A very impressive & refined looking variant in your electric seaplane initiatives. Likely dual float to deal with the weight & balance of (some) motors & batteries being further outboard than the twin motor on (is it more slippery through air & fluid?) monopod. I guess the monopod's outrigger sponsons might not quite be up to the task robustly enough in the 4 motor, dual float configuration. Has there ever been any feedback (officially or otherwise) from the FAA regarding the interpretation of 5 gallons of fuel as the limit on the volume of your batteries (as you explain to camera here. ua-cam.com/video/ix7pWElDaEY/v-deo.html)?
I have not heard of any court ruling on various interpretations of the 'fuel' wording of Part 103. I still believe that my interpretation is solid. I believe that 'letters' from the FAA are not always the correct interpretation of the law and that these 'letters' could be challenged in court.
@@DaleCKramer I'm a little surprised that the regulations haven't been updated to eliminate any ambiguity (one way or the other). That they haven't suggests to me that they are content with interpretations such as yours which have hardly made in secret. The FAA likely has an obligation to meaningfully, proactively address any manifest risk arising from their reg's. If there is an issue, it feels to me that they haven't done their job to address ambiguities in the regulations that create the motivation for the existence of their organisation.
@@leuvenisaplace It is also likely that the FAA is taking the path of least resistance, after all it is a lot of work and justification for them to have Part 103 wording modified.
@@DaleCKramer In my experience liability arising from inaction is a potential heat source that organisations prefer to be proactive regarding. The rate of updates/amendments is low, but even if they were seeking to bundle some changes up prior to an update, a decade seems a long time. Please keep up your good work with your aircraft and your videos. High efficiency flight likely will be very important as entry route for general aviation & beyond. I hope you already know about the channels @AmazingDIYProjects (Levitator), @Think Flight (Ekranoplan) and @RCTestFlight (solar & long duration automation).
Looks cool Dale! Congrats on your continued success with your eLazair4. It's great to see how well it works, as you explained/predicted it would, when you showed me your pod assembly and controller (when I got to meet you up in NJ). Sorry that I couldn't make it down to Sun 'n Fun this year, as I was REALLY hoping to get to know each other better and discuss fun projects, etc. Best wishes on your continued successes!!!
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
A very impressive & refined looking variant in your electric seaplane initiatives. Likely dual float to deal with the weight & balance of (some) motors & batteries being further outboard than the twin motor on (is it more slippery through air & fluid?) monopod. I guess the monopod's outrigger sponsons might not quite be up to the task robustly enough in the 4 motor, dual float configuration. Has there ever been any feedback (officially or otherwise) from the FAA regarding the interpretation of 5 gallons of fuel as the limit on the volume of your batteries (as you explain to camera here. ua-cam.com/video/ix7pWElDaEY/v-deo.html)?
I have not heard of any court ruling on various interpretations of the 'fuel' wording of Part 103. I still believe that my interpretation is solid. I believe that 'letters' from the FAA are not always the correct interpretation of the law and that these 'letters' could be challenged in court.
@@DaleCKramer I'm a little surprised that the regulations haven't been updated to eliminate any ambiguity (one way or the other). That they haven't suggests to me that they are content with interpretations such as yours which have hardly made in secret. The FAA likely has an obligation to meaningfully, proactively address any manifest risk arising from their reg's. If there is an issue, it feels to me that they haven't done their job to address ambiguities in the regulations that create the motivation for the existence of their organisation.
@@leuvenisaplace It is also likely that the FAA is taking the path of least resistance, after all it is a lot of work and justification for them to have Part 103 wording modified.
@@DaleCKramer In my experience liability arising from inaction is a potential heat source that organisations prefer to be proactive regarding. The rate of updates/amendments is low, but even if they were seeking to bundle some changes up prior to an update, a decade seems a long time. Please keep up your good work with your aircraft and your videos. High efficiency flight likely will be very important as entry route for general aviation & beyond. I hope you already know about the channels @AmazingDIYProjects (Levitator), @Think Flight (Ekranoplan) and @RCTestFlight (solar & long duration automation).
Looks cool Dale! Congrats on your continued success with your eLazair4. It's great to see how well it works, as you explained/predicted it would, when you showed me your pod assembly and controller (when I got to meet you up in NJ). Sorry that I couldn't make it down to Sun 'n Fun this year, as I was REALLY hoping to get to know each other better and discuss fun projects, etc. Best wishes on your continued successes!!!
With a steady 20-30 knots, and the tail vaning the props into the wind, might put a decent charge on the batteries!
fantastic，i just wanna build one，can you share the blueprint
cool！where can i found or buy the construction plans
Plans for what?
@@DaleCKramer for the electric lazair
@@jackhovran Sorry but my eLazair4 modification is not ready for prime time yet. You will have to buy a Lazair and make your own mods to it.
@@DaleCKramer what is the lazair‘s battery capacity and weight
@@jackhovran You will find that and more in this videos description: ua-cam.com/video/EHAaNfEwbMg/v-deo.html