New threads and interesting conversations directly in your inbox. Sign up now and get a daily summary of the latest forum activities!
Discussion in 'Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology' started by J.L. Frusha, Apr 30, 2019.
Are you sure the two questions above apply to Sport Pilot, or are you perhaps conflating Basic Med?
For one, conflicting information from both the FAA and AOPA websites for Sport Pilot say '... must be eligible to pass a Class III Medical examination'.
For another, a disqualification for the Class III is the use of Opiates. I'd have to get a waiver for it. Not impossible, but...
Third, the condition I will not admit to publicly is one where a physician giving the Class III Medical exam is liable to rule against me, because I have a known, much higher risk of sudden death than just about anyone you know.
Not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make that person unable to operate a light-sport aircraft in a safe manner.
It's up to the person to decide. Anyone can have a sudden death heart attack at any time. Don't get an FAA exam, not required. If you have a known condition that makes you unable to operate a light-sport aircraft in a safe manner, then don't fly until that condition improves.
But I think that may apply to Ultralight operation also. Ultralights may not be operated in a manner that creates a hazard to other persons or property.
If you think you are not eligible to pass a medical then don't get a medical. Choose the drivers license option if you have a drivers license. With Sport Pilot, you have the option of drivers license medical standards or Private Pilot Medical standards. Most choose the lower drivers license standards.
“You can lead a horse to water, .....”
I'm pointing out for others going down this path that you have a choice. If you have a D.L. and no record of medical issues specifically against flying then it works. The issue is you are always considered as operating commercially until the record says your not. Thats the way I read the various publications of the rule from different sources.
Macrae, you got me thinking about this. I think I came to that conclusion in the section about moving from PPL to SP. Are you asking if one is actually disqualified from SP which is kind of what I implied? I think it disqualifies one from PPL and would have to start over as it were with SP.
My uncle always had hopes of passing a medical but he has since come to his senses so that would better explain why he let it expire. I will look into again when I get some time.
A private pilot can let his medical lapse and move to sport pilot with no paper work and no medical.
Can then move back to private pilot any time after getting a new medical.
If the FAA has a record of a failed medical than no sport pilot privileges are allowed. Or until that medical condition is cleared at FAA. (not easy)
So I was correct intially?
Well the first sentence in your post 225 is correct. The second sentence with "commercially" is meaningless to me.
Both trusses can be built somewhat like miniature bicycle frames facing opposite directions with the smaller one inverted. So, something like and adult bike and a small childs bike, facing opposite directions, with the rear wheel space of the childs bike above and inside the space of the rear wheel space of the adult bike, so the moving Bars mount where the rear wheel would be with the the rear bar from where the handlbars would be, down to the rear-wheel position of the larger frame
Very simple mechanism to handle the Fowler Flaps. Doesn't get much simpler. In addition, a simple fairing around the larger truss-frame helps with aerodynamics and keeping the assy clean and reduce FOD.
I know it sounds confusing. I'm not sure of the right wording, but I understand the motion, at any rate.
Should be simple enough to make and implement.
But what will it weigh compared to a simply hinged flap?
Its meaningless to most people because they don't understand it. A PPL is considered a commercial license meaning your plane is for hire. So you had better meet certain conditions.
A SPL is considered you operating privately i.e. not for hire. Thats why you cannot receive payment for transport or ferry services which would put you back into commercial and "ill"-legal unless you have a PPL with a current medical. Kinda of like the big boys at the big airlines.
I won't say more or the mods will deem it a political thing.
Back on topic....
No way to know until it gets built, is there...? However, using the same sheet materials and equivalent sizing, I would expect it to have a comparable weight. Even if it's double the weight of some, it should still weigh far less than a piano-hinge mount.
BINGO! We have a winner.
Heres my opinion and advice on the topic....take it for what it's worth or not at all,doesn't effect me either way in the end.
Everyone has seen the scaled down Mustang pics that I posted and wants info on the plane....here's just a bit that might clear an issue up.
The plane was designed using the Hummel Ultracruiser/Hummelbird building technique and it WILL NOT make FAR103 weight by about 65 lbs.
And trust me when I tell you that the designer knows what he is doing....DO NOT ask who he is because I will not offer that answer....that info will be revealed in the future when he is ready.
We have had a few lengthy conversations pertaining to getting a scaled P51 to meet the weight limit of FAR103 and have both come to the same conclusion every time.....the plane will need to be somewhat of a Frankenstein with building techniques.
Nothing exotic....just different construction methods blended together.
The problem with the path everyone is taking at this time is that you're trying to scale a big and heavy plane down to something smaller and lighter while still using standard building techniques.
If you want it to weigh as much as an ultralight then you WILL HAVE TO BUILD IT LIKE AN ULTRALIGHT.
Fuselage : build it using the tube and gusset method...will be light,strong,quick building,fairly cheap and fabric covered.
Wings : build them like an Ercoupe or Hummelbird...metal spars that will take gear loads,sheetmetal ribs and the wings can be fabric covered instead of sheetmetal.
Basically,Hummel style wings but with Ercoupe technique.
Landing gear : use fiberglass gear legs like the Challengers do...light and tough.
Ailerons,rudder,stabs. : use aluminum tube like ultralight... lightweight and easy to hinge using standard Quicksilver style hinges...eye bolts and fork bolts.
Fuel : plastic tank....light weight and cheap.
If you want to build an ultralight then use techniques that have already been proven to be light weight and strong......don't reinvent the wheel.
Has anyone ever "actually seen" an Ultracruiser or Sadler Vampire on the scales?
I'm thinking you may be surprised with the final tally on those numbers........sheetmetal isn't going to do the job in this situation either.
You're building an "Ultralight"....not an aerobatic, scale, 200 mph aircraft.
You're confused, and probably confusing others! A PPL does not allow you to fly "for hire"...you must have a commercial license for that. A private pilot can share certain expenses with passengers....so can a sport pilot. That is the only money that a private or sport pilot can accept for flying.
Yes, it is permitted.
61.113 (2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. (c) A private pilot may not pay less than the pro rata share of the operating expenses of a flight with passengers, provided the expenses involve only fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees.
It seems strange that a group of people who should be highly knowledgeable of all things aviation have so much misunderstanding. Especially, when the correct answer is only a Google click away.
Even then there's no guarantee that you will be legal. My Eindecker is a Baslee kit built as you show. It is specified as weighing 248 lbs empty. Mine weighs 348 pounds and several others that have been built weigh the same.
Meeting Part 103 weight often requires a set of very special "magic scales". When you weight the plane write down the number you want everyone else to believe and never, ever allow anyone else to weigh it again! That's as good a formula for being "legal" as any.
But,with your vast knowledge of Google,you already knew what the weight of the plane was going to be so you shouldn't have a problem with it...you knew Robert lied and you were okay with it.
We are talking about a new design that the numbers will have to be added up for and figure out if its possible to shed weight in places.
There is one other exception to the Private Pilot certificate - you can be paid for towing sailplanes, not just for expenses, but be compensated or hired for towing sailplanes.
61.113(g) has the exception, and the FAA has issued a LOI on this topic specifically stating so:
"(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft."
"(g) A private pilot who meets the requirements of §61.69 may act as a pilot in command of an aircraft towing a glider or unpowered ultralight vehicle."
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/regulations/interpretations/data/interps/2010/umphres - (2010) legal interpretation.pdf
Separate names with a comma.