As some of you may have noticed, I've not made any progress on my plane lately. My workspace is a mess, and I keep coming up with great excuses not to clean it when I have time. Sadly, the plane has not automagically built itself, so I'm going to have to try a different tactic to get in the air.
I've decided to buy a small plane to buzz around with in the meantime. I mentioned that I was interested in something like this a few months ago, but the restaurants still haven't sold (we might have a buyer for one, but never assume anything). A few days ago, I stumbled across a plane that has a very low cost of acquisition, is super simple, and just might fit the immediate bill.
Here's the part that's going to garner wave after wave of tsk'ing from folks like Golfer. It's a Rans S-4, originally sold as an ultralight, now being sold as an LSA. It's a single seater, tail dragger, and has no electrical system. Statistically 2-stroke engines have the highest failure rate, so of course it has a Rotax 447, a 47hp two stroke with a pull cord to start (as featured on many fine lawnmowers). It is unencumbered by such niceties like 'flaps' and 'brakes' but that should just increase its charm.
It's basically a single seat Piper Cub. Tube construction, fabric covering (in this case, Dacron), and the doors are optional. If I get it, I forsee some nice, leisurely river running and maybe even some light XC. It only has a 5 gallon tank at the moment, but this is perfect, it'll give me perfect weight loss milestones. When I lose enough weight, I'll be able to upgrade my fuel capacity appropriately to keep it near max gross! Eat your heart out Richard Simmons, I'll be on the Chuck Lindberg diet.
It's in Hanford, CA, so I'm planning on heading down in a few days with a trailer to inspect it. If it passes muster, I fit, and I decide that it's the right plane, then I'll drive it back home behind my Buick. I have a friend who has more recent 2-stroke mechanical experience than I do so between the two of us we can give the engine a thorough inspection (my good looks and his skills combined form SuperMechanic(tm)).
I'm going to go schedule some tail dragger time at the local FBO before I head south. I've done a lot of reading, done a lot of sim time in conventional gear planes, but nothing really beats actual tail experience. My main concern is ground handling (obviously), and I'll need that taildragger endorsement before I finish registering it as an E-LSA so I can log some honest time.
Ok, let the flames begin. For ease of discussion, I suggest the following identifiers to use in your message:
"A1" - Messages about how dangerous ultralights are.
"B1" - Replies focussing on how stupid I am to consider flying a conventional gear plane without the endorsement, irrespective of it being an ultralight at the moment.
"A2" - Messages that would fall in the A1 category except they have too many exclamation points.
"C1" - Chastisements to just get back to work on my Cozy because obviously I'll never work on it again if I'm out flying.
"D1" - General admonishments about experimental aviation and how safe Lycomings and Cessnas and whatnot are compared to homebuilt deathtraps, even though it's not directly relevant to this conversation.
"E1" - This is a special category for messages that involve mathematical calculations about the gross weight and a general concern that the plane may, based on published stats, be flying heavy.
Thanks!
