Search the web
Sign In
New User? Sign Up
microlights
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Message search is now enhanced, find messages faster. Take it for a spin.

Best of Y! Groups

   Check them out and nominate your group.

Messages

  Messages Help
Advanced
BMAA History note on sub 70 kg.   Topic List   < Prev Topic  |  Next Topic >
Reply < Prev Message  | 

From "The BMAA 1986 & 87."

Controversy arose over the unregulated sub 70kg category, which the BMAA was
keen to maintain to provide low-cost, low-performance machines for those not
looking to use more expensive two-seaters having once obtained their flying
licence. The CAA was to review the position after a special interest group
devised necessary quality controls. However through his own involvement with
Mainair's production of sub-70kg machines group member John Hudson wrote to the
CAA about the inability of anyone to build a safe machine within this category
where so much emphasis was put on weight reduction, instigating a full CAA
investigation. Flight Line and the Newsletter became full of debate on this
issue. Later in the year members learnt that the sub-70 kg exemption was to be
withdrawn.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Mon Mar 20, 2006 6:36 pm

mikephallam
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email

< Prev Message  | 
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date

From "The BMAA 1986 & 87." Controversy arose over the unregulated sub 70kg category, which the BMAA was keen to maintain to provide low-cost, low-performance...
mikehallam
mikephallam
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
6:37 pm

I am not sure what your intent or personal thoughts are Mike on this post? However: History has proven that John was quite mistaken. The sub 70 machines that...
Paul Dewhurst
flylight02
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
6:53 pm

Could it also be added that the last 20 years have seen many changes in the availability of high-strength lightweight materials, of high performance power...
Joan
madambreakneck
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
7:16 pm

I didn't know John Hudson so may do him a disservice here.. but could it be that he had a commercial interest in there not being a sub-70 class of aircraft? ...
gwyn_carwardine
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
8:45 pm

... I've got copies of all the correspondence on this affair, dating from 1985/6, including a copy of the original John Hudson letter to the CAA. John always...
jeremy_harris_uk
jeremy_harri...
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
9:08 pm

... Quite coincidentally and with no relation to this post, I was reviewing aviation safety statistics this morning. Here are some relevant numbers for the...
jeremy_harris_uk
jeremy_harri...
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
7:27 pm

Quite coincidentally and with no relation to this post, I was reviewing aviation safety statistics this morning. Here are some relevant numbers for the period...
David Bremner
mfeditor
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
7:38 pm

... The last figure was added by me, as I know that there have been no sub-70kg fatals, and certainly none in the period in question................... Jeremy...
jeremy_harris_uk
jeremy_harri...
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
7:49 pm

There! And I thought my copy'd been edited! ... From: microlights@yahoogroups.com [mailto:microlights@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of jeremy_harris_uk Sent: 20...
David Bremner
mfeditor
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
7:52 pm

David Bremner wrote: surely someone should look at the bigger picture? *True, and also there's another factor:- Microlights tend to do short flights, gliders...
Kev Armstrong
factoryfit
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
10:55 pm

... my 'safety ... did you report the accident kev, and more importantly was you insured kg...
keith greatrix
keithgreatrix
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
5:21 am

Hi Kev, With the price of one hour in a spamcan I would guess their average flight is shorter than a microlight. Mark P................ Kev Armstrong...
Mark Phillips
mdphillips1956
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
6:39 am

I think the 'per flight factor' (or perhaps per movement is more accurate) is correct for overall accidents, however I don't think the correlation can be...
Paul Dewhurst
flylight02
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
9:31 am

Paul Dewhurst wrote: Recent fatals have included mid airs, in flight structural failure, spinning, and getting it very wrong following engine failure. So not ...
Kev Armstrong
factoryfit
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
9:43 am

Errm, the one we have been talking about for months?? I am not saying that pilot error didn't play its part in the break up though (in case you are trying to...
Paul Dewhurst
flylight02
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
12:09 pm

... *Debate on this is (correctly) prohibited Paul, and both you, Bob and everyone else must guard against accidentally posting anything that relates to, or...
Kev Armstrong
factoryfit
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
2:13 pm

27 January 2004, Sirocco, in-flight breakup of the tailplane leading to loss of the aircraft and pilot. Because of this the tech office was forced to ground...
Guy Gratton
guy_gratton
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
2:44 pm

... reserved to microlights. For example, it is worth reading the report into the fatal to G-BKCB on 3 December 2000 at ...
Kev Armstrong
factoryfit
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
3:30 pm

... The only in-flight structural failure I know of recently is the Scirocco, where the tail departed on climb out. Jeremy...
jeremy_harris_uk
jeremy_harri...
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
4:22 pm

Whatever the cause, the effect to Styx was a machine that was in several separate parts when it hit the ground. Therefore there is no escaping that it suffered...
Paul Dewhurst
flylight02
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
5:31 pm

... ???? I don't get what you're on about Paul. I'd welcome an explanation as to why my reply, giving a perfectly correct answer to Kev's question provoked...
jeremy_harris_uk
jeremy_harri...
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
5:59 pm

Don't do it...............please :-) bob the mod p.s. safety catch removed from big red button! ... From: "Kev Armstrong" <kevin@...> To:...
Bob Perrin
bobjperrin
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
9:51 am

... *Hello Bob, my goodness you really are doing an excellent job of supervising this group, what is this all about then? Have you read this edition of the...
Kev Armstrong
factoryfit
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2006
11:35 am

Spot on Joan, but,,,,,,,,,,,and it is a big but, this just emphasises the fact that its not the technology that's to blame for our present predicament. I am...
hugh lorimer
lorimerhugh
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2006
7:38 pm
Advanced

Copyright © 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines - Help