Since this is the EAA if you have or are building an aircraft what is it?
why did you choose that one?
I will go first
working on a Ragwing Ultra-Piet
I chose it because it is wood, in my price range, fits with my love of classic aircraft since it is a replica of a late 1920s design. And last looked like something I could actually complete with my limited budged, and talent.
I completed an RV-6 in 2001, and it is my current flying aircraft. I built it for speed, gentlemen's aerobatics, and X/C trips with various girlfriends. It still does everything well, except the girlfriend part. My wife (who acquired me in 2003) seems to frown on the girlfriend idea.
I'm months away from completing an RV-10, because the RV-6 only has two seats, and we have a 6 year old. The -10 should provide a great X/C platform for my family.
Somewhere in the basement are a fair number of Hatz parts, going back to the era between finishing the RV-6 and getting married. That project will be resurrected one of these days. I really enjoy building, so there won't be much of a pause after the RV-10. Except, I need to complete or sell my Champ project, which is a whole lot further along than the Hatz, so I guess it is next in line.
Somewhere along the way, I'd like to build a Steward Headwind, just for local puttering around.
I'm building a Fisher Celebrity. I really wanted a biplane. I like the single seat WWI fighters, but I also really wanted two seats (wife and grandkids). I have to stay within Light Sport limits, which elominated most designs. Couldn't really find anything else that met my requirements. I like the look of the Celebrity and the fact that it's all wood, so I don't have to either pay someone to weld the fuselage, or learn and equip myself to weld well enough that I'd bet my life and the lives of others on it.
I built a 7/8th scale Airdrome Aeroplanes Nieuport 11.
I wanted an airplane that was super inexpensive, open cockpit, low and slow, and single seat - that didn't require a lot of skill or tools to make. A biplane that looks like it could be over the skies of Verdun in 1916? Sign me up!
http://www.darts-page.com/images/Nieuport/Hero002.jpg
I started a project based on the Pitts S-1S in the mid 80's. The original mission was to continue flying competition akro but the realities of the sport and my advancing age have forced a mission change. After years of letting life get in the way I'm getting back on task. The mission is now to enjoy the build and to have something of a time machine to enjoy like I did when I was younger flying aerobatics in my all-time favorite airplane type.
Since I was always too tall for comfort in the S-1S and since there have been some nice developments in Pitts performance the airplane will not be stock (been there, done that). The airframe will be built using 'old school' methods while completely avoiding things like composites, flat panel displays and electronic instruments. But it is being designed in Solidworks so I must not be a complete dinosaur even if the project will produce an airframe that could have been built in the 50's. The result of setting that goal means the airplane will be a little heavier than it might otherwise be but I won't be flying akro contests so it doesn't really matter. It's a time machine after all.....
I am building a full sized, per drawings, 1918 Fokker D VII with a Ford 300 IL 6, in Alois Heldmann markings. He survived WW I with 15 confirmed victories. He later joined the Luftwaffe and survived WW II.
I figured this would be in my skills range by adding a few new tricks, minimal machining, and the plane was rated as the most stable, best all around fighter of WW I.
This will be my first build and first plane owned.
Attachment 6749
Does rebuilding count?
I'm getting ready to start rebuilding a Starduster One. I can't say I chose it, more like it chose me. I've always liked biplanes, had a Fisher FP-404 which was fun but limited performance, came across a good deal on a somewhat rough but airworthy Starduster. I wasn't that familiar with Stardusters, but it seemed the right plane for me. Bought it, flew it home, spent 4 months working on a new landing gear which it needed, only to break the plane when it cartwheeled in an off airport forced landing. After the initial disgust and wanting to sell the wreck and just get it out of my sight, I realized that although I only flew the plane for 20 hours before crashing it, I really liked flying it. So as soon as I can get some other home related projects out of the way, the rebuild will start. The restoration, which it would have needed in a couple of years anyway, will likely be more work than the actual repairs.
Started scratch building a Zenith CH-701 a few years back but I think I'm going to put it up for sale. I just turned 71 and I don't think I have it in me to finish the project. Wife wants to move, and or, build a house so the 701 is going. I have built the rudder, horizontal stabilizer, elevator and both wings, complete with fuel tanks. I have to admit though, I have enjoyed the building process, even with all the head scratching, but if I'm going to continue to fly, I need a LSA already flying.
Bob
I previously built a Sonerai IILT with a friend of mine and am currently building a KR-1. I was originally going to use the engine and other parts of the Sonerai project for my KR, but realized that it was much closer to completion, so we finished it instead. The Sonerai was a great airplane, and I am really looking forward to the build and seeing what the KR-1 can do. Totally different construction materials and methods with the KR-1, so it will be fun and interesting to stretch and learn new skills. Inexpensive, VW power, speed with economy, and beautiful are the reasons I am building it, and maybe I can set a record or two with it as well!
Planes built so far. I'll be retiring in the next few weeks. We'll see if the bug bites and I feel compelled to build again.
Attachment 6750
I completed this O-200 powered KR-2S 20 years ago. Still have it. Still fly it. Has about 1200 hrs on it now. The engine was a wrecked salvage engine that required a major before flying. I chose the KR because I wanted something with good cross country performance that I could build on a small budget.
Attachment 6751
Once the KR was completed, I was bored, so built this Avid Flyer, Mark 4 in a partnership just for the experience, then gave it to the partner in return for my costs. This Avid used a 2180 VW for the powerplant. I did this project strictly for my own building experience. I wanted experience with fabric work. With all the mistakes I made on the fabric, I got it in spades.;)
Attachment 6752
More recently, I had the desire for a fun, slow plane for off field activities, and for introductory rides, so built this SuperCub Clone. I completed the Cub 7 years ago and have somewhere around 250 hours on it. It is powered by a 160 HP O-320. This engine was also a wreck salvage that I majored. I built this because I already had my go-fast plane (the KR) and wanted a go slow, fun plane that I could use for introducing pilots and others to a more basic type of aviation.
Just got an Avid Flyer A. I got it because it was really cheap you can see why;). It will be a good learning exp for me and the kids. The middle one been wanting to build her first airplane. Attachment 7182
Building a Corben Junior Ace. I like the classic vibe without having to build four wing panels for a biplane. And I liked the utility vs a Piet.