UL training

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

radfordc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,388
Hello Radford,

Thanks for this clarification and what you wrote is what I thought. Now my question is, he is giving instruction in a Quicksilver II MXL. I know there are experimental aircraft (RV12) that can be built S-LSA but any idea of his aircraft meets that requirement. Also if he just offers a flat fee for his time with a wet aircraft and does not differentiate between his time and aircraft time does that allow him to use this aircraft if it does not meet S-LSA?
Seems like he's doing what he wants to do, and will continue to do so until someone with a badge says stop.
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
13,008
Location
Memphis, TN
How deep the guy flying the quicksilver is taking it depends. If it has an N number, fat UL LSA, he dodged a big bullet. Taking money for instruction, well ya know. He could have the waver. He does not have to flaunt it, just have it. If the plane is legal and he has a ppl, you can get payed for demonstrating an aircraft for sale. If you demonstrate it 20 times to one person and they pickup how to fly in that time, it is just matter of fact. If he is really doing all of it completely illegal, he will get slammed one day, just not today.
 

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,116
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
Hello Radford,

Thanks for this clarification and what you wrote is what I thought. Now my question is, he is giving instruction in a Quicksilver II MXL. I know there are experimental aircraft (RV12) that can be built S-LSA but any idea of his aircraft meets that requirement. Also if he just offers a flat fee for his time with a wet aircraft and does not differentiate between his time and aircraft time does that allow him to use this aircraft if it does not meet S-LSA?
Read the required sign by the entry. If Experimental, a LODA is needed to instruct. Ask if you can read the LODA. If it says "light Sport" it should be a S-LSA. It is possible that it was a S-LSA and has been converted to E-LSA but neglected to make all the required changes. If it says neither ask where the designation is and look for an N number. If the aircraft is not legal the time will not count for an certificate or rating. If you are going to stay ultralight makes no difference except for liability but time is probably worth less.

Part of the instruction should be to show you the airworthiness certificate and it will say either Experimental or Special.
 
Last edited:

pictsidhe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
7,495
Location
North Carolina
Since it was so close, I went to a CAP meeting earlier. I think I may try it out. They only do flight training for the cadets, but PPL holders can rent the planes for a bargain price. You need 200 hours to fly missions for them, so that is a long way off. Lotsa grey haired guys, I may have been the youngest at 48.
 

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,116
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
Hello Radford,

Thanks for this clarification and what you wrote is what I thought. Now my question is, he is giving instruction in a Quicksilver II MXL. I know there are experimental aircraft (RV12) that can be built S-LSA but any idea of his aircraft meets that requirement. Also if he just offers a flat fee for his time with a wet aircraft and does not differentiate between his time and aircraft time does that allow him to use this aircraft if it does not meet S-LSA?
No.
 

N8053H

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2013
Messages
2,523
Location
Right here in front of my computer
A two place Quicksilver can't be anything except an Experimental aircraft or an Special-Light Sport Aircraft (S-LSA)

The previous rules for UL trainers did not require the plane to be a licenced Experimental aircraft. Two place UL trainers in the "old days" were considered to be actual UL aircraft even thought they were two place and heavy. The FAA gave us an exemption from the Part 103 rules as long as we followed some simple rules: belong to an organization with a training program, qualify as a UL "basic flight instructor", and the plane had to meet certain standards.

When the exemptions went away UL instructors had to qualify as a Sport Pilot Instructor in order to continue to teach. The UL trainers had to be converted to Experimental aircraft through what was called the "grandfather program" and they were allowed to be used for instruction for a short period of time. After that time expired you could no longer charge for instruction in an Experimental airplane, but had to use a S-LSA certified aircraft.

I think that's all correct.

I could take my EAB, sell shares to it and everyone who then owns said shares can use this EAB for flight training.
 

choppergirl

Banned
Joined
Jan 30, 2015
Messages
1,682
Location
Choppergirl's Flying Circus ★★☠★★ AIR-WAR.ORG
I would think a two place primary glider towed or winched or otherwise launched into the air could take the place of 2 place ultralight training.

Without an engine or fuel tank or propellor or reduction drive, you should have no problem getting a 2 place primary glider under 254 pounds... qualifying it as a legal 2 person ultralight (glider).

No route to 2 place pilot training in an ultralight... well there you go... that, is how you beat... that.


Getting rid of all that engine/prop/fueltank/drivegear mess, you now can get a 2 place flying machine under the 254 lbs weight limit which is what shot down all the 2 placed "fat" ultralights. All that weight is moved off the plane and onto whatever plane/ground rig/car/motorboat that slingshots it into the air.
 
Last edited:

lr27

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
3,822
choppergirl:
They already thought of that and banned it. Part 103 requires "single occupancy" and 100 pounds less for gliders. I guess this is discrimination against single people, since someone could be trained by their "other half". ;-)

I suppose you could put the instructor in the boat with a FBW setup or something. As long as the line was slack, it would be like flying. Perhaps the regulations are different if you never release the tow line? Now you'd need a boat driver and maybe a spotter in addition to the instructor. sigh
 

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,116
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
There is a 2 person 254lb glider class?
No. Not unless it is a motor glider under FAR 103. 103 unpowered empty weight is 155 pounds. The two place glider would need to be less than 155 pounds to operate as an UL. However, if it were powered with a small electric motor it could then go to 254 pounds. It would still need to be towed as the motor would not be sufficient for takeoff. This puts it in the grey area of "is this cheating to skirt the regulations".

It would still need to be operated under an exemption from one of the UL organizations because of the two seats. The EMG 6 would be the best equipment for this. However, the EMG 6 has so many gotchas as a ultralight or other trainer that it is difficult to count them all.

Tried to find a quick answer for EMG 6 empty weight but got lost in the internet.
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
5,089
Location
Upper midwest in a house
Perhaps the regulations are different if you never release the tow line? Now you'd need a boat driver and maybe a spotter in addition to the instructor. sigh
If the tow line is never released, the FAA would call that a "kite" so it would fall under Part 101. Like parasailing at the beach or back when Bensen gyro trainers were a method of learning how to fly a gyro. Fairly certain that is a hobby or recreational activity only so you couldn't open up a business for ultralight training using a kite.
 

Turd Ferguson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
5,089
Location
Upper midwest in a house
No. Not unless it is a motor glider under FAR 103.

However, if it were powered with a small electric motor it could then go to 254 pounds. It would still need to be towed as the motor would not be sufficient for takeoff. This puts it in the grey area of "is this cheating to skirt the regulations".
A Cox .049 nitro engine would make it "powered"......lol. With a 5 gal gas tank it would have an endurance of 10 days or more.
 

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
13,220
Location
Port Townsend WA
The EMG-6 could be certificated as SLSA glider or powered glider for legal two seat instruction.
That was the purpose of the Light Sport rule. Just can't use electric motors yet.
 

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
7,052
Location
Rocky Mountains
Just can't use electric motors yet.
Yet..........

Give them some time. F44 is working on it as part of the ASTM version of part 23. Once they get it all voted on (draft version 10 at the moment) then F37 will have a template to follow. From my understanding it covers pure electric and hybrid.
 
Top