17 ms·

What planes can you fly without a pilot’s license?

168 points by b8 3y ago

ulrischa 3y ago
Does someone know how the situation is in Germany
- H8crilA 3y ago
  I don't think you can fly anything without a license in Europe. Even small drones require a license now (that you can obtain online in 1-2 evenings). Also, please just get whatever license is required. It's not difficult to do, and they will teach you what you absolutely have to know when flying. A fresh pilot with a private license knows just enough not to crash and not to be a problem to others, nothing more really. It's very similar to a driver's license, where you first get it and only later over the next year or so learn how to feel really comfortable on the road.
andrewfromx 3y ago
this is amazing, I had no idea you could just skip the license if u use a tiny plane.
- d4mi3n 3y ago
  You can also get a pilot's license at 14 years old in many parts of the US. That said, do so with caution. Flying is still dangerous and accidents will often be fatal, license or no. Note the provisions about "no passengers allowed". One reason these planes don't require licenses is that the risk of collateral damage is low enough to be comparable to a car. You can hurt yourself quite badly while not endangering others. So have fun, but definitely read up on the risks before you play around with aviation on a lark.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    The nice thing about being the pilot is that something like 90% of small plane fatalities are the pilot's fault. Compare to about 50% being the motorcyclists' fault. So if you're careful and level-headed, small planes are a safe delight. But if you ever feel pressured to fly into weather, then you will die.
  - wanderingmoose 3y ago
    I'm not sure about power licenses, but for gliders (sailplanes, not hang-gliders), you could solo at 14 via a student license that required instructor supervision. You could get a full license at 16. Growing up my family was into gliding (sailplanes) and I counted down the days until I was 14 so I could solo. Looking back, especially w/ a 14 yr old kid of my own...I think my parents were crazy for letting me fly, but I'm really glad they did. I have a medical condition and so couldn't reasonably fly power planes. This was before the power "sport-license" that is a good compromise between access for hobbyists and a regular license. The comment about risks if very true. These types of activities can have real risks. It is sobering seeing a friend have a fatal accident. (With gliding it is almost always trying to make it back to an airport, getting too low and having a stall/spin close to the ground). If anyone is near southwest ohio in the us....I'd highly suggest checking out Caesars Creek Soaring Club: https://www.facebook.com/CaesarCreekSoaringClub/ https://www.facebook.com/CaesarCreekSoaringClub/
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    > You can also get a pilot's license at 14 years old in many parts of the US. FAA is federal in scope, so the rules are the same across the US. You can get a student pilot certificate (allowing you to solo an aircraft) at 16 for airplanes/helicopters and 14 for gliders and balloons. 17 is the minimum age for a private pilot certificate and I believe 16 is the minimum age for a glider/balloon pilot.
gemanor 3y ago
Having a picture of a Piper Super Cab in the header and gliders with tractor engines in the content, sounds like clickbait. I'm a big fan of ultralights and paragliding, but they have more in common with gliders than with aircraft. Also, maybe UPO, but simulators teach more about airplanes than those tools.
- wood_spirit 3y ago
  Ultralights are fun and practical and their enduring popularity speaks against your assertion. They are also popular even in countries that require a pilots license for them.
  - gemanor 3y ago
    I like ultralights myself and paragliding for fun. I'm speaking at the point of having a picture of a piper super cub (required license) in the header and write 'this is the airplanes you can fly with no license'.
brucethemoose2 3y ago
This page is SEO-ey, with the "how to" question titles and padding and such. I would have instinctively skipped it coming from Google. ...Which is really sad, because it actually reads like a earnest author just trying to make their informative page visible.
- crooked-v 3y ago
  Well, there's definitely some SEO involved, because the site sells ground school courses for various piloting and drone flying subjects, as well as some free ones on specific hardware (like https://pilotinstitute.com/course/cessna-172-deep-dive/ https://pilotinstitute.com/course/cessna-172-deep-dive/ about the Cessna 172). The courses are pretty good from what I've looked at with their drone stuff, though.
- nullfield 3y ago
  The site is one of the places authorized by the FAA to do required TRUST certificates for non-Part 107 drone flights, and Greg here is a well-regarded instructor-so quite legit and all. You can also get the non-flying part of a private pilot’s license through them.
CobaltFire 3y ago
There are a few more complete aircraft than what that list has, if interested: Badlands F1 thru F5 models are based on the old Kitfox Lite: https://www.badlandaircraft.com/ https://www.badlandaircraft.com/ Merlin Lite is based on the Merlin LSA: https://www.aeromarine-lsa.com/merlin-lite/ https://www.aeromarine-lsa.com/merlin-lite/ Both of those are pretty interesting aircraft more in line with what most people might think of as a full aircraft.
- dtgriscom 3y ago
  Wow, that Badland Aircraft site is annoying! Too many cute animations and images running around.
b8 3y ago
The Mirocopter SCH-2A meets the FAA requirements so it doesn't require a pilots license. You can buy it for $35k on Ebay [0]. It's cheaper than most cars and gas wise (5 gallons for 50min for flight time) would make it about the same cost as commuting to work in a car. 0. https://www.ebay.com/itm/354879150317 https://www.ebay.com/itm/354879150317
- rlpb 3y ago
  The article doesn't really cover it but being able to fly without a license probably isn't the same as flying near a controlled (ie. towered) airport. If want to commute and aren't in the middle of nowhere you might find that flying in your local airspace does require a radio license in practice at least. Source: I am a licensed pilot but not familiar with flying in the US.
  - CobaltFire 3y ago
    You are correct. Knowing the airspace is required under Part 103, and operating an aircraft under those rules puts you under the legal requirements of Part 103. If you want to know more the entire document is only a couple pages: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-103 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F...
    - rlpb 3y ago
      I was wondering how access to class D airspace would work for an unlicensed ultralight pilot. Can they get a radio? Would they need a [radio] license both for themselves and for the aircraft? Is that practical to acquire without a PPL? Or, without a radio, would ATC approval for a flight be available over the phone before departure instead or would that be out of the question? For a regular pilot this is all just automatic with flight following of course.
      - sokoloff 3y ago
        § 103.17 Operations in certain airspace. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle within Class A, Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace designated for an airport unless that person has prior authorization from the ATC facility having jurisdiction over that airspace. What does that mean in practice? I suspect my local airport (a moderately busy class D field) would not authorize a NORDO (no radio) ultralight. There is no longer a requirement for an FCC license for an aviation band radio. (That was previously required and possible to get as an individual without a PPL.) I suspect most class D fields would authorize the transition of a radio-equipped ultralight.
semicolon_storm 3y ago
Pretty insane you can fly these with no license or certificates when basically all drones require having your TRUST certificate or full on drone license to fly.
- jopolous 3y ago
  1. These can only be flown in most class E airspace and class G, so not anywhere close to most airports 2. They are much bigger and more visible than drones 3. The ultralight pilot is inside the aircraft which means “see and avoid” is much more reasonable It’s hard to compare ultralights to drones IMO as a licensed pilot
- withinboredom 3y ago
  That’s because people with drones were assholes. Flying into people’s yards and demanding their property back, or suing because it broke. All kinds of stupid shit. Thus it had to be regulated to stop the nonsense.
- crooked-v 3y ago
  Barrier to entry. With a $1,000 drone you can be doing something stupid in an hour and not second-guess yourself right up until it crashes into somebody's head at full speed. On the other hand, for an ultralight you've shelled out $27,000 (current price for an Aerolite 103), plus costs for storage, transportation, arrangements for taking off at a small airfield, etc.
- tzs 3y ago
  1. If an ultralight crashes into my house the pilot has a good chance of being seriously injured or killed. If a drone crashes into my house the only harm to the pilot is financial. That gives the ultralight pilots a much bigger incentive to not do stupid things with their aircraft. 2. Ultralights have to stay out of cities and towns and can't fly over large groups of people. That puts some more on how much damage they can do to other people and other people's properties than drones have.
golwengaud 3y ago
Setting the legalities aside, flying any of these without the training behind a pilot's license sounds like a great way to have some fun, right up until you have a really bad day. Maybe you can skip the license---I haven't looked at those regs myself---but you can't skip the skills. (I'd also want to take a hard look at the design, parts, and maintenance before I flew something like this---but I don't really have the training or experience to do that. I know some people who I might trust to do it for me, but I think they all have A&P certificates. Again, maybe you can take shortcuts & skip the expensive, highly trained mechanic, but that shortcut may not take you where you want to go.)
- CobaltFire 3y ago
  Part 103 compliant aircraft are meant to have limits low enough to be LESS immediately lethal, but they are still dangerous. Maintenance is absolutely a possible issue, and due to their restrictions the engines are generally MORE needy than normal GA aircraft.
  - golwengaud 3y ago
    > Maintenance is absolutely a possible issue, and due to their restrictions the engines are generally MORE needy than normal GA aircraft. Interesting! How so? > Part 103 compliant aircraft are meant to have limits low enough to be LESS immediately lethal, but they are still dangerous. What do you have in mind? Quite a lot of what worries me when I fly involves misjudging the combination of weather with the aircraft's capabilities & my capabilities. Time under the care of a good instructor helps a whole lot with that judgement: you get to see a whole bunch of conditions that are beyond your capabilities & struggle with them, without endangering yourself or the aircraft. And (e.g.) winds variable 13-23, 3G12 on runway 09 is not so trivial, even if your aircraft has a 15kt crosswind limitation. Or---I fly gliders, and I've had it drummed into my head that you never ever fly between trees when you're landing in some random field, because there may be a power line and power lines are a great way to kill yourself. There are a thousand things like this, that are more about environment & pilot than aircraft. (FWIW I've flown power in the past, but mostly fly gliders now; still newish. Maybe that skews my perceptions a bit; glider pilots are pretty willing to fly in windy or gusty conditions, in search of ridge or wave lift, so it's not so uncommon that I'm standing there asking myself "sure, the much more experienced pilots are fine to fly in this, but am I fine?" This is really hard! I'm really grateful to my instructors for giving me knowledge & experience with which to make that decision, and for giving me good training to fall back on if I misjudge!)
tzs 3y ago
That covers what you can fly. There are also restrictions on when and where you can fly. These are daytime VFR [1] conditions only, only in uncontrolled airspace, cannot fly over cites or towns or large groups of people, cannot create hazards to other people or property, must yield right of way to other aircraft, and must comply with all FAA NOTAMs [2]. [1] Visual Flight Rules. VFR conditions are conditions where you can operate and navigate primarily relying on what you can see outside the aircraft. As opposed to IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) where you can rely entirely on your instruments and do not need to see anything outside. [2] originally Notice to Airmen (now Notice to Air Missions if one wants to take into account female pilots). Notices that the FAA publishes about potential hazards or events that might affect flights. For example if some airspace is temporarily closed because of military activity, there would be a NOTAM to let civilian pilots know that they have to avoid that airspace.
- imoverclocked 3y ago
  It’s also worth noting that “congested areas” are very loosely defined. Eg: It could be interpreted as a group of people sitting on bleachers.
  - CPLX 3y ago
    It can and would
    - pc86 3y ago
      If you have reason to know that they're there, sure. Flying over a high school football game is probably going to cause you issues. If you happen to be flying along and there happens to be a couple dozen people in the bleachers you fly over, you've unlikely done anything wrong.
      - imoverclocked 3y ago
        I'm not a lawyer but I don't think negligence holds up well as a defense. If the FAA is unhappy with what you have done or someone else who is loud enough is unhappy with what you have done, they can bend the loose definition to fit the situation. Look to Trent Palmer for a recent and pretty public version of this.
CobaltFire 3y ago
The relevant CFR, typically known as Part 103: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-103 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F...
blt 3y ago
> You don’t need a license to operate these aircraft because they’re easy enough to fly that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) doesn’t see the need to regulate them. I don't think that's the reason. The reason is that they are unlikely to hurt anyone besides the pilot in a crash. They can have an engine failure, stall-spin, or fly into a cloud just as readily as any other plane. Those are the biggest risks for GA, and they're no easier to handle in an ultralight.
- quasarj 3y ago
  Flying into a cloud is a big risk? They're everywhere!
  - itsyaboi 3y ago
    Not only is it a big risk, it's also illegal.
    - dylan604 3y ago
      For skydiving as well. However...there are plenty of stories of intentionally falling through a cloud on your back so you can see a person shaped hole in the cloud as you fall through. So it does happen. But people drive >55mph too
  - psunavy03 3y ago
    When you aren't instrument-qualified, get disoriented, and fly yourself into the ground, then yes, they are a big risk for the weekend warrior lawyers and doctors who never get an instrument rating.
    - AdrianB1 3y ago
      What is qualified: trained or certified? There is a small difference between the 2 in terms of knowledge and experience, but a big one in legalities.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
zzless 3y ago
Police in the US do not have to have a license to operate anything, including aircraft. In this case, insurance requirements take over though. They may have a legal right to fly but no insurance company would approve operation by anyone but a commercial pilot. I got a few hours in a local police Bell 206 because they needed a commercial pilot to fly while their official pilot only had a private license. Fun!
- ryanwaggoner 3y ago
  I’d like to hear more about this, because I’m a pilot and I’ve never heard anywhere that the FAA waives their license requirements for local police? That doesn’t make any sense to me.
  - genjii931 3y ago
    Police also aren't legally allowed to straight-up murder people, but...
  - zzless 3y ago
    As I mentioned above it is not that the FAA waves their requirements as much as the FAA does not have jurisdiction over such operations (under appropriate circumctances).
- repiret 3y ago
  I call baloney. Do you have a citation for that?
  - zzless 3y ago
    Here is a quote from AC No: 00-1.1A (Public Aircraft Operations): What Oversight of PAO Does the FAA Have? The FAA has limited oversight of PAO, though such operations must continue to comply with the regulations applicable to all aircraft operating in the NAS. The government entity conducting the PAO is responsible for oversight of the operation, including aircraft airworthiness and any operational requirements imposed by the government entity. The government agency contracting for the service assumes the responsibility for oversight of a PAO. The military is another entity that operates aircraft outside of FAA jurisdiction. Even military airman certificates have to be `converted' to civilian ones i a military pilot wants to become a civilian pilot.
WirelessGigabit 3y ago
To be honest, I don't like pages like this. The only reason this page is here is is to have more content for SEO purposes. The only 2 links on this page are links to other pages on the same website. All it does is pollute search results.
jameshart 3y ago
Additionally: - any plane you’re on board of, where all the licensed pilots on board have become incapacitated. - your instructor’s plane during a flying lesson Programmers should insist on more precision in their rule definitions.
- tass 3y ago
  Under part 91, any plane at all, so long as a licensed pilot is aboard as pilot in command.
dylan604 3y ago
When I was in elementary school (waaaay back in the 80s) I lived way out in BFE where there was a lot of undeveloped land around the school. One weekend, one of the students discovered a crashed ultralight in the fields surrounding the school, and then told his parents about it. There was an company a few miles from the school off of the highway that sold/rented ultralights, so the parents called them about it. Apparently, someone walked away from the crash and just decided not to tell anyone about it. As a reward for reporting the location of the "lost" ultralight, the place offered free flights to the kid and parents. The parents said no thanks. It was always one of those stories that stood out as a kid growing up and I hadn't thought about that in a really long time.
- pixelatedindex 3y ago
  If I were a kid, I’d be livid to not get free flights. I always wanted to fly - I think the first time I ever got on a plane was in high school and I remember being glued to the window almost the whole time. Incidentally, I just learned about ultralights not needing a license last week and there are some really affordable ones for like 16K: http://www.uflyit.com/aerolite103main.htm http://www.uflyit.com/aerolite103main.htm There are more manufacturers here: https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aviation-interests/ultralights/getting-started-in-ultralight-flying/ultralight-manufacturers https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aviation-interests/ultralights/getti... It’s also wild to me that some of these kits are build-it-yourself - they assemble the kit, test fly it, take it apart and ship it to you. I’m more than happy to build my own bike, but my own aircraft? That will make me triple check every step and still be super scared to fly it.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    If your kid discovered a crashed something and the people that operated the something didn't know it was missing gave your kid free time to fly/ride a thing just like it, would you let your kid go? But of course the kid was upset.
    - Invictus0 3y ago
      If your kid discovered a crashed rental car and the people that operated the rental car didn't know it was missing gave your kid free time to ride a rental car just like it, would you let your kid go? Amazing how people today let fear get in the way of enjoying life
indus 3y ago
Beware: That Piper Super Cub in the cover image requires a license to fly. LOL.
grepfru_it 3y ago
Unpopular opinion but technically correct answer: you can fly any plane without a pilots license. In fact I just saw a Quora question with this exact question and the answer came from a 60 year old pilot that has been flying without a license for 30 years. If you never fly out of a major airport where an FAA inspector can ramp check you, who will ever find out? Please don’t do this.
- userbinator 3y ago
  and the answer came from a 60 year old pilot that has been flying without a license for 30 years. More precisely, someone who claims to be one online.
  - serf 3y ago
    it's not an uncommon story, so I don't really doubt it. lots of history with older crop-duster or other utility-craft pilots who sort of passively ignore the FAA.
  - grepfru_it 3y ago
    Think about people in the Midwest who flew with their parents and inherited a Cessna. They may have never gotten a pilots license but racked up thousands of hours. They take off and land on a grass strip or their own private paved runway. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license? How about a kid who loved planes but parents did not or could not afford lessons. They found simulators and cut their teeth on 20 years of Microsoft flight simulator and x-plane. Then they fly with some friends who comment on their remarkable flying skills. This emboldened pilot continues to fly without a license without an incident. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license? How about a drug runner in Columbia or Mexico who learned to fly on his or her own to make $10k per flight. Mastering extreme short field takeoffs/landings and abandoning the plane afterwards. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license? Please do not do this.
    - civilitty 3y ago
      > How about a drug runner in Columbia who learned to fly on his or her own to make $10k per flight. Mastering extreme short field landings and abandoning the plane afterwards. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license? > Please do not do this. Seriously, you should never do this. Narco subs are much more effective than planes nowadays.
mike50 3y ago
Clickbait. Real Answer Ultralight aircraft.
Justin_K 3y ago
After your solo signoff you can fly alone without a license. Many people do this and never go all the way, they'll l fly for years.
- gusennan 3y ago
  an instructor’s solo sign off is only valid for 90 days in the US, and there are a bunch of restrictions as to what a pilot is operating under the instructor’s sign off can do.
BWStearns 3y ago
Please actually get lessons to fly unless you have a lot of room to crash and kill only yourself while learning (in which case you probably have enough money for lessons).
chrisweekly 3y ago
Getting insurance is a related question I have (eg for a sport pilot license).
wkat4242 3y ago
Wow here in Europe you need a license for ultralights as well. Not quite as rigid in terms of requirements and the medical is easier too. But you still need one. I've flown gliders also which meet these criteria too and they need it as well. I think it makes sense though. You can still hurt people on the ground and more importantly, you could endanger other air traffic. Airspace in Europe is too dense for people not to know what they're doing. This is why every aircraft needs a mode S transponder now too at the very minimum.
1letterunixname 3y ago
You don't even need a plane. PPG is a parachute and a motor.
technick 3y ago
I once had dreams of becoming a pilot but the FAA considers adderall a no fly drug, even though it makes me better at everything I do. Because I wasn't diagnosed with it by a shrink or psychologist, the FAA doc in Oklahoma told me I could stop taking it for six months and then get my medical but there wasn't any way I could do that. Another guy I know who was in the same boat as me, went and got his pilots license in another country (I think Australia) and just flies here without any problems. The FAA needs to let go a little bit, otherwise more and more are going to start violating laws because we are tired of the overreach. Update: Forgot to mention a lot of people that are getting caught up with ADHD or Adderall can go get their sports pilot license but that restricts them to ultralight planes with a max of 2 seats and very low weight limits. The good thing about the sports pilot is it doesn't require a medical.
- sealeck 3y ago
  I really wouldn't want someone with ADHD flying a plane – it's just not safe.
  - technick 3y ago
    There's different degrees of ADHD, like in my case I don't have hyperactivity though I have issues completing things I'm not into, however if it's something I am passionate about, I'm 110% in on it. I have 19 hrs towards my private license, have flown 3 different lines of planes (Cirrus, Cessna, Piper), have a great understanding of aviation principles and aerospace science, and am confident I can operate in every class of airspace proficiently.
    - sealeck 3y ago
      Sorry I should have qualified that, for extreme cases of ADHD.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
andersrs 3y ago
My hot take is that hobby pilots are a bunch of selfish assholes creating a bunch of noise and emissions just do they can have fun. So selfish they only started thinking about removing lead from fuel very recently. One of the aircraft is even called a mosquito so the industry is so aware of the issue they're making a joke out of it. At least commercial aircraft have a purpose and try to be as quiet as possible. Fuck pilots.
- entropy47 3y ago
  > creating a bunch of noise and emissions just so they can have fun Wait until you hear about parents! I haven't actually done the maths but I expect an ultralight is comparable to a car hobbyist in both noise and emissions. Agree that flying a jet liner for fun would be a dick move.
  - andersrs 3y ago
    Yeah I hate those kind of people as well when they are noisy. Is that supposed to be an argument?
    - entropy47 3y ago
      Yes. I think my core thesis is that if noise and pollution upsets you, then I would spend less time complaining about a niche hobby that barely effects anybody, and a lot more time getting annoyed about really common hobbies, business patterns and lifestyle choices that are destroying the planet. And I think the obvious counter is "that's whataboutism, you can care about lots of things at once" but I personally am pretty fatigued with just causes, so when I see people complaining about hobby aviation in ultralights I just see it as a distraction that pulls time, focus and attention from bigger problems. All of this is, of course, completely subjective. But that was the intent behind the comment.
      - andersrs 3y ago
        I do actually post about other pollution like (micro)plastics. But this thread is not about that. Back to the scope of the thread: The reason I find it so distasteful is that the pilots have a big noise footprint. One aircraft can be heard by thousands of people. That one person has a disproportionate effect compared to the neighbours lawnmower which can only be heard by a few dozen people. I understand your argument that there aren't that many aircraft but I must say those few people are punching orders of magnitudes above their weight when it comes to noise.
gU9x3u8XmQNG 3y ago
Hmmm… Australia is heavily regulated, which is good and bad. Unfortunately, due to regulation and other costs; recreational flying - in my experience - is suffering greatly in Australia. I watch a few US youtube channels, including the STOL groups, often in awe. My recreational flying days are likely over, primarily due to cost. Cannot even find hangar space, in west Victoria, within my budget :( Drones (also heavily regulated) and Flight Simulator are all that remain.
NoNameHaveI 3y ago
Mosquito XEL looks pretty good to me. Would save me a lot of time on my commute.
mft_ 3y ago
Anyone interested in the DIY route might find some value in Peter Sripol's Youtube channel. This was his first DIY ultralight build: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAIipq7EZswtld3d8ttKQWQDFLS_e9tNu https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAIipq7EZswtld3d8ttKQ...
nikau 3y ago
UA175 and AA11 are 2 that come to mind
LispSporks22 3y ago
Dunno if it counts as a plane, but you can fly a paramotor (basically a parachute attached to a 2-stroke motor and prop). Cheap to get into and fairly safe, although kinda limited. I looked into it after being treated for depression made it practically impossible to get a private pilots license. The FAA would rather you fly untreated, undiagnosed. Good job, FAA.
mycall 3y ago
> the aircraft must weigh less than 254 pounds 8-bit?

168 points by b8 3y ago

ulrischa 3y ago

Does someone know how the situation is in Germany

H8crilA 3y ago
I don't think you can fly anything without a license in Europe. Even small drones require a license now (that you can obtain online in 1-2 evenings). Also, please just get whatever license is required. It's not difficult to do, and they will teach you what you absolutely have to know when flying. A fresh pilot with a private license knows just enough not to crash and not to be a problem to others, nothing more really. It's very similar to a driver's license, where you first get it and only later over the next year or so learn how to feel really comfortable on the road.

andrewfromx 3y ago

this is amazing, I had no idea you could just skip the license if u use a tiny plane.

d4mi3n 3y ago
You can also get a pilot's license at 14 years old in many parts of the US. That said, do so with caution. Flying is still dangerous and accidents will often be fatal, license or no. Note the provisions about "no passengers allowed". One reason these planes don't require licenses is that the risk of collateral damage is low enough to be comparable to a car. You can hurt yourself quite badly while not endangering others. So have fun, but definitely read up on the risks before you play around with aviation on a lark.
- bombcar 3y ago
  The nice thing about being the pilot is that something like 90% of small plane fatalities are the pilot's fault. Compare to about 50% being the motorcyclists' fault. So if you're careful and level-headed, small planes are a safe delight. But if you ever feel pressured to fly into weather, then you will die.
- wanderingmoose 3y ago
  I'm not sure about power licenses, but for gliders (sailplanes, not hang-gliders), you could solo at 14 via a student license that required instructor supervision. You could get a full license at 16. Growing up my family was into gliding (sailplanes) and I counted down the days until I was 14 so I could solo. Looking back, especially w/ a 14 yr old kid of my own...I think my parents were crazy for letting me fly, but I'm really glad they did. I have a medical condition and so couldn't reasonably fly power planes. This was before the power "sport-license" that is a good compromise between access for hobbyists and a regular license. The comment about risks if very true. These types of activities can have real risks. It is sobering seeing a friend have a fatal accident. (With gliding it is almost always trying to make it back to an airport, getting too low and having a stall/spin close to the ground). If anyone is near southwest ohio in the us....I'd highly suggest checking out Caesars Creek Soaring Club: https://www.facebook.com/CaesarCreekSoaringClub/ https://www.facebook.com/CaesarCreekSoaringClub/
- sokoloff 3y ago
  > You can also get a pilot's license at 14 years old in many parts of the US. FAA is federal in scope, so the rules are the same across the US. You can get a student pilot certificate (allowing you to solo an aircraft) at 16 for airplanes/helicopters and 14 for gliders and balloons. 17 is the minimum age for a private pilot certificate and I believe 16 is the minimum age for a glider/balloon pilot.

gemanor 3y ago

Having a picture of a Piper Super Cab in the header and gliders with tractor engines in the content, sounds like clickbait. I'm a big fan of ultralights and paragliding, but they have more in common with gliders than with aircraft. Also, maybe UPO, but simulators teach more about airplanes than those tools.

wood_spirit 3y ago
Ultralights are fun and practical and their enduring popularity speaks against your assertion. They are also popular even in countries that require a pilots license for them.
- gemanor 3y ago
  I like ultralights myself and paragliding for fun. I'm speaking at the point of having a picture of a piper super cub (required license) in the header and write 'this is the airplanes you can fly with no license'.

brucethemoose2 3y ago

This page is SEO-ey, with the "how to" question titles and padding and such. I would have instinctively skipped it coming from Google. ...Which is really sad, because it actually reads like a earnest author just trying to make their informative page visible.

crooked-v 3y ago
Well, there's definitely some SEO involved, because the site sells ground school courses for various piloting and drone flying subjects, as well as some free ones on specific hardware (like https://pilotinstitute.com/course/cessna-172-deep-dive/ https://pilotinstitute.com/course/cessna-172-deep-dive/ about the Cessna 172). The courses are pretty good from what I've looked at with their drone stuff, though.
nullfield 3y ago
The site is one of the places authorized by the FAA to do required TRUST certificates for non-Part 107 drone flights, and Greg here is a well-regarded instructor-so quite legit and all. You can also get the non-flying part of a private pilot’s license through them.

CobaltFire 3y ago

There are a few more complete aircraft than what that list has, if interested: Badlands F1 thru F5 models are based on the old Kitfox Lite: https://www.badlandaircraft.com/ https://www.badlandaircraft.com/ Merlin Lite is based on the Merlin LSA: https://www.aeromarine-lsa.com/merlin-lite/ https://www.aeromarine-lsa.com/merlin-lite/ Both of those are pretty interesting aircraft more in line with what most people might think of as a full aircraft.

dtgriscom 3y ago
Wow, that Badland Aircraft site is annoying! Too many cute animations and images running around.

b8 3y ago

The Mirocopter SCH-2A meets the FAA requirements so it doesn't require a pilots license. You can buy it for $35k on Ebay [0]. It's cheaper than most cars and gas wise (5 gallons for 50min for flight time) would make it about the same cost as commuting to work in a car. 0. https://www.ebay.com/itm/354879150317 https://www.ebay.com/itm/354879150317

rlpb 3y ago
The article doesn't really cover it but being able to fly without a license probably isn't the same as flying near a controlled (ie. towered) airport. If want to commute and aren't in the middle of nowhere you might find that flying in your local airspace does require a radio license in practice at least. Source: I am a licensed pilot but not familiar with flying in the US.
- CobaltFire 3y ago
  You are correct. Knowing the airspace is required under Part 103, and operating an aircraft under those rules puts you under the legal requirements of Part 103. If you want to know more the entire document is only a couple pages: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-103 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F...
  - rlpb 3y ago
    I was wondering how access to class D airspace would work for an unlicensed ultralight pilot. Can they get a radio? Would they need a [radio] license both for themselves and for the aircraft? Is that practical to acquire without a PPL? Or, without a radio, would ATC approval for a flight be available over the phone before departure instead or would that be out of the question? For a regular pilot this is all just automatic with flight following of course.
    - sokoloff 3y ago
      § 103.17 Operations in certain airspace. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle within Class A, Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace designated for an airport unless that person has prior authorization from the ATC facility having jurisdiction over that airspace. What does that mean in practice? I suspect my local airport (a moderately busy class D field) would not authorize a NORDO (no radio) ultralight. There is no longer a requirement for an FCC license for an aviation band radio. (That was previously required and possible to get as an individual without a PPL.) I suspect most class D fields would authorize the transition of a radio-equipped ultralight.

semicolon_storm 3y ago

Pretty insane you can fly these with no license or certificates when basically all drones require having your TRUST certificate or full on drone license to fly.

jopolous 3y ago
1. These can only be flown in most class E airspace and class G, so not anywhere close to most airports 2. They are much bigger and more visible than drones 3. The ultralight pilot is inside the aircraft which means “see and avoid” is much more reasonable It’s hard to compare ultralights to drones IMO as a licensed pilot
withinboredom 3y ago
That’s because people with drones were assholes. Flying into people’s yards and demanding their property back, or suing because it broke. All kinds of stupid shit. Thus it had to be regulated to stop the nonsense.
crooked-v 3y ago
Barrier to entry. With a $1,000 drone you can be doing something stupid in an hour and not second-guess yourself right up until it crashes into somebody's head at full speed. On the other hand, for an ultralight you've shelled out $27,000 (current price for an Aerolite 103), plus costs for storage, transportation, arrangements for taking off at a small airfield, etc.
tzs 3y ago
1. If an ultralight crashes into my house the pilot has a good chance of being seriously injured or killed. If a drone crashes into my house the only harm to the pilot is financial. That gives the ultralight pilots a much bigger incentive to not do stupid things with their aircraft. 2. Ultralights have to stay out of cities and towns and can't fly over large groups of people. That puts some more on how much damage they can do to other people and other people's properties than drones have.

golwengaud 3y ago

Setting the legalities aside, flying any of these without the training behind a pilot's license sounds like a great way to have some fun, right up until you have a really bad day. Maybe you can skip the license---I haven't looked at those regs myself---but you can't skip the skills. (I'd also want to take a hard look at the design, parts, and maintenance before I flew something like this---but I don't really have the training or experience to do that. I know some people who I might trust to do it for me, but I think they all have A&P certificates. Again, maybe you can take shortcuts & skip the expensive, highly trained mechanic, but that shortcut may not take you where you want to go.)

CobaltFire 3y ago
Part 103 compliant aircraft are meant to have limits low enough to be LESS immediately lethal, but they are still dangerous. Maintenance is absolutely a possible issue, and due to their restrictions the engines are generally MORE needy than normal GA aircraft.
- golwengaud 3y ago
  > Maintenance is absolutely a possible issue, and due to their restrictions the engines are generally MORE needy than normal GA aircraft. Interesting! How so? > Part 103 compliant aircraft are meant to have limits low enough to be LESS immediately lethal, but they are still dangerous. What do you have in mind? Quite a lot of what worries me when I fly involves misjudging the combination of weather with the aircraft's capabilities & my capabilities. Time under the care of a good instructor helps a whole lot with that judgement: you get to see a whole bunch of conditions that are beyond your capabilities & struggle with them, without endangering yourself or the aircraft. And (e.g.) winds variable 13-23, 3G12 on runway 09 is not so trivial, even if your aircraft has a 15kt crosswind limitation. Or---I fly gliders, and I've had it drummed into my head that you never ever fly between trees when you're landing in some random field, because there may be a power line and power lines are a great way to kill yourself. There are a thousand things like this, that are more about environment & pilot than aircraft. (FWIW I've flown power in the past, but mostly fly gliders now; still newish. Maybe that skews my perceptions a bit; glider pilots are pretty willing to fly in windy or gusty conditions, in search of ridge or wave lift, so it's not so uncommon that I'm standing there asking myself "sure, the much more experienced pilots are fine to fly in this, but am I fine?" This is really hard! I'm really grateful to my instructors for giving me knowledge & experience with which to make that decision, and for giving me good training to fall back on if I misjudge!)

tzs 3y ago

That covers what you can fly. There are also restrictions on when and where you can fly. These are daytime VFR [1] conditions only, only in uncontrolled airspace, cannot fly over cites or towns or large groups of people, cannot create hazards to other people or property, must yield right of way to other aircraft, and must comply with all FAA NOTAMs [2]. [1] Visual Flight Rules. VFR conditions are conditions where you can operate and navigate primarily relying on what you can see outside the aircraft. As opposed to IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) where you can rely entirely on your instruments and do not need to see anything outside. [2] originally Notice to Airmen (now Notice to Air Missions if one wants to take into account female pilots). Notices that the FAA publishes about potential hazards or events that might affect flights. For example if some airspace is temporarily closed because of military activity, there would be a NOTAM to let civilian pilots know that they have to avoid that airspace.

imoverclocked 3y ago
It’s also worth noting that “congested areas” are very loosely defined. Eg: It could be interpreted as a group of people sitting on bleachers.
- CPLX 3y ago
  It can and would
  - pc86 3y ago
    If you have reason to know that they're there, sure. Flying over a high school football game is probably going to cause you issues. If you happen to be flying along and there happens to be a couple dozen people in the bleachers you fly over, you've unlikely done anything wrong.
    - imoverclocked 3y ago
      I'm not a lawyer but I don't think negligence holds up well as a defense. If the FAA is unhappy with what you have done or someone else who is loud enough is unhappy with what you have done, they can bend the loose definition to fit the situation. Look to Trent Palmer for a recent and pretty public version of this.

CobaltFire 3y ago

The relevant CFR, typically known as Part 103: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-103 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F...

blt 3y ago

> You don’t need a license to operate these aircraft because they’re easy enough to fly that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) doesn’t see the need to regulate them. I don't think that's the reason. The reason is that they are unlikely to hurt anyone besides the pilot in a crash. They can have an engine failure, stall-spin, or fly into a cloud just as readily as any other plane. Those are the biggest risks for GA, and they're no easier to handle in an ultralight.

quasarj 3y ago
Flying into a cloud is a big risk? They're everywhere!
- itsyaboi 3y ago
  Not only is it a big risk, it's also illegal.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    For skydiving as well. However...there are plenty of stories of intentionally falling through a cloud on your back so you can see a person shaped hole in the cloud as you fall through. So it does happen. But people drive >55mph too
- psunavy03 3y ago
  When you aren't instrument-qualified, get disoriented, and fly yourself into the ground, then yes, they are a big risk for the weekend warrior lawyers and doctors who never get an instrument rating.
  - AdrianB1 3y ago
    What is qualified: trained or certified? There is a small difference between the 2 in terms of knowledge and experience, but a big one in legalities.
- mschuster91 3y ago

zzless 3y ago

Police in the US do not have to have a license to operate anything, including aircraft. In this case, insurance requirements take over though. They may have a legal right to fly but no insurance company would approve operation by anyone but a commercial pilot. I got a few hours in a local police Bell 206 because they needed a commercial pilot to fly while their official pilot only had a private license. Fun!

ryanwaggoner 3y ago
I’d like to hear more about this, because I’m a pilot and I’ve never heard anywhere that the FAA waives their license requirements for local police? That doesn’t make any sense to me.
- genjii931 3y ago
  Police also aren't legally allowed to straight-up murder people, but...
- zzless 3y ago
  As I mentioned above it is not that the FAA waves their requirements as much as the FAA does not have jurisdiction over such operations (under appropriate circumctances).
repiret 3y ago
I call baloney. Do you have a citation for that?
- zzless 3y ago
  Here is a quote from AC No: 00-1.1A (Public Aircraft Operations): What Oversight of PAO Does the FAA Have? The FAA has limited oversight of PAO, though such operations must continue to comply with the regulations applicable to all aircraft operating in the NAS. The government entity conducting the PAO is responsible for oversight of the operation, including aircraft airworthiness and any operational requirements imposed by the government entity. The government agency contracting for the service assumes the responsibility for oversight of a PAO. The military is another entity that operates aircraft outside of FAA jurisdiction. Even military airman certificates have to be `converted' to civilian ones i a military pilot wants to become a civilian pilot.

WirelessGigabit 3y ago

To be honest, I don't like pages like this. The only reason this page is here is is to have more content for SEO purposes. The only 2 links on this page are links to other pages on the same website. All it does is pollute search results.

jameshart 3y ago

Additionally: - any plane you’re on board of, where all the licensed pilots on board have become incapacitated. - your instructor’s plane during a flying lesson Programmers should insist on more precision in their rule definitions.

tass 3y ago
Under part 91, any plane at all, so long as a licensed pilot is aboard as pilot in command.

dylan604 3y ago

When I was in elementary school (waaaay back in the 80s) I lived way out in BFE where there was a lot of undeveloped land around the school. One weekend, one of the students discovered a crashed ultralight in the fields surrounding the school, and then told his parents about it. There was an company a few miles from the school off of the highway that sold/rented ultralights, so the parents called them about it. Apparently, someone walked away from the crash and just decided not to tell anyone about it. As a reward for reporting the location of the "lost" ultralight, the place offered free flights to the kid and parents. The parents said no thanks. It was always one of those stories that stood out as a kid growing up and I hadn't thought about that in a really long time.

pixelatedindex 3y ago
If I were a kid, I’d be livid to not get free flights. I always wanted to fly - I think the first time I ever got on a plane was in high school and I remember being glued to the window almost the whole time. Incidentally, I just learned about ultralights not needing a license last week and there are some really affordable ones for like 16K: http://www.uflyit.com/aerolite103main.htm http://www.uflyit.com/aerolite103main.htm There are more manufacturers here: https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aviation-interests/ultralights/getting-started-in-ultralight-flying/ultralight-manufacturers https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aviation-interests/ultralights/getti... It’s also wild to me that some of these kits are build-it-yourself - they assemble the kit, test fly it, take it apart and ship it to you. I’m more than happy to build my own bike, but my own aircraft? That will make me triple check every step and still be super scared to fly it.
- dylan604 3y ago
  If your kid discovered a crashed something and the people that operated the something didn't know it was missing gave your kid free time to fly/ride a thing just like it, would you let your kid go? But of course the kid was upset.
  - Invictus0 3y ago
    If your kid discovered a crashed rental car and the people that operated the rental car didn't know it was missing gave your kid free time to ride a rental car just like it, would you let your kid go? Amazing how people today let fear get in the way of enjoying life

indus 3y ago

Beware: That Piper Super Cub in the cover image requires a license to fly. LOL.

grepfru_it 3y ago

Unpopular opinion but technically correct answer: you can fly any plane without a pilots license. In fact I just saw a Quora question with this exact question and the answer came from a 60 year old pilot that has been flying without a license for 30 years. If you never fly out of a major airport where an FAA inspector can ramp check you, who will ever find out? Please don’t do this.

userbinator 3y ago
and the answer came from a 60 year old pilot that has been flying without a license for 30 years. More precisely, someone who claims to be one online.
- serf 3y ago
  it's not an uncommon story, so I don't really doubt it. lots of history with older crop-duster or other utility-craft pilots who sort of passively ignore the FAA.
- grepfru_it 3y ago
  Think about people in the Midwest who flew with their parents and inherited a Cessna. They may have never gotten a pilots license but racked up thousands of hours. They take off and land on a grass strip or their own private paved runway. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license? How about a kid who loved planes but parents did not or could not afford lessons. They found simulators and cut their teeth on 20 years of Microsoft flight simulator and x-plane. Then they fly with some friends who comment on their remarkable flying skills. This emboldened pilot continues to fly without a license without an incident. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license? How about a drug runner in Columbia or Mexico who learned to fly on his or her own to make $10k per flight. Mastering extreme short field takeoffs/landings and abandoning the plane afterwards. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license? Please do not do this.
  - civilitty 3y ago
    > How about a drug runner in Columbia who learned to fly on his or her own to make $10k per flight. Mastering extreme short field landings and abandoning the plane afterwards. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license? > Please do not do this. Seriously, you should never do this. Narco subs are much more effective than planes nowadays.

mike50 3y ago

Clickbait. Real Answer Ultralight aircraft.

Justin_K 3y ago

After your solo signoff you can fly alone without a license. Many people do this and never go all the way, they'll l fly for years.

gusennan 3y ago
an instructor’s solo sign off is only valid for 90 days in the US, and there are a bunch of restrictions as to what a pilot is operating under the instructor’s sign off can do.

BWStearns 3y ago

Please actually get lessons to fly unless you have a lot of room to crash and kill only yourself while learning (in which case you probably have enough money for lessons).

chrisweekly 3y ago

Getting insurance is a related question I have (eg for a sport pilot license).

wkat4242 3y ago

Wow here in Europe you need a license for ultralights as well. Not quite as rigid in terms of requirements and the medical is easier too. But you still need one. I've flown gliders also which meet these criteria too and they need it as well. I think it makes sense though. You can still hurt people on the ground and more importantly, you could endanger other air traffic. Airspace in Europe is too dense for people not to know what they're doing. This is why every aircraft needs a mode S transponder now too at the very minimum.

1letterunixname 3y ago

You don't even need a plane. PPG is a parachute and a motor.

technick 3y ago

I once had dreams of becoming a pilot but the FAA considers adderall a no fly drug, even though it makes me better at everything I do. Because I wasn't diagnosed with it by a shrink or psychologist, the FAA doc in Oklahoma told me I could stop taking it for six months and then get my medical but there wasn't any way I could do that. Another guy I know who was in the same boat as me, went and got his pilots license in another country (I think Australia) and just flies here without any problems. The FAA needs to let go a little bit, otherwise more and more are going to start violating laws because we are tired of the overreach. Update: Forgot to mention a lot of people that are getting caught up with ADHD or Adderall can go get their sports pilot license but that restricts them to ultralight planes with a max of 2 seats and very low weight limits. The good thing about the sports pilot is it doesn't require a medical.

sealeck 3y ago
I really wouldn't want someone with ADHD flying a plane – it's just not safe.
- technick 3y ago
  There's different degrees of ADHD, like in my case I don't have hyperactivity though I have issues completing things I'm not into, however if it's something I am passionate about, I'm 110% in on it. I have 19 hrs towards my private license, have flown 3 different lines of planes (Cirrus, Cessna, Piper), have a great understanding of aviation principles and aerospace science, and am confident I can operate in every class of airspace proficiently.
  - sealeck 3y ago
    Sorry I should have qualified that, for extreme cases of ADHD.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

andersrs 3y ago

My hot take is that hobby pilots are a bunch of selfish assholes creating a bunch of noise and emissions just do they can have fun. So selfish they only started thinking about removing lead from fuel very recently. One of the aircraft is even called a mosquito so the industry is so aware of the issue they're making a joke out of it. At least commercial aircraft have a purpose and try to be as quiet as possible. Fuck pilots.

entropy47 3y ago
> creating a bunch of noise and emissions just so they can have fun Wait until you hear about parents! I haven't actually done the maths but I expect an ultralight is comparable to a car hobbyist in both noise and emissions. Agree that flying a jet liner for fun would be a dick move.
- andersrs 3y ago
  Yeah I hate those kind of people as well when they are noisy. Is that supposed to be an argument?
  - entropy47 3y ago
    Yes. I think my core thesis is that if noise and pollution upsets you, then I would spend less time complaining about a niche hobby that barely effects anybody, and a lot more time getting annoyed about really common hobbies, business patterns and lifestyle choices that are destroying the planet. And I think the obvious counter is "that's whataboutism, you can care about lots of things at once" but I personally am pretty fatigued with just causes, so when I see people complaining about hobby aviation in ultralights I just see it as a distraction that pulls time, focus and attention from bigger problems. All of this is, of course, completely subjective. But that was the intent behind the comment.
    - andersrs 3y ago
      I do actually post about other pollution like (micro)plastics. But this thread is not about that. Back to the scope of the thread: The reason I find it so distasteful is that the pilots have a big noise footprint. One aircraft can be heard by thousands of people. That one person has a disproportionate effect compared to the neighbours lawnmower which can only be heard by a few dozen people. I understand your argument that there aren't that many aircraft but I must say those few people are punching orders of magnitudes above their weight when it comes to noise.

gU9x3u8XmQNG 3y ago

Hmmm… Australia is heavily regulated, which is good and bad. Unfortunately, due to regulation and other costs; recreational flying - in my experience - is suffering greatly in Australia. I watch a few US youtube channels, including the STOL groups, often in awe. My recreational flying days are likely over, primarily due to cost. Cannot even find hangar space, in west Victoria, within my budget :( Drones (also heavily regulated) and Flight Simulator are all that remain.

NoNameHaveI 3y ago

Mosquito XEL looks pretty good to me. Would save me a lot of time on my commute.

mft_ 3y ago

Anyone interested in the DIY route might find some value in Peter Sripol's Youtube channel. This was his first DIY ultralight build: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAIipq7EZswtld3d8ttKQWQDFLS_e9tNu https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAIipq7EZswtld3d8ttKQ...

nikau 3y ago

UA175 and AA11 are 2 that come to mind

LispSporks22 3y ago

Dunno if it counts as a plane, but you can fly a paramotor (basically a parachute attached to a 2-stroke motor and prop). Cheap to get into and fairly safe, although kinda limited. I looked into it after being treated for depression made it practically impossible to get a private pilots license. The FAA would rather you fly untreated, undiagnosed. Good job, FAA.

mycall 3y ago

> the aircraft must weigh less than 254 pounds 8-bit?