Sign in to follow this  
wolfpack21643

Bug Out Aircraft

Recommended Posts

I have been considering the para-glider concept. NO FFA issues, fuel efficient light able to work in limited take off environments. only issue is they cant handle any really rough weather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been considering the para-glider concept. NO FFA issues, fuel efficient light able to work in limited take off environments. only issue is they cant handle any really rough weather.

 

Yup! They are pretty neat. Limited usually to early morning or late in the day when the wind is very light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Rod when my Sheriffs Office first got into aviation we started out with a Skykits Savannah VG which is a copy of the Zenith 701. We had a Rotax 100hp 912 in it and flew the crap out of it. I am probaly one of the highest time pilots in the world in that type of aircraft (over 2500 hours logged). I will tell you this dont be in a hurry to put hours on your Zenith because that thin aluminum wont take the stress of landing and engine vibration very well over the hours.

 

After 1000 hours we started having to fix alot of structral issues caused by vibration and at 2000 hours the plane was used up and ready for the bone yard. The last 500 I put on it had me holding my breath alot (haha).

 

As far as the paraglider thing goes I dont think it would be a great help. It makes enough noise that you would be heard way before you are seen and you move so slow that you are a sitting duck. And the weather has to be perfect.

 

I currently serve on a panel for the Dept. of Justice which eveluates small aircraft for Police Dept. use and we spent alot of time on para gliders, Gyrocopters and lite sport aircraft (hence the Savannah VG). We found the para gliders not much use because of speed and weather restrictions. There are Police Depts. using them with sucess but they are in areas where they dont have much weather like Southern Calif. ect.

 

The Gyrocopters actually did the best job but the FAA is dead set against them from what I can tell. I have sat in meetings between the DOJ, FAA and Gyro Manufactuers and let me tell you the FAA are a bunch of jerk wads. If one of thier buddies isnt in line to get a kick back then they want nothing to do with it. When you sit in closed door meetings with these guys you see how the govt really works and it aint pretty.

 

The Gyro makers are having a hard time getting thier aircraft approved for use in the US. I have flown about 10 diffrent designs through my work with the DOJ and all I can tell you is they are awesome. Cruise like an airplane land like a helicopter, thier only draw back is not much payload and they burn alot of fuel but if the FAA would be alittle more accepting then you might see their design really improve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Rod when my Sheriffs Office first got into aviation we started out with a Skykits Savannah VG which is a copy of the Zenith 701. We had a Rotax 100hp 912 in it and flew the crap out of it. I am probaly one of the highest time pilots in the world in that type of aircraft (over 2500 hours logged). I will tell you this dont be in a hurry to put hours on your Zenith because that thin aluminum wont take the stress of landing and engine vibration very well over the hours.

 

After 1000 hours we started having to fix alot of structral issues caused by vibration and at 2000 hours the plane was used up and ready for the bone yard. The last 500 I put on it had me holding my breath alot (haha).

 

That is interesting information wolfpack! I had not heard that before. We put a Jabiru 3300 in. It is very smooth and quiet. We can sit in the cockpit without headsets and talk in a normal voice. I think, but may be wrong, that the Zenith sheetmetal is a bit heavier than the Savannah. At least that is what another Savannah driver told me when he switched to a Zenith 750.

 

In any case, I doubt I wil be putting those kind of hours on it. Maybe a hundred a year at most. Jeez, I am just thinking about what your butt must have felt like in that little plane for 2,500 hours! :(

 

I agree about the gyrocopters. I had a chance to fly in one. Boy that was cool!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is interesting information wolfpack! I had not heard that before. We put a Jabiru 3300 in. It is very smooth and quiet. We can sit in the cockpit without headsets and talk in a normal voice. I think, but may be wrong, that the Zenith sheetmetal is a bit heavier than the Savannah. At least that is what another Savannah driver told me when he switched to a Zenith 750.

 

In any case, I doubt I wil be putting those kind of hours on it. Maybe a hundred a year at most. Jeez, I am just thinking about what your butt must have felt like in that little plane for 2,500 hours! :(

 

I dont know about the sheetmetal thickness we also had alot of electrical problems (and ours was factory built). I have never flown a 701 or 750 but I know for a fact that the Savannah is a cheap copy of the Zenith birds. One major problem I had was that Skykits made the cockpit roof even with the wing tops. The Zenith airplanes dip down alot and make the wings look like they were scabbed on but they do that for a reason.

 

The Savannah has horriable rudder authroity because that high cockpit roof blocks the air to the tail on take off and landing. Plus the Zenith has a flying tail and the Savannah has a normal smaller rudder and she is a bear to land in any kind of cross wind.

 

And about the 2500 hours, think cruel and unusaul punishment and you would be close, but hey flying is better then working road patrol anyday!!! Have you had any problems with your Jabiru yet, I have been intrested in them for awhile now and so far the DOJ program has yet to send me a bird that has one installed to test.

 

I have been thinking hard about bulding a RANS S-6 or 7 for awhile now (about 5 years now lol) and the Jabiru gives you more horse power for the same price as the Rotax 912. I have a Rans dealer on my field who bulds several a year for customers (all Rotax installs) so I feel good about customer support during the building process it's just hard to part with the $20,000 it takes to get started. If RANS sold their kits in sub assembleys I would have already pulled the trigger but that 20g at one time is alot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you had any problems with your Jabiru yet, I have been intrested in them for awhile now and so far the DOJ program has yet to send me a bird that has one installed to test.

 

I have been thinking hard about bulding a RANS S-6 or 7 for awhile now (about 5 years now lol) and the Jabiru gives you more horse power for the same price as the Rotax 912. I have a Rans dealer on my field who bulds several a year for customers (all Rotax installs) so I feel good about customer support during the building process it's just hard to part with the $20,000 it takes to get started. If RANS sold their kits in sub assembleys I would have already pulled the trigger but that 20g at one time is alot.

 

The Jabiru has run great though we don't have many hours on it yet. There were some inital cooling problems until we got the baffles set correctly. We just got done re-torcing the head bolts per instructions. Otherwise, smooth as silk! Although, I have to say that I have heard a few complaints about them cropping up on the forums lately. But we have had none of the issues being talked about. Maybe it is because we followed the instructions. :rolleyes:

 

 

I have several friends with the RANS S-6 and S-7. They have nothing but praise for them. The S-7 in particular. Great backcountry machine. Good cruise speed at 118 mph. Nice looking aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have several friends with the RANS S-6 and S-7. They have nothing but praise for them. The S-7 in particular. Great backcountry machine. Good cruise speed at 118 mph. Nice looking aircraft.

 

I have a friend with a S-7 that he built over a three year period. He really did a masterful job and made alot of speed mods. He gets his to cruise at 130 mph with no loss of short field capabilty. It turns heads everywhere it goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
actaully after my post I was looking around at some of the newer paramotors out there they have come a long way in last two years.

 

While they may be better looking with more bells and whistles they still have many faults when it comes to weather like wind and turbulance. I have been flying since I was 12 when my dad bought a Cesnna 150 and now have been flying commercially since 1997. Over the last 6 years I have been flying law enforcement aircraft and have been deeply involved in the Light Sport area with the Dept. of Justice / FAA including paragliders and gyrocopoters.

 

The airfoil of the paramotor just wont support speeds over 30 mph (give or take alittle). That means if the wind is blowing 15 mph when you are head into it then you can not go faster then 15 mph foward. They also sway and swing ALOT in just the lightest form of turbulance due to the cockpit placement hanging by lanyards from the chute. Yes they are fun in very light winds but if you plan on bugging out in one you better hope that it's first thing in the morning or right at dusk (best avg. wind speed times). Paramotors will always be aerodynamicly challanged due to there inherit design. I dont belive you will see any major jumps foward in speed or weather capibility over the next 20 years or so. Everything has a "hull speed" and the paramotors is slow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SLow is fine oddly at least out by me night is also very calm and cruising at about 1500 to 3000 feet i will avoid any obstacles. with extended fuel tanks is was figuring i could pull off a 6 hour flight at about 20mph covering 120 miles in a night is better then 20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The desert along the boarder is full of dead drug runners flying paramotors and ultralights at night. Two stroke motors (which is what most paramotors have) and long distance night flying are more dangrous then getting in the ring with Mike Tyson. And trust me you wont cover 120 miles because there are still winds alot at night even though its calm on the surface. And 6 hours at one time in a paramotor is just laughable at how crazy hard on your body that would be. And if you could get "long range tanks" on a paramotor your weight and balance would be so close to the edge that you would not be able to carry anything at all (like a bug out bag). The dream sounds good but the reality is not even close to what you think it would be. Sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to get my pilots licence. The skills would be there and like someone posted with a pair of bolt cutters the planes would be to. Study, study, study. Look into what planes have what payload and what range. If you have a BOL You would have an idea where you could set a plane down safely. If you don't have a BOL then with the average light plane you would be 200 or 300 miles ahed of the herd of grasshoppers. With a fully loaded Cessna 172 (1 of the most popular) 4 adults and 25# each I think you have 3.5 duration at a cruise speed around 120 mph. That would put you approximately 400 miles ahead of the fleeing mob.

 

Just some thoughts (facts subject to review)

Ben228

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With a fully loaded Cessna 172 (1 of the most popular) 4 adults and 25# each I think you have 3.5 duration at a cruise speed around 120 mph. That would put you approximately 400 miles ahead of the fleeing mob.

 

You be pushing it to get 4 adults in a 172. The performance numbers you read about diffrent aircraft are shall we say embleshied a bit. Aircraft companies are notoriuos for putting up cruise speeds, fuel burn and weight loads that are not even close to what the aircraft will really do. You have to figure in the fuel load when you figure what you can carry.

 

Let me show you an example:

 

We will use the mid 1970's Cessna 172M (which is one of the most common you will find at your local airport)

Gross weight (max take off weight):2300 lbs.

Useful weight (what weight it will carry after empty static aircraft weight is factored in): 1335 lbs

Fuel weight (42 gallons at 6.5 lbs a gallon): 273 lbs.

 

1335 lbs - 273 lbs= 1062 lbs.

So that gives you 265 lbs per person (4 people)

 

Yeah right!!!! hahahaha never happen. You would need 2000 foot of runway to get off the ground with that load and I bet it would be so tail heavy you would only get a 100 mph cruise if you could control the aircraft at all.

 

The real numbers from my exprince (I have close to 1000 hours in a 172M).

 

Full tanks (273 lbs), two 200 lbs guys (400 lbs), two 120 lbs wives (240 lbs) and that adds up to 913 lbs.

And that my friend is all that 172M wants trust me. You would never get into or out of a tight (less then 3000 feet) off airport runway with that load. The cruise speed suffers alot when you fly at gross also.

 

I am all for using a bug out aircraft (I started the thread) but just getting your Pilot Lic. I fear would just get you killed. Planes are not like automoblies. I can get into any Ford F-150 from any year and drive it saftley. Not so with aircraft, due to avionics and engines you could look at two aircraft that came off the assembly line one behind the other and they would be completely diffrent.

 

You need to be a very exprinced pilot when it comes to airplane hopping. I know whenever I fly a new aircraft (and I have flown about 30 diffrent aircraft as pilot in command) I spend alot of time studying the pilots operating hanbook for that exact aircraft, talking to the main pilot of the aircraft and just sitting in the cockpit for a half hour or so studying the switches, gagues ect.

 

I think your best bet would be all joking aside the microsoft flight sim. That program is awesome I use it all the time for IFR and emergency training. I actually had a Tatical Flight Officer who flys with me at work who put several hundred hours in a 172 on his flight sim and after he bugged me to let him shoot a landing one day I gave in and let him. I never had to touch the controls he greased that aircraft right in like a pro.

 

His next three attempts were not too good but he could have gotten us saftely on the ground if he had to so if your plan is to go to the airport then get some real flight training and hit the flight sim because flying is a perishable skill.

 

And one last thought. If a bug out scenerio ever came true, do you really thing uncle same would let you fly his airways without the military chasing you down? On 9-11 they shut the air down for two days I believe (I was forced to land and got stuck in Ohio that day) So you would have to scud run to get anywhere and that is a very dangerous thing to do. It is for the exprinced pilot only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good info. I was just going on printed info. I have a flight simulator and fly them low (scud run) which isn't the same as flying an airplane in the real world.

 

The thread was about using private planes to GOOD. I was thinking that as a general idea it had merit. I still think the idea does have merit but you also brought up some really good points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good info. I was just going on printed info. I have a flight simulator and fly them low (scud run) which isn't the same as flying an airplane in the real world.

 

The thread was about using private planes to GOOD. I was thinking that as a general idea it had merit. I still think the idea does have merit but you also brought up some really good points.

 

Scud running in a time of crisis might be getting alot harder now. Due to my work with the FAA and Dept. of Justice over the last few weeks I have been made privy to the fact that the Feds are now using drones over the main land US. I was flying at work last week when a predator drone pulled up next to my left wing (only about 300 foot away). I was like holy crap. The drone stayed off my wing tip for a bout 5 mintes or so until I made a 180 degree turn and started the other way. It followed about 90 degrees through the turn then straighting up and flew off.

 

I made a call to some friends and found out that those news reports about drones patroling the US are TRUE. I have now seen that drone 3 more times since then, it seems it will shadow us then after a few mintues move on. I think they see my flight path which is in lots of circles (cause Im patroling) and they want to see what im all about. It's the police, policing the police I guess.

 

Now I work about 30 minutes by air from Washington DC so that may be why the drone activity as of late but I was told 4000 of them are now patroling the US. One of the times they pulled up on me when I was at 300 feet off the ground so I know they can see me at ground level so I think the scud running days are over if the Feds want to shut the air down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wolfpack, nice reply involving the 172. Most people find it hard to understand the limitations of an aircraft as they view it from the family car perspective. You did a good job of explaining it.

 

It is interesting to hear about your experiences with Predators. My son is in country over in Afganistan supporting Predator operations as a civilian contractor. He has told me that operations were increasing like crazy in the U.S. for forestry and border patrols. Did not say anything about other uses. I know that General Atomic can't seem to make enough of them. But 4,000 is quite a number! I had no idea they had even produced that many!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK .... someone said my name ..... bad mistake since I felt the disturbance in the ether .....

My daddy taught me to fly over half a century ago, off of 1200 of grass, over 40 foot high lines, in a Cessna 140 (tail wheel not nose gear, 85 hp, two seat piece of mechanical perfection - OK, so I'm biased). I've flown over 5,000 hours airplanes and helicopters. I am a commercial, instrument, multi-engine pilot as well as a military trained helicopter pilot. I've done instruction (I taught my son to fly:D ) and am a school trained (Army and NASA) aircraft accident investigator.

 

The problem for an aircraft as a BOV is that you most likely will not be able to use it if really needed. It can cost up to 4 or 5 thousand dollars a year to MAINTAIN currency even if you never fly for any other reason. Helicopters have gotten very much better (my HUEY required 4 to 6 hours of maintenance for each hour of flight!) but are still incredibly expensive to maintain and fly. They are a lousy flying machine but NOTHING else can do what they do and they are a real blast to fly. Weather is always an issue and I have buried more than one acquaintance who actually thought he could scud-run. If you don't practice scud running, it will kill you and if you do practice scud running you are breaking the law. Oh, yeah, it will also kill you. If you don't fly often, you are NOT good enough to handle a disaster flight. Mountains are different than sea level flying. A four SEAT aircraft is NOT a four adult passenger aircraft. Even some surprisingly big aircraft have weight and balance problems. The Beech 1900 (IIRC) commuter airliner that crashed on takeoff from Atlanta (LOOOONNNNNGGGGG runways) had a weight and balance problem and was uncontrollable after takeoff.

 

One of the reasons I am no longer active is that the new regulations about restricted flight areas (anywhere Air Force 1 is for example), airport security, fuel availability, etc. just took all the fun out of it.

I used to fly a Cessna 310 (Sky King's twin engine airplane) from Houston to Wisconsin on a fairly regular basis. I really liked it but we were limited in the amount of stuff we could take. If you're doing an aircraft as a BOV, you absolutely must have all your stuff prepositioned because you won't be carrying it with you!

 

I love flying - there is a sense of freedom and self reliance that simply can not be found anywhere else with the possible exception of an open ocean sail boat. I would recommend that you not depend on an aircraft as a BOV unless you have at least 200 hours of flying time and are experienced in flying in the area in which you will be flying. I've done some bush flying, it is wildly different that normal, civilian, airport to airport flying. The instruction you get for your private pilot license will NOT equip you for bush flying, especially in the mountains. This was a flat land pilot who THOUGHT he could handle the density altitude.

Even helicopters have density altitude problems, you can't just load them up and go; I know because I've investigate the wrecks when folks have tried.

 

Just a first cut at my thoughts. I'd love to have a solid helicopter at my BOL for use at the site. I would also love to have the financial resources to have and operate a plane and a helicopter. I just think a few hundred thousand dollars would be better spent on the location and non-fossil fuel transportation. I like horses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this