If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
FAR rules on "ground-effect" vehicles?
Does anyone here know if / what-section-of FAR rules govern the operation of
"ground effect" vehicles? Specifically, how high can a machine fly AGL before its technically classified as an aircraft and not a hovercraft, hydroplane-boat, Ecronoplan, etc.? Is there a loophole for a powered airplane that can't climb to more than 5' AGL? Second question: If a machine has tricycle gear with nosewheel steering, wings and 3-axis control, and is solely propelled by thrust from an engine/propeller, BUT CANNOT FLY, how is it classified? Trike motorcycle? NOTE: Both of these questions relate to a proposed machine that will weigh more than 254lbs dry, i.e. not Part 103 legal. Serious responses please. I'm looking to find and verify a specific FAR rule, as the correct answer to this question is critical for legal, operational, and insurance purposes. Thanks, Harry Frey Wright Brothers Enterprises |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone here know if / what-section-of FAR rules govern the operation of
"ground effect" vehicles? Specifically, how high can a machine fly AGL before its technically classified as an aircraft and not a hovercraft, hydroplane-boat, Ecronoplan, etc.? Is there a loophole for a powered airplane that can't climb to more than 5' AGL? Second question: If a machine has tricycle gear with nosewheel steering, wings and 3-axis control, and is solely propelled by thrust from an engine/propeller, BUT CANNOT FLY, how is it classified? Trike motorcycle? NOTE: Both of these questions relate to a proposed machine that will weigh more than 254lbs dry, i.e. not Part 103 legal. Serious responses please. I'm looking to find and verify a specific FAR rule, as the correct answer to this question is critical for legal, operational, and insurance purposes. Thanks, Harry Frey Wright Brothers Enterprises Do an internet search on hovercrafts, WIG, Wing in Ground effect etc etc.... I dont remember the exact sites, but IIRC as long as it CANNOT get and stay out of ground effect, ie KEEP gaining altitude...it AINT an aircraft...and it can wiegh what ever you want....though its still a good idea to keep it light.....(though high hops that utilize the vehicles kinetic engery, trading off temporary altitude for speed are allowed)....its considered an ocean going vessel and you actually have/should register it with the coast guard....and if you do you'll probably be one of only a handful of people on the planet that has such a registration..... Now if you fly it over land I have no idea who you talk too....but besides Groom lake i dont have a clue where youd fly such a thing over land.... here is one site I happen to have: http://www.se-technology.com/wig/index.php take care Blll |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Hi,
found a few old WIG links last night.... these have pics of WIG hovercraft flying.... http://popularmechanics.com/outdoors...ts/print.phtml http://www.hovercraft.com/ http://www.se-technology.com/wig/index.php I used to have one pic showing a WIG hovercraft about 10 feet above the ground doing a "hop"....bet it felt like a hundred feet to the operator though! WIG hovercraft appear to have many problems....airborne stability for one....another, dealing with mirror contacts with ground or water (waves) without it turning into something resembling that bad landing they used to show at the begining of the 6 million dollar man episodes.... Another problem is variation of weight.....you need to make sure you CANT get truelly "aircraft" airborne at minimum load, yet you still want to be a decent height above the surface at maximum load....so it may make more sense to NOT make the thing as light as possible as you would an aircraft....so that the percentage difference between min load and max load is significantly smaller than that of a true typical aircraft.... which aint neccessarily bad...becuase if I built one of those suckers I'd put in a heavy duty roll cage that protected me, my neck, and ensured that I floated upright and intact when (not if) I wrecked the thing and it ripped apart in spectacular fashion! Sure, that way the drag is more than if you made it as light as possible, BUT I bet you would still be going alot faster with much less energy than you would in an equivalent boat! And the ride would be smoother...at least until you crashed.... The CD reduction is .8 at height = .25 wing size, .6 at .15, and .5 at .10 the wing size...where IIRC size = chord...though it could be span....and at height above ground effect CD = 1.0 So you can see you need to get pretty close to the ground for the WIG effect to help much... I'll email you the graph I have take care Blll |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Let me make a clarification to my original post:
The machine that I'm considering is NOT GOING TO OPERATE FROM/OVER WATER. It is not a flying-boat / hydroplane / Skycar / UFO thingie. It was designed as a land-based aircraft and looks something like an untralight. It had wheeled landing gear, wings, control surfaces, engine & prop, etc. However, it never flew very well or very far... if it ever flew at all. There is no photographic proof that it ever could or did leave the ground. Eyewitness reports lead me to believe that it never flew out of ground effect, and never flew more than a few hundred yards before being retired. Now here's the rub: all of the flying Wright 1903 Flyer replacas that I know of are considered (and are) true aircraft, thus requiring a PPL, N-numbers, etc. They rely on sound aerodyamic principles and would be capable of flying for miles at altitudes in excess of 10' AGL, given a very good pilot. The machine that I'm researching does not benefit from any sort of aerodynamic wing design. Its ribs are flat. If it flew, it was because large ammounts of power were used to shove it into the air for a few hundred feet. SO, is there a difference in the eyes of the FAA? And if so, what part of FAR would govern such a machine? I realize this is a very unusual question, thanks for your help. Harry |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
SO, is there a difference in the eyes of the FAA? And if so, what part of
FAR would govern such a machine? I realize this is a very unusual question, thanks for your help. Harry If it doesnt fly why should the FAA give a hoot? The FAA doesnt regulate hovercraft or airboats and those use airprops for forward propulsion... Of course I dont know diddly about FAA regs either... I hope you have some smoothhhh, softffff ground and that you are going pretty darn slow when you do your flight tests at 3 ft AGL.... take care Blll |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Bill,
I was hoping that the FAA already had a rule or subsection on the books governing WIG's. That way I could redesign the aircraft I'm considering so that it would meet the rule. Unfortunately, it looks like the FAA has never addressed this subject. However, they were adament about regulating ALL of the reproduction Wright Flyers built last year. Even though the flight envelope of those craft are very similar to the one I'm considering. Since I do not currently have a PPL, clasifing the aircraft experimental is not really an option. It might still be possible to go Part 103, but that won't be easy. Right now my calculations put the plane at least 100 lbs. overweight. This is the case for most turn-of-the-century aircraft. They are too slow and primative to fly like modern airplanes, yet too heavy to be considered ultralights. So far, I've managed to avoid the FAA problem by building kites and gliders. But having to wing-walk / push my glider 7 miles around an airfield last year convinced me that I want power on the next plane I build. If anybody does happen to find an FAA subsection that specifically mentions WIG's, please let me know. Thanks for your input, Harry |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
(BllFs6) wrote in message ...
Hi, found a few old WIG links last night.... these have pics of WIG hovercraft flying.... http://popularmechanics.com/outdoors...ts/print.phtml http://www.hovercraft.com/ http://www.se-technology.com/wig/index.php I used to have one pic showing a WIG hovercraft about 10 feet above the ground doing a "hop"....bet it felt like a hundred feet to the operator though! WIG hovercraft appear to have many problems....airborne stability for one....another, dealing with mirror contacts with ground or water (waves) without it turning into something resembling that bad landing they used to show at the begining of the 6 million dollar man episodes.... I am not an expert on this topic but I have seen WIG hovercraft in operation and talked to their designers. The idea behind this design is that the aircushion makes final break-away from the surface easy, with very little drag at the transition. Also, touch down is very smooth. As for wing tip contacts with water, it does not seem to be very upsetting. The tip shapes dictate that the contact is only with the trailing edge. These things are cool to watch but they are mostly just a stunt, in my humble opinion because they are slower than the hovercraft they are derived from. Plus, they are naturally more wind-sensitive than a hovercraft. One reason that the hovercraft community keeps looking at WIG technology is that light hovercraft start to fly away from dynamic lift effects around 55-65 mph. That has been an upper speed limit, unless one is willing to pile on weight. High performance hovercraft can accelerate to 60 mph from a dead stop in under 10 seconds ( precise measurement is nearly impossible. Maybe with a calibrated video camera) That performance comes from having static nearly equal to empty weight. Another problem is variation of weight.....you need to make sure you CANT get truelly "aircraft" airborne at minimum load, yet you still want to be a decent height above the surface at maximum load....so it may make more sense to NOT make the thing as light as possible as you would an aircraft....so that the percentage difference between min load and max load is significantly smaller than that of a true typical aircraft.... which aint neccessarily bad...becuase if I built one of those suckers I'd put in a heavy duty roll cage that protected me, my neck, and ensured that I floated upright and intact when (not if) I wrecked the thing and it ripped apart in spectacular fashion! Sure, that way the drag is more than if you made it as light as possible, BUT I bet you would still be going alot faster with much less energy than you would in an equivalent boat! And the ride would be smoother...at least until you crashed.... The CD reduction is .8 at height = .25 wing size, .6 at .15, and .5 at .10 the wing size...where IIRC size = chord...though it could be span....and at height above ground effect CD = 1.0 So you can see you need to get pretty close to the ground for the WIG effect to help much... I'll email you the graph I have take care Blll |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
WELL, this certainly has turned out to be an interesting thread...
Let me make a few more clarifications: First, I was not trying to infer anything about a Wright 1903 or later machine. Not the point... not even close. 1903's, 1904's 1905's, etc are definately and emphatically airplanes. Second, the original "flying machine" that I am thinking about reproducing was built in 1907. At best, a reproduction would be limited to straight-line demonstration hops of less than 1,000 linear feet down a runway, closed road, cow pasture, etc. Third, I was reminded not so long ago that the original designer's son asked me not to try to fly an accurate reproduction of this machine if I ever built one. Therefore, I think I have found my angle... Its got 3 wheels, it does not use public roads, and it will not fly. Therefore, it SHOULD be possible to classify it as an ATV, rather than an aircraft, even though it does have "wings". That takes 1/2 of the fun out of it, but maybe I could compensate by making the engine louder or something. Sorry that this thread wandered so far off-topic. Harry |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wing in Ground Effect? | BllFs6 | Home Built | 10 | December 18th 03 05:11 AM |
Antenna Ground Plane Grounding | Fastglasair | Home Built | 1 | July 8th 03 05:21 PM |