seems but a distant memory and we’re settling back into ‘business as usual’, with only the absurdity of world politics to keep usmildlyamused.There’salways a bitofa ‘limbo’ period at the start of the year, as the weather is usually anything butflyable and even working in the hangar becomes something of a chilly chore. So perhaps it’s time to start planning the year’s adventures?
With that in mind, you'll find comprehensive RAéC listings of every known event up to the end of September in this issue’s Where to Go (page 60). There will certainly be a few more additions over the next couple of months but, happily, most of this year’s major event dates are already settled.
This month’s cover story concerns the lovely Aeronca Defender owned by Reg McComish, which Clive Davidson had the opportunity to fly late last autumn.
When you think of American WWII liaison aircraft, the Piper L4 Cub is certainly the most likely aircraft that springs to mind, but
a number of other manufacturers produced
take a look at the other US marques which fulfilled this important role.
Conspicuity is the latest buzzword electronic conspicuity (EC), to be more precise. The CAA is keen to encourage the adoption of EC throughout the GA tleet, ADS-B being its system of choice.
lan Foster looks at what’s currently available on the EC market (page 20) and, not unreasonably, suggests that, if the UK CAA wants GA to universally adopt it, there has to be something in it for us though. In the US, the 2020 mandate for ADS-B has been sweetened with the added benefits of UAT, which provides the user with weather and traffic information. Unfortunately, in Europe it appears unlikely that we'll enjoy that option.
Meanwhile, Martin Ferid’s Touring Aaventure (page 16) concerns Kilkenny, Ireland, a lovely old city in a country that’s a joy to visit. Throughout the year, members will be encouraged to stretch their wings a little, and visit a number of events in the UK and abroad. Come to think of it, a wonderful
Many find the question of which aircraft can and cannot be considered to operate on an LAA Permit to Fly rather complex, so our Chief Engineer, Francis Donaldson, explains how the system works and what rules apply (page 30).
Needless to say, EASA are the prime movers in writing the rules on this issue, but understanding what is and isn’t possible will help LAA members to decide which aircraft or project they might purchase.
weekend trip to France might be just the jaunt will follow suit, isn’t it?
Brian Hope aircraft to meet the same requirement. With you need towards qualifying for either your Keep warm and EDITOR that in mind, in addition to the Aeronca, we silver or gold LAA Wings. stay safe.
Head Office Turweston Aerodrome, Nr Brackley, Northants NN13 5YD
Telephone 01280 846786
Editor Brian Hope, 60 Queenborough Road, Sheerness, Kent ME12 3BZ
Telephone 01795 662508
Email BFUJode/@talktalk.net
«CROFT
06 NEWS
Where are we with 8.33kHz?
CAA launches Aispace Change Portal, APPG on ‘brown field’ sites, Dr James Hayward RIP and much more
|0 PROJECTNEWS
Sonex, Van’s RV-12, EuroFOX 120hp 912iS and Van's RV-9 plus NewProjects and Cleared to Fly
|6 TOURING ADVENTURES
MartinFeridheads-offtoa fly-in at Kilkenny, Eire
20 COMMUNICATIONS
lan Fraser explains Electronic Conspicuity, technology which allows you to ‘see and be seen’
26 OXFORD/BRIZEAIRSPACE
LAA CEO Steve Slater on what we can do about the Consultation on this Airspace Change Proposal
28 STRUTS 4U
Anne Hughes with a look at the Gloster Strut, plus Strut listings
30 LAA ENGINEERING
Francis Donaldson on the potential pitfalls of importing homebuilts and loking to put them on a LAA Permit
36FLIGHTTEST
Clive Davidson flies a rare WWII US liaision ‘grasshopper’, the Aeronca L-3B Defender
44 OBITUARY
Glynn Richards and Jim Wraight pay tribute to the LAA’s longestserving Inspector, Les Usherwood
46 SAFETY SPOT
Malcolm McBride with this month’s cautionary tales for pilots, builders and maintainers
52 SAFER HAND-PROPPING
Jim Crawford explains a system designed to help prevent runaways
56MEETTHEMEMBERS
The first instalment of a two-part chat with the evergreen Don Lord
59 PPL LICENSINGTIMEBOMB
Steve Slater on what the EASA licensing changes, which come into force on 8 April, will mean for you
60 WHERETO GO
A bumper listing of events, in the UK, Europe and beyond, to help you plan the forthcoming season
62 LAA CLASSIFIEDS
Aircraft, parts and services for sale
66LANDINGVOUCHERS
Free/reduced landings and offers
utside it’s a cold grey day, so I’m sitting regulation, one which will directly affect me when | want to go flying this summer. I’ve an old UK PPL and although | can currently pass a Class 2 Medical, | ‘ve made a Medical Declaration, so | should be good to go for the next three years...
Well, no a much trailed EASA regulation comes into force on 8 April 2018 which says that | can no longer fly an EASA C ofA aircraft without an EASA licenceandaClass2Medical.Waitaminute! | have an |CAO-compliant, lifetime UK PPLthat's recognised around the world. However, from 8 April 2018 |can’t legallyfly a G-registered aircraft holding a UK-administered Certificate ofAirworthiness in UK airspace! How did that happen?
Welcome to the wonderful, weird world of aviation regulation, one that’s been completely stood on its head. | think we all agree that Civil Air Transport needs to be highly regulated and maximum safety achieved. | think we also agree that recreational aviation, particularly in very light aircraft, should be regulated with a light touch, recognising that a higher level of risk is acceptable.
Originally, with the invention of the European JAA, and also when EASA was first formed, aviation regulation was based on a ‘one size fits all’ system. All of the associations representing recreational aviation shouted loudly that this was nonsense, and gradually things have changed towards a lighter-touch, more pragmatic approach to GA. The result, however, is quite bizarre...
Those at the pinnacle of the aviation world, who hold an ATPL and fly large public transport jets, live in a relatively simple regulatory environment. Pilot licensing is pretty obvious and unambiguous, and the air traffic environment is controlled. They don’t normally need to worry about airspace complexities, as their flights are fully, professionally briefed, and aircraft largely pass through the system without any fuss or negation. Airworthiness requirements are also clear and unambiguous.
Compare that to the amateur/recreational flying world, where a blizzard of complex, often contradictory, regulations define the various categories of pilot licences and determine what you can, and cannot, fly. There are a whole host of differing medical requirements. The airspace environment is incredibly complex and hostile, open to infringement and potential collisions with
other users as a result of only a small lapse in planning or concentration on behalf of the pilot. Airworthiness requirements are even more complex, with differing rulesfor SSDR,Microlights, EASA ELA1, ELA2, CS-VLA, CS- 23, Permit to Fly,and C ofA, to name but a few. Some would say that you really need to consult a lawyer before you goflying. So, who’s responsible for this topsy-turvy mess? Well, we could just blame the regulators but | think we have to carry a shared responsibility. The regulators wanted a simple ‘one size fits all’ set of regulations but we argued against this and, despite being bound by the original rules, they've tried to help by issuing a raft of exemptions and variations. Each new request from us has resulted in another variation and a new level of complexity, and often some unintended consequence... How do we resolve this mess? The ideal would be to start again, with a fresh sheet of paper, but we know that this just isn’tgoing to happen. The two key bits of legislation/regulationare the UK Air Navigation Order (ANO) and the EU Basic Regulation. Tne ANO has recently been redrafted and that’s helpful, but much of the drafting has been to create compatibility with EU law, which has created a new challenge. The EU Basic Regulation has been under revision for the last few years and this opportunity only comes around about every decade, so it’s vital we get what we want this time. Sadly, as so often happens with EU legislation, it’s become bogged down by politics. The end-user is being rapidly forgotten as clauses are being traded like gambling chips to overcome political objections. Is there a way out of this messy regulatory world? Well, thank goodness for Annex 77,the Permit to Fly world that most of us in the LAA live in. The old and the new EU Basic Regulation still recognises that there’s a category of flying which is “outside the regulation” and can be administered by the individual National Aviation Authorities (NAAs). Our airspace seems to be managed differently to the rest of the world so, hopefully, we can influence the long-term result and move towards a simpler, more logical and user-friendly system. Now we just need to develop a sensible, pragmatic UK pilot-licencing system which allows us to escape the clutches of EASA. We just need to be careful what we wish for and beware the unintended consequences!
Safe and lawful flying.
06 LIGHT AVIATION | FEBRUARY 2018 2018 was somewhat thrown into confusion Sounds simple enough, but as ground
towards the end of 2017, when the CAA issued an unexpected, last-minute exemption. Instead of allowing a very limited number of exempt ‘sporting’ 25kHz frequencies to be used, as Originally intended, the regulator decided that if a ground station hasn’t yet changed its radio to an 8.33kHz unit, aircraft owners could legally use their ‘old’ 25kHz radios on that frequency. However, where a ground station has transitioned to 8.33kHz, pilots must use an 8.33kHz radio to communicate.
stations will be changing to 8.33kHz at various times throughout the year as a rule, depending on when their radio licence comes due how do you know when, or indeed if they’ve transitioned?
Any printed frequency references will be
The CAA has recently launched its new Airspace Change Portal which, the regulator says, will help to ensure that the revised process, announced in December 2017, is fair, transparent, comprehensible and proportionate.
The Portal is an interim solution, using existing online tools, to enable transparent consultation on new
well out of date within a few weeks of their publication.
So, firstly, there are the originally intended temporarily exempt sporting frequencies, eleven of them in total,
proposals, while the CAA procures and builds a purpose-built, long-term resource.
Airspace ‘change sponsors’ will be required to use this temporary Portal to make available all material relating to any new Airspace Change Proposal, including the consultation documents, any responses and the decisions made
which will run until the end of 2018. Included are a site-specific microlight frequency, 129.825, plus SafetyCom 135.475, Parachute (DZ) 130.525 five gliding frequencies, and one each for hang-gliders/paragliders and balloons.
Please check the full list and any usage limitations in CAP 1606via this CAA pdf document: www.tinyurl.com /833exceptions
Then we have three 25kHz-only channels which will remain indefinitely, the only one of which LAA members are likely to use being the emergency frequency, 121.500.
And, finally, we need up-to-date information on which frequencies ground stations are operating. That’s updated by NATS on a 28-day basis, via doublesided, A5-sized Frequency Cards.
NATS has very helpfully changed the format of the Cards available to download from its website, so they can be printed in landscape format on A4, then folded to produce the double-sided A5 version. You'll find the Frequency Cards at www.tinyurl.com/natsfrequencycards
Please ensure that you have an up-to-date Frequency Card before you fly, the publishing dates for 2018 are 4 January, 1 February; 1 March, 29 March, 26 April, 24 May, 21 June, 19 July, 16 August, 13 September, 11 October, 8 November and 6 December.
The Portal will be used to engage with stakeholders, including local communities which are potentially affected by an Airspace Change, and to seek their feedback during the consultation process.
The Portal can be accessed at www. caa.co.uk/Commercial-industry/Airspace/ Airspace-change/Airspace-Change
a commitment by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Sajid Javid MP, to revisit Government planning policy in relation to airfields.
In a positive reply to the APPG’s letter of 6 December 2017, Mr Javid said he was ‘grateful for the considered arguments’ raised by the group, for recognising the economic importance of airfields under planning policy.
Mr Javid said that he’s asked officials in his department, which is responsible for setting the national planning policy guidelines, to review the existing policy, in close liaison with the Department for Transport.
RIN TOPNAYV 2018
These days, most pilots use some form of GPS, and an increasing number are switching to moving maps, thanks to the competitive price of tablets and nav software. It’s easy to kid ourselves thatwe'realsokeepingourbasicchart/ watch / compass skills well-honed, so why not put yourself to the test by having a go at this year’s TooNav competition?
Commenting on Mr Javid’s response, Grant Shapps MP, the Chair of the APPG on GA, said, “No Whitehall department is more essential to the future of General Aviation than the Department of Communities and Local Government. However, up until now, that department hasn't grasped the connection between planning, airfields and the very survival
of one of the UK’s most vibrant sectors aviation. This latest letter from the Secretary of State is, therefore, very significant indeed.
“The APPG on GA strongly welcomes and appreciates the Secretary of State’s thoughtful response to our arguments on strengthening planning policy on airfields.
“We look forward to working with the Department for Communities and Local Government, as well as the Department for Transport and Government, more widely, to get the balance right for this critical sector and the whole of the UK economy.”
For more information about the work of the APPG on GA, please visit www.generalaviationappg.uk
Institute of Navigation’s (RIN) General Aviation Navigation Group
For further details visit our website (GANG). It’s a true test of ‘traditional’
TopNav is an annual navigational event forprivatepilots,organisedbytheRoyal SkyViewHDXisthe new flagship systemfrom Dynon.
with a weather reserve of 19 May.
navigation skills, Soyou'll need to dig out that old Wizz-Wheel nav computer.
The event is held simultaneously at four locations around the country on the same day Peterborough (Conington), White Waltham, Bodmin and Lee-on-Solent/ Daedalus namely Saturday 12 May,
The event is for two-person crews pilot and navigator and requires you to plan and fly a route of approximately eighty-minutes’ duration, overflying around eight waypoints, which you must photograph as proof of being there.
Further information, including entry forms (the electronic version may be completed and emailed straight back) and entry fee payment details, may be found at www.rin.org.uk/Events/5 107/TopNav-2018
DRJAMESHAYWARD, RIP
David M Edes writes, “It is with great sadness that we record the unexpected passing of Dr James Hayward. James was an integral part of the flying scene in the Highlands as an AME, Flying Instructor, Examiner and flying buddy.
“James had a share in the Brackla Flying Group Warrior, G-BHJO, for a number of years, then joined the Cawdor Flying Group, piloting Jodel DR1050, G-AZWF. He also acquired G-GOLA, a Zenair 701 project which he was endeavouring to complete.
“We have shared many fantastic flying events and experiences with him over the years. James will be sorely missed as a mentor for many, but mostly as a treasured friend. RIP.”
An LAA aircraft with a long and fascinating history has recently been woken from hibernation in a barn in rural Hampshire.
Airymouse is a Currie Wot, a tiny, 22ft-wingspan, single-seat biplane, which was originally commissioned by Viv Bellamy of the Hampshire Aeroplane Company, and built by its pre-war designer, Joe Currie, in the fifties. As to how the aircraft got its moniker, Currie reportedly once said, “Call it wot you like.”
The Wot in question was subsequently sold to former Westland chief test pilot, Harald Penrose, who gave the aircraft
its name and, subsequently, wrote a book titled after it, Airymouse, which was published in 1967, about the pleasures of low-and-slow, open-cockpit flying. Airymouse, which was stored following the death of its previous owner, has been acquired by LAA CEO Steve Slater. In early January she was transferred by road to Turweston in Northamptonshire and, after some gentle restoration, is expected to take to the skies again in the early spring. This historic Wot is pictured being started, for the first time in many years, at Turweston.
EFLEVA DAYS FLY-IN 2018
The second annual EFLEVA Days fly-in will take place between 29 June and 1 July 2018 at Sanicole Airfield (EBLE), Belgium. Prebooking is required via the event’s website, www.efleva-days.eu.
Although Customs won't be available at Sanicole, free passage through Ostend has been arranged. Attendees should be prepared to flight-plan out of Ostend for Sanicole, and into Ostend from Sanicole. And don’t forget that you no longer have to seek permission or pay to fly your homebuilt or (most) PtF vintage types in Belgium.
Camping beside your aircraft will be possible this year, for €10 per night, per tent, and basic rooms in military housing, a mile or two up the road, cost just €18 per person.
Hotels are available only a short taxi ride away. Breakfast, lunch and dinner deals are available at the airfield, plus bicycles can be hired, if you’d like to explore the local area.
Barbara Rose, a longtime stalwart of the Oxford Strut, is seeking a copy of the DVD made for the 60th Anniversary of the PFA,as it contains an interview with the Rose family. If you can help, please email office@laa.uk.com or call 01280 846786.
EXPENSIVE DOCUMENT
REPLACEMENTAT CAA
The CAA has announced that, with immediate effect, itwill no longer accept the submission of a sworn affidavit as the primary means of accepting hours for the grant of a licence, rating, certificate or the revalidation and extension/or removal of restrictionof privileges where the applicant is unable to provide logbook evidence of their required hoursdue to loss,damage, theft or data corruption. Infuture, two pre-arranged meetings at the CAA’s Gatwick offices will be required, to discuss the issue, each costing £100. Details in the General Aviation section of the CAA website, at www.caa.co.uk/general-aviation
USHUAIA2USA RALLY IS POSTPONED
The Ushuaia2USA Vintage Air Rally, due to start in Ushuaia, Argentina, on 1 March and end at Sun ‘n’Fun in Florida, USA, in early April, has been postponed. The organiser explains that, due to ‘unforeseen circumstances’, preparations aren't as advanced as expected, so the event will be delayed until the next good weather window, later in the year. The Rally is now scheduled to start in Ushuaia on the 1 November and end in the US on 14 December.
For more information, please visit ROTAXwww.vintageairrally.com 915iSc3 NOW
EASA-CERTIFIED
BRP-Rotax has announced that its new Rotax 915 iSc3 engine has been type-certified by EASA, with a maximum power output of 141hp, which is 5hp more than originally targeted. The increased power of is available up to at least 15,000ft.
The EASA TypeCertificateallows productionof certifiedenginesfor the European market and, thus far, BRP-Rotax says that twelve manufacturershave integratedthe engine intotheir designs andwill make these aircraft available soon.
For more information, please visitwww.rotax.com
is very healthy, as it features six entries in each category. Considering that this data only represents the three working weeks of December, then | think you'll agree that it shows the building urge remains very strong among our membership,even during the darkest and coldest days of the year.
In the world of plans- or scratch-built aircraft, it isn’t unknown for the constructor to source, recondition and convert an automotive powerplant for their project but, as a general rule, kits end up with stock aircraft engines. Interestingly though, there are still a handful of tyoes which continue to offer VW-based engines.
Sonex Aircraft is probably unique among manufacturers in that, in addition to being able to purchase an airframe kit from the company, you can also buy a self-assembly, VW-based engine, and thus have the pleasure of building both. The Sonex is a rare bird for Project News, with only around eleven on the UK register, eight of which are flying. It's a compact, capable and economic kit to construct, and I’ve often pondered why it isn’t a more popular choice. Tim Mobbs has recently finished his Sonex and provides his impressions and experience herein, as a first-time builder of the type.
EVENBEFORE
|learnedtofly,|wantedtobuildanaircraft.Initially,it was to be a Kitfox, and then the Europa burst onto the scene, and subsequent to that my idea of heaven was an RV-7. However, | spent all my spare money and time flying, so building would have to take a back seat until | retired. After renting a club Cessna, my first share was in an ARV Super2, then a Jabiru 400 and currently a Jodel D11A.
Potential builders or purchasers of aircraft are encouraged to define their mission up front. Eighty per cent of my flying is within East Anglia, as although I’ve flown my aeroplanes to Germany, France, Holland and Ireland, | tend to make only one trip abroad each year.
Significant engine modifications to the Rotax 9-series engines are virtually unheard of, as it’s a well-sorted and reliable powerplant. However, a couple of months ago inProjectNews,werecounted a littleofwhatBristell UK was up to, with its supercharged 912.
Well, this month, low and behold, Roger Cornwell outlines how EuroFox is trying to give their 912-powered glider tug more pep with a 120hp continuous upgrade. The company has built a new demonstrator to prove the concept of its significantly modified engine.
Many builders keep a detailed photographic record of their project's progress, and in days gone by this would’ve taken the form of a photograph album or scrapbook. Times move on, of course, and such records are now often online for all to see. Jon Edmunds has created just such a record of his RV-12 build, and I'd recommend investingafewminutestotakea lookathisblog,whichisvery interesting and could’ve been titled ‘How to build an aircraft in a Cupboard’ details in his update herein!
Please get in touch with Project News and let your fellow members see what you've been up to, finished or are only part-way through your example may just be the fillip that gets someone else involved withhome-building.Dropanemailtoprojectnews@laa-archive.org.uk
Perhaps most importantly, | decided that the build shouldn't depend on which skills | lacked or probably would’ve had difficulty acquiring, so that suggested an aluminium construction, rather than wood or fibreglass. And finally, the aeroplane had to be affordable.
Eventually, | reduced the shortlist down to the Groppo Trail and the Sonex, both of which are VW-powered, aluminium two-seaters. While both had real attractions, | thought the side-by-side layout and higher cruise speed of the Sonex would suit me best.
A flight from Crossland Moor with Andy Carter in G-ZONX confirmed the sprightly performance that a VW-powered Sonex could provide, so
A tidy panel,with MGL Discovery Lite avionics.
(Photo:TimMobbs)
| ordered a kit and set off with my ‘build buddy’, Chris Larke, to the company’s factory at Oshkosh, Wisconsin, to find out how to build one.
Not having a workshop at my home, | chose to build the aircraft in a hangar at Seething Airfield (EGSJ). However, having spent my entire career in centrally-heated offices, | knew that the winter cold would be a dis-incentive so, before the kit arrived, | erected a well-insulated wooden shed inside the hangar.
Rex Ford of Fordaire, the resident engineering company at Seething, kindly agreed to be my LAA Inspector, which was very convenient as his hangar’s only a few metres away from mine. In the early days, at least, when the assemblies were small, | could take structures to him to inspect before | closed them up.
Although Sonex’s plans are brilliant, featuring detailed drawings of every part, in case you have to remake any, Rex was able to clarify points which |found ambiguous. Kerry Fores at Sonex Technical Support was another valuable source of advice.
Although most of the Sonex is quite easy to build, | did make mistakes that took time to correct. | found the canopy and cowling to be significant challenges but, fortunately, Sonex provides all overseas customers with two of the former and I’ve already used my spare!
Several Seething flyers have built aircraft, so | had access to a lot of help and advice. |’m particularly grateful to Chris Larke, Roger Riseborough, Tony Simmonds and the late Humphrey Daines. Chris did all the electrical work and installed the avionics, while the painting was executed by Murray Flint. Rex built the engine from an AeroVee kit provided by Sonex considering that this is a component of significant importance | concluded that I’d have it constructed professionally.
Seething was the base of the 448th Bomb Group of the USAAF and its ‘assembly ship’ was a yellow and black-chequered Consolidated B-24 named You Cawn’t Miss It, so | gave my Sonex the same moniker (hence the registration) and also a paint scheme inspired by the Liberator. Murray also painted the USAAF star and the black letter
On 9 November 2017, G-YCMI took to the air for the first time, in the very brave hands of Airbus Captain and fellow Sonex builder, Steve Moody. |’m delighted to report that, after 35 minutes in the air, both he and the aircraft landed safely. The test programme is continuing well, so maybe it'd now be useful to reflect upon the type, having closed the build phase of the project.
The Sonex is certainly a very affordable aeroplane and is much simpler to build than most RVs. That isn’t just because it’s built mainly using pulled or ‘pop’ rivets, as it takes just as much preparation, and therefore time, to put in both types. | think the Sonex was designed to be built by people with little experience. Both Sonex and Van's can provide ‘quick-build’ solutions. However, while many choose Van's quick-build option, where a great deal of the work on the wings and fuselage has already been completed before delivery, | don’t believe any UK examples of the Sonex have been constructed from that company’s QB offering.
(Right)The builders take a break from left, Seething’s Airfield Manager, Alan Youngs, the late Humphrey Daines (sitting), Roger Riseborough and Chris Larke. (Photo:TimMobbs)
PROJECT NEWS
WhyisitthattheSonexisn’tthatnumerousintheUK?Firstly, ny or the aircraft is very small, with a wingspan of only 6.7m, and people can'tbelievethey’rereallytwo-seaters. pe]
Also,theLAA-approvedMaxTakeOffMassis522kgandthe eatoenn emptyweightofmineis311kg,givingausefulloadof211kg.That's ne AyHeons enoughformywifeand|,afulltankoffuelandjusta littlebaggage, i Windenee but it wouldn't suit everyone. ee
| could've saved weight, as many do, by not having G-YCMI painted, but my base at Seething is close to the coast and | wanted to protect her from the salt air as much as possible.
Alsoy, no Sonex has yet been approved by the LAA for aerobatics. As anyone who searches for Sonex videos on YouTube will see, in most other parts of the world, the type is a highly manoeuvrable aerobatic performer.
As | understand it, the LAA has no structural concerns and one example (G-HELL)has been cleared to do aerobatic testing. Its (Above)“I'd
halves of owner, Tim Shaw,and the UK agent, Mike Moulai of Silver Fern, the spar,” Tim recalls, “It’s customary for Sonex builders to are working with the LAA on this issue. make aeroplane noises at that point.” (Photo:TimMobbs)
BUILT BYJON EDMUNDS
"RV-12 has now been cleared to commence its components and supplies. On the upside, it must've been easier to testflyingandhe’sbeenintouchtorevealalittle ofthebuild.As keepsuchasmallspacewarminwinter! his first project, Jon chose the RV-12 due to a combination of its
From Jon’s pictures, the wings looked to have been particularly projected build time and the fact that the wings are removable, glider challenging to build in such a small space but at least the main style. The latter point would assist with his workshop limitations. cockpit shell, tail cone and empennage were all able to be kept
The space available for the build was painfully small, which separate until it was time for final assembly, which eased pressure necessitatedJonspending a lotoftimemovingthingsaround,justto upontheworkspacealittle. be able to work or move on to the next task. His primary work surface Having used a spray gun a couple of decades earlier, Jon wasaCastoffofficedesk,plusasmallshelvingareaforstoringsmaller_tentativelyfelthiswaythroughthepaintingprocessas,atfirst,he was unsure as to whether it was something that he could do and get acceptable results. Logic and a determined, small-scale, progressive, experimental approach finally led him to the conclusion that it was goingtobeaDIYpaintjob,withasinglebasecolouranda vinyl wrap for the graphics. However, due to the lack of space, each assembly would be finish-painted as it was completed.
Jon has created a very good blog that details the project, from the arrival of his empennage kit, the setting up of his compact workshop and his painting experiments, through to the arrival of the aircraft at the airfield for testing. There are also some intriguing time-lapse videos of most component builds. The blog is a very goodreadforanyonewonderingwhat'’sinvolvedinafirst aircraft build project, be it a Van's or any other sheet-metal kit. Jon’s blog, BuildinganRV-12,canbefoundatwww.rv12uk.blogspot.co.uk
(Left)Jon’s micro-workshop, which gave birth to his RV-12, just goes to show what’s possible. (Photo:Jon Edmunds)
(Below)G-VRRV on the airfield for its first engine test. (Photo:JonEdmunds)
just drilled the holes that mate the two
possibly know, EuroFOXwas the first LAA kit-built and Rotax-powered glider-tug back in 2011, and there are now around 25 acting in that capacity at UK gliding sites. The existing, normallyaspirated 100hp 912ULS, the 100hp injected 912iS and the 115hp turbo 914UL engine options which EuroFOX offers work well at most clubs, but a few feel that more power is required to aerotow the heaviest of gliders on the most marginal of hot and still days.
So, for the last year or so, the company has been working to find a simple solution to make more power available for tows to 2,000ft and above. Significantly, the 914’s turbo is normally only used to 500ft, then it’s backed off turbo boost to 100hp, so for tugging there's mainlyan‘upandaway’advantage in itsuse.
After a few attempts dealing with Rotax directly, we went with a popular and proven aftermarket 912 conversion. We decided not to have a complex turbo unit which would require careful and specialised management, and instead took a normal carburettor-based 912ULS engine and converted it to an injected unit with many uprated internal components. So, our Rotax 912-120 conversion provides almost 120hp at the max continuous Rotax rom of 5,500, allowing the tug pilot to firewall the aircraft at the start of the tow and leave it there until it’s time to release, at 2,000ft or above, all with no loss of power at altitude.
The conversion has proved to be very robust and reliable, and it needs to be, as a tug’s life is just about as hard as an aircraft can have, with multiple pilots, 5,000 landings per year and 1,000 hours at either full power or idle in the decent.
The conversion works out about 12-15kg lighter than the 912iS and 914UL, and just a couple of kilograms heavier than the basic 912ULS. It’s a simple conversion the ECU controls only the fuel injection system, while engine parameters are monitored by analogue instruments and sensors, just as with the basic 912ULS. As the 912 series usually provides about 90hp at 5,500rpm, you can see that 120hp at that rom is a huge, thirty per cent increase.
The power-to-weight ratio should be better than that of a Pawnee or the large Cubs, but the only way to tell is to produce an aircraft and test it in club use, including at boggy hillside gliding sites. For the majority of clubs on grass, only a tail dragger will do, and all existing tug options are still available, including retractable winch, parachute, etc.
As a tug, the EuroFOX has stood up well in Europe for over a decade and some UK aircraft have amassed close to 1,500 hours of use, averaging four to five tows to 2,000ft per hour with very few problems. A number of clubs have ordered additional aircraft.
Hoping to stand out from the crowd, this demonstrator boasts a special colour scheme, not only for the Poly-Fibre covering but also for the fuselage tubing, seats and other fabrics, as they've all been detailed in black.
The flight-testing is now underway and progressing well. As this is a new engine type, LAA Engineering require a 25-hour test schedule. Theenginehasaroar toitthatisn’tpresentwiththestandard912 series, but at the same time it’s smooth, in my opinion possibly slightly more so than the 912iS. | don’t think it'll be as economical as the 912iS,
PROJECT NEWS
but will be very good for a tug. In the ground roll the acceleration is noticeably brisker, with extra rudder being required to counter the additional power effect, thereafter a 2,000fom climb was achievable with no glider, of course! Other than that, it’s a standard EuroFOX and handles very nicely.
EuroFOX Aviation have many clubs eagerly awaiting a demonstration as soon as we've finished the flight test schedule. It’s looking as if 2018 will be another busy year for us and I’m hoping that all of the planning, hard work and expense will be worth it. A big thank you to LAA Engineering for being open and pragmatic regarding this project, and for turning the paperwork around in short order, with only the most reasonable and specific of build clarifications requested.
lf your aircraft has been featured inthe New Projectslist,please let ProjectNewsknow about your progress by emailing projectnews@laa-archive.org.uk
@Eurofox 912(S) (LAA 376-15522) 15/12/2017
Mr G Slater,24 Priorsfield,Marlborough, WiltshireSN84AQ
lf your aircraft has featured recently in LA and has subsequently completed itsmaiden flight, ProjectNewswould liketo hearfrom
(Above)The upgraded Rotax 912ULS produces 120hp but the only obvious modification is the fuel injection system.
BY
after spotting an advert on the internet. A flying friend and Van's builder, Jim Edgeworth, ferried me down to Enstone in his RV-6 and it made me think, “I need something as fast as this”. John’s daughter met us at Enstone and took us to inspect the project, which was nearby.
Work had commenced on the aircraft and pages 1-10 of the old-style ‘blue’ build book had been signed off. Everything seemed to be there and in order, so a deal was agreed. The whole lot was shipped up to my hangar at Fishburn in September 2013, with a target of twelve months to complete the build.
Well, just over four years later, it’s finished! All the common stories around the Van's build process are true and this project was no different. The chore of removing pinholes from the fibreglass parts and the fitting of the canopy and engine cowls being among the most entertaining.
The beginning of this year saw everything in place to commence the test flying, and that'll be underway as soon as the weather and Fishburn’s runway conditions allow.
@G-VRRV Van’s RV-12 (LAA 363-15322) 22/12/2017
Mr Jonathan Edmunds, 2a Langton Road, Bournemouth, Dorset BH7 6HS
@G-HONO Just Aircraft Superstol (LAA 397-15378) 18/12/2017
Name & address held by LAA Engineering
(Above)SuperSTOL G-HONO takes to the air for the first time.
(Photo:Mark Harris)
@G-CKAB Eurofox 9121S(LAA 376-15432) 21/12/2017
Name & address held by LAA Engineering
@G-CKKG TL-3000 Sirius (LAA 386-15474) 21/12/2017
Name & address held by LAA Engineering
MARK MEYNELL the RV in 2013, from the estate of the late John Siertsema,
(Above) Reserved parking for one Europa Snow Goose before being transported to the airfield. (Photo:BobDawson)
prompts mem
hen|waslearningtofly,all (Above)Kilkenny Castle,which dominates thoseyearsago,whilewaiting _theskylineoftheMedievaltown. for the last studentto finish (Photo:Tolivero/ Wikicomkons) kangaroo-hoppingdownthe runway,|cameacrossan advertforsomethingcalledthePopularFlying Association(PFA).Havingcaughtmyattention withits‘affordableflying’slogan,duringmy subsequent lesson asked my instructor d me about the PFA. His reply clearly save from a ‘narrow escape’ as he warned that the Association’saircraftwereneithercertified normaintainedbylicensedengineersand, therefore,shouldbeavoided.Thatperception stayedwithmeforyears,until "'dreacheda criticalpointinaviation,when|eitherneede tofindawayforward,onewhichallowedme totrulyengagewithcross-countryflying,or take the easy way out and just give itup.
I'dreachedthatpointbecauseclubflyingwas no longer working for me. Cost wasn’t the onlyfactoras,exceptforclubfly-outs,there simply weren't any opportunities to get away forafewdays.Therequired,28-daycheckouts eventually led to a lack of currency and theneedtoreturntheplaneinanhourforthe next hirer, which nurtured feelings more akin
Agroupofpilots,somewithwhat|then consideredanawe-inspiring350-500hours,hadplanned a triptoBirr,CountyOffaly, in themiddleoftheRepublicofIreland,andas
to that of a nervous passenger than a Pilot in Command. With just an hour under my belt over the course of the previous calendar year, |thenansweredanadvert,whichledmeto joinanexperiencedgroupwhowerelooking for something called a ‘permit aircraft’.
Withalittletwo-seatJodelpurchased, | was then in a state of bewilderment, as not onlydiditlooklikeanaeroplaneandwas| legallyclearedtofly,butitalsokeptasmapartofaviationhistoryalive. _ AfterspendingdaysjustpolishingtheJodel, | foresaw three main hurdles. Firstly, flyingatail-draggerwhich,inthosedays, wasmostlydonewithamoreexperienced pilot-a certainBrianHope,!nmycase. Secondly,flyingwithastick,whichwaspretty instinctiveandpreferable.And,finally,flying fromanunlicensedstrip,whichcanstilbe justaschallengingandalwaysrequires a pilot’s full attention. At the time, | had no notion that the little Jodel was about to open
By responding to a single advert, I'd subsequentlyfoundmyselfoverthemiddleO the IrishSea,overtakingaTaylorcraft,having just passed a Woody Pusher,and about to catchanotherJodel.Totallyoverwhelmed andnotquiteabletograsptheenormity of the situation, felt that I'd finally ‘arrived’. f this wasn't real aviation freedom, wasn't sure what was, or where it could be found.
Asthe Chinesephilosopher,Laozi,put it,
around 604BC, “A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.”
Not being in a position to criticise these ‘demi-gods’, we did make Birr, but only after diverting to Waterford for the night, getting stuck for two days on the Emerald Isle and spending another night as a guest ina disused caravan in Wales.
In 1885, German philosopher Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850-1909) was the first person to describe the ‘learning curve’, which graphically plotted the acquisition of knowledge due to experience. It would’ve been quite illuminating to see my own graph developing over those few days. Realistically, my spirit should’ve been irrevocably marred, and a far less demanding pursuit sourced. Not on your Nelly! Even though | realised that there was so much to be learnt, and was starkly aware of my own ineptitude, for the first time | could see an affordable solution to the type of flying | wanted to do. They could keep their ‘circuit’ and the local area, this was for me! And, yes, I’d been stretched, but there was no going back and, for me, the ebullient feelings generated from that trio proved to be a turning point it was one of those eureka moments.
Those reflections of my first flight to Ireland were particularly significant, as there was again, years later, armed with both a deal more experience and advanced technology.
had GPS, a transponder, a PLB anda decent radio, and was about to coast out from approximately the same point, across the Irish Sea and on to a fly-in at Kilkenny.
How different it felt instead of being overwhelmed and dependent on others to lead the way, over the years I'd steadily developed the ability to become self-reliant and trust my own decision-making. guess that, if | had any real concerns, it was the fact that was about to make a longish sea crossing.
Surprisingly, though, my early feelings of awe, wonderment and privilege, of simply being an ‘aviator’, remain just as strong as ever. Naturally, since that trip to Birr, Il’dmade many mistakes while exploring the limitations of my experience but, whether due to luck or judgement, had also always managed to extricate myself from the messes | sometimes found myself in. As US President Theodore ‘Teddy’ Roosevelt (1858-1919) once put it, “The only man who never makes a mistake is the man who never does anything.”
TO KILKENNY
The question of sea crossings is a moot point for most pilots and my own position probably doesn’t really add any clarity, as it’s equally ambivalent. can honestly say that | don’t mind them and do more crossings than most throughout the season, but | always feel more at ease upon reaching the ‘other side’. | most likely agree that the engine does sound different mid-channel, probably because we tend listen more intently, and as for the old adage regarding the fact that the engine doesn’t know it’s over water, well, | do often remind it, ‘If you must miss a beat, not now, please!’
On that occasion | was due to meet up with a couple of pals, Mike Wells from Watchford Farm, Devon in a Van’s RV-4, and Bob Hallam of Sleap, Shropshire, who’d be in whichever one of his aircraft he’d felt like flying. Bearing in mind that we were coming from different parts of the country, the rendezvous was something that synchronised swimmers, high-wire acrobats or even the Red Arrows would have been proud of, as all three of us arrived in the Kilkenny circuit at the same time.
(Left) The Shee Alms House, founded by the Shee family in 1582, “to accommodate twelve poor persons”, is now the city’s Tourist Information office (www. visit kilkenny.ie).
(Photo:MKUltra3340/ TripAdvisor)
(Below) Kilkenny from the Round Tower of St Canice’s Cathedral, looking across to St Mary’s Cathedral. (Photo: Andreas F. Borchert / Wikicommons)
hen | was learning to fly, all those years ago, while waiting for the last student to finish kangaroo-hopping down the runway, | came across an advert for something called the Popular Flying Association (PFA). Having caught my attention with its ‘affordable flying’ slogan, during my subsequent lesson | asked my instructor about the PFA. His reply clearly saved me from a ‘narrow escape’ as he warned that the Association’s aircraft were neither certified nor maintained by licensed engineers and, therefore, should be avoided. That perception stayed with me for years, until I'd reached a critical point in aviation, when | either needed to find a way forward, one which allowed me to truly engage with cross-country flying, or take the easy way out and just give it up.
I'd reached that point because club flying was no longer working for me. Cost wasn’t the only factor as, except for club fly-outs, there simply weren't any opportunities to get away for a few days. The required, 28-day checkouts eventually led to a lack of currency and the need to return the plane in an hour for the next hirer, which nurtured feelings more akin
to that of a nervous passenger than aPilot in Command. With just an hour under my belt over the course of the previous calendar year, | then answered an advert, which led me to join an experienced group who were looking for something called a ‘permit aircraft’.
Witha littletwo-seatJodelpurchased,| wasthenina stateofbewilderment,asnot only did it look like an aeroplane and was legally cleared to fly, but it also kept a small part of aviation history alive.
After spending days just polishing the Jodel, | foresaw three main hurdles. Firstly, flying a tail-dragger which, in those days, was mostly done with a more experienced pilot a certain Brian Hope, in my case. Secondly, flying with a stick, which was pretty instinctive and preferable. And, finally, flying from an unlicensed strip, which can still be just as challenging and always requires a pilot’s full attention. At the time, | had no notion that the little Jodel was about to open
up a whole new world for me or the addictive nature of what would ensue. It really was ‘let the adventure begin!’
A group of pilots, some with what | then considered an awe-inspiring 350-500 hours, hadplannedatrip toBirr,CountyOffaly,in the middle of the Republic of Ireland, and as an ‘enthusiastic newbie’ | was invited to tag along. These guys weren't the run-of-the-mill chaps you meet in a pub, as apart from their comparatively vast experience, they also retained and maintained their own aircraft. These ‘aviation gods’ casually discussed complex aeronautical issues with a flair and authority that | had’t come across before.
BEYOND THE SEA...
By responding to a single advert, I'd subsequently found myself over the middle of the Irish Sea, overtaking a Taylorcraft, having just passed a Woody Pusher, and about to catch another Jodel. Totally overwhelmed and not quite able to grasp the enormity of the situation, | felt that I'd finally ‘arrived’.
lf this wasn’t real aviation freedom, | wasn’t sure what was, or where it could be found. As the Chinese philosopher, Laozi, put it,
(Above) Kilkenny Castle, which dominates the skyline of the Medieval town.
(Photo: Tolivero/ Wikicomkons)
around 604BC, “A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.”
Not being in a position to criticise these ‘demi-gods’, we did make Birr, but only after diverting to Waterford for the night, getting stuck for two days on the Emerald Isle and spending another night as a guest in a disused caravan in Wales.
In 1885, German philosopher Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850-1909) was the first person to describe the ‘learning curve’, which graphically plotted the acquisition of knowledge due to experience. It would've been quite illuminating to see my own graph developing over those few days. Realistically, my spirit should’ve been irrevocably marred, and a far less demanding pursuit sourced. Not on your Nelly! Even though | realised that there was so much to be learnt, and was starkly aware of my own ineptitude, for the first time | could see an affordable solution to the type of flying | wanted to do. They could keep their ‘circuit’ and the local area, this was for me! And, yes, |’d been stretched, but there was no going back and, for me, the ebullient feelings generated from that trip proved to be a turning point it was one of those eureka moments.
Those reflections of my first flight to Ireland were particularly significant, as there | was again, years later, armed with both a deal more experience and advanced technology. | had GPS, a transponder, a PLB and a decent radio, and was about to coast out from approximately the same point, across the Irish Sea and on to a fly-in at Kilkenny.
How different it felt instead of being overwhelmed and dependent on others to lead the way, over the years I'd steadily developed the ability to become self-reliant and trust my own decision-making. | guess that, if | had any real concerns, it was the fact that | was about to make a longish sea crossing.
Surprisingly, though, my early feelings of awe, wonderment and privilege, of simply being an ‘aviator’, remain just as strong as ever. Naturally, since that trip to Birr, I'd made many mistakes while exploring the limitations of my experience but, whether due to luck or judgement, had also always managed to extricate myself from the messes | sometimes found myself in. As US President Theodore ‘Teddy’ Roosevelt (1858-1919) once put it, “The only man who never makes a mistake is the man who never does anything.”
(Left) The Shee Alms House, founded by the Shee family in 1582, “to accommodate twelve poor persons”, is now the city’s Tourist Information office (www. visit kilkenny.ie). (Photo:MKUltra3340 / TripAdvisor) (Below) Kilkenny from the Round Tower of St Canice’s Cathedral, looking across to St Mary’s Cathedral. (Photo: Andreas F. Borchert / Wikicommons)
TO KILKENNY
The question of sea crossings is a moot point for most pilots and my own position probably doesn't really add any clarity, as it’s equally ambivalent. | can honestly say that | don't mind them and do more crossings than most throughout the season, but | always feel more at ease upon reaching the ‘other side’.
| most likely agree that the engine does sound different mid-channel, probably because we tend listen more intently, and as for the old adage regarding the fact that the engine doesn’t know it’s over water, well, | do often remind it, ‘If you must miss a beat, not now, please!’
On that occasion | was due to meet up with a couple of pals, Mike Wells from Watchford Farm, Devon in a Van’s RV-4, and Bob Hallam of Sleap, Shropshire, who'd be in whichever one of his aircraft he'd felt like flying. Bearing in mind that we were coming from different parts of the country, the rendezvous was something that synchronised swimmers, high-wire acrobats or even the Red Arrows would have been proud of, as all three of us arrived in the Kilkenny circuit at the same time.
Known as the Medieval City of Ireland, Kilkenny in Celtic is Cill Chainnigh, which means ‘Church of Cainnech’. The city sits on both banks of the River Nore and has its roots in the sixth century, originally being a part of the Kingdom of Ossory. Following the Norman invasion of 1207, the Lord of Leinster, William Marshall, granted it town status, which is how it remained until 1609, whenitofficiallybecamea city.
Kilkenny’s rustic charm, with quaint shops and excellent restaurants, and a generally historic feel, makes it a popular tourist destination. Being Ireland, it'll come as no surprise that there are a lot of pubs, many of which have inexpensive rooms available, making the journey from bar to bed a simple task. The distinctively-flavoured Kilkenny Ale, these days, an Irish ‘cream ale’ from the makers of Guinness, has been brewed locally, in one form or another, for centuries.
Perched high on a hill, Kilkenny Castle dominates the town. Completed in 12138,it was bought by James Butler, the third Ear! of Ormonde, in 1391, and the family really
recently, Skydive Ireland, which purchasedThings
managed to create some dynasty as it remained with them until Arthur, the sixth Marquess of Ormonde, sold it to the ‘people of Kilkenny’ for a token payment of £50 in 1967.
The area has produced quite a few famous names, including architect James Hoban (1755-1831), who went on to design the ‘White House’ in Washington DC, and George Berkeley (1665-1753), one of the most respected philosophers of the 18th century, best known for his theory of ‘immaterialism’.
In addition, Jonathan Swift (1667-1745), the writer of Gulliver's Travels undertook his studies at Kilkenny College.
KILKENNYAIRPORT
Situated 1.5nm the to west of the city, as the crowflies,andalittle over4mbycar,Kilkenny Airport (www.kilkennyairport.ieé)opened in 1963. For those who prefer ‘Shanks’s pony’, rather than following the meandering road, try heading more or less due west, as the shortcuts will help reduce the time it takes to walk it expect around an hour’s stroll. More
(Left) The city’s ‘Medieval Mile’ offers a wide range of attractions. (Map: www.visitkilkenny.ie) (Below left & right) KilkennyAirport, which opened in 1963, is now run by Skydive Ireland. (Photo: Kevin Higgins/ Wikicommons & Kilkenny Airport)
the Airport in 2014, has unfortunately been embroiled in a battle over planning issues with the local council, regarding its charitable skydiving activities.
Most of Ireland can be reached in an hour by air from Kilkenny and we'd specifically arrived a day early, for the opportunity to nip across to the Aran Isles, of Inishmann, Inisheer and Inishmore, the following day.
Coincidentally, shortly after our arrival, the familiar Aeroncas of Bodmin-based Pete White, and members of the Aeronca Club, dropped-in during the homeward leg of its annual tour. Within an hour there were two neat lines of tents and tied-down aircraft, conjuring up nostalgic thoughts of ‘canvas under the wing’.
However, we'd already booked into The Club House Hotel (+353 (0)56 77 21 994, www.clubhousehotel.com) in the city centre. It's housed in a restored Georgian building and is said to be Kilkenny’s oldest hotel, which fitted in nicely with the ‘olde worlde’ charm of the place.
I'd previously made contact with Peter Gorman, based in Newcastle, County Down,
Black mill st.
weather, there was an actually Kilkenny GAA, had a home-turf match
(Above) Cillian Buckley in action for Kilkenny against Galway in the 2015 National Hurling League at Pearse Stadium.
who drove across to join us for dinner at a nice restaurant in the town centre. In truth, | didn’t know Peter could drive as we'd only ever met up by plane and wherever | talked to him he was off to some far-flung place by air.
For those who aren’t aware, Peter owns an RV-6 and is a committed aviation junkie who's way past any form of redemption. He took the RV down to South Africa, with Essam Bishara, back in 2011, has been up to see the Northern Lights and down to Cyprus and, more recently, across to China with Ben Hinds in a Mooney.
Suffice to say that, althought | think I’ve managedtogetarounda bit,|certainlycan't purport to be in Peter’s league my final destination is likely to be the same distance away as his first night-stop!
The next morning the Irish weather was true to form and our planned lunch on the Aran Isles wasn’t possible as a front had slipped in through the middle of the night. Any yearning for a night under canvas was quickly dispelled and, after a lift back to town, we became tourists for the day.
‘KILKENNY CATS’ & THE FLY-IN
The Irish are a sociable, warm and welcoming people, and with their relaxed attitudes to most things, it'd be easy to think of living there ifitwasn’tforonerathersignificantfactor it isn't called the Emerald Isle without reason!
After traversing the Atlantic, the Gulf Stream relentlessly deposits temperate, moist air often carrying rain onto Ireland, creating a very fertile land, but also bringing the associated challenges for VFR pilots.
In spite of the rainy weather, there was an excited atmosphere in the city as the ‘Kilkenny Cats’ hurling team, actually Kilkenny GAA, had a home-turf match against its arch rivals, Tipperary, later that evening. Kilkenny’s team takes its name from the fierce reputation that cats, as in the feline variety, were known to have had in Cromwellian times when, cruelly, their would’ve had their tails tied together and then made to fight each other. As the local Limerick goes:
“There once were two cats of Kilkenny, Each thought there was one cat too many, So they fought and they fit,
TOURING ADVENTURE
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
MARTIN FERID is a Class Rating Instructor and Revalidation Examiner who specialises in helping qualified pilots expand their horizons by introducing them to the splendours of flying in Europe, both asdaytripsorforafewdaysata time.
Ifyoulackalittle confidenceincrossing the Channel, touring in general or indeed in any aspects of flying, please contact him using the details below.
Shouldyoubelookingfora little inspiration or new destinations, just visit www.lightaircrattraining.co.uk, which should offer enough ideas to quench most thirsts, all of which can be discovered cruising at a relatively sedate 9Okt.
You can call Martin on 07598 880178 or email ightaircrafttraining@yahoo.com
LAA FLY-OUT NEWS
AS PART of this monthly series, during 2017 we arranged fly-outs to destinations in both the UK and abroad. Picture a weekend away in a nice town, with good food, a glass or two and a bunch of like-minded people. We aim to continue into 2018 so if you'd like to join us on any of our fly-outs to a local airfield, enjoy a weekend down by the Loire or even further afield you'd be most welcome. It makes no difference whether you’re a seasoned tourer or haven't ever crossed the Channel before, there’s enough support and experience around to help allay those fears. Email the address above and I'll add your name to the list then keep you informed of future fly-outs.
(Left) Martin (centre) being presented with the ‘furthest travelled’trophy at the Kilkenny fly-in he can’t remember why his camera was in black and white mode!
(Photo: Martin Ferid)
And they scratched and they bit, Till, excepting their nails, And the tips of their tails, Insteadof two cats, there weren't any.”
The fly-in was well attended, with as many G-registered aeroplanes as Irish ones, and ‘yours truly’ won the prize for the longest flight. A brisk tailwind made the trip home fairly straightforward, and had it not been for the twelve-hour requirement for GAR forms to and from the Republic, | would’ve altered my flight-plan and been able to make it back in one hop.
I've been in touch with the people who run Kilkenny Airport these days, who said they’re prepared to provide LAA members with a Free Landings voucher via LA later this year. | do fancy a trip across to Ireland this season, particularly the West Coast. Send me an email if you’d like to tag along you'll find my contact details above. @
Next month’s Touring Adventure will see Martin visiting the hidden gem of Weybourne, on the North Norfolk coast.
(Photo: Seaninryan / Wikicommons)
oubtless many LAA members have recently noticed the term electronic conspicuity or EC, and the slogan ‘see and be seen’ mentioned ina number of adverts and news items. Perhaps you wondered, “What is it?”, “Should | buy it?” and, if so, “What should | buy?” Well, the answers to those questions very much depend on what you expect EC to do for you, so this article looks at the subject from the viewpoint of a potential customer.
NEW ADVANCES
In practical terms, EC is an electronic beacon that’s carried on your aircraft, which transmits your GPS-derived identity, position, height, direction and speed on a special radio frequency. That enables anyone in range, with a compatible receiver, to be alerted to your presence and, depending on their equipment, generate a proximity warning, a risk of collision warning or a display of your position. To see similarly-equipped aircraft, you also need to have a receiver.
(Above) A PowerFLARM unit-this technology was originally developed for glider pilots, and has been in use for over a decade. (Photo:www.flarm.com)
From a collision avoidance point of view, this is a move in the right direction, but it'll only become truly effective when enough of us fit compatible EC transmitters and receivers which can ‘see’ one another, and we're a long way from that at the moment...
DIFFERENT STANDARDS
Currently, the certified EC standard is ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast) which, as its name implies, automatically broadcasts GPS-derived data that can be received by ground stations (ATC) and also suitably equipped aircraft. At the non-certified end of the market, we have FLARM (FLight al[ARM),which was originally developed for glider pilots, who regularly fly in close proximity to each other.
FLARM transmits and receives position data in its own unique standard, and proximity warnings can only be received by other aircraft carrying FLARM equipment.
Finally, we have PilotAware, which also transmits its own standard (P3i) and can receive that, Mode S, Mode A/C and ADS-B. The US is using a system known as UAT (Universal Access Transceiver), which transmits position data to a ground station that relays all Know traffic information plus live weather, notams, etc, back to your aircraft. Although some ‘dual-band’ transponders available in UK are equipped to do this, the UAT traffic service isn’t available in Europe.
THE CAA’S VIEW
The CAA is trying to encourage all pilots to equip their aircraft with EC beacons. As described, several companies have products available today which offer varying functional capability but with non-compatible standards. Recently, as part of a safety initiative, the CAA published CAP1391, which defines
CAP1391(eguAvionix)
PilotAware P3i
Aircraft Tracking apps. (internet)
another ‘low-cost’ standard for an EC beacon, and with it the regulator announced that ADS-B, and its derivatives transmitting on 1090mHz, are its preferred standard in the UK.
The CAP1391 spec is for a “portable, low-power” device using the same frequency and format as the existing, more powerful certified standard, ADS-B. The CAA suggests that such a beacon should cost about £250.
Unlike the existing, low-cost EC beacon standards, FLARM and P3i, the new one can be ‘seen’ by ADS-B ‘In’ equipment but, disappointingly, it seems to be incompatible with current ATC kit and can’t currently be operated at the same time as a Mode S transponder. The CAA is still investigating these issues and conducting trials using a portable device, manufactured to the CAP 1391 standard by an American company, uAvionix.
There seems to be a belief among its champions that coverage from a cockpitmounted portable device is isotropic ie that it can be seen from all round your aircraft. That's almost certainly a long way from reality and the actual coverage is one of the key issues which must be addressed if electronic conspicuity beacons really are to work.
YOU PAYS YER MONEY...
The CAA’s target of £250 for a beacon is supposed to be an incentive to get as much take up as possible but, unfortunately, it’s only part of the story.What you might get for £250 is quite basic and will provide only partial coverage around your aircraft. Ergo, full coverage will probably cost much more.
I'm not surethe CAA has fully understood the market or the requirements from a pilot/ owner's point ofview. In the regulator's own words, it’s about ‘seeing and being seen’, but its solution only really considers the latter, and not very comprehensively, at that. The cost of ‘seeing’ is additional and | certainly wouldn't consider putting any EC in my aeroplane without also being able to ‘see’ similarly equipped aircraft, and also holding the belief that mostothers will be carrying an effective beacon during my flying lifetime.
In my 1,800 hours of flying I’ve experienced several close calls from directions which | couldn’t have seen below and behind. Although basic ECequipment may work as an aid to spotting aircraft out front and to the side, its potential to see all around must be explored. I’ve looked at this from a point of
view of equipping my Van's RV-6with effective EC and am sharing my conclusions here, for the benefit of my fellow flyers.
WHAT DO! BUY?
The key questions which need to be addressed before buying any EC system are:
@What standard should | adopt?
@How well does the equipment work and what do | have to do to ensure that it’s effective? The key issue for the overall effectiveness of EC is compatibility the more of us that can see one another, the better!
The table shown above identifies each of the standards transmitted and identifies which systems, according to their respective publicity,
For example, the table shows that although a PilotAware system can receive (ie see) most of the standards, none of the others can see its P3i transmissions. An ADS-B In receiver can see CAP13971but not Mode S, FLARM or P3i, and so on. The transmissions that can be seen by most devices are ADS-B or CAP1391, so either would be my preferred beacon standard. Although many systems claim to see multiple standards, one must be careful, as the receivers don’t always process and display all of them in the same way. Some receivers display the full position data for aircraft transmitting one standard, while only detecting and reporting the presence of a signal (proximity) for others. Although a general proximity warning might be useful in >
PuctAware
transit, it could be a nightmare in a busy circuit. My preference is for a receiver which gives full position data on as many of the standards as is practicable, including the most popular ones, namely ADS-B / CAP1391 and FLARM.
Another key issue for receivers is how alerts and data are presented to the pilot. Some present it on a tablet or smart phone, others a permanent compass or radar-style display, and some give an audio alert through your headset.
My principle issue is with the cockpit clutter which results from this myriad of ‘portable’ devices |’d prefer an installed solution.
COVERAGE AND EFFECTIVENESS
Having decided on the standard to adopt, | see little point in installing a beacon which only provides limited coverage, nor a receiver that solely identifies that which can already be seen visually. To be effective, a system must see and be seen by the majority of threats at an adequate range to do something about it.
Based on a one-minute warning, the Diagrams 1 and 2 indicate the sort of range
DIAGRAM |
2
of the standards as
CAP1391 and FLARM”
and coverage required to achieve a one-minute warning for my RV-6.
For conspicuity to work between two aircraft, their beacon transmission must be of sufficient strength over the whole spatial coverage required (range and azimuth), and the receiver's coverage and sensitivity adequate to pick up the other aircraft’s signal from whatever direction it comes.
Beacon transmission power varies from 20-250wforADS-B / CAP1391butit’svery difficult to determine the sensitivity of the receivers on the market my investigation suggests that it could vary between -88 to -100 dBm.
In general, the more sensitive the receiver or more powertul the transmitter, the greater the effective range between the two.
In the real world there will be a hotchpotch of different transmitters and receivers contributing to conspicuity. A low-power transmitter and low-sensitivity receiver will have a very short effective range, whereas increasing those parameters can improve it.
DIAGRAM 3
Ergo, effective range will be a function of both aircraft's installations.
Ratherthan claim ‘pie inthe sky’ ranges based on their own optimised equipment (and tests), the manufacturers need to address the issue more openly. |’d certainly go for as much power and sensitivity as | can get, to ensure my equipment works in all scenarios.
ANTENNAE
Having sorted out the electronics, getting the signal out to, or receiving it from, the sky is the next challenge, and this is done by an antenna.
It's normally an insulated brass or copper rod about 7cm-long (1090MHz ADS-B) for a monopole antenna, or 14cm for a dipole. Matching the length to the frequency is important for efficiency. For example, for 830MHz (FLARM or PA) the optimum length is 8.5cm., Soexpecting the same antenna to work well for ADS-B is unrealistic.
To work at all, a monopole needs to be mounted on a conducting surface (ie a metalground-plane),such asthe fuselage or an aluminium plate, whereas a dipole can just sit on the end of its cable.
It's important to understand that an antenna doesn’t radiate or receive signals evenly in all directions (ie isotropic radiation), as would a light bulb, but has a distinct pattern, meaning strong signals in some directions but almost non-existent in others.
Antennae radiate or receive most efficiently in a disc or donut-shaped beam around their axis. The efficient zone of the beam widens with distance by 20-25° for a monopole or about 40-50° for a dipole.
Another consideration is polarisation. lf a transmitter antenna is mounted vertically then, for maximum efficiency, any antenna expecting to receive its signals should also be vertical. That’s referred to as polarisation, and is normally chosen to achieve the best coverage. In the case of EC, all antennae should be vertical, as any difference between transmitting and receiving antennae’ relative angles (such as when manoeuvring or due to installation issues) results in a deterioration of signal level, with almost total loss as the difference becomes 90°.
Therefore, although in ideal conditions long detection ranges can be achieved with comparatively low power and sensitivity, most of the time the equipment will be operating outside its optimum. This can only be compensated for by a significant excess of sensitivity for the receivers and power for the transmitters over that required for an optimised system.
MOUNTING AND COVERAGE
Possible coverage provided by an in-cockpit antenna.
For my RV-6,a basic portable beacon in the cockpit could provide some forward and sideward visibility perhaps 20 per cent of coverage.
Mounting the antenna externally on the airframe, as shown in Diagram 4, in a position that’s designed to optimise the coverage and minimise obstructions and reflections, does go some way to addressing the coverage issue. However, it’s also important to select the correct antenna system.
Within its optimum beam, the antenna should achieve the predicted range of the transmission or sensitivity of the reception but, outside of that, its performance will deteriorate rapidly to a point where there's no signal at all.
DIAGRAM 4
5
Not withstanding the theory outlined above, an aircraft is a far from ideal environment for mounting an antenna efficiently. Radio waves can reflect off or refract around an airframe in a relatively chaotic manner. If that happens, some signals may radiate in unexpected directions and others vanish from the predicted direction entirely. However, the key to effective range and coverage (transmit and receive) is still a good antenna, location and installation. Most basic EC systems have a small antenna sticking out of a portable box. Radio waves travel in straight lines and reflect off, rather than pass through, metal or carbon-fibre, so the coverage provided by the box is very dependent on where you put it. For many, it won't be very effective in the cockpit only ‘seeing and being seen’ out of the windows, as shown in Diagram 3.
A single antenna, no matter how clever, will always have significant coverage limitations due to their radiation pattern and the potential presence of the airframe and engine between them and a target. For my RV-6, mounting a single antenna on the fuselage should provide all-round visibility on either the top or bottom but not both perhaps 50 per cent coverage.
The theoretical coverage provided a top fuselage-mounted monopole antenna.
Mode S ADS-B certified transponders, in particular, are affected by this limitation because they’re required by their approval to have a single simple antenna on the bottom oftheaircraft,asshowninDiagram5,which >
DIAGRAM
limits coverage to the lower zone only. That’s great for sending your squawk or extended squitter to ATC, but not much use for your conspicuity to an aircraft above you.
The US system of choice, UAT, addresses this problem by using a ground-base which relays the traffic data it receives from transmitting aircraft up to all the others, so it only needs downward-looking antennae.
However, as previously noted, that system isn’t scheduled to come to Europe! So we have to resolve the coverage problem in another way. Commercial traffic warning systems such as TCAS use multiple or ‘diverse’ antennae to address the problem of gaining full coverage.
Antenna diversity involves using more than one to fill in the coverage gaps. However, diverse antennae require synchronised transmitters and receivers, so they don’t interfere with one another, which is more complex.
With that in mind, I'd look for a system which could at least be easily expanded to include diverse antennae. Although I’m as yet unaware of a diverse solution for CAP1397, there’s nothing in the specification which precludes it, and some of the other manufacturers already claim it as a feature.
TESTING ANTENNA EFFICIENCY
The actual coverage provided by an antenna is notoriously difficult to measure or guarantee.
‘Seeing’ another aircraft on the ground, ie ramptesting, only indicates that it’s transmitting and you're receiving it has little correlation with what will happen in the air.
One simple way of indicating how well such equipment is working in the air is to take a leaf out of the radio amateurs’ book and log all traffic contacts electronically (direction and
The uAvionix SkyEcho, which weighs only 200g, is an approved portable ADS-B Out solution in the UK. (Photo:www.uavionix.nl).
take a leaf out of the radio amateurs’ book”
range, relative to the aircraft) and then, after sufficient time, analyse them with respect to direction. As this history builds up, you should be able to get a good idea of coverage and blind spots, and re-site the antenna, if necessary. For me, such a data log would be an essential tool to give me confidence in how well a system is working.
One of the requirements of CAP1391, for the manufacturers of beacons, is to provide advice to their customers on antenna installation and performance.
l'm keen to see what this might be and how they address coverage and range advice.
MY SPEC FOR AN EC FIT
I'd like a modular product which can grow into the ‘total package’ that, when complete, would provide the following features:
i Beacon: A ninety per cent coverage (ie isotropic) on 1090 MHz, detectable by correctly-equipped aircraft within five
miles horizontal radius and +/-2000ft of the height of your aircraft.
@Receiver: A Ninety per cent probability of a position (not proximity) warning of a conflicting aircraft's transmission on any of the candidate standards, made within a five mile horizontal radius and +/-2000ft of the height of my aircraft.
Bf Intercepted target data-logging, to enable antenna coverage and performance-monitoring.
@An acoustic warning connectable to the intercom system.
An installed, radar-like display of conflicting targets, giving approximate relative bearing and height.
@Dataoutputtoa tablettrafficdisplay (Bluetooth or Wi-Fi)
Cockpit-selectable ‘Beacon(s) Off mode for use in Class D airspace, operated by a switch, not an app.
@Rugged, light, multi-band or broadband antenna, suitable for exterior mounting and capable of up to 190kt.
@Automatic start-up upon the application of power.
At this point, you may be thinking, “So what is the solution?” Well, we're not there yet! I’m well aware of the challenge that the required coverage | specified presents to manufactures, but my wish list certainly isn’t pie in the sky.
I'm not suggesting any functions or features that one or another EC manufacturer doesn't already offer. However, they simply aren’t all available as a single system, as of yet...
IN SUMMARY
EC is about safety, nothing more. | want to see every aircraft close to me that can be seen, and be seen by any aircraft with a receiver.
I'm one of those, now sceptical, people who replaced a perfectly good Mode A/C transponder with a Mode S and am still wondering why. So I’m not going to spend £250+ and clutter up my aircraft just to transmit into a vacuum. I'll only consider a system if it could eventually do what | really want.
CAP1391 is a broad spec and its compatibility with ADS-B is an opportunity to develop a better, more effective traffic warning system which will help us all.
The technical issues outlined herein need to be addressed by the industry and the authorities, to help convince us to take up EC. In particular, the industry must drop the ‘hope and prayer’ method and honestly address how these things perform, in terms of range and coverage, and what the installer must do to make it happen.
In addition, remember that EC will only begin to work effectively when most of us have it, but many won't buy it unless we believe it’s going to do something for us, not just ATC and the tracking enthusiasts!
Should you buy one? As | said at the start, it depends on what you want it to do for you!
FEEDBACK
I'd like to encourage others to comment on what they might like in the way of EC, so that the CAA and industry can use our feedback and develop the system we actually want, rather than something they think we should have. After this article is published I'll be starting a blog to collate any opinions, so please email your thoughts and findings to me via frasersi@btinternet.com.
ven by the standards of recent Airspace Change Proposals, the Consultations launched by Osprey CSL, on behalf of RAF Brize Norton and London Oxford Airport, potentially represent one of the most devastating blows to VFR flying ever seen in the already congested airspace of southern England.
The combined bids would increase the area theirrespectiveCTRsandCTAsbya factorof roughly three, bringing it close to the size of Luton, a scale which is totally disproportionate to even the most optimistic calculation of air traffic movements for the two airfields.
Worse still, the proposed airspace is incredibly poorly designed. It takes no account of prominent ground features for VFR navigation, such as the M40 motorway and the giant runway at Upper Heyford. The twelve extra segments of controlled airspace have bases at seven different heights, making ita prime target for air soace busts from traffic attempting to circumnavigate the airspace.
PINCH-POINTS
To the north of Oxford, the proposed controlled airspace will extend to Barford St John, just south of Banbury. Take a look at the top right corner of the second of the two diagrams produced by the British Gliding Association (BGA), shown below right, and you'll see a pronounced ‘pinch-point’, routing traffic which cannot enter the airspace within 1nm of Hinton-in-the-Hedges. In addition to being a busy GA airfield, Hinton also hosts a very active parachute drop zone I'll leave the potential consequences to your imagination!
This northward extension of controlled airspace is allegedly to accommodate procedural approaches into Oxford’s R19. In fact, few such approaches are made. Even the local Oxford-based air training operations prefer to use Gloucestershire for such exercises, operating in Class G airspace with just an ATZ, despite handling more than twice the movements of Oxford.
London Oxford however, is using this as justification to potentially block E-Wtraffic from a heavily-used swathe of airspace to the north of Oxford, restricting and excluding those known to be operating from Weston-onthe-Green, Shotteswell, Bicester, Hinton and Enstone, as well as several private airfields in the area. It'll also hit airfield utilisation at Chiltern Park, Turweston, Sywell, Wellesbourne and further afield, as en-route traffic will almost certainly be affected.
ProposedBrizeLOAasa Singlechange
Diagrams produced by the BGA, showing the current areas of controlled airspace (above) and the increased area, with narrower pinch-points, if the Proposalswere to go ahead.
In addition, to the west, the proposed Brize Norton Class C airspace will extend beyond Kemble, creating a significant impediment to north-south traffic. Combined with the proposed airspace surrounding Farnborough, it has the potential to, at the very least, result in more pinch-points and, at worst, become an impenetrable barrier to VFRnavigation.
Again, there appears only tenuous evidence that Brize Norton’s procedural training requirements, for such aircraft as the Hercules, Globemaster, Atlas and Voyager, justifies the scale of the proposed airspace. The majority of this training can now be done, at a lower cost to the taxpayer, in simulators. In fact, during the whole of December, the airfield’s total number of training sorties numbered just 27, and its busiest day inJanuary saw only nine flown. Hardly Heathrow, is it?
As with the Farnborough airspace bid, the gliding community are set to be most heavily penalised, with Lasham, Nympsfield and Aston Down, three of the biggest (and most ambitious, in terms of cross-country gliding) in the UK, struggling to see how many of their ‘goal’ flights could be achieved.
Sites close to the restricted airspace, such as Bicester, Enstone and Shenington, will see their training flights inevitably restricted, while some locations, like Weston-on-the-Green, may potentially close. Competition glider flights are very accurately tracked so we can readily see just how much they could be affected.
Take a look at the third diagram, shown above, which documents flights from just one location (Aston Down) and you can then figure, if access to the controlled airspace is restricted, how busy those pinch-points are going to become on a good weekend for soaring!
LACK OF TRANSPARENCY
Adding insult to injury is the somewhat cynical manner in which the information surrounding the Consultations has been presented.
Although initial scoping discussions began in 2014, it’s obvious that the official
Consultation documents were hastily rushed out on 15 December 2017, one suspects largely to ‘beat’ the deadline of 2 January 2018, when new Airspace Change consultation rules came into force, with CAP1616 demanding greater transparency. Certainly, there are signs that, in Osprey's haste to beat the deadline, a number of errors have crept in. Forexample, a significant number of diagrams have been distorted, deliberately or otherwise, with their vertical scales compressed, giving an inaccurate impression of the scale of the proposed airspace. In addition, the two ACPs, for Brize and Oxford, are only presented individually. Nowhere in their lengthy documents (121 pages for Oxford, 84 for Brize) will you see images, as shown here, on the opposite page, reflecting the full extent of the total controlled airspace proposed.
There are other howlers, too. Some of the (up to a decade or more-old) ‘airproxes’ quoted in justification of the Expanded Class C airspace are erroneous. One conflict (20140809), only occurred when the aircraft in question inadvertently entered the Oxford ATZ and came into conflict with another aircraft downwind on a visual circuit to R19. Meanwhile, 27 out of the 43 Brize Norton-recorded ‘airprox incidents’ involved aircraft arriving at or departing from Kemble.
These should have been dealt with under a Letter ofAgreement, and extending the controlled airspace wouldn't have mitigated the alleged risk.
WHAT’S THE LAA DOING?
The LAA, as part of the General Aviation Alliance, is already assisting in a strategic approach, namely formal Letters of Objection to the two Consultations.
Meanwhile, the GA Alliance is also in discussion with both the CAA and the Department for Transport. The lead organisation in framing this response is the British Gliding Association, with the
LAAandBristolandGloucesterGlidingClub member, Steve Noujaim, heading the team.
We’re also considering writing to Osprey and the CAA, proposing that, until accurate documents are presented, we shouldn't consider the Consultation period to have started. Ifthis were to be accepted, it would, of course, mean that the Consultations will be required to follow the new, more transparent CAA Air Change Process (ACP) (2).
WHAT YOU CAN DO.
The first thing is that, before 5April, we all need to complete either the online ‘Consultation Form’at www.oxfordairport.co.uk/the-airporl/ public-consultation-2, or write an email direct to London Oxford Airport at consultation@ londonoxfordairport.com.
The RAF doesn’t appear to have an online form, but you can email rafbrizenorton consultation@ospreycsl.co.uk.
Alternatively,youcansendaletter for each Consultation to London Oxford Airport Consultation Response (or RAF Brize Norton Consultation response), Osprey Consulting Services Ltd, Suite 10, The Hub, Fowler Avenue, Farnborough Business Park, Hampshire GU14 7JP.
In addition, if you wish to express your personal concerns, contact the Airspace Regulator (Coordination), Airspace ATM and Aerodromes, Safety and Airspace Regulation Group, CAA House,45-59 Kingsway, London WC2B 6TEor email airspace.policy@caa.co.uk.
Do feel free to use any of the points raised inthis article to support your argument, plus | suspect you might find a few of your own. We'll also doubtless be coming up with some other ideas in the immediate future, so keep an eye on the LAA website and Facebook page (www.facebook.com/lightaircraft association) for more news. I'll also prepare a further update for next month’s edition of LA!
ow we are settling into 2018, we decided to take the opportunity of ‘visiting’some of our Struts to learn a little of their history and significiant people and events. As the Gloster Strut has just celebrated its 25th birthday, we thought we’d start by heading south, to let its members tell us their story.
“On 12 January 1993, thirty-five members, out of a total of 45 who had responded to a letter of invitation, gathered at Gloucestershire Airport and formed the Gloster Strut,” recalls Harry Hopkins. “The current strength stands at 138 and has been north of 100 for the last twenty years.
Harry, who was the Strut’s general factotum, recalls that shortly after it started he began to worry where he was going to tind speakers for the rest of that year and another ten articles for its newsletter.
Now, some 298 successful meetings and informative newsletters later, Harry’s decided it’s time to hand over to someone younger, with that someone being SE5A builder and Pietenpol owner, Mike Waldron, who's stepped up to the chairmanship of the Strut Committee.
Quite early on, the Strut celebrated a wedding when one of its founder members, Robin Morton, married Elizabeth Stanley the daughter of another founder member, Lt Cdr Denis Stanley DFC MBE RN (rtd). Denis had been a Fleet Air Arm observer in the days of the Fairey Swordfish, which was affectionately known as the Stringbag.
Denis and his brother-in-law had built a Minimax, which he flew extensively until, aged 84, he had to give up his licence due to ill health. He and other Strut members have built a total of forty aircraft; a few had been constructed before Gloster’s formation but they’ve averaged over one new aircraft per year since.
At one time, the Chairman of the PFA’s Executive Committee and five of its sixteen members were from the Gloster Strut, and they sent a representative to each National Council meeting until it was abandoned. Similarly, Strut members have participated fully at every PFA/LAA Rally since 1993.
For many years, the Gloster Strut has run tutored jaunts to le Touquet for crossChannel newbies, these trips being part of a regular fly-out programme.
Several Strut members have won prestigious awards. In 2005 Strut President, Manuel Queiroz, circumnavigated the world solo in his Van’s RV-6, winning the Royal Aero Club’s (RAeC) Britannia Cup in the process. Four years later, Steve Noujaim, another Strut member, flew the RV-7 he’d built from London to Cape Town and back, taking records previously held since 1939 by Alex Henshaw. He, too, won the Britannia trophy.
Dr David Joyce, a Europa builder, has flown his aircraft in several Dawn-to-Dusk challenges,
winning twice and, in the process, been awarded the RAeC’s Norton-Griffiths trophy and an RAeC Silver Medal. He’s also the Strut’s safety officer, flying programme organiser and sommelier!
Another Strut award winner, Eddie Clapham, who’s built six aircraft, won a gold medal in the 1993 Microlight World Championships and, more recently, Fiona Macaskill, a newcomer to powered flying, was awarded the British Women Pilots’ Association’s Brabazon Cup for her many flying achievements, namely championshiplevel para-gliding, air-racing, mountain flying and Dawn-to-Dawn challenge included.
The Strut’s purpose is to support the LAA and, therefore, it takes our Association’s objective of making flying affordable very seriously. Also, few Struts can boast that its current subscription fee is less now than it was 25 years ago! The Gloster Strut started with subs of £7.20 per year but for the last twelve years it’s been pegged at £5. Nevertheless, over the years, it’s donated more than £2,000 to the Armstrong-lsaacs Foundation flying scholarship fund, in addition to making donations to other charities.
“We're now looking forward to celebrating our 50th anniversary,” says Harry Hopkins, “Only another 24 years, 11 months and 299 newsletters and meetings to go. You're very welcome to join us!”
Next month we'll be hearing from the Highlands & Islands Strut, which is fortunate to fly in some of the UK's most stunning scenery!
(Above) Members of the Gloster Strut during its annual trip to Le Touquet.
21 February “Flight to Calais Demo Radio and Navigation” by Alan Kilbride
22 March “Ditching and Survival” by Dave Allen
Wessex Strut
Henstridge, 1900 (food) & 2000 (meeting) Contact neil.wilson@laa.uk.com 19 February “Safety Spot” by Malcolm McBride 19 March PilotAware by Keith Vinning
West of Scotland Strut
Bowfield Country Club, Howwood, PA9 1DZ
Contactnkg@barnbeth.demon.co.uk / 01505 612493
Please note that some Struts make a small charge towards costs for non-Strut members but all are welcome to attend the gatherings. Could members please email any Strut newsletters to struts@laa.uk.com and let me know if there’s a ‘feature’ from your group suitable for publication herein. Also, please inform me of any calendar changes or amendments to contact details ASAP.
Thanks to all the Strut coordinators and newsletter editors for the steady flow of information for Struts4U. If you’d like us to feature your Strut, please get in touch.
rgent questions about the eligibility of an aircraft for an LAA Permit to Flyare among the most frequent received at our Turweston HQ. They often run along the lines of, ‘Good morning, LAA, I’ve just found a Bloggs BulletforsaleintheUSAonAFORS.|really like the look of the aircraft and | need to make an offer today. If | import it can this aircraft be transferred to the LAA fleet?’
The subjects of these types of messages pertain to a very wide range of aircraft, from seemingly every country, and in every state from a few corroded scraps dragged out of a jungle, to a complete, gleaming aeroplane with a current Certificate of Airworthiness.
It's just such questions which, over the years, have been the starting point of a great many fascinating projects that have collectively created such a wonderful diversity of machines among the LAA fleet.
However, given that the answer to these enquiries will likely influence the spending of thousands of pounds of a member’s money maybe into six figures, with the complex types we deal with nowadays and probably be the focus of years of their spare time, not to mention also involve a substantial commitment
(Above) Wooden aircraft, such this gorgeous, Australian-built Falco, are generally straightforward to inspect for build quality, but do remember that beauty is only skin-deep so take nothing for granted. (Photo:WikiCommons}
by LAA Engineering, these questions always deserve a very carefully-considered response.
We'd hate to encourage a member to buy a ‘pig in a poke’, and with the complexities of the issues involved in trying to strike the balance between feeding a member's enthusiasm yet realisticallymanaginghisexpectationsit would be all too easy to inadvertently mislead.
ACCEPTABLE STANDARDS
If it’s a Homebuilt aircraft, the good news is that the UK is unlike many other countries, which see the amateur-built category only as a privilege available for locally-manufactured aircraft. Under the UK system there’s no blanket prohibition on homebuilts which are built under the airworthiness regime of another country being transferred to a UK Permit to Fly.
In the UK, particularly under the LAA system, a foreign-constructed amateur-built
can be granted a Permit to Fly exactly the same as one assembled in the UK. That's provided it’s genuinely amateur-built and is assessed as being of a design standard which is acceptable in the UK, and has been constructed and maintained to an adequate standard of quality.
Of course, the aircraft must be ‘anglicised’ by putting it on the UK register and also substituting the new G- registration letters. Also, its radios, instruments and placards have to be brought into line with UK requirements, and the flight tests must show that it has satisfactory flying qualities.
Although it’s usually pretty straightforward to check that an aircraft is genuinely amateur-built, it does occasionally trip people up. Generally, the LAA relies on the classification of the aircraft by the national aviation authority of the previous state of registery. For example, in the case of a US-made aircraft, the‘experimental amateurbuilt’ classification on the former Certificate of Airworthiness issued by the FAA.
However, problems can arise if the registered builder is a company rather than an individual, with ex-demonstrator aircraft originating from a kitvendor, or if there are indications that the aeroplane was a
eis
TheEvektorE-97EurostarispopulararoundEuropebutisnolonger beingmanufactured.ThisEstonianexamplemightbenicetotelabutwhobuiltit?Itmayhavebeenafactory-built, in whict aaa atey=)eSultEla}teeaebeltsBZLa
LAA ENGINEERING
‘cheque-book job’, assembled to order, for a client who hired a professional builder to put it together. And, of course, if the design has been made available both as a kit anda factory-built aircraft, such as the Eurostar and the SportCruiser, then only amateurconstructed examples can qualify for an LAA amateur-built Permit to Fly.
NEW TYPES
The heights of the administrative and technical mountains which must be climbed increase hugely if the aircraft isn’t of a type that’s already been cleared by the LAA. We've hundreds of types on the ‘approved’ list, including the most popular models from all round the world.
However, there are still plenty of types out there which the LAA has either looked at and rejected, not been asked to evaluate yet, or where we've approached the suppliers for design information but either nothing has been forthcoming, or what’s arrived has been inadequate or erroneous.
Although, over the years, there have been a few ‘new types’ which have been cleared using an imported example as the lead machine, rather than one built in the UK, it's a decidedly high-risk endeavour if you invest your family fortune in the aircraft before LAA has had a look at the design data for the type. That’s also a risk because it deprives LAA Engineering staff of the possibility of seeing the aeroplane coming together and generating any necessary modifications while the project is still at an early, easily accessible stage.
The airworthiness authorities in many countries including, for example, the US, Canada and Australia don’t require the designer of an amateur-built to present any design documentation for independent
endeavour if you invest
aircraft before LAA has
checking. Consequently, only the most self-disciplined designers take the trouble to comply with design requirements in any sort of depth, or to put together a proper documentation package. Even with designers who have gone to that trouble, and perhaps produced a substantial-looking package, sad to say, the work often doesn’t stand scrutiny when rigorously assessed, even when it comes with what appears to be excellent provenance.
Taking the other approach, of putting a handinyourpockettocommission a thirdparty to do a retrospective analysis of an existing design, is a possibility, albeit an expensive one. However, this is only really practical with a simple wooden or steel-tube structure, rather than with a composite or stressed-skin design, which can only reliably be proven by proof- and ultimate-load-testing.
Even after the structural and other design aspects have been cleared, gaining approval will also depend on the flight test results, and some designs fail at that stage. For example, a small amphibian we tested a few years ago was frighteningly quick to enter a spin, and
although with further testing it might've been possible to come up with an aerodynamic ‘fix’, the owner chose to sell it abroad instead.
So the message is that taking ‘pot luck’ with a design which hasn't yet been given the LAA’s blessing is very likely to end in tears.
WHAT’S THE CONFIGURATION?
Apart from the basic issue of whether the type has been approved by the LAA, there’s also the question of the individual aircraft ie is it of a configuration which has, or can be, approved by us? That includes not only such things as the choice of engine for example, if the design is intended for a VW engine, we'll be challenged if a Continental has been fitted but also the propeller and the undercarriage configuration (nosewheel, tailwheel, retractable, etc).
Clearly, it’s highly unlikely that a particular example will have exactly the same choice of ‘designer’s options’ as a previous example on the LAA fleet. Departures such as a different choice of fixed-pitch, wooden propeller, or wing- rather than a fuselage-tank, are much less radical and will involve a much lower level of scrutiny than, say, being the first example seen in the UK with the retractable undercarriage option, a new type of constantspeed propeller or a high-compression engine with electronic ignition.
Even the choice of avionics can cause expensive problems and delay, if the radios aren't of types that can be cleared in the UK. These days, buyers seem to put the choice of avionics suite and auto-pilot high on the ‘wish list’, sometimes perhaps at the expense of actually more important considerations, such as the condition of the engine.
Another thing that can cause problems is that many of the homebuilt types on the LAA’s
accepted list have only been cleared with variousmodifications,suchasataller fin and rudder on the Eurofox, and the strengthened wing spars on the Alpi Pioneer. Sometimes a kit manufacturer adopts a mod required by the LAAfor all subsequent kits produced, in which case, with any luck, you might find that a relatively new example from another country is indeed to ‘LAA spec’. An older example certainly won't be, and the changes may not be practical to include retrospectively, without, for example, inthe case of the Pioneer,a new pair of wings.
Some kit manufacturers only embody the LAA-required mods in kits destined for the UK, in which case an example built outside of these shores won't be straightforward to get cleared here. Or, of course, it may embody other modifications that were acceptable inthe country of origin but which will need investigating here. There’s no mutual acceptance of mods from other countries because they work to widely different standards of rigour in such matters.
BUILD QUALITY
Aside from the basic design of the aeroplane and its modifications, the thorniest issue with an imported, amateur-builtaircraft is assessingits quality of construction and maintenance state.
When an aeroplane is built under the LAA system, it’sinspected at many stages throughout the build, to check conformity with the drawings and the quality of workmanship,
the blade of a cricket bat was found bolted to a buckled aluminium
and (in theory, at least) to ensure that no pieces of structure are ‘boxed-off’ without first being independently inspected.
Many countries, including the US, don't require these stage inspections and the project is only examined when it’s ready for flight. When an amateur-built aircraft from one of these countries is imported to the UK, it’s a real challenge to achieve something approaching thesamedegreeofconfidenceasthereisina UK-build. At the very least, this involves a very detailed check of the whole aircraft against drawings and build manuals, preferably by an LAA Inspector already familiar with the type. With a traditional wood-and-metal structure, it isn’ttoo difficult to check the build quality retrospectively, especially in a fabric-covered
machine, ifthe constructor has thoughtfully included plenty of removable access panels. If not, access holes will have to be cut, and should problems be found, the whole covering may have to come off.
Nothing can be taken for granted. We've seen a number of our Association’s members get their fingers burnt over the years, buying aircraft which turned out to reveal modified or sub-standard structure under the skin, and they've had to be substantially rebuilt before being able to be issued an LAA Permit.
Sometimes the flaws have been obvious poor-quality wood, missing nuts on bolts and de-laminating glue joints but others proved subtler, such as stripped threads on tie-rods, structural members of the wrong cross-section, wings of different span or with struts and wires attached differently to how the designer originally intended.
The LAA’s ‘black museum’ includes several objects removed from the innards of imported aircraft,includingFOD(tools, a rolloftape,etc) and, would you believe, a piece of wood which had clearly once been the blade of a cricket bat and was found bolted to a buckled aluminium wing spar, acting as a makeshift splint!
lf all this sounds very bleak, then | should balance it by saying that, these days, the majority of imported, amateur-built aircraft are of the RV type, and thanks to the excellent quality of the kit parts, the high level of detail in the drawings and the builder support provided by Van’s, the airframes mostly
LAA ENGINEERING
seem to turn out to a high standard. We see very few problems with major modifications having been incorporated. With such good, well-proven basic designs, it'd seem that there isn’t much incentive to change things.
Not that all RVs available to buy are necessarily good, of course in particular, watch out for bent firewalls on examples which have had heavy landings. Nevertheless, an imported RVis certainly usually less of a challengetoLAAEngineeringthananaircraft from one of the minor kit manufacturers, or which has been constructed from plans and where the builder has had more scope for ‘doing their own thing’.
the structure depends so much on following properprocessesduringthebuild,andfaults which can drastically affect its strength, such as improper surface preparation, straightness of unidirectional fibres, mixing of resins and ‘pot life’, are impossible to determine retrospectivelyona finishedstructure.
Consequently, in the past, the LAA has insisted on imported composite aircraft with major, amateur-built, wet lay-up structure, such as the Long-EZand Varieze,being proof-load tested, ie with sandbags, while inverted on trestles. This isn’t something to been lightly undertaken, and these days, with the more stringent guidelines in the CAA’s CAP 659 to be addressed, the LAA generally only accepts composite, amateur-built aircraft if the main structural elements have been provided as pre-mouldeditemsina kit.
An experienced LAA Inspectorwon't be too phased when faced with a wood or metal aircraft to inspect it isn’t difficult to check, visually, that rivets have been properly set, and he can try to break apart a few sample joints to give confidence that a wooden aircraft's glue joints are sound. However, it's a major problem with composite aircraft, where the integrity of There was a time when you could bring in lovely old classic types, such Cess allowed them to go onto a Permit. Sadly, EASA rules have all but stopped that
Nonetheless, extremely careful inspection is still needed, for evenwhen provided with pre-moulded parts, bonding the larger components together is a complex task,
one which provides ‘only one bite at the cherry’ and ample scope for going wrong. Sometimes, without extreme care, the process leaves flawed joints that are almost impossible to detect in the completed structure.
Airframe weight is another issue to be careful of in any imported homebuilt, and particularly so with one with a composite structure. With a metal airframe, an overweight aircraft is usually due to the paint finish or the choice of equipment, which though a pain ultimately can be changed and the machine brought back to a sensible weight.
In contrast, an overweight composite aircraft quite likely has its unwanted excess pounds locked into the basic structure, in the form of over-thick filler and resin-rich lay-ups, which are not only impossible to rectify, but also don’t bode well for the structural qualities of the airframe.
Whatever the type of structure, remember that many other countries, including the US,allowanamateurbuilderto specify nas, Pipers and Luscombes, and the CAA possibility. (Photo:WikiCommons)
the max take-off weight as he or she sees fit. Consequently, unlike in the UK, a builder can legally overload a heavily-built aircraft, to the detriment of safety margins, of course, which also inevitably leads to a disappointing flight performance.
However well it’s been built, an aircraft is only safe if it’s properly looked after. Adverts usually say nothing of how an aircraft has been maintained. Logbooks often aren't very explicit about these details, either, particularly if it’s a complex type. For instance, one with a constant-speed prop, where the details of when the last propeller overhaul was done can have a not insignificant cost implication. It isn’t unusual to find a constant-speed prop past its overhaul date, and once brought to the UK, when torn-down by the prop shop, it often comes to light that it has one or two expensive Airworthiness Directives outstanding.
Dealing with these aspects is just one of the many actions needed to bring an aircraft to the UK that’s previously enjoyed (?) a less
regulatedenvironment-it’s somethingofa ‘square peg in a round hole’ situation.
EASA DOES IT...
With a factory-built aircraft, the whole approval situation is very complicated and has numerous traps for the unwary. It’s all-too-easy to assume that because one or more examples of a particular type of aircraft is already on the LAA fleet, another example would surely be able to follow the same route.
Likewise, it’s all too easy to wrongly assume that, if there’s a split fleet, with some examples onPermitandothersonaCofA, itmustbe the owner’s choice which route to take. It’s vital to understand that the arrangements for dealing with aircraft airworthiness were completely turned upside down by the introduction of EASA and precedents set beforehand cut no ice in the current regime.
There are hundreds of Piper J3s, Cessna C120s and Aeronca Champs on the LAA fleet, which transferred to the LAA (then PFA)system
back in the seventies, eighties and nineties, in the days when the CAA was able to take a pragmatic view on the best way to look after these old aeroplanes, and when the only external Constraints on the regulator were complying with the broad-brush principles of ICAO.
However, the introduction of EASA meant that, by default, all aircraft came under its control, except for various specialist groups, which were left under national regulation. Importantly, for the LAA, these included microlights, ex-militaryand amateur-built aircraft, so that these elements of our Association's core fleet weren't affected.
The BritishGliding Association didn’t escape so lightly, however, and has been forced to overturn all of its previous arrangements and bring most of the fleet of previously self-regulated gliders into an airworthiness regime equivalent to that for aCof A aircraft.
Where LAA didn’t escape the hand of EASA was with our arrangements for transferring certain individual vintage C ofA aircraft onto a Permit to Fly, which allowed them to be looked after in a similar manner to a homebuilt, and so stay airworthy, despite a lack of spares or factory support. The numbers of these aircraft on the LAA fleet grew steadily up to the turn of the millennium, and provided many with ready entry-level access to safe and economical flying.
When EASA came along, the LAA and the UK CAA negotiated tirelessly with the regulator and representatives of other national sporting bodies, to ensure that the minimum possible number of owners of existing aircraft were disadvantaged by being forced into a different airworthiness regime. Even for those owners whose LAA aircraft couldn't escape being classed as coming under EASA, a special ‘grandfathering’ provision was negotiated, to allow them to continue to operate through the LAA system, even though the Permit to Fly bore an EASA logo and slightly different ‘small print’. Although existing LAA aircraft were catered for, the EU regulations that EASA operates underhavehadadrasticeffectontheability to bring more vintage aircraft into the UK and put them on a LAA Permit.
Even during the period since the introduction of EASA,there have been changes in the implementation of the Basic Regulations and detailed requirements. And as EASA has continued to develop its airworthiness systems for small aircraft, they seem to have become more reluctant to allow individual aircraft to be released to national control.
Having discussed mainly amateur-built ypes in this issue of LA, next month we'll ook in.detail at how vintage aircraft are classified, whether they fall under EASA, CAA, or LAA, or in some cases, two or all hree of these bodies.
We'll also look at the situation with factorybuilt aircraft of more recent origin, such as he US Light Sport category and our European spin-off, the LSA category types, such as the Remos and PiperSport. ®
FURTHER READING
The following LAA Technical Leafets are available to download from www.laa.uk.com: @ 7L 1.06: ImportedAircraft @ 7L 1.20: Transferring from a C of A to a Permit to Fly
LAA ENGINEERING
seem to turn out to a high standard. We see very few problems with major modifications having been incorporated. With such good, well-proven basic designs, it'd seem that there isn’t much incentive to change things.
Not that all RVs available to buy are necessarily good, of course in particular, watch out for bent firewalls on examples which have had heavy landings. Nevertheless, an imported RV is certainly usually less of a challenge to LAA Engineering than an aircraft from one of the minor kit manufacturers, or which has been constructed from plans and where the builder has had more scope for ‘doing their own thing’.
An experienced LAA Inspector won’t be too phased when faced with a wood or metal aircraft to inspect it isn’t difficult to check, visually, that rivets have been properly set, and he can try to break apart a few sample joints to give confidence that a wooden aircraft's glue joints are sound. However, it’s a major problem with composite aircraft, where the integrity of
the structure depends so much on following proper processes during the build, and faults which can drastically affect its strength, such as improper surface preparation, straightness of unidirectional fibres, mixing of resins and ‘pot life’, are impossible to determine retrospectively on afinished structure.
Consequently, in the past, the LAA has insisted on imported composite aircraft with major, amateur-built, wet lay-up structure, such as the Long-EZ and Varieze, being proof-load tested, ie with sandbags, while inverted on trestles. This isn’t something to been lightly undertaken, and these days, with the more stringent guidelines in the CAA’s CAP 659 to be addressed, the LAA generally only accepts composite, amateur-built aircraft if the main structural elements have been provided as pre-moulded items in a kit.
Nonetheless, extremely careful inspection is still needed, for even when provided with pre-moulded parts, bonding the larger components together is a complex task,
one which provides ‘only one bite at the cherry’ and ample scope for going wrong. Sometimes, without extreme care, the process leaves flawed joints that are almost impossible to detect in the completed structure.
Airframe weight is another issue to be careful of in any imported homebuilt, and particularly so with one with a composite structure. With a metal airframe, an overweight aircraft is usually due to the paint finish or the choice of equipment, which though a pain ultimately can be changed and the machine brought back to a sensible weight.
In contrast, an overweight composite aircraft quite likely has its unwanted excess pounds locked into the basic structure, in the form of over-thick filler and resin-rich lay-ups, which are not only impossible to rectify, but also don’t bode well for the structural qualities of the airframe.
Whatever the type of structure, remember that many other countries, including the US,allow an amateurbuilderto specify
There was a time when you could bring in lovely old classic types, such Cessnas, Pipers and Luscombes, and the CAA allowed them to go onto a Permit. Sadly, EASA rules have all but stopped that possibility. (Photo:WikiCommons)
the max take-off weight as he or she sees fit. Consequently, unlike in the UK,a builder can legally overload a heavily-built aircraft, to the detriment of safety margins, of course, which also inevitably leads to a disappointing flight performance.
However well it’s been built, an aircraft is only safe if it's properly looked after. Adverts usually say nothing of how an aircraft has been maintained. Logbooks often aren’t very explicit about these details, either, particularly if it’s a complex type. For instance, one with a constant-speed prop, where the details of when the last propeller overhaul was done can have a not insignificant cost implication. It isn’t unusual to find a constant-speed prop past its overhaul date, and once brought to the UK, when torn-down by the prop shop, it often comes to light that it has one or two expensive Airworthiness Directives outstanding.
Dealing with these aspects isjust one of the many actions needed to bring an aircraft to the UK that’s previously enjoyed (?) a less
regulated environment -it’s something of a ‘square peg in a round hole’ situation.
EASA DOES IT...
With a factory-built aircraft, the whole approval situation is very complicated and has numerous traps for the unwary. It’s all-too-easy to assume that because one or more examples of a particular type of aircraft is already on the LAA fleet, another example would surely be able to follow the same route.
Likewise, it’s all too easy to wrongly assume that, if there’s a split fleet, with some examples on Permitand others on a C ofA, it must be the owner's choice which route to take. It’s vital to understand that the arrangements for dealing with aircraft airworthiness were completely turned upside down by the introduction of EASA and precedents set beforehand cut no ice in the current regime.
There are hundreds of Piper J3s, Cessna C120s and Aeronca Champs on the LAA fleet, which transferred to the LAA (then PFA) system
back in the seventies, eighties and nineties, in the days when the CAA was able to take a pragmatic view on the best way to look after these old aeroplanes, and when the only external constraints on the regulator were complying with the broad-brush principles of ICAO.
However, the introduction of EASA meant that, by default, all aircraft came under its control, except for various specialist groups, which were left under national regulation. Importantly, for the LAA, these included microlights, ex-military and amateur-built aircraft, so that these elements of our Association’s core fleet weren't affected.
The British Gliding Association didn’t escape so lightly, however, and has been forced to overturn all of its previous arrangements and bring most of the fleet of previously self-regulated gliders into an airworthiness regime equivalent to that for aCofA aircraft.
Where LAA didn’t escape the hand of EASA was with our arrangements for transferring certain individual vintage C ofA aircraft onto a Permit to Fly,which allowed them to be looked after in a similar manner to a homebuilt, and so stay airworthy, despite a lack of spares or factory support.
The numbers of these aircraft on the LAA fleet grew steadily up to the turn of the millennium, and provided many with ready entry-level access to safe and economical flying.
When EASA came along, the LAA and the UK CAA negotiated tirelessly with the regulator and representatives of other national sporting bodies, to ensure that the minimum possible number of owners of existing aircraft were disadvantaged by being forced into a different airworthiness regime. Even for those owners whose LAA aircraft couldn’t escape being classed as coming under EASA, a special ‘grandfathering’ provision was negotiated, to allow them to continue to operate through the LAA system, even though the Permit to Fly bore an EASA logo and slightly different ‘small print’.
Although existing LAA aircraft were catered for, the EU regulations that EASA operates under have had a drastic effect on the ability to bring more vintage aircraft into the UK and put them on a LAA Permit.
Evenduring the period since the introduction of EASA,there have been changes in the implementation of the Basic Regulations and detailed requirements. And as EASA has continued to develop its airworthiness systems for small aircraft, they seem to have become more reluctant to allow individual aircraft to be released to national control.
Having discussed mainly amateur-built types in this issue of LA, next month we'll look in detail at how vintage aircraft are classified, whether they fall under EASA, CAA, or LAA, or in some cases, two or all three of these bodies.
We'll also look at the situation with factorybuilt aircraft of more recent origin, Such as the US Light Sport category and our European spin-off, the LSA category types, such as the Remos and PiperSport. ®
FURTHER READING
The following LAA Technical Leafets are available to download from www.laa.uk.com:
@ 7L 1.06: ImportedAircraft
@ 7L 7.20: Transferring from a C ofA to a Permit to Fly
ith her varnished wooden prop, snub nose and the exposed cylinders of her Continental A65 engine, the Aeronca L-3B Defender is certainly a characterful aircraft. Finished in military camouflage green and proudly carrying D-Day invasion stripes on her fuselage and wing, you’re in no doubt that this delightful little aeroplane has led a very interesting life.
Against her left flank is the final clue, a painted, blue grasshopper and the proclamation, ‘Aeronca, the first and finest’, proudly confirming that, like the better-known Piper L-4 Cub, this is a veteran of the WWII, a liaison aircraft which fulfilled a USAAF requirement to carry out all manner of roles, from ferrying around senior officers to spotting troop movements and delivering supplies.
‘Grasshoppers’, as the appropriate nickname implies, operated from unprepared forward grass fields and were, of necessity, rugged, light, manoeuvrable, and simple to maintain and repair. With good take-off and landing performance, the type possessed the very attributes which, even today, still gives it a strong and ready following within the LAA community.
Reg McComish has been involved with his Defender, G-BRHP, since he agreed to help her owner, Major Chris Willis, with repairs after she was blown from her tie downs and badly damaged in the ensuing cartwheel during strong winds in September 2009. As can be
One of the most awkward replacements were the four wing struts, each approaching 11ft-long which, apart from the difficulty of manufacturing, required £3,000 (at today’s prices) for materials alone.
EAE
Reg initially had a half-share in the aircraft and made the first post-restoration flight in November 2012, becoming sole owner of what's believed to be the lone Aeronca L3B Defender flying outside of the US in late-2014.
Reg operates ‘HP from a sloping, 320-metre strip at Ashsprington, near Totnes in Devon, which isn’t perhaps too dissimilar to the sort of locations she flew from during military service.
Built in April of 1942, Reg’s Defender was taken on charge by the USAAF and saw service with the 2nd and 3rd Infantry in both North Africa and Italy, but thus far it’s proved impossible to determine any further details of her wartime movements. Post-war, she held the FAA registration of N 58JURand first appeared on the British register in August 1989.
Previously, I’d been fortunate enough to sit in the back of an Aeronca Champ at Rush Green, catching the odd bounce and fielding the occasional mistake, but that was many years ago. I’ve also owned a J3 Cub, but the Defender was certainly new to me, although comparisons are inevitable. The similar characteristics of the Cub and the Defender would almost certainly shine through, but one thing | did like about her, straight from the off, is that the pilot's seat is up front, rather than back in the centre of the fuselage -it’s a decidedly more desirable position which offers an infinitely better view forward. | do believe, though, that when loaded with heavy radio equipment and the necessary batteries, the wartime L-4 Cub was also flown from the front seat.
IN THE ‘GLASS HOUSE’
Beneath its camouflage paint, the Defender has a simple, flapless two-spared wooden wing with internal steel bracing wires. The fuselage and empennage are of welded steel tube, the latter
being braced top and bottom with steel rods, and apart from a small amount of aluminium sheet between the cowling and the screen, the entire machine is fabric-covered. A cableoperated trim tab is fitted to the portside elevator.
The tandem cockpit has an extensive ‘glass house’ canopy, which runs right to the back of the parcel shelf, although the area immediately above the pilot carries the fuel tank, thus limiting straight-up vision. Apart from the windscreen, the entire canopy is made up of easily replaceable, flat perspex sheets. The parcel shelf is actually a cover for a space capable of holding up to 40lb of baggage when flown solo, and half that two-up. In USAAF use it would’ve carried the not insubstantial radio equipment.
Entrance to the cockpit is via a very civilised, wide and conventional door on the starboard side, which swings forward, the lowest rear corner of it contacting a stop on the rear strut. Getting in is straightforward for the pilot, you simply place your right foot on the undercarriage leg-mounted step and lean forward into the cockpit, grab the convenient, centrally-mounted diagonal cockpit bracing strut, then pull yourself up and in, bringing the left leg in and sliding your rear across the seat squab, followed by the right leg. The solid steel-framed seat, with its firm cushion, is comfortable, and what a grand view, albeit with the intrusion of a pair of diagonal bracing struts coming from the top corners down to the centre-front of the coaming.
The rudder pedals aren’t adjustable, but have neat brake pedals pivoting off the inner ends to operate the cable-brakes. Fortunately, the seat-to-pedal measurement fitted my frame, otherwise cushions would've to be the order of the day. The view immediately over and around thenoseisgoodfora flat-fourengine,which
eppathaayoeaya o5tle leaspati,ae eh
you might think would interrupt the field of vision —it’ssufficiently prevalent to place against the horizon for visual cues, but not so wide as to be awkward when taxying or, as | later discovered, airborne with a high-nose attitude.
| cut my tailwheel teeth on the Auster of the Wasp flying group at Panshangar some forty years ago, when it was still just a big open field which allowed take-off and landing into wind. However, the Auster’s wing roots are set lower than on the Aeronca, and the pilot had to dip his head down to clear the sky before rolling to bank for a turn. Here in ‘HP the tandem front seat has both elbow and sufficient headroom, with the wing roots set high enough so as not to obscure the scan and sideways view. The pilot’s left perspex glazing may be slid back for some fresh air or, as doubtless happened back in the day, to pass a message to a ground-handler.
| could put a good fist’s-width clearance over my headset band and the tank above. Should you wish to emulate the original pilots, there’s more than enough headroom to wear a formal USAAF ‘crusher’ cap and enter the growing band of the re-enactors. Personally, | can’t caste dispersions as, once, | was wearing full-dress Luftwaffe uniform in a replica Storch whenwehadtomake a forcedlandingduring a photoshoot - try explaining that to a nervous, elderly lady walking her dog who came to ask what on earth we were doing on her brother’s land, only to break off from her rant when a spying two enemy airmen, and run away at a frantic pace pulling her half-throttled hound behind. ‘Auf Wiedersehen, pet’, and its owner...
Originally, the Aeronca’s rear seat back could be pulled forward, with the control column removed and stowed, so that an observer was able to sit facing backwards, offering an alternative view of events. The crew, acting as a team, could then undoubtedly take advantage of better sight of all the sectors in front, beneath and behind the aircraft.
During its rebuild, the fuel tank, which had been damaged, was enlarged from 10 US gallons (8.32 Imperial) to 10 Imperial gallons, providing perhaps 2.5-hours’ endurance without reserve for the 65hp engine. Needless to say, the aircraft is devoid of any generator or alternator, and the fuel system relies on gravity feed they don’t come much simpler!
SIMPLICITY IS KEY
Continuingthe simplicity theme,the blackpainted metal instrument panel carries the barest essentials.Smackinthemiddleisa slipball,and lower left is a rotary mag switch and the yellow ‘oull for hot air’ carb ‘heat’ knob. The Ki-gas primer is towards the centre where the red on/off fuel selector is mounted, and either side of this are the oil temperature (left) and the oil pressure gauges. Further right is a CHT gauge.
The three larger dials, mounted higher on the panel, are the ASI (the Vne being marked at 120mph), the altimeter and the rom gauge (which runs anti-clockwise).
The radio is a hand-held unit on the far right-hand side, with a supplementary battery plug, and a GPS mount is secured by a vacuum sucker on the far-right perspex.
The throttle falls conveniently to hand on the left sidewall, and | like its smooth, curved slide from the idle setting to full power and back again. Adjacent is the trim control.
Single-crew starts by hand-propping are potentially problematic, the pilot being remote from the throttle, and outside of the
The wide door and handy step enable easy access. Nice wide rear seat = originally, the backrest was swung forward to give the observer a rear-facing viewpoint.
Simple and functional some modern-day pilots might be surprised at just how few instruments you
(Left) The Defender proudly displays its WWII heritage as a ‘grasshopper’.
(Left)
cockpit upon start-up means a cautious approach and the correct technique must be rigorously followed on every occasion. We have our own tie-down ring staked deep in the grass at Henstridge, and at his home strip, Reg anchors the tail to a 4x4” post and chocks the wheels. However, I’ve no problem today as Reg is on-hand and also coming along for the ride
The standard taxying techniques, of first checking it’s clear, moving forward, closing the throttle and applying the toe brakes, found the latter pulling symmetrically. Once moving again on grass, the prop’s slipstream was sufficient to maintain direction without brakes. With the high-set wings and the central, forward-placed P1seating position,there are no surprises, so long as One continues a sharp lookout.
Magneto checks are done at 1,700rpm and give a 75rpm-drop, with a similar rom drop when applying carb heat. Always be careful of an A65, their proclivity for gathering ice is legendary.
A static testagainst brakes showed a healthy 2,100rom. No matter how many times we do this, notwo take-offs are exactly the same, and adding a new type into the mix
always brings a certain frisson of excitement to the proceedings.
| know the Aeronca isn’t a hot rod, but it'll still need looking after without any wind it will want swing to the left, and so need right rudder to correct. So slowly and smoothly does it...
It isn’t a race to get the tail off the ground in a fuselage-length, but it’s essential to have complete directional control. So | made things easy, only raising the tail after running straight for five seconds or so, before applying forward pressure on the stick. Once the tail was off the ground, enough rudder was available to easily hold our line, and as the speed increased the stick was brought back to maintain the take-off attitude.
Held in the correct attitude, no rotation was needed, the Defender became light on her wheels at 45mph and flew off smoothly, accelerating in ground effect. Climb may be between 60 and 65, and without a VSI | estimated the we were scrambling uphill within the region of 500fpm.
The rudder pressures were light and the slip ball kindly remained in place at the bottom
of its downward curve, indicating that we were flying in balance.
As the top of the climb arrived we saw an indicated speed of 7Omphat 2,100pm for the cruise Reg told me that, solo, he gains another 5mpnh.A fuel burn of four Imperial gallons per hour, gives two hours and 140 statute miles in still air, with a half-hour reserve. That’s long enough before you’d wish to stretch your legs and wet one’s whistle...
GETTING ACCUSTOMED
Once in the air, stability checked with everdecreasing phugoids, and crossed controls released for both directional and lateral stability, the Defender showed that she’s a stable girl of even temperament, one who’s unlikely to cause a fuss fighting you or make flying awkward.
The Defender’s stability is ideal for the task for which it was designed it doesn’t demand constant tampering or attention, being easily and accurately trimmed.
No aircraft comes without slight blemishes, and although there’s a large fin and rudder, accurate footwork while airborne is required,
The narrowness of the tandem- seat fuselageis evident from this nearly head-on shot.
LIAISON AIRCRAFT were small, usually unarmed, aircraft which were primarily used including transporting important personnel, battlefield reconnaissance, air ambulance, light cargo, message delivery and similar.
The ability to operate from small and with STOL capabilities was paramount, and most liaison aircraft were developed from, or were later used as, GA types.
A 1938 specification laid out the United States Army Air Corps’ requirement for a UAS companies produced prototypes, in an attempt to get in on the lucrative military contracts for the large numbers of aircraft required once it was evident that the States would become involved in WWII.
important types...
STINSON L-1
as an American equivalent to Germany's Fieseler Storch, which had impressed when it was demonstrated at the Cleveland Air Races before the war.
Stinson beat eleven competitors to win the contract and the company produced a Lycoming radial-engined, high-wing monoplane with trailing-edge high-lift devices for low-speed and high-lift performance. Constructed of steel tubing
was Capable of stopping in less than its own length, and could maintain stable flight at 31mph.
Re-designated the L-1 in 1942, just over one hundred examples were allocated to the RAF under the Lend-Lease Act, but and L-5 Sentinels fulfilled the required role. Stinson L-1
TAYLORCRAFT L-2
Unusual in that it featured side-by-side seating (the majority of submissions were tandem), the Taylorcraft L-2 first flew in 1941, and was closely based on the company’s civilian BC-65.
Using either a 65HP Continental or, later, the Franklin 4AC, many variants were built, totaling 2,237 of all types.
The Taylorcraft was also instrumental in the formation of Auster Aircraft in the UK, which provided the British forces with their liaison aircraft during WWII.
AERONCA L-3 DEFENDER
The Aeronca L-3 was a variant of its civilian cousin, the Aeronca Champ, and made its first flight in 1941. Many liaison pilots were trained on the L-3 before moving onto the frontline L-4s and L-5s. All-told, 1,484 L-3s were built, some being shipped to supply the Free French Forces.
Unusually, the airframe was redesigned as a three-seat training glider, the Defender’s wings, empennage and rear fuselage being reconfigured with a new forward fuselage. Designated the TG-5, some 250 examples were built for the US Army.
STINSON L-5 SENTINEL
Like its sibling, the L-1, Stinson’s L-5 was the only other US liaison aircraft of WW2 which was specifically built for military use, as the company’s conversion of its civilian HW-75 had failed to meet performance expectations.
The L-5’s first flight was on 28 June 1941, and some 3,590 Sentinels were delivered to the military, as either observer or ambulance versions. One hundred were delivered to the RAF (SEAC) in the India-Burma theatre as Sentinel Is (L-5) and Sentinel Ils (L-5B). The aircraft was of steel tube, wood and fabric, andwaspoweredbya six-cylinder,190hp Lycoming O-435.
This US-based example, an L-5E called House Call, was rescued and restored by its current owner, Marty Stickford, and put back to its original form of a stretcher carrier. It has many of the original interior features, which were given to Marty by its wartime pilot, Lt Robert Elson, who’s also helped him fill in the history of this particular aeroplane.
Stinson L-5 Sentinel
PIPER L-4 GRASSHOPPER
The best known of the L- series, the L-4 Cub was derived from the popular J-3, which flew in 1938, although its ancestry goes back to the Taylor Cub of 1930. With the outbreak of hostilities in Europe, and the realisation that the US might soon be drawn into the conflict, the Civilian Pilot Training Program (CPTP) was established in 1939 and the J-3 Cub became its primary trainer. The L-4 variant, like Aeronca’s L-3, features considerably more fuselage glazing. Over 14,000 J3s and L-4s were built, which meant that Piper took the lion’s share of the liaison aircraft market.
Piper L-4 Grasshopper
INTERSTATE L-6 CADET
Around 570 L-6 Cadets were produced between the 1941 and 1942, by the Interstate Aircraft and Engineering Corporation, which was based in El Segundo, California. The construction techniques employed were a welded steel-tube fuselage, a wood (spruce) wing structure with metal ribs and fabric covering.
Interstate L-6 Cadet
to look after the seemingly omnipresent adverse aileron drag, which will yaw the nose away from any roll input. With her quite considerable span of35ft,andbeingarelativelyunsophisticated vintage type the Defender has just celebrated her 75th birthday you can’t really expect otherwise. It’sonly a matter of getting accustomed to applying the correct amount of rudder pressure to keep the nose rolling in the same direction as the turn with time and practice, it becomes second nature.
Stallsin aircraft with wings that have zero washout can tickle your humour, as you tend to expect a wing to drop at the break. Shedidn't disappoint here, dropping a wing by 15°at 40mph with 1,500rpm, and at a couple of miles an hour earlier when throttled right back.
Recoveries with stick forward, a handful of power and balancing rudder are near instantaneous, with very little height loss.That was nice to know or any potential upsets close to the ground. However, the one thing | did misjudge was the approach. The Defender has no lapsand,onreturningtotheairfield, | elected to do a practice forced landing. Well,pridecomethbefore a fall,and|really hought | had her taped, but lwas wrong. managed the high-key and positioned for he low-key. All drills, airmanship and trafficollowing accounted for, low-key was met.
Then it just appeared to be a simple matter of slipping off the height for a curved approach at 55mph, so | started the slipping turn, rolling left with deliberately opposing inefficient right
FLIGHT TEST
The rudimentary cowling exposes the cyclinders of the Continental A65.
rudder. | was trying to reduce my touch-down point from the third of the way into the field, and although she was coming down, it wasn't at anything like the rate I’d anticipated. Had | continued, | probably would’ve landed in the last third of the runway!
A go-around was in order, featuring a slightly wider base-leg-to-finals, with power as required, to maintain speed on the approach and a constant aspect. | made a nice, three-point landing, but had certainly underestimated the efficiency of all that 169 square feet of wing. More training required, sir!
Despite my poor first approach, | entirely enjoyed my flight in the Defender and have to thank Reg for his calm patience and friendly disposition throughout the day and our ensuing telephone conversations.
Reg is planning to be involved in more Continental visits this year, specifically to mark historic events, so | hope that he can get out and about throughout this season and show his rare bird off to a wider audience. | look forward to seeing him and his trusty ‘girl soon at a local fly-in.
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS
Length 21ft 10in (6.67m)
Wingspan 35ft (10.67m)
Height Oft1in (2.74m)
(15.6sqm)
(379kg)
PERFORMANCE
Maximum speed 87mph (76kt, 139kph)
Cruise speed 79mph (69kt, 126kph)
Stall speed 46mph (40kt, 73kph)
Range 218 miles (189nm, 350km) 10,000ft (3,050m)
e regret to record the passing, last December, of the LAA’s longest-serving inspector, Les Usherwood. His involvement in aviation began at a very early age. As a schoolboy, at weekends, Les used to accompany his Father, Stuart, to Rochester Airport in Kent, where he was an engineer at Pobjoy Airmotors, working on such aircraft as the BA Swallow and the Comper Swift, and also assembling and maintaining engines.
Uponleavingschool,Lesbecameafitter at Pobjoys, which was subsequently taken over by Short Brothers, as that company had used the firm’s radials in several of its aircraft, including the half-scale, prototype Stirling bomber.
As soon as he was old enough, in 1943, Les enlisted in the RAF and commenced pilot training. However, before he’d completed the course, he was a victim of so-called ‘friendly fire’, when a practice bomb dropped by one of our aircraft exploded right next to him. The resulting damage to Les’s hearing meant that he was deemed unfit for flying duties and discharged from the service. He went back to work for Pobjoys which, by that time, was manufacturing components for the Spitfire.
WIDE-RANGING ABILITIES
After the war, Les once again was involved with his father Stuart in several ventures, including the restoration and repair of a number of aircraft. Les’s abilities as an engineer were wide-ranging and he worked for some time in the automotive field, and then spent the later decades of his working life as an electronics engineer.
Nevertheless, his interest in aircraft never left him, and he either owned or had a share in the following types: Aeronca C3, BA Swallow (three examples), Tipsy Belfair, Auster (two), Turbulent, Piper Cubs (three J3s and a J2), Piper Vagabond and a Jodel D18.
Back in the fifties, the embryo PFA didn’t have the authority to supervise the maintenance of the aircraft that Les was involved with and the cost of maintenance when carried out by ARB-approved set-ups was a real problem. Therefore, Les set about passing the relevant exams and acquired an ‘A Licence’, which allowed him to carry out the maintenance and inspection on the BA Swallow and all types of Auster.
It was only natural that later, in 1967, Les became a PFA Inspector and, at the time of
his passing, was the LAA’s longest-serving person in that valuable role.
Until recent times, Les was regularly overseeing a half-dozen or more Permit renewals per year. He was also recognised as a great asset to the LAA’s Engineering Department, and never hesitated to get in touch if there was a query or matter of concern that he thought the team should be aware of.
In addition to flying for his own enjoyment, Les undertook some enterprising delivery trips for people, including one from Kent to Papa Westray in the Orkneys. And only a couple of years ago, Les achieved an ambition which had been thwarted back in 1944, when he flew in a two-seat Spitfire at Biggin Hill.
ONE LIFE, TWO LOVES
It'd be wrong to chart the course of Les’s life without mentioning the part paid by his wife, Onella, who he married in 1949. Nella, as she was known to us, not only encouraged his interest in flying but also assisted Les with a lot of the practicalities, such as fabric work.
Les lost Nella three years ago, and right up to that time she really had been ‘the wind beneath his wings’.
In 2000 he brought out an autobiography, One Life, Two Loves they being, of course, Onella and aviation. Les’s younger brother, Allan, also shared his passion for aeroplanes,
and now resides in Australia, where he’s currently building a replica Spitfire.
Jim Wraight writes, “Les was our Inspector on an L4H Cub | co-owned until 1980, when he and Nella invited me to test-fly and share a J3 they were buying.
After that we briefly flew a very underpowered PA15 Vagabond, until it crashed, and then spent many hours in another J3, which | took over in 2005, when he moved briefly to Australia.
“He once had rotary aspirations and made a pair of gyrocopter blades. In 1984 we went to Ireland to fly Robinson helicopters, then we each bought a Rotorway Scorpion, although Les soon sold his.
“In addition to almost always owning an aeroplane, after rebuilding an Austin 7 when he was sixteen, Les was usually also working on cars, including a vintage Rolls-Royce. He once told me that he’d owned over 300 cars and, for a time, had run a garage in Devon.
“Les’s other enthusiasms included aeromodelling, electronic organs, films, going on cruises and ballroom dancing, which he was still doing at the village hall at the age of 91, despite the progression of a terminal illness. He was very frail when we had a long reminiscence on the eve of his 92nd birthday, and he slipped away on the day after it. RIP, dear Les.”
Visitor Information
OpenDaily 09:00-17:00. Payon the gate. Adults £7, Seniors £5, Children under 12accompanied byan adult and disabled Carers free of charge. Flying into Popham (PPR)-Visiting Aircraft pay £5/LandingPophamFeeonarrival. Airfield, CoxfordDown,Winchester,HampshireS0213BD OM20) 2h
Operational Only = 34 (5R)
Other = 2 (Canopy and UC Selection)
LOC- EnR = 1 —>
LOC- TO = 4 (+1R)
LOc-L = 16 (+4R)
LAA Administered Aircraft
Reportable incidents - 2017
Operational/Technical Total =18
LOC L = 16 (All after engine issues)
1 brake issue
1 static vent (failure to reconnect after re-rigging).
Technical Total = 6
Note: all related to UC failure.
elcometoSafetySpot,|hope 66|nsteadof havingjust
eightypercent.You'llnotethatwe’velooked that you and those you care at the numbers for 2017 in a slightly different way. Instead of having just two categories for remain well enough to enjoy : themanygoodthingswhich twocategories (OperationalandTechnical),we’veadded a surround us all. | am, it has to : third which, for lack of another name, we've besaid,justaboutabletomaintainasmile (Operationaland calledOperational/Technical(Opp/Tech). through the gloom of winter, it’s absolutely ; Most of these Opp/Tech incidents, as you pouringdownwithrainoutsideandthenormallyTechnical We Ve added canseefromthechart,relatetoalossof busy airfield here at our Turweston HQ has control during landing (LOC-L) after an engine settledintoafewdaysofhibernation.Instead y third, which we've issueofsomesort.|say‘issue’because the of placing my head into a light box I’m not incidents don't only involve complete engine Officiallya victim of Seasonally Affected Disorder, j failures, though most of them do sometimes, writing Safety Spot, that'll cheer me up... ended in a poorlanding, often in a farm field.
REPORTABLE INCIDENTS
(out of a total of 62 incidents), four featured
| expect that you've already fathomed-out the gyroplanes, sixteen were straightforward pilot almost obligatory ‘pie’ chart | created, using error events, sixteen involved a problem with the numbers culled from the airworthiness the engine and two, counted as Opp/Tech, had database. It confirms that the vast majority of other technically-related causes. incidents which reached the level of being a
In the past, if a pilot damaged an aircraft ‘reportable’ incident have been labelled as during a forced landing after an in-flight Operational in 2017 it was something like emergency, such as an engine failure, it'd
simply be counted as a LOC-L incident. That was because of the mantra, ‘The pilot of a single engined aircraft should always fly in such a way that, in the event of an engine failure, he or she must able to safely land the aircraft.’ This is a good general rule which implies no damage to the airframe in the event of a forced landing.
However, taking into account the variables the unseen rut or fence post, livestock, etc that’s often an impossible task. The pilot of a single-engined aircraft has to balance the risk of a powerplant failure against the terrain they're flying over it’s an operational decision, with the possible overall risk of an engine failure, which is a technical issue.
As part of our annual incident-accounting exercise, it should also be noted that, although an aircraft may have been damaged during a forced landing, it doesn’t necessarily mean the damage was severe. Or indeed,taking that into account, that the damage implies poor pilotage it’s very easy to damage an undercarriage when landing on rough terrain, even when a pilot exhibits great skill getting the aircraft down in one piece in a challenging circumstance.
Almost every incident leading to a report will include both operational (pilotage, decision making, past training, currency, age-related issues, etc) and technical aspects (design, service history, age, etc).
Six out of our 62 incidents (around ten per cent) have been labelled as having a purely technical origin and all of these were the result of a mechanical failure in the undercarriage. The causes included issues with the rigging of retractable undercarriages, wear, unspotted previous damage (after a heavy landing), and one potential design issue (torque link over-load failure on the Titan Mustang).
LAA-administered gyroplanes featured in five ‘reportable’ 2017 incidents. One hit terrain while the pilot’s attention was distracted, while the others, as stated, involved landing incidents. It’s worth looking at the gyroplane numbersinalittle moredetail...
There’s a Mark Twain adage, which | expect you've heard: “There's lies, damned lies, and statistics.” This is an illusion, as statistical analysis forms one of the building blocks in much of what we do, though, especially when dealing with relatively small data sets (where oneeventcanmakea bigdifferencetoa quoted percentage), it’s important to take the numbers as a guide rather than a directive when it comes to changing policy or directing safety resource.
An issue which can make or break any statistical analysis is bias. Naturally, we try to avoid this as far as possible. One way we do this is by relying on an external body to make the decision as to what’s counted and the UK AAIB does this for us by providing the list of reported accidents and incidents. All we do is classify the incidents and accidents, add up thenumbersandpresentthemasalist.
That said, part of our role is to look into these numbers to see if we can tease out common features between incidents and then, using a variety of tools, try to offer ways to improve overall safety. Because an incident may have one glaring cause doesn’t mean that we should ignore the less obvious components. Don't forget, when looking at the LAA’s incident list, each accident featured a huge number of variables and, because most would accept that the LAA has a very good safety record, it’s a relatively tiny data-set.
Looking through the numbers from 2017, | can say with certainty that our total fleet size is 6,907 aircraft, which doesn’t include ‘projects’ (some 1,527) because they’re not really ‘flying’. Some 4,137 aircraft have expired Permits to Fly should we include those (or some of them) while trying to figure out an incident rate?
To make things simple, we stated that our fleet size contains only the aircraft with a current Certificate of Validity which is 2,770 aircraft. We appreciate that this, in reality, lower fleet number will make our overall incident stats look worse, but then we aren't trying to garnish an argument, we're engineers trying to seek guidance from the numbers about ways to make things safer for everybody. Our numbers show that for fixed-wing aircraft (totalling 2,598) the annual incident rate is approximately two per cent.
Looking, as promised, at the gyro fleet numbers, well, we've taken on the factory-built types over the last few years, and three of these featured in landing incidents. Rotorsport types, including the MTO series and, of course the beautiful Calidus and Cavalon two-seaters, represent the largest contingent (105 aircraft), with Magni M16 and M24 types being the other factory-built machines so far accepted (38 aircraft)... that’s a total of 143 FB gyros. We've looked after the kit-built and plans-built gyros for many years, our fleet includes MongomeryBensen, Cricket, Everett, RAF and VPM types, some 201 aircraft in total.
(Left) Another brief lapse in concentration, another handstarting incident. Fortunately, the pilot of this excellent example of a 1943 Piper L4H didn’t forget to chock the wheels. He did, however, have a narrow escape when the aircraft pitched forward after the engine ‘fired-up’ with the throttle incorrectly set. This engine will now needafull shock-load inspection and a new propeller an expensive error.
(Photo: Stuart Gray)
Currently though, and emphasising the earlier question about ‘what to count’, only 29 (around fourteen per cent) of these ‘heritage’ aircraft have current Certificates of Validity. That’s a total of 143 + 29 = 172 aircraft, so although there may have only been five gyro incidents through 2017, this drives an incident rate of around eight per cent, some four times higher than for fixed-wings.
Last year there were four fatal accidents involving LAA-administered aircraft two Europas, an Auster and one Kolb Twinstar during which, sadly, five people lost their lives. Our job (that’s you and me) is to work hard to keep our accident/incident rate down to as low a value as possible. One way of doing this is establishing exactly what’s gone wrong after an incident and making changes so that, in future, similar incidents can be avoided. In an organisation like the LAA this can only be achieved with everybody’s participation, so keep the reports coming in.
ANOTHER HAND-STARTING MISHAP
Thanks for all your fuel-related and handstarting feedback, driven by the January editionofSafetySpot - it’s,allgoodstuff.
Take a look at the article on page 56 of this issue, by Jim Crawford, where he explains his quick-release device, which is designed to stop an aircraft running away during a hand-start, should something go wrong.
Said device perhaps wouldn't have helped our latest hand-start victim the first, and let’s hope last of the year! Enough has been said on this subject so | won’t go on about it further here, except to say that our annual accident statistics for 2017 have now been collated and it shows that we lost three aircraft to handstarting incidents through the year. To be fair, they were only the ones that reached the level of being a ‘reportable’ incident.
Very fortunately, last year, nobody was injured in a hana-start incident, though this ‘first of 2018’ sounds to have been a closeshave for the pilot, almost literally!
MOGAS AND JABIRU WET-WINGS
Thanks especially to a number of you who let me know that |’d missed out the two-seater Jabiru J160 in the list of the manufacturer’s
aircraft which also have wing tanks. You'll remember, | hope, that we've written an Airworthiness Information Leaflet (AIL) prohibiting the use of mogas in these wet-wing types. If you haven't got a clue what I’m talking about, apologies, I’ve had my telling-off from our Chief Inspector, Ken Craigie, who complained that he’s let the Inspectors know we've issued a number of A/Ls prohibiting the use of mogas in all wet-wing Jabiru aircraft and said they can read about it in Safety Spot. Trouble is, and I’m not sure why, it never reached these pages!
We've addressed this issue now, first by issuing an AIL for the J160 and updating the Airworthiness Alert (available from the LAA’s Engineering web page), and second by briefly talking about it in this edition of Safety Spot.
Affected Jabiru owners should also note that in the updated Alert, we've also corrected an A/L numbering error, so please make sure that your logbooks reflect the corrected A/L reference number if you’ve already checked your aircraft. Ken Craigie, our Chief Inspector, has alerted the Inspectors about this directly, so they should be up to speed if you need advice.
We have, of course, discussed some of the issues surrounding the use of mogas many times over the past months, and talked about the issue where rippling was seen on a Jabiru J400 wing skin back in the June 2017 edition of LA. Here I'll just remind all owners that there’s an investigation and approval procedure to be followed before mogas is permitted to be used in suitable LAA aircraft and, if you want to read the recently published AlLs concerning the wet-wing Jabirus, go to the ‘Alerts’ page in the Engineering section of the LAA website, www.laa.uk.com.
Before | leave the mogas story, | must thank LAA Inspector Dave Almey for his good memory. We've written to the owners of the two Jabiru UL450 ‘Calipso’ microlight hybrids, which are operating with the sandwich-skinned wet wings of the UL-D model, rather than having the usual, foam-tfilled UL-450 wings and a single separate tank in the rear of the cabin.
It's a lesson, perhaps, one which reminds us that, although two aircraft operating in the LAA fleet may have the same name and look similar, they may possess significant differences. The variations between apparently identical LAA aircraft were highlighted in the many discussions about fuel systems last year.
LAA AIRWORTHINESS LEAFLETS
The recent issues with Jabiru ‘wet wings’ has, as we've already discussed, led to the LAA prohibiting the use of mogas in Jabirus with fuel tanks mounted in the wings. The A/Ls which the LAA uses to pass information to owners of aircraft have three levels of urgency built in. They're listed on the bottom of the leaflet itself as:
Classification A Considered Mandatory by the LAA & Classification B-—Recommended by the LAA @Classification C Material published for information and/or guidance
Naturally, time pressures being what they are, most of the A/Ls that LAA Engineering produces are considered very important, and therefore carry Classification A, in other words ‘must do’. The AIL prohibiting the use of mogas in wet-winged Jabs was just such a case.
Of course, we don't like imposing restrictions on things but when we see a problem in an
aircraft (or operation) inour fleet then, as part of the aforementioned safety response, we have to act in an appropriate way.
EVECTOR EV97 CANOPY CATCH
Quite often, a manufacturer will come up against an event in their worldwide fleet of aircraft and issue a factory Service Bulletin as aresponse to the event. LAA Engineering evaluates these carefully, to see whether we feel that the requirements held within the Bulletin are proportionate or appropriate to the risk that the apparent problem might pose.
A good example of this is the recent Bulletin issued by Evektor, introducing a second canopy catch (see photos opposite, top). In this case, LAA Engineering doesn’t feel that the risk of a canopy coming undone poses a great threat on this particular aircraft type. That because early testing showed that when the canopy was opened in flightitonlydidsotoaboutsix inches and then stabilised. Flight control wasn't affected and the aircraft had sufficient power reserves to overcome the increased drag.
JABIRU J430 UNDERCARRIAGE FAILURE
Another reason for a factory Bulletin might be issued is that in-service experience has shown
(Left & below) LAA Engineering has issued a number of Airworthiness Information Leaflets (AILs) prohibiting the use of mogas in all wet-wing Jabiru aircraft following problems. These include the rippling and softening of the wing skins on some aircraft which have been using mogas. This prohibition affects the four-seat J400-series aircraft, the Factory-Built Microlight version (UL-D), the J160 two-seaters and a few UL 430/450 two-seaters. Naturally, we’ve sent all the owners of these aircraft a copy of the relevant AIL directly, but access to them is available via links in the online version look for ‘Alerts’ in the Engineering section of our website, www.laa.uk.com. (Photo: LAA Library)
thatacomponentmayhavealimited service life. We evaluate these factory instructions against the operational norm in the LAA, which is that each component is assessed as being suitable during a thorough inspection. LAA Engineering terms this as being operated On-Condition. We're particularly wary of imposing restrictions when the factory Bulletin requires a component change based upon calendar life.
In 2005, Jabiru Aircraft issued a Service Bulletin (the company calls these JSBs) requiring that all the undercarriage attachment bolts on its J400 (four-seat) range of aircraft be upsized, from 5/16” to 3/8”. Later, in 2009, Jabiru issued another JSB, which introduced a life of 500 hours into these bolts. Although it didn’t say so directly, the JSB implied that all of its aircraft must be fitted with the bigger bolts and were included in this life limit. At that time, we hadn't had any failures in our fleet so we didn’t mandate this using our AlL system. Then, through 2018, we saw two undercarriage failures linked to these bolts, so we issued an AlL effectively mandating the JSB. The AIL required the fitment of the larger bolt, regular inspections for looseness and replacement at 500 hours.
LAAsAWA/18/01
(Above & right)Sometimes a safety device doesn’t really solve the root problem, though there may be some safety benefit. A recent Service Bulletin issued by Evektor affecting the UK EV97 EuroStar fleet, seems to be a good case in point. This secondary canopy catch would stop it openingmorethana fewinchesifapilot forgets to secure the canopy before flight, but if heor she forgot the first catch, why would they remember the safety catch?
(Photo:Dave Simpson)
(Right& below)Regular readers of Safety Spot will remember that we featured this picture in the December 2012 edition. This was followed by the issuance of a number of typespecific Airworthiness Information Leaflets (AILs), mandating a factory Service Bulletin limiting the life of the attachment bolts to 500 hours. The A/Ls also required a detailed inspection of the undercarriage. We’re returning to this issue because a Jabiru 430 aircraft in our fleet has recently suffered an undercarriage failure, and the owner wasn’t aware of the importance of maintaining a careful eye on this undercarriage attachment. The A/Ls offer advice about the best method for checking the tightness of the undercarriage bolts, something that hadn’t been undertaken on the subject aircraft for some time. The pictures show the general arrangement of the Jabiru undercarriage system the left and right legs are separate cantilever springs. You can see that each main undercarriage leg is secured by three bolts, the outer two being 3/8” (AN6) bolts fitted through a clamp (see close-up below) which holds the leg to the fuselage structure. The inner bolt on each leg is rubber-mounted which, along with the flexible nature of the composite leg itself, affords some flex. The main undercarriage leg is canted forward, which creates a loading asymmetry in the clamp itself and, as you can see from the picture of a clamp, if an attachment bolt becomes loose, fretting will occur. (Photos:Jabiru Aircraft Pty/AA/B)
(Top & above) This pair of photos show two mechanisms of failure of the Jabiru main undercarriage attachment system. In the first example, from an earlier failure, the nut has actually failed and pulled off the bolt, and the residue of the material of the nut’s threads is clearly visible. The second picture shows the fracture face from the most recent failure. Note the multiple overload (beach) lines, clearly demonstrating a failure through fatigue. And also note the small area of corrosion (at about four o’clock) suggesting an initial break, perhaps during a heavy landing, then failure due to fatigue over time. (Photos: AA/B/Malcolm McBride)
Here’s LAA’er Stephen King’s account of a recent bolt failure on his J430:
“My Jabiru J430 is lovingly looked after and currently has 430 hours TTand first flew in 2008. I’m the second owner and have owned the Jab for over four years now. As for me, I’ve coming up for 1,400 hours and about 200 on my 430.
“| had flown the J430 once that day already, taking my wife on the very short trip to North Weald, as she likes a wonder round the market. The flight there and back was completely uneventtul.
“After getting back to Damyns Hall Aerodrome, | offered to take my brother for a short local flight he’s also a Jabiru owner. With power checks complete we lined-up on R21 and applied power.
Our runway is pretty smooth for grass and doesn’t have any nasty bumps or undulations. | generally try to get the nosewheel lightASAP, and | was accelerating nicely down the runway with the nosewheel just hovering above the ground.
“At approximately 45-50kt we heard a oud bang, which | thought was a puncture. | immediately throttled back, but didn’t brake, allowing the aircraft to coast to a stop.
“At that point | still thought that it was a puncture, but the right wing did appear to be quite low. | shut-down and we both exited the aircraft. It was clear, once we were out, that the centre undercarriage bolt had failed.
“The leg had dropped at the centre-bolt, popping off the undercarriage cover panel. I'dsay that the leg at the centre-bolt point had dropped about 100mm and it was the fuselage, just outboard of the main leg clamp, which had stopped the leg rotating up any further.
“Luckily, with plenty of friends at Damyns Hall, we were able to find a spare AN6 bolt and quite quickly lift the wing and replace it. | taxied back to my spot and was amazed at how little damage there was. In fact, the only damage appeared to be the cover panel that hadpopped off and the paint on it was crazed.
“A few days later, we took the leg off to inspect further and did find that one of the main clamp bolts had very slightly bent. But with the leg out of the way the undercarriage tunnel and mounting points were all inspected and no further damage was found. Weput the leg back on with some more temporary bolts.
“Since this incident | have ordered two new leg clamps, new centre-bolt rubbers and a complete new bolt set, which I’ve now fitted.”
Stephen's report just goes to show that it's important to take notice of other people's experience. He wasn’t aware of the advice on the subject in the LAA’s Type Acceptance Data Sheet (which are known as TADS,for short), or the requirement to regularly inspect this undercarriage bolt.
Although the undercarriage bolt hadn't quite reached its 500-hour life, the fact that it'd become loose in the clamp meant it was far more prone to the effects of fatigue. Also, evidence from the bolt suggests an earlyoverload partial failure, which is possible owing to a heavy landing or, perhaps, running over a rut at high cockpit weight.
In any event, bravo to Stephen for his quick thinking in not using the brakes!
Okay, that’s it for this edition of Safety Spot, please keep your tales coming through. As | always say, safety is everybody's business. Fair Winds. =
(Top& above)Another winter, another aircraft damaged by a hangar collapse. This time, the primary culprit was an unexpected snow shower, whereas normally the problem is wind. Fortunately, and rather by luck, the damage to the aircraft inside wasn’t catastrophic. The lightweight structure had buckled under the snow load, which this type wasn’t designed to resist note that the damage to the aircraft was limited to the perspex canopy, which has now been replaced. However, as you can see, the empennage had a narrow escape. (Photos:DaveSteohens)
LAA ENGINEERING
uite some time ago, | was a member of a group which operated a Chipmunk, which was a delightful aircraft, other than the battery being rather tired. Consequently, once | was cleared to fly solo, the next step was formal training in safely hand-swinging the mighty Gipsy Major engine, although always with a pilot in the cockpit to control the procedure.
Since then, I’ve been building a Taylor Monoplane and have acquired a Tipsy Nipper so, as it’s certain that, sometimes, I'll be hand-propping either of these aircraft on an isolated strip with no competent help, | came up with a scheme to prevent the aircraft running away, to negate the associated possibility of serious damage or injury.
Chocks which are capable of preventing a runaway when, if for some reason, too much power should be set, take up a lot of room in a small single-seater. The type of chocks you can actually carry would either be pushed out of the way or jumped over by your aircraft. Should you actually have roomto carry the larger type of chocks, a system like this is ‘belt and braces’, even if you aren't operating on your own.
ONE, TWO, THREE...
The three photos illustrate the scheme in its trial layout, which is effective in preventing the aircraft from moving forwards by the use of a restraint line. The line passes from a release ring slipped over the flying arm of a snapshackle that’s attached to the tail of the aircraft, around a secure anchor point car bumper, fence post, etc and is returned to the fixed eye of the snap-shackle. A shackle trip-lineisledforwardtothecockpit.Trip-line
Photo 1 shows the whole assembly ready for operation. The snap-shackle articulated arm has been closed through the restraint line release ring and through a standard shackle which is attached to the airframe, in this case by a small piece of aluminium angle that replaced a couple of washers on the tail bumper (see Photo 3, which is a view from starboard). The tail-shackle and the aluminium angle are the only parts which remain permanently attached to the aircraft.
The snap-shackle trip-line is led forward to the cockpit, and the restraint line passes from the ring, around the fixed object (fence post, etc) and back to the fixed eye of the
snap-shackle. The line is tensioned when you tie the restraint line at the fixed eye.
Please note that the restraint line release ring shown is an ordinary split keyring part, solely for test purposes a welded stainless ring is a much better alternative.
This arrangement will prevent the aircraft from moving forward on engine start. The pilot can then ensurethat the engine is at tickover and pull out the chocks, get into the cockpit, strap in and sort out whatever needs doing to prepare for flight. When ready the trip-line is pulled, the spring-loaded pin will be withdrawn from the snap-shackle, which will fly open. This action both releases the snap-shackle from the
mAlthough the restraint line release ring may appear redundant, it’s necessary to guarantee a clean release from the snap-shackle flying arm. If the release ring is omitted it’s possible for the soft loop at the end of the restraint-line to lasso the snap-shackle arm and hang up. @Similarly, the tail-shackle must be large enough so that the snap-shackle arm will fly through it without hanging up.
g The restraint-line should be chosen with enough strength to take the static thrust of the motor at full power. The cord used for the proof-of-concept tests was 3mm in diameter with a breaking strain of 140kg. For an operational unit this is fine for the trip-line but it could be usefully increased in size for the restraint-line.
tail-shackle and the restraint line release ring from the snap-shackle.
Photo 2 shows the assembly as it’s tripped the shot was mocked up by holding the parts intheir positions with safety wire as the operation happens too rapidly to photograph. The snap-shackle and restraint line can then be recovered intothe cockpit by reeling inthe trip-line, and afterwards stowed out of harm’s way. Nothing is left behind on the ground.
The system, as presented, has the advantage of being compact, lightweight (about 85 grams), can be safely operated from the cockpit after engine start and leaves nothing to be retrieved. The shackles and ring are readily available from marine suppliers or Ebay, and the whole arrangement shouldn't cost your more than about £15 to put together.
The tail-shackle could also double as a tie-down point on a taildragger. ®
You can watch three short videos which show the test-operation of the system at www.tinyurl.com/handproppingvideos Tail-bumper
@The anchor point should be carefully chosen, so that the release ring end of the restraint-line will pass around it freely when the line’s recovered. B@On a tailwheel aircraft, there’s potential for the restraint-line to drop into the tailwheel arrangement and jam. This scenario could be made less likely by offsetting the line from the centre, by adjusting the attachment bracket arrangement. For example, the tail-shackle is offset 40mm to port on the Nipper so that the trip-line doesn’t rub along the lower longeron when it’s been tensioned from the cockpit.
aft and won't prevent a tailwheel aircraft tipping onto its nose. Such aircraft should be started with the stick held fully aft, to stop the tail lifting.
mThe system is designed to prevent runaways due to the aircraft jumping chocks, inadequate brakes or accidental full-power starts. It only provides tension mwThe knots should be secure or the
scheme will be unreliable. As shown in the pictures, the restraint-line is fastened to the release ring by an overhand loop, which has the property that the free end is parallel and adjacent to the standing line. This allows it to be secured with heat-shrink, to prevent it sticking out and possibly snagging as the line is recovered. Somebody with more skill and patience than | would probably splice a soft eye onto the release ring.
The trip-line is fastened with a bowline, as is the restraint-line return to the fixed eye.
Restraintline release ring ad Restraint line to fixed anchor~° =
getting ready to build, construction, fiberglass
, control systems, interiors,canopies &
windshields, landing gears, instrumentation,
In the thirties my Father had a large furniture factory in High Wycombe. He was a keen motorist so most weekendswouldinclude a tripout.|canrecall going to Brooklands race track, where one meeting involved midget racers, mostly Austin 7s, which I'd get involved with later in life.
We also went to Hendon to watch the flying displays, where | saw Juan de la Cierva in his Autogiro and rows of Hawker biplanes 1936, | think it was.
It was about this time that a German gentleman known as The Birdman would drop from an aircraft, spread his arms and legs, which had skins between them, and fly around for a few minutes, then parachute down. On one occasion his parachute failed to open and he was killed the rumour at school was that he was a German spy and the military had sabotaged his chute.
We also went to see Sir Alan Cobham’s air display, where a ride in a de Havilland DH60 cost four shillings (20p), which was about three months’ pocket money so | didn’t get to go up for a ride.
(Above) Don at the 1987 PFARally, with the Air Squadon Trophy he was awarded for Best Homebuilt, in recognition of his Currie Wot, which had taken him nine years to build. (Photo:DonLord)
At the end of 1937 my Father’s company collapsed and he took a job at Woodley Aerodrome for a couple of months, before joining a company called E Gome. | used to go with him occasionally it made Jicwood, a highly compressed plywood which was said to be fairly bulletproof. | saw a stack of Mosquito main spars there, and remember that they seemed to be enormous.
My eldest brother went to work for de Havilland at Hatfield, where he stayed throughout the war. By then we lived on London Road in High Wycombe, and during the Battle of Britain we could see the vapour trails and occasionally hear the gunfire. When the Blitz started, we we could see the red glow of London burning.
In 1941 my second brother was called up and joined the RAF, working on Halifax bombers in the rather clandestine squadron
which dropped people and supplies in France and also towed gliders. He spent ime in North Africa, supplying the SAS in he desert, and then returned to the UK to prepare for D-Day. His squadron towed the irst troops to land in France, including the amous Pegasus Bridge operation and then Market Garden. After Europe he went to ndia, supplying the Chindits in Burma.
That same year my sister married a farmer whose land formed the south side and part of he west side of Booker Aerodrome where, or the remainder of the war, I'd soend most weekends and holidays watching Tiger Moths, Avro Ansons, Airspeed Oxfords and more.
Towards the end of 1941, our dining room was taken over as two gentlemen were billeted with us. These gents were from the Aeronautical Inspection Directorate and had come to work in Davenport Vernon's garage, where they refurbished Wellington bomber fuselages.
The fuselages would go back and forth past our house on Queen Mary trailers, often still with the guns on they were so long that the tail would be over the cab and the cockpit end hung off the end by several feet.
(Above)Piltdown, East Sussex, is famous for its ‘Piltdown Man’ missing link hoax but it once hosted popular fly-in, on land owned byformer Prime Minister, Sir Harold MacMillan. He’s seen here discussing Jodels with Don in 1978, during the early days of the event. (Photo:DonLord)
(Right)Don did a lot of aerial film work, shooting commercials and public information films. He’s seen here filming a road safety campaign from an Alouette helicopter. (Photo:DonLord)
The first thing | can remember is, when | was five or six, my brother had a model aeroplane called a Frog which was sat in a box to wind its elastic-powered propeller. | wasn’t allowed to touch it! It came to grief one summer holiday, when he tried to fly it across Cheddar Gorge it didn’t.
Also, during the war, High Wycombe was full of factories building Mosquitos how could a youngster not be thrilled and excited?
| was fifteen when the war ended, and we’d just moved to a small hotel in Brighton where, within two weeks |’d found the job | wanted, in electrical engineering, playing with electric motors. | started an apprenticeship, and went to college one day plus two evenings per week.
My brother had a motorbike and, sometimes, he’d drop me off.
When | was seventeen | bought a motorbike from a neighbour, which hadn't been used since 1938. We got that going and, most
weekends, we’d go off to watch motocross racing. | got hooked on it so | saved some money, sold my motorcycle and bought a racing bike.
| then bought a cheap motorbike with a sidecar frame, to carry my racing bike on it was a 1928 1,000cc V-twin Royal Enfield, which cost £10. A few of my first race meetings were at Brands Hatch it was just a grass field at that time.
While at college, | met David FaulknerBryant, later to become the PFA’s Chairman, who was also a motorbike racing and aviation enthusiast,andsobegana friendshipwhich continues to this day.
| completed my City & Guilds and Higher National Certificate, and eventually became a freelance electrical engineer. In 1955, during a gap between jobs, | had a phone call from the Labour Exchange, to see if I’d be interested in three days’ work, running a generator for Brighton Film Studios on the sea front. The studio people were having trouble with the rented generator slowing down and the set lights going out. We got on well and, eventually, thestudiotookmeonasa full-timeelectrician. Over time, | learned the tricks of the trade and became a cameraman.
The company specialised in commercials, and with my aviation interest, | became their cameraman when it came to filming from aircraft and helicopters. It was a fantastic job —! had a tremendous amount of fun.
What with motorbike racing, work, and the time and financial constraints of bringing up a young amily, it was the early-seventies before | learned o fly, at Shoreham. |’d become involved with the PFA before that, though, having met up with DFB again in 1968. I'd been involved in the ormation of the first Strut, in 1969.
Subsequently, I’ve been co-ordinator wice, treasurer, newsletter-writer, Strut rep at the National Council meetings, and was a member of the Executive Committee Ed: now the Board) for five years.
| organised the Rally trophies for four years, and spent a number of years working in the Homebuilder’s tent, demonstrating wooden aircraft build techniques.
Once | earned my PPL, in 1973, | knew that I’d need to have my own aircraft if | was going to make good use of it. So I’ve had an aircraft, of one sort or another, ever since.
in
his Currie Wot. (Photo:DonLord)
(Below) Don’s Jodel D11, nicknamed MobyDick, at Ecuvillens in Switzerland during 1978. The airfield hadn’t long been open and still had a grass runway. Behind Don’s aircraft is former LAA Chairman David Faulkner-Bryant’s Currie Wot. (Photo; Don Lord)
| had a Jodel D11 for about ten years | only sold it to buy a Tiger Moth, in 1983. I’m a great DH fan, am a member of the Moth Club and was a member of the Tiger Club when it was at Redhill. The Tiger, G-ALNA, had belonged to a big group, which | think included Doc Urmston, John Isaacs, three lecturers from Southampton University and twelve others. | had it for a couple of years but had to sell it when the bank wanted their money back!
| then bought a French aircraft, an Adam RA-14 Loisirs, which is a bit like a Piper PA-15 Vagabond. It was based at Kilkern, just south of Glasgow, and on the way back | had to divert into Carlisle due to sea fog. | waited a couple of hours then set off down the M6, but when | was level with Lancaster the crankshaft broke between the third and fourth big ends. | putitdownina fieldandallwaswelluntil,at the far end, | hit a dry-stone wall, which won. | then flew various aircraft, including a long spell with a Putzer Elster B, G-APVF,
and then had a half-share in a Vagabond, G-ALGA, until June 1987.
I'd been building a Currie Wot and, after nine years, |finally finished it. Registered G-CWOT, it won Best Homebuilt at the 1987 Cranfield PFA Rally. It went on to win Best Homebuilt at the NVAV rally in Holland, and yet another award at the RSA Rally at Brienne. There's definitely a glorious feeling when you're flying an aircraft that you've built yourself.
| kept the Wot until October 1995, when | gave into my grandson, and bought a twoseater again, the Vagabond I'd shared until 1987. | kept it until my first Kitfox 3, G-BVAH, in 2001. | then had a Kitfox 4, and then a Kitfox 5, G-LESZ,which had a Rotec radial. Unfortunately, itcame to griefwhen the tailwheel locked at 45° on take-off and we went through a hedge.
|then finished and flew and an Easy Raider project, G-CBXE, but since 2012, I've had a Rans S6, G-BWYR.
ou may recollect that, in last month’s CEO Chat, | wrote about a ‘ticking time bomb’ which is set to hit PPL licensing our Chairman, Brian Davies, has added his thoughts on the situation this month, you'll find them on page 5. To put the issue in its simplest form, from 8 April this year, in order to fly an EASA-certificated light aircraft or helicopter, you'll need to hold an EASA licence.
The original European Commission legislation for this change dates back to 2012, when the European Part-FCL legislation was designed, to replace licences issued by national authorities with standardised EASA Part-FCL Licences across all EASA member states. At the time, the UK CAA sought, and won, a derogation which delayed the implementation of these rules for EASA aircraft until 2018. However, that derogation is now about to run out and, as it’s EC law, Brexit or not, the regulations have to be implemented. t should be noted that the CAA GA Unit and its lawyers have tried as hard as possible to find a means of further deferring this, but as it’s firmly enshrined in EC law, try as we might, the deferral cannot be extended nor the regulations changed.
THE GOOD NEWS
If all your flying is done on LAA Permit types, which are regarded as ‘Annex 2’ aircraft and outside the scope of EASA control, you'll still be able to use your UK PPL or NPPL within UK
airspace. However, to fly a PA-28 or Cessna, you'll need an EASA PPL or LAPL.
EASA licences require either an AME Class 2 Medical (for the PPL or LAPL) and either a LAPL Medical undertaken by an AME or your GP (if solely for a LAPL).
UK PPL and NPPL licences offer the opportunity for you to take advantage of self-declared medical status under CAA CAP 441. Currently, an estimated 4,700 pilots have taken advantage of the proven safety case which demonstrates that, if a pilot’s fit enough to meet the standards of the DVLA Driving Licence, there’s also no significant risk in their flying. However, the CAA scheme only applies to UK national licences, as the aeromedical lobby in many EC member states has resisted such developments.
Therefore, in order for your UK PPL to be used outside of UK or Irish airspace, you'll need to have an AME Class 2 Medical.
We're currently awaiting news from the CAA of the possibility of a fixed-duration trial to allow some GA pilots with EASA Part-FCL Licences to operate EASA aircraft, within the UK, with a UK self-declared medical. If this data-gathering trial can be implemented, those operating privileges are expected to align with the EASA LAPL. Watch this space!
There are a number of exceptions to the April 8 2018 deadline. Sailplane and Balloon licences under EASA SPL, BPL, LAPL(s) or LAPL(B) have an extended deadline, to 8 April 2020.And Microlightsand Gyroplanes Renewal Licence EASA conversion options
WHAT YOU CAN FLY AFTER 8APRIL 2018
Existing Licence
NPPL(SSEA,SLMG) NPPL(SSEA,SLMG)
PPL(SLMG)
NPPL(M)PPL(M)
PPL(GYROPLANE)
UK PPL(A) UK PPL(A)
LAPL(A),LAPL(S) (LAPLmedicalcertificaterequired.TheLAPL medical assessment can be conducted either byyourGPor anAMEandtheLAPLmedical certificateisvalidthroughouttheEU.)
are regarded as outside of EASA licensing jurisdiction, so there’s no equivalent EASA Part-FCL Licence and it’s business as usual for those pilots.
WHATCAN | FLYAFTER8APRIL2018?
The official CAA guidance on the licensing situation can be found at www.tinyurl.com/ caaconverting. In addition, the fuller version of the CAA table included bottom left (which we've edited to only show LAA-appropriate licences, and not commercial, helicopter, etc.) can be found at www.tinyurl.com/caatable
FUTURE GOTCHAS...
There are also some things to watch out for in the future first of all, your bi-annual flight review. If you exclusively fly an LAA Permit aircraft (and assuming, of course, have a two-seater) you're able to fly your instructor or better still an LAA Pilot Coach, on the mandatory, one-hour assessment flight.
But what happens if you almost always fly a single-seater? | speak from personal experience in that, until recently, hiring an EASA-Certificated aircraft from a local flying school was necessary to do my assessment flight. Inthe future, it seems that many of us may need to keep or acquire an EASA Part-FCL PPLjust for our bi-annuals!
However, some more daftness may even preclude that. Last week, we received the news that an agreement, NPA 2014-29 (A), supported by such national authorities as Sweden, Finland and France, proposing that, “Flight time is completed during flights operated inthe same class or type of aircraft falling under Annex II, shall be given full credit for the purpose of issue, revalidation or renewal of a licence, rating or certificate,” had been rejected by EASA’s legal services.
In other words, even if you own an Annex 2 aeroplane, you'd have to fly twelve hours on an EASA aircraft to revalidate your PPL or LAPL! The good news is that, unlike with the licensing issue, this isn’t yet law and is still being discussed ‘within the system’.
That said, if you think this daft rule is bad for us, just take a moment to sympathise with France,whereover230Annex 2 aircraftare used by flying clubs for pilot training. These aircraft, forming ten per cent of France’s flying club fleet, face being forced out of service because pilots won't be able to count the hours flown on them towards up-keeping their EASA licences!
Swansea GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Hounsditch, London GASCo
Safety Presentation Evening
Bristol Airport GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Cumbernauld GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Sturgate, Lincs AC Breakfast
Patrol & Fly-in 01427 838305
Old Sarum BDAC Museum
Vintage Sunday Fly-in
Wellesbourne GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Lee-on-Solent GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Norwich GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Guernsey GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Jersey GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Spanhoe Threshold Day & Night
Photoshoot [pre-book]
White Waltham GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Derby GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Pocklington GASCo Safety
Presentation Evening
Sywell VAC Members Lunch Meet [PPR]01604 644917 (booking essential)
Old Warden Shuttleworth Scale
Model Exhibition
Ockley, near Dorking GASCoSafety
Presentation Evening
Sywell BMAA InstructorSeminar
Darley, Harrogate Brass Monkey
Balloon Meet
Newark Museum Aeroboot/ Aerojumble Sale 01636 707170
Henlow DH Moth Club Flying Forum Allerthorpe, E Yorks Pocklington Flying Man Festival Balloon Meet Bodmin RIN Topnav Competition West White Waltham RIN Topnav Competition London Lee on Solent RIN Topnav Competition South Conington RINTopnav Competition North Sandown RRRA Handicap Air Race
North Coates Spring Fly-in 01472 388850
Compton Abbas Vintage Fly-in
Popham Van's RV Fly-in 01256 397733
Rochester GASCo Safety Presentation Evening Old Warden ShuttleworthEvening Air Show
Shobdon Aeronca Club US Classics Fly-in 01568 708369
16 Compton Abbas Pocleys Day Fly-in [PPRwith Pooleys]
21-23 Bodmin FOG Charity Cornwall Air Scout Camp 01752 406660
21-23 Naburn Lock, York PRBA Balloon Meet
22-23 DuxfordIWMBattleofBritain Air Show
22-23 LeicesterBAeAAerobaticComps
22-23 SywellClassicWings&WheelsShow
23 Popham Solent Av Soc Fly-in 01256 397733
23-24 AlderneyRRRAHandicapAirRace
26 Met Office, Exeter GASCo Weather Decision-Making for GA [pre-book]
29 Compton Abbas End of WWI Centenary Event
29-30
OldBuckenhamLAA&Homebuilt Festival [PPR] FEBRUARY 2018 | LIGHT AVIATION
AIRCRAFT FOR SALE
Slingsby Venture with T hangar, based Hinton Airfield. ARC till March 2016. Recent engine overhaul. £8000. Contact 01280 706272.
Light Aircraft Association
For all display or commercial advertising enquiries please contact Neil Wilson: 07512 773532
neil.wilson@laa.uk.com
You can email your classified advertisement direct to the LAA at the following address: sheila.hadden@laa.uk.com
Deadline for booking and copy: 19 February 2018
If you would like to place an aircraft for sale advert please see details below:
MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS
Up to 30 words: £6; 31-50 words: £12
Up to 50 words with a coloured photo: £45
NON-MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS
Up to 30 words: £22; 31-50 words: £44
Upto50wordswithacolouredphoto:£60 www.laa.uk.com
LAA Engineering advice to buyers:
AIRCRAFT APPROVED? Members and readers should note that the inclusion of all advertisements in the commercial or classified sections of this magazine does not necessarily mean that the product or service is approved by the LAA. In particular, aircraft types, or examples of types advertised, may not, for a variety of reasons, be of a type or standard that is eligible for the issue of a LAA Permit to Fly. You should not assume that an aircraft type not currently on the LAA accepted type list will eventually be accepted.
IMPORTED AIRCRAFT? Due to unfavourable experiences, the purchase and import of completed homebuilt aircraft from abroad is especially discouraged.
TIME TO BUILD? When evaluating kits/designs, it should borne in mind that technical details, performance figures and handling characteristics are often quoted for a factory-produced aircraft flying under ideal conditions. It is wise, therefore, to seek the opinion of existing builders and owners of the type. You should also take your own skill and circumstances into consideration when calculating build times. The manufacturer’s build time should be taken as a guide only.
AMATEUR BUILDING All LAA aircraft builders and potential builders are reminded that in order to qualify for a LAA Permit to Fly, homebuilt aircraft must be genuinely amateur built. For these purposes the CAA provide a definition of amateur built in their publication CAP 659, available from LAA. An extract from CAP 659 reads “The building and operation of the aircraft will be solely for the education and recreation of the amateur builder. This means that he would not be permitted to commission someone else to build his aircraft”. An aircraft built outside the CAA’s definition could result in an expensive garden ornament.
Europa Classic, excellent condition with SkyMap GPS, EDM700 engine monitoring system, fuel monitoring computer, autopilot, SmartASS airspeed warning system and EPIRB. Low hours Rotax 80HP recently fitted in exchange of previous Subaru unit. VP Prop. £30,000 including Trailer. For further info, photos or to arrange viewing/ flighttestcontactchrisdeith@hotmail.com
PA17 Vagabond G-BUXX (pic. on ginfo) A/F 2108. Eng. A75, 1839Hrs., 227 STOH. Individual seats. Two doors. Fuel 22 US gals. Wind generator, Cleveland brakes. £19,000. Tel.07833615929. Email: richardhunt968 @btinternet.com
1941 J3 Piper Cub. G-BTSP. 65hp Continental. AF. 3908. Eng. 1028. Fully refurbished 2000 by Trenchard Aviation Ltd. Kemble 2004 winner of Best Piper Cub. Best Vintage Aircraft. Best Restoration. Based at Sligo. Contact Adrian 0035 3834 553003
Van’s RV6 £50,000 or consider selling 1 or 2 shares. Individually hangared Damyns Hall, Essex. 2001 Van’s RV6 - UK built, 800 hours airframe and engine, 160HP Lycoming O-320-D1A. Narco Nav/Comm, Narco Mode C Transponder, VOR with Glide Slope, fuel flow meter, panel mounted Garmin 496, including Trio 2-axis auto pilot (not yet fitted). Cabin heater, electric flaps, full dual controls, elevator and aileron trim, landing lights and strobe. Sensenich fixed pitch metal propeller. Lightweight canopy cover. Great Condition. Contact Martinflymartin@hotmail.co.uk
AAS Group Gamston. Only 1/6 shares so great availability in four-seat tourer. A/F 2100 hours, Lycoming O-320 150hp with only 300 hours since TBO. Now for the first time, non-equity shares £50 p/h and £120 p/ month. 25 hours up front = £1250 to fly off over 12 months. Details: www.gbcpn.co.uk
Tel: 07976 802107
Gloucester based RV-4. 1/8 share in wellequipped and tidy aircraft, always hangared. Fixed costs £56 per month; 70 per hour wet. Share price and full details from Brian 01453 844840 Email bryn@brianoke.plus. com or Harry, 01242 260242 Email: harry. hopkins@talktalk.net.
Rutan LongEz. 164ktas cruise @6gph. Like the one above. 90% complete. Lycoming 0-320, Ellison Fl. Excellent construction - fit your own glass or steam panel and details to finish. Too many projects. LAA & CAA registered. Experienced builder advice included. £18,000. Bill Allen 07779 505707 Email: billallensworld@gmail.com
Wittman Tailwind W8 in own “T” hangar. Two seats. Fast, economical. Beautifully built and maintained. Fine condition. Lycoming 0-235 freshly run-in. www.supasash.com/ tailwind.html for more details. Tel: 07831 194 655
Van’s RV 6. Lycoming 160 HP, 500 hours A &F. Leather trim, 8.33, Mode S. Lovely machine. For more details call, text or visit the website www.vansrv6.weebly.com Tel: 07514 003495
Elstree AA-5B Tiger. A 1/8 share in this excellent aircraft, always privately owned. Engine 400 hours since zero-hour overhaul, airframe total strip and repaint in 2016. New carpets. IFR equipped with GNS430W, GTX330, Narco 12D, ADF141. For details contact lan. Tel: 07710 126546 or Email: ian.richmond @hotmail.co.uk DHC1 Chipmunk. 12th share in_this excellentaircraftbasedat HighWycombe.11,000hrs,PermitMay2018. TrigTY96 8.33Transceiver.£85/mthand£100/flight hr. DavidOnlinebookingsystem.£4,250.Call 07887623529
Wanted to buy, borrow or hire. Propeller hub extractor tool for Gipsy Major Mk 1 engine. email : jm452650@gmail.com Tel 01986 894 902
Wanted. Traditional cast-iron Wheel. Email Al@NuttreeFarm.net
English
Partially completed Vans RV 12, Empennage/Tail-cone_ kit, Wing Kit and Fuselage Kit all signed off, plus tools. Offers Invited. Andy 07971 292626 Lytham, Lancashire.
RV9 QB Kit for sale including various other parts. Much work done, empennage completed and signed off. Shoreham Airport area. £30,000. Jeremy Dawe 07711 126128,emailjeremy320@btinternet.com
Jodel D11 project, G-BAPR. Airframe resprayed, new glazing, interior re-trimmed. Twin tanks (front and rear). Hydraulic disc brakes. No engine or instruments. Based Northants. For viewing or more details Tel: 07833 947 233
JPM, Oil filter adapters. Will fit Continental 0-200, C90, C85, C75 (-12, -14, -16). £260. Will help with Mod _ paperwork. These adapters replace the oil screen assembly. Julian Mills Mobile 07976 530563 Email:jom.aviation@gmail.com
Light speed Zulu 2 ANR headsets for sale with Bluetooth. Excellent condition and working order. Welcome to view and try before you buy. About four years old, one headphone has done 100 hours and one around 30 hours. £470 and £450 ONO. Tel 07738 718382. Cambridge
Recently retired established inspector available for permit inspections and general help with projects etc. Workshop facilities and hangarage available. Essex Norfolk and Suffolk areas covered. John Cook 07817 543 754 or hatzflyer2@gmail.com
Welding Services (Mobile). CAA approved for 4130 airframes manufacture and repair. Custom exhaust systems and aluminium fuel tanks undertaken. Manchester based. Contact Julian Mills on 07976 530563 or email:jom.aviation@gmail.com
Would you like to join us in sunny Dorset at one of the UK’s most beautiful airfields? Due to expansion we are looking for a licensed or unlicensed engineer to run our maintenance facility. Interested? Contact
H.R. JENNINGS & CO. LTD.
Established 1922
Authorised andregulated by theFinancial Conduct Authority
AVIATION AND GENERAL INSURANCE BROKERS
quotationsOurinsuranceservicesincludecompetitive forallaviationriskrequirements from initialconstructiontoflight. Forconstructionprojectscovercanbeupgraded underthesamecontractastheworkproceedsandthesuminsuredcanbeadjustedinaccordance with yourinstructionsasandwhenrequired.
@Full digital accessvia iPad, iPhone, ™@There’sno sponsoredor paid-for editorial 2 Get the next three issuessentto youfor free AndroidorPC inFLYER,inprint,online,anywhere _ 3Carryonbecauseyou’reenjoyingthemag
@We testeverything wereview 4Ifyou don’t think FLYER isfor you,cancel last 13issues.Enoughfor that new ® Stunning photography within aweekof receiving your third issue ANRheadset! _ & Awardwinningarticles _ andwewon’tchargeyouapenny
Pleasetakethelanding/entryvoucherwithyou,ratherthana weekends-only), one at Lydd, Kent (on the uplift of thirty litres of photocopy, and do consider uplifting fuel or using the cafe, if fuel), and a reduced landing fee (£10) at Haverfordwest in Wales. available, so we all win from the generosity shown to the LAA. We also have a two-for-one offer on admission to the Tangmere Don’tforget, winter days are very much shorter so ensure that Military Aviation Museum near Chichester, West Sussex. you head for home in plenty of time to make it back before dusk.
4 al a
REDUCED LANDING OF £10 FOR MARCH 2018
Owned and run by Pembrokeshire County Council, serving a variety of hot and cold food and drink. Haverfordwest Airport is situated in the middle of Avgas and JET A1 available. PPRplease and picturesque countryside, within easy reach of great avoid the local riding stables and the residences beaches why not venture out on a coastal walk? on North RO9/27.No overhead joins when RH ~—andmakes for a great stepping stone to Ireland. Circuit is active. Radio is 122.200. The Propellers Cafe is open seven days a week, www.pembrokeshire.gov.uk/haverfordwest-airport
FREE LANDING WITH THIRTY LITRES OF FUEL UPLIFT FOR MARCH 2018
Situatedon the Dungenesspeninsula,between when transferringoutsidethe UK. ILS/ NDB/ GPS Folkestoneand Hastings,Lydd’s nearby attractions approach procedures. Servicesincludethe Biggles include PortLympneZoo, Canterbury,and Lydd Restaurant& Bar,which is licensedand has a Golf Club. Lydd Airport's prices are very competitive Sunday carvery. No non-radio aircraft. PPRplease. with others inthe SouthEastand it’sdesignated for RadioATIS 129.225/ APP/TWR120.7/ TWR 119.375 clearing Customs& Immigration.Duty-freeAvgas when directed. www.lydd-airport.co.uk
FREE LANDING —-WEEKENDS ONLY - FOR MARCH 2018
A very friendly aerodrome located in deepest
Please avoid flying over Shipdham village. The Norfolk, one of the driest parts of the UK! The well looked after runway was resurfaced a few airfield was used by the USAAF during WWII, years ago. Nearby Marham is on 124.150 operating B-24 Liberators, and is now only open and A/G is now 132.230 please make blind at weekends and on Bank Holidays. The club calls if there’s no answer. houseCafeisopen1000-1400.Avgasisavailable.|www.shipdhamflyingclub.co.uk & Ld 2 TWO-FOR-ONEENTRYOFFERFORMARCH2018 So
This popular museum, off the A27, east of
With a new Jet Provost ‘Power up the Cockpit’ Chichester, joins us again for 2018. Based on display, plus a Lighning simulator, there’s much one of the famous Battle of Britain airfields, the to see (book on arrival). Donation towards upkeep museum has many aircraft, themed halls and is appreciated. The museum is open to visitors by exhibits, including the famous red Hunter, WB188, road only, from 1000-1700 daily. Shop and cafe. in which Neville Duke broke the sound barrier. www.tangmere-museum.org.uk
