ETLB Squawk Forums — Archive

I wonder if you ve seen this:

http://jameswiebe.wordpress.com/2014/03/03/crashing-a-belite-airplane/

Three things comes into my mind:
- Part 103 in structural strength respect is a thinn ice.
- Low speed capability and attitude of the aircraft gives more room for errors
- I would not ever choose a smaller engine "just" fit into 103-

But I must admit that Belite is a quite capable aircraft to save pilots from major injuries.


What do you think ?

I don´t like where the fuel tank is located.
If that tanks punctures the fuel will be all over the pilot, a small spark may be fatal.
Also, If  fire starts and the pilot is unable to exit the plane inmediately, the tank on his back becomes a huge risk.
After what happen to our fellow pilot with a 5 gallon tank right  behind him and would do anything to avoid such risk.

Belite is a local company hereabouts, and we're proud of their accomplishments. That James was willing to publish this article speaks well of his commitment to safety and inspiring confidence in part 103 safety. Kudos to him and everyone at Belite.

While the Belites are very capable aircraft, I feel that they lack a certain aesthetic appeal. They are long on function and perhaps a bit short on form. As an artist, I probably notice this more than most. Line and proportion are the first things I see--one of the reasons I like the Airbike design.

I always wanted to be an airplane designer. Maybe the 103 world is a good place to start. I wonder if James is hiring...   Have degree, will travel!

While part 103 is a thrilling excercise for low budget flyers, materials becoming more and more available so as Belite does with carbon wing spars.

"What do I think.?  "

I think the pilot needs flying lessons on 'type' and a general change of atitude.  Such a basic aircraft requires different skills stick and rudder skills from his flying experience. His eagerness to fly the aircraft was one factor in the crash.
His arrogance due to his experience with his Commercial pilots licence was another.

I have seen this before and it will continue to happen, due to the belief that 'simple' aircraft are easy to fly.

100% pilot error..!! He forgot to fly the aeroplane. He is a very lucky man.

How do I know...?    because I have friends with commercial pilots licences....who think they know how to fly both my aircraft..!!! and one of my friends would certainly die in my minimax if I allowed  him to fly it.

The aircraft looks like a great little aircraft.  

Education and flight training are the answer...in my opinion.

regards Arthur

Ditto Arthur:  Watched my old CFI give a flying lesson to an F-16 pilot before he would rent him a 172.

All aircraft are meant to fly. We (as experimental pilots) should understand
our own aircraft's design characteristics then  handle it accordingly.
I think flying part 103 airplane is only few mph speed above stalling..yes only few I mean it

Quoted from Garyk   Watched my old CFI give a flying lesson to an F-16 pilot before he would rent him a 172.

I know that if you want to rent a C-172 from Flightline Air Service at K2L0,  Lonnie(FBO owner and CFII) is going to inspect your license, logbook, and medical.  If it has been more than 90 days since you flew a 172,  he may insist on riding with you for a couple of T/Os and landings.

I know that when I got my taildragger endorsement in the SuperCub last month,  it took a few approaches to get used to the approach speed and visual sight picture as compared to a 150/152 or 172.  Slower speed and steeper angle.  
I'm sure it will be similiar when I get my Himax up in the air. Additionally,  the Himax is so light that short final and touchdown will be different.  I'll probably do wheel landings first before 3-pointers.

Thru automation, flying the big jets does not give you much "stick time". I fly simulators when weather keep me in the house and this gets very boring at times. since part 103 aircraft does not require any certification, future pilots should think twice about hopping in and flying... experienced or not. glad he was not hurt.

monte

i have told this story countless times. back in the mid to late 80s i had a customer who lost his medical and built a cgs hawk.  while he was in mid construction he went out to the factory and found only a secretary there.  she said everyone was out at the field flying.  interested in seeing one actually fly he decided to head there.  he watched as these guys took off and climbed very steeply.  when one of them landed he talked with him and asked about rate of climb on take off, departure stalls, and stall characteristics.  the guy didnt have a clue what the answer was!  most of the guys flying were engineers and the only flying they had done was in hawks since no pilots license was needed.  

when i was looking for a plane to buy i found an add for a rans s4 that was close to me....needed a little work.  the guy ( who had never flown before in his life ) bought this thing for 8k and tried to take off in a field that was too short had hedged in by trees.  when he approached the tree line he pulled up...stalled and mushed into the ground.  i thought he was lucky to be alive.  well the "little work" was a gross understatement...which he down played.  i passed on that ac.  

anyways both of these incidents made a lasting impression on me.  that is why i strongly suggest to anyone with an interest to get into ULs to go get at least enough hours of instruction to solo.....so they understand the basic principals of flight...stalls and recovery...etc.  and when i do finally get my vmax in the air i will not press any limits.  i intend to give myself a lot of runway to land and land probably a little hot.  taking off i am not going to break any records to gain alt....a nice easy climb with a generous amount airspeed.  i will get a few thousand feet of air and practice stalls.   this is a hobby where FUs can be fatal and i dont plan to be a statistic if i can help it.

Dalek: Sounds like you got the right Idea.

Termite:  keep the energy up coming in, power on until touchdown, probably 4k RPM anyway.

My DumbA$$ thought the I could glide in after essentially all my Aeronca landings were essentially with the engine Idling.
My 2nd real landing in the Hi-Max nearly cost me an airplane. I essentially was nearly diving on the runway to keep my airspeed up, then when levelling out before I could flare, saw the runway coming up at an alarming speed, DANG NEAR STALL...
my own personal Stall Warning (eyes bugging out), came on and I hit the throttle, which gave me some additional lift and I cut it the instant my tires hit.
Which caused a little bit of bounce and a near porpoise....  kinda more like the tail bobbing up and down.
Since I had cut the power back on the tires hitting ground and she sorta turned, I had to fight and stab the rudder twice or 3 times to get her straightened out on the runway....  Very little rudder control without power....  Boy was I lucky....
From now on....... POWER is my friend.
At least I had sense enough to climb gently, and training enough to add power at the end.  I credit both of these to my flight instructor.  

I was talking to my friend Gary who is building a full size replica Nieuport 28.  His hangar mate also has a Belite ultralight and in passing I mentioned that I had seen where a Belite had crashed.  Gary paused for a moment and said that yes it was Jeff's plane and that Gary was the pilot!

Gary and I have flown together and he is in fact a very good pilot...he does my BFRs in my Sonex.  He said that he was trying to be very aware of keeping the airplane in the proper attitude and airspeed but that he was just caught unaware of how close to stalling he really was.  He said that as he climbed out of ground effect he felt the plane becoming "squirrelly" but didn't realize that he was feeling an approaching stall.  When the wing dropped he slammed the stick forward and hit opposite rudder and got the spin stopped but didn't have room to recover.

Basically a lack of experience in airplanes of this type.  Gary said that Kitplanes magazine was publishing the story.

Quoted from Arthur Withy "What do I think.?  "

I think the pilot needs flying lessons on 'type' and a general change of atitude.  Such a basic aircraft requires different skills stick and rudder skills from his flying experience. His eagerness to fly the aircraft was one factor in the crash.
His arrogance due to his experience with his Commercial pilots licence was another.

I have seen this before and it will continue to happen, due to the belief that 'simple' aircraft are easy to fly.

Knowing the pilot I have never seen him display any arrogance regarding his flight experience.  I think it is very easy to sit in front of a computer and demean someone you don't have any knowledge of whatsoever.  He freely admits that his lack of experience in type was the major factor.  Unfortunately, the FAA has ensured that it's nearly impossible to get dual training in ultralight aircraft here in the US.

Radfordc

I have sent you a PM with an apology about my comment 'arrogant' and some further information about my experiences in Australia. I dont know the pilot or the person and I should not stereo type.

regards Arthur