Hi from the Sunshine Coast. Am I expecting too much?

[eddi]

Hi everybody,

 

I live in Tanawha and started flying with the age of 6 weeks. I have thousands of hours in the air on nearly everything imaginable to talk about. Sad to say never as a pilot.

 

I want to change this but can't decide what to go for. The reason being sounds awkward. I'm not interested in flying as such or getting fast from A to B. I love the change of perspective so it's more sightseeing than anything else.

 

All the places I am interested to fly over are either estuaries or a mixture of water and islands. Scenic places with lots of wildlife. Means it must be amphibious to be save.

 

Slow flying and able to deal with open water conditions are other must haves. Because it's slow flying it would be great to be able to trailer it around Australia. Adds easy to setup and maintain to the list. It shouldn't cost an arm and a leg either and it definitely needs to seat two people.

 

The list goes on and on but I guess the above mentioned criteria make the decision very slim.

 

An aircraft that fits these criteria exists but it isn't certified by anybody in Australia so it has to be flow under VH-experimental. I've waited a few years now for an Ra-Aus certification but it looks as if it's not going to happen. It's the Polarismotor FIB. Going down the VH-experimental avenue for a simple ultralight amphibian sounds a bit over the top for me.

 

Am I looking at this the wrong way. Any aircraft out there for the kind of flying I am looking for?

 

Cheers,

 

Edward

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

Sounds like you have the right idea thinking about trikes - it's just the sort of flying they excel at. However the Polaris FIB isn't the only way to do this as its quite possible to fit floats to other trikes such the Airborne models. There are some videos of a couple of these used to support the Alinghi Americas Cup yacht team on Airborne Microlight Aircraft, microlights, trikes, ultralights, ultralight trikes and hang gliders.

 

I'm not quite clear why you think these have to be registered VH experimental though - they can be registered with RAAus even though they are certified aircraft.

 

As an aside, whatever form of aquatic flying you decided on it would probably be best (cheaper & easier) to learn with wheels first and that get a waterborne endorsement afterwards

 

Hope that helps & welcome to the forum

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[Deskpilot]

G'day and welcome Edward. Ever thought of a Powered Parachute? There's the personal one where you strap the motor on your back, or there's the more conventional pod which could be fitted with a floatation chamber of some sort. The personal type is small enough to throw in the back of a ute or large wagon.

 

 

[eddi]

I'm not quite clear why you think these have to be registered VH experimental though - they can be registered with RAAus even though they are certified aircraft.

Hi John,

 

I talked to Steve Bell from RA-AUS 2 days ago and he said that he never received enough information from Polarismotor to allow it being registered with RA-AUS. The only one he knows of "officially" flying in Australia is owned by Adventurer Don McIntyre. That's registered as VH-experimental.

 

Thanks for the link to Alinghi. I never took floats into consideration because they need smooth surface to operate on and don't look good when coming down in rough terrain or rough waters. The fact that the Alinghi team uses them will make me look a bit deeper into these particular floats. A racing yacht only operates in high wind areas and that always comes with choppy waters. I'll try and get in touch with the team.

 

What came to me looking at the floats is that they might work on something like the Little Wing Gyrocopter. A super stable slow flying platform with little to none start and landing speed. Simple to build and not much to fuss around.

 

By the way: Do you know any trike on floats in Australia that I might be able to look at or fly with?

 

Cheers,

 

Edward

 

 

[eddi]

Hi Doug,

 

How do they go with landing on water or in rainforest? Sounds crazy but I'm looking at the aircraft from the point of having to perform an emergency landing in rough terrain. Just watch "keeping up with the Jonses" and you'll see what sort of terrain I'm interested to fly over. If I can imagine myself surviving a landing in that terrain the aircraft is on my list :-)

 

Is there any one around in SEQ that I can have a look at?

 

Cheers,

 

Edward

 

 

[Guest Baphomet]

I suggest you take a look at the 'Ramphos' a similar machine to the Polarismotor (rubber ducky base with a trike wing). As far as I know, still sold by Freeflying at Redcliffe.

 

Baph

 

 

[JG3]

Have a look at this one. Very well proven, and very versatile.

 

Krucker Manufacturing

 

JG

 

 

[Tracktop]

Don't like to be a wet blanket but for your main criteria I suggest

 

A really good life jacket, an epirb and a tree hugger type craft - paramotor

 

Cannot see much else you are going to have even a chance of a half reasonable outcome when ditching / downing

 

into your wide selection of terrain - rough water, jungle, rough ground etc

 

once down you probably aren't going to get back in the air again from those locations.

 

At least you want to have a practical look at your choice - look past the advertising hype into reality.

 

Good luck and remember ever device is a compromise, there really is no - one fits all - yet anyway :-).

 

 

[eddi]

Hi Baph,

 

I had a look at it a few years ago when it came out. Very nice flying but the pilot didn't want to land it in what I would describe best as ripples. We had 5-7 knots steady winds which doesn't really churn up waters. I figured out that if landing in such nice conditions is too much of a risk I'm not interested. I also couldn't find any trace of this aircraft being used for flying over dangerous territory. Going back to the website the home page basically stated that the creators wanted an FIB with better flying performance. The Ramphos flies twice as fast as the FIB. I guess that says it all. Fast Flying = Fast landing = High Risk outside prepared airstrips (or on water).

 

Thanks very much for pointing to the model. It doesn't get much attention either which I find strange.

 

Cheers,

 

Edward

 

 

[eddi]

You nailed it Ray. It seems that beautiful country in Australia is most of the time so rugged that you have to look at it from a survival point of view rather from an aircraft performance view.

 

I like the paramotors and wonder why I never looked at them. I did a tandem flight once but never thought of looking at the rigid frame bigger brothers. All the replies here have helped me get a better direction.

 

The paramotor isn't much of a cost and looks like it can get me up for sightseeing with very little fuss.

 

Cheers,

 

Edward

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

Hi John,I talked to Steve Bell from RA-AUS 2 days ago and he said that he never received enough information from Polarismotor to allow it being registered with RA-AUS. The only one he knows of "officially" flying in Australia is owned by Adventurer Don McIntyre. That's registered as VH-experimental.

Thanks for the link to Alinghi. I never took floats into consideration because they need smooth surface to operate on and don't look good when coming down in rough terrain or rough waters. The fact that the Alinghi team uses them will make me look a bit deeper into these particular floats. A racing yacht only operates in high wind areas and that always comes with choppy waters. I'll try and get in touch with the team.

 

What came to me looking at the floats is that they might work on something like the Little Wing Gyrocopter. A super stable slow flying platform with little to none start and landing speed. Simple to build and not much to fuss around.

 

By the way: Do you know any trike on floats in Australia that I might be able to look at or fly with?

 

Cheers,

 

Edward

Interesting if there is a trike on VH (though I'm sure Steve is right). When the Airborne XT was certified in primary category I thought that CASA had some rule about not registering them GA (not that there is any real reason to do so).

 

It might be worth checking back with Polaris if they have certified any of their models as LSA. I believe they sell them in the USA so this is quite possible and would make getting one on RAAus register much easier. Thats how the Ramphos got approved.

 

As for the Alinghi (and other float trikes here) your best bet would be to have a chat with Russell at the Airborne factory - 02 4944 9199

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[eddi]

Hi John,

 

the entire matter with the FIB is very confusing for me. There are over 1000 units flying in the most remote and hostile environments. In the USA there are several clubs. And yet here in Australia where the idea for it was born and where it would make so much sense the aircraft is not even really known.

 

Thanks very much for pointing me towards Russel. I'll give him a call.

 

Cheers,

 

Edward

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

I wouldn't call myself an expert on this area but I do understand your confusion.

 

There isn't really a universally accepted standard for aircraft which can't, won't or don't have a certificate of airworthiness. Some countries (such as UK) produce their own standard (Eg BCAR Section S) which all designs of microlight/ultralight there have to be shown to comply with. Some countries (such as Australia & NZ) simply recognise other national design standards hence any aircraft which has been demonstrated to meet the UK Section S standard can be registered with RAAus.

 

Other countries (most noticably the USA) basically imposed no standard at all for aircraft which met certain weight & performance criteria - they aren't even technically considered as aircraft so anything goes including no pilot licence or training requirements. I suspect that the FIB meets these requirements so its entirely possible that most of the 1000 or so are being flown in the USA or other countries which have either adopted the same approach or simply just don't worry about it. Because these types of aircraft have generally never been demonstrated to meet any standard you can't register them in countries which do enforce design standards. This doesn't necessarily imply that the aircraft aren't safe, just that the manufacturer for what ever reason has never submitted them for testing. This would be the lack of information Steve Bell mentioned.

 

The advent of the LSA category a few years ago in the USA changed this situation slightly. Its still a design standard but demonstration of compliance is done by the manufacturer rather than the countries National Airworthiness Authority. So its much easier & cheaper to do this compared to Section S for example. An increasing number of countries including Australia & NZ also recognise LSA aircraft so if Polaris have or do adopt this approach you would then be able to register them with RAAus.

 

Quite where a VH experimental trike I have no idea !

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

Eddy;

 

It seems you have a lot of requirements that seem mutually exclusive, so somewhere you will have to decide on which requirements can be dropped in favour of the ones that will be most important to you.

 

One of the things I wonder about the trikes that have a rubber boat suspended underneath is how well they cope with turbulence and strong gusty wind, or even just cross-wind on landing. With trikes at least, as you go up in cruise speed of the available wings, the behaviour in these conditions improves markedly, but a boat underneath presents a fair wind capture area.

 

Check out the practicalities, not just the specs. A group of us flew from Yarrawonga to Holbrook last week and we had a 25kn head wind all the way. It turned a 75min trip into a 118min trip. Wind on the ground was about 3kn We could still have made the trip if the headwind was 40kn, with a correspondingly longer travel time. Just a quick look at a 2 seat "Aerochute" specs reveals Cruise = 32kn to 38Kn. Maximum wind = 15kn.

 

The wind is often a lot stronger at circuit height and above than on the ground.

 

It strikes me that sight-seeing over dangerous terrain is mostly going to dictate take-off and landing at some distance, so you don't want to be too slow, or you won't get there in a reasonable time.

 

The Airbourne 912 trikes have a very reliable power plant, so the risk of letting you down over tiger country is quite small, but ever present. It just depends on the level of risk you as an individual are willing to accept. I suspect that most people, from time to time, fly over terrain, be it water or tiger country where an engine failure isn't going to be pretty. They just don't do it for longer than they are comfortable with the risk profile, and that's going to vary from person to person.

 

Given you seem to be talking remote areas, also check out the extra safety equipment and survival supplies mandated for designated "Remote Areas". Not the least of the considerations is that these need to be taken into account for Maximum Takeoff Weight as well as occupants, fuel etc.. The VFR Guide, available as a PDF, from the CASA web site is a good starting point. Such areas are sometimes closer to home that you might expect. For instance much of the Victorian high country is so designated.

 

 

[eddi]

Eddy;One of the things I wonder about the trikes that have a rubber boat suspended underneath is how well they cope with turbulence and strong gusty wind, or even just cross-wind on landing. With trikes at least, as you go up in cruise speed of the available wings, the behaviour in these conditions improves markedly, but a boat underneath presents a fair wind capture area.

Hi David,

 

That's what I thought too at first. Then I started searching the internet for reviews, videos,... Turned out that the FIB seems to do a great job in nasty conditions. The manufacturer even send me videos of flights in strong, gusty conditions. From what I learned it is mainly used in areas like Norway (Fjords everywhere and nasty weather all the time), The Amazonas (fly over dense rainforest or water), Florida (Everglades and the Keys), South East Asia (tourist sightseeing flights at beach resorts) or marine biologists (cheap aerial observation of wildlife). Greenpeace has a few of them. Some guys are at the moment attempting a round the world with it over the oceans.

 

All in all I found more proof of safe flying in rough conditions for the FIB than with all the other trikes together.

 

My explanation for this: The hull is made for expeditions and rough waters. Means that it absorbs and forgives a lot more than conventional landing gear. There's nothing to break away if you think about it. Means you don't have to land nicely.

 

I've seen some footage where the hull is just slammed on the ground and slides on the side until it stops. Don McIntyre told me that you can hit submerged icebergs without nasty consequences. The manufacturer even recommends to slam it down in nasty conditions. The hull absorbs it. People I talked to told me that the flying characteristics are that of a fat pelican. It keeps you up pretty stable but doesn't do anything sporty.

 

A guy that uses it in the Amazonas told me that people have ditched it into the rainforest and walked away. The hull apparently takes the brunt of the impact and reduces the risk of getting speared by a branch.

 

That's in short what I have learned: Boring flight characteristics but highly forgiving in not so nice open sea conditions. Great energy absorption in super bad landings.

 

Guess what John wrote sums it up for me: If the manufacturer doesn't need to put effort into certifications then I'll take it off my list for flying in Australia. Wasted enough time already.

 

Thanks very much for pointing me towards the "Remote Area" requirements.

 

I have started looking at the Aerochute. They told me that there is an emergency floatation device available for flying over water. Also told me that a lot of people in the NT and Singapore use it for what I am looking for. Weather permitting I will have a test flight in 3 weeks.

 

Cheers,

 

Edward