In between plane

[Dago]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Dago: Both of those = $$$

And the idea of having to file a 337 to put a new knob on the end of the stick or to fix a piece of broken upholstery is repugnant, but those are actual examples.  

If I want to mount a GPS, I couldn't make it 'part of the panel', if I wanted to put in a compass, an A&P would have to do it....

It's just silly, I'd rather take responsibillity for myself.  I'm going to be doing this stuff anyhow in my own plane.

Chairboy, I hate to say this, but your comments show a lack of familiarity with general aviation.  To replace a broken piece of aircraft (interior included) doesnt require a 337.  But, to make changes to the aircraft does.

There are standards that aircraft components must meet to be used on an aircraft, and there are standards and regulations for installation.  Would you want to fly in an aircraft that the non-maintenance trained owner, or maybe the non-trained previous owner had been making changes to?  Want to fly in an aircraft that the guy had been altering with NAPA auto parts stuff everytime he got a whim?  Not me.

Believe me, in general aviation this stuff is way too common, and without question creates unsafe aircraft.  But, luckily, most owners follow these "silly" rules and hence we have safe aircraft.

BTW, you can put a GPS in a panel, but you need to follow the regs and do the paperwork.  Hopefully then your aircraft will not catch on fire due to unsafe wires or wiring installation, your alternator will not overload at night in IFR, and you will not find your compass wildly inaccurate due to electrical fields.

BTW, its worth remembering that when you build a homebuilt aircraft, you will be the liable person for that aircraft basically for it's life, or at least 35 years, so if you ever sell it, you carry that liablity.  You will be sued if it crashes, even if it isnt your fault or the aircrafts fault.  Just ask Cessna.   Many A&Ps like myself wont build a homebuilt for that reason.

Good luck.

dago

[Dago]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Dago: Both of those = $$$

 

I forgot to address this statement.  

Basically, if a person cant afford the cost of aircraft ownership including proper maintenance (it isnt cheap) then they shouldn't own one.  They are better off renting.

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by Dago
Chairboy, I hate to say this, but your comments show a lack of familiarity with general aviation.  To replace a broken piece of aircraft (interior included) doesnt require a 337.  But, to make changes to the aircraft does.

Try again.  From an A&P on a discussion about requiring a 337 to replace some decorative plastic:

As an A&P, I believe this is absolutely not true.  The regs actually
make it more difficult to do proper and safe maintenance, and easier to
do a shoddy but approved job.  The intent of the regs is exactly to
create a "gotcha" situation so as to empower an FAA inspector to ground
any aircraft at will.  The sooner you understand that, the easier it
will be to figure out what does and doesn't make sense.

I've seen it happen.  I've seen airplanes grounded for illegible
(supposedly) TSO tags on seatbelts and placards curled up at the
corner, and the pilots written up for flying those supposedly
unairworthy airplanes.  The rules are the way they are so feds can do
that.  Safety doesn't enter into it.

I'm a plane builder, and I'll be making parts decisions for my planes for the rest of my life.  

One problem I have with some GA flyers I've met at the field is that they seem to feel that because an A&P looked at their plane 6 months ago, that their aircraft are bulletproof examples of 100% reliable machinery that will never fail.  Your message seems to imply that you feel the same way, I hope complacency doesn't get you the way it gets hundreds of other pilots in certified aircraft every year.  

With an experimental, I'm not only responsible for my own safety (as is any pilot), but unlike the owner of a non-certified aircraft, I can actually DO SOMETHING with that responsibility.

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by Dago
I forgot to address this statement.  

Basically, if a person cant afford the cost of aircraft ownership including proper maintenance (it isnt cheap) then they shouldn't own one.  They are better off renting.

Enter the strawman argument.  What I've done is set myself up with a budget.  Your post reads an awful lot like saying "If you can't afford to buy a Porsche, then perhaps you shouldn't even OWN a car.  Yes, quite" while lighting your cigar with a burning $100 bill.

Do you understand the difference?

[Golfer]

Enter the strawman argument. What I've done is set myself up with a budget. Your post reads an awful lot like saying "If you can't afford to buy a Porsche, then perhaps you shouldn't even OWN a car. Yes, quite" while lighting your cigar with a burning $100 bill.

Do you understand the difference?

The problem Chairboy is, and it's a fact...not everybody can afford own an airplane.  Homebuilts help take down costs because of the labor involved in the construction of a certified airplane as well as the actual certification procedure.  Instead of paying, you're taking that burdon on your own.  Great!

Aviation in this country is not a class struggle between the "elitist aristocratic certified aircraft owners" and the "little guy blue collar EAA homebuilt brotherhood."

A certified aircraft is just that.  It met prescribed safety standards.  Do all of them make sense?  Nope.  Light twins aren't required to have a positive rate of climb at any altitude if they're going to be used for personal use and are certified to part 23 standards.  Again...what's legal is not always safe.

The red flags going up are all over the place.  This isn't a personal slam it's simply the way it is.  $20,000 for an airframe gives you next to no options.  Bargain basement cheap as they go airplanes are going to be $25,000 for a C-150 in any fair condition.  I wouldn't expect to pay less than $40,000 for a reasonable C-172.  It's not that if you can't afford a Porsche you shouldn't have a car...it's that our entry level cars are Porsches.

I could aquire a Pitts S1S today.  I can't afford to operate it.  I can't afford to maintain it.  I can't afford to hangar it.  I can't afford to insure it.  But hey...at least I could own it!

I did some consulting for a company about aquiring an SR22.  The owner is a student pilot almost private pilot.  Long story short he could only afford the airplane if everything went right.  That's a 100% guarantee that it won't.  It seems (without knowing your full budget, cash flow and what not...stuff I don't want to know) that you're in the same position.

Don't try to skimp in aviation.  Saving $2000 this year isn't worth dying for.

[Chairboy]

I guess one of us has some cognitive dissonance here, could be me!  I'll try again.

1. I could buy a Cessna 152, Tomahawk, an Ercoupe, Yankee, Cherokee 140, or one of many other certified two seaters.  $20,000 is a guideline, not a line in the sand.
2. I choose not to because it limits the role I can take in maintenance, equipment choices, and more.

Also, and I think this is the part that you and Dago are stuck on (and I appreciate your responses, btw) is that the annual cost of maintaining a certified plane at the same level of safety is higher than for an experimental.  Why would I choose to pay more when I've already made the decision to be a homebuilder?  Since I won't be the guy who built the plane, I won't have a blank check in what I can do to it, but I'll sure have a lot more options.  For example, I'll be able to have a bunch of friends from the EAA come over to do stuff, something that's not an option with a certified plane.  Maybe i want to replace the wing with the higher speed one?  Maybe I decide to change the engine for a single rotor wankel to do tests on the technology before I commit to one in my less forgiving (in terms of off airport landings) Cozy canard?  I'm a sign-off away from either of those.  Not so with a certified aircraft.

If either of you disagree with the above statement, please tell me.  I don't think I'm a wild-eyed idealist here, as I see it, I'm making a level headed decision to take more personal responsibility for my safety.

Hey, it doesn't hurt that it looks like a fun plane to fly into grass with that has a big cabin!

[Chairboy]

Interesting, according to this:
http://www.sportpilot.org/faq/Experimental%20Light-Sport%20Aircraft%20FAQs.html

If I license it as E-LSA, there's actually a route I can follow to get my repairmans certificate so I'll be able to sign it off for annuals.  Also, no repairmans certificate is required on E-LSA for doing the maintenance/modifications as I had originally thought.  The only thing an A&P is needed for w/o repairmans cert is the annual.

Curiouser and curiouser...

[Dago]

If I remember right, you are the one who started this thread about buying a normally certified airplane until you got your homebuilt finished.  Now you are going on about building your own and then you can fix it.   Make up your mind what we are talking about.

And no, I dont think if you cant afford a Porsche, you shouldnt have a car.  But, I do believe that if you cant afford to have an aircraft properly maintained, you shouldnt have an airplane.  Your analogy doesnt make sense.  

How about "If you cant afford to have a doctor do your facelift, you dont let your neighbor the accountant do it"?

Go ahead and build a homebuilt, have fun, they tend to perform well and there is a terrific amount of satisfaction in building them.  You can do that maintenance then to a larger degree that you could with a store bought plane.  Or you could go the route HiTech did, buy a homebuilt already assembled by someone else, but I think he is limited again by maintenance regs as he is not the manufacturer.

Remember though, a fair amount of people have died in homebuilts for a number of reasons.

dago

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by Dago
If I remember right, you are the one who started this thread about buying a normally certified airplane until you got your homebuilt finished.  Now you are going on about building your own and then you can fix it.   Make up your mind what we are talking about.

Nope.  Re-read my first message.  This thread has been about an experimental the whole time.

Originally posted by Dago
And no, I dont think if you cant afford a Porsche, you shouldnt have a car.  But, I do believe that if you cant afford to have an aircraft properly maintained, you shouldnt have an airplane.  Your analogy doesnt make sense.

That's the thing, I _can_ afford to properly maintain an experimental plane.  

Originally posted by Dago
Remember though, a fair amount of people have died in homebuilts for a number of reasons.

Far more people have died in certified planes, but I don't think it's a contest.

[Golfer]

chairboy that last statement is laughable.

It's no secret that more people have died in certified airplanes than in homebuilts.  More people (vastly more) fly them and log many multiples of hours each year as opposed to the homebuilt group.

The first fatal accident in a powered aircraft was a homebuilt.

I promise you that the fatal accident rate is several-fold larger for homebuilt airplanes per hours flown than any other aircraft ever produced.



More people died in volvos than in Delorians.  We know which is still being produced.

[Chairboy]

Heh, fair enough.  I was amazed it took this long for someone to call me on that.  

Regards,

Ben

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Golfer
I promise you that the fatal accident rate is several-fold larger for homebuilt airplanes per hours flown than any other aircraft ever produced.

According to the NTSB, in 1999 it was 25.5 accidents / 100,000 hrs in homebuilts vs 9.9 / 100,000 in commercially built.

Environmental factors (weather) was the cause for 28% of the homebuilt accidents, while 44% for the commercially built.

[LePaul]

All airplane talk aside (the Experiementals are better than Certified is getting very tiring)....what about the simple, immediate future you described?

You *hope* to have $20k but from what you've written, you are in a net zero situation with your businesses.  You're loosing everything you make and you want to jibber jabber airplane ownership?

You havent mentioned what you intend to do for work once the restaurant(s) are sold, if they sell, etc etc

I can tell you as a guy who had big dreams for a BD-5 I owned, insurance, hangaring, maintenance, etc etc are all huge costs.  I'd also encourage you to call insurance places like Avemco and the sort.  Get an idea of what coverage will cost, its a real daydream buster, especially as a low time pilot.  

Low time pilot plus Experiemental Aircraft is a sobbering experience.

And finally, Im just in awe how quickly you strike down anything people with experience tell you.  You seem to have your hands on your ears, screaming loudly when well meaning people try to point out some of the things you've said.  Clearly you have the experimental aviation bug, but I think its become viral and taken you over

A man and his imaginary money are quickly parted once the entire details are provided!

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by LePaul
All airplane talk aside (the Experiementals are better than Certified is getting very tiring)....what about the simple, immediate future you described?

You *hope* to have $20k but from what you've written, you are in a net zero situation with your businesses.  You're loosing everything you make and you want to jibber jabber airplane ownership?

Wifey works, plus we have income from an apartment building and two managers from my old job called this week to interview me, and I've got a bundle invested that's showing positive cashflow.  Would you like a complete financial statement?  

Originally posted by LePaul
You havent mentioned what you intend to do for work once the restaurant(s) are sold, if they sell, etc etc

...continue with my life?  One of the restaurants was run by my father-in-law who died last month (the one I've taken over in his absence) and the other is run by someone else we've hired.  The restaurant has never been my 'career'.  If they sell, then I'll also carry the loan from the buyer and have another source of income there.  

Originally posted by LePaul
I can tell you as a guy who had big dreams for a BD-5 I owned, insurance, hangaring, maintenance, etc etc are all huge costs.  I'd also encourage you to call insurance places like Avemco and the sort.  Get an idea of what coverage will cost, its a real daydream buster, especially as a low time pilot.  

Actually, I doubt I'll insure the plane.  My idea is to buy something inexpensive to operate and simple to work on so I can build skills, supported by my local EAA.  Whassa matta you?  

Originally posted by LePaul
And finally, Im just in awe how quickly you strike down anything people with experience tell you.  You seem to have your hands on your ears, screaming loudly when well meaning people try to point out some of the things you've said.  Clearly you have the experimental aviation bug, but I think its become viral and taken you over
 

I'd hate to stick my head in the sand, can you provide an example?  A few people have said "you is stupid" because I'm interested in experimental aviation, and I've respectfully disagreed with them.  I felt that Dago was trying to push me towards certified aircraft through 'poor shame' (eg, "What's the matter, can't you AFFORD it?"), and I was also encouraged to check out the Kitfox.  I'd absolutely appreciate an example of clapping my hands over my ears and saying "lalalala"!  

If my plans are shaky enough that they don't survive questions, then they're not strong enough to haul my prodigious backside through the air either!  Fire away, and thanks!

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Chairboy

* Operate out of rough fields.  I landed on a combo grass/gravel field once, and there was something exhilerating about it.  

HEHe! Yea, exhilerating is a good word for it.
Back in the day of the dinosaur, when I was a kid, my flight instructor was a spray pilot. Quite a guy. He picked me up one day and we headed to the store and bought ten pieces of white poster board. I kept asking him what we were going to do with them and he kept replying "You`ll see". We then collected ten rocks about the size of a grapefruit. Same question, same answer.
We ended up in a rye/bermuda mixed field. Five pieces down one side with a rock on each and five down the other. He said "OK, we`re done". I asked him what it was all about and he replied "You have just built your first airstrip."
We used that place and many more like it for quite some time. It was also the first place I made my first takeoff and landing on.
It was a long time before I actualy experienced a landing or takeoff on pavement. Those times were definitely exhilarating. Some of the best fun I have ever had.
Of course in another thread, our expert on everything, Beetle made the statement that I knew nothing about light aircraft..so what the heck do I know.