Get yourself an X'Air or Thruster T600N as a basic trainer; two seats, reliable, easy to service and maintain and can live in a trailer or the corner of a shed.
The future of Part 103
- Thread starter FritzW
- Start date
Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:
Look at any of the light European two-seaters. X'Air is ideal for this mission and is already widely used in the US.
jedi
Well-Known Member
Because current regulations do not allow experimental aircraft to be used for basic training. They can only be used for transition training to currently certified pilots and even then a difficult to obtain LODA is required.
jedi
Well-Known Member
Wow! What a great thread we have going here. Wish I could keep up!
"Is it something that your average airport bum with time in old light airplanes and gliders (like me, ahem) can get without a huge hassle?" YES!
"Is a guy like me what they are looking for or are they looking for old graybeard UL pilots who started with chainsaw powered hang gliders?" Who is looking? I do not see anyone standing standing at my door or other over the hill pilots/CFIs. I am not even qualified to help cure the "pilot shortage". Airlines need young pilots with the minimum legal flight experience. Do you really expect a line at your door when you get any CFI certificate. You could however go down to the local flight school and earn $20 per flight hour ($6.66 per actual hours on the job. 20/3) to train a kid in debt for $240 /hr of flight time.
It would be nice to have a good stick and rudder guy like you to teach those young airline pilot wanabee but that is not what they need. They need to learn how to talk (and sometimes listen) on the radio and push the right buttons at the right time.
"I find myself in need of a revenue stream ..... profitable, insurable, etc." These are not the qualities aviation is known for.
"I might be able to teach basic stick and rudder airmanship." I am sure that you could if the regulations would allow you.
Now about the future of FAR 103. It is here and now. You and the entire population of the US, including illegal aliens, are ultralight pilots. Most do not know it.
You VB, because of your superior knowledge and longstanding experience as the traditional stick and rudder pilot are a Utralight flight instructor. Neither require a FAA certificate of authority. You are also an Ultralight Ground Instructor.
To be continued .....
radfordc
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2008
- Messages
- 1,389
To be exact, you can't charge for instruction in an experimental airplane. The LODA allows you to charge for transition instruction.
I have heard stories of clubs being formed and the club owning the experimental trainer. A new student buys a share of the club trainer and is then a co-owner. As the "owner" of the experimental trainer he can pay an instructor to teach him in his own airplane.
Is this a viable plan?
jedi
Well-Known Member
Yes.
Post #64 continued with reference to the associated UL training thread by Twodeaddogs.
"UL training
since it was talked about in another thread about how the 2 seat UL trainers are outlawed. i was curious how should one these days get a bit of UL training?
Do's, Don'ts ect. "
VB - Find people like this and mentor them. No they are not standing outside your door but I am sure you know of a few and you can advertise for them. You can charge for UL instruction and you can give them UL instruction in your C 172 or a Kolb. This procedure is also available to the entire population of the US.
VB, you are and have been a qualified ultralight instructor for the last 50 years. It is time to step up to the plate and go to work if you are up to the challenge.
The problem is not a lack of UL instruction. It is a lack of understanding and suitable equipment.
Last edited:
PiperCruisin
Well-Known Member
Seems to me that one of the primary challenges for an ultralight (airplane) is a good engine. I helped design one and that was the biggest problem.
An honest 30-35 hp with the weight of a Hirth F-33. The Hirth was ok until the belt started to slip...single cylinder vibrates a lot...would prefer 4 stroke. Suggestions?
An honest 30-35 hp with the weight of a Hirth F-33. The Hirth was ok until the belt started to slip...single cylinder vibrates a lot...would prefer 4 stroke. Suggestions?
I have seen it suggested recently on another thread that a Suzuki G-10 direct drive would be around 40hp and light enough.
A different approach is to consider the failure rate of UL engines and use smaller engines in larger numbers. Like three engines @ 12hp each.
jedi
Well-Known Member
Wikipedia does not list weights. Any Data?
Sounds like it is no longer in production and therefore would not be suitable for turn key new UL sales. OK for kits or projects. Still, it sounds heavy for a true 103.
Is this SLSA approved? (Special Light Sport Airplane)
What are the low cost SLSA from Europe?
there are three basic X-airs; the classic, the XAir F (flaps) and the later XAir hawk, which has a more traditional cabin. I think the Hawk is classed in the US as an LSA. the smaller, lighter Classic uses a 582, while the big sisters use R 912s, Jabirus and D-motor. All are easy and pleasant to fly and cost at the lower end of the spectrum. They can be bought as a kit or as a finished aircraft and have a host of options.
For legal paid training it must be SLSA, not just LSA.
Best I can find about weight is 112lbs with redrive of about 15lbs so just under 100lbs.
http://www.ultralightnews.com/sunfun2001/ravenredrive.htm
http://www.ultralightnews.com/sunfun2001/ravenredrive.htm
Turd Ferguson
Well-Known Member
VB, I believe there is something like that in place. The FAA can issue a LODA for:
"Training for the operation of ultralight vehicles only when conducted in
low-mass, high-drag aircraft with an empty weight less than 500 pounds and a maximum speed
in level flight with maximum continuous power (VH) less than 87 Knots Calibrated Airspeed
(KCAS)."
That sounds like classic ultralight aircraft training. It would be "train to proficiency" type training and there would be no competition with LSA or PPL. The only catch I see is the vehicle has to have some kind of airworthiness certificate. Can't do it with a completely unregulated aircraft like a Pt 103 aircraft. Theoretically, you could build a 'fat ultralight' replica as an E-AB airplane, get the LODA and provide ultralight vehicle training.
The ultralight association in MI had their annual event in Aug. They had ~50 LSA/Pt 103 ultralights in attendance. That seems fairly active to me. I'm totally unconvinced there is a slew of folks, millennials, old geezers or any other demographic sitting on the fence waiting for a rule change before they jump in and start flying. There is in general, not much interest in recreational flying.
It just seems to me that in the 1920's and 30's aircraft engines were not all that reliable and did not have a lot of power typically so to address the lack of reliability and power people put extra engines on the plane. Which is were my thinking is at in ultralight, it is in many ways like going back to the thought process of earlier aviation. Settle for lighter lower hp less reliable engines and have 3 or 4 of them.
jedi
Well-Known Member
Lets clarify that. "For legal paid training it must be SLSA, not just LSA" is not entirely true. No pilot can be paid to fly an experimental light sport for any reason unless there is some sort of waiver or LODA.
For legal paid Light Sport Pilot logable pilot training it must be SLSA, not just LSA. Any legally flyable aircraft, certified, experimental, or old two place ultralight trainer converted to Light Sport Experimental, etc. and any pilot legally qualified to fly that aircraft can legally give Ultralight flight training in that aircraft.
Furthermore, anyone (no need to be a pilot) can mentor an ultralight pilot* and charge whatever the market will bear for that service.
*Anyone can bestow the title of ultralight pilot upon him/herself as there is no required training, experience or certification required to be an "ultralight pilot".
I am well aware that others will disagree with these statements. However, there are certified pilots that some will disagree that they are in fact a "pilot". I have seen a few of those pilots, who are at least temporarily have been a passenger in their own airplane. I think I have been there myself on one or two occasions.
I understand that these statements are "on the edge" but I will stand by the statement that if you are not living on the edge you are taking up to much space. If you want to expand the limits you will need to approach the edge. There seems to be a definite desire among those on this list to want to expand the limits of 103. Just do it! But do it within the limits permitted. All of the above is within permitted limits!
Last edited:
I suppose anything is possible if nobody is looking. For an Ultralight/Light Sport business to set up at my airport, the airport manager will require approval from the FAA.
I guess you are saying that giving a joy ride in any EA-B and getting money is legal as long as it isn't logged?
I guess you are saying that giving a joy ride in any EA-B and getting money is legal as long as it isn't logged?
Turd Ferguson
Well-Known Member
Approved in what way? There is nothing to approve. If the regs are being followed the operation is legal.
If you call the FAA and ask to get a flight training center approved, they are going to think you want 141 or 142 certification.
I wanted to give scenic rides, not flight training. FAR 91.147 and 119.1 requires a "letter of authorization" I think.
