As a new member of the Forum, I would like to say that you guys are doing a helluva good job here, and providing quite a resource to the community. Thanks a pile and a half. And so, on to business...

For a goodly number of reasons, I wanna build a 'Bike.  As my hangar is at a tower controlled field (WHP), I will be registering it to fly as Experimental and not under Part 103.

When you visit Air-Bike "Home" at Jordan Lake Aero, you can be tantalized by the idea of an Air-Bike LS, about which there is the promise of future info, but alas, no info.

When you buy a set of plans for the Air-Bike 103 and LS, as I have, you get a wonderful set of very well drawn and detailed plans, but with no mention therein of there being more than one version of the aircraft.

I am beginning to suspect that the Air-Bike LS is the moniker given to a Part 103 Air-Bike that has been given the gift of brakes, wing tanks and maybe wheel pants and wing tips, tipping the scales above the Part 103 limit, but keeping the original, basic airframe and wing.

I have called our brothers at JLA a number of times for a clarification, but they don't seem to have anyone available for "phone duty" these days.  

So, anybody out there able to confirm or correct the theory? What constitutes an Air-Bike LS?

Thanks

The Light Sport Air-Bike is the exact per-plans aircraft offered by TEAM in beginning.  The 103 is the different factory airframe with lighter tubing in the tail, tube axles, etc. to make legal weight with the smaller engines.

My Airbike was built from a TEAM kit.  It had a Rotax 447, fiberglass wing tips and cowl, and brakes.  It weighed about 300 lbs.

Quoted from MedicalGasDan

For a goodly number of reasons, I wanna build a 'Bike.  As my hangar is at a tower controlled field (WHP), I will be registering it to fly as Experimental and not under Part 103.

You have much bigger gonads than me to fly an Airbike over that area!

I assume you are referring to LAX, and yes, things get A Bit Tricky down thattaway. So, we all stay up thissaway, instead. Cruising out north of the field, things open up.

No, I was talking about Whiteman.  On Google maps it looks completely surrounded by built up areas.

Remember, with a two stroke engine it's not if it will quit, but when will it quit.  What engine are you going to use?

Right you are, and that's a problem at times. Boys have put 'er down a number of times on Osborne Street, which fronts the field, and there is a golf course East, a couple of blocks away too. We recently had a CFI who thought he could double back after engine failure during the climb out with a 150. He couldn't. So, it is always on your mind, no matter who you are or what you are in.

In answer to your question, I have given it thought and study, and am inclined to use a Verner 3V, the Czech built, 4 stroke, 42 max and 38 sustained, 82 lb, 3 cylinder radial. There is a lot of work to do to create a firewall forward package to marry this engine to the AirBike, not the least of which would be to create a real firewall and a trustworthy mount.  If successful, it would no longer be an AirBike, but a hybrid.  But that is why its called "experimental" anyhow.

I have spent some time with Les Homan and his 3V powered Legal Eagle XL Based on his success with his O.R.V. and that of the Tree Hugger LE XL, I think it could make a good match on an evolved AirBike style aircraft. The sound of that 2500rpm max radial cannot be beaten.  With one of Frank's 66x34 Performance Propellers its torque will provide a lot of thrust and will have great efficiency.  With only short straight pipes for exhaust, they fly quietly and, from what I can divine, the Verners are proving to be dependable. And not having a reduction drive involved has to be a step in a good direction.

So, there is my guilty little secret. Maybe a perversion of Wayne Ison's handiwork, but I hope instead to help it to a next level. I think its time for a four stroke 'bike, or maybe a 'byke (AerByke anyone?).  

As I write this, I am reminded of the old joke -"If you want to hear God chuckle, tell him your plans."

Would welcome considered feedback and if the rumors are true and there is someone else working in this same direction, I would love to establish a dialog on the subject.

Thank you for your interest.

If you simply must have a  four-stroke on your Airbike,  why not a HKS-700E?

As for 2-stroke reliability,  a properly maintained Rotax 503 DCDI Prov 8 is a very good engine.  

I have a friend with an HKS-700E on his Kolb tandem.  A nice engine, but a lot of HP and Weight for a 'bike. And it is a high rev engine with a reduction.  

The nice thing about the Vernor 3V is that it horsepower and weight are not much different from a Rotax 447. And with no reduction and almost no exhaust system, it's a pretty compact package that should install without too much effect on the loading, weight and balance of the aircraft.      

The goal is to do a re-powering without losing the flying characteristics and overall feel that have made the aircraft such a favorite over the years.

And you are correct that good care and maintenance is essential to the success of any engine  system.                                                                                                                                                                                                                      

One thing to keep in mind is that the weight on the Verner starts to add up when you get all the accessories (oil tank, oil, starter, battery, longer prop etc.)

Some good details on an installation at

https://www.eaglersnest.com/forum/index.php?topic=1779.msg10429;boardseen#new