Interesting video. Thanks for posting it. I built a plans-built Hummel UC with a friend back in 2009 with a Hirth F-23 fuel-injected engine (50 HP) and a tricycle gear mod. What sold me on the Hummel was that it is all-metal and the wings come off easily with one person so it can be trailered. It has been a great plane with no complaints after more than a decade of use. It's very straight-forward to fly and I love the torque tube controls.
I am so glad to have stumbled across your video! I also am an engineer (mechanical) and enamored with the idea of building my own plane. I'm fortunate to be very experienced fabricator, having my own turn-key CT Scanner factory (not to mention hundreds of Cleco's already on a shelf). However, I'm very much a right-brained engineer and averse to doing all the due-diligence that most normal engineers thrive on, unless and until I can't avoid it. ;-) Your experience in evaluating an evidently exhaustive list of tradeoffs and characteristics...well, you've done the heavy lifting for me in deciding because a) I trust your judgement based entirely on your demeanor, and 2) I'm already passionately invested in the Hummel Ultracruiser just based on its looks and inferred performance specifications. You, sir, have pushed me over the edge. I almost feel like I owe you a consulting fee. Once I finish building this dang ICF castle I've started, an Ultracruiser will take over the space in my factory presently occupied by my Six Chuter Skye Ryder. Are you flying yet? I hope you are and am curious as to the flight characteristics. As you intimated in your video, I also share some apprehension in a flying machine with such low wing loading and sensitivity to turbulence & shear. I also want to build as a 103 but that canopy is mighty alluring. I'm in Oregon and the calmer periods of the day can also be quite cold. How does the Ultracruiser handle bumps? I've heard it's so light that ground effect can make it a challenge to set down. Do you have good tail authority to avoid ground looping? Since I value the canopy and electric start, I might have to buck up and go for my sport pilot license. Well, I guess I can't avoid ALL the homework, eh? Thanks for a great post. Maybe someday I'll have an Ultracruiser kit of my own. James C.
I wanted to build a Hummel Bird when I first found out how small it was...but, I'm too tall and too heavy for it, so it looks like the Ultracruiser someday, God willing. Thanks for the video!
I love how he says 7:25 there no reported cases of structural failure and that it's super strong. There's a reason why just about ever ultralight airplane out there has a canvas or soft skin and that's that for this plane it's a crab in that they put all the weight in the skin not leaving much weight allowance leftover to install a proper support structure IE a frame to properly support the aircraft leaving the the 1/16th inch thin aluminum skin to take all the weight of the aircraft leading to failure in the skin and yes there is a video right here on UA-cam 3 years ago 2 years before this video showing and talking about just this problem with the skin failing. So this guy really didn't do his research. I can't put a link as UA-cam doesn't like that but I will put the channel name and the title of the video if you want to go and see for yourself. Name is *_Dennis Brooks_* and title name for video is *_Video for Alan.... strengths and weaknesses of the Ultracruiser_* I also want to say sorry to everyone that owns one of these but this plane really needs a redesign badly.
As a former ultracrusier owner- sold due to health issues- I have to disagree with you about the strength of the UC. I'm not an engineer but I felt very comfortable flying it! However, I've always been a proponent of increasing the weight limit of ultralights so safety features can be added without penalty!
Interesting video. Thanks for posting it. I built a plans-built Hummel UC with a friend back in 2009 with a Hirth F-23 fuel-injected engine (50 HP) and a tricycle gear mod. What sold me on the Hummel was that it is all-metal and the wings come off easily with one person so it can be trailered. It has been a great plane with no complaints after more than a decade of use. It's very straight-forward to fly and I love the torque tube controls.
I am so glad to have stumbled across your video! I also am an engineer (mechanical) and enamored with the idea of building my own plane. I'm fortunate to be very experienced fabricator, having my own turn-key CT Scanner factory (not to mention hundreds of Cleco's already on a shelf). However, I'm very much a right-brained engineer and averse to doing all the due-diligence that most normal engineers thrive on, unless and until I can't avoid it. ;-) Your experience in evaluating an evidently exhaustive list of tradeoffs and characteristics...well, you've done the heavy lifting for me in deciding because a) I trust your judgement based entirely on your demeanor, and 2) I'm already passionately invested in the Hummel Ultracruiser just based on its looks and inferred performance specifications. You, sir, have pushed me over the edge. I almost feel like I owe you a consulting fee. Once I finish building this dang ICF castle I've started, an Ultracruiser will take over the space in my factory presently occupied by my Six Chuter Skye Ryder.
Are you flying yet? I hope you are and am curious as to the flight characteristics. As you intimated in your video, I also share some apprehension in a flying machine with such low wing loading and sensitivity to turbulence & shear. I also want to build as a 103 but that canopy is mighty alluring. I'm in Oregon and the calmer periods of the day can also be quite cold. How does the Ultracruiser handle bumps? I've heard it's so light that ground effect can make it a challenge to set down. Do you have good tail authority to avoid ground looping? Since I value the canopy and electric start, I might have to buck up and go for my sport pilot license. Well, I guess I can't avoid ALL the homework, eh?
Thanks for a great post. Maybe someday I'll have an Ultracruiser kit of my own.
James C.
I wanted to build a Hummel Bird when I first found out how small it was...but, I'm too tall and too heavy for it, so it looks like the Ultracruiser someday, God willing. Thanks for the video!
I enjoyed that good info a credit to Hummel but also helpful with the decision process when buying a plane thank you 👍
Very inspiring video!
I am 196cm and 105kg.
Does he also have a UA-cam channel that we can watch?
Anyone in Ohio or western PA? I’d love to come see it or chat.
the hardest thing there is to do ... wait
Where to buy kit
Go to hummelaircraft.com
I love how he says 7:25 there no reported cases of structural failure and that it's super strong. There's a reason why just about ever ultralight airplane out there has a canvas or soft skin and that's that for this plane it's a crab in that they put all the weight in the skin not leaving much weight allowance leftover to install a proper support structure IE a frame to properly support the aircraft leaving the the 1/16th inch thin aluminum skin to take all the weight of the aircraft leading to failure in the skin and yes there is a video right here on UA-cam 3 years ago 2 years before this video showing and talking about just this problem with the skin failing. So this guy really didn't do his research. I can't put a link as UA-cam doesn't like that but I will put the channel name and the title of the video if you want to go and see for yourself. Name is *_Dennis Brooks_* and title name for video is *_Video for Alan.... strengths and weaknesses of the Ultracruiser_* I also want to say sorry to everyone that owns one of these but this plane really needs a redesign badly.
As a former ultracrusier owner- sold due to health issues- I have to disagree with you about the strength of the UC. I'm not an engineer but I felt very comfortable flying it! However, I've always been a proponent of increasing the weight limit of ultralights so safety features can be added without penalty!