The Glasair III is not a “full-CofA” plane. It is a kit built plane which in the USA is certified in the Experimental category. Various versions of the aircraft are also approved by the LAA here in the UK and are eligible for a Permit to Fly. The Glasair III-LP, mentioned in the document above, dates back to 1994. Other manufacturers, e.g. Lancair, offer quite sophisticated all composite kit built planes that regularly fly “hard IFR” in the USA, so I imagine they also have some sort of lightning protection.
That’s exactly what I have been saying. This is a full-CofA plane
Where did you get that from? This is a homebuilt, and an experimental. It’s the “LP” version of the Glasair III. They did this because:
Since the Glasair 111 is capable of cross-country
flight, Stoddard-Hamilton felt that its customers wanted
the ability to use the airplane in instrument fl~ght conditions.
Because instrument weather conditions are very
often the same conditions that produce lightning, the company
decided that a lightning-protected version of the
Glasair III would also enable more extensive instrument
flight, enhancing safety and improving the marketability of
Glasair III.
NASA came along because:
Langley Research Center a joint development program to develop
and test a Glasair 111-LP (Lightning Protected) version
that would be able to land safely if struck by lightning.
Langley, which had long conducted a multiyear Storm
Hazards Research Program, was interested because the
airplane was made of composites and there was need for
a database on this type of general aviation aircraft
Two things can be deducted from this:
1. LP (just to use a nice acronym) is necessary to enable full (and safe) IFR capability of a composite airplane
2. LP is old news in the experimental community.
The Glasair III is a very popular homebuilt. Fast, aerobatic and has full LP – if you want. LP or no LP, this is up to the builder.
OK… I missed that this is not an ICAO CofA. But what they have done is what you would have to do on a ICAO CofA plane, so my comments on what is needed stand.
Out of interest, does anybody know which US homebuilts might have this protection as standard in the basic kit?
Out of interest, does anybody know which US homebuilts might have this protection as standard in the basic kit?
RVs of course 
All metal.
As for the composite kits, I would be very surprised if anyone offered it as standard in the basic kit. The weight, cost and complications are all for nothing unless you actually plan to fly into thunderstorms.
Well, that’s pretty much the definition of explosion (I did not say detonation).
Yes, but you said that the composites explode.
If not done, why not, and how can static wicks work then?
Don’t follow your question,, none the less, my all composite Lancair Columbia has electrical conductive mesh bonded throughout the airframe, wings & empennage and there is a conductive path to the static wicks that are bonded with a special conductive epoxy.
Bonding is using a piece of wire (or equivalent) to connect say a metal airframe to a moving control surface, for
The TB20 has no bonding except on the rudder. A few years ago, after a good service with plenty of grease in the elevator bearings, I almost lost COM2 whose antenna is further back (near the elevator). It was completely cured with a couple of lengths (2 for redundancy) of copper braid, running from the airframe to the elevator.
But the ailerons and flaps are unbonded, yet they have static wicks.
Bonding through the support bearing and the control links for the ailerons is used on just about every single GA I’ve ever seen, so we can surmise that it must be working. Rudders & elevators tend to have bonding straps, but that varies widely.
Also, consider that Cirrus aircraft do NOT have static discharge wicks at all …
