Phantom ultralights continue to charm many pilots The proposed sport pilot and light-sport aircraft rule changes have been the focus of much discussion and anticipation over the last several months, and good reasons for such unbridled attention are plentiful. Under the proposed rule, you can obtain an FAA sport pilot certificate in as little as 20 hours and then carry a passenger without having to become a flight instructor. Many interesting aircraft will become available for purchase either as kits or ready-to-fly light-sport aircraft (LSA), and these machines will be more “capable” in that they will be faster, better equipped, more comfortable, and more closely resemble conventional aircraft. In many ways, they will outperform the general aviation aircraft they may come to replace. Experts expect financing and insurance to become more readily available. And access to America’s 12,000 airports should follow. You’ll be able to buy fully built LSA that will qualify for commercial operations like flight training or rental. And on top of everything else, a sport pilot certificate requires either a valid U.S. driver’s license OR a third-class medical, making medical requirements less expensive to meet. Given all the strong arguments favoring the new rule, why would anyone still want to consider buying a single-place ultralight? I have my answer to that question—they’re simply fun to fly—but many other excellent reasons exist. Go Fly Alone! Do you think you need two or four seats in your aircraft for true aviation happiness? I believe the answer is no. You may need two or four or even six seats if you want to transport people or to introduce friends to light-airplane flying. Yet for many pilots, the goal of happiness in aviation is best achieved through solo flight. Look at sailplanes, aerobatic flying, hang gliding, paragliding, or sky diving. All these popular aviation sports are largely done solo. When you fly alone you have no one else to please or worry about; you can make sure your flight experience is exactly as you prefer it. Single-place machines are less costly to buy, build, fly, insure, and maintain. Single- place ultralights are more agile than their heavier counterparts. Their lightness allows them to operate from shorter strips and suffice with smaller hangars; many can fold up for trailer transport, which saves hangar costs. And single-place ultralights are easy to push around on the ground. In my view, few other air vehicles deliver the fun of flight better than a single-place ultralight. A single-seater ultralight on floats is about as good as flying gets, according to many enthusiasts. Convinced Yet? If you’re aware of or convinced by this argument, then you need to think about a flying machine like the Phantom X-1. Several other Part-103-compliant ultralights can be bought, but the Phantom has a long and strong reputation and meets the performance needs of many pilots. Over the past few months, I’ve had friendly but vigorous discussions with other ultralight experts. People who should know better continue to think that Part-103 ultralights cannot be purchased anymore. They say the only possible way is with a spartan-equipped ultralight that uses the 28-hp Rotax 277, an engine Rotax has ceased building because of low consumer interest. Over the years I have written several articles about legal Part-103 ultralights that are fun to fly. Sure, some require the 277 engine to meet the 254-pound weight limitation of Part 103, but others do not. Don’t tell me you cannot buy a Part-103 ultralight because I can prove otherwise. Be honest. You may want more aircraft— and that’s where LSA will come in—but don’t blind yourself to the easily seen fact that a variety of Part-103-legal ultralights are on the market. Case in point: the Phantom. Frankly, it drives me nuts to hear people state with conviction that no legal Part-103 ultralights are for sale. If that’s how I feel, imagine how Phantom Aircraft Company president Pat Schultheis feels. The Phantom X-1 can indeed be built to stay within Part 103, and it will do so with the 40-hp Rotax 447 engine that provides plenty of power and twin-cylinder smoothness. True, Phantom Aircraft offers a more capable Phantom, the X-1E, but that does not meet Part-103 weight. Its full enclosure, larger engine, added structure, and options push it over the line (though only by about 35 pounds). However, Pat swears that you can meet the 20-year-old rule with that model, if you build carefully. Phantom Expatriated When Phantom Aircraft came to life, it was a Connecticut-based company. John Dempsey was the designer of the original machine introduced by his company, Ultralight Flight, at the Sun ’n Fun EAA Fly-In in March 1982. Several hundred machines were sold in the heyday of ultralight growth during the early 1980s. As the industry matured, the original Phantom owners sold the design to a southeastern company who resold it a few years later to a man in the furniture business. The business moved to California at one point. It was a slow period for the famous name. But despite some management shenanigans along the way, Phantom, the machine, survived nicely. Eventually, new folks in North Carolina purchased the business, and Pat, being a Phantom enthusiast, became involved with the operation. But in time, those owners decided they wanted out of the business. Pat’s friends in Kalamazoo, Michigan, told him he was the logical guy to buy the business, but having spent 29 years as a schoolteacher in a Michigan school system, that prospect wasn’t within his financial reach. Pat tells the story of what happened next. “I told 35 of my friends, well, if you really think I should buy the company, put your money with mine, and I’ll do it. I’ll guarantee a personal note to everyone who lends money, and I’ll pledge to pay everyone back in three years, plus I’ll pay interest along the way. My lawyer told me I was nuts, but that was my personal conscience. Three years to the day, everybody was paid back.” Pat adds, “I really didn’t want 35 shareholders telling me what to do. I have one good woman looking over my shoulder and that’s all I need.” Pat says the first few years weren’t easy, but adds, “There’s some 1,500 Phantoms out there, and old Phantoms don’t die, they just get recycled, so there’s lots of folks who need parts.” After Pat bought the company, he made several changes that separate the new Phantom from the old one. His Kalamazoo, Michigan-based enterprise replaced the slab aluminum gear with a chromoly steel landing gear. Ironically, Pat originally developed the slab gear; he says the new construction is tougher and offers better ground clearance. Phantom Aircraft now also offers six-inch aluminum wheels as standard. A new fairing has a wraparound flange (an extended side section outside of your knees) that allows placement of more instruments for those who want them. The windscreen was subtly reshaped to bring it a bit higher and wider to enclose the side support tubes. When the screen was routed inside these tubes, more wind got to the pilot; now the cockpit is surprisingly calm. The seatbelts were reattached in a new place that keeps pressure off the top of your shoulders in case of impact. Connected up higher, the belts now better restrain your forward movement, which is desirable in mishaps. The motor mount was changed, shaving an impressive 50 percent of its weight, from 23 to 12 pounds. A simple swap exchanged the round forward engine support tube (running from nosewheel to engine mount) for a streamlined tube. The shaped tube cuts drag somewhat and also provides a clean and neat way to hide wires that route from the engine to the instruments. It looks trick, too. The Phantom’s pre-sewn Dacron wing now splits in the center (like several other ultralight aircraft), so that takedown for trailer shipment is less time consuming. To make transport by trailer even easier and setup quicker, Phantom Aircraft started offering a folding wing option for $800. All these changes made the Phantom more polished. But for my money, Pat did something even more important when he bought the company. He made a promise to take care of all owners. Many of the kits supplied by previous owners were shorted parts, yet Pat made good to everyone. I’ve long said that when you buy an ultralight airplane, you’re marrying the company and its people as much as buying an airplane. If you don’t feel good about the company, don’t buy the airplane unless you believe you can handle all the details on your own. Given Pat’s long experience with Phantoms and his sense of ethics, you won’t go wrong with Phantom Aircraft of Michigan. Give a Yank If you want to comply with FAR Part 103, you’ll have to stick with a pull-rope starter for the Rotax 447. I found this challenging, as the Phantom’s cockpit is rather small for a long, hard pull. I wasn’t beyond asking Pat to help. I’m not a fan of starting from the outside when you are positioned so close to the spinning prop. Yet an electric starter and its attendant battery and heavy electrical cables will push you over the weight limit of Part 103. The Phantom’s sling seat may not look comfortable to pilots accustomed to padded, upholstered, metal-framed seats, but the sling is actually quite supportive, and it’s terrific in hot weather because it breathes readily. If you need generous lumbar support, though, you’ll need to add the optional Velcro® pads. The Phantom’s rudder pedals are aimed back at you at a rather sharp angle. They have a small lip at the bottom to support your heels. Flying with my legs nearly straight felt more comfortable than I expected, though it may not be optimal for long flights. On the other hand, a legal Phantom with a five-gallon fuel tank can stay aloft about two hours, so stretching your legs can come with fuel stops. The Phantom won’t taxi turn quite as tightly as some other ultralights, and no change was made to steering linkages. Fortunately ultralights don’t stay on the ground long and bungee-cord suspension helps smooth landings. Most owners fly from rural airparks where taxiing is minimal and space is generous. I’ve enjoyed consistently great landings in the Phantom X-1. My experience with the design helps, but the Phantom X-1 seems capable of making lots of pilots look talented, thanks to a combination of good low-speed handling and forgiving performance characteristics. Pat advises 50 mph or better on approach, but this insures a wide safety margin as 40 mph—still the recommended 30 percent above stall—worked well for me after a little practice. When you’re ready for the slower speeds, you’ll eat up less runway. The Phantom displays a wide flare window, probably because pitch is very authoritative—partly a function of the ventral fin area below the tail boom and partly due to good empennage placement in the prop blast. And to some pilots, a higher sink rate on landing approach is merely a means to touch down in a more precise location. With its side stick, the Phantom does not permit control as briskly to the right as to the left. Your right hand must work the stick asymmetrically as it is positioned on the right side of the cockpit. This assures great leverage moving your hand/arm to the left but restricts your movement to the right. The good news is you don’t need to move much in the X-1. The Phantom ailerons are more powerful than the rudder, a fact to keep in mind while trying to slip to a landing. Remember, the Phantom has no flaps. In most maneuvering, I noticed generally good control harmony despite the more potent ailerons. Roll rate measures about 2.5 seconds for 45-to-45 reversal, although it seemed marginally quicker to the left, probably because of the stick position. You push to the left versus pulling to the right, and pushing works better in the Phantom cockpit. Phantom Flying The Phantom’s 40-hp Rotax 447 with two-blade wood prop zoomed up powerfully. It felt at least as strong as the factory’s statement of 700 fpm. More powerful 50- or 65-hp Rotax engines are optional for heavier pilots flying in higher elevations, but you truly don’t need more power if you’re of average height/weight flying nearer to sea level. Some legal 103 ultralights must use small engines that limit their performance enough that some pilots aren’t interested. However, the Phantom X-1 can make the legal weight with the twincylinder Rotax 447. The engine’s 40 horsepower gives this single seater plenty of power; it can zoom to a couple thousand feet in barely over two minutes. You can cruise very comfortably at 5,000 rpm and see about a 55-60 mph cruise airspeed. At full power, a 447- equipped Phantom stays within the 55-knot/63-mph speed limit of Part 103. Seeking a comfort zone, I experimented with 4800-4900 rpm. At this power I found that Phantom X-1 could hold altitude well, and it will definitely make you a quieter neighbor as you cruise overhead. With such a reduction comes less vibration, noise, and fuel consumption. Cable bracing to inboard and outboard locations on both leading edge and trailing edge—and a similar bracing scheme for the tail—yields a very solid feel in flight. You tend to notice bumps more than some designs because of the rigidly supported airframe. Some folks think cable bracing brings more drag than streamlined struts, but this is incorrect, at least when cables are compared to front and rear tubing sections with jury struts. I found I was unable to stall in fullpower mode with the 447 engine; the Phantom just kept climbing albeit in a rather mushing flight. I backed off the throttle and recorded power-off stalls barely above 30 mph. Power-on stalls showed less than 30 mph indicated at break. The Phantom X- 1 dropped its nose slightly though the wing never really stopped flying. ASI error below 30 mph with the nose held very high is surely significant, so the number can be considered little more than a reference. But it was obvious to me the Phantom has a genuinely slow stall. Power-off stalls also broke at 30 mph; they did drop the nose more convincingly yet remained modest. A couple of ultralight designs will stall slower and respond gentler, but the Phantom’s stall is recognizable for alert students and anyone with a few hours in ultralight aircraft. In all stalls the Phantom wallowed around at the top of the stall to give you plenty of warning that you must lower the nose. As with earlier Phantom flights, I found only a modest amount of adverse yaw despite the presence of full-span ailerons. (The Phantom design was one of the first to popularize this configuration among ultralights.) Part of the reason for low adverse yaw qualities comes from the tail’s generous vertical area. Of course, coordinated use of the rudder cured the problem. Bargain-Priced With a price tag of only $10,888 (with a Rotax 447, or $8,888 less engine and prop), you won’t spend a lot of cash, but you’ll get everything you need. At a time when the average new car costs twice as much, the Phantom X-1 represents an excellent value in my opinion. If you start in Part 103 and eventually want to become a sport pilot and fly your machine as an experimental LSA, you’ll be pleased to know that options like the enclosure are retrofitable. You can start with the X- 1 and add goodies as soon as you have your new sport pilot certificate. If you make the switch during the sport pilot/light-sport aircraft transition period (currently defined as two years after the effective date of the proposed rule), you can register your aircraft as an experimental LSA and continue to do your own maintenance. Whether Phantom Aircraft will build a ready-to-fly LSA model Phantom in accordance with the yet-to-be-finalized consensus standards for LSA remains to be seen. However, with rumors of a twoplace model on the horizon and Phantom Aircraft’s ability to supply highly finished kits, it might be an easy step for the small company. In the last analysis, the Phantom is a design with a long and successful history now owned by an affable, knowledgeable Phantom enthusiast. With manufacturing done by people who have worked with ultralights for a long, long time and given its superb flying qualities, no wonder the single place Phantom X-1 remains famous as one of ultralight aviation’s most enduring models. If you want a little more power, an enclosure, and more speed, a 503-powered Phantom X-1E might just be your dream machine. Most of the Phantom owners I’ve spoken to over the years have said they love their Phantom and they’re sticking with it proudly. With a fan club that strong, I imagine Phantom Aircraft will continue its selling ways. Plus, if you stay with Part- 103 aircraft like the X-1, you could make a purchase today, fly legally forever, and have less regulation to boot. Sounds like a winning combination to me.