The future of Part 103

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Twodeaddogs

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
899
Location
Dunlavin, County Wicklow,Ireland
The FAA did take control with the Light Sport rule. All the rules for Light Sport pilots and instructors are in place. It just isn't working as was promised for the light training aircraft. So fix Light Sport and don't change FAR103.
There needs to be a one or two seat, 496 pound, 87kt Light Sport trainer or sport category with limited rules. Same as the exemption was, with no aircraft standards.

The Light Sport Instructor certificate is easy to get. No instrument rating required.
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
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,119
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
Just how easy is it to get BB? Do you have that LSI certificate?

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? 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?

I find myself in need of a revenue stream right now, but I have no idea if this is a good choice for my skill set and my personality. I also have no idea if it's profitable, insurable, etc. I never considered myself "flight instructor material" because I've never done the instrument/commercial/airline/military stuff. But this may be different and I believe I might be able to teach basic stick and rudder airmanship.
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
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.
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
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,119
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
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?
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
Joined
Jan 17, 2017
Messages
150
Location
Idaho
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?
 

blane.c

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
3,906
Location
capital district NY
I have seen it suggested recently on another thread that a Suzuki G-10 direct drive would be around 40hp and light enough.
 

blane.c

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
3,906
Location
capital district NY
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
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,119
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
I have seen it suggested recently on another thread that a Suzuki G-10 direct drive would be around 40hp and light enough.
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.
 

Twodeaddogs

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
899
Location
Dunlavin, County Wicklow,Ireland
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.
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
5,097
Location
Upper midwest in a house
What about this... bring back the previous exemption and specifically allow experimental "fat ultralights" or previously "illegal" two seat ultralights to be used for flight instruction WITHIN LIMITS, including the limits that govern Part 103 ultralights such as not over populated areas, day VFR only, and limited to basic flight instruction to be used ONLY for that pilot to operate a Part 103 UL.
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.
 

blane.c

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
3,906
Location
capital district NY
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
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,119
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
For legal paid training it must be SLSA, not just LSA.
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:

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
13,244
Location
Port Townsend WA
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?
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
5,097
Location
Upper midwest in a house
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
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.
 

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
13,244
Location
Port Townsend WA
I wanted to give scenic rides, not flight training. FAR 91.147 and 119.1 requires a "letter of authorization" I think.
 
Top