Just thinking about getting into Part 103 here shortly. Always wanted to fly, cost was prohibitive. Been a sim nut and the two times I've been behind the stick of a Cessna, I did everything but land just fine. I figure I will do some flight lessons to master the basics, but there is a lot of empty airspace down here.



Been working on converting the Kolb Ultrastar plans online into CAD - either going to scratch build or find one reasonably priced.



Anyways, would love to hear your stories, tips, etc.  

There are a few of us here.

Best thing to do is find someone local to you with a two seat MX (Quicksliver) that you can hop a few rides with before getting deep into it.

I volunteer every year at the EAA AirVenture UL airstrip.  We coach everyone interested to at LEAST get to the point of soloing under instruction in a GA plane before trying to hop in and fly a UL themselves. It's good investment in that you get safe instruction AND you see if this is something you really want to do.

I've known a few people with Ultrastar's.  Good planes but not exactly a beginners plane.  Being a taildragger and fairly narrow on the gear can make things interesting.

Back to the first point.  Get a ride in something with an open cockpit.  It's completely different than GA flying.  It's like riding a motorcycle but with altitude.

Good idea. And the instruction to solo is what I was planning on doing - my company employes a pilot who does instruction on the side in his little 4-seater homebuilt, so the low and slow should help ease the transition to the UL, I hope.



I believe it's totally different than GA, and honestly, that's what appeals to me the most - low, slow, and a hell of a view. No fear of heights, or anything like that. (I volunteer with the local SAR team, to include helo rappels and short-hauls.)



My requirements I'm looking at are: 3-axis, handle well in mild crosswinds (we have constant winds down here, but i realize there is a low tolerance for crosswinds in anything ultralight), excellent stall characteristics, and high wing. I would prefer a pusher motor as well (again - all about the view!) though I do wonder about how to mitigate the enhanced FOD risk to the prop.



 

Also, which birds tend to perform in high and hot environments? I live at 4,633 ft, with temp averages of 36°F to 94°F (with the occasional 110+ days.)

Barnstormers.com. Check the UL and LSA sections.  

You may want to,consider a single seat Challenger.  Very easy to handle and meets all your other requirements.

You will need a 447 Rotax to technically meet the weight requirements.  The interesting thing is that a 503 works too and you get another the hp or so.  . (Eats more fuel too.  Nothing is free)

I built and flew a firefly. The biggest difference between flying a part 103 and a spam can is how quickly an ul bleeds off speed. It can be fun trying to lose altitude and keep the speed up flying in summer thermals on short final. I would keep some power until touchdown to prevent bending a gear leg.
A kolb taildragger is a lot easier to ground handle than a cub.

I've got a Preceptor N-3 Pup (Cub lookalike) with folding wings that myself and my EAA chapter have been getting ready to fly.
So far it's had about 12 different people inspect it, and our chapter's Tech Counselor has given me a write up of things to fix.
One of our members is a flight instructor and is providing me with flight lessons and training.
With a 1/2 VW, it will burn about 1.5 gallons per hour and I can keep it in my garage.
If I find that I want to get my pilot's license, then I'll pursue it, otherwise I'll keep flying the ultralight.
For me, it's a relatively inexpensive way to get into the air.

I understand your opinion. It is valid at a personal level but not much at a mechanical one these days.  The risks of a structural issue or operation of UL's and light aircraft have really gotten much better.  Engines are engines.  They are a constant maintenance item that the maintainer has to do right.  That is regardless of UL or GA.  Same can be said of pilots.  Most people that get into problems with light aircraft find the root cause is poor pilot decision making whether they admit it or not.

Doing that buzz job at the friends house and run into trees, running out of gas, not changing spark plugs at recommended intervals, not checking weather before leaving with a front coming soon with 25+ gusts and other things like that are what get people hurt now.  It all goes back to basic pilotage.  Airspeed and altitude are your friends.  They give you many more options to consider than if you are at 300 ft and slow.

Same goes for GA flying these days otherwise the top two reasons for accidents would change.  Running out of fuel and controlled flight into terrain are always 1 & 2.  Both of those normally are pilot decision related also.  . The poster above with the Pup is doing it the right way.  Never hurts to have others review your aircraft and offer suggestions.  Not going to say they are always right, but catching that loose nut or poorly routed fuel line can only be a good thing.

You really need to fly the plane before you decide to build/buy one. My 103 experience is limited, but I have flow a good deal of light sport planes which were two seat versions of the singles. I owned a Quad City Challenger and have very little bad to say about the airplane. If It was not for me wanting to fly acro, I might still have it. Flew a Drifter, and loved it. But with the lack of any cockpit made it cold and wet if the conditions were cold and wet. But I flew a Rans S12 and thought it was a dog that I would not own. But others have exactly the opposite opinion. So the basic premise is you have to fly them to know if you are going to like them.

The problem with 103, is there are not many people that are going to let you fly their single seat plane to see if you will like it. So the best you can do is try to find a two seat plane that is close to the same. For example, Quad City makes a single and a two seat Challenger.  Titan makes a single and two seat Titan. If you want a Rans 17, look to get some time in a Rans 18.

Here is what looks like as a nice example of a Rans 17 http://www.rans.com/aircraft/for_sale/robert_sherwood/ad-1708.html
I think 9k is a bit much since you can get two seat versions for 12-15 all day long.

Now, lets talk engines. If you are going to fly part 103, that pretty much means you will be flying a two stroke engine. The most popular two stroke is the Rotax. The 503 seems to be the most reliable of the two stroke Rotax engines. The 582 is a bit bigger with more horsepower but it is also liquid cooled and that brings some issues such as more weight. Rotax recommends that all of the two stroke engines have a rebuild every 300 hours or 5 years. The two stroke engines use the case pressure as part of the fuel system. After 5 years the crank seals start to dry out and this can cause a lean condition that can make it difficult to start the engine and can lean it out in flight causing the engine to seize. This problem can be intermittent which can make it difficult to identify and can cause a sudden onset. The crank will start to get out of true and can cause a sudden engine loss if it goes out of spec. (Rotax engines use a crank that is pressed together).

Rotax also recommends that the engine be taken apart and de-carboned every 150 hours. Carbon will build up and will burn hot and if left alone it can create a hot spot that can destroy a piston. You also need to clean the carbon out of the piston rings, or you will lose power due to lack of compression.

You will need to pull and inspect the plugs (4) every 12-15 hours and replace them per Rotax at 25 hours. They are inexpensive plugs (2-3 bucks each) So if I went to the trouble of pulling them to check them, I just replaced them. You also need to check the needles to make sure that the engine vibration does not break one and cause it to shut off the fuel flow.

I don't like two strokes anymore. I owned one and flew it for 113 hours. I had two engine issues, one was a cracked block (that if it cracked all the way through my engine would of died instantly). The other was a problem in flight. I had a normal run up, but when I took off at about 100 feet the engine started to run rough. I landed and checked a bunch of things and kept trying. I finally replaced my plugs and the problem seemed to go away.

In the two years I have been a plane owner and really in that scene, I have had 3 friends have five 2 stroke engine issues (plus mine) and three of those resulted in a damaged aircraft. Compare that to my 4 stroke friends and I have had two guys have a jug issue and I had a small inflight fire issue. None of those issues resulted in any aircraft damage (other than the small fire damage on the carpet).  

Long story short…. You can fly a two stroke, but you will have to tinker with it all the time and honestly expect an engine out at any time.

How do you avoid these issues? Get with a group of guys that REALLY know two strokes. Or just get a 4 stroke. If you go 4 stroke you will most likely have to avoid 103 and go light sport.

If you have some questions, ask….. I would not be afraid of a 4 stroke LSA plane as long as it uses known engines like the Rotax 4 stroke 912 or 914 or the Jaburu. In fact I would LOVE a Super Drifter on floats with a Rotax 912.  

Great info, I was looking at the 503s and 582s as a powerplant. I have rebuilt an old clapped out 447 that I got running awesome, and
put a few hours on it on a test stand, just as a learning project. It has a few faults in it that should make it scrap.





LSA is a little out of my reach as the aircraft are orders of magnitude more expensive.





That S-17 looks amazing. Are there any options for shipping ultralights? Trying to avoid taking a week off of work for a roadtrip. (Of course I would go inspect it prior to purchase.)





 

. It's all good

Great, just understand that a few hours and putting your butt on the line in the real world is not exactly the same thing.



This is not true.I bought my LSA for 9,500 dollars. I had to get the engine rebuilt (Way over the 5 year mark) and it cost about 1300 bucks. So for 11K I had a good LSA with a newly built engine.

Here are several examples…. some the asking price is 10K:

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_933716_LSA+1946+Luscombe+8A.html

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_932098_MSquared+Two+Place+Sport+1000.html

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_932083_Challenger+II.html

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_896235_Baby+Ace.html

Are there any options for shipping ultralights?
Yes, you can pay someone to trailer it for you. Me, I flew in to inspect my LSA and rented a UHaul to bring it home. I took the wings off and slipped it in and drove home with it.

Totally tracking on your first point. I'm a mechanical designer for one of the Army's major UAVs for the day job - so I do understand a little about flight safety from the mechanical standpoint.



I'll definitely look into the LSA option further. Perhaps I had misjudged the usefulness of it. Sure would be nice to be able to stick a larger tank on this thing. The idea of 5 gallons of gas max makes me shudder a little.



 

Well then 'CM'.



More than 5GA is nice, but what is better is being able to fly a second person. Yes, most of my flight time is solo, but taking the wife up when she wants helps save a marriage. But it is also super cool to be able to take a buddy flying or just carry camping equipment for yourself.

Simply put, I have a single seat plane just for me, and a two seat plane just to take the wife up when she wants. Having the second seat also allows me to take people up and shown them how to do their first loop.

I'm flying something a little bigger than the part 103 stuff.  Been flying 2 seat powered parachutes, Rans s6 and s7,  Several of the Kitfox models.  Piper cubs.  Went back to LSA after many years in bigger planes.  Any more I just fly for fun.  Right now I own a 1998 Buckeye Dream machine PPC with a 581 and a 1991 Kitfox II with a 582.  Will  probably be selling the PPC soon.  I have several interested in it.

If you can find them the Rans planes are some of the best LSA and part 103.

Well, been working on converting the Ultrastar to CAD.







Trying to debate between 3 powerplants:



Rotax 447

Rotax 503

Victor 1+



One of the gentlemen on the yahoo group for the ultrastars turned me on that BRP (Rotax's parent company) has a new 4 stroke on the Ski-Do Spark line of PWCs. Trying to investigate if it would be compatible with any gear boxes/prop redrives out there.

As a Kolb Club member (Firestar II, 2000 model, 500 hours, built myself) I have always wanted an Ultrastar. I keep telling the Kolb company when I see them at OSH and LAL that I'll take serial number 0001 if they begin production again.

Not ultralight but light sport.  We'll see if I get this bought tomorrow morning.







Hey, flaperon,  I think I know where you got your name.  

It's now mine

Wife says that now I MUST sell this.









 

Yeah, at times I have to pull out a good walking stick to wade through the BS, but there is a gem in the rough at times.



I've found several inconsistencies so far, and some good modifications to this plan. This is a fairly fun project, CAD side alone.



I've been studying more on the powerplants, and really just debating between the 447 and 503. I like the dual ignition on the 503, and capability for oil injection. Not sure if it will push me right out of Part 103 yet. (Either weight wise, or top speed wise.)



 

Agreed. QD attachments for all the "extras". Entire instrument pod will pop with a couple of pins and a connector. Cargo "pod" will be QD with a few connection points. I hadn't heard of Orotex, but it looks quite interesting. I'm deploying next year - so I have about a year and a half to plan ahead of me. I'm also examining the Hirth F23 as a viable candidate with skyrocketing prices on the Rotax engines.



 

Model is coming along nicely. I think I am going to do a bolt on cargo "pod" that will snug up and bump under where the stock gas tanks goes - I think dacron covered with chicken wire between a lightweight welded frame will do nicely - I only want to hold about 30-40 pounds for camping/cross country trips, and it will help push the CG forward - I'm not done modelling the items after of the CG, but with the heavier engine installed (Hirth F23) it pushes the CG about 4 inches aft. I haven't put in a dummy weight to simulate myself or a gas tank forward of the CG - though as I keep having to remind myself, gas can't be counted on for CG adjustment....you burn it!

Never fly higher than you're willing to fall