Helicopters on LAA permits

[peter bewley]

Hello isn"t it about time the LAA took on board kit built helicopters ,like they have gyro-planes ???????

[Brian Hope]

LAA does not have the expertise within its Engineering department to take on helicopters so I'm afraid there is no chance of us taking them on in the forseeable future.

[peter bewley]

Thank you for your reply, I just can not under stand why the LLA does not employ a helicopter engineer as there is a lot of kits on the market, that have got track records ie mini 500 , safari baby bells , angle helicopters and the rotorwayexec , 90, 162F , and the new talon.
as a PFA/LAA member for years it,s doing very little for me.
peter bewley

[Brian Hope]

Hi Peter, would that life were that simple. Disregarding the economic argument, the LAA does not have an exposition to approve helicopters for UK build and on-going airworthiness, and to gain such an exposition would be reliant on the CAA being prepared to issue one - based on its satisfaction that LAA had the appropriate levels of expertise and procedures. On an economic front there is unlikely to be a sufficient number of people wanting to build helicopters to justify employing a helicopter aeronautical engineer, and we're not talking about a helicopter mechanic here, we would need a guy who can deal with helicopter structures, stressing etc., and they are not exactly two a penny. On top of that we would have to have an inspection regime as well. I'm afraid the reality is that the current CAA regime for homebuilt helicopters is likely to remain the logical route for what is a niche market, unless of course currently unforeseen changes brought about by EASA significantly move the current goal posts. I know two people who have/are building Rotorways. One is completed and flying, the other very close to completion and the story seems to be that as long as you don't incorporate any mods then the build/inspection process is reasonably straightforward (the UK agents, Southern Helicopters, do most of the inspection I believe). I guess the biggest problem is getting new types approved for build and I'm afraid there is no easy or affordable answer to that quandary.
I hope though that the many other aspects of LAA activity have been of benefit to you over the years. Certainly the Association's increasing involvement in consultative issues benefits all flyers and enthusiasts, things like resolving the fuel tax on recreational fuels, airspace and Mode S transponders etc. And of course there is the social side of the Association, Rallies, fly-ins, Struts and the magazine. I hope you continue to enjoy your membership in the years ahead and if as your nom de plume suggests, you are building a Rotorway, I hope you have a lot of fun with it.

[Rob Swain]

On an economic front there is unlikely to be a sufficient number of people wanting to build helicopters to justify employing a helicopter aeronautical engineer...

Just playing devils advocate here but what basis is there for the above assertion?

Given the amount of money that people spend on building some fixed wing aircraft such as RVs (especially the RV-10) Jabiru J400s, Glastars and anything with a half decent modern avionics fit I would expect that there would be quite a number of people with the wonga to throw at kit helicopter building. Of the number with the money then I would estimate a not insignificant number might be interested in a helicopter if they could build one under the same regime as their fixed wing beastie.

I think there is a general belief that kit build helicopters are not allowed in the UK. This is not true, and bringing them under the LAA would help to dispel this myth. Let's face it - there's a hell of a lot of licensed pilots who don't know that home build fixed wing aircraft are possible in the UK! If more people knew it was possible I feel certain that the number of people building kit helicopters would rise significantly.

Let's be clear about some of the kit prices we are dealing with here.
Many fixed wing aircraft have kits of (just for illustrative purposes) £16,000. But to that you have to add an engine (often £15,000), prop (VP anyone? £8000), glass cockpit / auto pilot / avionics (£15000), paint job (£6000), and the other thousand and one things (wiring, upholstery, harnesses, lights) that add a huge amount when all added up. I'm sure that some of my figures above are conservative too as my experience is of two seaters!
We all know there are a good number of people owning and building what the above illustrates.
Compare that with the Rotorway Exec (because I've been watching "A Chopper is Born"). OK this is an expensive kit but look at what it includes as well as the basic airframe - the engine, all cooling and baffling, complete rotor assembly, all covers, glazing, instruments, radio (might be wrong on that point), upholstery, harnesses etc. Basically all you add is paint. In real terms it's not that expensive, and well within a lot of people's budgets.

As regards the regulatory issues I would have thought that given the changes for compliance with new EASA rules the CAA would be only too pleased to divest itself of the direct responsibility for kit-built, permit-to-fly helicopters. The LAA has picked up the Austers because the type had no Type holder (or whatever the phrase is) and the CAA didn't want them to go on to CAA Permits. Why not kit-helicopters too?

I would have thought this could be a valuable revenue stream for the LAA (kit registrations, permit renewals, memberships) with relatively low work-load as I would expect any aircraft coming over from CAA permit would already be flying so requiring little in the way of engineering input and any new kits of already UK flying types would just require ensuring they are built to the same design and standard. Any new kits seeking approval would have to supply the necessary engineering data to support the application, much as seems to happen for fixed wing kits.
The CAA can do all this without an in-house engineering department. How much easier would it be for the LAA to do it? We do a lot of it already, after all!

Yes, we have no helicopter inspectors - but that's because we have no helicopters - bit of a circular argument there! We have few gyro inspectors, but I assume this is an increasing number because the number of gyros is increasing. When flex wing microlights came under regulation there were no inspectors - now there are lots! You see where I'm going with this point...

Given the EASA changes I can't help thinking the CAA will be looking to divest itself of its responsibility for kit-built helicopters in the foreseeable future. It seems logical that the LAA should take them on, and if it is seen to be reluctant we may end up with yet another amateur built aircraft body to go with the two we already have!

[Bill Scott]

Oh for goodness sakes....
Brian, let's put the diplomacy to one side and get the real reason out in the open. Helicopters are not natural, if God intended us to aviate in eggwhisks, he wouldn't have invented proper aeroplanes.

[Brian Hope]

Hi Rob, that's an alternate view but I don't think the numbers stack up. The latest pilot stats I can readily come up with are from 2004 when there were 23K medical holding PPL A holders. This number does not include the several thousand PPL D (microlight) holders. At that time there were just under 3K PPL H holders. Each year LAA signs off around 100 new kit built aircraft, if we're generous we could say 50% were in the £50K bracket of a Rotorway, so 0.2% of the PPL A population builds a £50K aircraft kit per year. Of the 3K helicopter pilots that would be 6 people. The CAA database shows 45 Rotorways of which 18 have either a current or recently expired Permit. Many have not had a Permit for years or have never had a Permit at all, and this community dates back about 20 years. With most UK kit sales, once secondhand aircraft become available, the demand for new kits slows dramatically, so based on the numbers, selling 6 a year would be more than a result, particularly in the current climate.
So, our business plan looks like £50K for our Helicopter aeronautical engineer, plus maybe £10K for additional liability insurance, to oversee maybe a couple of new builds a year and inspect perhaps 20 for Permit.
OK the numbers are crude guesstimates, and you can argue that if we used a freelance engineer we would cut the employment costs, but I'm afraid I certainly can't see an income stream here, just a river of money flowing out in the wrong direction. And we haven't even talked about getting approval for new types. LAA has no magic wand, it would have to approve a new type in accordance with what CAA currently lays down, which is no doubt why we do not have kits like the Safari and Revolution here. The approvals process is complex - hence expensive - and the potential sales too small.
My view entirely of course, not an official LAA one.

[Steve Brown]

I'm no expert on this but ask simply as an LAA member. Since the avenue for getting a helicopter permit to fly via the CAA already exists (via it seems in some cases a devolved organisation like Southern helicopters) , what is the primary motivation to move to LAA administered PtoF?

I would be interested in how the 'whole' costs between the current CAA route and a proposed LAA route would compare.

This would include CAA project startup / 'in-build' fees; then once flying - the on-going annual CAA 'admin' fees; and the maintenance/LAE regime.

When coupled with the potentiol numbers of users, one could then assess whether that justifies ( via a good business plan to assess what the LAA helicopter fee structure would likely be) the LAA getting involved.

This all assumes the CAA would be willing to delegate this authority to the LAA in the first place.

Regards

[peter bewley]

Hi Rob,
This is where the EAA USA covers ultralights to ex-military aircraft under one body on a permit basis.
I built my rotorway Exec 90 in 1995 and have trouble each year renewing my permit as I have to get a helicopter engineer, a test pilot and a CAA engineer to sign it off, this has proved to be quite costly and time consuming - you would have thought life could be made much simpler by carrying out all such tasks by one body.
The majority of helicopter pilots also have additional licences including fixed wing and gliders.
As it has been pointed out there are few current Rotorways with permits that have licences because of the above problems. In hindsight, if I had known then, the problems that I have incurred permitting my kit built helicopter, it would have been more cost effective and less time consuming to have bought an R22!
Regards
Peter Bewley

[Brian Hope]

Hi Peter, the EAA does not cover ultralights to warbirds on a permit basis, it has nothing to do with airworthiness or approval (it does have Designees, who are mentors offering advice to builders but they have nothing to do with the approval of designs or the on-going airworthiness of an aircraft). It is the FAA's quite liberal Experimental category that allows these aircraft to fly without the onerous requirements that are insisted upon by our own CAA. The two airworthiness regimes are like comparing chalk and cheese I'm afraid.
The UK SSDR category is the only similarity, it being akin to the US Ultralight category in that it falls under the airworthiness radar altogether.

[Nigel Hitchman]

Im with Brian on this one. While of course it would be nice if LAA could cover homebuilt helicopters, there really isnt the demand to justify employing someone. Now I guess if a helicopter engineer came forward offering to work for no cost to the LAA, then it might be a different matter. But they or other volunteers would have to cover test flying and inspections too.
I wonder how much its costing Southern Helicopters to get the new Rotorway Talon through the CAA, even though it must be a derivative rather than a new type.
Whether having kit built helicopters on a LAA permit would fuel a big interest in the type is another question, But when even in other countries with more easy regimes, you dont see many. How many kit helicopters were at Oshkosh? Maybe 10.
The Rotorway Exec appears to be a good well thought out helicopter. People say they are easier to fly and safer than the R22, but people still but the R22 or even R44 in preference. There are hundreds of Robinsons on the register.

It is interesting that Gyros have suddenly become much more popular. This all seemed to come about because of the factory built MT-03. There must be more of those imported and flying in the UK in the last 3 years than all the other gyros built in the last 20 years! These are on a CAA permit and are quite a lot more expensive than the homebuilt gyros previously available and comparable price to the top of the range kit built aircraft you can buy.
There have been very few new homebuilt gyro projects registered in recent years. I guess part of the problem being that all the available designs are quite old, although the VPM M-16 used to be available as a kit and is now being sold in larger numbers as the MAgni M-16C factory built aircraft.

The CAA dont seem to be in a hurry to give these gyros to the LAA to administer their permits, I think the CAA find it quite a good income stream.
The CAA do have a large dedicated engineering dept, and a large dept looking after individual aircraft approvals.

The CAA already looked at the Mini 500 helicopter and rejected it, there were several registered in the UK which will never be approved. I dont know if anyone has tried to get the Safari (ex Baby Bell) approved.