Mooney I wouldn’t like to pay the same price as trucks on French motorways but I think there is a big difference. In a car if I go to a city I have to pay large sums to park these days. I don’t like that either.
But the thing about flying UL is that I don’t have to go to these large airfields and pay huge parking fees. There are many small fields surrounding cities and often nearer to the attractions.
But all this is not the point. Having switched to ULMs in the past year or so I find myself really enjoying my flying again. I am having fun at a great deal less cost. It suits me. I realise it doesn’t suit everyone. But I don’t feel I am losing out on anything. Maybe that will change. I hope not but I know we always have to be careful not to allow ourselves to get sucked into a whole lot of regulation and cost for very little gain.
Airborne_Again wrote:
Care to explain why?
It’s dependent on type I guess, but the experience in my club (for club use obviously) is they just don’t cut it. This is a VLA, P2008. Nice aircraft, but low performance and too little payload. The examiners won’t fly it because there’s no way to fly it legally with 2 grown up Norwegians in it 
Payload for the LSA is 212 kg, the VLA has 232. Two grown ups equals no fuel, zero fuel reserves.
Two petite Italian ladies, just perfect
Some other VLAs are better, but the empty weights usually kills the payload. A 600 class UL usually has 300 kg payload, or more, which is way more than adequate. Why the empty weight suddenly jumps 50-100 kg just because it’s a LSA/VLA, I don’t know.
For club use, the C-172 simply is very hard to beat. Even an old one. One may get the impression that a CA-LSA is a certified 600 kg UL. This is very far from the truth. In reality it’s a low performance, much lower payload, much more costly to maintain certified 600 kg UL. Dependent on body size, it may be just perfect, but not as a general trainer. Then you need a payload of 260+ kg.
LeSving wrote:
A 600 class UL usually has 300 kg payload, or more, which is way more than adequate.
That is a gamechanger indeed. 300 kg is a lot for a 2 seater… don’t know what the fuel capacity is but yea, find even a C150 with that kind of payload.
LeSving wrote:
For club use, the C-172 simply is very hard to beat.
It and the PA28.
I know of a club which went with all sorts of modern airplanes and almost went broke, nobody wanted to fly them. They got rid of them and bought 50 year old PA28-180, I think 2 of them and were looking for 2 more. I think they paid 50 k per piece, both are decently equipped and nicely kept. And the rental price is only slightly higher than it was for the VLA’s they had before. I think they kept one for basic training but are wondering weather to get rid of it in favour of a PA28-140 with MOGAS.
LeSving wrote:
It’s dependent on type I guess, but the experience in my club (for club use obviously) is they just don’t cut it. This is a VLA, P2008. Nice aircraft, but low performance and too little payload. The examiners won’t fly it because there’s no way to fly it legally with 2 grown up Norwegians in it Payload for the LSA is 212 kg, the VLA has 232. Two grown ups equals no fuel, zero fuel reserves.
It certainly depends on the type. Our new Evektor Sportstar (an LSA) has 236 kg payload. With two 100 kg persons on board you can take enough fuel for about 2 hours + reserves. This aircraft is also night VFR equipped which makes it noticeably heavier than the standard version.
Airborne_Again wrote:
With two 100 kg persons on board you can take enough fuel for about 2 hours + reserves.
Yes, but make that two 110 kg persons, and you barely have 1 hour of fuel and no reserve. Might as well get an electric plane For the structurally identical 600 UL you would (could) have 100l of fuel. 600 kg is not enough if you also want all the “BMW quality” stash/fat in addition to payload. This requires an MTOW of say 750 kg, and by then it barely flies with 100 HP.
LeSving wrote:
Yes, but make that two 110 kg persons, and you barely have 1 hour of fuel and no reserve.
Sure, but you need to draw the line somewhere. Two 110 kg persons at the same time is not likely enough to be a hurdle in a club/school environment. Compare that with the venerable Cessna 150 (750 kg MTOM). We have one and with two 100 kg persons it can take 30 minutes of fuel. With two 110 kg persons, it will be overweight with empty tanks.
A 600 class UL usually has 300 kg payload, or more, which is way more than adequate
600kg class ULMs, when it comes to real travelers, fully equipped, usually have an empty weight of around 350kg. Even more if a Rotax 915/916 is fitted.
LeSving wrote:
Yes, but make that two 110 kg persons, and you barely have 1 hour of fuel and no reserve.
Exactly my problem apart from the fact that most with this weight will loose their medical, most ULM’s are not designed to take one such person, let alone two. At FHA I once wanted to try to sit in one of those contraptions and was told, sorry, you are too fat, you will damage the airplane.
200 kgs is more than ok, as usually if one guy is that fat, the other one won’t fit in the cabin. And no, a C150 is way too tight to fit two such people, even if it will fly…. I guess outside the UL scene there is no plane which gets regularly overloaded to the extent a C150 is… usually it’s full fuel payload is below 150 kg.
aart wrote:
600kg class ULMs, when it comes to real travelers, fully equipped, usually have an empty weight of around 350kg. Even more if a Rotax 915/916 is fitted.
So that is 250 kg traffic load, with what kind of fuel capacity? If we say 50 kg / 70 liters with a fuel flow of 30 liters, that is 2 hours plus 20 minutes reserve with 200 kg payload?
Mooney_Driver wrote:
So that is 250 kg traffic load, with what kind of fuel capacity? If we say 50 kg / 70 liters with a fuel flow of 30 liters, that is 2 hours plus 20 minutes reserve with 200 kg payload?
Usually 100-120 liters capacity. Consumption according to engine of course, say 14 l/hr for a 912iS and 25 l/hr for a 915, so a little better than you assume. But yes, although a great step forward from 472 kg ULMs the 600 kg ULM is not a traveling machine with a high payload capability.
@aart I think that’s the kicker here.
“ULMs the 600 kg ULM is not a traveling machine with a high payload capability.”
But even with 525kg a ULM is a travelling machine without high payload.
I have already given figures for the Super Guépard ie empty weight around 285kg, 60litres UL95 = 42kg = 4hrs (plus a little bit of reserve approx 30min = somewhere between 360 and 400Nm.
So you have 195 kg give or take a few for pilot, passenger and luggage. Not enough for 2 × 110kg chaps without ditching some fuel.
But doing circuits we are only using 10litres per hour so our 110kg + instructor is doing okay.🙂
