Page 3 of 3
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 9:18 pm
Yes Dave and Ian, you are both right. That's a two way street though, so watch your six o'clock!!
Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2011 11:51 am
I was delighted to see in the latest LAA magazine that the engine 2 category of the competition has been extended to include engines of not less than 28 bhp and not more than 1 kg/hp, in my view just right for the SSDR.
I am still scanning the horizon for the entry forms, have I missed them?
Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2011 1:27 pm
Hi David, I had just sent you an email re the competition before seeing this. I will get something organised re entry forms asap but anybody waiting on them need not be concerned, an email to Engineering that you are interested and want to get going will suffice for starters.
Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2011 11:39 pm
would it be worth getting Penny to create a couple of categories under the new 'Aircraft Design Forums' heading for each category of engine in the competition?
It would be good place to set out the objectives for each category and I'm hoping that that people would be prepared to discuss their ideas.
Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 6:39 pm
After 43 of continuous ppl activity, have recently been musing about going SSDR as funds inevitably diminish following arrival of the bus pass...not to mention debilitating medical issues.... but after many years of both LAA and BMAA permit-based based machines (and presently trying to escape from an unwise late intrusion into C of A ownership....) , really would like to get back to basics !
Trouble is, although I turn my hand to just about everything, really can't see myself as a serious builder .... unless I could get away with simply modifying an existing airframe to comply with SSDR regs ? As it happens, am fortunate enough still to own a very small airfield by the house and with adjoining 500 yard runway on rented land, and do have a number of old airframes lying around, still potentially airworthy.
Has anybody investigated the Goldwing (I have one - with a 447) or Tiger Cub (have two complete, plus various bits) as having potential to modify ? I'm aware that original Goldwings were built very light - but not mine. Tiger Cubs - much maligned but very sweet when you get to know them (for as long as the Robin 440 will run without burning out the rear cylinder) were always built heavy, but surely have some scope to be lightened. I also have an old early-generation Rans S6 (Gp.A) , and a Gp.A Minimax only just out of permit. It's also possible that I may shortly acquire a slightly bent Zenair 701, following an unfortunate accident associated with what turned out to be a truly lamentable engine type. Surely, from somewhere within this vast pile of material it might be possible to cobble together a very lightweight flyer ?!
I'm not an engineer but believe I have a keen amateur appreciation of material strengths and stresses, and find it difficult to muster much respect for what appear to be quite arbitrary weight maxima which surely must encourage taking things right up their structural limits ? It seems quite likely that an 'underground' of slightly-too-heavy craft will eventually emerge, albeit eminently defensible in the name of safety. I'm certainly with those who have expressed sentiments akin to 'why tinker with proven designs?' .
Please try to excuse the potentially criminal suggestions above - but I am genuinely interested in pursuing this route, even it means drawing on the far superior design and building skills of others !
Cheers for now / David
Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 11:20 pm
I'm trying to come up with a reply but the thought of a day or two rummaging around in your hangar is all too much for me.
Re: Help needed with SSDRs
Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2016 4:52 pm
I've been putting together a website specifically for SSDR microlights - you'll find it here: http://www.ssdraircraft.co.uk
. I'm in the process of writing up the individual aircraft spec sheets that will be linked from the manufacturers' list. Always happy to receive comments and constructive criticism!
Re: Help needed with SSDRs
Posted: Mon Nov 28, 2016 1:51 pm
That's really useful, thanks!