NGPA, a worldwide organization for the LGBTQ+ community, is doing its share to encourage its members to begin their aviation careers by once again offering its annual scholarship program to those interested in becoming pilots, A&P mechanics, or other general aviation-related vocations. 

With the support of generous NGPA members and corporate sponsors, they continue the tradition of their annual scholarship program, providing financial support to the most qualified and highest-achieving members through a scholarship to pursue those lofty dreams.

And NGPA’s scholarship program is more than just a financial aid opportunity. It’s a powerful statement about the organization’s commitment to diversity, inclusion, and excellence within the aviation industry. By providing recipients with the necessary financial support, NGPA is not just helping them reach their professional goals but also paving the way for a more diverse and inclusive aviation community.

Applications for the annual scholarship program are now being accepted and are due June 30. To apply, simply visit the NGPA website and complete the online opportunity profile. Additional information, such as eligibility conditions, required documentation, and how the selection process works, can also be found on the NGPA website, located at: Apply – NGPA – The Worldwide LGBTQ+ Aviation Community

The post NGPA Scholarship Applications Open for 2024 appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

They make a mess when they hit the windscreen. They are distracting when they swarm you as you are trying to do a preflight inspection of the airplane. And sometimes, they can get into the equipment and make it fail.

Over the weekend the crew of a Challenger 350 at John C. Tune Airport (KJWN) in Nashville, Tennessee, was having difficulty starting its engines. The aircraft was hooked up to an auxiliary power unit (APU), which is designed to assist with engine start. But, according to Blake Love, co-founder of Mansa Aero, although the APU was operating, it was not able to start the aircraft.

Love and Mansa co-founder Andrew Warwick both checked to see what the problem was.

“We put a borescope down the APU and found it full of cicadas. They blocked the airflow,” Love said. “We have never seen anything like it. We have 20 years of experience between the two of us and this was a first.”

Cicadas are flying insects that spend most of their life underground. They emerge every 13 or 17 years (depending on their particular cycle) looking for a mate. They swarm in such great numbers that they produce a deafening hum, so loud that outdoor events like weddings are relocated. The louder the bugs—which are about an inch long and have wings—the better they are for increasing the species.

Cicadas are not terribly selective, and they were apparently attracted to the noise and heat of the APU and piled into the inlet, blocking the airflow.

When the technicians evaluated the problem, they were attacked by the swarm. They are not poisonous, but if you are frightened of bugs, you are not going to have a good day as thousands of inch-long flying insects zip around and land on you.

Love and Warwick said they were being dive bombed by the cicadas as they put the APU back together, and the noise of the engines stirred them up even more.

“It was quite a swarm, almost biblical,” said Warwick, noting that great numbers of the insects flew into the operating APU, where they promptly met their demise.

• Mysteries of Flight: Drone Swarms In 2019-2020

Love and Warwick offered advice for aircraft owners as we wait for this cicada manifestation to run its course: Don’t let your airplane sit outside with the APU running for an extended amount of time.

There are two swarms of cicadas making an appearance this year—those on the 13-year cycle and another on the 17-year cycle. They are emerging from the ground by the trillions when the temperature of the soil reaches 64 degrees. Once they come out, they molt, leaving behind exoskeletons. When their wings become dry, they head into the treetops to find a mate. Cicadas do not destroy crops, but they just make a lot of noise and in great enough numbers can block drains and air intakes.

According to insect experts, the cicadas will be emerging through June as far north as Wisconsin and as far south as Alabama.

Editor’s note: This story originally appeared on flyingmag.com.

The post Flying in the Time of Cicadas appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

Attendees were able to take part in sessions covering topics as wide ranging as pilot medical concerns, national weather service forecasting support, emergency operations, and air traffic control (ATC) coordination to name a few sessions. Presenters from the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, Detroit’s approach control facility, National Weather Service, and industry writers and professionals brought expertise and experience to share.

Some of Michigan’s best flight instructors, promoters of safety, and mechanics also were recognized at the event. As part of the General Aviation Awards program (GAA), Michigan’s winners will be entered into consideration for regional and national recognition. The long-standing awards program is a cooperative effort between many different sponsors and organizations from the aviation industry and FAA.

For more than 50 years, the GAA program has recognized aviation professionals in flight instruction, aviation maintenance, avionics, and flight safety for their important contributions to the general aviation community.

Stephen Tupper was named the East Michigan FSDO CFI of the year’ Daniel Holtzclaw was recognized as the East Michigan FSDO and overall Michigan FAASTeam representative of the year; Marty King earned the Grand Rapids FSDO and overall Michigan aviation maintenance technician of the year; and James Whittles was honored as the Grand Rapids FSDO and overall Michigan CFI of the year.

​The GAA said these awards highlight these individuals’ important leadership roles in promoting aviation safety, education, and professionalism. 

If you missed this year’s Michigan Aviation Safety Forum, keep an eye out for 2025. The MASF is held each February in Ypsilanti and hosted at Eastern Michigan University.

More information on  the MASF event can be found here and here.

The post Michigan Aviation Safety Forum Gathers Mechanics, Pilots for Currency and Proficiency appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

On January 5, a door plug separated from the frame of an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 Max 9 as it climbed through 16,000 feet. The flight crew was able to report the emergency to ATC and land the aircraft—and only minor injuries were reported. 

Aviation has grown increasingly safe over the past few decades, with safety records ticking up steadily to the point that it’s statistically less dangerous to take a commercial flight across the planet than to get in your car and drive to the next city. General aviation isn’t quite at that level, although safety numbers on that front have been climbing as well—an aging GA fleet accessible to the majority of pilots notwithstanding. This incident would seem to be a warning call to remind us that aviation is safe because we work so hard to make it so. 

But apparently there were warnings before this for this particular aircraft. According to the NTSB’s preliminary report, the aircraft had experienced pressurization problems on December 30, just a few days before the door plug blew out. 

Without knowing all of the details, I can’t comment on this particular case. 

But the whole scenario has me thinking a lot in general about the human factors of aviation and the checks we use to protect ourselves and others in the air. We have developed these checks with the full understanding that human beings are fallible and subject to pressures that can lead, at times, to bad decision-making. 

In fact, the recognition of human factors in aviation dates to its early days when accidents were often attributed solely to technical failures. Over time, it became evident that human error caused a significant number of accidents. This realization led to the establishment of human-related factors as a distinct field within aviation, with a focus on studying and mitigating the impact of those issues. 

To help mitigate this fallibility, professionals in aviation go through rigorous training and testing. They must use checklists. And they are required to make decisions that occasionally put personal interest (or at scale, economic interest) behind scrapping a flight because the risk is just too high, whether because of a potential maintenance issue, weather, or a crewmember just can’t hack it that day. 

Economic considerations in aviation are not small. Sometimes the safety of a flight is weighed against the commercial ramifications of failing to complete it. And that is powerful medicine, especially when risk looks somewhat abstract from the ground. However, pressure to complete a flight or project on schedule or within a particular budget should never eclipse safety considerations. 

It’s always worthwhile to slow down, investigate, and triple-check that our T’s are crossed and I’s dotted. We can’t allow all of the safe flights we’ve had before lead to complacency. 

Aviation is made safe by people committing to following established procedures, double-checking everything, and putting the safety of a given flight above commercial concerns or other social or psychological pressures. It takes strength to do this, but it’s so vital. In commercial aviation or general aviation, we should trust—but always verify. 

The post Boeing Max and the Case of the Missing Bolts appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

Aeroprakt, builder of the very successful A-22 and A-32 series of special LSA, suffered when a missile hit their flying club building. Their main factory remains in the central city of Kyiv, where it has been for many years. I visited this location back in 2003, so they’ve been stable for more than 20 years.

Their stability and determination to continue building and shipping quality aircraft as the war drags on is admirable. After an Oshkosh 2023 visit with former importer Dennis Long and present importer Andy Humphrey, I have some Aeroprakt news to report. 

Aeroprakt of Ukraine in 2023

I had to ask, even though I was worried about the answer: “How is Aeroprakt doing while the war rages?” It is reasonable to think Aeroprakt must be struggling to stay aloft when so many citizens are focused on defending their homeland. The glare of the world’s spotlights during the turmoil is surely uncomfortable and unhelpful.

Yet, “They are back to ten aircraft per month,” said Humphrey. “Their best-ever steady performance was 12 aircraft per month before COVID, and then Russia’s invasion. So, they are doing surprisingly well.”

I asked about supply line problems and while acknowledging many challenges, Humphrey indicated Aeroproakt is managing well enough. “They have to deal with power outages at times, shifting to generators to keep the machinery humming,” he stated.

He also noted Aeroprakt is shipping materials in and finished aircraft out of Poland, a country that has been very supportive of its Ukraine neighbor. Aeroprakt employs about 50 personnel and has remained steady throughout the last three years. Long added that Aeroprakt has now passed 1,500 airplanes manufactured. Many light aircraft builders would love to match that performance

After A-32’s introduction five years ago, Aeroprakt has continued to upgrade A-22 even after the original was greatly streamlined to arrive at A-32.

One of A-22’s newer changes included a third door.

While we are anticipating MOSAIC LSA or mLSA to offer larger cabins in 2025 and beyond, today we have some spacious LSA-like A-22s and A-32s. The third door made using their larger cabin much easier.

After eight months of 2023, Humphrey’s Heavenbound Aviation said sales are running about 50-50 between A-22 and A-32. The former, which has sold more than 1,000 units, has become popular with flight schools. They don’t need the speed and sophistication of the A-32 and the prior model is attractively priced for flight schools or recreational pilots. “A-32 generates interest from its 115 knot cruise, 27-knot stall—great for shorter airfields—and its brisker climb,” said Humphrey. “On the other hand, A-22 is more forgiving on landing as its flatter fuselage allows better slips, and it doesn’t retain energy as efficiently as the slicker A-32.”

No matter which model may catch your interest, Heavenbound is prepared. “We have all spare parts to service Aeroprakt’s line in our Ohio facility,” reported Humphrey. He also said that his enterprise enjoys a good relationship with the local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) which approves Aeroprakt models as they arrive in the U.S.

Heavenbound has long been an active flight training operation as well. “Today flight training is a busy activity for us. We have three CFIs offering flight instruction in two Aeroproakts and two Taylorcraft,” said Humphrey. Though the Lordstown, Ohio outfit has as many students as they can handle, they always make room for a new Aeroprakt buyer. When I inquired, Humphrey said that “more [buyers] than you think” take instruction with their aircraft purchase, as many as half of them in recent years.

IFR Trainer

Heavenbound brought the first fully-IFR-equipped A-32 to Oshkosh and it sold before the week finished. Since Aeroprakt has modest prices compared to many other LSA—A-22 is the price leader but even A-32 isn’t bad—you may not be surprised to learn an IFR A-32 sells for $195,000.

Before you gripe about that price, remember a basic A-22 costs far less. If you select the thoroughly-redesigned A-32 with an expensive Garmin IFR suite of digital instruments, the cost will be much higher. You may not need all that.

Surrounding the Garmin G3X Touch main screen, Heavenbound specified the GMA 24 audio panel, a GTN 650 for IFR operations offering GPS, nav/com, VOR, ILS, plus RNAV capabilities. Those who want some of this equipment but can operate more simply could save a bundle by choosing the Garmin 175 instead, Humphrey explained.

The fully-equipped A-32 is ready for cloud penetration, assuming the pilot has an IFR rating and is current. Naturally, it is not approved for flight into known icing.

“A flight school or an individual can file IFR and do under-hood training operations,” in the Special LSA model, Humphrey explained. If a customer wants to fly into IMC (Instrument Meteorological Conditions… “in the soup” if you prefer), then that pilot will need to change to ELSA status where paid flight instruction is no longer permitted, though that may not matter to many pilots.

The IFR version is quite complete. “In addition to the panel instruments, our model comes with Garmin’s autopilot and all the lighting you’d expect,” finished Humphrey.

It is wonderful to see Aeroprakt continuing to build their handsome, colorful aircraft even as their homeland is troubled. This demonstrates the will of pilots and builders to pursue their interest in flight, regardless of obstacles placed in their way.

The post Some Good News from Ukraine appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

If you plan an altitude where the temperature aloft is zero degrees Celsius or less, airframe icing becomes exceedingly more likely while flying in visible moisture. Therefore, the freezing level is one key variable that you need to determine during your preflight analysis to better quantify your risk of airframe ice.

Let’s clarify something right from the beginning. The FAA likes to use the term “freezing level” in all of its documentation. This is kind of a misnomer, given that water in the liquid state doesn’t necessarily freeze just because the static air temperature is below freezing. We must be concerned about the presence of supercooled water, which leads to airframe icing. On the contrary, water in the solid state (i.e., snow) must melt even if the static air temperature is a hair warmer than zero degrees Celsius. Meteorologists prefer to use the more accurate term of “melting level.” But pilots are stuck with “freezing level” for the foreseeable future.

A Rarely Standard Lapse Rate

One approach that some instructors teach is to use the standard lapse rate to calculate or estimate the lowest freezing level. That is, they use the current surface temperature at the airport and then subtract 2 degrees Celsius for every 1,000-foot gain in altitude. For example, if the surface temperature is 10 degrees Celsius and you are departing from an airport at sea level elevation, then the freezing level should be 5,000 feet. That method seems easy enough, but it’s a bad idea to do this. The standard lapse rate should only be applied to performance tables in the pilot operating handbook as a method to determine the departure from standard.

When Mother Nature is at her worst behavior, the atmosphere is rarely standard. In fact, during the late morning and afternoon, the environmental lapse rate is more often than not greater than standard near the surface. This is the layer of air that is directly influenced by the presence of the earth’s surface and, therefore, is what meteorologists refer to as the planetary boundary layer (PBL). The lapse rate in the PBL is often closer to the dry adiabatic rate (DALR) of 3 degrees Celsius for every 1,000-foot gain in altitude. Under these more typical conditions, using the standard lapse rate will cause you to calculate a freezing level that is higher than the actual lapse rate suggests. Therefore, if you expected the freezing level to be at 5,000 feet, you might be surprised during your climb to encounter supercooled liquid water beginning at 3,500 feet instead of 5,000 feet.

You might say, “That’s crazy—no sane pilot would do this.” Well, even the FAA fell into this line of thinking. In 2005, a student and a flight instructor ended up with a hard landing at Paine Field (KPAE) in Everett, Washington, after accreting airframe ice in a Cessna 172. They departed a nearby airport, Boeing Field (KBFI), to go out and shoot a few practice approaches in actual instrument conditions. This is certainly a noble effort when it is safe to do so. After the first missed approach, the instructor noticed ice accreting on the airframe and directed the student to return to Paine Field to land. During this landing, the aircraft ran off the runway, which resulted in an accident and subsequent FAA and National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation.

The FAA later determined the instructor, who was pilot in command, busted FAR 91.9 (a), which prohibits pilots from operating an aircraft without complying with its operating limitations. In this case, there’s a placard in the aircraft that states: “Flight into known icing conditions is prohibited.” The instructor was also cited with careless or reckless operation under FAR 91.13 (a). So, a certificate action was taken that included a 90-day suspension. The instructor requested an evidentiary hearing and later appealed the ruling to the NTSB. However, the NTSB agreed with the case the FAA presented.

I certainly don’t take issue with the outcome of this judgment, but one thing struck me as being a bit strange. The FAA argued that the instructor should have been aware of the lowest freezing level and, therefore, the potential for airframe ice at higher altitudes. To my chagrin, they suggested the instructor should have been aware of the surface temperature at the airport of 2 degrees Celsius—based on their briefing prior to departure—and then, they should have used the standard lapse rate to determine that the temperature would be at or below freezing in the clouds aloft. Ugh! Well, this just happened to be convenient for the FAA since the lapse rate near the surface was close to standard on that day and time. Therefore, it worked out, coincidentally, to favor the FAA’s case against this instructor. The lapse rate, as stated previously, varies and may not be the accurate measure to use when figuring the altitudes where icing might be likely.

Temperature Inversions

At the other extreme is a common situation when there is a formidable surface-based temperature inversion. In this situation, the surface temperature can be a chilly 7 degrees Celsius (45 degrees Fahrenheit) with a freezing level at more than 12,000 feet msl. This is quite common in regions around a warm front. As warm air overruns cold air at the surface, this creates a negative lapse rate (called an inversion) or a scenario where the temperature increases along with altitude before it begins to resume a more normal positive lapse rate in the free atmosphere aloft. When such an inversion exists, using the standard lapse rate may leave you with the impression that the freezing level is quite low when, in fact, it might be a very reasonable day to fly from an icing perspective if you remain below 12,000 feet.

In this scenario, it is quite common when an aviation accident occurs for the casual observer to quickly conclude that the aircraft encountered icing conditions. If it’s that chilly at the surface, then the freezing level must be just a few thousand feet up, right? That’s what pilots generally thought when a Beechcraft B58 Baron went down after departing the Spirit of St. Louis Airport (KSUS) on the winter evening of January 8, 2022. The flight departed at 7:10 p.m. CST headed westbound toward Denver. They were on an IFR flight plan and were cleared to climb to a cruise altitude of 8,000 feet. Shortly after reaching cruise, the Baron appeared to depart controlled flight with a rapid descent under unknown circumstances. It subsequently impacted the terrain 2.5 miles south of New Melle, Missouri (12 miles west of the Spirit of St. Louis Airport), killing the pilot and another occupant.

The temperature at the surface was 7 degrees Celsius with a dew point temperature of 6 degrees Celsius. There was much speculation and debate within the internet aviation community that airframe icing may have played a role in this fatal accident. This is certainly understandable. The elevation of KSUS is 463 feet msl, and using a standard lapse rate, the altitude of the lowest freezing level should be approximately 4,000 feet as shown here.

1,463 feet –> +5 degrees Celsius
2,463 feet –> +3 degrees Celsius
3,463 feet –> +1 degrees Celsius
4,463 feet –> -1 degree Celsius

Using the standard lapse rate in this way leads to an incorrect freezing level. This is echoed in the one-hour forecast (above), which suggests the lowest freezing level west of the Spirit of St. Louis Airport was between 11,000 feet and 13,000 feet. Using the standard lapse rate instead of the low freezing level forecast cre-ates an error of 7,000 to 9,000 feet in this case.

Shortly after the accident, the NTSB was quick to point out in a press conference that the freezing level was 12,000 feet and icing was unlikely since the aircraft remained below this level. But that didn’t make the internet community all that happy. Some still concluded that the NTSB was premature in its comments and that the causal factor would ultimately be associated with airframe icing, citing the standard lapse rate in their argument.

In fact, one YouTube personality suggested this flight likely encountered freezing drizzle, although no precipitation was reported at KSUS at the time of the accident. The NTSB will release its findings very soon, but the temperature profile on that evening included a healthy surface-based inversion and clearly the standard lapse rate would lead to a much lower freezing level.

Warm Air Overrun

With a little weather forensics, it was easy to discover that this was the classic case of warm air overrunning cold air—the result of the northerly movement of a warm front through the accident area as shown above. In fact, the temperature at approximately 5,000 feet msl was 9 degrees Celsius as shown below. It is not possible to accrete ice at those static air temperatures. Yes, there was freezing rain reported at the surface about 100 nm to the north-northeast at the Abraham Lincoln Capital Airport (KSPI) in Springfield, Illinois, where it was much colder, and the surface temperature was a chilly 1 degree Celsius.

Even so, there was a massive temperature inversion aloft over Springfield such that the temperature at 3,100 feet msl was 8 degrees Celsius. That’s an increase of 7 degrees Celsius at 2,500 feet above the surface. The temperature didn’t go negative over Springfield until roughly 9,000 feet msl. Whether in St. Louis or Springfield, this would have created a warm-soaked aircraft in the climb.

Where There’s Freezing Rain

In a freezing rain scenario, it is common to have two (or more) freezing levels. One way this occurs is in the presence of deep saturated conditions with cold cloud top temperatures. This allows ice crystal growth and creates snow which falls into a melting layer to create rain. These drops then fall into a subfreezing layer near the surface to create supercooled large droplet (SLD) icing called freezing rain. All of this is courtesy of a surface-based temperature inversion with multiple freezing levels aloft. This is the classical freezing rain temperature profile.

But there’s also a more common case where clouds aloft are dominated by liquid when the cloud top temperature is much warmer. In this non-classical case, there may be two or more freezing levels, or the entire temperature profile may be below zero degrees Celsius. In this non-classical case, the saturated layer has a depth usually less than about 10,000 feet. This places the temperature of the cloud top to be warmer than negative-12 degrees Celsius. Warm-topped precipitation events like this—even when the entire temperature profile is below freezing—are dominated by water in the liquid state and often produce drizzle-sized drops with little or no ice crystals that are needed to develop the growth of snowflakes. This kind of non-classical temperature profile produces most of the cases of freezing rain and freezing drizzle.

If you want to avoid making a bad judgment, understand the big weather picture and then use the lowest freezing level forecast, like the one depicted above, which is found on the Aviation Weather Center’s website. This includes an analysis along with hourly forecasts up to 18 hours from the time they are issued.

This forecast is automated but is updated hourly and is generated from the Rapid Refresh (RAP) numerical weather prediction model. The vertical resolution is quite reasonable at 2,000 feet.

The official freezing level forecast is found on the same website at aviationweather.gov/gairmet. This graphical AIRMET (G-AIRMET) forecast is issued by aviation meteorologists and depicts the freezing level at 4,000-foot intervals. It also indicates where multiple freezing levels may exist, including their height. Its spatial and temporal resolution is not as good as the automated forecast, however.

If you are a weather nerd, you might try learning how to use a Skew-T log (p) diagram like the one above. One of the most interactive websites for these is found at rucsoundings.noaa.gov. The Op40 input data source used here is the same RAP model that is used to produce the lowest freezing level chart forecast. With such a diagram, you can precisely pinpoint the forecast freezing level over a particular location at a particular time or determine for yourself if multiple freezing levels exist.

And if you are a bit lazy, you can use a vertical route profile or vertical cross section that depicts the freezing level along your proposed route of flight. Many of the heavyweight apps have such a depiction, including my progressive web app, EZWxBrief. With a profile view, as shown above, it’s painless to see how the freezing level changes across your route of flight so you can quickly compare this to your proposed altitude. In fact, in addition to lines of constant temperature that include the zero-degree isotherm, you can overlay other key elements, such as clouds, icing severity, or even turbulence.

From the December 2022/January 2023 Issue 933 of FLYING

The post Rising Above the Freezing Level appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

ALPHA was promised for April, and Pipistrel nailed it — how often do we see that in manufacturing?

Pipistrel is the same progressive Slovenian company that won the CAFE electric flight competition last year with the Taurus Electro G4 and has gained a growing reputation in the sport aviation industry for innovative, high-performing, highly efficient aircraft such as the Virus and Sinus S-LSA.

After keeping its promise to debut the ALPHA in April at the European AERO show, word comes from Ivo Boscarol and company of the successful conclusion of flight testing. The ALPHA is now in production.

The original concept was to create a do-it-all trainer that would garner substantial orders, enabling mass production economies of scale that would keep costs affordable for everyone.
Due to the wide variance in regulations country to country, Pipistrel realized that goal was not feasible and instead offers two versions of the ALPHA.

For countries in support of FAA-LSA (or ASTM-certified) standards, the company offers a 1212 lb. (550 kg) MTOW version.

In places where the UL LTF standard is adopted, the European Ultralight/Microlight model, with a MTOW of 1047 lb. (472.5 kg), takes center stage.

Even though the price is dramatically lower than comparable composite LSA, the ALPHA Trainer is no stripped-down, bare bones bird.

Some of many appealing features for this latest in a line of low-drag, light-weight LSA:
<> Strong and easy to fly for entry-level students
<> Ballistic parachute system
<> Benign stall and overall handling
<> Affordable and easy to operate, maintain and repair
<> Built for endurance (takeoff/landing circuits) and extremes of weather: good ventilation and cabin heating
<> Approved strobes and lighting
<> Quiet cockpit for easy communication between instructor and student
<> Readily available access to spare parts for quick repair turnaround — vital for flight schools

<> Good cross-country training range (390 nm)
<> Easy daily service and refueling,
<> Durable finish for outdoor storage
<> Good brakes for ground handling emergencies
<> Dual flight controls with quick/easy adjustment for a variety of body types
<> Long operating life
<> Tricycle configuration with steerable nose wheel
<> Easy cockpit ingress, even for older students
<> Affordable and cost-effective to operate

Some other features: robust composite undercarriage, including a shorter, stronger nose strut which improves visibility during taxi.

The 15-gallon, easy-fill fuel tank is fuselage mounted and gives 5 hours endurance. And that fuel burn estimate factors in multiple takeoff/landing circuits too.

Pipistrel is known for its superbly clean aerodynamics: though power comes from the tried-and-true Rotax 912, 80 hp engine, the ALPHA is no performance slouch with a cruise speed of 108 knots (same as a Cessna 172), “very short” take-off distance and a climb rate listed at more than 1000 fpm.

The ALPHA Trainer uses the basic fuselage shape from its other successful designs but the wing, from the Pipistrel Virus SW (Short Wing), is significantly redesigned to eliminate air brakes (wing top spoilers) and incorporates redesigned flaperons with 25° of flap travel.

Also new is a wooden propeller, designed and CNC-carved in house, then covered with a durable coating.

Lots more to appreciate here and congratulations to Pipistrel for another dramatic entry into the field.

My big question is, will the market recognize this as the breakthrough design I believe it to be and order in sufficient quantities to make it another Pipistrel success story? We’ll see.

The post Pipistrel Comes Through Again appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.

All this attention also signifies somebody at Terrafugia is really doing a superb job at getting the word out, which has in fact been evident from the beginning: I’ve seen notices of hundreds of articles in all kinds of publications since the program was first announced some years ago.

Clearly the idea of a Jetsons-style flying car continues to tickle the cultural subconscious.

That the Transition is wildly unaffordable for most 99 percenters hardly matters: it’s kind of a kick, isn’t it, to imagine being able to fly your car anywhere, then drive around once you get there?

Of course, it seems vastly more logical, and certainly more cost effective, to simply fly where you want in an airplane, and carry more than two people by the way, then rent a nice big comfortable car once you get there, but hey, let’s not stomp on romantic notions, alright?

Still, I can’t help but wonder, after returning from 2+ weeks driving through the breathtaking Utah, Arizona and Colorado canyon country, how practical a flying car will ever be.

Take the Transition: those vertical folded wing panels might not cope too well with the kind of hellacious sand/dust storms I experienced more than once driving through high desert landscapes. I was tense at times just driving our rental car!

To be fair, it seems likely anyone who buys one of these come-to-life fantasies would be prudent to practice the same kind of weather-checking safety acumen required of any pilot before he/she climbs into an aircraft, lest they find, after a vicious gust on the highway, that the flying mission of the car was no longer possible because the wings were cartwheeling downwind all by themselves at 50 mph.

I don’t mean to poke fun at the Transition or any other promising flying road vehicle, such as the Maverick (which uses a dune buggy “fuselage”, a large paraglider-type airfoil and costs $94,000 and is being marketed as a kit to avoid a mountain of regulatory hassles) and the PAL-V roadable gyrocopter, I guess you’d call it, which is indeed a cool, spacey-looking vehicle. They’re marvels of engineering and deserve our respect just for that.

The Dutch company that produces the PAL-V, for Personal Air and Land Vehicle, just flew it’s Proof of Concept model and projects its cost at $300,000 when it hits the market in 2014.

At 1,500 lbs., though, it won’t qualify as an LSA.

Flying car dreams are nothing new. There have been many, many designs that actually flew but most never came to market over the decades since civilian flight began.

And let’s not overlook Moller Internationalwhich has somehow gone through tens of millions of dollars of investor money without, so far as I’ve been able to discover, ever marketing a flying production vehicle through more than 40 years of trying.

That doesn’t prevent the company from also showing up in the news on a regular basis, typically with yet another new design (there have been several).

Kind of amazing how Dr. Moller’s managed to levitate through the years amidst prevalent and recurring bankruptcy rumors without ever producing a single vehicle…and it’s probably a good thing, since when these designs lose just one engine, they are heading straight for the ground. Engine technology may someday approach complete immunity from mechanical breakdown, but not in our lifetimes for sure.

Nonetheless, last month the Transition drew admiring crowds at the New York Auto show even though it’s now pegged to cost $279,000 once it’s in production, perhaps next year.
Enthusiasm for flying cars shows no signs of waning, not if Terrafugia’s PR people and news organs like the LA Times have anything to say about it.

The post Roadable Airplane, Meet Mainstream Media appeared first on Plane & Pilot Magazine.