Vaporware

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Pops

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Other than the redundant power a part 103 gyroplane with a good pre-rotator could fill most of the above list of wants.

Regarding the 60 Hp VW engine: (thread drift)

I've got all the needed tools, a collection of cores and the experience to build them.
Unlike Pops I've just never been able to emotionally bring myself to feel comfortable with one for aviation use. I've seen too many broken ones over the years, both ground bound and aviation converted. I know there is nothing fundamentally wrong with them - it's just my personal problem. A purpose built head and a tweaked version of the Force One hub would go a long way toward making me feel comfortable enough.

Well-Known Member
Log Member
I know that I am not the only person wanting a trailerable aircraft. Making it simply fold into garage would really make it popular.
Type?
I'd usually like a sport plane. Bush planes look like they may be fun in areas that aren't split between trees and people...
Engine. Lots of cheapskates here. For a single place, a good industrial conversion would be popular.

I'm already working on the 'perfect' 103 sport plane A bush 103 may follow that.
If we cover it in foreskins, it will be the size of a Pou Du Ciel, but give it a gentle rub and poof it now can hold full fuel and 6 people and 4 pairs of golf clubs....

pictsidhe

Well-Known Member
If we cover it in foreskins, it will be the size of a Pou Du Ciel, but give it a gentle rub and poof it now can hold full fuel and 6 people and 4 pairs of golf clubs....
True, but just how long can you keep it up for?

Geraldc

Well-Known Member
True, but just how long can you keep it up for?
Use blue pills for fuel.

trimtab

Well-Known Member
Single seat, 325 lb useful after full fuel.
Accommodate a 6'8 pilot without issues
450 mi range.
265 mph cruise.
VTOL or < 100' takeoff and land at 9000' DA
Cost less than $60k to scratch build. No need to be trailerable due to TO/landing performance for someone with a rural property, but would be nice in any case. I can dream. jedi Well-Known Member True, but just how long can you keep it up for? Normally two hours is the limit but my doctor says not to bother him unless I am up for three or more. Guess I have bugged him too often.. Dam, I should have deleted that but it is too late now. No do overs allowed? David Lewis Active Member Another parameter: How easy is it for low-time pilots to fly and how safe is it? BJC Well-Known Member HBA Supporter How easy is it for low-time pilots to fly “Easy to fly” is mostly a function of training. BJC Victor Bravo Well-Known Member HBA Supporter True, but there are several well known design choices that result in decent or less demanding characteristics. BJC Well-Known Member HBA Supporter True, but there are several well known design choices that result in decent or less demanding characteristics. Many of today’s pilots would have trouble landing a J-3, because they don’t know how (were never properly trained) to fly it. BJC Bigshu Well-Known Member HBA Supporter I would like a Part-103 compliant ultralight where no pilot certificate, aircraft registration, insurance or taxes are required. Like a paramotor, it would be cheap to purchase ($8k to 12k price range) and it would store in my garage. Unlike a paramotor, it would handle windy conditions and turbulent air with grace and safety, and it would have very nice control and handling characteristics in all flight modes (especially at stall).

It would be capable of cruising at 48 to 55 mph, but would also be capable of flying slow enough for foot launching and have good off-field performance, because I generally don't want to use it at airports unless attending an airshow, or fly-in. I'd prefer it to have an easy foot launch where I can just run off the ground, but something with bush capable landing gear could be acceptable as well.

It would fit in a cargo trailer, or possibly even the back of a pickup, with no more than 2 minutes of preparation to go from transport to flying configuration, or back. It would be resistant to hangar-rash, or in this case trailer-rash, and also be quick and inexpensive to repair if something does happen.

It would have redundant propulsion for safe operation at low altitude and over hostile terrain. It would run on 87 octane mo-gas without expensive 2-stroke oil mixed in, and be able to squeeze 2.5 hours of cruise out of 5 gallons of fuel.

It would be easy to convert it over to float operation so I can fly it off the water when I want to do that, and it should also be able to carry camping gear in case I want to use it to go camping on some remote mountain lake.

How does this sound to the rest of you-all? Am I alone, or is my 'perfect aircraft' perfect for you too?
I don't know about foot launched, and I'd like to go highway speed or it's faster to drive...Folding wings, and quick change floats/skis would be fun. I'd like a zip on cover for when it's folded, to help avoid bumps and rash. They need to inflate the 103 reg closer to the current LSA numbers, when they open up LSA to heavier legacy aircraft. 250 is just too low for modern giant pilots (not fat, I'm 6'4" 245# and proportional). If 103 was 450 airframe, with a MTOW of ~900 and a 10 gallon tank, it would be sweet.

Last edited:

Bigshu

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Actually, I think a Doak 16 would check most of my boxes, even if it was scaled down some. Ducted fans driven by a single engine, VTOL or roll for TO and landing. Combine a Volksplane with a Doak, and you'd have a smallish, lightish, pretty capable LSA that has low price and ease of build baked in...

trimtab

Well-Known Member
The Doak was an exercise in how to barely lift two people with 60gph of kerosene. Interesting though.

I hope VTOL doesn't have to be that arduous.

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Many of today’s pilots would have trouble landing a J-3, because they don’t know how (were never properly trained) to fly it.

BJC
I have to begrudgingly and angrily agree.

REVAN

Well-Known Member
I don't know about foot launched, and I'd like to go highway speed or it's faster to drive...Folding wings, and quick change floats/skis would be fun. I'd like a zip on cover for when it's folded, to help avoid bumps and rash. They need to inflate the 103 reg closer to the current LSA numbers, when they open up LSA to heavier legacy aircraft. 250 is just too low for modern giant pilots (not fat, I'm 6'4" 245# and proportional). If 103 was 450 airframe, with a MTOW of ~900 and a 10 gallon tank, it would be sweet.
My take on the situation is that it is more important to divorce the ultralight from the airport operational model than it is to cruise fast, which in and ultralight can't be more than 55 knots anyway. If choosing between a machine that bucks the maximum speed limit and that needs an airport runway for operations, or a machine that has 10 mph of margin to maximum Part-103 speed limit, but can fly well from an open field, a park, a beach or just about any place one might be able to foot-launch a paramotor under ideal conditions, I think the one with more operational access options takes favor over squeezing out a little extra cruise speed.

pictsidhe

Well-Known Member
I don't know about foot launched, and I'd like to go highway speed or it's faster to drive...Folding wings, and quick change floats/skis would be fun. I'd like a zip on cover for when it's folded, to help avoid bumps and rash. They need to inflate the 103 reg closer to the current LSA numbers, when they open up LSA to heavier legacy aircraft. 250 is just too low for modern giant pilots (not fat, I'm 6'4" 245# and proportional). If 103 was 450 airframe, with a MTOW of ~900 and a 10 gallon tank, it would be sweet.
I'm 6'6" and don't have a problem working within 103. Changing 103 is very unlikely to please us. There is no way it will be open as it is now. The FAA have also said as much, too.
With the upcoming 'Heavy Sport' reg changes, there is perhaps grounds to ask for something between 103 and the growing monster that LSA is becoming. LSA was supposed to replace fat ultralights, but was pressured into being something else.

103 really needs some way to train for it. Many people are taking to the air with no training at all. I'm likely to be one of those. Not because I can't afford a few Cessna lessons now, but because the TSA won't let me...

pictsidhe

Well-Known Member
Oh I gotta hear this....
As an alien, there are additional legal hoops to jump through before I can take a PPL lesson. I lack enough pieces of paper from the US government for them.
I don't even currently have a US driving license. But that is nothing to do with the TSA.

mcrae0104

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Take a lot of discovery flights.

Last edited: