Page 11 of 32 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 320
  1. #101
    Wannabe Pilot Trident's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Lincolnshire
    Posts
    26
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Morton View Post
    P&M almost certainly obtained the vast majority of parts needed to assemble an aircraft from 3rd party sources, looking from a flexwing ownership we already have a very competent sail maker in the guys who were left behind at Rochdale, we have LAS who can supply every nut and bolt, CFS aero for rotax and flylight for a large range of spares also.
    What we need is to find the aluminium supplier who made the tubes etc for P&M and hopefully the governing bodies will get behind the sailmakers, ali suppliers and anyone else who can assist in keeping the fleet flying.
    Looking through simplistic eyes this shouldn't be a difficult task for the CAA as these suppliers are already meeting the standards required to supply.
    Yes that's great knowing of companies who can almost certainly supply much of the standard hardware, but how many of the P&M Parts Manuals give the exact details of each component? For my Quantum, much of the hardware is given a P&M in-house number which doesn't translate to an AGS number or a material spec or strength or finish etc.
    I understand the imperial tubing used on many (older?) P&M machines has minimum order value of possibly thousands of pounds. The BMAA are apparently pro-actively working to collect as much "technical information" as possible from various sources. There have also been several parties who have shown a definite interest in the business, so hopefully there will be a successful outcome tomorrow.
    Comfortably Numb......


  2. #102
    Captain Randombloke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,077
    Thanks
    351
    Thanked 177 Times in 138 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by MadamBreakneck View Post
    Orphaned types? You could ask Shadow owners for instance. They've been orphaned for ages (kits dealt with by LAA, factory built dealt with by BMAA).
    There are 165 Shadows left on the register. 91 have been de-registered.

    A fair few of those still on the register, are, I suspect, no longer flying.

    Dave Cook is scathing about the LAA in his book. Suggest it gets read for a glimpse of the future.

    I have only seen two Shadows in the last three years, make of it what you will.

    Quote Originally Posted by MadamBreakneck View Post
    We have just legitimately put Top Flight sails on our Thruster as a 'Standard Major Modification' under MAAN 2749. So yes, I would imagine so.
    When Aerial Arts ceased trading, the patterns for the (hang glider) sails went to Avian, who started getting them made, by the same people who made them for Aerial Arts, some of you might remember the name Clive Betts.

    There were no problems with this, there was no huge amounts of paperwork, or gold plating.

    The reason you had to fill out a major mod for your Thruster sails is because it's not financially viable for them to be made under the current overbearing weight of regulation by an approved supplier.

    Most of us know where we can get a plain Quantum sail for about £1,000 new, or £1,300 if we want a trailing edge Technora strip. But we can't fit it to a two seater without an expensive piece of paper.

    Quote Originally Posted by MadamBreakneck View Post
    Failing that, there's the SSDR route... and Rotax 912 engines are said to retain their value well. ( sorry)

    Let's hope someone suitable gets the rights.
    It's not a question of buying the rights, it's a question of the burden of regulation and thus the cost of exercising those rights.

    So two points to make -

    If it's fine as SSDR, then what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

    Most 912 P&M aircraft would be marginal for SSDR. If you're saying that an aircraft with an empty weight of about 210kg (Quantum Supersport 912) can be an SSDR without raised eyebrows then I'd challenge that.

    A flexwing microlight is really just a posh or expensive hang glider with a trike underneath.

    Given that there are successful, long term hang gliding manufacturers without safety problems or "the world's toughest regulation" in other parts of the world then you'd look to see how they work. Moyes, Icaro 2000, Wills Wing.

    Or look at Air Création.

    Look at the regimes they operate under.

    Most two seater paratrikes are certified to DGAC. Yes, it's declarative. Like the USHGMA standard for HG. The final dossier is filed as a legal document.

    The power of a declarative document in the event of a disaster shouldn't far off a certification standard, but with a difference - in the event of Govt. body certification, the manufacturer says the aircraft was in compliance with the standard, if the standard had holes in it, it's not the manufacturer's fault. In the event of a declarative, if the manufacturer didn't comply with the standard they chose or set for themselves, or it was inappropriate, they'd be to blame every time.

    Bottom line is, there isn't enough money in the system to support viable spares and all the bureaucracy that goes with it.

    It seems like the BMAA policy is to wiggle within the current framework a little, claiming that the rules are set by someone else.

    The answer maybe is that another association looks at this with fresh eyes and proposes something outside the current framework. Something along the lines of the EN certification standard for paragliders or the BHPA CoA for hang gliders.

    Until is it profitable to make parts for or entire flexwing two seater microlights, they will not get made.
    Steve U.
    PG, HG & microlights
    "Weekend bimbler, day to day car driver & genuinely undeserving Southern oik who has never done anything of any worth"


  3. #103
    Co-Pilot Martin Watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    510
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 71 Times in 60 Posts
    https://afors.com/aircraftView/42556
    There's at least one Shadow that's had time, effort and money spent on it.

    But I do agree - if something isn't profitable then it isn't going to happen - and only the BMAA (currently) can lobby for rule changes on our behalf. Maybe the p&m debacle should provoke a proper campaign to look after orphan types. As I said before, it's an issue that exists in LAA land and CofA land too - we should look at what happens elsewhere.

    Now that microlighting is more than 30 years old there are going to be more and more orphan types around. And fewer sales of expensive new 912 engined beasts. The culture of the sport (and it's representative body) needs to change to reflect that.
    Martin
    BMAA 5370
    Fixed wing instruction, examinations and revalidations in Norfolk.


  4. #104
    Captain Roger Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Dordogne, France
    Posts
    1,333
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 149 Times in 110 Posts
    Thank you Steve, for an intelligent, well reasoned appraisal of the situation. Much as a white knight appearing from over the horizon, picking up P&M and taking up from where it left off, would be a good thing (probably the best thing in the short term for P&M aircraft owners) in many ways it would possibly be the very worst thing to happen.

    The reason is that then those with vested interests or those who in reality care little for the long term future of ultralight and light aircraft manufacturing in the UK would be able to say that no changes are needed. In such an event, IMO the white knight would need to demand a full review of the rules and regulations that apply in the UK and if they are more rigorous than those that apply in similar, competitive markets, demand to know why they should not be changed and brought into line. It's not good enough to keep saying that we've always done it this way.

    I don't care what anyone says, change has got to come. If not movement will be in a backwards direction, not forwards.


  5. #105
    Airfield Ops Keith Nelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Tweedmouth
    Posts
    41
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
    It would seem that there was already a NEW OWNER called Adeniyi Ibraheem Makanjuola who has acquired all the P&M ASSETS and created 3 new companies that were registered with Companies House on the 23rd May 2019?

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/12013455?fbclid=IwAR1Lh38GBiOcNywpKM88rzAEnOTTOWFTJ0Egg03m4-I52tEVEIyhC6AYiQg

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/c...2mTXzeMAK7egnQ

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/c...X2lEIQGK38d6GI
    Keith Nelson
    ( Actively looking for a microlight to buy ).

    I stayed up all night to see where the sun went, and then it dawned on me.


  6. #106
    Test Pilot Paul Dewhurst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,049
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 352 Times in 201 Posts
    I think we have seen more progressiveness in microlighting in the UK over the last decade than any other country. SSDR pretty much doesn’t exist in any other EU country, then there was a step further with sub 70 - far less rules than in France for that.

    we have seen hiring allowed, expansion of syndicates, homebuilt training rules relaxed and lots of relaxation in other areas.

    I was in a meeting with CAA / BMAA/ LAA yesterday for 600kg - which looks like we will get - without excluding trikes like France and without restricting weight to 500kg like France.

    There is movement in mindset for production approval too - CAA even exploring the idea deregulating it entirely.

    part of the 600kg process is harmonising with the German and Czech design codes too.

    they acknowledged the current unsatisfactory position of legally having their hands tied on orphan classification , and the need for change on that.

    we have a much more progressive CAA now than we would ever have dreamed of 15years ago. But change takes time and effort - and considerable expense for the regulator. The CAA team that travelled up for the meeting was 7, and many more departments are involved and will be needed to change the regulation - not to mention DFT, and parliamentary time.

    so none of this is trivial to do. It needs effort and work on all sides. BMAA and LAA do more than you might think.


  7. #107
    Captain Gentreau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    2,595
    Blog Entries
    4
    Thanks
    331
    Thanked 198 Times in 153 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Nelson View Post
    It would seem that there was already a NEW OWNER called Adeniyi Ibraheem Makanjuola who has acquired all the P&M ASSETS and created 3 new companies that were registered with Companies House on the 23rd May 2019?
    Seems he has some history in aviation, having run a large offshore helicopter operation in Nigeria (Caverton Helicopters)
    However, a Google search turns up some interesting stories ....
    The three most useless things in aviation:
    • The air above you.
    • The runway behind you.
    • The fuel in the bowser.


    Rule #1: Always tie your aircraft to the largest heaviest object available. The planet Earth meets these requirements and is readily available in all locations.
    Rule #2: The great thing about twin engined aircraft is, if one engine fails, the other engine always has just enough power to get you to the scene of the crash.

    Semper specto in clara parte vitae.

    .


  8. #108
    Co-Pilot Arielarts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    665
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 98 Times in 88 Posts
    I would have thought the failing of the biggest microlight manufacturer in the UK, and the sheer number of aircraft left in limbo, might have prompted the BMAA and the CAA to re-think our current regulatory strategy. Now the company has been bought, they're off the hook.


  9. #109
    Co-Pilot Antoni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Derbyshire
    Posts
    279
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 20 Times in 19 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Mole View Post
    ....I don't care what anyone says, ...
    SSDR, good.

    Some pillock persuading an aviation-clueless next-door neighbour to fly in an under-maintained, unwisely modified, and never recently so highly-loaded aircraft, bad.

    Nobody ever makes that point. It's a weak point, but it's my point.
    "The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place" - G.B.S.


  10. #110
    Captain Gentreau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    2,595
    Blog Entries
    4
    Thanks
    331
    Thanked 198 Times in 153 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Dewhurst View Post
    ........part of the 600kg process is harmonising with the German and Czech design codes too.
    That is definitely a step forwards but maybe should include other countries.....
    The three most useless things in aviation:
    • The air above you.
    • The runway behind you.
    • The fuel in the bowser.


    Rule #1: Always tie your aircraft to the largest heaviest object available. The planet Earth meets these requirements and is readily available in all locations.
    Rule #2: The great thing about twin engined aircraft is, if one engine fails, the other engine always has just enough power to get you to the scene of the crash.

    Semper specto in clara parte vitae.

    .


Similar Threads

  1. Aviation converts
    By LeeMc in forum Microlight Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 15-09-15, 09:46 AM
  2. Aviation Store
    By turkeysneck in forum Training
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 28-05-13, 14:57 PM
  3. Pioneers of Aviation
    By paramotorpilot in forum Off Topic Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 29-11-11, 16:38 PM
  4. Aviation Dictionary
    By RichardP in forum Off Topic Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 22-09-11, 10:54 AM
  5. KERNAN AVIATION
    By WORLDWIDE FLYER in forum Microlight Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-02-09, 01:59 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •