Ultraflight News

AUF UPDATE There has been some steady work going on: draft versions of the operations and training manuals have been submitted to the Department of Aviation for review and eventual approval. The new president (since the April elections), George Markey, has had a number of meetings with the Department and the Minister and this should result in some concessions.

So far, much of the AUF activity has been done by the executive. Now that operations and training manuals, together with “how to do your 95. 25 data package” procedures are on the way, work can be decentralised to the area representatives and clubs.

The concerns of pilot training and aircraft approval have been with us for too long already. Having the appropriate manuals is a necessary step. . However, approving CFI’s, instructors and facilities is also necessary. Equally important is getting type approval for 2-place training aircraft. ANO 95. 25 was issued without the requirement that an ultralight pilot should be a member of the AUF. ANO 95. 10 issue 2 has been withdrawn and will be amended similarly. This unexpected move came following a legal challenge to the Department of Aviation regarding their ability to issue an ANO requiring membership of an organisation such as the AUF. It also brings into question similar requirements for the gliding and hang-gliding fraternity. The AUF are considering several options; since constitutional changes may be required to implement some alternatives, it will be several months before they can be put in place.

The AUF membership is approximately 500. Estimates of the total ultralight pilot population have ranged from 2,000 to 4,000. This puts the membership ratio in the range 12. 5% to 25%. This compares with figures from the USA showing that 10% of pilots registered with the AOPA’s ASF ultralight voluntary safety program.

The conclusion in the USA is that voluntary programs are not effective. It would not be difficult for our own Department to reach the same conclusion

FIRST WORLD ULTRALIGHT CHAMPIONSHIPS The championships are to be held in France from August 15th to 25th, at the Larzac aerodrome, near Millian. The competitions are being organised by the French Ultralight Federation under FAI rules. Unfortunately, there are no Australian competitors. We hope to be able to give information on the next world championships much earlier. Further details are available from the AUF or RFACA.

VEENSTRA 2-SEATER FLIES The 2 place ultralight built by Sanda Veenstra just before his unfortunate fatal accident has been undergoing flight trials since late June. A syndicate has already placed an order for the prototype.

Glen Lyon, ably supported by Judy Veenstra, is now managing SV Aircraft. Glen’s comments were: “We are very pleased with the performance of the 2-seater. It fits in nicely with our existing range of aircraft. ” BUNYIP DEVELOPMENTS A spokesman for Ultralight Aircraft Industries of Goolwa, S. A. , said that they expect to be able to produce 40 aircraft per year by the end of 1985. Tony Peters has also applied to Canberra for a permit to develop ultralight aircraft for agricultural spraying purposes. He said that his company would work closely with the Department of Aviation, both in Canberra and Adelaide, and with the Roseworthy Agricultural College on this project.

THIRD-PARTY LIABILITY INSURANCE The Australian Aviation Underwriting Pool have a policy called “the Ultralight owner’s and pilot’s aviation personal liability policy”. This policy applies to each pilot (. e. members of a syndicate would each need their own policies) and provides cover for “accidental death or bodily injury of other persons or accidental damage to the property of other persons”. For a cover of $250,000, the annual premium is about $250.

There are, of course, various conditions in the policy, but the presentation allows it to be understood fairly easily. One important exclusion relates to illegal use.

We understand that some of the operators of unlicensed aerodromes are now requiring ultralight pilots to have a policy of this type.

I feel insurance still seems some distance away. Aircraft type approval and registration, together with pilot certification, seem to be the necessary prerequisites.

SV B The elegant SV11 Farmate. Judy Veenstra and Glen Lyon will continue production from their Nagambie base.

AERIAL SPRAYING Aerial spraying in parts of Australia (notably, defined parts of Queensland) is under the control of State Departments of Agriculture. You cannot apply chemicals by air unless you have a pilot’s chemical rating, which will not be issued unless you have a commercial or higher pilot’s licence and have demonstrated the appropriate level of knowledge of agricultural chemicals and their handling.

Specialist aerial agricultural operators have pointed out that coverage rates per hour work out, in practice, to be about 20% of the theoretical coverage rate per minute. This is due to the time spent in turns, landing and loading, pre-spray inspection and clean-up runs. Furthermore, the theoretical coverage rate per minute for an ultralight can be as low as 20% of that of a purpose-built agricultural spray plane (e. g. an Agtruck). This is due to the slower speed and narrower swathe width. Of course, for some applications, these factors may be desirable. Also, care needs to be taken in regularly checking flow rates as the flow regulators on ultra-low volume units wear rapidly with use.

The safety aspect of low-level flying cannot be stressed too often. Power lines have caused many professional spray pilots to come to grief. Turbulence due to the terrain-hills, valleys, gullies, etc. , buildings or trees -could cause difficulty. The performance of the aircraft when fully loaded will also be noticeably different. The pilot must give a large proportion of his attention to the spraying operation. It is easy to see why aerial spraying, particularly in unfamiliar territory, is a job for an experienced and competent pilot.

THE STRATOS

In our June issue we showed a photograph of Charles Ligeti’s intriguing ultralight, together with the comment that it had not flown at that stage. Well, it certainly has flown. There was a slight delay while Charles received some fight training in more conventional aircraft. By early July. Charles had covered quite a lot of his testing program with a total of 38 hours. The main sequences not yet covered are stalls and spins. Charles has deferred these tests until he has installed and tested his recovery parachute.

Due to the unusual nature of his aircraft, Charles has had to check many aspects which would not be the case in a more conventional ultralight, e. g. the fan blade pitch, the effect of flaps, aileron offset, nose-wheel rudder.

With a coarse blade pitch, top speed is 100 knots and climb rate is 500 FPM. With a finer pitch, climb rate goes up to 600 FPM, but top speed is reduced to 90 knots. Slow-speed flight has been accomplished at 45 knots. It may be possible to reduce this even further when the aileron incidence is reduced to zero. Normal cruise speed is 80 knots, with the Konig engine burning about 6 litres/hour. Take-off speed is about 45 knots, while the touch-down speed is closer to 40 knots. The writer can confirm that the Stratos flies very smoothly whether climbing, turning or straight and level since he has been alongside the Stratos on many occasions.

There has been quite a bit of media coverage during June: channel 7 showed it on their news; the Australasian Post featured the Stratos; and Channel 9 have filmed a segment to be shown on the Ossie Ostrich Show. Charles was visiting Oshkosh, USA and Europe during July and August. He will be getting a feel for the market possibilities. Charles sees his options as full manufacture, kit manufacture, sell plans or license another manufacturer. He will be making those decisions on his return from overseas.

Other plans include building a new fuselage to accommodate larger pilots (then I may even be able to sit fully inside) and some minor modifications including shock-absorber dampened nose-wheel suspension. Then, a little further into the future, Charles has the gleam of a 2-place machine in his eye.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES INQUIRY The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Transport Safety are holding an inquiry into the sports aviation aspects of aviation safety, “with particular attention being given to ultralight aeroplanes”.

We understand that many interested parties (the AUF, the SAAA, ultralight clubs, dealers, individuals, etc. ) have made submissions to the inquiry.

PIONEER STOPS SALES IN U. S. A.

Pioneer International Aircraft have stopped selling their Flightstar in the U. S. A. , due to concerns regarding the unsatisfactory state of liability insurance. However, they are continuing to supply markets outside of the U. S. A.

Bob Reedy says that Nason Industries have ample stocks of spare parts and are continuing to service anyone’s Flightstar needs.

MANGALORE AIRPORT – AUSTRALIA’S NATIONAL SPORTS AVIA- TION CENTRE? During his speech at the Sport Aircraft Association’s national convention at Mangalore last Easter, the Minister for Aviation said:”In recognition of the need for the sporting aviation group to have its own dedicated centre of activity, the Government supports the concept of establishing Mangalore as the National Aviation Centre. ” Mr Wes Willoughby, the Department’s Regional Director for Vic/Tas, arranged a meeting on the 3rd July of representatives from the various sports aviation organisations (gliding, hang-gliding, ultralights, ballooning, models and SAAA).

The Government has a very positive attitude regarding Mangalore as a Sports Aviation Centre. The main point of interest to ultralight pilots is that Mangalore would become an unlicensed aerodrome. This would mean that it would be available to ultralight pilots without the need for prior dispensation. Of course, operating procedures will be required for compatible co-existence with other types of sport aviation.

A consultant will be appointed to determine the various requirements. It is envisaged that there would be buildings available for administration, classroom training on conventions and permanent camping facilities. It is expected that engineering and supply organisations would be attracted to locate some of their facilities at Mangalore.

NTSB SAFETY STUDY The National Transportation Safety Board made a safety study on ultralight accidents during the period March 1983 and September 1984. The board investigated 177 ultralight accidents, of which 88 involved a total of 93 fatalities. All fatal accidents were investigated.

Conclusions: 1.

The percentage of ultralight fatal accidents that involved airframe failures has been much greater than the percentage of comparable general aviation fatal accidents that involved airframe failure.

2. The percentage of ultralight fatal accidents that involved in-flight loss of control has been significantly greater than the percentage of comparable general aviation fatal accidents that involved such control loss.

3. Forty-two percent of the ultralight operators killed in accidents held a pilot certificate issued by the Federal Aviation Administration.

4. The certificated pilots involved in ultralight fatal accidents had far greater total flying experience than the noncertificated operators involved in ultralight fatal accidents.

5. Fifty-nine percent of the operators (both certificated and noncertificated) involved in ultralight fatal accidents had fewer than 10 hours flying experience in the make and model ultralight in which they crashed.

6. Total flying experience appears to be less significant in safe ultralight operation than flying experience in the make and model ultralight being operated.

7. The in-flight loss of control ultralight fatal accidents were primarily related to improper handing techniques because of operator inexperience in the vehicle being flown

8. Alcohol or drug-related physical impairment was found in 6. 8 percent of the ultralight fatal accidents and in 7. 9 percent of the general aviation airplane fatal accidents.

9. The ultralight fatal accidents involving airframe failures were related to improper assembly or maintenance of the vehicle, structural overload induced by the operator, or design or material defects; the selected general aviation fatal accidents involving airframe failures were not related to design or material defect.

10. Ultralight operators are using restraint systems when available, but there is evidence that some systems have not effectively restrained Operators during crashes.

11. Although property damage data from ultralight accidents do not indicate, statistically, the existence of a significant safety problem, some accidents did show there was some potential for endangering persons and property on the ground.

12. Ninety-three percent of the ultralight fatal accidents occurred in uncontrolled airspace; 91 percent of all ultralight accidents occurred in uncontrolled airspace.

13. Thirty ultralight incidents reported to the Aviation Safety Reporting System between 1978 and 1984 involved near-midair collisions or other potentially hazardous conflicts with conventional aircraft on or near airports.

Recommendations: As a result of this Safety Study, the National Transportation Safety Board recommended that the Federal Aviation Administration:

• Establish minimum standards for airworthiness certification of ultralight vehicles which address design criteria, manufacturing procedures and quality control, materials specifications, and recurrent condition inspections.

• Establish appropriate minimum requirements for certification of ultralight pilots, including demonstration of knowledge of flight rules, aeronautical knowledge, and flight proficiency.

• Require the registration of ultralight vehicles and develop a mail notification system for the effective dissemination of significant safety information to owners of both new and used ultralight vehicles. For the USA, this represents approximately 2 ultralight pilot fatalities per thousand per year.

The report makes very interesting reading, although rather sobering. Some interesting statistics: In the case of fatal accidents, 59% of the pilots had less than 10 hours on the type.

•The “first occurrence” cause determined for fatal accidents showed:

• in-flight loss of control 42%. airframe or system failure or malfunction 32%.

• In 80% of fatal accidents, the wind was less than 10 knots. Comments in the report:

• The ultralight fatal accident involving in-flight loss of control were primarily related to improper handling techniques due to the pilot’s limited experience on training in operation of the aircraft. •Reasons for airframe failure include:

• improper assembly or maintenance 35% design limit exceeded by pilot 35%

• design or material defect 10% Our reading indicated that stalling at low altitudes (100 to 200 feet) was quite frequently the factor in loss of control.

BRITISH TYPE APPROVAL Aviasud Engineering have announced that the Sirroco now has type approval under the British ultralight regulations. The Sirocco is the first 3-axis aircraft to satisfy the strict British requirements. In June, after 15 months of design and testing. Aviasud Engineering, the manufacturer of the Sirocco, gave the first public showing of their new two-place ultralight at the Paris air-show, where it created a great deal of interest.

It is a bi-plane with a tractor engine location and side-by-side seating and all-composite construction. Garry Leach, of Cloud 9 Fight Systems, said that Aviasud are now starting production and deliveries should commence later this year. The price will be about twice that of the Sirocco. This aircraft seems to fit the concept for a low-cost primary trainer, now being discussed by the RFACA.