Re: Which Ultralight to build.....

On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 08:29:36 -0600, "Wayne Paul" <wayne@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:

>While wading into the technical requirements required to certify an
aircraft 
>as motorglider, the basic definition a glider should not be overlooked.
>
>The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) defines a glider as a 
>heavier-than-air aircraft that is sup****ted in flight by the dynamic 
>reaction of the air against its lifting surfaces, and whose free flight
does 
>not depend on an engine.
>
>As has been stated, gliders are launched by three methods, ground launch 
>(winch/auto-tow), aero-tow and self-launch (motor.)
>
>It may be hard to convince FAA your homebuilt is a self-launch glider if
it 
>can not maintain flight with the engine(s) turned off.

All aircraft can maintain flight with the engine(s) turned off.  The
question is how for how long, and how far.

Even the Pitts has a glide ratio.  It's not a GOOD glide ratio, but
it's a positive number.

Consider - the sheep is not a creature of the air.  They do not so
much fly as...plummet.   But if you throw one off a cliff it will
remain airborne for a short period of time.  To someone writing a
rulebook, that's flying.

The weight/span squared is a reasonable stab at L/D that you can do
with simple tools (scale, tape measure) and without having to estimate
drag.  If a few people figure out how to game the system, I think FAA
is OK with that.  So, you get a few heavy ULs.  They're not going to
be THAT heavy, and even though the pilot doesn't have to have a
medical he DOES have to have a pilot's certificate.  With the
comparitively light weight and long wing, he's going to have a pretty
low stall speed.  If he crashes into a house he's going to do MUCH
more damage to himself and his machine than the house.