Ok people, a bit of a relaity check from somone who knows what thay are talking about. I am a Flight Instructor with 5000 hrs dual given. I have sent about 700+ student pilots on their 'First Solo". Of the 3000 different students I have trained, only 1 or 2 of them would be able to handle an aircraft of this performance level with 31 hrs of flight training experience. A very good student would be at least 150 hrs before they can even start training in this aircraft.
Thanks for posting this. It looks like a heck of a lot of fun, but it's not exactly a C-152! .if you get low, slow, uncoordinated, and stall on a base to the final turn, just pull the chute. - maybe not!
I agree with your general aviation 31hr assessment, but not the 1 or 2 out of 3000. Apples to pears I know, but I sent quite a number solo in high performance military trainers at the 8-10 hrs mark. Outside of bashing the circuit, these students were later flying solo IFR/Aerobatics/Low level/ Formation [not all at the same time!] at much less than 150hrs total. Just sayin'
@@spdaltidyou are correct. His numbers don’t add up at all. I was an instructor for 1500 hours. Majority of my students would solo in less than 20 hours. And most could handle an aircraft like this rather quickly.
It may sound expensive but it’s not . I had a glider costing almost as much.It’s absolutely a beast for the money,speed, range , electronics, safety parachute and the way it looks 😮I need one asap😮
Yes, learning to fly gets expensive as is renting or buying an aircraft after you get your license. I took lessons many years ago in a piper tomahawk and ran out of funds to continue after 12 hours. The title says "YOU CAN FLY THIS from just 31 hours training from ZERO" and I'm not sure what that means. FAA regulations require a minimum of 40 hours, some people are ready to solo before that and others need more time. But I'm pretty sure you can't solo and get the license at 31 hrs not even if you're Chuck Yeager! There could be people that are so talented at it that they COULD solo at 20 hours but regulations are regulations.
@@minerran i am talking about the cost of this plane. Not talking about the cost of learning to fly. I fly from 16th i am 42 . I had different gliders and older planes but this one as a new plane with the electronics and all performance its a bargain
@@MADTASS I just did the math, 142 miles / 2.9 gallons = 49 MPH. That puts it up in Toyota Prius territory. Of course, it has half the passenger and cargo capacity but will get you there 2 to 3 faster.
Lots of people in here are getting very het up about the fact someone fresh out of training for their NPPL could fly this! I guarantee you it’s a lot safer than a new PPL holder going out and buying a Cirrus as their first aircraft! They are also forgetting the instructor element - no instructor is going to sign someone off as competent to fly this aircraft unless they demonstrate that they are indeed just that! It could take 5 hours, it could take 10. The level of licence you hold is absolutely irrelevant! It comes down to an individuals skill and capacity to learn. That aside - it was an excellent video Terry 👏
That's a lovely sentiment but a bit like saying a 250c motorbike is less dangerous than a 750cc one, or a modern one easier to handle than a vintage one . Whilst there might be some truth in that, if you come off going around a bend and hit a tree, because you didn't factor in Autumn, trees and the possibility of slippery fallen leaves, it won't matter much which bike you are on. And it will have happened because (perhaps while being too involved in just riding that bike) your intuitions ('what if', 'eventualities', the essence of good/safe piloting) were not good enough. Experience matters here. And of course skill and capacity to learn are important. But, as that old wisdom about aviating says: unlike driving a car or sailing a boat, flying is very unforgiving of mistakes. So you can get killed before you get to learn what not to do. I am a (surviving) glider pilot, in case credentials are relevant. I actually completed by Silver badge with about 15hrs from starting flying. But I never, ever deluded myself that this made me a pilot fit to fly in conditions other than those I was familiar with. You need relevant instruction and experience before you allow yourself to believe that.
Nice one Terry. Looks like you had fun. It truly is an amazing aircraft. We are blessed to have all these amazing machines now in the microlight category. These can easily meet 90% of UK pilot missions and hopefully will inspire more people to take up aviation.
I love Little Snoring. I did a precautionary landing there once. Great place to practice x-winds. Some students may be ready in the time stated others may take longer. The faster speeds will be taught in the Nav groundschool. Times will be taught in proportion to the TAS and ground speed, so instead of trundling along at 98 kts, +or- the wind, your doing 160kts. So, stating that students will or will not be ready in the quoted times is like asking how long is a piece of string. And, if the student fails to demonstrate the required competence in any particular skill during the test, then they would have to be trained up to the required standard in order to pass the test. It's not a case of being ready in a certain amount of time, it's a case of having the competence to pass the test. So, it's horses for courses either they will complete their training in those times, or they won't.
How amazing is that aircraft? What an incredible and approachable light plane. A recreational craft that doesn't sell you short on speed and distance. Just perfect in every way.
A good ziplock bag with a large cup of kitty litter can't spill the way a bottle can. But I think you can still install a pilot relief tube, can't you?
While flying Shark aircraft siblings Zara and Matt Rutherford each separately broke the Guinness Book of World Records as the youngest teenage pilots to circumnavigate the globe. Zara was only 19 and Matt was only 17 when they accomplished this amazing feat!!
Age is not the question, they both had a lot more of 30 hours and are professional pilots. I became a helicopter commercial pilot and flight instructor at age 19 as well.
@Ozbird-72 Obviously, the Rutherfords had loads of experience just being around aircraft their whole lives. I just think the Shark is a very cool and capable aircraft design, and that's why they chose it for the record.
Those records are meaningless nowadays. That just means their parents have lots of money for them to blew getting records. Airplanes are more reliable and navigation , with GPS are no longer an issue. None of this flying around the Pacific wondering where Howland Island is, to my right or left or did I passed it. You know your position within 10 ft . In other places, they have young guys doing much more dangerous things , like being soldiers in wars and running drugs. Under age kids are preferred because the law exempt them from serious charges. It is actually easier for a teenager to do records, for ocean crossings, Lax to Hawaii is the longest , for a small plane it be 12 hours + and older pilots cannot make that without a washroom in the plane. For that, you need something like a King Air or a PC12.
I want to say I absolutely love you're videos. You have been the soul reason that I got the motivation and courage to dive back into trying to become a pilot full time. I struggled with F.U.D. for the past year after flying my first few hours and realizing I want to change careers and become a commercial pilot. I have had so much motivation and positivity about making it happen since I watch one of your videos a few months ago. Again here I am watching another video and you're doing nothing but showing me that it's possible. Thank you so much! I'm going to owe you so much the day I become a commercial pilot!
Anyone with the mindset that all they need to do to fly this thing is qualify with minimum hours/training is living in dreamland.. but don't worry, you won't be living there for long.
If a prospective pilot is flying 2 hours a week, he will never get there. If he's flying 25 hours a week, he could probably do a complete certificate in 2 weeks.
@@DumbledoreMcCracken And that's the mistake many dead pilots have made in the past. It's not simply about certification. it's about experience.. this plane is fast... fast enough to get people into trouble much quicker.. It's complex, so when things are going pear-shaped it's more complicated to find a way to deal with the problems.. inexperience will bite.
Watch "pilot debrief" with Hoover and get to see whats happens when hubris meets General Aviation. Plus, not all people will train at the same rate - guaranteeing something in 31 hours is simply impossible. Videos like this are going to get real people killed.
@@jamesgraham6122 even though I’m not a pilot, I watch a lot of these videos and can see exactly where you’re coming from. Watched enough RU-vid videos on passed pilots, particularly those who bought machines that were too advanced for them, I learned about the phrase “being behind the plane” and what it means. Even I can safely fly a Cessna 172 and land it literally in any situation (on Microsoft Flight Simulator!).
N36LV builder here. With respect, I completely disagree. This is not a Lancair 4 with a very unforgiving wing below 70kts. 160kts true means 130kts indicated around 10,000ft. With that excellent visibility and 40mph stall speed this looks like a slightly quicker version of the original Diamond Katana. One of the most memorably easiest airplanes to fly, especially in the landing phase. I applaud their efforts at fuel efficiency and cockpit design. Probably a big baby to fly….I want one!
Flown around the world safely once by a 19 year old girl and then by her brother who was 17. It's really easy to fly but things happen quickly at 150 knots. Thank you great comment.
Only that after decades of flying aging Pipers and Cessnas, it was the most refreshing new design (at the time) which sipped fuel, had a reasonable cruise speed and was without peer the easiest plane to fly near the runway environment and into ground effect (my Velocity notwithstanding).
Another good video Terry thank you. I think you may stay with your Sport cruiser and I will stay with my Skyranger. I’m sure the Shark is faultless but cost will take it away from the majority of microlight pilots. 👍
I started in an "Ultralight", here in the USA. 254 pounds in weight empty/dry, max 54 knots. NO license at all needed. Flew my Maxair drifter over 90 hours. I had 4 hours of dual instruction in a Cessna 150 when I soloed my ultralight. I even looped it. The loop happened at a fly-in where we were mock dog fighting. I couldn't shake this trike turning so I decided to use my superior speed (i might have replaced the stock 28 hp engine with a 60 hp) get out in front of him and then pull hard around to get "guns" on him. I actually climbed and turned, looking over my shoulder. It was more of a cork screw than a loop but I did get my shot on him, coming over the top upside down. 3 engine outs, an accidental loop and I took it down for IRAN. It was close to coming apart in key areas! The "Micro Light" is way more airplane. I would have died trying to learn to fly in a Shark. I am 69 now, so getting in that hot rod would test my limits...
It sounds like you fly your airplane "beyond it's capabilities" too see if you can make it do what you want it to do not what it's supose to do and that makes you a very stupid pilot.
@@ShortField I might of skipped over your mentioning any fees for flight time cost for being checked out or if there is any checkout to fly it away for certificated pilots.
Wow! What a privilege to be asked to review it 😮 Well done Terry, I’m glad you enjoyed it, and produced an excellent review of a beautiful small plane 👌👍👏👏
I have no idea why RU-vid recommended me to this video, I’m not a pilot and don’t watch aviation channels but that might change now! Beautiful aircraft and great review, I just have to decide what colour I’d have mine in now 😂
@@skyboy1956 Even the BBC call planes "aircrafts" now, in their news articles. I truly despair for this country. Edit: I think this country is full of sheeps who don't know how to spell
"It looks like a shark! It moves like a shark, It must be an Air Shark." 👍 ~I love the introduction of the emergency fuselage Parachute system(It is a marketing advantage due to sales when it is noted to the attention of all potential candidates), and the compacted construction of the aircraft. The 55 knot takeoff release is a plus, and? The Rotax adds to the spice.~ "Good Job on the completion of this aircraft; Congratulations on an item that is wanted by many, it is needed. I like the small size of the item, it is compatible Due to storage and low maintenance review once evaluated regularly."
Great review terry! Sounds like you had a blast! Very informative review the plane. Ive seen several on this plane. But none, quite as thorough as yours. 👍🏽
wonderful review, thank. it would be great to have some acrobatic capability but, for the intended audience/customer, it seems awesome. would love to get a ride in her.
Hi Terry, I've only just had a chance to see this video, what a fab little aircraft. Sadly, now that HMG has chopped my winter fuel payment I don't think I'll be ordering one any time soon🙄 Oh well, back to MSFS😉 Stay safe🙃🙂
In USA we will have to wait until the MOSAIC rule come into effect. But the completion is big and will come down to who can offer the most for the money.
Not as slippery as this Shark, but was sighned off on a ARROW & SARATOGA as a student pilot. Got my license at 41.5 hours. Not typical but some can handle this craft under 100hrs. Pitch & power & never forget, A AIRCRAFT CAN STALL AT ANY SPEED & ANY ATTITUDE!
I’m a former hang glider and want something I can fly from a pasture in the evening for 30-40 minutes in my neighborhood. I don’t have to worry about restricted air or airports. I’m thinking about a powered ultralight. I hope I can find instruction and sales near central Arkansas.
All the instructors dropping in their qualifications suggesting a 100hp aircraft is high perfomance.. low stall speed and a same HP as a Cessna 152 Suggest it's actually safer than a c152
Seems some 'instructors' on here want to puff up their self importance. I had one instructor many years ago, that made it really hard for students just to bump up his $$$$. Most of his students eventually moved to other instructors or quit. Guess what? All the students who certified with other instructors are still alive.
@@tonylam9548 but this has a lower stall speed than a 152. Where is there any evidence that's it's any harder than that to fly .. yes it goes faster but it lands slower which is where most accidents happen in the pattern ..
@@PILOTCIRRUSASIA I don't know, it might be easier, the thing is, this is a much faster and looks like an agile plane. Inexperienced people might have issues in managing speed or they might get carried away and do stuff they shouldn't and maybe they wouldn't try at all in a slow moving truck like chesna. This is obviously a better plane, and in certain respects, safer - I bet it's a better glider than a C152/172 for one. So I don't know... noone is gonna complain for the minimal requirements or the price, if instructors are complaining, maybe they should train properly for this type of aircraft. They too might complain cause they wanna justify more hours of training, who knows. I think they should certify this plane for spins and abnormal departures, cause it's a plane where you wanna do things, it's best if the plane can actually do them and the airframe can cope. Then again, people will need to be trained on those as well. Is this in an UL license? It should be, I don't know. It's a far better plane, progress is progress, better materials, aerodynamics, better engine, cheaper, it's a plane, it carries risks, people will need to do their own homework as well, not totally based on instructors. I'm not a "safety" person really. At least not the UK kind of "safety". If you need a license to climb stairs or go over a gap, maybe you shouldn't be flying planes at all. Let others do it. The UK got the money for the expensive type training and old expensive "elevator" (LOL) type planes, maybe this isn't for the UK market.
In Australia this would have VH Reg. and you'd need a PPL... A Rec Aviation license wouldn't be sufficient due to the speed and the retractable gears....
I really don't like our licensing system over here, having met a few NPPL and LAPL license holders here in the UK (a few not all obviously), their lack of knowledge and proficiency scares me! Modern Microlights are much faster and can be way more complicated than your basic Cessna 152 but you need LESS training?! I'm glad the 6 hour conversion for the Shark is mandatory. The medical requirements are a joke, how many elderly drivers really shouldn't be on the road let alone in the sky, self certification is dangerous.
@@ShortField I'll bet!! Had ~10 hours fuel in my Commanche across 6 tanks and my longest single hop was 8 hours. That was certainly enough for personal endurance in anyone's book 🙂
Iam lucky enough to have had a flight in G-MAKO. Its a very impressive aircraft, ultra fast and has very nice easy handling although I think its too complicated an aircraft to fly with only thirty odd hours training from scratch. I really enjoyed flying it but you do lose some of the STOL characteristics of other more affordable microlights and the amount of pitch up you need to slow the thing down is incredible. It is also pretty awkward to get in and out of even for someone young and flexible like me. Its a great plane but you can buy a lot of GA aircraft performance for less than a third of the price.
No ones going to be in this in 31 hours, however it's a great selling point. I don't know what you think but to me this is not really a practical aircraft for touring as although there's that massive range you'd be hard pressed to fly anywhere in Europe for 10 hours VFR.
@@ShortField This is the bottom line issue... I find it incredibly strange that there are RVs etc that are Night and IFR approved to fly under permit from the LAA .. but this £250,000 brand new airplane isn't.
5:18 ... can't explain, but it's the first time that I watch an aircraft onboard footage and feel claustrophobic. Not even inside real aircraft I ever felt this way
This looks like an RC model I used to fly from Multiplex! And it was called the Shark, but I had no idea it was based on a full size. One difference, it was a pusher prop.
I'd say you're going to need at least 60-80 hours of training to be able to handle the performance of that aircraft. Most pilots with a Sport Pilot's license will likely need closer to 100 hours. That's a complex high performance aircraft, which could get people in serious trouble if they get behind the aircraft. You'd need to be thinking at 160 knots, not 100 knots, like most light training aircraft, so you'd need to be on your game to handle that thing with less than 80 hours in your log book. Some PPL license holders have both an HP and complex endorsement at less than 100 hours, but that's more the exception than the rule. If you were training pretty constantly, it could be done, but you'd need to be flying at least a few times a week to get it done in low hours.
Since this is a low requirement, cheap to buy and maintain plane, and very fuel economical, people will fly those hours. If you add complex license fees, extra expensive training hours, add expenses here and there, no-one will. Sure all those people in the system, all those gears will be greased, but noone will fly those hours, the system can get costs super high if they want to. That's what you're asking? In the name of "safety"? Either you are a gear in the system, an instructor or something, and you want more monies, or you're one of those exclusivity rich, you got the monies for it, you don't want anyone else in on it. So yeah, let go of those safety fairytales. People have launched themselves on rockets, flown with their sofa tied to balloons, gimme a break with your safety BS richman.
Interesting aircraft, reminds me a bit of the Embraer Tucano trainer and it appears they've been used for circumnavigations already which is quite impressive.
That's the part that worries me the most about this, not how few hours you need to be able to fly it. I suspect that a number of people who self declare because they "don't need a medical" would probably fail a medical. And they know it. I work in the classic car business and some of the MOT exempt cars I've seen out in the wild would be flagged as dangerous if they ever went near an MOT bay.
Terry, do you realise that you've accidentally given birth to Top Gear for the skies?! Great aircraft! I just wish microlight category planes could be IFR certified. Does it have the relevant Nav radios?
I never once said they were in effect, I said once MOSAIC is here they will be available to sport pilots. Please let me know if you heard different and tell me where in the video I said that and I'll change it.
Very cool, about time we stopped letting gov’t regulate the air with long flight hour requirements. Should be like a drivers test, make it on the first try and you are good to fly any vehicle!!!
Nice airplane! Well done. But this would be a killer for the average zero time trainee. This clip is hopefully not aiming for the below average enthusiast... living in fantasy land. If you really expect to fly this almost "high performance" airplane after 31 hours... (from pedestrian to pilot) you need to train with the airforce. In other words: You have to be qualified and selected ! Regards from the 747 cockpit ✈ (fmr P-51 , T-6, PC-7 jockey and instructor on other airplanes, 747, 737). But I have to admit: The clickbait worked pretty well.. 😉 And, more importantly: It's a very cool airplane ! Good luck with it. .
i think it can be done, with a good intensive training program. it's not for the average student flying 2 or 3 times a week. but a structured program flying the way military trains, 31 hours is very reasonable
OK after reading the comments this is absurd. Anyone with the money for this airplane is going to be able to afford the training required to fly it safely. And if they are the type of person who won't they will kill themselves in something else or this. It's not the airplane it's the pilot.
Truly a lovely looking aircraft. Seems economical to run as well, or would be if avgas was cheaper. I wonder how these will depreciate over time? I know older planes like Cherokees can be had for a fraction of the cost. However, I think flying is always going to be expensive, and a pipe dream for most
