Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34

Thread: Good first build airplane?

  1. #11
    "Great topic but tell us a bit more about you? Have you taken or started lessons"? - If you mean flying lessons, then yes I have my private with tail wheel and high power endorsement.

    "If taken what airplanes do you have time in"? - Most of my time is in a C-172, Piper Warrior 2. I have logged about 10 hours in various aerobatic planes including an Acrosport 2, T-34, Extra 300 and Pitts s2c. Total time is about 75, yes I know not a lot but I've yet to have an instructor tell me I was incapable of learning to mastering any of the planes I've flown.

    "Why tandem seating? Why mid or low wing? Help us focus in on where you are at and why you are aiming in the listed direction". - I should have said single seat, not center line as a requirement. Single seats are cheaper to operate (less weight, less engine required) As for the wing, I really hated flying in the Cessna specifically because I could not see very well when turning. As soon as I got in another plane and was able to see clearly in a turn I've never gone back. Just preference I guess.


    You can build an RV-12 EAB with a Viking Engine ( or refirbed conventional one) right at your $40,000. Resale value would be good and plenty of support. wings come off very easily. Only negative is the side by seating - which many prefer.
    Jim



    The top end of my budget is really the absolute max I would be willing to spend in all circumstances. Basically if I was 5k short of completion i would be willing to go UP TO that to finish.
    Last edited by Whallon.jesse; 12-11-2014 at 02:49 PM.

  2. #12
    Two other considerations I forgot to mention is my location and build time line. I'm living in my apartment so anything with welding is out, I would need to hire someone or have a pre-welded fuselage shipped. Next is noise but I've built a dresser and a office table, pre warned the neighbors before I started hammering away and had no complaints about noise so I should, be ok if I maximize the use of hand tools. Build time estimations should be about 500 hours or basically be capable of finishing the project in 2 years. The one good thing about having the project in my living room is there is no way I can forget to work on it!

  3. #13
    cluttonfred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    World traveler
    Posts
    457
    OK, now we're getting somewhere! ;-) Why not an all-wood aerobatic single-seater?

    Jurca Tempete





    http://www.marcel-jurca.com/index.ph...id=207&lang=en
    *******
    Matthew Long, Editor
    cluttonfred.info
    A site for builders, owners and fans of Eric Clutton's FRED
    and other safe, simple, affordable homebuilt aircraft

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,718
    Quote Originally Posted by Whallon.jesse View Post
    Two other considerations I forgot to mention is my location and build time line. I'm living in my apartment so anything with welding is out, I would need to hire someone or have a pre-welded fuselage shipped. Next is noise but I've built a dresser and a office table, pre warned the neighbors before I started hammering away and had no complaints about noise so I should, be ok if I maximize the use of hand tools. Build time estimations should be about 500 hours or basically be capable of finishing the project in 2 years.
    I'm a logical, reasoned kinda guy. I'm thinking welding, pre-welded, noise, tools and build time would be the least of your concerns.

    So s'plain this to me Lucy. How are you going to get a pre-welded fuselage into an apartment in an apartment building and how are you going to exit same with a fully finished airframe??? Curious minds want to know.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    12
    OK, so you work out of an apartment: that leaves out larger airplanes; even an RV-12 might have wings and fuselage too big to handle. You will know.
    You want to build it in about 500 hrs? That leaves out plans-built airplanes; I'd say it leaves out ALL homebuilts: I do not know of any kit plane that can be built in 500 hrs.
    You want some aerobatic capability: that leaves out the RV-12 and many other.
    The Onex was mentioned: I'm building one, in my basement. Size-wise it won't get smaller than this: I can built ~75-80% in my small basement; ultimately the thing has to be assembled and that needs space.
    However: I find the Onex pretty complicated and demanding to build. OK, I'm one of the early buyers and boy, the amount of mistakes on the 76 sheets of plans is tremendous. Parts that don't fit, wrongly delivered ones,.... the list goes on. You will do as many hours head scratching as building. I estimate to need about 1500 hrs to finish it; I have already 900 hrs into it sans the plan study hours. In all honesty I must say that I saw more recent kits which appear to have some corrected plans and parts.
    The Onex has no luggage space (design it yourself up to 10 lbs.).
    The Onex is not a X-country ship (not enough range)
    The Onex cannot be left outside: rain water will come in everywhere.
    The Onex "kit" is far from complete: you need to buy all hardware separately, as well as many desirable extra's, such as larger wheels for grass operations, a cabin heater, vents, avionics and so on. So its completed price tag goes up rapidly. But it should be possible to have the flyable single-seater for just under $40k, but you must assemble your own Aerovee engine (another daunting task with parts that do not always fit)
    It can be built, mostly, with little noise (quiet compressor, no welding,....), but you do need to drill, file, bandsaw,.... I'm afraid your neighbours in the end will complain.

    For your budget, time, space and noise requirements/wishes: don't build: get a ready homebuilt second hand.

  6. #16
    I doubt you'll find a perfect match for what you're looking for so you'll have to decide which features are the most important.
    With that in mind I would suggest you look at the Quad City Challengers, specifically the XL-65.
    It seats two with centerline seating. It's a high wing but the front of the wing is behind the pilot.
    The aerobatics would be a weak point. It's rated at +6/-3. The wings are removable but not trivially.
    The visibility is fabulous! It has a pusher prop allowing the dash to be fairly low and the wing is behind you. About the only way to get better visibility is with a Breezy or a helicopter.
    The high thrust line takes a bit getting used to but that can easily be solved with a good instructor.
    It has tube and fabric construction. The fuselage comes completely assembled. I had mine up on wheels in a few hours.
    The cost is quite good - about 35K including the engine and simple instruments.
    You will need a compressor and a rivet puller. It has lots of rivets. I didn't want to deal with dope and paint so I went with Oratex cloth - glue, shrink, fly.
    The factory estimates 300 hours build time. Mine looks like it will take 300-400 (I might be a bit optimistic).
    The older Challengers were basically overgrown ultra-lights but that's no longer true. I'm putting a heater in mine and plan to fly all winter long.
    http://www.quadcitychallenger.com/
    http://www.challenger.ca/

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    161
    The Challengers are great. I had one and it was fun. It is rated for +6, but that is MAX "G" and not like every other plane is rated. +6 max is about 4G based on normal planes.

    So Challengers will not meet your acro and IAC desires. But they are fun. I sold mine to get a Citabria so I could do acro.

    Must have - Center-line seating - Got it.

    Either mid wing/low wing design or high wing not positioned directly over pilot - GREAT visibility. It is a high wing, but it is pretty far aft.

    Some aerobatic ability, +6/-4 would be ideal - Nope. Does not mean it is not fun, but no loops, rolls, and I have been told not to spin them, but I know people that have done it.


    Would like - Ability to be moved on a trailer, folding wings/removable wings. - Not really, you can take the wings off, but it is not easy.

    Decent forward visibility - Fantastic

    Usable in IAC Primary/Sportsman - Nope, not a chance

    Welding of structures complete and shipped as a whole - Fuse is complete, wings are not difficult to build. You could build the wings in an apartment.


    Don't care - Baggage room, avionics, quick build options - Builds quick, avionics is based on what YOU want t put in. You can have baggage room, but mine had none unless I didn't have a PAX.

    Budget: 23,000 - 40,000: Doable
    Build Location - My apartment! - Might be doable.
    Time line - 2 - 2.5 Years- Doable.





    1996 Quad City Challenger CWS w/503 - Sold
    1974 7ECA Citabria - Sold
    1986 Pitts S1S

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    If it wasn't for the aerobatic part, I'd of recommended any of the aircraft Airdrome Airplanes puts out - tube and gusset construction using pulled rivets.

    Price is at the lower end of your scale, and one could build it in an apartment without seriously pissing off the neighbors all of the time. Build times are even in line. And, if one is smart they take advantage of the builder's assist, where one learns everything one needs to know about building such an aircraft, and in a few days can come away with the fuselage complete and on gear.

    But they're strictly utility aircraft - no intentional spinning, no loops, no rolls, no errors.

    http://www.airdromeaeroplanes.com

    Trust me - as a first time builder with no experience they're very doable!
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  9. #19
    planecrazzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Brrrmidji , Minne-SNOW-ta
    Posts
    216

    I am GROOT

    Since the subject got down to earth...
    Kolb over Challenger any day of the week...
    Semi aerobatic... Have a BRS
    Folding wings
    Tandem seating ( FSII )

    It is "Classed" as a High Performance Light Aircraft.

    Or the Firefly Ultra lite...

    These Fly like Planes... Not draggy Ultralights.

    Going to Fly-ins with other similar aircraft...

    I noticed the Kolb Firestar II was Faster...

    But also... I could slow fly with the best of them
    .
    Gotta Fly...
    .
    .
    And with minimum tools... COULD be built in an Apt.
    I built mine in a Basement...
    Attached Images Attached Images     
    Last edited by planecrazzzy; 12-30-2014 at 08:48 AM. Reason: added more

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by planecrazzzy View Post
    Since the subject got down to earth... Kolb over Challenger any day of the week...
    Ford vs Chevy.... I have flown both and much prefer the Challenger. But for 40K you can buy many flying planes that you could not afford to build. 40K with get you an RV4 with a 0-320. I doubt you could build one for that (I didn't think I could). My buddy bought a Phantom kit from an estate with a 503 for under 4K. He had the engine rebuilt and had less than 7K in it. But while some claim it can do acro, you are not going to compete in it. And you can buy a flying Pitts S1 for 25K-40K pretty much all day long. This one is pretty nice and only 25K http://www.barnstormers.com/classifi...itts+S-1C.html This one is supposedly very nice http://www.barnstormers.com/classifi...SMOH%3A+7.html This one is 40K but looks nice with a lowish time engine (200 hours). http://www.barnstormers.com/classifi...erimental.html And kits partially started or needing a rebuild http://www.barnstormers.com/classifi...cial+S1-C.html
    Last edited by ssmdive; 12-30-2014 at 12:14 PM.
    1996 Quad City Challenger CWS w/503 - Sold
    1974 7ECA Citabria - Sold
    1986 Pitts S1S

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •