Edenvale Fatal Crash - Nov 12

[AirFrame]

You really could have found a better example than the A380 or any other modern commercial airliner that's been through computer modeling, small scale wind tunnel testing, large scale wind tunnel testing, construction by a leading aerospace manufacturer and has multiple redundant systems and was test flown by test pilots.

Sure, I could have used the 777 as an example instead. Because all the problems with it were fixed before it was delivered to customers, right? Just ask Quantas about their Trent 900 engines. The point was that certified aircraft aren't immune to problems with their design either, I just chose the largest plane I could think of to try and make my point... That all other things being equal, homebuilts aren't any more dangerous than certified aircraft.

There's a lot of stats showing that there are a higher number of accidents in homebuilts than in certified aircraft. There's very little info that normalizes that data for factors unrelated to who built the aircraft.

[fish4life]

what about ultra-lights vs certified a/c?

[AirFrame]

what about ultra-lights vs certified a/c?

Intuitively it seems clear to me that they'd be less safe. Given the shorter ranges in an U/L, the mission profiles are usually quite different. Both an RV and a Cessna could go fly from Vancouver to Kelowna for lunch, for example. An UL may only go to Chilliwack or Hope. No mountain crossing, probably not very high, etc.

But I don't have any first-hand experience with UL's so that's just speculation. I know a lot of pilots who started out in UL's and became full private pilots later... A lot of them are better GA pilots than the ones who went PPL directly, IMO.

[Hedley]

Ultralights have a much higher accident rate than certified aircraft, but they are hardly ever reported. There is a senior ultralight flight instructor near me who has experienced over 25 engine failures. Two-stroke with no carb heat.

Homebuilts have a higher accident rate than certified aircraft, but that's usually because the builder hasn't flown in 10 years, and he wants to fly his high wing loading pocket rocket that he has heavily modified from the plans. Not a good combination. First few flights can be exciting. Builder usually insists on doing first flight because of emotions. You can guess the rest.

Mechanically, homebuilts are much, much better than ultralights. IMHO. However they may have handling characteristics which are uncertifiable and can be a handful for even a proficient private pilot, which builders usually aren't. Every year there is usually a fatal crash or two of a high-wing-loading pocket rocket on approach to OSH. Not the aircraft's fault. Heck, Jack Roush destroyed a bizjet at OSH this year, and it was certified.

[Finnegan]

As Hedley says, some builders take years to put their airplane together and fly very little, if at all, in the meantime. Their dream is probably much less forgiving than the 172 they previously flew. I think it's possible that with this combination, a lot of builders don't recognize soon enough when things are going sideways. The tragedy is that these are people who purely love flying.

[KK7]

Ultralights have a much higher accident rate than certified aircraft, but they are hardly ever reported. There is a senior ultralight flight instructor near me who has experienced over 25 engine failures. Two-stroke with no carb heat.

It's unbelievable the number of ultralight engine failures I've witnessed (from the ground or another airplane in the vicinity...I've never flown an ultralight). 9 times out of 10, the engine failure has been caused due to the simple fact that the prop is belt driven, and eventually the little elastic band goes snap. Who connects a critical piece of equipment to the engine using a rubber band?!

[Hedley]

People tell me ultralights are so much less expensive, and one reason is that they don't require the maintenance of certified aircraft.

This is true - in fact, they require more maintenance than a certified aircraft - not less! IMHO, if you fly an ultralight, you'd better be an ace 2-stroke mechanic, and an expert at forced landings. Lots of people have died because they aren't even one of the above.

Also, the handling characteristics of ultralights are unbelieveably bad. I have flown a couple, and they flew so poorly, I thought they were broken to the point of dangerous. I can only surmise that they are popular amongst people whom have never flown anything else.

Personally, I find it much safer to do a surface-level loop in a certified or homebuilt aircraft, than fly straight and level in an ultralight. Less risk involved.