Author Topic: Kitplanes  (Read 847 times)

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Kitplanes
« on: January 05, 2003, 09:46:43 AM »
Me and some friends are thinking about purchasing a semi built kitplane, (not ultralight though), and I was wondering if the AH community does not have some gurus in that field.
We found one that looks quite interesting, - its a Spitfire replica, a nice fast all-metal plane for a very decent price.
What do you think:
TEST PILOTS REPORT:

General  
Pilot weight 85 kg Military style hard helmet worn.

Weather was fine with a 7-knot headwind, 22degrees OAT, short dry grass, level surface. 2 sorties were flown solo and with a pax. AUW solo 545 kg. With pax 620 kg. Max fuel weight at start of 115 litres.

The aircraft was fitted with a composite four-blade fully variable pitch propeller without an automatic constant speed control. A manual pitch selection switch on a panel on the upper left front console gave an 8-second adjustment range between fully coarse and fully fine. The Mk 26 has also been flown with a two bladed wooden propeller as fitted to the RV6 aircraft.

Some pilot seating and rudder control adjustments must be made prior to strapping in.

The aircraft is fitted with differential toe brakes on the rudder pedals. They are adjustable for length via panels either side of front lower fuselage. The front seat has three fore aft positions selected by removing two bolts on the seat frame. The rear seat has no adjustments with no stick or rudder controls fitted.
 
Walkround and Prestart Checks
 
A positive check of the undercarriage locking levers, with their big black knobs fully forward on the front starboard cockpit wall is advised before clambering under the aircraft. Combine this with a check of the two tell tale locking pins protruding from the wings. More on the gear later. The aircraft has no fabric surfaces, and only a couple of fibreglass fairings on the base of the fin attached by self-tapping screws. The aircraft is otherwise riveted aluminium.

The low wing requires a fair degree of bending and crawling around to check control rod connections, access panels, undersurfaces and undercarriage. The main engine panels on this prototype required 20 minutes to remove and replace (production models have redesigned panels) if a visually check of the engine is desired. Otherwise it is a simple task of checking quick release fasteners and 4 intakes for carby and cooling air.

A look up, for oil leaks, in the lower engine sump area, can be achieved if the engine cooling cowl, which hinges down immediately in front of the firewall, is fully opened on the initial cockpit check. This push /pull control is handily placed at the lower front console.

Fuel and oil caps are on the upper surface of the top engine panel a couple of feet in front of the windscreen. A small step-up device is recommended, as standing on the leading edge will damage the surface of the wing.

The oil dipstick, under a quick release panel, is an awkward long reach, fine threaded, plastic affair. Heat soak makes this device difficult to remove and check quickly and accurately. Fuel drain is directly under the 115 litre tank on the under belly.

The end of the U/C down lock pins can be seen in the large holes at the top of each oleo leg and the tell tale pins mechanical linkage connection (vital) should be checked. Otherwise, all other connections and micro switches are internal to the wing root and cannot be checked. Each leg and its controls are a completely separate system. Only one half of the wheel is covered by the oleo mounted door on retraction. The tail wheel sits on a strong leaf spring and is linked to the rudder by a horizontal bar. Electric flaps are fully variable to 55 degrees and are very large extending to almost half the wing span. A large vertical blade radio antennae sits behind the canopy on the upper fuselage.
 
Cockpit General
 
Entry is over the port inboard trailing edge with flaps up. A small fold down door is easy to open after sliding the lockable bubble canopy fully rearwards. The removable seat cushion is canvas-covered foam. I added a small leather document case with a polystyrene filling to increase my height in the cockpit by approximately one inch (pilot 185cms) until my hard helmet was just clear of the canopy.

Entry is fighter style by standing on the seat and lowering oneself using the cockpit arch and surrounds. Care must be taken to prevent stressing or marking plastic transparencies is recommended. The spade shaped, Spitfire style, control column is comfortable and has trim and RT switches fitted.

A four point Sutton type harness system for both seats provides good restraint and is easy to adjust and lock safely. Instruments and switches were generally well sited and easily read and operated, the main fuel cock is low behind the stick but easily checked.

There was little forward vision available over the long nose and forward wing. This can be improved down the left side only if the side door is opened and one leans out of the cockpit.

A master switch centre console gives 12-volt power and is flanked by two mag switches. Start is by pressing both Boost and Start buttons simultaneously. Boost has no function other than decorative, why not! Having sat in the real thing, this cockpit certainly feels and looks remarkably like the real thing, it just smelt new.

Undercarriage locked or unlocked position lights were not fitted to this aircraft. All aircraft are fitted with 2-inch telltale pins mechanically linked to the leg oleo. These pins protrude through the top of each wing by the inboard leading edge to indicate gear position.

Only the colour BLACK showing on a shorter pin length indicates locked down. A longer pin showing RED and BLACK indicates unlocked. NB. These pins will only indicate locked (up or down) if both large undercarriage locking levers are fully forward also.

Difficulty was experienced siting these pins with the canopy fully closed and hard helmet fitted. My helmet touched the canopy despite the concave moulded into the canopy curve.

The undercarriage emergency lowering system: to be used if the gear motor fails in the up position, are two black handles 4 inches long situated either side on the floor behind the stick. The handles are easily reached and pulled separately. This direct cable link pulls a pin thereby disconnecting the control arm of the electric motor from the top of the leg. This enables the pilot to unlock the leg with the black knobbed locking lever starboard cockpit and use G forces to lower it before locking it again by pushing the lever forward. This simple system was seen to work on the ground during trials.
 
Engine Ground Runs  
The sliding canopy can be opened under full power. No parking brake is fitted. The aircraft was tied to a small sapling via a rope attached to the tail-wheel spring with chocks in place.
Full choke was applied for start but cancelled immediately; idle was 800rpm at 5-7 L/hr. There was no tendency to over-temp during prolonged running. 3000rpm was obtained at full power and fully fine on prop setting. No significant mag drops noted. Pick up and throttle response was smooth and instant over the full rpm range. The engine emits a loud powerful bark and a noticeable torque roll left during slam accelerations to high power.
 
Taxi  
The aircraft moved forward at 1000rpm there is no forward vision and a constant weave is required to clear ahead. Turning is easy, the tail-wheel is liked to the rudder and the progressive toe brakes enable tight areas to be negotiated. The aircraft is capable of turning through 180 degrees almost within its own length.
 
Take-off and Climb  
No flap was used; zero trim was selected on the electric stick trimmer as indicated by the gauge. There are no aileron or rudder trimming controls.

The undercarriage electric motor switches (they are three position UP, OFF, DOWN) can be selected to the UP position pre take-off if desired. Only by selecting unlock (rearward) on the levers on the starboard cockpit wall does a lever attached to the locking pin move a micro switch allowing the motors to start. These switches were not selected on the ground on these first two sorties. However, subsequent flights proved the viability of this technique as it saves time and some actions after take-off during high cockpit workload situations.

Run-up produced an easily controlled port swing right rudder was immediately effective and no brakes were required to hold it straight. The tail lifted quickly and smoothly pitch control was good throughout the ground roll.

The aircraft flew itself off at 60 knots after approximately 100 metres. Gear retract takes 8-10 seconds and a change of hands on the throttle and stick is needed to bring the locking levers rearwards.


To be followed...
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Kitplanes
« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2003, 09:49:32 AM »
The aircraft flew itself off at 60 knots after approximately 100 metres. Gear retract takes 8-10 seconds and a change of hands on the throttle and stick is needed to bring the locking levers rearwards.

Throttle friction should be tight at this juncture as it is recommended that the right hand remain lightly on the levers to feel the travel of the gear. The locking pin is sprung loaded onto a plate during its travels and it can be felt sliding along this plate and eventually into the up lock as the levers move forward under the same spring pressure. A positive check that the levers are fully forward and that the telltale pins are showing RED will confirm gear is fully up. The two u/c switches can now be set to OFF or DOWN or left in the UP position. The motors having been shut off by the locking levers being checked fully forward.

This rather protracted handling sequence is recommended as there is no trim change, sound or mechanical feel imparted by movement either way during undercarriage selections and one can imagine Mr Murphy visiting the scene, especially with two totally independent systems to get involved with. A simple red LED unlocked light is being fitted to other Spitfires.

Climb at 100 knots gave 2000 fpm. 85 knots achieved 2500 fpm. Engine indications were 3050 rpm (fully fine) at 24 map at 51 litres per hour. Climb to 5000ft was achieved in 3 minutes from wheels roll into the overhead with one climbing turn.

The controls were light and responsive with no significant adverse yaw noted during a steep climbing turn. The canopy and windscreen transparencies were clear and undistorted. Full cowl open position was selected shortly after take-off to maintain oil temperature limits.
 
Cruise  
A 135-knot cruise at 27 lph @ 19 map was achieved with 2350 rpm by selecting 50% coarse pitch or 4 seconds on the switch. I would equate this to approximately 75 % cruise.

A 150 knot cruise was achieved @ 2200rpm fully coarse 24 map and 43 lph the throttle was about 95% fully open.

Subsequent sorties with fixed pitch props and a slightly modified four bladed propeller produced cruise speeds in the region of 150 knots with fuel flows between 30/35 lph at 2000ft.

There was a satisfying surge of speed and deepening engine note on selection of fully coarse. Cowl flap fully open kept oil temps within normal limits at all high power settings however, this reduced speeds by 2-3 knots. Cylinder head and exhaust gas temps were within limits.
 
Stalls and Manoeuvre  
These were carried out at 5000ft. OAT 15 degrees, half fuel capacity.
 
Clean Stall power off  
Control effectiveness was diminished below 55 knots though full control in all axis was easily maintained, a very light airframe buffet was felt at 50 knots. The nose dropped gently at 44 knots no wing drop was noted. Recovery was instantly achieved with power application and a slight forward movement on the stick. An estimated height loss of approximately 30 feet was experienced.
 
Stall Full Flap 75% power, level 30 degree banked port turn  
Control effectiveness was diminished below 50 knots though full control in all axis was easily maintained, a light airframe buffet was experienced at 45 knots, the nose dropped at 40 knots with a slight roll left. Recovery was instant as full power was applied and the nose lowered slightly, the left wing was easily picked up with a small amount of right rudder. Height loss was less than 100 ft.
 
High G handling  
The aircraft has no negative G capability with the present engine configuration, as oil and fuel starvation will result. No oil pressure fluctuations or engine misfiring was experienced throughout the manoeuvring of up to 4.2 G. The controls were flutter free and very pleasant to use, with no stiffness or over lightness in their feed back to a maximum indicated TAS of 205 knots at 8000ft. This was easily achieved in a 1500ft ROD from 10,000ft. The placarded Vne is envisaged as 190 knots at present. However, I feel the all-metal build and 9 G limit imposed on this airframe gives significant scope for a safe increase in this figure.

A significant torque roll at max power setting was experienced when G stalling. This was predictable and controllable over the speed range used (40-180 knots) during this phase of the air test.

The handling is excellent and the pilots seat position, harness capability and all round visibility during spirited manoeuvres gives one a very pleasant confident feeling making it worthy of its name, if my reading of the real Spitfires handling is correct.
 
Gliding, Circuit and Landing
 
The aircraft glides at 85 knots with a rate of descent of 650 fpm with the engine at idle. It was trimmed and flown hands off at this speed with the canopy fully open to simulate abandoning. The aircraft was stable.

Flap and undercarriage can be lowered below 100 knots with no significant trim changes experienced even with full flap on finals.

A curved approach was flown at 75 kts. With the canopy open a very clear and continuous view of ones touch down point is available. There is no obtrusive wind draught in the canopy half-open position and normal RT calls can be heard. Full flap lowered the nose appreciably and low power was required to prevent speed build up, there are no airbrakes fitted. A last look speed of 65 kts was used over the threshold as the flare was initiated and forward vision lost. This can be reduced to 60 kts for short field approaches. The aircraft is easy to land on three points with good control in all 3 axis right down to a very low touch down speed of around 40 knots. Flapless landings were flown adding 10 knots to all speeds.

A crosswind component of 7 knots was handled easily using both crabbed and wing down techniques. Side-slipping is easy to achieve with effective and manageable rudder forces up to 75 knots.

The toe brakes were snatch free with no tendencies to pitch forward from the 3-point attitude. 2 point, main wheel only touch downs were carried out but are not recommended as touch down speeds of below 65 knots were difficult to achieve and significantly more ground roll was used than 3 pointers. 3 point landing roll outs averaged about 200 yards using minimum braking.
 
Rear Seat Occupied  
The first rear seat sortie was flown with a 75 kilo 185 cm pax with 85 litres of fuel. The rear seat passenger must enter first after moving the pilots seat fully forward. This new forward position did not inconvenience control of the aircraft. The presence of legs and feet either side of me were not a distraction. My right elbow had to be lifted slightly higher during the backward movement of the undercarriage locking levers to avoid a large knobbly knee. Sorties over 1 hour duration will require some form of lumbar support for the pax as a slightly crouched curved lower back position is unavoidable due to the shape of the seat.

I have flown 75 minutes sitting in the rear and I used a large oblong en route frequency book tucked behind me to achieve a fair degree of comfort. Vision is restricted forward dramatically by the pilot’s shoulders which are a foot or so in front of you. The pilots shoulder harness is also routed close either side of your head.

However, this rather cramped and claustrophobic feeling soon diminishes as one gets airborne and the aircraft levels off in the cruise when good vision out and down is available through the side windows. Map reading is achievable but folding a large map would not be easy to accomplish.

A couple of medium squashy overnight bags can be stowed either side of the pax’s shoulders. There is also a small storage area beneath the pilot’s seat for tie-downs and a few tools. A 100 litre fuel / baggage pod has been developed. This fits flush under the belly beneath the pilot and is accessed through a built in door in its side. This pod has not been test flown yet.

It would not be possible to instruct from the rear, there are no controls or useful forward vision.

Take-off with 20 flap in still air was still lively and only another 30 metres were covered before lift-off. No noticeable trim change was experienced throughout the 40-minute flight, which was a close formation photographic sortie. The aircraft handling was precise and responsive over its full speed range. Steep turns up to 3 G were carried out. Glide, circuit and landing performance were the same as for solo with only a small amount of nose up trim required as fuel diminished.

The Mk 26 is a full two seater which, though cramped compared to many tandem aircraft, is capable of transporting two large males with overnight gear over its full range and capabilities.
 To be followed...
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Kitplanes
« Reply #2 on: January 05, 2003, 09:55:16 AM »
Overall Impressions  
The aircraft was well presented with all instruments, radio, transponder and GPS working. The automatic prop controls were not fitted. The engine worked flawlessly, it is meticulously engineered, very light and simple. It sounds and looks lovely and is easy to work on despite difficulty with present engine covers. A new oil dipping or visual check system (like BMW K100 motorcycles) would be ideal.

The aircraft is difficult to look forward and down out of whilst taxiing or in other high nose attitude flight regimes. The undercarriage system works smoothly and efficiently but owners would be well advised to get further electronic confirmation of locked positions.

The aircraft is easy to land in a 3-point attitude with enough peripheral and forward references to achieve consistent success. Correct approach and touchdown speeds are essential to prevent bouncing and or pitching forward especially on rough surfaces or when tempted to wheel it on to the runway.
The controls are well harmonised and the handling very good throughout the speed range flown (40-205 knots) The aircraft is stable with positive stability characteristics in all three axis. However, during manoeuvre the dynamic and static stability mix nicely towards the negative side of the equation giving a spirited fighter feel to the aircraft’s nature which really gets you loosening your straps and looking up sun whilst feeling for the stick top button!


Homepage is :
http://WWW.supermarineaircraft.com


For about 60-70.000 USD, not so bad?

And here she is ;)
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
Kitplanes
« Reply #3 on: January 05, 2003, 11:20:01 AM »
Are you a pilot? Is this your first kit?

Offline Habu

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1905
Kitplanes
« Reply #4 on: January 05, 2003, 11:35:01 AM »
Ok I am going to tell you something that may save you a lot of grief.

A metal spitfire homebuilt is probably going to take 2000++ hours minimun to build and if it is your first project you chance of finishing it are probably 10% at best.

You should buy a much easier to build kit such as a RANs and treat it as a teaching tool. Get a space to construct it, see how well you all work together and share the work. When it is flying use it during you Spitfire project to keep you motivated.

A replica spitfire is probably the most difficult type of homebuilt you can tackle.

Any RC flyers here? They will tell you it is much better to buy a partly completed plane kit first and finish it before moving on to more complex kits and eventually plans built planes. The same would apply 10 fold for the project you are considering.

Also if you are in the US or Canada join the local EAA  chapter and volunteer to help members who are constructing planes with their projects. This is a risk free way to see if you have what it takes to complete such a task. Also the will be your biggest source of information and help if you do decide to go forward with the project.

Whatever you decide best of luck. Building and flying your own plane can be one of lifes best experiences.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Kitplanes
« Reply #5 on: January 05, 2003, 12:10:58 PM »
I am not a pilot, however some of my associates are, and it would be our first kit also.
The replica is actually half-way finished with some 700 Factory hours on it, in there are included the tricky Spit parts.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Thorns

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 429
      • http://members.cox.net/computerpilot/
Kitplanes
« Reply #6 on: January 05, 2003, 04:42:28 PM »
Here's my 2 cents...

This Spit airplane looks awesome, and will make you crazy dreaming about it, so stay a dreamer.  If, you really have the money, have the time to get lots of training including high performance tail dragger time which means getting your SEL, then tail dragger endorsement, and then a high performance endorsement, and an advanced aerobatic endorsement with at least 200 hours of the t/d and h/p flight time, and the time to finish building the kit, with someone from the factory who can test fly the airplane, and the discipline to treat this Spit airplane as if it will kill you with each flight, you are ready for an airplane of this kind.  Plus the last requirement, never ever own an airplane with someone else.  Bottom line: this airplane can and will kill you if you aren't ready for it.  Angus, you ain't ready.  Go see your airport flight school, and start your flight training.  Sorry to be so negative,  please don't be upset with me, as I have my reasons, funerals aren't fun.

Regards,
Thorns

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
Kitplanes
« Reply #7 on: January 05, 2003, 04:45:11 PM »
Thorns-

That was the reason I asked my questions. Most people want to start where they should be ending. That plane is an accident waiting to happen if he is not an experienced pilot.

Offline davidpt40

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1053
Kitplanes
« Reply #8 on: January 05, 2003, 04:59:51 PM »
edit: Just checked out the webpage.  The performance of this aircraft is really tame.  
« Last Edit: January 05, 2003, 05:04:41 PM by davidpt40 »

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
Kitplanes
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2003, 05:11:46 PM »
The Vne of 190knots got my attention. Something that slick with folding gear is going to gather speed downhill in a hurry. Sure, it's stressed for 9G's, but that doesn't mean stuff won't flutter and pop above a certain speed.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Kitplanes
« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2003, 06:04:19 PM »
My interest in this plane is mainly inspired by the following factors:

1. Its a Spitty looking thing. Beautiful.
2. Its rather cheap for a brand new aircraft, - at least compared to a Cessna or suchlike
3. It looks quite rugged.
4 The handling is told to be good, and although a taildragger, it has a low landing speed. Also short field capable.
5. Its still a high performing aircraft, - climbs 2500 feet and cruises fast.
6 Its economical with fuel consumption all the way down to 12 litres an hour. Covering 170 miles that is really good!

doesn't look unsafe, unless one starts doing something stupid.

Reminds me of something. I witnessed a Taxi-off a couple of years back (nearest runway is only 300 yds from my house). Reason: Not enough power, the grass on the field was too long. The plane (Cherookee) smashed through fences and into the rough doing 60 KNOTS after using up 800 yards of RWY. Bet that spit would already have been a 1000 feet into the air :D
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Gunthr

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3043
      • http://www.dot.squat
Kitplanes
« Reply #11 on: January 05, 2003, 09:41:30 PM »
Angus, this is an exciting airplane/airplane kit arriving from the factory with "1000 hours" work left to be done, and the engine is a really good one from what I've read ( 8cyl 4 stroke)

It looks like a good flyer too. I say go for it if you've got the bucks :D

I'd be concerned about one or two things from  my point of view, though.  First, I would not want to share that bird. I might take a partner if I had to, but only one, and even then - only after I had it built. Of course, if your friends are all A/E mechanics... maybe.

Even though it looks like this plane is quite a stable flyer, its no Cub or Champ.

Poor forward visibility taxiing, retracts, detachable wings and so on complicate matters enough so that even if you limit your partners to 3 other pilots, you have 4 pilots who have to be very sharp, and all pilots are not created equal. What I'm trying to say, is somebody is going to prang your pride and joy.

Try to be realistic about monthy maintenance and how it will be paid.


If you go ahead with this, I'd plan on the partnership alliance falling through before long, (like when the "1000 hours" of remaining work turns into 2500 hours) and make sure your attorney makes provisions like for this in your written agreement.

Any idea where I can get some video of this... I'd like to hear it, maybe see a fly-by.

At any rate, keep us posted on what you decide... that plane is beautiful.
"When I speak I put on a mask. When I act, I am forced to take it off."  - Helvetius 18th Century

Offline ra

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3569
Kitplanes
« Reply #12 on: January 06, 2003, 07:32:20 AM »
If I were to built a homebuilt, this would be my first choice:



The Pulsar:  good performance, tame, economical.

ra

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
Kitplanes
« Reply #13 on: January 06, 2003, 07:56:34 AM »
Guess what I'm saying is if you want a plane to get you from point A to point B in a hurry, it will do it but... there are kits that do it better and cheaper. If you want to stunt it, I would be very, very careful.

Offline LePaul

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7988
Kitplanes
« Reply #14 on: January 06, 2003, 09:06:46 AM »
I've been there and done that with a BD-5 kit.  

Do you have your pilot license?

I had always adored the BD-5's and couldn't wait to have one.  They have a iffy reputation as being hard to fly and unforgiving, but in truth, they are no worse than any other sport plane ASSUMING the pilot has the qualifications and experience to fly a high performance airplane.  BD-5s are little, have no crush room, and very very small landing gear.  A hard landing can be expensive, and nosing in..well, you are the crush room  :eek:

I obtained a 90% complete BD-5 kit from a local A&P mechanic who did a marvelous job with it.  Solid rivets, all that.  I'd never built much of anything since I made birdhouses as a cub scout.  Needless to say, learning to rivet and stuff was interesting, and the more I thought about it, the less I liked my first learning experience being a high performance airplane.  That and these things are like model kits, where every step tells you what to do next, etc.  Just LOTS of blueprints and exploded drawings of pieces.  I really had no idea what to do next...this wasn't like any of those Revell models I've built!

Last June, a guy called who really really wanted to see what I had...he is a 747 pilot or flies Gulfstreams on the side.  He's built a few BD-5s and commented mine is the best he's seen (wish I could've taken credit!)  He made a huge cash offer, which I accepted and gleefully helped load into his truck (after a very carefully worded bill of sale was made eliminating my liability)  We still stay in touch and he's made incredible progress on the airplane.  

Summary is I bought the wrong kit for me, I let my dream go a bit overboard.  I like the kitplanes a lot, I find their designs and such ore exciting..but I think I lack the skill to really build one.  Though a friend has an RV9 he's building and I'm surprised how easy that goes together.  But that is a 900 hour kit versus mine was a 2000+ one.

If I have a chance to do it over, I'd either hire someone to build my dreamplane, or if I insist on learning to build, I'd most liely delve into the RV series