EAAAirVenture OshkoshShopJoin

aerobatic ultralight

Posted By:
Kurt Fredrickson
Homebuilder or Craftsman
16
Posts
1
#1 Posted: 12/21/2009 00:06:26

Was wondering if any one knew of any ultralights that were structurally desinged safe enough for aerobatics?

 



Ralph Burlingame
Homebuilder or Craftsman
21
Posts
4
#2 Posted: 12/21/2009 10:12:30
Kurt Fredrickson wrote:

 

Was wondering if any one knew of any ultralights that were structurally desinged safe enough for aerobatics?

 

 

It's probably not a good idea to perform any aerobatics in LSA's and definitely not ultralights.

Ralph



James R Thomas
Homebuilder or Craftsman
48
Posts
10
#3 Posted: 12/21/2009 13:32:00

Hey Kurt, the answer is yes, the Phantom. In the past they advertised it was  fully aerobatic and rated to 9 g's. It will take about anything, within reason, that you're likely to ask of it.



William Czygan
Homebuilder or Craftsman
9
Posts
5
#4 Posted: 12/21/2009 19:54:20

Kurt,

As mentioned in another post the Phantom is aerobatic stressed. So are most of the Quicksilver's at +6 and -3 G's. But you need an aircraft with a pumper carb to do negative G maneuvers. I have a Quicksilver Super which was designed with a symetrical wing and a pumper carb. This allows most aerobatic maneuvers including sustained inverted flight. Search Youtube for videos. Or look here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QD4962CZ440

 

Bill



Jim Heffelfinger
Homebuilder or Craftsman
256
Posts
43
#5 Posted: 12/21/2009 23:26:28

Here is the question again - Are there any ULTRALIGHTS .... those mentioned are most likely not in true UL (part 103) form

 

 



James R Thomas
Homebuilder or Craftsman
48
Posts
10
#6 Posted: 12/22/2009 20:44:31

Hey Jim, Check out Phantoms web site. They say their X1 with MZ201 (45hp) engine and a light battery will make Part 103 with 5 pounds to spare. James Thomas



William Czygan
Homebuilder or Craftsman
9
Posts
5
#7 Posted: 12/23/2009 21:39:11

They're UL's in my book. Single seat. Good enough.



Chase Balcom
Homebuilder or Craftsman
40
Posts
4
#8 Posted: 12/30/2009 22:27:57

   I've owned 3 phantoms ,..2 with 503's 1 with a 447,.the 503's rule with exception to a 582,..but that's more weight.

I've done loops, spins, wing overs, inverted flight, barrel rolls,..imalmans,..tried to do a snap roll ..too much aeleron surface,..although you can get to altitude ,..hang her just off  of a stall,.. then full power nose her down full right rudder full right aeleron all atthe same time ..closest  I can get to a snap roll   recover pull her nose straight up let her climb till she runs out of airspeed ,..full right rudder  a little left aeleron and weeeee~!!! ,..OK all this talk about aerobatics ,..I need to go get an altitude fix.

Chase



Theodore Fails
Homebuilder or Craftsman
6
Posts
3
#9 Posted: 1/6/2010 13:06:21

CGS Hawk is capable and the Ultra Model is part 103.  But you should check out the CriCri on YouTube to see what can really be done with 160 lb. empty and 20 hp.



Charles Radford
3
Posts
1
#10 Posted: 1/14/2010 19:10:19

I used to do acro in my CGS Hawk.  Loops, rolls, spins, stall turns, and such.




James R Thomas
Homebuilder or Craftsman
48
Posts
10
#11 Posted: 1/14/2010 21:03:53

I have a CGS Hawk, all Stits with a 503. I don't think there's a better plane in its class but I don't think I would want to pull that hard on it. It's just not built for it and I'm pretty sure Chuck S. would say the same thing. I used to know a pilot who did all sorts of aerobatics in his Hawk including tail slides. Chuck's advise, "PLEASE STOP". He designed the Hawk and he said it was never designed for such. It's a great airplane, my personal favorite but sooner or later, if pushed too hard, its's liable to bite 'ya. James Thomas



Kurt Fredrickson
Homebuilder or Craftsman
16
Posts
1
#12 Posted: 1/17/2010 10:21:23

Thanks to all of you for your input.



Dick Anderson
Homebuilder or Craftsman
74
Posts
14
#13 Posted: 1/27/2010 12:15:36

An absolutely legal ultralight that would perform loops was the Lazair. Had an Air Progress magazine cover picture of one upside down in the second of three consecutive loops at about 300 ft AGL. Don't know if it would do any other maneuvers. I expect the weight of the pilot would make a huge difference in the ability of  a 254 lb aircraft to perform aerobatic maneuvers---- not to mention proper training and experience. Maxair also made an aerobatic model, but it was too heavy to be a legal UL.



Dick Anderson
Theodore Fails
Homebuilder or Craftsman
6
Posts
3
#14 Posted: 1/29/2010 11:28:39

My two cents:

In this month's Sport Aviation on page 75 there is a new completion of a CriCri which has empty weight of 194 lbs and uses 22 hp.  Since its design intent is aerobatics at fairly high speeds, it doesn't meet part 103 regs, but it does show what can be accomplished with an aircraft in that size range.  Here is a video:

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TtnPJB3tWU&feature=related

The part 103 rules make an aerobat very difficult, not because of weight, per se, but because of top speed and stall speed.  On the other hand, how about a design of a tiny motor glider?  Many things are possible if the MTOW is low enough, even on meager horsepower.  I don't think it can be done with a 254 lb craft carrying a 250 lb pilot, though.

 

 

"Big whorls have little whorls, which feed on their velocity;

little whorls have lessor whorls and so on to viscosity."



Seth Jackson
Homebuilder or Craftsman
13
Posts
3
#15 Posted: 10/11/2010 14:09:36

Also, The Hytek Hurricane is aerobatic. The Phantom is the same thing but the stick is on the side instead of the middle. Also, The Rotec Ralley is a aerobatic ultralight so is the Quicksilver MX Super