Providing Ultralight Flight Training

N918KT

N918KT

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
720
Location
Philadelphia, PA
Display Name
Display name:
KT
http://eaa.org/news/2014/2014-01-30_eaa-faa-review-full-agenda-at-summit.asp

During the EAA's Recreational Aviation Summit, One of the things the EAA officials proposed to the FAA was allowing people who want to learn to fly ultralights provide ultralight flight training probably again in fat ultralights so that ultralight pilots could fly safely.

In my opinion I think flight training is absolutely necessary to fly ultralights because right now, there is no way to learn to fly ultralights without becoming a test pilot yourself.

Also in my opinion, there should be another class of pilot license called the Ultralight Pilot Certificate, which ultralight pilots could fly 2-seat fat ultralights without a medical or drivers license, not even self certification required, the same medical regulations like Part 103 ultralights. This would be a step below the Sport Pilot Certificate.

Thoughts?
 
I think you'll get a lot of buy-in from fellow GA pilots.

I also think the FAA wants nothing to do with it, because the SP/LSA was developed to restrict the fat ultralight expansion.

In a way, I don't fault the FAA for this expansion regulation. If a guy wants to fly UL, I don't see a downside to getting the SP first. Or, if the person didn't want to go all the way to SP, they could take the training they feel they need to safely handle a plane, then go UL on their own. Gives the individual the power to get as much, or as little training(right up to zero training) as they like before setting out on their UL experience.
 
The FAA eliminated the 2-seat fat ultralights and flight training in ultralights when they created Sport Pilot -- that was part of the deal. They put the ultralights outside the tent, and they want ultralights to stay outside the tent. OTOH, they want anything involving two seats or formal training inside the tent, with all the rules appertaining thereto, and that's where LSA/Sport Pilot comes in. What you suggest was eliminated because the FAA doesn't want anything to do with it, and as overworked as they are, they aren't going to even consider re-opening the ultralight door as you suggest.
 
You already have fat 2 seat ultralight training. Find an SPL instructor and go for it. IIRC the fat 2 seat ultralights are now called LSAs. Find a guy who's got what was previously a fat ultralight and SPL CFI cert and go train as much or as little as you want.
 
Part 103 certificate no thank you. There are currently fat two seat ultralights being built that are legal LSAs have to be some old ones that got registered during the window. Just need a SP instructor, problem is lazy pilots not the rules.
 
In my humble opinion, aircraft certification rules are not all that problematic, and in fact we do have UL-compatible S-LSA on the market, such as M-Squared Breeze. So if one wants to techa UL pilots, the hardware is available even without LoDA. However, certification of instructors is a problem, since there's no such thing as "Sport CFI". A CFI must carry a 2nd Class medical certificate, by virtue of it necessary for providing commercial services, such as teaching. It's not an insurmountable obstacle, just not an economically feasible option, considering how cheap the prospective Part 103 pilots are. Heck even Sport Pilot wannabees who buy $80k Aerotreks and $230k Carbon Cubs complain about the cost of training. When your top of the line is $20k BYF, there's only so much you can allocate to training. My cost of training was $14k in 2011 dollars from zero to Private checkride.

P.S. Although a prospective CFI cannot hope to take a loan enough to carry through Commercial and CFI checkride, and then recoup it by providing UL training, we (students) can still hope for some washout retiree CFIs to trickle out of the system and into UL market. But 2nd Class is even more acute for that demo.
 
Last edited:
CFIs don't all need second class medicals. But yeah there is a problem paying and a problem making it worthwhile to become an instructor. Guessing there were more pre-sp ultralight instructors because pilots would jump the hoops so they were legal playing with two seat ultralights.
 
N918KT said:
http://eaa.org/news/2014/2014-01-30_eaa-faa-review-full-agenda-at-summit.asp

During the EAA's Recreational Aviation Summit, One of the things the EAA officials proposed to the FAA was allowing people who want to learn to fly ultralights provide ultralight flight training probably again in fat ultralights so that ultralight pilots could fly safely.

In my opinion I think flight training is absolutely necessary to fly ultralights because right now, there is no way to learn to fly ultralights without becoming a test pilot yourself.

Also in my opinion, there should be another class of pilot license called the Ultralight Pilot Certificate, which ultralight pilots could fly 2-seat fat ultralights without a medical or drivers license, not even self certification required, the same medical regulations like Part 103 ultralights. This would be a step below the Sport Pilot Certificate.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Sport Pilot Instructor is the certificate for that, that's why Sport Pilot and LSA regs were instituted to begin with, to handle the fat ultralights. Teaching yourself in a single seat ultralight is not that difficult, it's where I started at 16.
 
zaitcev said:
However, certification of instructors is a problem, since there's no such thing as "Sport CFI". A CFI must carry a 2nd Class medical certificate, by virtue of it necessary for providing commercial services, such as teaching.
Click to expand...

Actually there is such a thing as "Sport CFI", and regular CFI's only need a 3rd Class medical to teach. It's the only paid flying that can be done with a 3rd Class.
 
zaitcev said:
In my humble opinion, aircraft certification rules are not all that problematic, and in fact we do have UL-compatible S-LSA on the market, such as M-Squared Breeze. So if one wants to techa UL pilots, the hardware is available even without LoDA. However, certification of instructors is a problem, since there's no such thing as "Sport CFI". A CFI must carry a 2nd Class medical certificate, by virtue of it necessary for providing commercial services, such as teaching. It's not an insurmountable obstacle, just not an economically feasible option, considering how cheap the prospective Part 103 pilots are. Heck even Sport Pilot wannabees who buy $80k Aerotreks and $230k Carbon Cubs complain about the cost of training. When your top of the line is $20k BYF, there's only so much you can allocate to training. My cost of training was $14k in 2011 dollars from zero to Private checkride.

P.S. Although a prospective CFI cannot hope to take a loan enough to carry through Commercial and CFI checkride, and then recoup it by providing UL training, we (students) can still hope for some washout retiree CFIs to trickle out of the system and into UL market. But 2nd Class is even more acute for that demo.
Click to expand...
There is such a thing as a Sport CFI-look it up. Also, teaching for hire is not considered flying for hire, so the instructor must only hold the minimum class of medical to act as pic (or no medical if instructing in an LSA and adhering to Sport pilot limitations) if he/she even has to act as pic for the training being given. Stuff like commercial training and flight reviews can be given by a CFI without a medical in any airplane given the trainee can act as pic (rated for cat/class, holds any pertinent endorsements and has a current medical).
 
At the moment the issue is that there are very few "fat-ultralight" type planes that are either SLSA, or have a LODA. I know that they are out there, but not in any meaningful numbers.

The instructors are easy to find, but to be legal you either need to find one of those rare-as-hens-teeth planes, or supply your own ELSA two-seat to get trained in.

A lot of folks are getting trained in planes that bear no resemblance to the ultralights or the ELSA planes that they will eventually fly. If they are smart, they get their Sport Pilot Cert. and then go get some unofficial training with their buddy in his fat-ultralight ELSA on some $100 hamburger runs (more like $35 in these planes).

If they are not smart, they jump right in to the ultralight and stall-spin on the base to final turn wherein they learn what high-drag low-mass means in real life.
 
I think the problem is getting training in a two place that is like the one place UL they want to fly. Although a few heavy ultralights were transitioned over to SP aircraft, not many are in the hands of CFIs. Those that have been made since then are expensive, and also not readily available to CFIs who are willing to give only introductory training to individuals who want to fly Ultralights exclusively without an LSPilot certificate.
 
N918KT said:
http://eaa.org/news/2014/2014-01-30_eaa-faa-review-full-agenda-at-summit.asp

During the EAA's Recreational Aviation Summit, One of the things the EAA officials proposed to the FAA was allowing people who want to learn to fly ultralights provide ultralight flight training probably again in fat ultralights so that ultralight pilots could fly safely.

In my opinion I think flight training is absolutely necessary to fly ultralights because right now, there is no way to learn to fly ultralights without becoming a test pilot yourself.

Also in my opinion, there should be another class of pilot license called the Ultralight Pilot Certificate, which ultralight pilots could fly 2-seat fat ultralights without a medical or drivers license, not even self certification required, the same medical regulations like Part 103 ultralights. This would be a step below the Sport Pilot Certificate.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

My thought is that pieces of plastic from Big Brother rarely solve problems. Attending a few meetings of your local EAA chapter is a better idea.

-Rich
 
GCA319 said:
There is such a thing as a Sport CFI-look it up. Also, teaching for hire is not considered flying for hire, so the instructor must only hold the minimum class of medical to act as pic (or no medical if instructing in an LSA and adhering to Sport pilot limitations) if he/she even has to act as pic for the training being given.
Click to expand...
Thanks for setting me straight about this.
 
Stevel said:
A lot of folks are getting trained in planes that bear no resemblance to the ultralights or the ELSA planes that they will eventually fly.
Click to expand...
I did that.

Stevel said:
If they are not smart, they jump right in to the ultralight and stall-spin on the base to final turn wherein they learn what high-drag low-mass means in real life.
Click to expand...
About that, I'm beginning to think that the danger is fairly overblown, if we're talking about an ultralight that's properly designed and constructed without odd vices like significant changes in balance with throttle changes.

When I downsized, I found the ground handling more challenging. I had lots of PIO and fairly dangerous porpoising. In the air, however, not a problem. Again, it must depend on the design, but I heard that modern ULs like Aerolite fly very much like conventional airplanes.
 
Stevel said:
At the moment the issue is that there are very few "fat-ultralight" type planes that are either SLSA, or have a LODA. I know that they are out there, but not in any meaningful numbers.

The instructors are easy to find, but to be legal you either need to find one of those rare-as-hens-teeth planes, or supply your own ELSA two-seat to get trained in.

A lot of folks are getting trained in planes that bear no resemblance to the ultralights or the ELSA planes that they will eventually fly. If they are smart, they get their Sport Pilot Cert. and then go get some unofficial training with their buddy in his fat-ultralight ELSA on some $100 hamburger runs (more like $35 in these planes).

If they are not smart, they jump right in to the ultralight and stall-spin on the base to final turn wherein they learn what high-drag low-mass means in real life.
Click to expand...

Quite a few Eipper Quicksilver MX-2s out there, and they don't cost much to buy new either. You can even get them on Amphibs, there is also the GT-500.
 
Buy a Challenger II for $10K call one of the many instructors off the challenger forum and go have fun.
 
Dean said:
Buy a Challenger II for $10K call one of the many instructors off the challenger forum and go have fun.
Click to expand...

A Sport student of mine is training in a Remos GX and has a single place Challenger II that he plans to fly once he has his certificate. Obviously, the Remos is very much a standard airplane and the Challenger is more of a high drag, low energy ultralight (the two require different speed endorsements for a Sport pilot to operate them). Do you happen to know of a way he can get proficient in his airplane once he has his ticket? The Challenger is an ELSA that isn't all that popular, so I'm willing to bet there isn't anyone who has a 2 place Challenger with an LOA to provide expermental transition training for compensation.
 
GCA319 said:
A Sport student of mine is training in a Remos GX and has a single place Challenger II that he plans to fly once he has his certificate. Obviously, the Remos is very much a standard airplane and the Challenger is more of a high drag, low energy ultralight (the two require different speed endorsements for a Sport pilot to operate them). Do you happen to know of a way he can get proficient in his airplane once he has his ticket? The Challenger is an ELSA that isn't all that popular, so I'm willing to bet there isn't anyone who has a 2 place Challenger with an LOA to provide expermental transition training for compensation.
Click to expand...

I have owned 2 Challengers, a single seat and a 2 place. I did my transition training at Ultralight Flight in LaMars Iowa. Tom has a 2 place he does training in.
 
GCA319 said:
Obviously, the Remos is very much a standard airplane and the Challenger is more of a high drag, low energy ultralight (the two require different speed endorsements for a Sport pilot to operate them). Do you happen to know of a way he can get proficient in his airplane once he has his ticket?
Click to expand...

Challenger has nosewheel, doesn't it? He should be fine after a few high speed taxis. Like I said above, I only pranged the Sparrow because I'm an idiot. I have 6 hours in it now and already it feels like second nature, at least when crosswind component is 10 knots or less.

Albuquerque Ultralight Association has members with 2-seater S-12s (Bill Stephenson is one), who should be able and willing to give a ride, just to demonstrate how low mass, high drag "fat" ultralight flies. It never glued together for me, but with some persistence and schedule flexibility it could be done, I think.

Alternatively, Dennis Kirby invited me once to make some right seat time in his Kolb, based at Sandia. It's got a tailwheel, but it should do for the low-mass, high drag demo.

P.S. Actually, come to think of it, did you ask Michael about people based at your own field? I bet he knows a ton, maybe someone with a Kolb or something.

P.P.S. You know what, I have an idea. Give him a couple of rides N8415M. No, really. I remember that checking out in N2966V down at Bode was an eye-opening exeperience for me: that thing slows so much faster than Cherokee! It's obviously laughable now, but back when I had 80 hours it was a big deal. It may help him to watch airspeed enough to handle the Challenger.
 
Last edited:
zaitcev said:
Challenger has nosewheel, doesn't it? He should be fine after a few high speed taxis. Like I said above, I only pranged the Sparrow because I'm an idiot. I have 6 hours in it now and already it feels like second nature, at least when crosswind component is 10 knots or less.

Albuquerque Ultralight Association has members with 2-seater S-12s (Bill Stephenson is one), who should be able and willing to give a ride, just to demonstrate how low mass, high drag "fat" ultralight flies. It never glued together for me, but with some persistence and schedule flexibility it could be done, I think.

Alternatively, Dennis Kirby invited me once to make some right seat time in his Kolb, based at Sandia. It's got a tailwheel, but it should do for the low-mass, high drag demo.

P.S. Actually, come to think of it, did you ask Michael about people based at your own field? I bet he knows a ton, maybe someone with a Kolb or something.

P.P.S. You know what, I have an idea. Give him a couple of rides N8415M. No, really. I remember that checking out in N2966V down at Bode was an eye-opening exeperience for me: that thing slows so much faster than Cherokee! It's obviously laughable now, but back when I had 80 hours it was a big deal. It may help him to watch airspeed enough to handle the Challenger.
Click to expand...
In my experience, it's actually alot easier to get slow in the Remos when reducing power/adding drag than it is in a 150. I may be getting in touch when he's close to finishing up. He'sgoing to need an endorsement to operate an airplane with a VH of less than or equal to 87 kts in order to operate his airplane as a Sport Pilot and I may need an instructor referral from you (the Remos requires an endorsement for greater than 87 kts).
 
Last edited:
In order to train for SP in an LSA, it must be either a factory built twin seat or the student must own it.

Lets look at a Zenith 701. Its a twin or dual seat and factory built but you can not buy one and train anyone in it. You can buy one and train yourself but not the public.

The Faa has a list of airplanes that can be purchased and used for training anyone in, none of the Zenith airplanes are in that, in fact very few have a factory built LSA one can train SP in.

Same for UL. You can have a registered two seat quicksilver but only the owner can get training in that. The general public can not train in that unless they own it.

Tony
 
1600vw said:
In order to train for SP in an LSA, it must be either a factory built twin seat or the student must own it.

Lets look at a Zenith 701. Its a twin or dual seat and factory built but you can not buy one and train anyone in it. You can buy one and train yourself but not the public.

The Faa has a list of airplanes that can be purchased and used for training anyone in, none of the Zenith airplanes are in that, in fact very few have a factory built LSA one can train SP in.

Same for UL. You can have a registered two seat quicksilver but only the owner can get training in that. The general public can not train in that unless they own it.

Tony
Click to expand...

You can train in an experimental owned by a flying club if you are a club member. ( you are a fractional owner ) There are some clubs that own Challengers, S-12's, 701's, RV 9's etc that do club training in them. So it can be done.
 
1600vw said:
In order to train for SP in an LSA, it must be either a factory built twin seat or the student must own it.

Lets look at a Zenith 701. Its a twin or dual seat and factory built but you can not buy one and train anyone in it. You can buy one and train yourself but not the public.

The Faa has a list of airplanes that can be purchased and used for training anyone in, none of the Zenith airplanes are in that, in fact very few have a factory built LSA one can train SP in.

Same for UL. You can have a registered two seat quicksilver but only the owner can get training in that. The general public can not train in that unless they own it.

Tony
Click to expand...

I believe that the FAA issues type training waivers even for experimentals.
 
GCA319 said:
In my experience, it's actually alot easier to get slow in the Remos when reducing power/adding drag than it is in a 150.
Click to expand...

Sorry for being unclear, I meant an inadvertent slowdown while on base and final and already with flaps. In Remos the tip of the power curve seems wider: I had the luxury to work the stick slower. But in Bode's 150 I had to steal a look at the airspeed every 2 seconds and immediately dial nose down when it fell below the dot. Without that it slows quickly and flirts with a stall, as well as sinks below the glidepath. I imagine that's what flying an ultralight would feel to inexperienced. It may feel different to you as an instructor, but that was my impression at the time.

Update: here's what AC 90-109 Appendix 4 clause 4 says (Appendix 4 is dedicated to low-inertia, high drag airplanes):
a. Simulating. In some cases, simulating the drag characteristics of these airplanes using a TC’d training airplane, such as a Cessna C-150 maneuvering with 40 degrees of flaps (in accordance with the airplane limitations) is possible. The deceleration upon power loss can be similar, and the steeper descent rates can help prepare them for operation of their own airplanes.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Dean said:
You can train in an experimental owned by a flying club if you are a club member. ( you are a fractional owner ) There are some clubs that own Challengers, S-12's, 701's, RV 9's etc that do club training in them. So it can be done.
Click to expand...


Thanks for posting this. I thought I heard this somewhere. If you start or join a club you can train in their Experimental even if this experimental is not FAA certified to train in.

I might have to start one of these clubs.

Tony
 
1600vw said:
Thanks for posting this. I thought I heard this somewhere. If you start or join a club you can train in their Experimental even if this experimental is not FAA certified to train in.

I might have to start one of these clubs.

Tony
Click to expand...

If your airport has liability insurance requirements, be prepared to jump through a lot of hoops. The guys at Camarillo proved that it can be done, but it was not easy.
 
zaitcev said:
Sorry for being unclear, I meant an inadvertent slowdown while on base and final and already with flaps. In Remos the tip of the power curve seems wider: I had the luxury to work the stick slower. But in Bode's 150 I had to steal a look at the airspeed every 2 seconds and immediately dial nose down when it fell below the dot. Without that it slows quickly and flirts with a stall, as well as sinks below the glidepath. I imagine that's what flying an ultralight would feel to inexperienced. It may feel different to you as an instructor, but that was my impression at the time.

Update: here's what AC 90-109 Appendix 4 clause 4 says (Appendix 4 is dedicated to low-inertia, high drag airplanes):
Click to expand...

40 degrees of flaps is alot of drag for a 150 and I definately see how it is easy to get behind the curve in one with minimal warning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top