If you like airplane statistics and facts, this article may interest you. Some pilots don’t follow such things while others eat it up (you know who you are). For these readers, we have a new perspective that many may find intriguing.

The comparisons below relate to the numbers of Single Engine Piston (SEP) general aviation (GA) aircraft on the U.S. registry compared to an umbrella group including SLSA, ELSA, and kit-built aircraft that Sport Pilots may fly (or those using a different certificate but exercising the privileges of Sport Pilot) …in other words, all the aircraft we cover on this website.

Even after more than 15 years of LSA and the kits that Sport Pilots can fly, the GA fleet still seems immeasurably larger. The truth is, we can measure it; in fact, we have up-to-date info and both are as accurate as FAA’s database allows.

Which Is Bigger?

The total SEP GA fleet numbers approximately 135,000 aircraft, 15 times larger than LSA/SP kits (by our criteria, about 9,000 aircraft) but the bigger number includes aircraft made since the 1940s and significantly in the ’60s and ’70s.

As most aviators know, the GA fleet averages better than 40 years old where the entire LSA/SP kit fleet is less than 15 years old. It will be decades before LSA/SP kits catch up with the GA fleet, if ever …although that’s before the LSA sector undergoes a major transformation and likely expansion in 2023 (more on that here, and we will offer regular updates).

Aero Adventure‘s Aventura kit aircraft models are part of a gaggle of Sport Pilot kits enjoying solid growth.

The size difference takes on a different view when we compare only the period from 2005 forward. This is when the first LSA started winning FAA acceptance signaling the official start of the industry.

Given this history, all our data points start in 2005; we count nothing before even if that aircraft would today be called a Sport Pilot kit aircraft.

(To save space, I will use “LSA/SP kits” to represent Special, fully-built LSA plus Experimental LSA plus Experimental Amateur Built Sport Pilot kit aircraft.)

When you go global with these two aviation sectors, you find the USA has 80% of the GA fleet with the entire rest of the globe flying the other 20%.

The table is turned upside down for LSA/SP kits, where the USA has about 20% of the global total and all other countries account for 80%. However, the U.S. share appears to be increasing gradually since the recession of 2007-2009. As you can note that recession hit GA very hard; the GA industry has yet to recover to pre-recession registrations.

Since 2005

Viewed in total, the numbers for GA compared to LSA/SP kits are remarkably close. For all of 2019, the LSA/SP kit market registered 690 aircraft (up 8.3% over 2018) while GA registered 729 single engine aircraft (up 3.5% over 2018).

Although SEP GA registered about 6% more aircraft in 2019, a major share of that count comes from one brand, Cirrus Design. The Minnesota company alone accounts for close to 40% of all GA airplanes registered last year. Cirrus registrations have been quite steady over the last three years, though 2019 was the lowest of the three.

As always, please remember registrations will not precisely equal a manufacturer’s reported deliveries perhaps due to year-end paperwork delays that affected at least two producers of light aircraft in 2019.

Take Cirrus out of the count and GA registered 448 aircraft from 15 producers, only 65% as many as all LSA/SP kit producers registered.

Although we have clear leaders in LSA/SP kits (see chart), the 690 aircraft come from an impressive list of 171 producers, more than 11 times more manufacturers than for SEP GA aircraft. This clearly illustrates what happens when you free up the design energy and productive spirit of small aviation companies.

Given a means of market entry, we saw the arrival of a new batch of manufacturers with a flock of new models to satisfy the diverse interests of pilots: from those seeking speedy cross country cruisers to back country taildraggers to special flying machines like gyroplanes, weight shift trikes, and powered parachutes. Go LSA and Sport Pilot kits!

Again a shout-out to Steve Beste, our supreme “datastician.” The GA info presented here was stimulated after an exchange between Steve and General Aviation News publisher, Ben Sclair. All data is from FAA’s registration database but, other than the tables and charts, all statements in this article are mine alone.

Compress Post ...

Welcome to the two-seat Sherwood Scout. We previously presented Sherwood’s single-place Kub. Now, our favorite British writer, Dave Unwin — master pilot of many aircraft of widely varying types — reviews the UK company’s Scout model. All photos are by UK photographer extraordinaire, Keith Wilson. Thanks to both gentlemen. Enjoy! —DJ

A handsome high-wing, side-by-side two seater, Scout’s lineage goes back to 1983, when Dean Wilson’s trendsetter-to-be Avid Flyer was first introduced.

His often-imitated design was the basis for Kitfox, Rocky Mountain’s Ridge Runner and the Flying K Sky Raider. The latter morphed into the Just Aircraft Escapade.

When The Light Aircraft Company — TLAC — bought the design in 2013 the first thing Paul Hendry-Smith and his team did was implement a significant number of improvements to both its design and construction.

They improved stability, pitch authority, and decreased adverse yaw. After a year of flight testing various revisions, they enlarged both the elevator and rudder, cleaned up the junction between the wing root and flaps, added gap seals and implemented several other aerodynamic tweaks.

Describing Scout

Renamed the Sherwood Scout, TLAC currently market it as either a ready-to-fly factory-built microlight or as a kit or fast-build kit. The overall construction is TIG-welded 4130 steel tube, while the wings use aluminum spars and plywood ribs. The fuselage, wings and tail are all covered with Oratex (see at end) and power can be supplied by either the 80 or 100-horsepower Rotax 912, 85-horsepower Jabiru 2200, 95-horsepower UL260i or a 95-horsepower D-Motor. Scout can be configured with either a tricycle or tailwheel undercarriage (converting takes only two hours) and is fitted with wings that can be quickly and easily folded aft with no control disconnection.

Of course, the folding mechanism adds both weight and complexity (two things that light aircraft designers generally try to avoid), but the trade-off in this instance is worth it; the wing-fold mechanism does not add much weight or complexity.

Scout’s constant chord wings are braced by V-struts, with about half of the trailing edge taken up by the large, single-slotted mechanically-actuated flaps with four positions: 0°–10°–25°–40°. Ailerons extend to the cambered tips, which feature large LED position lights.

The tail consists of a very slightly swept-back fin and large rudder, a tailplane braced by a combination of struts and wires, and separate elevators. Primary controls are actuated by a mixture of pushrods, bellcranks, and cables. Longitudinal trim is provided by a large tab set into the trailing edge of the left elevator. 

The main undercarriage uses bungees for shock absorption and is fitted with tundra tires and slotted hydraulic disc brakes. The pneumatic tailwheel steers through the rudder pedals up to about 30° each way; beyond that it breaks out and free-castors. If fitted with a nosewheel it free-castors with steering provided by differential braking. 

All Scout’s fuel is carried in two 9-gallon metal tanks located in the wings, which feed into a fuselage-mounted one gallon header tank to give a total capacity of 20 gallons although a pair of 13-gallon long-range tanks are an option.

Access to the cockpit is good. The front-hinged doors are enormous — they open 180° — and the surrounding frame is comfortably low. The doors are skinned with Perspex, and the top half hinges upward. If it’s warm you can fly with the top half open, or simply remove the entire door!

With a maximum width of 44 inches Scout’s cockpit and the extensive glazing gives it a very airy feel. The baggage bay behind the seats has an impressive volume of 17 cubic feet, and its open floor area can take up to 77 pounds. Unusually for an aircraft in this class the seats adjust, secured in position with a positive locking pin.

In another indicator of the high build spec there are toe brakes for both pilots. The tall, slightly curved sticks feel very natural, while levers for the flaps and trim are between the seats. The plunger-type throttle is mounted centrally just below the instrument panel, an easy reach from either seat.

Flight and engine instruments are a mixture of analog and digital — an MGL Discovery-Lite IEFIS — which shows both flight and engine information and even synthetic vision, with the analogue ASI and altimeter to its right. A Trig transceiver and transponder are mounted in the center of the panel along with the circuit breakers and electrical switches and analog oil pressure and temperature, coolant temperature and voltmeter on the right. On the left is the Master and a key-operated rotary unit for the mags and starter. 

It’s all neatly and logically laid out, with very little to criticize. With the flaps deployed the trim lever isn’t quite so accessible while as fuel quantity remaining is only shown by sight-tubes in the wing roots.

The 912 starts easily (it is fitted with the “soft start system”) and runs smoothly, but I am soon reminded of what may be the worst feature of any 9-series Rotax: the powerful throttle springs. These are arranged to give full power should the throttle cable break, so unless you have the throttle friction wound right down, then the second you let go of the throttle that’s what happens. Of course, like most of us I generally keep my hand on the throttle when I’m on the ground, but even briefly setting the flaps, adjusting the trim, or any other task, can have the engine accelerating alarmingly quickly. Conversely, if the friction is wound right down, you have no finesse.

Preparing to Fly 

With the minimal pre-take off checks complete and 25° of flap set I line up on runway 25 and smoothly open the throttle. I wouldn’t describe Keith and I as “overweight” — more “underheight” — but even with full tanks we’re still about 45 pounds below the 1,098-pound maximum all-up weight.

Ambient conditions are slightly above standard atmospheric, with an airfield elevation of 196 feet and an outside air temperature of 66°F. We had about ten knots on the nose, the grass is short and the acceleration excellent. I doubt we used even the first 300 feet of the 2,700 available. Scout’s climb rate was equally impressive, the best rate of climb of 55 knots produced around 900 fpm. 

Aloft, I commenced my evaluation with an examination of the general handling, and a couple of steep turns and reversals reveal crisp, authoritative controls with delightfully pleasant stick forces. Controls all seemed agreeably light and reasonably frictionless, with low breakout forces and control around all three axes is very good, with the roll rate being particularly noteworthy. It’s fun to fly.

Visibility in the turn — and indeed every phase of flight — was very good for a high-wing aircraft. An exploration of the stick-free stability around all three axes revealed it to be strongly positive longitudinally, weakly positive directionally and positive laterally. Slowing down to examine the stall confirms what I already suspected: this is a very well-mannered flying machine.

As the flaps extend they produce a very slight nose-down pitching moment that is easily trimmed out. There is no stall warning but the speeds are so slow and the deck angle so high that it’s obvious that something isn’t going well. With any flap deployed and irrespective of the power setting it always broke straight ahead, although with the flaps fully up it did have a slight tendency to drop the left wing. With full flaps and a hint of power we got the IAS down to 31 knots.

At the other side of the speed scale I got the distinct impression that it would probably exceed Vne in straight and level flight, though we didn’t try due to some turblence.

With Keith diligently taking notes, an examination of the cruise revealed that 5,100 rpm at 3,000 feet produced a TAS of 96 knots with a fuel flow of a bit more than four gph. This means that the range at fast cruise is around 360 nm with at least 30 minutes’ fuel left. Pulling the power down to 4,000 rpm saw the fuel flow drop to a bit over two gph. Fit the optional long range tanks and the maximum endurance rises to a butt-bruising eleven hours!

Back at launch airfield I discovered that, as with just about every other aspect of flying the Scout, it’s a very honest aircraft in the pattern, with perhaps the single caveat that pilots converting to it from older, heavier machines need to bear in mind that it has considerably less inertia than a Cessna 152 or Piper Tomahawk. Indeed, for the first few hours it’s probably prudent to stay away from using full flaps because speed bleeds away quickly. Maintain speed at 50 knots over the fence and Scout will touch down where you want it every time. Having got comfortable landing on the long runway 25 I finish off with a smooth three-pointer on the shorter length of turf that parallels the taxiway. Great fun!

One more thing: Folding Scout’s wings is both a quick and simple process while all the controls remain connected. That’s great for those who want to use less hangar space or wish to trailer their Scout.

Conclusions?

I honestly feel that TLAC has got a winner here! Obviously care needs to be taken with the weight and balance of the lightest version, but with a typical useful load in excess of 517 pounds the larger Scout is a very practical machine, with good numbers for speed, range and endurance, and the ability to carry a good load into and out of rather short strips. The folding wings are a big plus, while the ability to reconfigure from a nosewheel to a tailwheel quickly and easily could also be very useful. I liked it, a lot.

Sherwood Scout
The Light Aeroplane Company Ltd

• Length — 19 feet       
• Height — 5.75 feet
• Wing Span — 28.5 feet / wings folded — 8 feet
• Wing Area — 120 square feet   
• Empty Weight — 578 pounds            
• Gross Weight — 1,098 pounds        
• Useful Load — 522 pounds
• Payload (with full standard fuel) — 402 pounds               
• Wing Loading — 10.47 pounds per square foot
• Power Loading — 11 pounds per horsepower
• Fuel Capacity — 20 gallons 
• Baggage Capacity — 77 pounds
• Never-Exceed Speed — 115 knots 
• Maximum Cruise (True Air Speed) — 95 knots
• Economical Cruise — 80 knots
• Stall — 34 knots
• Climb Rate — 1000 feet per minute
• Take Off Distance over 50 foot obstacle — 600 feet
• Landing Roll over 50 foot obstacle — 600 feet
• Powerplant — Rotax 912ULS 100hp
• Propeller — Composite three-blade fixed pitch

Oratex No-Paint Covering

Developed in Germany, Oratex is a water-based, solvent-free, pre-colored aircraft covering system that is available in two different weights, depending on the size of aircraft.

It is claimed to offer several significant advantages over legacy covering products such as Ceconite, Diatex, and Polyfiber. Unlike earlier systems, it is non-toxic and, being pre-colored, makes Oratex quicker and safer to work with, while the covered aircraft is invariably lighter, as you don’t have to paint it.

Compress Post ...

As we kick off a new year and a new decade, it feels like the starter’s timer has just been clicked into action. The next four years should prove to be highly interesting — and for all of aviation, not only Light-Sport Aircraft, Sport Pilot kit aircraft, and ultralights. Change can be difficult, but it’s coming. For the most part, I feel this is heading in a great direction even if some may struggle with elements of the new rule.

Earlier, an often-shared report discussed the changes FAA plans as part of a “deregulation” of Light-Sport Aircraft. Below, you can see a video that stimulated numerous comments.

An updated report is still being prepared from a late-fall 2019 discussion with FAA rule writers. That will be sent to LAMA members first with specific details. Other industry pros will get a simpler update so all the makers of our great aircraft can be prepared when the rule is issued no more than four years from now.

In this article, I will answer some common questions. The goal is not to repeat the earlier info but to provide clarification. Call this an FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) review.

Light-Sport Aircraft are being presented with new opportunities and I hope both manufacturers and pilots will take full advantage of all the new rule may offer.

Wait, Weight! Do Tell Me

A common misconception is that “FAA is raising the weight of LSA.” Nope, they are not. They are creating a Power Index that will describe the aircraft’s size while trying to keep LSA “safe, simple, and easy to fly” yet encourage them to grow and develop. That short phrase is FAA’s stated goal, so, simplistically, larger airplanes will require larger wings to keep their flight qualities docile.

The striking Bristell RG (retractable gear) may be available as a Light-Sport Aircraft. Also see Bristell USA.

Aircraft will indeed be permitted to be heavier, perhaps even as high as the 3,600-pound number once stated (though more likely topping out at 3,000 pounds). The fall 2019 speculation was wrong but weights of LSA will indeed rise.

FAA’s goal here is not to fit Cessna 150s and 172s or Pipers or other legacy GA airplanes into the mix (though they may qualify), but rather to increase the capability of LSA and to “bridge the gap between present-day LSA and certified aircraft meeting Part 23” (which itself is changing), said FAA personnel.

Texas Aircraft‘s Colt 100 is a clean-sheet design approved in 2019.

One hard number associated with FAA’s Power Index — basically a formula that hopes to assure agency goals — is stall speed. While horsepower may also be capped at 200 horsepower, it is nearly certain that stall speed will be limited to 50 knots while using devices like flaps and other wing modifications.

Many LSA do NOT need to get heavier. I think of weight shift trikes, powered parachutes, gyroplanes, and motor gliders. Many fixed wing designs are also perfectly fine as they are. A heavier aircraft, requiring more raw material and needing more power will surely be more costly although they should offer additional capabilities. Some producers strive to keep prices low and affordable so they might stay at 1,320 pounds or their present weight… nothing wrong with that, of course.

Other Benefits

ByDanJohnson.com office manager, Randee Laskewitz, went up in the Magni gyro with expert gyronaut, Greg Gremminger of Magni Gyro USA.

I reported that LSA may also get: • in-flight adjustable props, • more seats, • higher speeds, • electric or hybrid propulsion, • fully-built gyroplanes should arrive, and — the big one: we hope for • commercial use of LSA. Some pilots will see this as a chance to pursue a new business and manufacturers may embrace this as a way to sell more aircraft.

Many have asked about retractable gear. While I did not report this earlier, that configuration is also in planning. However, as stated earlier, none of this is certain even if it is likely. Several other FAA departments have to weigh in and then it will (later, perhaps in 2021?) be released for public comment, which could further change it.

FAQs from the Video Below

As you can read for yourself if you wish, many comments were posed after the video was uploaded. Here is a brief summary of what I read among the comments:

Higher speeds — Yes. While not 200 knots, it seems entirely possible LSA may be allowed to zoom past 120 knots, perhaps to 140 or more. As with all parts of the proposed rule, this is still being decided and any number of FAA entities, including the tough Legal Department, have to (hopefully) add their blessing.

Why Build Now? — One commenter asked, “Why produce something under the old standards if there are changes coming?” As mentioned above, some aircraft do not need to change; I can think of many that are ideal as they are now. However, an ambitious manufacturer will see new markets to explore with larger,  faster, more capable aircraft. Just because a 2024 LSA could weigh 3,000 pounds doesn’t mean it must. However, if a builder does wish to pursue a new model, they need information sooner than later.

The Airplane Factory USA flies the Sling 2 in formation with Sling 4.

Why Buy Now? — Impending rule change can cause market paralysis, which would be a most regretful result. Please, potential buyers… remember that this rule will not become effective for around four years. If you wait for something later, you will miss out on lots of good flying over those years. You can always sell what you have now or may acquire during the next four years; used LSA sales are a growing phenomenon and offer more affordable prices.

Super Sexy? — Ekolot America‘s shapely Topaz lives up to its registration numbers. photo by Pawel Hawrot

If you cannot live without an in-flight adjustable prop or retractable gear or four seats or other promises, well, you’re stuck. You must buy a much-more costly (probably older) certified aircraft. Others could spend the hours to build a kit or buy one some other person built. If you fly for fun, you have so many choices now it’s hard to choose the ideal one for you. Need help deciding? Try PlaneFinder 2.0; it’s fun and may help you select your perfect LSA.

Badland Aircraft’s F-series Part 103 entry was a hit when it debuted at EAA Airventure Oshkosh 2019.

Won’t Current LSA Lose their Value? — Legacy Cessnas, Cirruses, or Pipers have faced this music for decades. Anything new — car, boat, RV, etc. — will lose some value after purchase. However, LSA will hold up much better than your current computer or TV, both of which will lose nearly all their value within weeks after you take it home.

You are urged to keep in mind that enjoying a present-day LSA is a thing of joy… now! If you wait, think about all the great flights you will miss. You have 150 models to choose between: see our SLSA List.

Flying GA Airplanes with a Sport Pilot certificate (without an aviation medical) — A commenter asked, “Will this new rule will allow planes like the Piper Cherokee to be considered as acceptable for LSA status and [can owners] change their certification [to LSA]?” Simply, we don’t know yet. I am quite sure the effort to allow weight to rise and to add other features was not to bring in legacy GA designs to become LSA. FAA’s usual pattern is that when an aircraft is certified or accepted as one type, it generally cannot be changed to another classification.

Perhaps more to the point, will FAA allow you to fly a 2,500-pound GA airplane with a Sport Pilot certificate …without getting a Class 1-2-3 medical? Alternatively, can a Sport Pilot fly a 3,000-pound new LSA? We don’t know this either.

Our hope is that FAA will allow the Sport Pilot certificate to be used to fly heavier, more capable aircraft perhaps using the logbook endorsement method employed today. For example, a basic SP certificate does not allow flight into Class B airspace until the pilot has received additional training for this. However, after getting more instruction, a SP ticket holder can fly into Class B once securing only a logbook endorsement (no further testing is needed).

Shockingly short takeoff roll and a blistering climb makes Sportair USA‘s LSA true to its name.

Multiple Engines on LSA — A commenter asked, “How about a multiengine LSA?” LAMA has posed this question to FAA and it may be possible. At least for electric propulsion, the idea of what’s often called “distributed lift” — that is, multiple motors/props driven by a common energy source — is being considered by rule writers.

Bad FAA? — Although a number of commenters threw darts at FAA for not being more responsive or for taking too long with this regulation, LAMA advocates for industry have seen FAA be very open to new ideas for LSA and for letting industry handle more of the approval process. The agency has been remarkably receptive to every idea LAMA has presented and they specifically say they want to be “less restrictive, less prescriptive.”

The one-and-only Arion Lightning taildragger has that go-fast look.

Yes, 2023 seems a long way off now, but two points are worthwhile: (1) to be all completed by the end of 2023, dictated by a congressional mandate attached to FAA budget funding, rule writers must complete their final drafts by the end of 2021 or so; (2) this is a sweeping, comprehensive rule with lots of detail. I have observed FAA personnel working diligently on this but it will take a couple years more to sort out hundreds of points… especially as this significantly changes how FAA does business (giving industry more leeway to devise methods and standards). I urge patience.

U-Fly-It‘s Aerolite 103 is so popular they can barely keep up.

Changing Part 103 Ultralight Vehicles — (A fair number of comments spoke to Part 103 ultralights.) Nope, no changes coming. While some think this is imperative, many experts feel certain that to ask for changes will be to upset the least-regulated form of manned flight in the USA. Other countries have adopted similar hands-off rules (SSDR in England; 120-Kilogram Class in Germany, etc.). Many believe that asking for any change to Part 103 could potentially ruin the charm of these lightest-of-aircraft… ‘er “vehicles.” Perhaps later, but no change to Part 103 is sought at this time.

North Wing makes wings for many trikes plus their own LSA models.

The good news about Part 103 is you have several good choices now (Kolb Firefly, Aerolite 103, Badlands F-series, and others plus a number of trikes or PPCs or PPGs). Those aircraft are selling well enough that the first two mentioned are backed up trying to satisfy demand.

More? — It’s great that pilots are reacting to this news and that manufacturers are studying everything they can as they plan their next steps. Indeed, the next four years will be very exciting — both positively and confusingly. Change is coming. Our mission is to give you more info, to help you stay informed, and hopefully all will see ways the coming changes will be good for them.

Nonetheless, to repeat, LSA manufacturers are building some fine aircraft today, in a dizzying number of models and configurations. Pilots have never seen a better time to buy and fly something you love. So, get out and do so — but be smart and safe in your enjoyment.

Happy New Year!

The lead photo seen on the home page was of a Progressive Aerodyne Searey LSX dubbed “Phaeton” and owned by Robert Richardson. It depicts the Maryland state flag in its graphics. A Searey is used by RS Aerotech’s project to develop single lever control for an in-flight adjustable prop.

Compress Post ...

As readers of ByDanJohnson.com know, we enjoy keeping a tight (though not exclusive) focus on the aircraft we love to fly. That approach is not changing but I discovered two products at DeLand Showcase 2019 that can make airplanes safer, perhaps much safer.

As the show concludes tomorrow, I will resume focus on aircraft with more news and fresh video. For now, please consider these two products.

Teknofibra’s Miraculous Cloth

I recorded video with developer and company founder Alessandro Molteni watching as his U.S. representative Mark Harper did a demonstration like you see in the nearby photos.

It looked for all the world like a visual trick — the way a magician or sleight-of-hand artist might fool you. Yet I stood right nearby watching a live person hold a blue-flame torch up to the palm of his hand, protected only by a soft cloth of 4 millimeters (about 1/6th of an inch or about a stack of 3 dime coins). That was the only barrier between tender human skin and a hot fire of more than 2,000°F.

Mark admitted to being nervous before doing this demonstration the first time but he seemed no worse for the wear after applying the scorching torch to the cloth on his hand for more than 30 seconds.

To say I was impressed would be gross understatement.

Working with Teknofibra

The magical material is made of carbon fiber (about 80%) and the balance a closely-guarded secret. Soft to the touch, something like felt, Teknofibra cuts easily with a scissors and does not produce fibers that are harmful.

Ceramic fibers may have similar heat resistance but working with such material requires a breathing filter, gloves, and other protective clothing. If you’ve ever rubbed again fiberglass insulation with bare skin, you know how uncomfortable that is and it can itch for days. Ceramic fiber is said to be much worse. Teknofibra seems innocent in comparison.

Taking the material directly from Mark after his blowtorch demo, the cloth felt only slightly warm. It appeared completely unaffected and is comfortable enough against the skin that you could make fire retardant clothing from it, I imagine.

Uses of Teknofibra

Mark Harper is not an aviation guy. His business supplies high-end motorcycle racing. One use is to protect fiberglass body parts from hot exhaust pipes near the bodywork. Alessandro said it is widely used in auto racing and customers include a wide range of top names in that field. The uses are potentially endless.

For pilots… the uses are arguably even more valuable because of the seriousness of an in-flight fire. A firewall protected with material about 8 mm thick (a little more than a quarter inch) can be mated to a thin foil on one side and with an adhesive on the other. Recall it can easily be cut to fit precisely.

In addition electrical wires and fuel lines can be wrapped with material. Teknofibra supplies this in pre-made tubes of many dimensions. For an airplane manufacturer or kit builder, this would be a great finish. Airplanes already flying can use a sheet form of the material with strategically-placed adhesive so you can wrap the wires or fuel lines.

Still Not All the Value

Fire resistance is certainly a worthy application of Teknofibra but it also has very significant sound deadening capabilities. A test stand involving an 8-inch wide tube into which was inserted a sheet of the 8 millimeter (or so) material such that it filled the inside diameter of the tube. At the bottom was an electric bell.

When the Teknofibra was in the tube I could hear the bell ringing but it was clearly muted. When Mark pulled out the Teknofibra inner cylinder, the bell was at least twice as loud, maybe more.

Imagine not only the firewall but your cockpit side panels, floor, and ceiling being lined with Teknofibra before the interior finish was applied. You might quiet your cockpit fairly dramatically and that can reduce pilot fatigue.

Technically-inquisitive readers can go to Teknofibra’s page, which explains how the material works.

Ah, but such a remarkable material must be very expensive, yes? Nope. A firewall for a common Light-Sport Aircraft might cost around $100-150. Surrounding the entire cockpit with the miracle fiber might run $1,000 but you’d have one of the quietest (and safest) cockpits anywhere. Compared to the cost of many LSA today, that seems a modestly-priced and worthy option. Contact Mark at his website to learn more.

Anti-Explosion Fuel Tank

I did not get to examine this in the same way as Teknofibra, but the Skyblazer 1 gyroplane from Italy has a special fuel tank under the aft seat. This seems another worthy development to consider. The idea is not new but imagine experiencing an aircraft accident where no fuel can be spilled. Fire danger drops sharply.

These cost more than standard fuel tanks, but I was told by a reliable source that a completely filled anti-explosive tank — sometimes called a “safety tank” — can sustain a drop from 100 feet without rupturing. Several light aircraft makers use such tanks to increase safety.

Put anti-explosive tanks and Teknofibra together and you significantly increase fire safety for airplane occupants. Doesn’t that seem worth further consideration?

Compress Post ...