Printable View
I am trying to figure out if I just got very lucky... There are two EAA chapters in Omaha one with an UL/Light Sport focus. Nationwide how many EAA chapters are focused on the very light aircraft? I do not know how I would have gotten so far in my quest to get back to flying if it hadn't been for the help and encouragement of the guys here in the UL group.
I don't fly ultralights but if there was a chapter like that near me, I'd join in a heartbeat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Furr
Yep, me too.Quote:
Originally Posted by martymayes
I would join one, in fact I would like to start one. If you are in the Central IL. area and want to do this, contact me.
Here's a list of chapters that have "officially" identified themselves as having an ultralight focus:
http://eaa.org/chapters/locator/SearchResults.asp
Looks like about 30 or so.
Personally, I'd love to see more chapters look at ultralights. I'll never forget my first hop in a weightshift Quicksilver at age 14, back in the early days of 103...
Hal, that link is blank on my end.
Sorry about that - I thought it would carry the search term with it.
Go here:
http://eaa.org/chapters/locator/
And select "Ultralights Chapters" under "Chapter Types" and you'll see the list.
Wow! 2 states (IL & WI) comprise 20% or 1/5 of the list!
Only one ultralight chapter in Washington state. And not much activity noted in past year, from their website:http://www.ul127.eaachapter.org/apps...ents?page=last
I wonder if EAA could do more to promote and insure local grass field flying sites.
Something like what AMA does for local RC model clubs.
I bet ultralight, vintage, Homebuilt, etc. could work together to lease farm land and make local Pioneer type airstrips in local hayfields.
My model club rents a field with grass airstrip (75'x400' ) for just $500 per year. AMA provides insurance to the farmer for $90/year.
I know of a couple clubs on this list that are not active clubs. They hold monthly meeting for the members and maybe a breakfast a couple times a year but that is about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by martymayes
I bet if the EAA had a set of rules an active club had to follow in order to remain an active club, we would see the EAA chapters cut in half if not more.
I've admitted this before, but I was one of the people really pushing for Sport Pilot/Light Sport Aircraft (SP/LSA), and I got into a fair number of arguments on-line with Chuck Slusarczyk over his belief that SP/LSA would not change things much, but would kill ultralights (ULs). I'm sad to say that Chuck was about 99% right and I was only 1% right. EAA (and I love EAA) really put their emphasis behind SP/LSA and left ULs to fade from memory. Now, we are 8+ years into SP/LSA, and while they have had some positive impact, my guess is that killing ULs has had more of a negative impact. I've seen some evidence that EAA is realizing the ULs still exist, and I'd like to see EAA ramp up their UL promotion.
I think if ultralights could be modernized a bit, it might help the image and attract more interest. Paul Poberezny advocated the transition to "proper little airplanes", I think was his words
It might also help if the SLSA standards could be relaxed for single seat craft (for sure) and maybe the lighter (496 lb) two seaters as well.
I recently joined ASTM to attempt to do just that.
I think a big problem are places to reliably fly from and store them. I was seriously thinking about a belite, but have since decided against.
1) I'd have to build a building at home to store it, buy a trailer for it, and trailer it 20 minutes to the airport every time I wanted to fly. The local airport won't rent hangar space to ultralights because there is such a long list / high demand for certified airplanes (currently 16 on the list, I've been told that some have been on the list for more than 2 years).
2) There was also some debate (with local pilots) as to whether it would be an issue with ultralights using the airport, since its so close to populated areas (would have to fly over a good size office complex on final from one direction and right next to a school from the other).
3) A couple pilots at the airport that I talked to said they'd raise an issue with it with the board because of them being no radio (even though a hand held could be carried).
Decided it would be too much headache and aggravation, so I never even approached the airport management (officially) about it. Buying something registered (likely a tri-pacer) instead.
But, to me that's the big thing. In order for ultralight flying to be really accessible to someone, they need to have access to a good size field / farm. At least in this area, the airports aren't too UL friendly (granted, 2 of the 3 in the area are Class D. And I wouldn't expect them to be UL friendly).
That search is bogus, there is one very active UL chapter in Arkansas near Little Rock and one in Middle Tennessee. Neither one shows up on that search, so it is far from complete.
What are their numbers?
That search site is no good. I know there is one very active one in Arkansas near Little Rock and one in Middle Tennessee. Neither one show up on that search. There may be many more that are no on that list.
We get that you think the search doesn't work - I'm just trying figure what chapters you say are missing. Do they show up as "regular" chapters? If you can tell me their numbers, we can figure out why they're not showing up,
When I search, I find 2 ultralight chapters in Arkansas, and one in Tennessee - are you sure that the two you're talking about not among those three?
"Quote- 3) A couple pilots at the airport that I talked to said they'd raise an issue with it with the board because of them being no radio (even though a hand held could be carried)."
That is the problem with pilots today. They believe everyone uses a radio. In my experimental Airplane I fly, I have no radio. Just because it has an N Number does not mean it has a radio. No electric means no radio. Sure there are handhelds but according to the regs I do not have to have a radio and I don't use one.
I guess these pilots would not want me around either in my experimental with no radio.
Quote:
A couple pilots at the airport that I talked to said they'd raise an issue with it with the board because of them being no radio (even though a hand held could be carried).
Quote:
That is the problem with pilots today. They believe everyone uses a radio.
Having them complain would be a good thing. Then they could be educated on ultralights and nordo aircraft.
The main reason ultralights are dying is that the FAA, when they approved light sport planes and pilot training, they eliminated the rule which allowed training in two place training ULs. This also eliminated all the dealers who would sell kits and offer training. The FAA now allows training in only certified aircraft by certified flight instructors and all these planes are four to five times heavier. So much for type training.
I have an enclosed trailer for my Kolb. I keep the plane in the trailer, at the airport, during the flying season, and pay the outdoor tiedown rate (there's a waiting list for hangars, but not for tiedowns).Quote:
Originally Posted by mbond
My airport allows ultralights as long as they have a radio. So I have a handheld, big deal. I think it actually be more important for an ultralight to have (and use!) a radio than a faster experimental, as the faster plane is likely easier to see and is more matched with the speed of the other aircraft in the pattern.Quote:
3) A couple pilots at the airport that I talked to said they'd raise an issue with it with the board because of them being no radio (even though a hand held could be carried).
I've actually had a couple of GA pilots compliment me on my radio usage (I learned to fly at a towered field, 37 years ago). They seemed pleasantly surprised that a "mere" ultralight pilot would know how to behave.
What call sign do you use?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana
A towered (well, before sequester) aiport KAEG allows weight-shift ultralights. Often the faster traffic uses runway 22 while trikes use 17. However, trikes have N-numbers. So they are idenditifed as "Ultralight One Five Juliet" and such.
And that is really crazy because no ultralights have an N-number.Quote:
Originally Posted by zaitcev
I believe the cost ran ultralights out of their class. Why spend 20K on an Ultralight when you can buy a used 150 or something that is reliable for the same amount and now you are going places.
I just say "ultralight", i.e. "Chester traffic, ultralight turning left base one seven." If there are other ultralights in the pattern I might say "orange ultralight". If have yet to fly into a tower field, but if I did I'd use "Kolb ultralight".Quote:
Originally Posted by zaitcev
Years ago you were supposed to use your radio station call sign, but now that a station license isn't required for an aircraft radio that's no longer an option.
This question was rehashed ad infinum. First, you can only fly a 150 as long as you can keep your medical. Second, you must be a Private pilot, and getting the rating is a significant expenditure. Third, you cannot keep 150 in a trailer. The MX is several times less on ultralights as well. So if a 150 works for you, by all means, go ahead. But the argument based on the purchase cost alone fails completely.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1600vw