Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

The PERFECT two seater local plane for the modern age.

Perhaps a Pipistrel Velis Explorer or Club could fit. EASA certified, VFR N even IFR

IFR?

always learning
LO__, Austria

Snoopy wrote:

IFR?

I believe so.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

It is certified acc. CS-LSA. No IFR.

Tecnam P-Mentor is CS23 IFR.
Elixir is CS23 Night VFR (ifr planned).
Bristell B23T is CS23 Night VFR (ifr pending).

always learning
LO__, Austria

Is the taildragger configuration for the Bristell also available for the certified B23T?

Last Edited by Supersonic at 27 Feb 06:56
EDNG, EDST, EDMT, Germany

Is the taildragger configuration for the Bristell also available for the certified B23T?

No. Only the UL version enables a range of choices, tricycle or conventional landing gear with or without bush wheels, retractable, 912S, 912iS, 914, 915 (916?) engines, and avionics a-la-carte.

Last Edited by aart at 27 Feb 07:34
Private field, Mallorca, Spain

It is certified acc. CS-LSA. No IFR.

So you would think perhaps But the Velis Explorer is different than most other CS-LSA.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

CS-LSA specifies day vfr only.

always learning
LO__, Austria

I know. As I said, the Velis Explorer is not like most other CS-LSA. As to how, don’t ask me. Pipistrel themselves say a “one and only”, but I have heard about others.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Snoopy wrote:

CS-LSA specifies day vfr only.

Yes, but exemptions for night VFR are common, so I don’t see why – in principle – you couldn’t get an exemption for IFR. There is little difference in the way of required equipment. Of course the aircraft must be designed to withstand lightning hits.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

In one of the “uncertified IFR” threads I posted the UK LAA “analysis” (from some consultant by the looks of it) regarding lightning as a negligible risk and this was a requirement to get the UK LAA IFR programme going and including non-metal planes.

Much of the “IFR issue” is political… throwing some meat to the “professional pilot airspace” dog. The “great thing” about VFR is that ATC can always say NO and this is the enabler for VFR deregulation. Other hoped-for deregulation enablers are persistently identified incorrectly. With IFR, they can’t say NO (in practice); you have the implicit whole-route clearance, and this kicks up masses of dirt in the “corridors of power”, starting with airline pilot and ATC unions. Of course none of them say so openly. In the US you don’t have this problem…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top