Electronics > Projects, Designs, and Technical Stuff
Toggle switch for small aircraft charging system in case of failure
SkyMaster:
--- Quote from: ITman496 on April 19, 2020, 01:26:50 am --- Too bad the bd-10 was a failure.
--- End quote ---
John Bede was a genius. Among other things he designed the BD-1, which became the Grumman American AA-1. Instead of using rivets, the skin is glued to the inner structure. I never flew the AA-1, but flew the GA-7 were Grumman American took the same approach; smooth skin everywhere, no rivets.
Unfortunately, except for the BD-4 none of Bede design were commercial success.
I saw a BD-10 in a museum in Toronto, I was surprise how relatively small it was.
:)
ITman496:
That is fascinating!! I know another plane I wanted to make which would have a similar appearance was the Velocity, specifically the v-twin. Because fiberglass.
I didn't know there was a museum with a BD-10 in it in toronto. That's only 8 hours from me, maybe when this whole covid thing blows over I'll go over and find it!
richard.cs:
--- Quote from: ITman496 on April 19, 2020, 01:26:50 am ---Yeah, that is quite depressing. Reasonable, but depressing. I'm honestly shocked that the FAA of all groups in the usa allows ultralights to exist still.
--- End quote ---
What I did find looking at things (far too late last night/this morning tbh) is that as a result of a change in 2017 the UK almost has an unregulated category again, but a very restrictive one. Under 70 kg and under 20 kt stall speed is now in the same category as paramotors, with no requirements other than insurance. I'm currently mulling over whether modern materials allow any kind of conventional design in a 70 kg mass budget. I suspect you need so much wing area to meet the 20 kt stall speed requirement that it eats up most of the budget straight away.
ITman496:
Oof, that is not a lot of weight! I suspect you're squarely in the territory of those paramotors but instead of a backpack its a gokart kind of thing.
Do they actually check? I know with the FAA they have their limits but nobody actually comes and weighs the airplane.
richard.cs:
--- Quote from: ITman496 on April 19, 2020, 09:50:40 pm ---Oof, that is not a lot of weight! I suspect you're squarely in the territory of those paramotors but instead of a backpack its a gokart kind of thing.
Do they actually check? I know with the FAA they have their limits but nobody actually comes and weighs the airplane.
--- End quote ---
It's intended for paramotors with gokarts (people here call them trikes). It came about in response to various disabled people wanting an exemption to use a trike because they were unable to footlaunch. You may well be right that it's all that can be done in 70 kg but when I get some time maybe I'll run through some design calculations.
The question of enforcement is an interesting one. I mean if I were to build anything and fly it at low altitude over private land it seems highly unlikely anyone would either notice or care however big it were. Not that I or anyone I know owns a plot that big. However if I made something that looked like a microlight but didn't have paperwork, registration numbers, etc. and took it anywhere where I might encounter someone who knows the rules then it is likely to at least get questions, and if the response is "it's under 70kg" then that's going to raise interest if it's not a paramotor simply because that's hard to do (if it's even possible).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version