NOPE!!!!!!!!It's basically an Affordaplane
I've heard that all Pitts drivers carry a brick in their airplane. If they have an engine failure they throw the brick out. They then watch it to see where it lands so they know where THEY'RE going to land.How many ultralight biplanes are there anyway? Biplanes with an empty weight of 254 lb or less? Biplanes have more structure, which equals more weight. They have a lot more drag, from struts and wires and four wingtip vortices instead of two. Short wings, and biplanes, have terrible glide performance, and since ultralight monoplanes are not known for their gliding performance, an ultralight biplane would have the glide angle of a sack of wet sand. Poor gliding ability is another way of saying that the lift-to-drag ratio is rotten, which is another way of saying that takeoff and climb performance will be lousy on small power. More power means a bigger engine which means more weight and a stronger structure to take it, and now we're way past the 103 weight limit.
Fat wings. It would need fat wings to get the lift, which would make it slow but would keep the stall speed down, but would also make it risky in winds or turbulence.
EVERY airplane is a collection of compromises. The fewer compromises, the better. Too many, and you don't have an airplane. You have a big expensive lawn ornament.
Years ago, NASA had a live TV transmission from the pilot’s perspective of a SST landing. I commented to my wife that the approach angle looked very familiar.I've heard that all Pitts drivers carry a brick in their airplane. If they have an engine failure they throw the brick out. They then watch it to see where it lands so they know where THEY'RE going to land.
I was with him when we had multiple issues with customer aircraft the first time we would get them.
With the parts going wrong, there are more that can go wrong, that’s why they cost more to fly, you can’t skirt replacement. A helicopter business is pretty. Our helicopters were relatively easy to maintain but we probably spent $50,000 a year on parts for each helicopter. It’s very hard to mix helicopter and airplanes in a business. Customers will alway cheap out when they find the helicopter is three times the cost of the airplane. The only way is not to give them the airplane option. Can’t pay for a helicopter if customers use airplane. Cheap out and you make the news. . It’s only about knowing how to do it.
I just checked. I'm a common guy. I don't have an airplane. I guess I'd better get rid of my helicopter. This whole thread is corrupted anyway (hijacked and pulled far away from it's original intent). Dennis
Actually, a lot of this discussion has been offered up as solid, proven examples to aircraft ownership and performance for the regular guy. Some outliers on the low end of the economic spectrum (self identified), have dominated the dialog with repeated "...I can't afford..." statements, yet insisting they are "average". The result is the discussion has now focused on the extreme low end of the utility spectrum (and by definition, a poor economic "value"), and anyone who has higher ambitions is "rich" (and therefore "uncommon" and not subject to this thread).
For me, its an interesting study. Nothing to to with homebuilt airplanes, but one more piece of evidence why the world works the way it does.
It would have been good to nail down the definition of "common man." In the US, the BLS says the median hourly wage in the US was $31.85 in April 2022*. There's little federal income tax due at that implied annual income, but let's say that yields $25/ hour after payroll taxes. Assuming our "common man" wants to aviate and so works 10 hours extra per week ($250), in a year he'll have squirrelled away $13,000. That right there will allow a choice of many partially completed E-AB builds, finished aircraft in need of work, or even partial ownership of existing flying aircraft. It certainly doesn't require the design of a new plane. As a bonus, continued working and this infusion of $250/week will pay for all hangarage, insurance, and fuel in many locations in the US for a modest aircraft.Actually, a lot of this discussion has been offered up as solid, proven examples to aircraft ownership and performance for the regular guy.
It would have been good to nail down the definition of "common man." In the US, the BLS says the median hourly wage in the US was $31.85 in April 2022*. There's little federal income tax due at that implied annual income, but let's say that yields $25/ hour after payroll taxes. Assuming our "common man" wants to aviate and so works 10 hours extra per week ($250), in a year he'll have squirrelled away $13,000. That right there will allow a choice of many partially completed E-AB builds, finished aircraft in need of work, or even partial ownership of existing flying aircraft. It certainly doesn't require the design of a new plane. As a bonus, continued working and this infusion of $250/week will pay for all hangarage, insurance, and fuel in many locations in the US for a modest aircraft.
In the US, aviation is within reach of the "statistical common man" if he (or she) wants it, even on a pay-as-you-go basis. No new engineering org technology required.
*Private nonfarm payroll, wages do not include other benefits.
Enter your email address to join:
Register today and take advantage of membership benefits.
Enter your email address to join: