Hello and help! (PPL or LAPL or UL)

Alexis, yes, if you don’t want to do your maintenance yourself you have to pay someone doing it for you. But I guess then you don’t want to do it on either plane. So the 150€-annual is impossible in this case, too.

Some of the items on your warrior, like retrofit APs aren’t quite fair to factor in, either, are they? First because in Germany Autopilos are not allowed on microlights and you don’t need them in these VFR planes anyway. So that is pure luxury.

And we don’t differ for the BRS in the SR22. The Cirrus has a proven, well engineered system, many microlight do not and the installations in some models, like the first tube-and-fabric Fascinations or the Dynamics with the uncalcuulated spars, are outright dangerous. There have been plenty cases recorded by the BFU where the pure necessity of “any BRS” prevented a safer aircraft. Safety is not to put stuff in the airplane, safety is a concept that you have to live by – as a pilot and as a desgner, and as a cetification engineer, too. FAA has done a much better job than the DAeC/DULV on that matter. See the accident reports for details.

Yes, in Germany autopilots are not allowed in UL. In theory ;-) In reality, there’s many. And in other countries anyway.

And i don’t see an autopilot as luxury. Although i have flown big parts of Europe, and even to Morocco and northern Sweden without one, today i would not want a traveling airplane without one anymore, especially when you fly alone – or with non flying family.

No, i would not want a Fascination either. And i think the C22 is a terrible airplane. But that has nothing to do with planes like the Virus, FK-9 and some other modern ULs. There are very good BRS installations in some ULs.

## thread drift alert! ##

in Germany autopilots are not allowed in UL

I was wondering that I seemed to have seen a couple, and heard about more…
What would be the logic of forbidding them, except to keep these futile toys out of serious travelling?

There’s many – and the ownwes take them out for the annual …The reason? No idea. I guess the authorities don’t like the UL IMC pilots … nor do i. And one can seriously question the glass cockpits in many ULs. I think that’s the wrong way.

It is certainly contrary to the original basic concept of an ultralight, but then so is a cruise speed of 250+ km/h.
I have sometimes wished for my plane to be a bit faster, but much more often have I wished for an autopilot, even if to only keep the bird steady for the time of properly taken photograph, or for spending more than a quick glance at a paper map. But perhaps we should not get too far off-topic.

Can all tech specifics on UL please go into a new thread in the Non Certified section

There’s many – and the ownwes take them out for the annual

Very very hard to argue for something and then explain that it is a good option due to illegal procedures… which takes us back quite a few posts.

Also, is the inspector really dumb, or does the owner remove the servos and their mountings and all accessories as well, and does something about the hole in the panel?

Flyer59 wrote:

You are right, but if you look at the vast majority of pilots – many of them fly alone.

Actually, my observation is quite the opposite and in our club most pilots do fly with others, be it other pilots, family, friends … Yes, many microlighters fly allone but other than them solo flying is mainly training, student pilots and aero towing, with some occasional trips of people using the aircraft for business. Flyer59 wrote:

It clearly depends on your preferred mission, but i bet that an affordable UL will keep many pilots in the air for more years than an airplane that’s too expensive.

I agree completely. Many people who I know who have bought an SR22, a Seneca, a turbo Mooney or alike don’t do local flights anymore because those aircraft are far too expensive for flying around in circles. Basically it is completely irrelevant if you fly an advanced microlight or a C150/MS880/HK36, they all deliver similar flight time for the money.

Flyer59 wrote:

The seven hour marathon flights are not for everybody either. I for one rarely fly longer legs than three hours – because i don’t enjoy it much.

Agreed. The median of german men is at 85,6 kg. Put two in the cockpit, 3 hours fuel and you need 210 kg useful load. Not many microlights can do this, even without luggage. Loading a tent, a bottle of wine, two bikes – forget it.

Flyer59 wrote:

Many pilots, thousands actually, are completely happy with their decision to go UL, and isn’t the success of this airplane class enough proof?

Well, the number of microlight licenses is declining for a few years now, while PPL/LAPL numbers in Germany are increasing, but that is not the point. As I said, I am against presenting microlights as an alternative, rather than as an addition to other kinds of aircraft and for most pilots that is not only true, but that is how they fly. They take the Cessna on vacation and the UL for coffee. And you can crunch in the numbers, to get there the cheapest way is to go via LAPL/PPL rather than the other way round. No matter if you can get maximum hours credited, or not.

This thread is going sideways now, repeating the same stuff. The Certified v. Homebuilt v. UL posts have been moved here

I join others in welcoming you to the forum.

As was written time and again, it really depends on what you want. Personally, I think soaring makes for a good entry into the world of aviation. Even if you don’t end up sticking to it, you can learn good lessons. And you might come to truly love it – for some people, it’s just irreplaceable. And there is room to grow (you have cross country flying, aerobatics or cloud flying).

So I would start with LAPL(S). There is also SPL but LAPL has for some unknown reason (I think it’s an oversight, meaning SPL should have it too) a crediting advantage when going to LAPL/ PPL(A) and switching to SPL is just an administrative task. And get a Stemme S10. Not a bird for competitions, but it cruises nicely, it can still soar very well (Klaus Ohlmann flies one) and the side by side seating is, I think, better for sharing the experience. It is, however, an expensive toy. You can extend these sailplane licences to include TMGs (essentially a two-seater SEP with a much better glide ratio). These can make for a rather cheap flying and they offer the best crediting option (AFAIK) for LAPL/ PPL(A) (IIRC you only need 10 hours dual and 5 solo to get a PPL – this is what I mentioned above and is not available with SPL). Also, once you have a SEP class rating, TMG hours count for revalidation (and vice versa).

However, you might have trouble locating a training provider. I believe sailplanes lag behind aeroplanes as far as Part-FCL is concerned. Meaning the new regime might not be mandatory yet and the available courses might still be for national licences. You’d have to check.