I have a lot of respect for the person who says, "clear prop", even when they can see that the prop area is clear. It gives me confidence whenever I see a pilot do this. Too many pilots don't have respect for prop safety. I've been walking right behind a182, unknown that someone was in it, until the pilot fired up the engine, and I got a face full of gravel and some added tinnitus to my ears
Thank you for the ultralight area video (especially the one rotorcraft). This is completely missing from other video folks and the EAA for this 2022 Airventure. sad
That Air Cam is Phil Lockwood's plane. He is an expert on the Klaus Hill Hummer, they used to produce them back in the day, and that plane evolved into the Maxair Drifter.
Really nice to be able to get a tour of the OSH ultralight area! Unfortunately I couldn't make it to Airventure this year. So, many thanks for sharing. Best regards from Brasilia, Brazil.
Nice Video. My dad had a Skywalker the PH1-Z7 till 8 years ago. It was made in Germany. From 50 till his 65 y he liked to fly every weekend with my mum and his friends till he got ill and the Maasvlakte next to Rotterdam hobby airplane had to close Nice memories ❤
Thank you for the info. The legal eagle ceo was interesting. Remember seeing lotsa kolbs and hummers back in the day. Also a cuyuna powered avid flyer prototype in 1984.
Les Homan and Leonard have worked hard to get that Briggs and Stratton Vtwin working. Its very nice, A clean and easy setup. They will be releasing plans for it soon they said. I was 2 rows in front of you to the right Jon, I wish I had seen you there.
I noticed there wasn’t the same amount of videos coming out of Air Venture in the UL area as years past also not much about the STOL Competition either.
Nice to see the maxair hummer. Good little ultralight. Very light. But made for calm weather as it was 2 axis. No ailerons or spoilers. Still excellent design!
been building ultralights since 1977. we started out foot launching. everyone having fun and flying on the cheap.. then everyone wanted wheels,,then a hard seat,no harness, 2 cyl engines,,,reduction drives.on and on till its a airplane. i dont see much interest shown,,,it all started with Moody being givin a field on the road coming into the show area. GA owners always look down on ultralights and owners. remember the guys that started it all,,Klaus Hill ,John Moody, Chuck S. Bill Adaska and others
Dude, not every ga or professional pilot looks down on ultralights. I am a corporate pilot, own a J3 kitten (among a few other eab acft). A hangar neighbor is a Latam captain who owns a super cute Legal Eagle (among other acft that include a Pitts S1S, a Citabria and a Mooney, among others). Often times it's just that many ga or pro pilots have never had the oportunity to try out ultralights. And sometimes it's because they live in places that have crummy weather. Anyway, ultralights are incredibly fun and affordable. It's a shame that some ga or pro pilots look down on them. Best regards from Brasilia, Brazil.
By ultralight you mean part 103? The single beam construction is like what I've proposed but using a low wing would presumably simplify the design a lot further. And engine right on top. Wheels could be on a low wing as well. Engine could be forward, has some pros and cons. Behind is probably cleaner. Also allows for a nice windshield or even full cockpit canopy. A good design for 103 could be a proper fully capable aircraft and would get more visitors.
I could be wrong, but that Hummel V-twin looks a lot like one of those 670cc Harbor Freight engines with a reduction drive on it. There are a couple of companies that offer PSRUs for those engines for fan boats and a few have made their way on to ultralights. They seem to work ok, even if they are a bit heavy. That being said, the cost of the PSRU and the parts to soup up the engine are less than half the price that Hummel has posted on their website. If you have the wherewithal to build an ultralight from plans you have what it takes to modify that engine. Now, if Hummel used a Honda GX690 as the core then it might be worth that price. (EDIT) I just saw another video where they interviewed Matt from Hummel. He said it was 670cc, so it is a Harbor Freight engine. That doesn't mean it's unreliable. With all of the performance parts that have to go on it, it's practically a different engine by the time you get done. It just means that the price is a bit steep for what it is.
Thanks a lot for part 45. I am still concerned about covering the under side of the wing. I still have not come up with a way of going around the strut attachments yet. So I'm waiting to see how you do it. I must say that I do not like the idea of looking through a radiator at what is in front of you. Has Polini come up with a modification to lower the radiator to give you a better view.
Arthur - go to www.patreon.com/homebuilthelp and there will be a public picture of the installed radiator on the Polini 202 from the pilot's perspective. It is just not an issue IMO
We know the prop is backwards, that's the first time it was assembled ever, we were working in the dark late at night on Sunday, I just didn't care enough to fix it because we aren't flying it yet,also no fuel lines or rigging cables to brace the engine, or tail brace, or fuel tank. If you read the sign it's a work in progress, Thanks
Thank you for your time in displaying this nice aircraft! Many enjoyed seeing it in person and in video. I believe we are not too far apart - so when you are ready to share more at your location, let me know (HomebuiltHELP.com ) and I will come to you for more filming and an interview. Our viewers here would really enjoy. Jon
I think basic med and light sport kind of brought alot of people into that space from the ultralight space, less limits on where you can fly and weight/speed, but also, anybody with a pulse can have a basic med.
I had heard a rumor that The Head Cheeses at EAA are considering moving the Ultralight area farther south, away from where they are now. Has any other heard this and/or CONFIRM it is only a nasty rumor?
I don't think it can get farther south without taking up parking spaces in the south 40. It'd also impede the paved runway so I can't see this happening. 5 months since your comment and I haven't heard anything around the usual EAA forums, groups or in the podcast so it probably was just a rumor.
@Justin Burton I hope so. Many people sometimes HATE changes, including me. I sometimes (read often) think the Ultralights and Balloons are the redheaded stepchild of EAA
Nobody’s there because they are all at home awaiting the next installment of the HBH Affordaplane! Back to building! (To borrow a phrase and stealing shamelessly.)
We know the prop is backwards, that's the first time it was assembled ever, we were working in the dark late at night on Sunday, I just didn't care enough to fix it because we aren't flying it yet, Thanks :)
We know the prop is backwards, that's the first time it was assembled ever, we were working in the dark late at night on Sunday, I just didn't care enough to fix it because we aren't flying it yet, Thanks
I wonder why such a decline in ultralight aviation? Gas Prices? Inflation? Aircraft Trends? Safety Concerns? Bad Weather? Too Confusing instructions on how to fly in?
People are into 'easy', its easier to buy an assembled plane than to buy a kit, its easier to buy a kit that to buy raw materials. The Legal Eagle is just plans, hand drawn plans at that. It requires the most techniques - 4130 welding, aluminum tube bending(tail), wood wing ribs and wood spar. BUT its so light you can put 90lbs of engine on it !!
@@orbitalair2103 100% I don't want to assemble an airplane, I just want to fly. But 103 time not counting towards atp mins makes me not want one, I wish it did count. Like I don't understand why you can't fly a 103 plane with a private and medical and that time doesn't count, but powered or unpowered glider time does count... doesn't make much sense to me.
