Reader Response To Our
Ten Question Editorial Rant
Was Overwhelming... And Thought-Provoking (Question #1)
Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The
troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see
things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have
no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with
them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t
do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human
race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see
genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can
change the world, are the ones who do.
Steve
Jobs
A few days ago , I noted that I was learning a lot in the
process of researching the necessary issues to be pursued at the
upcoming Aviation transformation Conference. I learned a lot from
hundreds of conversations... both in what people said... as well as
in what they questioned.
This inspired the Ten
Questions Editorial that I published a few days
ago...and ANN readers responded in great
numbers and even greater detail. So much detail, in fact, that I
think it behooves us to whittle down some representative selections
from the flock of responders and allow each question to be answered
via the many thoughts, comments and even more questions raised by
those who took SO MUCH time to respond with extensive replies.
Herewith, are some of the responses to Question #1...
What happened to the Ultralight industry and the
availability of very simple, basic, affordable flying machines? One
would think that such things would be more popular now than ever
before.
ANNRep--ANN Reader
Responses
ANN Reader Skip L: Ultralight producers
(kit & fly away) couldn't make it due to costs (materials,
shipping, LAWYERS, lawsuits), especially in this economic climate.
And, the FAA eliminated UL flight training by removal of two place
trainers. The FAA recognized that the flight training syllabus
initiated by AOPA/USUA was a realistic, inexpensive and safe
training program.
With over 1200 hours in TEAM planes, and over 1000 hours in a
447 (2 tops, 1 IRAN), I am involved with not only an Ultralight
club (Middle Tennessee Ultralight Group, MTUG) but with many
individuals who are VERY interested in quality (USUA) flight
training and purchasing a modestly priced real 103 Ultralight. Used
planes sell well, but training is absolutely needed.
And the solution is simple, well, except that the FAA is
involved. Allowing the 2-place trainers to be built as ELSA for use
by USUA UL BFI's and AFI's would open up the entire UL market. Many
single and 2-place UL's became ELSA, and many 2-place planes are in
use for ad hoc training of UL pilots, so that part works, although
below the FAA radar. So, if the FAA can bring into being a whole
new industry, LSA, they can certainly do this. No, I'm not holding
my breath.
ANN Reader Hobart T: The Ultralight
market is driven by existing pilots who do not want to (or cannot)
maintain their medicals. They want performance, bells &
whistles ~ otherwise they would by a $30K Champ or Luscombe.
ANN Reader Steve M: Don't know and don't
really care. Most of the folks I have ever met that flew
ultralights were a bit off (their) rocker.
ANN Reader Hunter H: Ultralights are only
marginally "airplanes," seen by many pilots and most non-pilots as
unsafe and impractical. There are few UL flying sites, many UL
flyers appear not to be pilots, and cowboy behavior w/ ULs is not
uncommon. Publicity about UL crashes has had a very negative effect
on perceptions. The difference between an UL Kolb, let's say, and a
Piper J-3 or a Champ is enormous, in terms of safety and utility,
so the licensed Private or Sport Pilots are little motivated to try
an UL.
ANN Reader Richard E: A theme you will
see/hear in many of my responses. The Ultralight industry was
usurped by FAA over-regulation. In its quest to make sure "the
general public" is safe, the FAA implemented rules, regulations,
and oversight that virtually decimated the ability of small
companies to test, experiment, and develop cost-effective
product.
ANN Reader Patrick M: The Government
screwed this one up by changing the regulations.
ANN Reader Daniel H: I know nothing of
ultralights so I won't comment with any confidence. Have LSAs
cannibalized ultralights? To me neither is worth considering: I
view aviation as a practical joy to be shared with others. I'm not
looking for a toy: I want something that I can take my wife, kid
and a couple suitcases somewhere.
ANN Reader Ben E: I wish I knew. I want
an Ultralight, but there is no active community for me to even
learn more about them. It would be fun to have just to putter
around. I am now thinking a gyrocopter is the way to go, and ANN
has highlighted some neat ones to consider. I think this sector
will bounce back, but it will not look like it did back in its hay
day.
ANN Reader Tom B: Probably a couple
things, really. Today there is more competition for free time.
Think back to the 70's when ultralights were growing, they were new
and unknown. People heard about them. Today, no one hears about
them, there are flight simulators on computers and other games and
such attracting peoples time and money, fulfilling their
adventuresome spirit.
ANN Reader Ralph R: Simple, in today's
litigious society, where everything has to be somebody's fault, one
cannot build performance without cost - lots of cost. Performance
is not provided = no sales. Though I don't look cool, I guess my 98
mph Luscombe rag wing will just have to suffice.
ANN Reader Scott K: Ultralights cover a
broad array of recreational aircraft. Young people's interest tends
towards video games and affordable motorcycles. Ultralights are
reasonable in bucolic rural settings and not many people live there
anymore. There is almost no practical use for many of the devices
in the Ultralight category and the availability of fast-build
aircraft kits has certainly eaten into that market. Water skis,
ATVs, etc. all take away from the Ultralight area and such
diversions give instant reward at a lower cost.
ANN Reader Robert C: First of all, a
little background. I am 63 years old, formerly flew GA aircraft
with a Commercial pilot certificate - ASEL, Glider, and Instrument
Airplane ratings, with additional training in aerobatics and
mountain flying. For 10 years I have flown ultralights almost
exclusively and was an active USUA BFI (basic flight instructor)
for several years. The major
reason for switching from airplanes to ultralights was
affordability.
The Ultralight industry is pretty much dead, as you noted.
Simply put, it was killed by Sport Pilot. When the FAA and the
sport pilot rule eliminated the two-seat Ultralight training
exemption and USUA, EAA, and ASC registered basic and advanced
Ultralight flight instructors, the Ultralight industry was doomed.
The FAA claimed that the sport pilot rule would provide an
opportunity for prospective Ultralight pilots to receive better
instruction in safer trainers. This has not come to fruition. Sport
pilot instructors have proven to be better instructors - for sport
planes. Ultralights have unique flying characteristics that cannot
be learned in most light sport aircraft. The cost of learning to
fly an Ultralight was about $1000. The cost of learning to fly a
light sport aircraft is over $2000, at the conclusion of which you
are not prepared to fly an Ultralight (with the exception of the
very few former Ultralight trainers that have been converted to
light sport aircraft for training purposes). In my case, the cost
of transitioning myself and my two-seat Ultralight trainer was more
than I wanted to spend in order to instruct part-time. There is now
no practical way for a prospective Ultralight pilot to learn how to
fly an Ultralight in most parts of the country.
If the FAA had kept the Ultralight training exemption in place,
I believe the Ultralight industry would have survived. Even if the
Ultralight training exemption was in place only for transitioning
from airplanes to ultralights, the Ultralight industry would have
survived. We would have better trained pilots that are prepared to
fly ultralights with their unique flying characteristics. As it is
right now, anyone jump in Ultralight and try to fly it. We're right
back to where we were in the 1970s, when people were killing
themselves (literally) to fly ultralights, before the Ultralight
training exemption resulted in a safe option to learn how to fly
them. I think people are now generally aware that flying without
training is unsafe, and with no way to learn how to fly an
Ultralight, they won't buy one.
ANN Reader Kirk V: Why would I pay $25K
for an "Ultralight" and take my chances that I would get a huckster
selling me crap? I can get a T-Craft and fly it as a sport pilot
for about the same money, don't have to build it, every AP knows
how to work on it, is more substantial and the resale value is
better.
ANN Reader Jeff M: I have been a private
pilot since 1966 but lost my medical 10 years ago because of
cancer. Well I am still alive and well but the thought of going
through all the hoops to get my medical back is enough to make me
stop flying altogether. I hate bureaucrats.