noob...

[chucky]

Hi.
The flying bug bit me bout 5 years ago, and I have been drooling over anything that flies. Mainly LSAs that I cant afford!
I have known about ultralights for most of that time but didn't take them seriously till a couple months ago when a friend
brought them up. I have three planes in sight. One is the Flit Plane, and the other two come from Aerodrome Aircraft.
The Dream Classic. One is rigged with wire and the other is strut braced. Dose anyone here have any advise on these
planes? The Flit Plane appears to have a more substantial fuselage, and a more modern wing. Dose the Dream Classic
have a built up or single surface wing, and what are the flight differences? Any advantages to a wire braced wing instead
of a strut braced wing? I like the look of this type of ultra light. I am looking to stay within FAR 103 type planes.
More and more questions seem to pop up as I go along... My only aviation experience is with flying models when I was
a kid. Great fun, but didn't take long to get bored. I would rather build them than fly them. Got tired of being on the ground
watching my plane go round and round.

[cluttonfred]

Welcome, chucky. I have no personal experience with the designs you mentioned, but here are a few other ideas. All of them happen to have two-axis controls, though I suggest them simply because they are affordable homebuilt Part 103-legal ultralights, all would work well with a modern paramotor engine, and all have associated Yahoo! Groups for discussion.


Bloop
Mike Sandlin's motorized development of his ultralight glider, which he calls a motorfloater, bolt-together construction, free plans, fore-and-aft-only stick for pitch, rudder pedals for turns, no ailerons


Sky Pup
Proven design of wood and foam and fabric construction much like your old model airplanes, fore-and-aft-only stick for pitch, rudder pedals for turns, no ailerons


APEV Pouchel Light
A modern Mignet Pou-du-Ciel (Flying Flea), joystick for pitch and turns, no rudder pedals, no ailerons, kits and plans, designer and most builders are French but they can and do respond to questions in English

[Dana]

Wire braced construction may be lighter and more rigid; at least that's the case with the Quicksilver. Struts make for a lower profile; wire braced Quicksilvers had problems getting under low hangar doors. I always thought the Flitplane was a cool design, but I don't know how many are actually flying, and as far as I know it's a plans only homebuilt. The Dream Classic, on the other hand, is a kit from a well established kit maker.

Here's another similar one:

http://www.pouchel.com/english/index...helle_eng.html

Dana

[chucky]

Thanks! I looked at the Bloop a year or so ago. Nice little plane. Video of the Sky pup was great. also knew this plane. had never seen one fly. Thanks for the video.
The last plane is a real beauty! Really like it. The Flit plane is offered as a kit. Possibly sub assemblies. I had been dreaming over Aerodrome's WW1 replicas for a while
and took interest in their ultralights. I have no doubt I can finish a kit, but have not built by a set of plans. Hope to find someone who knows these planes.
Although, the Pouchel is very similar to the design I am looking for.

[cluttonfred]

One point...I mentioned the Pouchel Light and not the other APEV two- or three-axis designs by Daniel Dalby only because at 110 kg the Pouchel Light is the only one that already fits Part 103 empty weight limit of 115 kg. All of the other models are just a little bit over Part 103 empty weight. The Demoichelle is the closest at 120 kg and I think you could make it work with a lightweight paramotor engine mounted all the way forward and a careful build. Mounting a ballistic parachute would also help as the fixed weight allowance for a chute bumps you up to 126 kg maximum empty weight, but a softpack chute only weighs about 6 kg. The Cubchel and Scoutchel are 130 kg empty weight and there is a very big difference between trimming 5 kg and trimming 15 kg, so they seem just out of reach for Part 103 but perfect for a low cost LSA if you want to log your time.

[crusty old aviator]

Decades ago, George Ritz designed a built a very nice flying, low wing that weighed under 200 pounds and had a tiny engine. Built of all wood geodesic, it was fabric covered. There are still plans out there, just do internet searches until you find them. Other all wood and fabric designs are Ray Hovey's birds, like the WhingDing. Fisher Flying Products' FP-101 and FP-102 are ultralight Champ and Cub facsimiles that are all wood geodesic, fabric covered. These will utilize your existing model making skills and get you airborne for less money than the kit route. Like the old song admonishes: don't be sold on the very first one, you gotta look around.

[cluttonfred]

I agree with crusty old aviator and, on a similar note, the Butterfly Aero (Mike Kimbrel) Banty is another proven, wood-and-fabric, scratch-built, Part 103-legal ultralight.



There is also the basic TEAM MiniMax 1100R that would be worth a look as it is quite reasonable for a kit at $6200, the plans are free, and you could pick and choose whether to get the kit, scratch-build, or split the difference by scratch-building with some premade parts.

[lake_harley]

+1 on the mention (recommendation?) of the MiniMAX. I completed a scratch build of the 1100R earlier this year. With some scrounging of reasonably priced parts I have about $4000-$4500 invested in my MiniMAX including the engine I rebuilt (277 Rotax) and new instruments. Yeah, it took longer to gather all the parts to do a scratch-build vs building from a kit, but that was part of the fun and challenge.

Best wishes on whatever direction you might go with an ultralight.

Lynn

[flyrgreen]

The Aerolight 103 is a very nice legal UL. I don't think they offer a scratch-build option, but possibly a kit. They do have ready-to-fly for very reasonable money. I see some used ones in the $8K range.