Quantcast

Is Part 103 possible with a full VW?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Pops

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
8,801
Location
USA.
According how its designed. I would like a little more wing area if the weight was increased. The weight of a VW 1200 cc, 1300cc, 1600 cc, 1835cc and 1915 cc long block engines are all 116 lbs.
 

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
14,441
Location
Port Townsend WA
The Morin in post 1 is interesting at 275 pounds. But it doesn't have enough wing area needed for a legal 103.
EAA told me just build it one seat and 5 gallons of gas and fly to strict 103 flight rules and that's enough for the FAA.
 

Protech Racing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
355
That's about reality here also. 4.5 #s per sq ft is about the upper limit for 103 IMHO. With that, you still need some CL modifiers. Build that plane with straight , thicker wing, adding maybe a foot of chord , should be close .
The 1200 heads with the tiny intake minus the starter, gen etc using a stock distributer, with 1600 or 1700 jugs, would be the lightest and maybe 35 good HP.
 

Daleandee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Messages
1,210
Location
SC
My answer comes from the Al Borland collection; "I don't think so Tim."

In my limited experience around ultralights for a number of years I've seen a lot of "looks like a duck" aircraft but the walk was a little heavy footed and the quack had a little too much baritone. But as BBerson noted above ... perhaps close enough is perfect enough.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
8,421
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
It may be possible, but it's a very slippery slope towards a disaster. With an engine that is heavy, you will be forced to look around for other places to remove weight, like the spar caps, longerons, and landing gear. We've all seen Part 103 legal airplanes with microscopic little wheels that look ridiculous. That's the best case scenario, to have an airplane limited to smooth pavement. The worst case is that you took too much weight out of the structure, and you have something that is not safe to withstand a 2 or 3G gust.

All thatis for a conventional airplane. If you really really want a heavy engine on a Part 103 UL, then the safest way IMHO is a powered parachute using a real light aluminum tube buggy. The "wing" on the PPC weighs very little of course, so you have a good chance to make 103 weight with a heavy engine.
 

103

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
351
Location
Wauwatosa WI
It may be possible, but it's a very slippery slope towards a disaster. With an engine that is heavy, you will be forced to look around for other places to remove weight, like the spar caps, longerons, and landing gear. We've all seen Part 103 legal airplanes with microscopic little wheels that look ridiculous. That's the best case scenario, to have an airplane limited to smooth pavement. The worst case is that you took too much weight out of the structure, and you have something that is not safe to withstand a 2 or 3G gust.

All thatis for a conventional airplane. If you really really want a heavy engine on a Part 103 UL, then the safest way IMHO is a powered parachute using a real light aluminum tube buggy. The "wing" on the PPC weighs very little of course, so you have a good chance to make 103 weight with a heavy engine.
That seems to be a good capstone to this inquiry. The SSSC as an Experimental seems to be an optimal trade off between performance and sufficiency ruggedness for safe daily operations. The Limit for VW appears to be the 1/2VW only to free up enough weight for proper structures.
 

stevel

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
128
Location
Camarillo, California
If one were to go the high-tech, super-genius-engineered, exotic-material-and-processes,...etc. route, then absolutely, but why would someone handicap such an aircraft with such an inelegant powerplant?
 

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
7,492
Location
Rocky Mountains
Not a “full VW.”
Posted in haste. Bad example :(

Yes, this one is a 1/2 VW. Missed/forgot that 'detail'. Kimbrel's original used a full VW. It was close to 254, but had some extras the original didn't.
 

Protech Racing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
355
I have yet to talk with many 1/2 VW flyers that are happy with it. Most state that they will add power as soon as they can. The power to density is poor. 30 -36ish HP.
The big dollar Casler engines seem like the ticket if you have to have one.
 

ToddK

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
429
Location
The Real Texas
103 is mostly about looking the part. People regularly get away with hiding a few extra pounds here and there.

The rule of the thumb with Part 103 is don't ask, don't tell, but a full VW is going to raise eyebrows.
 

Protech Racing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
355
The local ramp check guy told me that he thought my plane was a nice flying UL. Said thanks and went on my way . My newly installed 6 gal boat tank sitting right there. He wrote guys up for no tickets, at the fuel farm . Old guys just dont care, do we.
I avoided Sat AM flying after that. Most eves about 6-8 O clock was the best.
 
Top