Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

    http://www.iaopa.eu/contentServlet/i...ch-2016#More13
    subscribe to Microlight Flying eNews here : http://dm-mailinglist.com/subscribe?f=c4198184

  • #2
    Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

    Maybe someone can enlighten me, why do manufacturers take fat overweight aircraft , strip them down to barely get into the Microlight / Ultralight category , then bitch when it cant be flown with fuel baggage and a passenger. i guess what is it about the microlight category that makes it attractive to manufacturers rather than say our Laa a/c which can have a much higher MTOW be legal yet be flown on the exact same NPPL licence.

    Comment


    • #3
      Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

      Keven Gaffney wrote: i guess what is it about the microlight category that makes it attractive to manufacturers rather than say our Laa a/c which can have a much higher MTOW be legal yet be flown on the exact same NPPL licence.
      Some of us only have microlight licences, and don't want to have to be members of two associations?

      We'd be happy to have 495, which they are at, which is over 20kg more. 600 kg is a bit too much, and most microlight designed aircraft would not pass stall or load criteria at that weight...

      Comment


      • #4
        Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

        Steve Uzochukwu wrote:
        Originally posted by Keven Gaffney
        i guess what is it about the microlight category that makes it attractive to manufacturers rather than say our Laa a/c which can have a much higher MTOW be legal yet be flown on the exact same NPPL licence.
        Some of us only have microlight licences, and don't want to have to be members of two associations?

        We'd be happy to have 495, which they are at, which is over 20kg more. 600 kg is a bit too much, and most microlight designed aircraft would not pass stall or load criteria at that weight...
        And in 10 years time every one will want 595 Kg, its just a case of laziness on peoples parts forcing an entire class to be subjected to extra regulation, flying has never and will never be cheap if you want to fly heavier ac then get the relevant licence , same with any other sport / profession.

        Comment


        • #5
          Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

          I agree with Kevin, whatever you raise the limit to manufacturers will probably fit the most they can into that limit and you've back marginal on weight again and someone will request another increase. We have history. 390Kg to 450Kg was a decent increase but here we are knocking at the door again...

          Comment


          • #6
            Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

            Thought it was 450 Europe wide. 495 looks like 450KG plus fuel which would be a sensible proposal.
            450KG is a silly number anyway. Half a ton and be done with it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

              you get another 22.5 kg if you install a ballistic chute of which only about 10 is usable after the install.

              Not sure the old Eurostar ev97 was fat and over weight ( new one may be what you are describing……..vortex generators….). ok I have been carrying a bit of winter weight and the wife…… in winter trim
              Assuming 450kg
              Eurostar 265 185
              P1 80 105
              P2 60 45
              Fuel 60ltrs 44 1 (3-5hr flight time)
              Luggage 0

              i just pray i do not put on ice age weight or might have to register the wife with weight watchers.....

              Comment


              • #8
                Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

                Wayne Chang wrote: you get another 22.5 kg if you install a ballistic chute of which only about 10 is usable after the install.

                Not sure the old Eurostar ev97 was fat and over weight ( new one may be what you are describing……..vortex generators….). ok I have been carrying a bit of winter weight and the wife…… in winter trim
                Assuming 450kg
                Eurostar 265 185
                P1 80 105
                P2 60 45
                Fuel 60ltrs 44 1 (3-5hr flight time)
                Luggage 0

                i just pray i do not put on ice age weight or might have to register the wife with weight watchers.....
                Wayne re register it as an LAA machine you get 480 kg MTOW just fit the fuel pump
                gives you a 30 kg head room which is my point to start with. why compromise just to get into a category the A/C is not really suited to.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

                  Then Wayne can't fly it! As its not a microlight and I don't think Wayne has an SEP rating,
                  Andy Aiken
                  BMAA 5417

                  G-CITG

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

                    Tom Sheppard wrote: Thought it was 450 Europe wide. 495 looks like 450KG plus fuel which would be a sensible proposal.
                    450KG is a silly number anyway. Half a ton and be done with it.
                    495kg is the mtow for a microlight seaplane.
                    Andy Aiken
                    BMAA 5417

                    G-CITG

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

                      Andy Aiken wrote: Then Wayne can't fly it! As its not a microlight and I don't think Wayne has an SEP rating,
                      I dont have a 7.5 ton lorry licence but if i drive it empty is that ok ?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

                        Keven Gaffney wrote:
                        Originally posted by Andy Aiken
                        Then Wayne can't fly it! As its not a microlight and I don't think Wayne has an SEP rating,
                        I dont have a 7.5 ton lorry licence but if i drive it empty is that ok ?
                        Only if you re-plate it as a 3.5 ton lorry. Then you'd have no luggage capacity etc.... but if you only have a 3.5 ton license, at least you can drive it.

                        Have we come full circle?
                        Pete T.

                        "A closed mouth gathers no feet".

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

                          Keven Gaffney wrote:
                          Wayne re register it as an LAA machine you get 480 kg MTOW just fit the fuel pump
                          gives you a 30 kg head room which is my point to start with. why compromise just to get into a category the A/C is not really suited to.
                          Upgrading to an NPPL SSEA and joining the LAA is a lot cheaper than fitting a parachute.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

                            Peter Twissell wrote:
                            Originally posted by Keven Gaffney
                            Originally posted by Andy Aiken
                            Then Wayne can't fly it! As its not a microlight and I don't think Wayne has an SEP rating,
                            I dont have a 7.5 ton lorry licence but if i drive it empty is that ok ?
                            Only if you re-plate it as a 3.5 ton lorry. Then you'd have no luggage capacity etc.... but if you only have a 3.5 ton license, at least you can drive it.

                            Have we come full circle?
                            I think we have Pete, i believe its horses for courses, i do like the euro star and the ilk and when i get old i might get a conversion and depending on what i want to fly get the sep conversion , or get a skyranger

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Proposal to increase Finnish Microlight MTOW

                              Keven - I think there maybe a few things you are forgetting:

                              LAA can only handle kit planes (setting aside vinatge and orphan types as not being relevant to this discussion). One of the advantages of microlights is that you dont have to build them - as per Waynes Eurostar which is factory built (so he cant just go LAA fit that pump and get 480kg..!)

                              Europe wide certifying a non microlight for manufacture is a very big, very expensive PIA - as it has to gain EASA type approval and the company has to get EASA design organisation approval and Production organisation approval. from a study I saw presented at Friedricshafen last year you will need above 1million Euro to do it... which overhead then has to be clawed back in production which makes the machines unaffordable. Or they go bust doing it - like flight design just have..

                              And even if that bit was affiordable, having an EASA certified plane means EASA certified maintenace to Part M with licensed engineers and mountains of paperwork = another small fortune..

                              So EASA doesnt work for sport flying for the non super rich.

                              Microlights on the other hand are outside of EASA control - in annex2 of the basic regulation to be exact (soon to be redegnated annex1 to be super pedantic) - which means anything sub the takeoff weight limit (300/315 - 450/472.5/495 etc) and stalls at less than 35 knots, is then subject to national regulation outside of EASA.

                              Even in strict old blighty this means the situation is massively easier and less expensive. In some EU countries even more so - so microlights have flourished and become the largest sector of sport aviation across the EU.

                              But we have a problem - the problem is that we have a brilliant engine - the 912. powerful, economical and reliable. And mated to a cabin plane (which is what 99%of stick control recereational fliers want) it is extremely capable and has been a revolution to sport flying - but the problem is that even with some exotic structural solutions it doesnt give practical payload at microlight weight limits to match its otherwise capability (and dont joke by suggesting all fixedwings should go back to 582 power - or wrorse use a jab! . But because they are so capable people just use them anyway and many 'technically infringe' the letter of the law. Or maybe worse still they might not - but be having a fuel emergency on any out of the circuit two up flight.. The Finnish proposal (although maybe not 100% consistent with itself at all times) points out some of the real world safety issues this payload crunch leads to.

                              So it makes absolute sense to enable some payload legally. Doesnt it?

                              Trike pilots of course can be smug and argue no need - but really its not a trike issue, and they should respect that not everyone wants to fly about in a very old fashioned open cockpit slow three axis microlight when clearly the modern ones make so much sense and are excatly what most recreational pilots want- except the limited payload..

                              And folk that buy jodels / Euopas that some other poor sap has spent half their life in the treble car garage at their country pile to make (and then were too old to fly it), do need to see the flaw in that system as an answer for sport flying going forwards..

                              There is another proposal going in from Europe Airsports (the EU sporting bodies association) to open up annex2 for aircraft up to 600kg - to enable LSA equivalency. Thts could lead to tiered categories and / or expansion of the microlight one on natioanl levels.

                              Of course EASA might say piss off to any of these propsals - but they themselves have opened the door by proposing 540kg for electric powered two seaters be included in annex2.

                              Paul

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X