Sport Pilot Talk

HAPPYDAN wrote:

Possum69 wrote:I did talk with the EAA got some good feed back, But still like to get every ones feed back

Great bunch of folks, they are! They were building a twin engine ultralight while I was there, similar to one in the museum. Can't imagine what sort of certification, if any, that will require.

If it is a ultralight it requires no certification. If it is not an ultralight it can be certified as a experimental amueture built.

If you can turn the fat ultralight into a single seater, then as long at it weighs in at 254 pounds or less empty, and has a fuel capacity of 5 gallons or less, I believe you can still fly it under Part 103 ultralight rules. But to register it as an Experimental Amateur Built LSA, you would have to present a Designated Airworthiness Representative with documentation showing that you did at least 51% of the work.

drseti wrote:If you can turn the fat ultralight into a single seater, then as long at it weighs in at 254 pounds or less empty, and has a fuel capacity of 5 gallons or less, I believe you can still fly it under Part 103 ultralight rules. But to register it as an Experimental Amateur Built LSA, you would have to present a Designated Airworthiness Representative with documentation showing that you did at least 51% of the work.

If you are referring to my comment I was speaking to this posted by HAPPYDAN about the guys at EAA, "Great bunch of folks, they are! They were building a twin engine ultralight while I was there, similar to one in the museum. Can't imagine what sort of certification, if any, that will require.".

Ahhhh...

There is a twin engine ultralight kit available. I don't remember what it's called.

I remember one like this from the 70's or 80's at Oshkosh. They even flew it in the airshow demonstration aerobatics.

I believe that may be the same one in the Museum. One of the Docents said it was used by National Geo in Africa for filming a documentary. The plane the guys were building in the Marks/Weeks hangar north of the field was a kit, donated by someone who bought it but couldn't build it.

HAPPYDAN wrote:I believe that may be the same one in the Museum. One of the Docents said it was used by National Geo in Africa for filming a documentary. The plane the guys were building in the Marks/Weeks hangar north of the field was a kit, donated by someone who bought it but couldn't build it.

I believe the airplane the National Geographic used was an Aircam. Definitely not LSA or ultralight, though it does have some ultralight genes.

drseti wrote:If you can turn the fat ultralight into a single seater, then as long at it weighs in at 254 pounds or less empty, and has a fuel capacity of 5 gallons or less, I believe you can still fly it under Part 103 ultralight rules. But to register it as an Experimental Amateur Built LSA, you would have to present a Designated Airworthiness Representative with documentation showing that you did at least 51% of the work.

This isn't quite right. You have to convince them that 51% was built by amateurs for educational or recreational purposes (i.e., someone didn't build for hire). To restate: the person registering the plane doesn't have to be the one that built it. The built-it-myself argument is only required to get the repairman certificate, which is only needed for the annual inspection sign-off, not for doing actual repairs.

Ron

rsteele wrote:

drseti wrote:If you can turn the fat ultralight into a single seater, then as long at it weighs in at 254 pounds or less empty, and has a fuel capacity of 5 gallons or less, I believe you can still fly it under Part 103 ultralight rules. But to register it as an Experimental Amateur Built LSA, you would have to present a Designated Airworthiness Representative with documentation showing that you did at least 51% of the work.

This isn't quite right. You have to convince them that 51% was built by amateurs for educational or recreational purposes (i.e., someone didn't build for hire). To restate: the person registering the plane doesn't have to be the one that built it. The built-it-myself argument is only required to get the repairman certificate, which is only needed for the annual inspection sign-off, not for doing actual repairs.

Ron

To add to this, you don't have to build 51% to get the repairman certificate. A group of 4 can build a kit where 51% is completed for education or recreation. All 4 can have equal roles completing 12.75%. Any 1 of the 4 can apply for the repairman certificate, but only 1 repairman certificate will be issued per aircraft.

Also worth noting that there is no Experimental Amateur Built LSA classification. It is either Experimental Amateur Built or Experimental LSA. There is a big difference between the two. Experimental LSA does not require any specific build percentage requirements, only that it conform to a ASTM approved aircraft, except for the previously grandfathered aircraft.

Ron and Tom, your comments are 100% correct. Thanks for clarifying my oversimplification of the 51% rule.