Future EAA Sweepstakes - Pipe dreams and other suggestions wanted!

[Hal Bryan]

If you could win any aircraft in a future EAA Sweepstakes, what would be your top pick?

[Flyfalcons]

Since we're doing the vintage/classic thing this year, I gotta say a Sportsman 2+2 would be pretty sweet. Practical, useful, convertible gear (and floats!!!), won't break the bank to operate, and looks like a lot of fun to boot.

[KDoersom]

The sportsman would be a great choice. So would any one of the RV series. What would be great is to do a build series in sport aviation were we could follow along and polls to help choose the equipment that goes in it. Let's us help decide. Within reason of coarse.

[Frank Giger]

Tell Brady the good news!

1. EAA paint scheme and logos will be put on his plane!
2. He gets an opportunity to build another aircraft.
3. He'll be reimbursed for the price of the kit.

[Todd copeland]

I doubt the EAA is going to have a kit for the sweepstakes. A finished experimental would have obvious drawbacks. Maybe a sportsman with the Two Weeks To Taxi included but that might exceed the budget. How about a warbirds? Birddog? T-34, although those might also push the budget...

[scott f]

How about a Yak 52.. WAY better perfomrance than a T-34, very aerobatic, yet cheap enough to not break the budget. Plus the guys over at Weeks could go through it pretty cheap given it'e experimental heritage.

[martymayes]

I doubt the EAA is going to have a kit for the sweepstakes...

I think it's not a bad idea provided it's a complete kit. For example, Vans RV-12. The only problem I see with a kit is the winner doesn't get the instant gratification of flying his prize.

[Floatsflyer]

I think it's not a bad idea provided it's a complete kit. For example, Vans RV-12. The only problem I see with a kit is the winner doesn't get the instant gratification of flying his prize.


No, the real problem is if a Kit is won by someone who does not build airplanes or has no interest or inclination or skills to do so! A kit prize will severly reduce the number of tickets sold.

Additionally, winning a Kit by someone who does not reside in the U.S. could present possible importation restrictions to their country of residence. Same goes for warbirds.


I believe whatever choice is made, it must be factory built and certified. To that end, my choice is the leading edge Icon A5 Amphibian. Oshkosh made them highly visible and successful and helped them put more than 750 orders on the books. As production is currently scheduled for Q4 this year, EAA should ask this cash rich and growing company to donate an aircraft for Airventure 2013. I for one would buy a s**tload of tickets!

[martymayes]

No, the real problem is if a Kit is won by someone who does not build airplanes or has no interest or inclination or skills to do so!A kit prize will severly reduce the number of tickets sold.Do you have evidence to support what you say is true or are you just guessing? I have no interest or inclination to fly or own a cherokee but when they gave one away a few yrs back I sent in all 30 of my preprinted tickets. Actually, I'd been happy with second or third prize as well. I seriously doubt someone is not going to participate in the raffle because of the choice of plane (or kit).



I believe whatever choice is made, it must be factory built and certified. To that end, my choice is the leading edge Icon A5 Amphibian.

Well, I have no desire or inclination to own or fly one but I'd sure send in my tickets.

[Floatsflyer]

Marty, the "evidence" is that slightly less than one-third of EAA members are homebuilders based on statistical data both duly noted in various threads on this forum and collected by EAA. Add to that the many thousands of predominatly non-flying visitors who attend Airventure daily to see an airshow and would be inclined to buy tickets for a chance at winning a built aircraft they could use immediately to get their licence.

I am part of the two-thirds and I would not want to pay the required mandatory taxes on a prize I would not use or have any use for.

[martymayes]

I don't buy your argument. All homebuilders were at one time non-hombuilders. Winning a RV-12 kit might provide the motivation to convert one more non-builder to builder. I don't see a kit discouraging anyone from entering - you do realize the win a plane sweepstakes is a no obligation contest? No purchase or donatation is required.


I am part of the two-thirds and I would not want to pay the required mandatory taxes on a prize I would not use or have any use for.

I agree, which is why I would sell an ICON A5 ASAP or trade it for something I CAN use. Tax liability certainly won't stop me from entering.

[Racegunz]

A shiney new Luscombe 8A with the radial will do fine thanks. http://www.luscombe-silvaire.com/

[Floatsflyer]

Marty, I never expected you to buy my argument so let's just agree to disagree. You're a builder, I'm not. East is east and west is west and never the twain shall meet! Winning a kitplane would not convert me or many,many others. Don't misunderstand what I'm saying here. I have the greatest respect and admiration for those that have the formidable talents and skills and perseverance to build their own airplane. I neither have the time, interest and especially the skills to do it so 3 strikes I'm out.

"All homebuilders were at one time non-homebuilders." Ya....and all murderers were at one time non-murderers. Might be true but what does it signify?


And yes I know that no purchase is required but I observe that many give a donation.

[Floatsflyer]

A shiney new Luscombe 8A with the radial will do fine thanks. http://www.luscombe-silvaire.com/


Thanks for posting. I think that the Luscombe is the most esthetically designed non-radial taildragger ever produced. I didn't know they were being manufactured again. Good for them, hope they have great success.

[steveinindy]

How about just the cost of one of the small planes that have been given away as a prize towards building something?

[steveinindy]

Well, I have no desire or inclination to own or fly one but I'd sure send in my tickets.

Yeah, if I won something I didn't want or had no use for (like a Cirrus, Yak-52, Sportsman, one of the RVs or the "leading edge Icon A5"), I'd simply sell it and use the money to build something that would be useful.


I agree, which is why I would sell an ICON A5 ASAP or trade it for something I CAN use. Tax liability certainly won't stop me from entering.
Actually, I'd more than likely "donate" the aircraft to the non-profit we're establishing for research purposes (tax writeoff) then let the NPO turn around and "re-raffle" it off as a fundraiser towards the construction of something better.


"All homebuilders were at one time non-homebuilders." Ya....and all murderers were at one time non-murderers. Might be true but what does it signify?


A strawman argument?

[Frank Giger]

I was suggesting a completed, airworthy experimental, not a kit awaiting construction, as that has the same financial implications of a "free" dog.

Sorry to offend at the notion of someone winning an Experimental Aircraft; I didn't realize they changed the name of the organization to the Everything Aviation Association (except for us minority homebuilders who should be only occasionally seen and never heard).

This year they're giving away a Cub, which is unsuitable for the majority of members, who apparently are all Twin Turbine IFR only types who wouldn't waste their time on a two seat LSA compliant tail dragger (oh the horrors! No GPS, autopilot, transponder, cup holders, radio, or starter - is it even legal?). Clearly the EAA leadership needs to wake up and embrace the new realities.

Sheesh.

[steveinindy]

Clearly the EAA leadership needs to wake up and embrace the new realities.

Well played Frank, as always. ;)


This year they're giving away a Cub, which is unsuitable for the majority of members, who apparently are all Twin Turbine IFR only types who wouldn't waste their time on a two seat LSA compliant tail dragger

Actually the Cub is one of the few planes I wouldn't sell (although it would be getting a transponder and radio installed before I'd fly it) that I have seen in the sweepstakes over the years. Then again, I don't look at a Cub (which is a commercially built aircraft even if people do "clone" them) as any more of an "EAA appropriate aircraft" than any of the "high performance spam cans" some people look down their nose at. To me a "Cub clone" is less of an "spirit of EAA" aircraft than something that is designed to be similar in appearance and performance to for example a Mooney but was designed from scratch to emulate a similar goal and aesthetic. I feel the same way about warbirds and the other "classics" we seem to tolerate or welcome with open arms despite them not being homebuilts. It's kind of an odd double standard.

My only gripe about the Icon A5 is that it's so bloody ugly. I don't care if it can reach warp speed. There is something to be said for aesthetics.

[Racegunz]

My only gripe about the Icon A5 is that it's so bloody ugly. I don't care if it can reach warp speed. There is something to be said for aesthetics.

Like one of my friends says you don't see it from the inside when you're flying it! :rollseyes: Although I don't consider the Icon ugly....now the Sonex hmmmm.

[Racegunz]

Thanks for posting. I think that the Luscombe is the most esthetically designed non-radial taildragger ever produced. I didn't know they were being manufactured again. Good for them, hope they have great success.

I think they are sub 100k too, (wow! like that's cheap or something) better than a China made Skycatcher, in my opinion that is, obviously not for some.

[Racegunz]

I was suggesting a completed, airworthy experimental, .

According to some "drama queens" there is no such thing, (technically they are correct??)

[Flyfalcons]

My suggestion was for a completed, ready to fly Sportsman.

[Treetop_Flyer]

My first question would be what kind of budget do we have to work with here? From the "certified" world, I'd love to see a Super SeaBee, Stinson 108-3, Cessna 195, or Fairchild F-24 (with a radial of course). If we were allowed to go experimental, a Carbon Cub EX, Sportsman, or Bearhawk would be fantastic.

All of these are just my personal preferences.

[steveinindy]

Like one of my friends says you don't see it from the inside when you're flying it

Something similar can be said for fat chicks in dark rooms but then again, you know the social implications of that.


Although I don't consider the Icon ugly....now the Sonex hmmmm.

Yeah, the Sonex is pretty high on the list of my "ugliest airplanes" list too.

[Floatsflyer]

I was suggesting a completed, airworthy experimental, not a kit awaiting construction, as that has the same financial implications of a "free" dog.

Sorry to offend at the notion of someone winning an Experimental Aircraft; I didn't realize they changed the name of the organization to the Everything Aviation Association (except for us minority homebuilders who should be only occasionally seen and never heard).

This year they're giving away a Cub, which is unsuitable for the majority of members, who apparently are all Twin Turbine IFR only types who wouldn't waste their time on a two seat LSA compliant tail dragger (oh the horrors! No GPS, autopilot, transponder, cup holders, radio, or starter - is it even legal?). Clearly the EAA leadership needs to wake up and embrace the new realities.

Sheesh.

Your sarcasm and self-righteous indignation was so powerfully dripping off the page, I had to take a shower. Let's put an end to the inferiority complex and hostility you exhibit. No one on this thread to date has said one single negative or disrespectful comment, not literal or metaphorical, about "experimentals" and "homebuilding."

In fact, the exact opposite has been expressed and you take exception to people who have posted cogent arguments regarding why experimentals(built or otherwise)are not a good prize giveaway. You have zero reason to be or feel offended or to offer the childish sarcasm of "sorry to offend at the notion of winning an experimental..." and, "Twin, turbine IFR only types..."

Frankly Frank, your comments are offensive to me because you disrespect everyone in this organization who has a different aviation interest than you. You sir are an intolerant individual who only wants to exclude rather than embrace a notion of inclusiveness to make EAA stronger and representative to all who just have a passion for all things aviation. That makes you a part of the problem and not of the solution.

"Sheesh" is right. Clearly you need to wake up and embrace the reality of your anger and behaviour and find a way to seek out some good things about us "cup holders."

[steveinindy]

Hey Floats....I may not see eye to eye with Frank (since I'm part of the IFR club to which he referred) but I've always taken his comments to be more or less tongue in cheek at how offended others have gotten on other threads. Granted, I would like to see the EAA be more inclusive (especially among the older members) but at the same time, I don't believe we need to march in lock step to make that happen. I learn more from those who think my approach is a load of crap than the people who agree with me 100%. Maybe I am not picking up on something here but I don't think Frank was trying to be intentionally rude but rather simply sardonic.

[Floatsflyer]

Hey Floats....I may not see eye to eye with Frank (since I'm part of the IFR club to which he referred) but I've always taken his comments to be more or less tongue in cheek at how offended others have gotten on other threads. Granted, I would like to see the EAA be more inclusive (especially among the older members) but at the same time, I don't believe we need to march in lock step to make that happen. I learn more from those who think my approach is a load of crap than the people who agree with me 100%. Maybe I am not picking up on something here but I don't think Frank was trying to be intentionally rude but rather simply sardonic.


Sorry Steve, not gonna fly! Without actual speech inflection, I'm taking his written comments at face value-- comments that are far too cutting and abrasive to be sardonic. He wasn't rude, just over-the-top intolerant which in my books is a more heinous offense.

[steveinindy]

To each and to their own but I have talked to Frank and he seems to be one of the more reasonable folks on here even if it does usually involve a healthy dose of sarcasm.

[Hal Bryan]

If there was one thread that I thought might just be free from controversy, it was this one...

When you participate in a thread like this, remember that it's part of my job to present it to the "powers that be" who are genuinely looking for feedback and suggestions on the topic at hand. That doesn't mean that I just want a rosey, all-smiles list of dream airplanes from people - frankly, I've found the debate on the pros and cons of giving away a kit vs. a completed aircraft (the "free dog" analogy) to be fascinating.

But it doesn't do anyone any good when I have to go to, say, our VP of Donor Relations and say "have a look at some of the interesting ideas on sweepstakes aircraft, and, by the way, please ignore the parts where everyone gets ****ed off and starts insulting each other."

I think these forums, and 99ish% of the discussions that are had on them are important and that providing a platform for all of us to discuss and debate topics of interest and the issues that shape the direction of our organization is absolutely vital. It is one of my key responsibilities, and one of the biggest reasons I come to work every morning. (And stare at my phone every few minutes on nights and weekends to see what's up...) Sometimes, though, I need remind my colleagues just how crucial it is that we keep channels like this open and growing; that's usually easy to do, but not with a thread like this.

Everybody, please, just take a deep breath and count to ten or whatever works, be civil and let's move on.

Thank you all -

Hal

[jhausch]

My first question would be what kind of budget do we have to work with here? From the "certified" world, I'd love to see a Super SeaBee, Stinson 108-3, Cessna 195, or Fairchild F-24 (with a radial of course). If we were allowed to go experimental, a Carbon Cub EX, Sportsman, or Bearhawk would be fantastic.

All of these are just my personal preferences.

Sounds good to me, too...

[Treetop_Flyer]

Sounds good to me, too...

I'm really pining for the Super SeaBee. Man do I lust after one of those. :)

[Floatsflyer]

Hal,

Excuse the formatting here, but for all my trying, I can't seem to isolate single sentence quotes for reply within a posting.

1st par.- I would have thought so too. We were soooooo good for 2 1/2 pages in and then TSHTF. And I replied STFU in the nicest but firmest manner.

2nd par.- Funny, funny, funny! Made me laugh out loud. I want to be the fly on the wall when you say that to the VP. And then I read it again...and laughed even louder.

Last par.- I was very civil...but my alter ego went apoplectic. Aren't you pleased I can control my other state?

[Frank Giger]

Floats had it right - I take exception that only a spam can is suitable for a prize; but I should have toned down my response. Hmmm, may have to track him down to have a civil debate over an adult beverage some day!

Back on track - some other ideas:

EAA Super Member Package:

Lifetime membership.
Lifetime "free" admission to Air Adventure (yep, like a "free" dog, but less expensive)
Assorted EAA stuff - shirt, cap, jacket, etc.
Pick three EAA building seminars and go without charge (lodging, etc. not included)
ATC tour - be a fly on the wall as they route traffic into Oshkosh
Two tickets on any EAA ride - B17, etc.

[Hal Bryan]

Hmmm, may have to track him down to have a civil debate over an adult beverage some day!

I'm buying! (I might even bring some hidden camera footage of me making a fool of myself in front of various VPs... ;) )

[steveinindy]

I'm buying! (I might even bring some hidden camera footage of me making a fool of myself in front of various VPs... ;) )

LMAO I'm game if my presence would be welcomed. ;)

[Flyfalcons]

I didn't realize we were throwing out options for all the prizes and not just the big one. In that case, I think an all-expenses paid trip for four to Oshkosh would be pretty amazing. Throw in some tickets to a VIP event or two during the week and reserved parking up front for the included rental car and that would make a pretty special trip for someone.

[Floatsflyer]

Hal, thanks, I'll be there to have one...and bring that footage!

Frank, I dunno...maybe... if you're not packin'(yes I read that frightening thread and was so appalled and speechless, I couldn't respond) or have a cleko hidden in your pants.

Steve, of course your welcomed and you can serve as a buffer shield and another target in case Frank goes postal.

[rawheels]

Is there a list of the previous sweepstakes planes available online?

[hausding]

Guess being the "one third" you present to us as factual, I miss seeing any of your corporate spirit towards the true identity and historical beginnings of EAA as we know it...........not sure I appreciate your attitude and the thoughts you speak of concerning the other "2/3" not knowing or wanting something along the lines of a kit aircraft? Rather than your opinion Sir, why not rely on and listen to the answers you requested from the people you asked concerning this question to begin with...............

Sid Hausding
Alpena, Michigan 49707
989-356-0048
avidsid@yahoo.com
----------------------------------





Marty, the "evidence" is that slightly less than one-third of EAA members are homebuilders based on statistical data both duly noted in various threads on this forum and collected by EAA. Add to that the many thousands of predominatly non-flying visitors who attend Airventure daily to see an airshow and would be inclined to buy tickets for a chance at winning a built aircraft they could use immediately to get their licence.

I am part of the two-thirds and I would not want to pay the required mandatory taxes on a prize I would not use or have any use for.

[Richard Warner]

Definitely use a certified aircraft for the sweepstakes. Nothing against Homebuilts, I am a builder, but I think the most tickets would be sold if the aircraft is certified and flying.

[Barnstormer]

If you guys are not interested in actually building and airplane, why do you even belong to the EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION. AOPA would be happy to take your membership money. Barnstormer... p.s. I have only built four experimentals and I have plans for a couple more. Two of my previous ones have been Grand Champions. My E.A.A. number is 12611.

[Hal Bryan]

Guess being the "one third" you present to us as factual, I miss seeing any of your corporate spirit towards the true identity and historical beginnings of EAA as we know it...........not sure I appreciate your attitude and the thoughts you speak of concerning the other "2/3" not knowing or wanting something along the lines of a kit aircraft? Rather than your opinion Sir, why not rely on and listen to the answers you requested from the people you asked concerning this question to begin with...............


Sid, I'm not sure I'm reading your message correctly, but just to be extra clear, Floatsflyer didn't ask the question, I did. As for the rest of it, once again, I'm asking everyone to stay (or get back) on topic and give us your ideas for future aircraft giveaways.

Thanks!

[Hal Bryan]

If you guys are not interested in actually building and airplane, why do you even belong to the EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION. AOPA would be happy to take your membership money. Barnstormer... p.s. I have only built four experimentals and I have plans for a couple more. Two of my previous ones have been Grand Champions. My E.A.A. number is 12611.

Barnstormer - 4 completed projects and 2 Grand Champs - fantastic! So why not tell us what aircraft you think we should give away?

[Floatsflyer]

If you guys are not interested in actually building and airplane, why do you even belong to the EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION. AOPA would be happy to take your membership money. Barnstormer... p.s. I have only built four experimentals and I have plans for a couple more. Two of my previous ones have been Grand Champions. My E.A.A. number is 12611.


Speaking for me only, I belong to EAA because EAA speaks very loudly to me about my eclectic aviation interests and provides me with all that I require to pursue and learn more about those interests. I am not just a miopic spam can aviator. I have great enthusiasm and excitment for antiques/classics, warbirds, ultralights, LSA's, seaplanes(obviously) and yes, honest to God, homebuilts. Although I fly a 182 on wheels and a 172 on straight floats, when I come to Oshkosh, I don't visit the Cessna's, Piper's, Beech's, etc, etc. because for me they're booorrring. The excitement for me is all those other categories I mentioned. It's Airplane Disneyland on steroids for me.

In fact for many years, it has been my opinion that the kit industry produces some of the best airplanes available and no one comes close to them for being on the leading edge of innovation, creativity, materials use and airframe technology.

So there you have it Barnstormer--the world according to Floatsflyer. With apologies to Yaeger--I'm just a natural born stick and rudder man--I just don't build airplanes....I don't build anything!!!! I'm not good at it and I have no interest in changing that! You builder guys, God bless you, ya just gotta accept this is the way I roll, the way many of us aviation nutbars roll!

Oh, and by the way, I do belong to AOPA but for only one reason--to have online access to the airports directory. I trust you would not consider that heresy.

And one other thing. I belong to the Canadian Cancer Society....and I don't have cancer.

[bearhawk1231]

Back on subject, how about a Decathalon or a Super Decathalon. Both are "affordable" relatively speaking, easy to fly, fun, can be used as a trainer to learn, and are aerobatic. These planes are easy to fly and own, can be used to learn on as well as used to compete in sportsman class aerobatics. Sounds like the ideal airplane to win. Plus they have classic lines and style. High wings to help your significant other happy when looking down at the ground, slow enough to see what is going on below you and provide shade at fly ins. If the EAA and AOPA convince the FAA to let people fly with out medicals as recreational pilot, pretty much anyone could learn to fly a decent plane and afford to own it. Kit aircraft are cool and fun both to build and fly, but I think that a raffle event would have better turn out with a certified aircraft. Not everyone has the time, space, or commitment to build a plane.

[seadog]

Pipistrel Virus SW with the 100 rotax, high performance cheap to operate once won. Cruise 146 knots sipping fuel, 800 mile range or opt for the extended range wings and go 2400 miles.

[kscessnadriver]

If you guys are not interested in actually building and airplane, why do you even belong to the EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION. AOPA would be happy to take your membership money. Barnstormer... p.s. I have only built four experimentals and I have plans for a couple more. Two of my previous ones have been Grand Champions. My E.A.A. number is 12611.

And this is the exact reason this forum and association have a problem. Nothing more than a bunch of people who would love nothing more than to scream, "Get off my lawn". Either you're with their narrow view of what EAA is, or you are the enemy.

[steveinindy]

If you guys are not interested in actually building and airplane, why do you even belong to the EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION. AOPA would be happy to take your membership money. Barnstormer... p.s. I have only built four experimentals and I have plans for a couple more. Two of my previous ones have been Grand Champions. My E.A.A. number is 12611.

Nice to meet you. Allow me to introduce myself too....

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y58/usafmedic45/Richardintro.gif (sorry couldn't resist)


And this is the exact reason this forum and association have a problem. Nothing more than a bunch of people who would love nothing more than to scream, "Get off my lawn".

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y58/usafmedic45/mccain_simpsons_2008.jpg


Either you're with their narrow view of what EAA is, or you are the enemy.

Pretty much. There has to be a solution to that other than simply waiting for the natural attrition due to aging to alleviate the problem.....

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y58/usafmedic45/thorazine3.jpg

[MADean]

Okay... to answer the question (Ya'll remember the question, right?)... and with a truly selfish motive...

An Ercoupe. The 'C' model. With 85 horsepower. And no rudder pedals. Oh, and make sure it has an STC that raises the gross to 1320. But not an once over. Got it? Good. See you at AV. :cool:

[martymayes]

Kit aircraft are cool and fun both to build and fly, but I think that a raffle event would have better turn out with a certified aircraft. Not everyone has the time, space, or commitment to build a plane.

There is no one size fits all. Not everyone is going to find every grand prize in the sweepstakes is exactly what they want or desire. Doesn't mean they don't jump at the opportunity to win. I think Frank said earlier a kit plane has all the implications of a free dog, well, guess what? That is true of any airplane given away. Have to house, feed, maintain and pay taxes on it - IOW it comes with a big bill for the time you own it. Up to this point, every airplane in the sweepstakes has been a certified aircraft - if you include LSA as certified. Perhaps it's time to offer a kit plane. After all, builders are 1/3 of the membership. An RV-12 would be another LSA with the exception that is has to be assembled.

[FloridaJohn]

I don't think it really matters what we give away, so pick something cool - certified or E-AB, doesn't matter. AOPA gives away a plane every year, and they occasionally do follow-up stories on past winners. Just about every single person who won a plane has sold it within 12 months, mainly to pay the tax man. So, if the winner is unlikely to keep the plane anyway, pick something interesting you can write a few stories for, and something people might not get an opportunity to fly/own.

There is nothing wrong with a kit, if I remember correctly, I believe EAA has raffled off unfinished kits before. If the winner doesn't want to build that particular kit (or anything at all), then they can sell the kit on the open market, same as they would do with a plane they won that they didn't want.

So, instead of arguing about what would be "appropriate," lets argue about what would be COOL!

[hausding]

[Sid, I'm not sure I'm reading your message correctly] unquote..............

Yes, thanks for giving me another chance here. I may have started, unintentionally, the wayward venting of pro and con homebuilding attitudes towards the "prize". Sorry to all............my choice would be a FACTORY built experimental hi wing. BUT, then any factory built experimental aircraft would qualify for my choice as opposed to another refurbished spam can. There are even several great flying scale reproductions of antiques out there that might fit this years theme quite well.

Sid
Alpena, Mi
Curtis-Jenny project underway...... :)

[rawheels]

I wouldn't purchase a ticket for a kit, but I would for a flying experimental plane. How about a Hatz Classic or similar biplane.

[Treetop_Flyer]

I wouldn't purchase a ticket for a kit, but I would for a flying experimental plane. How about a Hatz Classic or similar biplane.

With a Rotec radial! Now that would be a sweet little bird. :)

[Flyfalcons]

Lots of people are getting hung up on a kitplane in kit form, but I think a kitplane in flying condition would satisfy both the non-builders and the spirit of EAA.

[Bill Greenwood]

Any plane EAA wants to raffle off is fine with me; as long as it comes in yellow and brown, just in case I move to Minn.

Seriously, I have liked most of the ones AOPA gives out each year, and was hurt when they gave my WACO to a guy in Houston, especially since his home airport of W. Houston, used to be Lakeside where I have flown into over the years and went to a couple of CAF events there, good folks. The guy didn't or couldn't appreciate what he had and wasn't a tailwheel pilot and I think he sold it.

Any plane EAA wants to give away is ok, even better if it is something like a Cub that fits in with the fun side of gen av. I am like90% of people, at Osh, would be more likely to buy more tickets for a flying plane than a kit, even though my partner and I once built a Starlite. Don't thibnk I am going to do it again.

2nd prize could be a kit, or flgiht time in blimp, B-17 or anything fun. Another great gift would be private or even sport pilot course, or even one for teenagers up through solo.

And for the corporate crowd, how about a separate special raffle, tiickets go for $1000, and winner gets a free trip with Mac in a fancy new Turboprop to the Republican Nat Convention! For the ladies comes with a small vial of jet a called Eu de Diesel.

If EAA has any thought of rebuilding a plane like AOPA has done, I know of a good basic T-34 available reasonable that could be the project would make a fine gift and is easy to fly for a beginner and still fun for a more advanced pilot. A fine sport plane if you don't need fire breathing performance.

[Hal Bryan]

What do you call it when you're laughing and crying at the same time? Whatever the term is, I'm doing that. :)

[Floatsflyer]

What do you call it when you're laughing and crying at the same time? Whatever the term is, I'm doing that. :)


It's called Mixed Emotions. Like watching your mother-in-law drive off a cliff in your brand new Corvette.

[martymayes]

............my choice would be a FACTORY built experimental hi wing. BUT, then any factory built experimental aircraft would qualify for my choice as opposed to another refurbished spam can.

I don't think those exist. If it's factory built, can't be experimental amateur-built.

[Flyfalcons]

I don't think those exist. If it's factory built, can't be experimental amateur-built.

No but a factory-built SLSA based on a kit aircraft (like the Kitfox or RANS S-6 or 7) would most certainly be fitting aircraft for the EAA to raffle off. They also fit the "easy to own and fly" category as well.

[ams]

Since this is a pipedream (emphasis on 'dream'), and to stay within the confines of the EAA (going towards the warbird/classic aircraft arena), I propose this list to choose from:
Pitcairn Mailwing
Waco YMF or UPF-7 or Taperwing
Great Lakes 2T-1A
Yak 3 or 52
Boeing Stearman PT-17 or 450

But then, I would be happy just just to be at Oshkosh to watch any of them fly. Best to all and good luck in the next sweepstakes

[Wiltzius]

If we are talking prizes other then the main prize, how about a ride in Rod's Stearman or T-6. I also liked the idea of a trip for 4 back to OSH, week passes, camper rental so they can enjoy camp scholler. I know EAA uses the airplane to travel with to raise awareness and bring employees to events before it is raffled off, why not a Cessna 210 or 182 then ;)

[nrpetersen]

Maybe one or several 1 hr rides in a P-51? At my age I'm not about to start a homebuilt, but I'd sure go for a P-51 ride - and not any of that turbine stuff either.......

What might be the tax consequences of a ride?

[Floatsflyer]

Maybe one or several 1 hr rides in a P-51? At my age I'm not about to start a homebuilt, but I'd sure go for a P-51 ride - and not any of that turbine stuff either.......

What might be the tax consequences of a ride?


No tax consequences........gastro intestinal consequences more likely (you know...at your age);)

[Larry Lyons]

I like the idea of giving a superb ride. I have had my ride in the 51 though so would love a ride in almost any turbine powered (hot air or prop) warbird designed and flown since 1951.
Larry

[Frank Giger]

That would be a helluva grand prize - WWII Grand Tour

Flights in various warbirds/trainers!

[Bill Barker]

Getting back to the original question...
The Experimental Aircraft Association should give away an Experimental Aircraft.
A completed aircraft by a "repeat offender" builder.
My suggetions would be a GlasStar (not a Sportsman). If I remember the specs; 2 people w/lots of luggage, 150 mph @ 20+ mpg.
You could pick an S-LSA that grew out of what was originally a kit.
Whatever you give, remember USEFUL LOAD is appreciated by most EAAers.

[steveinindy]

Pipistrel Virus SW with the 100 rotax, high performance cheap to operate once won. Cruise 146 knots sipping fuel, 800 mile range or opt for the extended range wings and go 2400 miles. 2400 miles at 146 knots? Why would you need that kind of range in something that is day VFR only?How much could you get on the very lightly used market for one of those?

[Bill Greenwood]

Larry, if you limit the warbirds that you want to ride in to post 1951 designs, you miss all the great classics of the 30s and the WWII ones.
That would be like saying I'd like to win any painting, but only those done after 1951 interests me; forget about the great master painters of the past.

[steveinindy]

If we are talking prizes other then the main prize, how about a ride in Rod's Stearman

From what I hear, all that takes is asking nicely.

[SGS 1-35C]

I'd love a wooden antique, but really, if I could spring for $700/mo hangar rent and so forth, I'd already have one.

I think an aluminum ship without too much horsepower would actually be kept and used by many EAA'ers. Not much point in giving a homebuilt - still need A&P to work on if you weren't the builder.

Something with a little panache - how about a Varga Kachina...or Cessna 190 (sigh).

[steveinindy]

if I could spring for $700/mo hangar rent

Good grief. Given that you can operate something that light out of a grass strip, why not just get a cheap steel building to store it in?


I think an aluminum ship without too much horsepower would actually be kept and used by many EAA'ers

I love being a minority. LOL

[Jim Hann]

Something metal with a tailwheel a la:

Cessna 140, 170, or gulp 195
Luscombe 8 or 11 (yeah, that is rare)
Wilga!!!!
Yak?!?!

I'm just throwing these out there, not saying I would actually want one (or one of each ;))

[Zack Baughman]

How about a refurbished Cessna 152 Aerobat (for the certified crowd) or a Sonex (for the experimental crowd)? I'd love to win a Pietenpol myself...

[martymayes]

If we are talking prizes other then the main prize, how about a ride

A ride would be adequate for the main prize..........If we're talking ride into space via Virgin Galactic.......

[jhausch]

Maybe one exp and one certified ? Winner could keep both, or sell one to cover taxes.....

[SGS 1-35C]

Good grief. Given that you can operate something that light out of a grass strip, why not just get a cheap steel building to store it in?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I love being a minority. LOL<br><br>

Dear Steveinindy - I don't own a grass strip either. Big metro area, would have to drive about 2 hours to a place pastoral enough for what you describe, and still buy or lease the land for the steel building. Said building would cost about the same as recovering a Stinson 108-1, so that's my choice.<br><br>

P.S. I misspoke, still need A&amp;P to inspect, not work on, an experimental...

[Ylinen]

AOPA already does the Certified refurbish give-a-way. It would be nice if EAA could do something around its heritage. Amateur Built, Vintage/antique or warbird.

It would be great if their could be some type of restoral of a category each year. Maybe by one chapter doing the renovation if that makes sense.

I would love to win a vintage Staggerwing, or a fully restored warbird. I think if the right Amateur Built was there that would be great. Sign me up for a Lancair Evolution.

[Cap'n Jack]

For the question, I'm happy with anything EAA would send my way as a prize. I personally think the idea of a kit is intriging, although I never built anything on that scale. The downside of a kit is getting the tools and the parts that may not be included with some kits (engines, instruments, for example). Many people wouldn't be able to find the time for an unfinished kit. A completed kit plane is a whole 'nother story. A magazine series could be done from building the kit- what surprises did the builder overcome and how? What skills did they employ? Like AOPA, see if the advertisers want to contribute stuff (instruments, rebuilt engine, tools, etc).

[Bill Barker]

A magazine series could be done from building the kit- what surprises did the builder overcome and how? What skills did they employ? Like AOPA, see if the advertisers want to contribute stuff (instruments, rebuilt engine, tools, etc).

I agree with Cap'n Jack. A full year series of watching the grand prize being built just as the AOPA spends a year of restoring their grand prize.
I would wait at the mailbox to pick up each new issue to see how "my" plane is coming along. Just don't go overboard with gee whiz stuff and lose the useful load.

[steveinindy]

Just don't go overboard with gee whiz stuff and lose the useful load.

Even if you plug in two full PFD/MFDs from Aspen, a three-axis autopilot, radios two full sets of back-up "steam" instruments, an EFIS, and all the other "gee whiz" stuff that would make any airline pilot jealous is under 90 lbs. Then again to me 90lbs isn't that much but for the really light stuff (RVs and below) it would be.

[Bill Barker]

[QUOTE=steveinindy;13677]Even if you plug in two full PFD/MFDs from Aspen, a three-axis autopilot, radios two full sets of back-up "steam" instruments, an EFIS, and all the other "gee whiz" stuff that would make any airline pilot jealous is under 90 lbs. QUOTE]

All the "gee whiz stuff" includes ?? lbs worth of exotic paint plus leather interior, excess sound proofing, constant speed prop etc. I've seen at least one RV-10 made into a 2 place by the weight of all the showy stuff.

[steveinindy]

[QUOTE=steveinindy;13677]Even if you plug in two full PFD/MFDs from Aspen, a three-axis autopilot, radios two full sets of back-up "steam" instruments, an EFIS, and all the other "gee whiz" stuff that would make any airline pilot jealous is under 90 lbs. QUOTE]

All the "gee whiz stuff" includes ?? lbs worth of exotic paint plus leather interior, excess sound proofing, constant speed prop etc. I've seen at least one RV-10 made into a 2 place by the weight of all the showy stuff.

And that's a problem how precisely? If that's what the pilot/builder wants, then it's just fine. As for "excessive" soundproofing, personally, I don't need (or want) to hear the drone of a 350 hp engine and I'd like to be able to avoid needing a hearing aid by the time I'm 50. That's why my design probably would have "excess" soundproofing by your margin. Then again, it's also designed to pack around 300 lbs of baggage in addition to the pilots and passengers (it can be configured as either a two or four seat aircraft depending upon the needs of the particular builder or flight).

I just think it's funny how some people think it makes you less of a builder or pilot or whatever to want to be comfortable or don't want to have 90 decibels of cabin noise at cruise. To each and to their own...

[Bill Barker]

I just think it's funny how some people think it makes you less of a builder or pilot or whatever to want to be comfortable or don't want to have 90 decibels of cabin noise at cruise. To each and to their own...

If someone is building their own aircraft, I have no quarrel with them building an IFR Breezy, if they wish. I someone wants to build a Murphy Moose and fill it with so much stuff that it can only be flown by a single 110 pound pilot. I'm fine with that.
However that's not what this forum is about. The question was what kind of grand prize aircraft would we all recommend.
Many people have had differing views on the perfect prize plane and I have enjoyed reading them even though they weren't my ideal. Some even gave me new insights on perfection.
In that spririt, I offered my opinion of the perfect prize plane and it's attributes. I didn't know that by offering my opinion, I was condemming all other thoughts.
It was fun reading all the various ideas, but now I think that I'll unsubscribe to this forum rather than have my opinion repeatedly attacked. Goodbye.

[Eric Witherspoon]

Like one of my friends says you don't see it from the inside when you're flying it! :rollseyes: Although I don't consider the Icon ugly....now the Sonex hmmmm.

Not much of the inside, anyway::eek:
1772

[Frank Giger]

A Kitfox might fit the bill - build time is about right, could be built to LSA specs, is a proven design, and looks pretty good inside and out. Kitfoxes are only outbuilt by the RV series, and not by all that much, after all.

Keeping it LSA eligible would be a plus for a lot of reasons, but namely price and pilot availability. The latter not just because I'm a Sport Pilot, but because a lot of PPL's are flying solely under light sport rules (and those that aren't can still fly it).

And I love the notion of watching it get built by an EAA team with cameos from various sponsors and the gear they put into it. And then have different guest pilots working off the 40 hours and their impressions - Mr. Hoover speaking about how it flys as an airplane and Mac describing how the autopilot and the cup holders work would be a nice set of contrasting articles. ;)

[rawheels]

Many people have had differing views on the perfect prize plane and I have enjoyed reading them even though they weren't my ideal.

The P-51 just won the AOPA Favorite Aircraft Challenge. How about a flying Titan T-51 as a grand prize? I'd buy a lot of raffle tickets for that!

Ryan

[provoshane]

Any multi-seat Vans aircraft would be a great prize!

[prasmussen]

I want a trip to space. THAT would make me buy a bunch of tickets.

[Louis]

Antique/Classic: Super Seabee (like some mentioned earlier) Experimental: Murphy Moose Warbird: deHavilland Chipmunk New: Citabria or Great Lakes

[Dave S]

Hmmm...how about a nice P-51? :D Some other ideers: SubSonex kit, Bell 47, RV-12 kit, Yak 52, Polen Special (most beautiful airplane ever built in my opinion), Navion, Cessna Skycatcher...come to think of it, just about any flying machine will do!

[kmacht]

I like the idea of giving away a completed RV but with a twist. Why not start with an older RV and spend the year showing articles of it being upgraded. Put a new engine in it, new paint job, upgrade the avionics, re-do the interior, etc.

Keith

[Hank]

What would make a good Grand Prize for an EAA Raffle?

How about several inexpensive ones instead? Think Fly Baby, Pietenpol, Champ. No need for glass panels, just the cool new Dynon gear that I can't put in my current plane.

Wouldn't one of each of these still be less expensive than a restored, certified anything?

[Flyfalcons]

Doesn't the Champ fall under "certified"?

[Hank]

True, my bad. But at least it's a fraction the cost of most "modern" certified aircraft . . .

[Bob Dingley]

Pipistrel Virus SW with the 100 rotax, high performance cheap to operate once won. Cruise 146 knots sipping fuel, 800 mile range or opt for the extended range wings and go 2400 miles.

I am with you Seadog. The dealer is near Tampa. Can be ordered as either LSA with the 3 blade fixed pitch prop or as self launch glider with the feathering/controlable prop. Price is in the ballpark with other kits. And they have a fast build. Or get it as a SLSA.

Advantage of a glider over LSA is that you don't even need the drivers license for medical certification. You do need a photo ID from the list in FAR 61. Also fewer of the Sport pilot restrictions.

This is the bird that won the NASA Challenge for efficiency. Its strong too. The computer says that it will take you to 11G.

[Kiwi ZK-CKE]

I'm not fussed what aircraft is in the sweepstakes - I'd just like overseas members such as myself to have a fair chance to win it as well. I find it very annoying that overseas members aren't eligible, since I pay my membership fees like anyone else...

[Hal Bryan]

If it were up to us, the sweepstakes would be available worldwide, believe me - we have nothing to gain by restricting it to the U.S. and (most of) Canada.

Unfortunately, every country has specific regulations that govern these things, from laws that require governmental registration to laws that forbid these types of contests altogether. Because of this, there's just no way for us to create a program that is universally available. It's just the unfortunate reality of promotions like this - if we could do it, we would.