BCAR Very Light Helicopters
Moderator
Thread Starter
BCAR Very Light Helicopters
Worthy of note for people in the R&D or certification spheres, this was in my mail this morning from CAA,
G
As requested, please find below details of new and amended Civil Aviation Authority Publications within your chosen categories:
---------------------------------
"CAP 750: British Civil Airworthiness Requirements Section VLH - Very Light Helicopters"
---------------------------------
A simplified airworthiness design code for amateur constructed helicopters of less than 750 kg MAUW. Helicopters qualified to this code will only be eligible for the award of a Permit to Fly.
Please click here for the document: http://www.caa.co.uk/publications/pu...ls.asp?id=1457
G
As requested, please find below details of new and amended Civil Aviation Authority Publications within your chosen categories:
---------------------------------
"CAP 750: British Civil Airworthiness Requirements Section VLH - Very Light Helicopters"
---------------------------------
A simplified airworthiness design code for amateur constructed helicopters of less than 750 kg MAUW. Helicopters qualified to this code will only be eligible for the award of a Permit to Fly.
Please click here for the document: http://www.caa.co.uk/publications/pu...ls.asp?id=1457
Moderator
Thread Starter
There's a good track record of simplified codes being used for certifying "private use only" fixed wing flying machines - and those few gyroplanes certified to BCAR Section T seem to have a reasonable safety record - so I don't think I'd be too troubled as an Engineer by being involved with the certification and testing of a helicopter to a simplified standard like this, nor with using it to recommend that a Test Pilot were to fly it - with all of the normal caveats and precautions that go with a test programme.
Bear in mind the alternative is either no helicopter, or a US "experimental" system with no airworthiness oversight at-all. The main CofA codes are a very expensive overhead when embarking upon an R&D project and if this allows people in the UK or other countries to do helicopter development within a reasonable budget and timescale, whilst maintaining a reasonable degree of safety, I'm all in favour.
As to a low hours PPL - I don't think that the handling qualities requirements are that different between BCAR-VLH and JAR/FAR-27 anyhow, it's the burden of proof (and associated cost) that changes.
G
Staunch defender of the UK Permit to Fly system.
Bear in mind the alternative is either no helicopter, or a US "experimental" system with no airworthiness oversight at-all. The main CofA codes are a very expensive overhead when embarking upon an R&D project and if this allows people in the UK or other countries to do helicopter development within a reasonable budget and timescale, whilst maintaining a reasonable degree of safety, I'm all in favour.
As to a low hours PPL - I don't think that the handling qualities requirements are that different between BCAR-VLH and JAR/FAR-27 anyhow, it's the burden of proof (and associated cost) that changes.
G
Staunch defender of the UK Permit to Fly system.
The PPRuNe 22
Since there is nothing (sensible) in the market place in terms of kit helicopters, why don't we pool our 'collective' resources and develop a cheap kit between ourselves?
PM me if anyone is interested.
CRAN
PM me if anyone is interested.
CRAN
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The problem with homebuilt helicopters is that the very market they are aimed at - those who can't afford to fly something more expensive - are those who shouldn't be flying them. Only because they don't have the experience.
I know of at least one person who taught themselves to fly a helicopter, but he had a great deal of time to do it over and a great deal of discipline.
A small light helicopter can kill you just as quickly and easily as small light airplane - and we have plenty of experience of that. The same safeguards and rules as the light homebuilt, kit built people use should be used on light helicopters.
I know of at least one person who taught themselves to fly a helicopter, but he had a great deal of time to do it over and a great deal of discipline.
A small light helicopter can kill you just as quickly and easily as small light airplane - and we have plenty of experience of that. The same safeguards and rules as the light homebuilt, kit built people use should be used on light helicopters.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
shawn
i thing you have possibly opened a hornets nest here in the uk and upset a few people
there are quite a few very experenced helicopter pilots flying rotorways there is an examiner and ex mil pilot who owns and flys one ,as well as lots of others
steve
i thing you have possibly opened a hornets nest here in the uk and upset a few people
there are quite a few very experenced helicopter pilots flying rotorways there is an examiner and ex mil pilot who owns and flys one ,as well as lots of others
The problem with homebuilt helicopters is that the very market they are aimed at - those who can't afford to fly something more expensive - are those who shouldn't be flying them. Only because they don't have the experience
A small light helicopter can kill you just as quickly and easily as small light airplane - and we have plenty of experience of that. The same safeguards and rules as the light homebuilt, kit built people use should be used on light helicopters.
I have watched all kinds of contraptions that can be flown with minimal or no experience, including powered parachutes, ultralights and then homebuilt helicopters. Some of these machines can be flown quite safely, others are simply waiting for some unsuspecting individual to step into them for a quick trip to the afterlife.
In the latter category, I would include the Mini 500 (and others of that ilk) and every homebuilt gyro-copter I have ever seen, which offers the operator absolutely no protection whatsoever in the event of anything beyond a normal landing.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The objective proposed by CRAN is a very interesting one. I would love to participate.
Unfortunately, the concerns mentioned by Shawn are very valid. The typical homebuilder/recreationalist lacks the funds, and/or the piloting, construction, and maintenance abilities to be a prospective customer.
Over the decades hundreds, if not thousands, have sought to achieve the same objective and the success rate is a couple of decimal places away from nil. IMHO, the possibility of success can only come about if there have been significant improvements during the ensuing years. Improvements such as; strong reliable lightweight materials, strong reliable lightweight power trains and engines, and last but far from least, significant improvements in rotorcraft aerodynamics.
Please excuse the above negativism, but my philosophy toward business decisions has been to look for the bad. The good can look after itself.
This forum might be an excellent place to initiate the discussions. The two primary considerations are probably;
1) The market for this craft.
2) A consensus as to principal characteristics of the craft.
'Just one persons opinion'
Unfortunately, the concerns mentioned by Shawn are very valid. The typical homebuilder/recreationalist lacks the funds, and/or the piloting, construction, and maintenance abilities to be a prospective customer.
Over the decades hundreds, if not thousands, have sought to achieve the same objective and the success rate is a couple of decimal places away from nil. IMHO, the possibility of success can only come about if there have been significant improvements during the ensuing years. Improvements such as; strong reliable lightweight materials, strong reliable lightweight power trains and engines, and last but far from least, significant improvements in rotorcraft aerodynamics.
Please excuse the above negativism, but my philosophy toward business decisions has been to look for the bad. The good can look after itself.
This forum might be an excellent place to initiate the discussions. The two primary considerations are probably;
1) The market for this craft.
2) A consensus as to principal characteristics of the craft.
'Just one persons opinion'
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: East Yorkshire
Age: 44
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I quite like the look and spec of the CHR Safari, and its gross weight is 680 KG, and it uses the O-320 or O-360 Engine,
But having never seen seen one close up I dont know a gret deal about them, I know that the Rotorway is too small for me.
Nigel
source
http://www.acehelicopter.com
But having never seen seen one close up I dont know a gret deal about them, I know that the Rotorway is too small for me.
Nigel
source
http://www.acehelicopter.com
Moderator
Thread Starter
Sadly I don't have the time, but I like the idea of setting up a group to develop a UK amateur helicopter. I'm personally quite comfortable from my own experience that it can be done safely - in fact in the UK you'd struggle to be allowe to do otherwise unless you completely ignore the existing rulebooks for amateur development.
But making money I think is optimistic - do it for the challenge, kudos and satisfaction - in the unlikely event you make any money from developing a light helicopter, I'd regard that as a huge and unexpected bonus.
Mind you, the same is probably true of most other aircraft design projects - it's not a peculiarity of helicopters.
G
But making money I think is optimistic - do it for the challenge, kudos and satisfaction - in the unlikely event you make any money from developing a light helicopter, I'd regard that as a huge and unexpected bonus.
Mind you, the same is probably true of most other aircraft design projects - it's not a peculiarity of helicopters.
G
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Please don't misunderstand my concern- in the proper hands, these can be delightlful and useful machines. The proper hands, by definition is someone who knows what they are doing, not just someone who thinks they know what they are doing.
You can't be mechanical in your flying technique for example - how do you learn not to be mechanical (and by that I mean "takeoff is defined as pulling up on the collective and waving the cyclic around and pushing in 3.2" of left pedal).
Having been peripherally involved in at least one of these devices, my first requirement for working with them was - you must set up a training school with experienced instructors who are not afraid to say no. Your reputation is on the line if you make a kit built helicopter. You must insist that your customers have at least a private pilot rating on helicopters before you sell them the kit.
Otherwise, you are risking your entire company on someone who doesn't really know what they are doing.
Rotorway, in the very beginning, had a book on how to teach yourself to fly a helicopter. They quite wisely withdrew the book.
If I could afford a light helicopter, I'd buy one - lots of advantages cost-wise.
You can't be mechanical in your flying technique for example - how do you learn not to be mechanical (and by that I mean "takeoff is defined as pulling up on the collective and waving the cyclic around and pushing in 3.2" of left pedal).
Having been peripherally involved in at least one of these devices, my first requirement for working with them was - you must set up a training school with experienced instructors who are not afraid to say no. Your reputation is on the line if you make a kit built helicopter. You must insist that your customers have at least a private pilot rating on helicopters before you sell them the kit.
Otherwise, you are risking your entire company on someone who doesn't really know what they are doing.
Rotorway, in the very beginning, had a book on how to teach yourself to fly a helicopter. They quite wisely withdrew the book.
If I could afford a light helicopter, I'd buy one - lots of advantages cost-wise.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
CRAN:
While I appreciate and understand that, the record on gyrocopters in the UK makes the invovlement of the authority and their ability to control things just a bit suspect.
While I appreciate and understand that, the record on gyrocopters in the UK makes the invovlement of the authority and their ability to control things just a bit suspect.
I see in the introduction that this specification is for "amateur built helicopters", but it looks like one-off experimentals are not accomodated. There is enough near-destructive testing required that only a kit manufacturer willing to produce a sizeable run could meet the requirements. From what I know of Rotorway or CHR (not a lot), there is no current documentation of ultimate loads, etc., so even these manufacturers would have to do a lot of testing to be able to sell into the UK.
And they deliberately exclude the sexiest designs: The Jet-Exec and the Helicycle!
And they deliberately exclude the sexiest designs: The Jet-Exec and the Helicycle!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
helicycle
Hi,
Excuse my ignorance, but how is the Helicycle excluded in the BCAR requirements ?
I know the helicycle design is based on passing the latest certification requirements in the US, and I'm guessing the BCAR requirements roughly equate to these ?
If because of the Jet engines, don't the requirements make allowances for specs not stated, as long as they can be shown to be effective, that is meet the intent of the requirements and are safe ?
sw
Excuse my ignorance, but how is the Helicycle excluded in the BCAR requirements ?
I know the helicycle design is based on passing the latest certification requirements in the US, and I'm guessing the BCAR requirements roughly equate to these ?
If because of the Jet engines, don't the requirements make allowances for specs not stated, as long as they can be shown to be effective, that is meet the intent of the requirements and are safe ?
sw
Senis Semper Fidelis
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lancashire U K
Posts: 1,288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only degree that you would need is that of:_
FTBFD, With Honours or the extended syllabus pass, Grade II
That will do for a start , actually very few of these about.
Vfr
FTBFD, With Honours or the extended syllabus pass, Grade II
That will do for a start , actually very few of these about.
Vfr
I don't know the answer first hand for the Helicycle case, but my guess would be that if they approached the CAA to bring it into the UK, the CAA would have turned around and said:
"Fine, here's the regulations that you need to prove it meets, come back when you've done it in a way acceptable to us"
In addition the CAA will charge large sums of money to look over the approval, which I guess is not justifiable based on the UK market for such a machine.
Hope this helps.
CRAN
"Fine, here's the regulations that you need to prove it meets, come back when you've done it in a way acceptable to us"
In addition the CAA will charge large sums of money to look over the approval, which I guess is not justifiable based on the UK market for such a machine.
Hope this helps.
CRAN
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I certify that the following statement may be correct.
swsw,
The Helicycle is in the US experimental category. As such, the craft does not have to pass any regulations. In addition, the only requirement on the pilot is that he has been signed off to solo.
Dave,
swsw,
The Helicycle is in the US experimental category. As such, the craft does not have to pass any regulations. In addition, the only requirement on the pilot is that he has been signed off to solo.
Dave,