capable and fit is barred from flying foot launched aircraft its not because they lack the skill, they simply lack the meat undercarriage required by current legislation.
The appropriate training environment already exists within BHPA schools and clubs, so Gengis's concerns can be allayed.
Pace makes a good point about how far we should go to accommodate different disabilities. The hazard to other air users and third parties should be the judgement criteria. In the wind shear example a tighter weather limitation may be appropriate if the pilot has limited strength.
We all fly with 'disabilities' of some sort, whether it be lack of experience, less strength and stamina than some other pilot or simply the need to fly with ballast to meet a C of G requirement (I wish!).
What I find galling is that a craft, which from the moment it leaves the ground, is exactly the same to fly and land whether the pilot has a lower limb disability or not, is restricted to the able-bodied simply due to the interpretation of a rule about the few seconds of takeoff run.
Last edited by Mechta; 6th Jul 2015 at 11:24. Reason: Spelling
We all have stuff that we can and can't do of-course, and there are many opportunities apart from "foot launched" to fly.
There are several reasons, speed only being one of them, why the foot-launched exemption was made in the present form. Another reason was that anybody who doesn't know what they're doing need to get proper training, otherwise they'll just fall flat on their faces and be dragged along a face looking like a tit.
BHPA club training is not mandatory, it's just that accepting such training is a survival trait.
So, it seems to me that the chap we're talking about does have a number of viable options:-
(1) Ask the CAA for a personal exemption based upon his circumstances. The odds are that particularly if it includes a mandatory requirement to receive BHPA training, they'd be quite happy.
(2) Get a microlight licence.
(2) is entirely achievable, and my guess is that so is (1), it just needs him to go and ask, possibly via BHPA who already have links with the CAA which will make it much easier.
Incidentally, fleetflyer's point:-
Would be a fun challenge for a competent engineer, or an MEng Group Design Project at a friendly university. Not something I do at present, but when I was an aeronautical engineering lecturer at a UK university, I'd have been delighted to have a go at this with my students, and I'll bet that there are others with a similar mindset.
G
There are several reasons, speed only being one of them, why the foot-launched exemption was made in the present form. Another reason was that anybody who doesn't know what they're doing need to get proper training, otherwise they'll just fall flat on their faces and be dragged along a face looking like a tit.
BHPA club training is not mandatory, it's just that accepting such training is a survival trait.
So, it seems to me that the chap we're talking about does have a number of viable options:-
(1) Ask the CAA for a personal exemption based upon his circumstances. The odds are that particularly if it includes a mandatory requirement to receive BHPA training, they'd be quite happy.
(2) Get a microlight licence.
(2) is entirely achievable, and my guess is that so is (1), it just needs him to go and ask, possibly via BHPA who already have links with the CAA which will make it much easier.
Incidentally, fleetflyer's point:-
Perhaps the solution lies in making wheelchairs that have suitable attachment points for a paraglider wing and a motor, the wheelchair being in the real world for all intents and purposes a leg substitute. (This is only partially a tongue in cheek suggestion!)
G
Thread Starter
Wheels for takeoff now legal on foot-launched powered aircraft
Common sense prevails at last:
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/1224.pdf
To summarize, foot-launched powered aircraft can now have wheels for takeoff and landing, provided the stalling speed is below 20 knots indicated airspeed, weigh 70kg or less (75kg if they have an onboard parachute) and they have third party insurance.
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/1224.pdf
To summarize, foot-launched powered aircraft can now have wheels for takeoff and landing, provided the stalling speed is below 20 knots indicated airspeed, weigh 70kg or less (75kg if they have an onboard parachute) and they have third party insurance.
Oooh, I may drag my old hang-glider out of the shed and get back in the saddle. Proper wheels? Awesome.
