Affordable Flying

A place to discuss affordable aircraft from ultralights to general aviation
 
HomeHome  GalleryGallery  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Share | 
 

 FAR 103 Discussion

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Chris
Admin


Posts : 106
Join date : 2008-07-22
Location : Mulvane Ks

PostSubject: FAR 103 Discussion   Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:53 pm

It is common knowledge that part 103 is outdated and needs to be updated to encompass the new ultralight aircraft designs, just for kicks I thought I would start a discussion thread to se what you all would like to see part 103 look like.
After january 2010 U have been told the 2 seat ULs that were converted to LSA will no longer be allowed to be used for instructional purposes! It was this remark that got me to thinking.

WEIGHT:
The ultralight weight limit should be increased by 80 pounds up to 334lbs plus the 20lb for the chute, batteries for electric powered ULs shouldn't be counted towards the planes empty weight. two seat ultralights should be unregulated provided that they do not weigh more than 754lbs empty (without chute) and are used for training only.

FUEL:
To keep with the spirit of recreational flying ultralights should only be allowed to carry 5gal as they currently can. 2 seat trainers should be restricted to 8 gallons.

SPEED:
All ultralights single and 2 seat should be allowed a 35mph stall and a 80mph top end'

AIRSPACE RESTRICTIONS:
Radio equiped craft should be allowed in class D airspace, Ultralights must still avoid congested areas.

Just a thought, If you have any FAA buddys give them a piece of your mind!

Chris

_________________
never run out of altitude airspeed and ideas at the same time

3 things that dont matter altitude above you runway behind you and the gas back at the hanger

takeoff is optional landing is mandatory

Fly only in the middle of the air, the edges are identified by buildings trees and houses, and it is much more difficult to fly there.

It is better to be on the ground wishing you were flying then flying and wishing you were on the ground!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.geocities.com/rcpilotcd@sbcglobal.net/Home.html
Greg Mueller

avatar

Posts : 27
Join date : 2008-07-22

PostSubject: Re: FAR 103 Discussion   Fri Sep 19, 2008 9:58 am

My only problem with current rules is the arbitrarily arrived at 254 lbs.
I think 325 lbs (not counting the chute) would make a safe craft.
The rest is fine with me as is.

I brought this topic up with the big shots at the EAA and their position is one of fear. Apparently the FAA has threatened that if anything they will do away with part 103 and will never up the weight limit. The EAA just ran scared.

We are not renewing with the EAA


PS
When I told them they were making 95% of ultralight fliers outlaws, they wanted to know what kind of plane I flew and what airport I flew out of.

I felt like asking if I should just paint a big target on my chest.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Greg Mueller

avatar

Posts : 27
Join date : 2008-07-22

PostSubject: Re: FAR 103 Discussion   Fri Sep 19, 2008 10:16 am

The email from the EAA

Dear Greg
Many attempts have been made in the past for weight increases to FAR
103. The FAA has denied all of them and said that before they would
make changes to FAR 103, they would eliminate that rule from the FAR's.
FAR 103 is by far the least restricted type of flying allowed in the US,
and we certainly don't want to push the FAA into dropping that rule &
the priviledges that we have in it. In short, we must cherish what we
have been allowed & not abuse it. If you need additional wieght, the
FAA has created the new Sport Pilot certificate & aircraft
specifications--these are available on line at EAA's website www.eaa.org
and click on sport pilot--these new sport pilot rules were created to
accomodate the 'overweight' ultralights.
Thanks for your question, even though I am sure the answer wasn't what
you wanted to hear!!!
Gentle breezes to you. Carla Larsh
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Chris
Admin


Posts : 106
Join date : 2008-07-22
Location : Mulvane Ks

PostSubject: Re: FAR 103 Discussion   Fri Sep 19, 2008 2:53 pm

If the sport pilot caragory was meant to "absorb" overweight ULs then why did the impliment a conversion deadline?
I agree with you on them making 90% of all ul flyers illegal, I am probably the only legal UL in the hanger!

Chris

_________________
never run out of altitude airspeed and ideas at the same time

3 things that dont matter altitude above you runway behind you and the gas back at the hanger

takeoff is optional landing is mandatory

Fly only in the middle of the air, the edges are identified by buildings trees and houses, and it is much more difficult to fly there.

It is better to be on the ground wishing you were flying then flying and wishing you were on the ground!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.geocities.com/rcpilotcd@sbcglobal.net/Home.html
Greg Mueller

avatar

Posts : 27
Join date : 2008-07-22

PostSubject: Re: FAR 103 Discussion   Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:54 pm

I think LSA was meant to extinguish Part 103
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Chris
Admin


Posts : 106
Join date : 2008-07-22
Location : Mulvane Ks

PostSubject: Re: FAR 103 Discussion   Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:07 pm

In my opinion part 103 has been around too long too be extinguished,
The FAA may delete it but ultralights will continue to fly from private fields

Chris

_________________
never run out of altitude airspeed and ideas at the same time

3 things that dont matter altitude above you runway behind you and the gas back at the hanger

takeoff is optional landing is mandatory

Fly only in the middle of the air, the edges are identified by buildings trees and houses, and it is much more difficult to fly there.

It is better to be on the ground wishing you were flying then flying and wishing you were on the ground!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.geocities.com/rcpilotcd@sbcglobal.net/Home.html
Greg Mueller

avatar

Posts : 27
Join date : 2008-07-22

PostSubject: Re: FAR 103 Discussion   Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:11 pm

That's the way I feel too

If they want to make an outlaw out of me So be it
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Chris
Admin


Posts : 106
Join date : 2008-07-22
Location : Mulvane Ks

PostSubject: Re: FAR 103 Discussion   Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:20 pm

The way I see it is that most UL pilots are flying ul's because they cant afford a LSA or maybe its because ULs are SO MUCH FUN Very Happy I fly UL for both of the above reasons, if the faa severly alters part 103 I will just give the one finger salute to the dar who lives at the end of our fields strip, as long as we remain on private property they cant really do much.

I hope we never see that day though, I thoroughly enjoy the freedeom provided by far 103 even if it is outdated.
All this talk about far 103 disapearing makes me want to go and fly, better enjoy the freedom to land at non towered airports before its gone.

Chris

_________________
never run out of altitude airspeed and ideas at the same time

3 things that dont matter altitude above you runway behind you and the gas back at the hanger

takeoff is optional landing is mandatory

Fly only in the middle of the air, the edges are identified by buildings trees and houses, and it is much more difficult to fly there.

It is better to be on the ground wishing you were flying then flying and wishing you were on the ground!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.geocities.com/rcpilotcd@sbcglobal.net/Home.html
FlyDiver

avatar

Posts : 13
Join date : 2008-07-22
Location : Shelton, WA

PostSubject: RE: 103 Discussion   Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:17 pm

IIRC one of the original requests for change to part 103 was a simple set of training requirements for two seaters. What we got was full blown certification and NO change to part 103 other than revocation of the BFI system. Pardon my pessimism but I think the only change to part 103 that FAA will ever consider is getting rid of it altogether.

Art
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.flydiver.com
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: FAR 103 Discussion   

Back to top Go down
 
FAR 103 Discussion
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Azumanga Daioh Discussion
» Burst Angel Discussion
» Tokyo Mew Mew Discussion
» Entry #48 Discussion
» Entry #51 Discussion

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Affordable Flying :: Hanger talk-
Jump to: