Well, if you ever decide that with the fixed gear, you end up making it a pod and boom pusher - a la Strojnik - I would definitely consider helping you build it (though then we'd actually build molds to put it into production!)
How about using plywood..it is very strong and yet lite material....and can be treated to withstand the weather. Also very inexpensive.All these discussions of cardboard, paper, and so on are nice on their face, but you can't simply focus on the one point-use-case of the impact itself. Any impact attenuator solution has to remain effective and intact for the lifetime of the aircraft, or at least through a reasonable service interval.
Humidity, spilled drinks, and getting out of the cockpit in a rain-shower are all ways that a cardboard/paper attenuator can be degraded by getting wet. We also tend to step on aircraft seats during normal ingress/egress of smaller airplanes, and that puts off-center point loads on the attenuator, meaning likely to break it down even further. This latter is also an issue with foams, honeycomb, etc.
After reading various resources, I'm more and more convinced that mounting the seat on a set of beams (S-beam or even simple straight ones) that yield under the necessary impact loading is the way to go. The results are predictable, consistent, and the system is really enduring in day-to-day use, simple, and made of inexpensive materials.
Yeah, "I need to post some updates." Back in February. >sigh<Topaz..can we see these updates ?
I think the Pipistrel Sinus and Alpha are showing that affordable aviation in electrics is also the safest when you fly a motorized glider type aeroplane.
Build-material discussion for my project is here: https://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/forums/threads/conceptual-design-of-an-inexpensive-single-seat-motorglider.19739/page-3#post-294How about using plywood..it is very strong and yet lite material....and can ba treated to withstand the weather. Also very inexpensive.
Very simple, and purely selfish: Once the madness in my life settles down a little, I'm going to be picking up my Sport Pilot certificate. Flying gliders is fun, challenging, and "different," but they're not usable for cross-country flights under power without a self-launch endorsement. I could get the latter somewhat less expensively than getting a Sport Pilot certificate, but the Sport Pilot cert offers me a much broader spectrum of aircraft to fly, and that was the deciding factor since I'll be renting until I finally get something of my own into the air. I have some medical issues that, while they don't interfere or make me unsafe while flying, would require a special issuance for adding an ASEL rating, and I don't want the annual mound of testing and paperwork it would require. I definitely don't want that Sword of Damocles hanging over my flying all the time, especially for the purely recreational type of flying I do and will be doing.Hi Topaz,
Why are you designing it to be LSA versus simply experimental? I'm not sold on either one, just curious the reasoning....
Thank you, but no. I've already decided on my engine. I don't need - nor want - a 40hp engine. I appreciate everyone's opinion as expressed in the various industrial engine threads, but I'm going my own way.
I've been away from the "scene" for a while now, but I know of nothing but some vague rumors that a lot of people want the LSA and Sport Pilot rule to be "bumped up" to larger, more-powerful aircraft, but I've seen nothing to substantiate that the FAA is even considering this. Have I missed a link here or somewhere, to which you might be able to point me?It is my understanding that LSA and Sport Pilot is going to be changed around pretty soon, to the point where the Sport Pilot license would cover something up in the Cessna 182 class. So make sure you keep abreast of those winds of change, and don't paint yourself into any corners with the design just yet.
You sir, are a most generous and kind fellow. We'll talk.You also have access to a particularly old, dusty C-172 for training if you need it, and access to it's particularly old, dusty owner for non-CFI flying practice whenever appropriate.
The recently departed acting FAA Administrator addressed this at AirVenture. Not surprisingly, details and schedule are still squishy at this point.I've been away from the "scene" for a while now, but I know of nothing but some vague rumors that a lot of people want the LSA and Sport Pilot rule to be "bumped up" to larger, more-powerful aircraft, but I've seen nothing to substantiate that the FAA is even considering this. Have I missed a link here or somewhere, to which you might be able to point me?