Or one of those kit helicopters?

I'd love to hear some stories about this sort of thing.

You don't need an FAA license to own/fly one, right?
They are fairly easy to learn to fly, right?
How expensive can they get?

I woudl think this would be a great thing to have to WTSHTF.

Go here, much has changed recently (Sept 1 to be exact)

http://www.sportpilot.org/

That said skip the ultralight and get your Sport Pilot Ticket.

With due respect to Hielo's Vampire (you flying that thing?), most ultralights leave something to be desired.

Something like this fits the Sport Pilot regs:

STOL CH701
http://www.zenithair.com/stolch701/index1.html

or this

Taylorcraft BC-12D
http://www.airbum.com/pireps/ClassiccompTCraft.html

Luck
Alac

Kpel:

Yea the Sadler - See if Hielo will sell you one of his.

Its an interesting design. Chris Heinz (designed the 701 and others) has his shit together as well, at least his engineering conforms with my design philosophy.

Luck
Alac

I was thinking of something a lot less complex... like the Free Bird Ultralight...



Free Bird

I don't know jack shit about these things... was hoping to leanr a little about them from you guys. There is a guy (that lives on the lake that my in-laws live on) who owns one that is probably something more like the one in the picture. Thought it was interesting and wondered if they cuold be flown by anyone after a quick lesson.

Quoted: I was thinking of something a lot less complex... like the Free Bird Ultralight... www.ultralightnews.com/ulbg2/images/freebird.jpg Free Bird I don't know jack shit about these things... was hoping to leanr a little about them from you guys. There is a guy (that lives on the lake that my in-laws live on) who owns one that is probably something more like the one in the picture. Thought it was interesting and wondered if they cuold be flown by anyone after a quick lesson.

I want one of these too. I would like to see anyone respond to this who has flown one of these.

no, but they sure do look fun!

I've never flown one, but the UL's by Kolb appear to have decent construction and look to perform pretty well. That said, Alacrity is right, the new Sport Pilot rule could turn out to be a great thing. At this point you can still buy an older light aircraft for about the same money as a UL and have a machine that you can actually go someplace in. BTW, if you're over 6' tall forget the T-Cart and go with the Aeronca 7AC.

I met a guy in Wixom that bought one, built it, and then took classes to fly it. The day came when he was ready to take his up, and we all went to see it. It was really cool. It had a ballistic parachutte on it too.

Well, he got off the ground, BARELY made it over the tree line and was screaming into his microphone almost the whole time. He almost flipped the thing twice. He got it down after a really rough landing and told us never again would he fly it...it was kinda funny afterwards.

My understanding is, barring registration in an approved program by Sept 1, you must now secure a SP ticket  to fly UL. Other than cost (and not much) theres no advantage to UL anymore. You can find good airworthy examples of Taylorcrafts for $12k and the 701 can be built new for less than $20k (the hard way) or easily $30k. Both have much greater performance per dollar and , IMO,  much greater safety factors. Nothing wrong with ULs, but SP has removed any licensing advantage.

Experimental vs. Type certified is something else you will need to consider. The old UL rules are out now AFAIK, but not onerous as the SP regs are reasonable.

If your concern is complexity - the two examples I mentioned are not complex. Dont be fooled by the enclosed cockpit of the 701. If you can build it safely yourself, it cant be too complex. The Taylorcrafts were built simply and robust. But I prefer a bit more versatility and think theres better values out there than ULs.

Im sure there are more knowledgeable pilots here. Hope they chime in

Luck
Alac

I remember when these things made their debut in the mid-80's.  It was pretty common to see them buzzing around the western Chicago suburbs.

They fairly quickly got a bad rap as people were killed in them, IIRC.  Most was due to inexperience...but given their light weight they are quite vulnerable to any unexpected wind.

Seems to me, a much better alternative would be a parachute plane.  Engine cuts?  Drift to the ground....though it might suck to get tangled up in a tree.  Or power lines.

Quoted: My understanding is, barring registration in an approved program by Sept 1, you must now secure a SP ticket  to fly UL. Other than cost (and not much) theres no advantage to UL anymore. You can find good airworthy examples of Taylorcrafts for $12k and the 701 can be built new for less than $20k (the hard way) or easily $30k. Both have much greater performance per dollar and , IMO,  much greater safety factors. Nothing wrong with ULs, but SP has removed any licensing advantage. Experimental vs. Type certified is something else you will need to consider. The old UL rules are out now AFAIK, but not onerous as the SP regs are reasonable. If your concern is complexity - the two examples I mentioned are not complex. Dont be fooled by the enclosed cockpit of the 701. If you can build it safely yourself, it cant be too complex. The Taylorcrafts were built simply and robust. But I prefer a bit more versatility and think theres better values out there than ULs. Im sure there are more knowledgeable pilots here. Hope they chime in Luck Alac

Last I checked, Part 103 is still in force...

You *MAY* register your UL with a N-number and operate it with a Sport Pilot ticket. The advantages of this are the ability to operate a 2-seat ship, to carry as much fuel as you can lift, and to be able to run an engine that will hit VNE, instead of being limited to teh Part-103 max speeds.

However, if  you are willing to limit your onboard fuel to 5gals, allways fly a single seater (no lap passengers either), and never fly faster than the legal limits for air & stall speed, then nothing changes...

The plane you have pictured is not an ultralight. You will need a private pilots license or a sport pilots license if it is approved to fly something like that. An ultralight by definiton has to be a single seater, not weigh more than 256lbs empty (or close to that weight) and carry no more than 6 or so gallons of fuel. With an ultralight you do not need a license or any training whatsoever to go fly it. Please dont think that you can get a lesson or two and go fly one of these things. Flying is not terribly difficult BUT!!!!!!!!! If you dont know what you are doing you will kill yourself rather quickly! It is not like driving a car or boat! Do yourself a favor and get some good proper training before you take one up by yourself. That said! Nothing beats being in command of flying machine guided by your hand!

pathfinder here is a link to the kiteplaneson-line you might also want to pick up a copy of kite planes magazine on newsstands. There is a allot of information in the magazine especial the buyers guide edition. These kites go anywhere from the basic doped fabric kite ($22000.00)to the high performance glass cockpit Lanceair ($135,000).

Quoted: Vampire?  The Sadler aircraft?  I have this thing about twin-boomers like the OV-10. Here's a good link for homebuilts (a good way to get rid of all your time and money):  www.homebuilt.org

Yup, metallic blue.  The engine is pulled being rebuilt right now.  The plane has always reminded me of a p-11.  Very fun.

P-11?

Friggin double tap!