Ultralight - Fatality

[Lawreston]

http://www.bangordailynews.com/news/t/news.aspx?articleid=150447&zoneid=500

(Please ignore my avatar in reference to this thread)

HR

 

[JohnR]

What a shame. Poor fellow. Survived the impact with trees, but fell when he was climbing down.

Abandoned runway? Not if he was using it.

Snowmobile engine? No, Buckeye uses Rotax AIRCRAFT engines.

Ultralight flying "doesn't fall within the jurisdicion of the FAA." No, part 103 is under the FAA's jurisdiction.

 

[Lawreston]

The airport - abandoned - has been used for drag racing for a long time.

HR

 

[JohnR]

The airport - abandoned - has been used for drag racing for a long time.

HR

Gotcha, so it's still not abandoned, just converted to a dragway. I wonder if he was the only guy flying from it?

 

[IamBull]

Damn, that sucks. Not a good way to go.

 

[bbchien]

Dang. I'd met "Red". 'E was a CHARacter"

 

[SkyHog]

WUltralight flying "doesn't fall within the jurisdicion of the FAA." No, part 103 is under the FAA's jurisdiction.

Misquoted. The actual quote is: Chief Trafton said crashes of single-passenger ultralight aircraft do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Federal Aviation Administration.

And that is true. Neither the FAA nor the NTSB investigates Ultralight crashes to find cause. I wonder if they will investigate E-LSAs?

 

[tonycondon]

And that is true. Neither the FAA nor the NTSB investigates Ultralight crashes to find cause. I wonder if they will investigate E-LSAs?

except if its High Profile. IIRC the NTSB investigated Sam Walton's sons fatal ultralight crash.

 

[JohnR]

Misquoted. The actual quote is: Chief Trafton said crashes of single-passenger ultralight aircraft do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Federal Aviation Administration. And that is true. Neither the FAA nor the NTSB investigates Ultralight crashes to find cause.

Thanks, I had a knee-jerk reaction there. Does the FAA investigate crashes at all, or just the NTSB?

I wonder if they will investigate E-LSAs?

As for the "E", they investigate experimental homebuilts. I don't see why not E-LSAs. They and their pilots are FAA regulated. The only difference is LSAs (not E-LSAs) are built to non governmental (ASTM Consensus) standards instead of part 23. Whew! That's confusing!

 

[SkyHog]

Thanks, I had a knee-jerk reaction there. Does the FAA investigate crashes at all, or just the NTSB?

Not positive, but this news story seems to imply that they do (but it is the news. Its easy for them to have gotten it wrong): http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/050919/crash.shtml

As for the "E", they investigate experimental homebuilts. I don't see why not E-LSAs. They and their pilots are FAA regulated. The only difference is LSAs (not E-LSAs) are built to non governmental (ASTM Consensus) standards instead of part 23. Whew! That's confusing!

True, but most E-LSAs are nothing more than Ultralights that went through the conversion process....that's why I ask. Its definitely gonna add to the NTSB backlog if they investigate those crashes.

 

[JohnR]

True, but most E-LSAs are nothing more than Ultralights that went through the conversion process....that's why I ask. Its definitely gonna add to the NTSB backlog if they investigate those crashes.

The E- part is Experimental, as in a kit or scratch built. My J-3 replica could be an E-LSA. A Piper J-3 cannot. I believe the "fat ultralights" are largely factory built machines and 2-place ULs not being used purely for training, plus many homebuilt ULs with a weight problem.

 

[tonycondon]

the NTSB doesnt really send out investigators to all crashes. most are handled by the FSDO, all the info is gathered and sent in where they read everything and make up an accident report. even some fatals are handled by local FSDOs. NTSB investigators go to high profile and big crashes.

 

[SkyHog]

The E- part is Experimental, as in a kit or scratch built. My J-3 replica could be an E-LSA.

It could also be an E-AB (which I'd suggest, since it would still qualify for LSA flight if you wanted to use it for that later, without changing anything.) The benefit would be not having to pay a fee to get your repairman's certificate, although, when it comes time to sell, I suppose it would be nice for the new owner to be able to get the certificate....

I have to see the numbers to be sure, but I'll bet the majority of E-LSAs are fat ultralights (not just fat ones, any ultralight will qualify). That's why I'm curious if they'll start investigating them. True, they are technically going to just be experimental aircraft, which makes me thing that they will investigate them. It will make the backlog much longer, that's for sure.

 

[JohnR]

It could also be an E-AB

Most definitely.

I have to see the numbers to be sure, but I'll bet the majority of E-LSAs are fat ultralights (not just fat ones, any ultralight will qualify). That's why I'm curious if they'll start investigating them. True, they are technically going to just be experimental aircraft, which makes me thing that they will investigate them. It will make the backlog much longer, that's for sure.

Since you can't operate a true UL over a "congested area" it would be interesting to take a 103 legal UL, register it as an LSA, and fly it out of a towered airport in the middle of a city, just because you can! Tower: "Learjet 12345, please slow to 40 knots for the ultralight on short final."