Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By MarkN
#1152073
The other current thread on Rotorways got me puzzling again as to why we are left with the situation that we have a choice of one kit build helicopter in the UK.
I know that the LAA have said they do not have the experience to regulate helicopters and that therefore approaching the Charge Aviation Alot remains the current route for (expensive) potential approvals.
The separate microlight approvals system here does seem to lead to some genuine improvements in certain aspects of design and potential safety of aircraft before they are allowed to fly here, but with everything else heading pan-european, shouldn't there be a move for unified ultralight / microlight approval?
Are there still any really dodgy european microlight designs flying over there?
Since last year, I understand that France has Opened up a sixth class of microlights - helicopters, which looks very interesting.
Come on BMAA - keep up.
How does the agreement for permit aircraft work with "unsafe" Frenchie creations that want to visit our different air on this side of La Manche?
Do they have the same rights to fly over here for 30 days at a time as our microlights do visiting France?
If so it would seem to be a bit of a farce.
In theory, would a UK resident be able to keep a French registered microlight helicopter at a French address and use it in the UK on "occasions"?
Am I missing something obvious? :?
User avatar
By EddieHeli
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1152080
MarkN wrote:Am I missing something obvious? :?

Yep,
You went wrong when you brought logic into the equation.
The same reason a US IFR is only classed as an IMC equivalent on G-REG but put an N on the side and suddenly the pilot is now a skygod and allowed in Class A.
If there was any logic to anything to do with aviation we wouldn't be getting shafted at every level, and the CAA and EASA would be laughed off the planet.
cockney steve liked this
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1152282
Yes you can, it's not impossible. There are British and European standards available - equivalent to Section S for microlights, that can be used to create your own helicopter.

Because BMAA and LAA don't have rotary competencies, you'd be dealing with the CAA. Not ideal, but not impossible - the vintage aeroplane people have done so for years, the gyroplane people and microlight (factory-built) manufacturers also all used to have to.

It's no harder than certifying any other type of aircraft: which is to say very difficult indeed, but still do-able for somebody with the right skills and education.

The 30 day rule is a spin-off from a much older ECAC agreement; it's still there, and still useable in both directions. Register in a country were it's legal, comply with their laws, and obey whatever rules exist about flying into neighbouring countries. An F-reg homebuilt or ULM can fly into the UK or Germany regularly, so long as it's not based there and the trips are below a certain number of days per trip / year. Ditto a G-reg that wants to fly regularly into Ireland, France....

I could do it certainly. I'm not going to try, as I've quite enough else to do, but it's possible.


There will be no pan-European approvals system for microlights or anything similar for as far into the future as I can see. The French have a lot of political clout, and object strongly to being required to meet the sort of safety standards that exist in the UK and Germany. That's just how it is, and it's not a battle I'd try and fight - I'd lose.

G
User avatar
By MarkN
#1152311
. There will be no pan-European approvals system for microlights or anything similar for as far into the future as I can see.


This seems such a shame. The light end of aviation is where things are tending to happen innovation wise. It is odd that nationalism stifles this.

But.... Playing devil's advocate.......

From what I've seen of the effects of pan-European EASA regulation in certified light aircraft, perhaps it makes sense to stick with the LAA and BMAA. (just wish they would consider taking helicopters under their umbrella).
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1152322
MarkN wrote:
. There will be no pan-European approvals system for microlights or anything similar for as far into the future as I can see.


This seems such a shame. The light end of aviation is where things are tending to happen innovation wise. It is odd that nationalism stifles this.

But.... Playing devil's advocate.......

From what I've seen of the effects of pan-European EASA regulation in certified light aircraft, perhaps it makes sense to stick with the LAA and BMAA. (just wish they would consider taking helicopters under their umbrella).


Most innovation in aviation comes from light touch regulation (the rest seems to come from war!). Local regulations tend to be lighter, and also it's easier for a developer to talk to regulators - whether they're authority or association - who are relatively local.

Once aeroplanes / helicopters / whatever, are developed it's relatively easy to take them to another country, make any modifications to meet local safety standards, and gain local approvals. The microlight and homebuilt worlds - where most of the real innovation is going on - have functioned that way for years. They also mostly work through members associations such as FFULM, BMAA, DULFV, LAA...

Voluntary convergence of regulations would be a good thing, but European / Worldwide binding regulations, centrally organised would be a really bad idea. Go that way, and you'll end up with the current position for certified light aeroplanes spreading to some other classes now happily exempt.

G
User avatar
By Old Pilot
#1152671
Genghis the Engineer wrote:Most innovation in aviation comes from light touch regulation (the rest seems to come from war!). Local regulations tend to be lighter, and also it's easier for a developer to talk to regulators - whether they're authority or association - who are relatively local.

Once aeroplanes / helicopters / whatever, are developed it's relatively easy to take them to another country, make any modifications to meet local safety standards, and gain local approvals. The microlight and homebuilt worlds - where most of the real innovation is going on - have functioned that way for years. They also mostly work through members associations such as FFULM, BMAA, DULFV, LAA...

Voluntary convergence of regulations would be a good thing, but European / Worldwide binding regulations, centrally organised would be a really bad idea. Go that way, and you'll end up with the current position for certified light aeroplanes spreading to some other classes now happily exempt.
G


I'd be interested to get your reaction or views on this little gas turbine helicopter Genghis.
Image
Image

I think you'll agree this is interesting engineering.
Image

See this great site
http://www.technologie-entwicklung.de/G ... _t-62.html
User avatar
By Old Pilot
#1152700
And what about this?


If you look at the sales pitch helicopters don't come cheaper than this.Image

http://www.innovator.mosquito.net.nz/mbbs2/turbine.asp
Image
Mosquito XET Turbine helicopter - the flagship model of the five Mosquito ultralight and experimental personal light helicopters. With a purchase price of just over $40,000 and total operating costs of just over $30 per hour this is the most economical high performance jet helicopter available. The XET can be used for personal and business transportation, training and extraordinarily inexpensive turbine time building, mustering, aerial imaging, law enforcement patrol, pipeline and powerline surveillance, agricultural spraying in confined areas and a host of other applications where a single place light helicopter is applicable. In the USA the Mosquito XET falls under the experimental category and is built as a kit. For other markets ROTOR F/X also provides a ReadyBuilt model ready to fly for just over $50,000 which can be shipped worldwide.
#1152707
If you want the LAA to take on helicopters, you need first to get a change in the laws of liability. The situation is already bad enough for the LAA with respect to autogyros; not so long ago, the Association's insurers decided not to fight a case (i.e. pay up) where a widow sued the Association because her husband had killed himself ('fast taxying his mount'). He had no licence, had been told by an instructor not to fly, and no Permit; i.e. the flight was illegal. But that was not followed by a reduction in the Association's engineering insurance premium.

Can you imagine what it would cost fixed-wing members in additional insurance premium (=annual membership fees) to cover a few small helicopters? Lawyers and ambulance chasers....
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1152724
golfcharlie wrote:If you want the LAA to take on helicopters, you need first to get a change in the laws of liability. The situation is already bad enough for the LAA with respect to autogyros; not so long ago, the Association's insurers decided not to fight a case (i.e. pay up) where a widow sued the Association because her husband had killed himself ('fast taxying his mount'). He had no licence, had been told by an instructor not to fly, and no Permit; i.e. the flight was illegal. But that was not followed by a reduction in the Association's engineering insurance premium.

Can you imagine what it would cost fixed-wing members in additional insurance premium (=annual membership fees) to cover a few small helicopters? Lawyers and ambulance chasers....


I know quite a lot about that case, and it's not quite as stated.

The aircraft had a PtF issued by LAA, the pilot didn't have a licence, but that was a technicality because the paperwork was with CAA and they admitted that they were going to issue it within a week or so, so he just got impatient.

The issues where that the CAA authorised instructor who had trained the pilot for his licence had blatantly not provided the same level of instruction that his paperwork claimed, and that the flight test data submitted to LAA was inadequate and should not have triggered issue of a PtF. The "test pilot" who tested it had been sent a couple of magazine articles on "how to do flight testing", and left to get on with it, but had never been properly trained in flight testing. The instructor had his instructors rating taken away a short while afterwards- although I'm sorry to say that he's now got it back and is teaching again; all evidence is that he's very dangerous and extremely irresponsible.

LAA has sorted its act out substantially so since then, and rightly so - but actuaries are triggered by statistics, and your broad point is valid. Things will change - LAA indeed recently ran a gyroplane flight testing course, and full power to their elbow for doing so.

But helicopters of-course are a different beast again, and LAA Engineering don't have that skillset, nor any real incentive to skill up, which would be very expensive just to support a handful of hobbyists. The CAA needs to be the port of call really.

G

(Re: the Mosquito - pretty pictures, but the proof is as ever in the detailed engineering and flight test, not in the pretty pictures! That said, isn't it more normal, even on helicopters, to put the engine gauges inside the cockpit, not outside the aircraft and behind the cockpit?)
User avatar
By Old Pilot
#1152788
The gyrocopter accident report makes interesting reading.
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cf ... 030918.pdf
(Re: the Mosquito - pretty pictures, but the proof is as ever in the detailed engineering and flight test, not in the pretty pictures! That said, isn't it more normal, even on helicopters, to put the engine gauges inside the cockpit, not outside the aircraft and behind the cockpit?)


I assume they are extra gauges to monitor the engine while doing adjustments to the turbine on the ground.
The turbine is a well proven commercial unit.

Image
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=FwoOo4QT45E[/youtube]
#1626214
Just a quick post to see if there’s still any interest in this subject.

UL helicopters and training schools are now well established in Europe, and some of us already have the relevant DGAC ULM Class 6 licence.

Might it be time to ask the CAA to consider this in the context of their GA Framework principle of deregulating activity which poses little risk to third parties?
#1640157
What does this actually mean ? What is there to stop having an Italian or French registered Heli operating in the UK. Can you legally do it for 30 days and if so who's counting. Most hobbyists do around 40/50 hours per years so would it be a big deal?