Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gcc-milo.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!lll-crg!seismo!harvard!gcc-milo!brad
From: brad@gcc-milo.ARPA (Brad Parker)
Newsgroups: net.aviation
Subject: Re: ultra-lights
Message-ID: <394@gcc-milo.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 27-Nov-85 11:34:02 EST
Article-I.D.: gcc-milo.394
Posted: Wed Nov 27 11:34:02 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 29-Nov-85 21:46:44 EST
References: <1162@princeton.UUCP> <825@osu-eddie.UUCP> <1026@vax2.fluke.UUCP>
Reply-To: brad@gcc-milo.UUCP (Brad Parker)
Distribution: net
Organization: General Computer Company, Cambridge Ma
Lines: 24
Keywords: ultralight

In article <1026@vax2.fluke.UUCP> bryan@fluke.UUCP (Bryan Sparrowhawk) writes:
>I have witnessed a beginner that I was coaching, do a 50 ft AGL
>departure 'stall' in the Kasperwing ultralight.  This particular
>machine (a highly reflexed flying wing design) turned what would have
>been a death dive with an ordinary machine .. into a forward mush ...
>no abrupt roll, no altitude loss ... nothing.  Dual instruction is the
>only way to go, especially in less forgiving three-axis craft ...
>including Cessnas, 707s etc.

If a Cessna is "less forgiving", you must be able to fly these things blind
folded. Most cessnas (150-172's) will take off and land with no hands given
correct trim. Personally, I wouldn't fly anything which had an uncertified
airframe. The damn thing could fold up when you least expect it. (those
4 g barrel rolls can play hell on the aluminum struts ;-)

Whether or not to fly ultralights seems to be based more on "religion" than
on fact. I'll fly one when it can accend at more than 1000 fpm.

-- 

J Bradford Parker
seismo!harvard!gcc-bill!brad

"Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon." - Alan Perlis