[Genghis the Engineer]

I know of a homebuilt aircraft that was ordered to be reduced to component parts, the individual parts re-inspected, and then assembly could be permitted to start again. This was partly because an inspector (soon to be ex-inspector) took money to build it, and partly because it was so full of faults it was dangerous. (I still have the photos somewhere, as I was brought in to do a duplicate inspection on the beastie.)

Which sort of makes the point - if you build it for yourself, you will pay attention, as it'll be your little pink body leaving the ground in it. And that is at the root of the rule that says that either you can build (at least 51% of ) it under LAA or BMAA supervision at relatively low cost and oversight, or you have a CAA approved factory with regular audits.


There are UK microlight manufacturers, and if you're prepared to pay, they'll do a certain amount of customisation.

There's a second hand market, and BMAA or LAA will handle mods for you. Frankly, I wouldn't encourage putting mods through on a CofA aeroplane unless you are a good chartered aeronautical engineer with a lot of initial airworthiness experience.

Badger - if you can accept a 2-seater, there are modern 3-axis microlights which will tick all of your other boxes, is available new and factory built, and I'm sure that the various manufacturers would be delighted to customise decor, instruments, and suchlike for you.

G

[Paul_Sengupta]

So what 4 seat homebuilts are available with BRS?

Probably a fairly narrow choice?

[Ben Twings]

So what 4 seat homebuilts are available with BRS?

Probably a fairly narrow choice?

http://glasairaviation.com/factory-inst ... -aircraft/

But it's unlikely to still be a 4 seater with 50lbs of BRS.

[G-BLEW]

So what 4 seat homebuilts are available with BRS?

Probably a fairly narrow choice?

http://airplanefactory.co.za/models/sling4

Is the only one I can think of.

Ian

[Genghis the Engineer]

It would be a fairly straightforward mod to design so long as you have the payload spare. A 4 seat Jabiru would be reasonably easyto do with the aid of a good composites engineer, something all metal would be easier, a vintage style fabric covered aeroplane easiest of all.

G

[ChrisRowland]

There seem to be plenty of second hand home builds around.
And some people are serial builders. They enjoy building aeroplanes so once they have built it and flown it a bit they sell it to fund the next build.
There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with this, legally or morally.

How much flying needs to be done before a kit build is second hand? 100 hours? 10 hours? The test flying for the PtF?
Can the builder sell his second hand AC for more than the cost of the kit? Would, say, £10,000 extra be acceptable?

I'm not sure where this process tips over from OK, to not.

I'd suggest that GtE's point about a skimped commercial build could be answered by always requiring that the builder and the inspector be different people, even if the builder is an inspector. That doesn't seem too onerous to me.

[flybymike]

What colour would you like the RV12 in Mike ?

Just make sure you sellotape the wings on properly.

[Shoestring Flyer]

If an Inspector is also a builder he has to get another Inspector to sign off the work, or sign off the build stage as appropriate.

[foxmoth]

How much flying needs to be done before a kit build is second hand?

Not sure it even needs to be finished, there are plenty that get sold during the build, not aware of the rules on this but I assume the build gets reregistered in the new owners name and the 51% has to be from the two (or however many more if it gets sold more than once) registered builders.

[fattony]

The danger in cheating the system is that, if found out, your permit could be revoked and the aircraft un-saleable as a complete aircraft. However, I've never heard of this happening.

Didn't the Europa in Mark Evans's "A Plane is Born" never fly because it fell foul of the amateur built rule?

[patowalker]

https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP659.PDF

[User72]

Talk to your nearest & dearest about the parachute - complete waste of weight and money and severely limits your options.
What will it save you from?
No aircraft that is well designed, constructed and adequately maintained will suffer an in-flight structural failure, and you will investigate your choice to ensure there is no history of problems.
You will make sure you can recover from any in-flight mishap.
Following an engine failure in an LAA/BMAA type aeroplane it will be much safer to fly it to the ground and choose where you land, rather than taking your chances under a parachute.
I'm sure you wouldn't fly into IMC without the skills to control the aeroplane.
For most kit aeroplanes the maximum parachute deployment speed is well below the max speed.
How many kit manufacturers have carried out a test deployment of the parachute?
That leaves a mid-air, which is a very rare occurrence and assumes you will be conscious to operate the parachute.
A parachute installation in a 4 seat aeroplane weighs something like 80lb, so turns it into a 3 seater, and needs expensive servicing every 5 or 10 years.
From an owner's perspective I can't see any reason to fit one.
From a manufacturer's perspective it could be different...

[Flying badger]

I'm constantly negotiating so I have tried. She understands that engine failure doesn't mean we fall from the sky, but I have no argument against a mid air collision....

(I could always tell her there's a parachute....but if she finds out there isn't i'll need to jump from the plane for my own safety)

[stickandrudderman]

Talk to your nearest & dearest about the parachute - complete waste of weight and money and severely limits your options.
What will it save you from?

Sorry but that is terribly biased advice.
It is for the OP to decide, along with his wife, whether a BRS is a waste of time or not.
YOU may not see the point, but that doesn't mean there is no point.

[EddieHeli]

Talk to your nearest & dearest about the parachute - complete waste of weight and money and severely limits your options.
What will it save you from?
No aircraft that is well designed, constructed and adequately maintained will suffer an in-flight structural failure, and you will investigate your choice to ensure there is no history of problems.
You will make sure you can recover from any in-flight mishap.
Following an engine failure in an LAA/BMAA type aeroplane it will be much safer to fly it to the ground and choose where you land, rather than taking your chances under a parachute.
I'm sure you wouldn't fly into IMC without the skills to control the aeroplane.
For most kit aeroplanes the maximum parachute deployment speed is well below the max speed.
How many kit manufacturers have carried out a test deployment of the parachute?
That leaves a mid-air, which is a very rare occurrence and assumes you will be conscious to operate the parachute.
A parachute installation in a 4 seat aeroplane weighs something like 80lb, so turns it into a 3 seater, and needs expensive servicing every 5 or 10 years.
From an owner's perspective I can't see any reason to fit one.
From a manufacturer's perspective it could be different...

You are entitled to your opinion of course, but I suggest that all of the people that have been saved by BRS (at least 214 so far I believe) would have a different view.