An Easy-Flying Ultralight Let's see. A single-seat plane that can be purchased as an ultralight, assuming your engine selection doesn't push it over Part 103's weight limit, or built from a kit and registered as an Experimental-class aircraft, or purchased as a light sport aircraft once the manufacturer meets the ASTM certification. What's a pilot to do? That's the conundrum facing T-Bird I shoppers. This single-seater can be a Part 103-compliant ultralight when using a Rotax 277, still available on the used-engine market, though no longer supplied from Rotax's Austrian factory. Few prospective owners would select this engine, yet a more powerful engine would push the T-Bird I over the Part 103 weight limit. Does that leave only the Experimental amateur-built kit option? The answer is no, and yes. To explain this apparent contradiction, a kit-built T-Bird I with a larger Rotax engine or the 60-hp HKS 700E engine could still qualify under the 51% rule. But the most recent news is that current T-Bird producer, Indy Aircraft, is pursuing Light-Sport Aircraft certification. They're currently working on the T-Bird II and plan to get the T-Bird I certified afterwards. When completed - and given the long history of this design, it seems reasonable to assume they can meet the requirements - Indy Aircraft could supply a fully built Special LSA (SLSA) and/or an Experimental LSA (ELSA). Following such ASTM certification, Indy would have the opportunity to sell T-Birds in four configurations: Experimental amateur-built, SLSA, ELSA, or even Part 103, if you could find the right engine and restrict empty weight to a minimum. Many Choices In addition to the regulation-driven choices, Indy Aircraft can also supply these aircraft in a variety of formats. For example, you can choose taildragger or tri-gear form; wheels, skis, or floats; joystick or control yoke, plus you have cockpit configuration options. Finally, you have a number of engine choices. The tri-gear T-Birds manage to look different from the taildragger models, more so than some other ultralight designs that have gone through similar development. T-Birds started life solely as taildraggers with nose enclosures and often used the 65-hp Rotax 582 engine. Under Indy Aircraft's new plan you can mix and match any features offered by the Iowa-based factory. For example, a single-place T-Bird I could be fully enclosed and powered by the 60-horse 4-stroke HKS 700E, which would make it a lively performer with great reliability, low fuel consumption, and modestly priced. Such equipment would not detract from the appealing simplicity of the T-Bird I and, thanks to the basic design qualities, the machine could be reconfigured, depending on the kind of flying you wish to do. When you remove the doors - typical of summer flying in Indy Aircraft's easygoing, slow-flying machines - entry is no more than grasping the overhead forward support tube with both hands, sticking one leg in and swinging your body onto the seat. Then you bring in the other leg. You will want to be sure you don't put weight on the throttle lever when entering the aircraft; it looks like a handle. Entry requires stepping around the control wheel (I much prefer joysticks, for handling, and for easier entry). All T-Bird models shine with an ability to handle larger-sized pilots. Perhaps because former company owners Bob Ellefson and Dale Kjellson are tall men, T-Birds accommodate tall or wide pilots with more comfort than many aircraft. A former enlarged cabin option has now been made standard. All T-Birds, especially the single-seater, offer superb visibility because you sit at the wing's leading edge surrounded by clear plastic. Without the optional doors, I found the T-Bird I a little chilly, even on a relatively warm day. The cooling effect derives less from wind striking you than from air being drawn swiftly out of the cabin. The seating position is quite comfortable in both the T-Bird I and II models, though upper back support was a bit limited. However, I enjoyed a bit of room to wiggle my feet and stretch my legs, thanks to the T-Bird's spacious cabin. My assessment of the seat support and comfort rings a bell with Indy Aircraft owner Bret Kivell. "We're working on an alternative," says Kivell. "The T-Bird I that we had at AirVenture Oshkosh '07 was rigged with a low-cost executive office chair, and had incredible back and head support. It completely changed the whole flying experience and almost made turbulent flying fun!" Taildragger or Tri-Gear In my experience, the T-Bird's nosewheel is tougher than many. Experienced pilots often take care in lowering an airplane to its nosewheel upon touchdown. The T-Bird I's robustness is worthy, given the way the plane tends to settle rather firmly on its nosewheel. Ground handling in the T-Bird I is very good. The nosewheel is highly steerable and offers a tight turn radius. Nosewheel suspension is also quite good; it absorbed the bumps of a turf runway quite well. I also found the T-Bird very stable on its steel gear. It tolerated turns at speed. Though awkwardly placed, the overhead brake is reasonably convenient once you get used to the unorthodox location. The T-Bird proved to be a most enjoyable companion aloft. Well-behaved and adequately responsive for most needs, the T-Bird I has sufficient performance and feels solid. Some details can amplify this basically good report. As I performed my familiar Dutch roll coordination exercises, I found the control wheel linked to pushrods brought a full usable range in control applications. This may be one advantage of control wheels. Joysticks sometimes can't reach their range limit because the pilot's legs get in the way. Throughout these roll reversals, and those I would do later in the steep bank series, I found the all-pushrod linkages were very smooth, making the control pressures entirely reasonable. Roll control was not fast, averaging 3.5 to 4.0 seconds in the 45° to 45° roll reversal. The controls harmonized well, that is, rudder and ailerons had reasonably balanced authority (one didn't dominate the other). The combination of roll rate, harmony, and ease of control pressure made my Dutch rolls work quite well. I could not sustain them to high bank angles, but that's expected with only moderate control response rates. Whipping around abruptly in the T-Bird was a joy; the plane responded well to control input and retained a solid feeling throughout. Some pilots have been critical of the robust frame, which transmits this solid feel. Many years ago, Dale Kjellsen, who founded the Teratorn Aircraft Company, had an elaborate airshow display where a bare-framed Tierra - precursor of the T-Bird series - rotated on a moving platform. This revealed the construction of the then-new design. That same display also prompted critics to use the phrase, "built like a truck," when describing the Tierra. Stalls and Stability A series of stalls in the T-Bird proved uneventful. Power-off stalls brought a break, but so moderate as to be difficult to identify. For most pilots - certain beginning aviators - this behavior is a plus. Power-on stalls brought only a mushing flight; however, the rate of sink rose dramatically. In cases like this, I believe a break or shudder is desirable to identify the onset of stall. Otherwise, a pilot taking off at stall might not clearly see the error of his slow-flying ways. I could not induce an accelerated stall, partly because I ran out of backstick. Once again the mush-mode flight occurred. Stall speeds seemed to agree with the figures printed in the company's brochures. Of course, this depends on airspeed indicator accuracy and I had no way to ascertain that quality. Stalls came about 26 to 28 mph indicated. This is a comfortably low number that assured me landings would be easy. My stability checks evaluate pitch oscillation recovery. I set the power and trim to find a good cruise attitude. Then, without other changes, I pull back on the stick to about 25° to 30° nose-up, then release the stick and watch. The same maneuver is repeated nosedown. The T-Bird I was quite well behaved, moving back and forth through about 2 to 2.5 oscillations before returning to approximately level. I also like to investigate engine-off sink rate performance. Glide angle and sink rate are the two performance parameters in a soaring machine, but it's important to know an airplane's capabilities in all aircraft. The potential for a stopped engine brings particular focus on these two measurements. The T-Bird I earned a respectable 400- to 425-fpm sink rate measured over 2 minutes of descent at what felt like optimum speed. A pilot more familiar with the subtleties of the T-Bird I might be expected to do better. Not one to stay with current construction, Kivell reports Indy Aircraft is also working on streamlining materials. "Another design factor we are working on is reducing the drag by incorporating more streamlined tubing," he says. "Streamlined struts are some of our more popular options ($800). The difference is very significant, especially with sink rate.We are looking at streamlining other areas as well. Of course, we should pick up some cruising speed, but the sink rate should improve significantly." The T-Bird I offered some highly enjoyable flying, but long cross-country flights are not one of the design's strengths. Kivell agreed. "The cross-country limitations of the T-Bird are indeed its biggest cons," he reports. "We intend to improve the comfort and ergonomics of the plane so that cross-country flight is more enjoyable. Also, doing some clean-up work on the plane to reduce some drag should help us pick up a little more cruise speed." The objective is to have a simple, low-cost plane that is very capable of making "breakfast runs" within a 100- to 150-mile radius. "We want to get the cost of that $100 hamburger down to $25," Kivell adds with a smile. Touchdown Ease Lower stall speeds generally suggest easier landings. Slow approaches also assist in making landings. Landings were a "cakewalk." Approaching at 40 mph, I was well above the 1.3-times-stall rule, yet I was not streaking toward the field. When I felt certain I would make the field, I relaxed my forward stick and slowed to about 35 mph. Touchdown occurred just below 30, making rollout extremely short. Every one of my landings was good. I did not experience any tendency to bounce back and forth from tailwheel to main gear partly because the TBird I that I flew didn't have bouncy tundra tires. The Tierra was purposely designed to sit rather heavily on the tailwheel. On the single-place TBird I, this design concept works better than on the 2-place T-Bird II, which is heavy to ground handle by lifting the tail. Yet T-Bird tail-heaviness can make the taildragger version more pilot-friendly to those without taildragger experience. Taildraggers are off-putting to many pilots without such familiarity. While this fear may be less appropriate in most ultralight designs - they are far easier than faster landing, high-deck-angle general aviation taildraggers - it is even less of a concern in the T-Bird I. A weighty tail tends to keep the tail down, the exact technique taught by instructors helping train new taildragger pilots. Combined with a broad stance and more forward main gear, ground looping is improbable in the TBird I. Takeoff was equally simple. You needn't worry much over stick position as the T-Bird responded well to either stick aft or stick forward at throttle-up. Of course, you should do the customary routine of throttle forward, stick forward to lift the tail, and then ease back to clear the ground. I don't believe you could stand the T-Bird on its nose because of the tail-heaviness, but even if you did, the pilot would probably be at little risk because of the T-Bird's strong airframe. If I had a gripe, it was the way the T-Bird I fell to its nosewheel briefly after the mains touched. I could not hold it off except when using a higher power setting. Fortunately, Indy Aircraft has additional plans. Kivell comments, "Regarding the tri-gear, we are considering a new design. The current system, though easy to retrofit onto existing planes - besides making the plane easily-convertible between configurations - adds a lot of redundant structural weight and creates a lot of additional drag. Our new design will be incorporated into the fuselage framework, and the main gear system will use streamlined material. "The new design is intended to give a cleaner look, reduce weight, and reduce drag at what should be lower cost. Also, a lot of the tail structure is built to accommodate the heavy weight of the tail design. Some of this can be reduced if we go to a tri-gear." Although this refit is progressing, Kivell could not say when Indy Aircraft would have this revision ready to go. Further to the tri-gear design, Kivell reports, "[Former Golden Circle owner] Bob [Ellefson] designed the tri-gear with the mains abnormally aft, so that the nosewheel would stay on the ground even when empty, which eases entry into the cockpit - a real plus. But with the mains that far back, it does indeed make for unorthodox takeoff and landing characteristics. It's an interesting tradeoff." The single-place T-Bird I stalled at about 32 mph. In comparison, the 2-seater stalled at about 35 mph with power off. The T-Bird I power-on stall occurred at about 20 mph and went into mush mode. It was almost impossible to detect a precise moment of stall. Accelerated stalls acted like they might fall to the outside wing but never did. These qualities are among the mildest accelerated stalls I've experienced even though I was banked to 45° and used cruise power (5,500 rpm). Satisfying T-Bird The T-Bird I is a well-built, docile-handling, and predictable aircraft with a number of good characteristics. It boasts an excellent rough-field capability (with or without the tundra tires), and should wear well. The designs have a long track record with at least 1,500 of them flying (in both single- and 2-place configurations). The number could be closer to 3,000 airframes, but with various ownership changes, some records were misplaced. For years, the T-Bird I has been known as a very easy-flying aircraft. Literally, if you feel challenged flying a T-Bird I, you need more flight training. I put the T-Bird I very high on my alltime list for sheer ease of operation. The T-Bird I's roll rate is more docile than most light aircraft, though it's comparable to other aircraft that can operate in this speed range. And aircraft that fly as slowly as a T-Bird I can offer a great platform for a kind of flying I consider almost magical. Low flying is simply the ability to enjoy the American landscape really close up. While you'll want to conduct low-flying operations over open fields that offer easy emergency out-landings, it brings a pleasure you can't find in faster, more expensive aircraft. And even among ultralights that can safely conduct such flying, few of them will be more fun than a T-Bird I. It offers low speed, good handling, and an easy-flying nature that never goes out of style. If you're looking for a speedster, you have many other choices. But the T-Bird I is a dependable and enjoyable bird with a good reputation. It is priced right at $12,850 for the T-Bird I kit in taildragger configuration with a 42-hp Rotax 447. The basic kit comes with simple, but adequate instruments: tachometer, ASI, CHT gauge, and altimeter. Without options you get a nose fairing, but not a full enclosure. However, the most popular option is a full enclosure, which costs around $500 when ordered with a new kit. Brakes cost $450 and the trigear option, at $1,200, is very popular, says Kivell, president of Indy Aircraft. Any T-Bird can be converted back and forth between tri-gear and taildragger in a few hours, he adds. Two other popular options are wing tanks with 20 gallons total capacity for $600, and streamlined struts for $800. You also may select more powerful engines: the 50-hp Rotax 503 costs $1,000 more and the 65-hp Rotax 582 is $2,700 additional. All prices are subject to change, especially imported items such as engines; check with Indy Aircraft for the latest price quotes. The joystick remains available on special request, but the yoke configuration has been virtually the only offering for several years, says Kivell. I believe the T-Bird I, which is genuinely affordable, has a solid future for those who enjoy boring holes in the sky on a beautiful day. Give business owner Bret Kivell and his team a call and see what they can do to put a high-flying smile on your face.