I can very much relate to the points raised in the changing horses thread and am therefore reading up about non certified planes. Ideally I would find the best bang for the buck all metal high wing with a cruise speed of not less than 100 knots, good build quality, clean/simple instrument panel (basic T) and comfortable side by side seats (in the case of an experimental: 3 or 4 of them). Short grass runway suitability (400 meters roughly) would be nice.
For a plane registered in ECAC it seems only 2 seats are possible. While some states allow 4 seat experimentals the oversight rules are then tougher negating some of the advantages of going non certified.
Unless going with an N-reg experimental (in which case an N-reg certified might be actually less hassle) like a Jabiru 400 it seems I’ll have to accept 2 seats.
The cheapest planes are 2 seat, fabric covered ultralights. So far I understand that in most ECAC states UL = max. 2 seats, day VFR and in some states a mandatory ballistic parachute system (Germany). The license required varies by state. Some accept PPL, others need a special license. Flying/basing within and to other ECAC states seems unproblematic (Austria accepts other ECAC UL/experimentals.
The main build materials are
Fabric +easy to repair, – uv exposure
Plastic/Composite + nice sleek look, – I have doubts about the quality of the building, difficult to repair, I was told composites have a very thin main spar and are not „baked“ as good as certifieds, purchase price
Metal/Aluminum + I like the look, durable, – corrosion, purchase price higher
Carbon (High end $$$)
Main engines are
Rotax (912, S, ULS / 914 / 915)
Limbach (VW)
Smart Car engine
Jabiru
Etc…
A RANS-S6, Avid Flyer and similar can be had for less than 20.000€. For short hops to grass fields the payload of only around 170kg would be sufficient for one person and fuel. I was always reluctant against fabric planes, but so is a Piper Cub and they fly and fly..
Starting in the 40-60k + range there are planes like the Tecnam P92, ICP Savannah, Nando Groppo G70…
All in all there is a myriad of planes and I am sorting through them currently.
I would be very interested in what planes you fly and in any advice on how to start the purchase process of a non certified UL or experimental (preferably factory built to be safe regarding build quality).
My MCR01 is a factory built experimental, has a reinforced spar, elevator bracing wires and different aileron kinematics all on request of the previous owner. Although it fits fine in 400m grass, it might not be your cup of tea. Afaik the all-carbon structure never made any problem, but it‘s definitely rather a Lotus than a Dodge. There have been structural failures in wooden planes (emeraude, Cap 10, Robin), in metal planes (Zlin, Piper) and in composite planes (Dynamic, Fascination), can‘t comment on the statistics. I would guess all actual comp. planes are tempered.
Thanks Kraut!
Tempered?
Snoopy wrote:
Fabric +easy to repair, – uv exposure
Nah, you can get good UV protection for your fabric. Some fabric already has it built in.
Snoopy wrote:
Ideally I would find the best bang for the buck all metal high wing with a cruise speed of not less than 100 knots, good build quality, clean/simple instrument panel (basic T) and comfortable side by side seats (in the case of an experimental: 3 or 4 of them). Short grass runway suitability (400 meters roughly) would be nice.
You’re describing an early 172 here. Or a 170.
…or a Piper Clipper or Piper Pacer (PA-16/20).
http://www.planecheck.com/?ent=da&id=41805 local copy
A very nice example.
mh wrote:
You’re describing an early 172 here. Or a 170.
How much is a broken attitude indicator in a Easa 172, how much in a N-reg 172 and how much in a ultralight/experimental?
Depends on what you want to do. Repairing an AI costs the same for all three.
Snoopy wrote:
While some states allow 4 seat experimentals the oversight rules are then tougher negating some of the advantages of going non certified.
I have never heard of such a thing. Experimental is experimental. Tougher oversight rules comes with complexity. It requires more to maintain and fly a MiG-21 than a Kitfox.
Snoopy wrote:
So far I understand that in most ECAC states UL = max. 2 seats
UL (Ultralights, microlights) is an EASA-thing. It has nothing to do with ECAC. The new 600 kg MTOW seems to become much more standardized though, most countries (that will opt out for the 600 kg) will adopt the German specifications. For these planes there are plans about going the ECAC route regarding overflights, same as has been done for experimentals and vintage. UL overflights today are based on country to country agreements at best, or case to case approving.
Snoopy wrote:
I was told composites have a very thin main spar and are not „baked“ as good as certifieds
And which certified composite planes would that be? The thing is with carbon fiber and UL (MTOW 450-600), the issue regarding design is to get it rigid enough, not strength. A carbon fiber UL wing typically can withstand 10+ G, not because it needs the strength, but because fiber cloth (and skin) only can be made so thin.
