Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Two Weeks To Taxi RV-10
- Thread starter N402RH
- Start date
dmaib
Well Known Member
I believe they have their TWTT programs approved by the FAA on their other airplanes, so I imagine that is what they are working towards with this. If that is the case, DAR signoff should not be an issue.
Wayne Gillispie
Well Known Member
That would be nice if one had the extra money
I would guess 1800 hrs x $50/hr=$90,000. It would take about 16 people working 8 hr days for two weeks. Then paint.
I would guess 1800 hrs x $50/hr=$90,000. It would take about 16 people working 8 hr days for two weeks. Then paint.
Jamie
Well Known Member
Plus engine, interior, avionics, prop, etc.
It's called the two weeks to taxi program -- it already has an engine and prop.
As a DAR, I will not have anything to do with TWTT airplanes.
Jamie
Well Known Member
Yes. (more characters for goofy minimum requirement).
sprucemoose
Well Known Member
Good on ya. You have more integrity than some of your peers.
alpinelakespilot2000
Well Known Member
From what I understand, this whole TWTT program exists because it meets the letter of the law (even though it IMHO clearly violates the spirit of it). Consequently, the FAA had no grounds on which they could deny approval. A GlaStar/Sportsman was going to be my 2nd project, but I crossed it off the list right after they announced the TWTT program a few years ago.
pierre smith
Well Known Member
You need to be there
In their defense, a guy built a slow-build -6 and flew it in two or three months, IIRC.
All the tools and parts are laid out in their assembly sequence and pro's show you how it all fits, with little to no plan-reading.
We have a school in Georgia where you work 6 10 hour days and take a completed empennage home with you. It can be done,
Best,
In their defense, a guy built a slow-build -6 and flew it in two or three months, IIRC.
All the tools and parts are laid out in their assembly sequence and pro's show you how it all fits, with little to no plan-reading.
We have a school in Georgia where you work 6 10 hour days and take a completed empennage home with you. It can be done,
Best,
Allen231ah
Well Known Member
Good for you .
I was merely thinking of the cost, I'm not sure why everyone is so scared of the program. I would think you'd get a better project out of a straight through end to end build than one that takes months or years. Especially surrounded by pros and every tool you can think of. Skills get rusty quickly, I've had to constantly relearn a few things. When you get on a hot streak though and your build "currency" goes up, so does quality. At least mine does.
pierre smith
Well Known Member
Agreed, Sig...
I've seen quick-builds and the riveting that was done by the builder didn't come close to the beautiful factory work.
Our -6A was a QB and at that time, you had to skin the UPPER outboard skin, not the lower one like the -7's. We had a heckuva time doing as well as the rest of the wing.
Best,
I've seen quick-builds and the riveting that was done by the builder didn't come close to the beautiful factory work.
Our -6A was a QB and at that time, you had to skin the UPPER outboard skin, not the lower one like the -7's. We had a heckuva time doing as well as the rest of the wing.
Best,
azcloudflyer
Active Member
For me, the build was more that just the finished product at the end. The journey to the end of the build was just as important. I really enjoyed and would not want to miss things like:
1. Researching parts, doing trade studies, researching what other builders did.
2. Posting pleas for help to this newsgroup. Feeling like I am part of a community with common interests and passion for the RV-10.
3. Having friends and family tracking my progress on my web page. Having people ask how my build is going.
4. The friends I have made in my local area by making use of tech counselors, sharing tools with local builders, inviting people over to see my build.
5. Trying my own technique and learning from success or failure.
I am not saying anything negative about TWTT but just pointing out why I enjoyed building it myself for those that my be deciding which way to go.
1. Researching parts, doing trade studies, researching what other builders did.
2. Posting pleas for help to this newsgroup. Feeling like I am part of a community with common interests and passion for the RV-10.
3. Having friends and family tracking my progress on my web page. Having people ask how my build is going.
4. The friends I have made in my local area by making use of tech counselors, sharing tools with local builders, inviting people over to see my build.
5. Trying my own technique and learning from success or failure.
I am not saying anything negative about TWTT but just pointing out why I enjoyed building it myself for those that my be deciding which way to go.
This is effectively a production aircraft. It is built in a production plant in an assembly line. How is this any different from a Cessna? Call it what it is, a production plane and not an owner built plane. Same plane, same result for the TWTT owner, while maintaining the spirit of the Experimental category.
Otherwise, the TWTT owner will get the same repairman's certificate that I will get after I spent 6 hard-fought years of blood, sweat, and tears (literally) earning the same.
IMHO basically, this is just another means of cheating that is so rampant in society today. In sports, this is called cheating by doping or steroids.
Can you imagine having the TWT MD or JD or PhD program? Give me a break!
Otherwise, the TWTT owner will get the same repairman's certificate that I will get after I spent 6 hard-fought years of blood, sweat, and tears (literally) earning the same.
IMHO basically, this is just another means of cheating that is so rampant in society today. In sports, this is called cheating by doping or steroids.
Can you imagine having the TWT MD or JD or PhD program? Give me a break!
The feds made the rules, and the Glasair program sounds like it has been looked over rather thoroughly by the feds, with approval.
there is no cheating. There is just a lot of money paying to get things done faster
Scott DellAngelo
Well Known Member
Agreed. As long as the airplane is built well and the owner has the money to do it, then what is the problem? Having ZERO experience with a TWTT program I could see it being a little iffy trying to get the repairman's certificate but then again if you did the work then why shouldn't you? If it flys with the FAA then who should care? Many non-QB builders probably think that a QB kit is cheating too. Take the wings for example. Having built a non-QB plane, receiving the wings only missing one skin and the tips seems pretty far off from "building" the wings. To me they were done when they reached that point. For the guys that want new, can afford it, and have more interest in owning a plane rather than building it seems like a great deal to me. Would I do it? No not even if I could readily afford it, but to each his own.
Edit: I'll add that even though I 'bashed' the QB if/when I build again it likely would be a QB.
Last edited:
Flyfalcons
Well Known Member
Some people simply have more money available than time. If Glasair has a program that is legal and suits the market, then I say good on 'em. All of the pro-level assistance available through these programs will undoubtedly result in a high quality machine.
N402RH
Well Known Member
Gary,
Have you visited the TWTT program and actually seen how they do it and what is really involved? Have you seen how much work the customer actually does? The FAA was very negative until they actually spent a week going through the program first hand.
Next time you are in Arlington you should take a tour of the TWTT facility and make an informed judgment about it, I was also very skeptical until I actually visited their facility.
There are a number of people that now own airplanes and are involved in aviation because of this program. We need to find innovative ways to promote and get people involved in aviation not find ways to discourage them.
Rob Hickman
N402RH RV-10
Just to fully clarify my point, i am only arguing the issue about the repairman's certificate for the -10 specifically. I have no experience with a Glastar or Sportsman, so I would not even speculate about those builds. Just given my experience with the -10, even with the QB, a LOT of extra work would have to be done for you to finish in 2 weeks IMHO.
I have just spent 2 solid long solid weeks doing final assembly on a -10. There is just no way i could ever do all that work in that time assuming universal Physics. Even if physical laws could be violated, my body and mind could not physically nor mentally do it in that time. I just cannot fathom how one could claim they did the work without a lot of "shortcuts" euphemistically speaking.
No doubt, the planes out of TWTT will fly and fly well, just like any other -10. In fact, being a "production" aircraft, they will undoubtedly all fly exactly the same, just like any other production aircraft from Cirrus or Cessna, even with the same avionics. I hope they sell a million -10's and get a million new, likely chinese or brazilian, pilots up in the air. However, don't give them the repairman's cert just because they paid for it, which at this point may just be symbolic.
I have just spent 2 solid long solid weeks doing final assembly on a -10. There is just no way i could ever do all that work in that time assuming universal Physics. Even if physical laws could be violated, my body and mind could not physically nor mentally do it in that time. I just cannot fathom how one could claim they did the work without a lot of "shortcuts" euphemistically speaking.
No doubt, the planes out of TWTT will fly and fly well, just like any other -10. In fact, being a "production" aircraft, they will undoubtedly all fly exactly the same, just like any other production aircraft from Cirrus or Cessna, even with the same avionics. I hope they sell a million -10's and get a million new, likely chinese or brazilian, pilots up in the air. However, don't give them the repairman's cert just because they paid for it, which at this point may just be symbolic.
Last edited:
pierre smith
Well Known Member
Amen.
You can get an RV entirely built by pro's in Russia and South Africa.
I'd sure like that to be an option over here and receive a very, very airworthy airplane that's been totally sorted and test flown/rigged.
The Pitts model 12 is a recent example and a friend of mine has a new one...immaculate.
Best,
You can get an RV entirely built by pro's in Russia and South Africa.
I'd sure like that to be an option over here and receive a very, very airworthy airplane that's been totally sorted and test flown/rigged.
The Pitts model 12 is a recent example and a friend of mine has a new one...immaculate.
Best,
Hi
There is a company in Brazil (www.flyer.com.br) that builds and flyes an RV in a month. It enters the assembly line and in 30 days it is ready to fly with paint and panel. The company delivers about 8 units per month. The RV10 costs U$ 215K without avionics but with brand new lycoming io540 and cs prop. and the queue is somewhere between 12 and 18 months. They are tested before delivered and have warranty. Finishing is amazing, leather interior. I am a happy owner of one of those 10s!!
Besides the whole RV line, they also build and sell other models such as Extra 200, Tecnans, Kolb Flyer, glastars, sportsman and so on.
Moura
There is a company in Brazil (www.flyer.com.br) that builds and flyes an RV in a month. It enters the assembly line and in 30 days it is ready to fly with paint and panel. The company delivers about 8 units per month. The RV10 costs U$ 215K without avionics but with brand new lycoming io540 and cs prop. and the queue is somewhere between 12 and 18 months. They are tested before delivered and have warranty. Finishing is amazing, leather interior. I am a happy owner of one of those 10s!!
Besides the whole RV line, they also build and sell other models such as Extra 200, Tecnans, Kolb Flyer, glastars, sportsman and so on.
Moura
Last edited:
Hi
There is a company in Brazil (www.flyer.com.br) that builds and flyes an RV in a month. It enters the assembly line and in 30 days it is ready to fly with paint and panel. The company delivers about 8 units per month. The RV10 costs U$ 215K without avionics but with brand new lycoming io540 and cs prop. and the queue is somewhere between 12 and 18 months. They are tested before delivered and have warranty. Finishing is amazing, leather interior. I am a happy owner of one of those 10s!!
Besides the whole RV line, they also build and sell other models such as Extra 200, Tecnans, Kolb Flyer, glastars, sportsman and so on.
Moura
Seeing as how a well appointed 10 is fetching $200Kish, I'd call this very competitive.
alpinelakespilot2000
Well Known Member
From: http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/ultralights/amateur_built/amateur_regs/
Is the TWTT program consistent in spirit with 21.191 part g below? Particularly the phrase "assembled by persons who undertook the construction project solely for their own education or recreation."? That's the part about the program that I question.
Title 14: Aeronautics and Space
PART 21—CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCTS AND PARTS
Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates
Browse Previous | Browse Next
§ 21.191 Experimental certificates.
Experimental certificates are issued for the following purposes:
(a) Research and development. Testing new aircraft design concepts, new aircraft equipment, new aircraft installations, new aircraft operating techniques, or new uses for aircraft.
(b) Showing compliance with regulations. Conducting flight tests and other operations to show compliance with the airworthiness regulations including flights to show compliance for issuance of type and supplemental type certificates, flights to substantiate major design changes, and flights to show compliance with the function and reliability requirements of the regulations.
(c) Crew training. Training of the applicant's flight crews.
(d) Exhibition. Exhibiting the aircraft's flight capabilities, performance, or unusual characteristics at air shows, motion picture, television, and similar productions, and the maintenance of exhibition flight proficiency, including (for persons exhibiting aircraft) flying to and from such air shows and productions.
(e) Air racing. Participating in air races, including (for such participants) practicing for such air races and flying to and from racing events.
(f) Market surveys. Use of aircraft for purposes of conducting market surveys, sales demonstrations, and customer crew training only as provided in §21.195.
(g) Operating amateur-built aircraft. Operating an aircraft the major portion of which has been fabricated and assembled by persons who undertook the construction project solely for their own education or recreation.
Is the TWTT program consistent in spirit with 21.191 part g below? Particularly the phrase "assembled by persons who undertook the construction project solely for their own education or recreation."? That's the part about the program that I question.
Title 14: Aeronautics and Space
PART 21—CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCTS AND PARTS
Subpart H—Airworthiness Certificates
Browse Previous | Browse Next
§ 21.191 Experimental certificates.
Experimental certificates are issued for the following purposes:
(a) Research and development. Testing new aircraft design concepts, new aircraft equipment, new aircraft installations, new aircraft operating techniques, or new uses for aircraft.
(b) Showing compliance with regulations. Conducting flight tests and other operations to show compliance with the airworthiness regulations including flights to show compliance for issuance of type and supplemental type certificates, flights to substantiate major design changes, and flights to show compliance with the function and reliability requirements of the regulations.
(c) Crew training. Training of the applicant's flight crews.
(d) Exhibition. Exhibiting the aircraft's flight capabilities, performance, or unusual characteristics at air shows, motion picture, television, and similar productions, and the maintenance of exhibition flight proficiency, including (for persons exhibiting aircraft) flying to and from such air shows and productions.
(e) Air racing. Participating in air races, including (for such participants) practicing for such air races and flying to and from racing events.
(f) Market surveys. Use of aircraft for purposes of conducting market surveys, sales demonstrations, and customer crew training only as provided in §21.195.
(g) Operating amateur-built aircraft. Operating an aircraft the major portion of which has been fabricated and assembled by persons who undertook the construction project solely for their own education or recreation.
That is indeed the part I have a problem with. In my opinion, this type of program undermines the intent of the amateur-built rule!
who says the intent of the owner isn't recreation?
and that is the general problem with laws like this, we can say we discern an intent behind the law, but every part of the government will follow the stated laws, not the "intent". That is to say, if there is a legal "loophole", then it is completely legal, doesn't matter how people feel about it.
dmaib
Well Known Member
There is no reason that an individual who has the financial resources could not undertake the TWTT program with an honest education and recreation goal. The FAA has "blessed" this approach and it is clear that the company is playing by the rules.
Canadian_JOY
Well Known Member
As somebody who is close to a Sportsman (and its builder, before he passed away) I'll chime in here with a little reality check. The owner of this aircraft made no bones about saying that the time he spent at Glasair was probably the most physically and mentally exhausting time of his life. And this guy was a double PhD. He spent some time in advance of the build working on scraps of aluminum etc and he told me that once he got to the factory he was shown what good workmanship was like, and was forced to work to that standard or better - nothing less was acceptable. This, I think, was the best part of the build because he learned humility, and he developed an intimate relationship with rivets and some of the tough spots on the airplane that demanded perfection, even when he had to be a contortionist to reach the workspace.
From a systems perspective the real time-saver was in having the parts pre-fabbed. Having fuel lines cut to length, pre-bent and ready to flare saved huge amounts of labor. But more importantly, having all the necessary parts neatly organized in racks, with spares immediately available if you wrecked the first one, saved days and days of work.
In the end would I have trusted this guy to maintain this airplane as a repairman? You bet! He knew the systems inside-out. While he may not have known exactly what the left fuel tank fitting looks like because he worked on the right fuel tank fitting, he knew how it should look, and how the fuel line should attach because he had DONE it himself.
There was no question in his mind that the TWTT program met the educational intent of the homebuilding rule.
Like most of us, he had had to go back to the build manual to remind himself just how something was built because the build happened some time ago. I'd wager that most homebuilders who've been flying their airplanes for a few years still go back to the plans to refresh themselves on one technical detail or another.
To put things into perspective, look at the "certified" world. A+P's sign off complete airplanes, even though they haven't built ANY part of the aircraft. Driving every rivet isn't the only way to learn about building and maintaining airplanes. At a personal level, what matters most to safety is that the individual maintaining the airplane knows where to find technical information, how systems work, how airplanes are built, and can recognize defects and deficiencies. One doesn't have to build an entire airplane to achieve this level of knowledge.
From a systems perspective the real time-saver was in having the parts pre-fabbed. Having fuel lines cut to length, pre-bent and ready to flare saved huge amounts of labor. But more importantly, having all the necessary parts neatly organized in racks, with spares immediately available if you wrecked the first one, saved days and days of work.
In the end would I have trusted this guy to maintain this airplane as a repairman? You bet! He knew the systems inside-out. While he may not have known exactly what the left fuel tank fitting looks like because he worked on the right fuel tank fitting, he knew how it should look, and how the fuel line should attach because he had DONE it himself.
There was no question in his mind that the TWTT program met the educational intent of the homebuilding rule.
Like most of us, he had had to go back to the build manual to remind himself just how something was built because the build happened some time ago. I'd wager that most homebuilders who've been flying their airplanes for a few years still go back to the plans to refresh themselves on one technical detail or another.
To put things into perspective, look at the "certified" world. A+P's sign off complete airplanes, even though they haven't built ANY part of the aircraft. Driving every rivet isn't the only way to learn about building and maintaining airplanes. At a personal level, what matters most to safety is that the individual maintaining the airplane knows where to find technical information, how systems work, how airplanes are built, and can recognize defects and deficiencies. One doesn't have to build an entire airplane to achieve this level of knowledge.
If I was on the fence about doing this program, that right there would have sold me.
pierre smith
Well Known Member
Alan Carroll
Well Known Member
I recall taking a tour of the Cirrus factory and being told how they worked hard to get their build time down under 2000 hours (this with factory tooling and an airplane that doesn't use rivets). They developed many time-saving processes to achieve this, and of course the builders are highly experienced. If a TWTT customer works 12 hours a day for 14 days this is 168 hours. Did he "build" 51% of an airplane? Of course not. I know the calculation is based on tasks rather than hours, but this idea doesn't even pass the smell test.
However, 51% is only relevant because the FAA says it is. If they are willing to calculate that number in some alternate universe then so be it. Meanwhile the customer gets a safe airplane and a really intensive, high-quality, hands-on training course in how it was built. Think of it as being like summer camp at the Cessna factory.
Obviously this is very different from the experience of most RV builders; I think I spent 168 hours just on the canopy of my early RV-8 kit. Don't even get me started on those "matched hole" slackers!. Of course, the plans builders can look down their noses at all of us. The meaning of "amateur built" continues to evolve...if you can afford it!
However, 51% is only relevant because the FAA says it is. If they are willing to calculate that number in some alternate universe then so be it. Meanwhile the customer gets a safe airplane and a really intensive, high-quality, hands-on training course in how it was built. Think of it as being like summer camp at the Cessna factory.
Obviously this is very different from the experience of most RV builders; I think I spent 168 hours just on the canopy of my early RV-8 kit. Don't even get me started on those "matched hole" slackers!
. Of course, the plans builders can look down their noses at all of us. The meaning of "amateur built" continues to evolve...if you can afford it!But this is the only rule I've seen:
Title 14: Aeronautics and Space
PART 21?CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCTS AND PARTS
Subpart H?Airworthiness Certificates
Experimental certificates are issued for the following purposes:
...
(g) Operating amateur-built aircraft. Operating an aircraft the major portion of which has been fabricated and assembled by persons who undertook the construction project solely for their own education or recreation.
First, I wish that the FAA would explain their rationale for how the TWTT program satisfies paragraph (g) above, and then show how that same rationale has been applied consistently to all other amateur-built aircraft. Having spent the last few years putting my -9A together, I can't see how anyone could possibly claim that the TWTT program even comes close to satisfying the "major portion" clause.
Second, the TWTT program appears to be simply a clever maneuver around the very expensive certification requirements that all other commercial aircraft factories must comply with. Do Cessna, Piper, Cirrus, etc, complain that there are two sets of rules for factory-built aircraft; one set for them and a different set for the TWTT aircraft?
John
Randy Means
Member
Certificate
I hope not!
I hope not!
N941WR
Legacy Member
One of the reasons the TWTT Sportsman program works is that you select the options up front and those options are very limited.
The panel is standardized, as is the interior and electrical system. When you arrive, all the parts are there waiting for you, not the other way around.
The build quality of TWTT airplanes is not show plane quality but is airworthy. In other words, it is on par with most of the builders on this forum.
With all of the bits and pieces laying around, expert help telling you what to do, and all the specialty tools laid out for you, I can easily see how a TWTT program meets the letter of the law.
The panel is standardized, as is the interior and electrical system. When you arrive, all the parts are there waiting for you, not the other way around.
The build quality of TWTT airplanes is not show plane quality but is airworthy. In other words, it is on par with most of the builders on this forum.
With all of the bits and pieces laying around, expert help telling you what to do, and all the specialty tools laid out for you, I can easily see how a TWTT program meets the letter of the law.
LAMPSguy
Well Known Member
Excellence without arrogance...
So I am thinking that if this offends you, just resolve to build yours BETTER than theirs. Be excellent without looking down on the "other" ways to do it.
Many different levels here like other posts have said...Plans built, non-matched hole, matched hole, QB, TWTT, **** we all know you can bend the rules and have one COMPLETELY BUILT for you if you just fib about the time "you" spent on it...I am sure it's been done.
It is like high school, those of us who grew up without money looked at the kids whose parents had it and complained. But IF you had it, be honest, you would at least THINK about it?!?
If I offered a check for $200K to the first 10 people who PM'd me on the condition they get it if they had already built and started another one from scratch...how many would move "up the ladder" to QB, or buy other time saving tips? More than one I bet.
My vote is for compassion, be happy for those fortunate enough to be able to fly that which we cannot.
So I am thinking that if this offends you, just resolve to build yours BETTER than theirs. Be excellent without looking down on the "other" ways to do it.
Many different levels here like other posts have said...Plans built, non-matched hole, matched hole, QB, TWTT, **** we all know you can bend the rules and have one COMPLETELY BUILT for you if you just fib about the time "you" spent on it...I am sure it's been done.
It is like high school, those of us who grew up without money looked at the kids whose parents had it and complained. But IF you had it, be honest, you would at least THINK about it?!?
If I offered a check for $200K to the first 10 people who PM'd me on the condition they get it if they had already built and started another one from scratch...how many would move "up the ladder" to QB, or buy other time saving tips? More than one I bet.
My vote is for compassion, be happy for those fortunate enough to be able to fly that which we cannot.
I'm just back from OSH. I had never considered building my own plane until a friend of mine who has built an RV and is working on a second one suggested looking into it. I did some reading on the Van's web site and saw that they were giving rides at OSH, so I took a demo in an RV-10. Very impressive, even though the demonstrator was minimally equipped and dressed up.
I'm posting because I also looked at the Glasair Sportsman, and found the idea of the TWTT program very compelling.
I understand the concerns others have expressed about involvement in the project and the spirit of amateur aircraft. I also, however, look at my own situation and know that without something like TWTT it will never happen for me. I live in an apartment far from the airport and I have a busy life. I love flying, and now for the first time in my flying career am starting to see the opportunities in experimental aviation. I can make adjustments in my life, but not what I think it would take to complete a multi-year airplane building project. I could see dedicating a two week vacation to a rigorous program rather than spending ridiculous amounts of money to go to an overpriced resort and do nothing. I value life experience more than "things".
Should I just reject the idea of flying an amateur built aircraft as being out of reach, or should I consider the TWTT program as an opportunity to experience something new and worthwhile?
I'm posting because I also looked at the Glasair Sportsman, and found the idea of the TWTT program very compelling.
I understand the concerns others have expressed about involvement in the project and the spirit of amateur aircraft. I also, however, look at my own situation and know that without something like TWTT it will never happen for me. I live in an apartment far from the airport and I have a busy life. I love flying, and now for the first time in my flying career am starting to see the opportunities in experimental aviation. I can make adjustments in my life, but not what I think it would take to complete a multi-year airplane building project. I could see dedicating a two week vacation to a rigorous program rather than spending ridiculous amounts of money to go to an overpriced resort and do nothing. I value life experience more than "things".
Should I just reject the idea of flying an amateur built aircraft as being out of reach, or should I consider the TWTT program as an opportunity to experience something new and worthwhile?
Phil
Well Known Member
You should simply do what's right for you and stop there.
I'm opposed to the TWTT because I'm actually building a QB -10 and I (we) know there is no absolutely no way you are building the airplane.
You might get to participate in each section and you might actually feel like you're building it because you're seeing it go together and getting your hands dirty - but the reality is that you're not building that airplane. There are a team of helping hands around you who know the process, know what is acceptable, and make the building decisions on your behalf. There is no education or experienced gained in that environment and therefore, as the future owner, I don't think you are really be qualified to make real decisions about maintaining and repairing the airplane once it leaves the nest.
But regardless of how I feel or anyone else for that matter; you should do what is right for you and not worry about everyone else.
I'm opposed to the TWTT because I'm actually building a QB -10 and I (we) know there is no absolutely no way you are building the airplane.
You might get to participate in each section and you might actually feel like you're building it because you're seeing it go together and getting your hands dirty - but the reality is that you're not building that airplane. There are a team of helping hands around you who know the process, know what is acceptable, and make the building decisions on your behalf. There is no education or experienced gained in that environment and therefore, as the future owner, I don't think you are really be qualified to make real decisions about maintaining and repairing the airplane once it leaves the nest.
But regardless of how I feel or anyone else for that matter; you should do what is right for you and not worry about everyone else.
Last edited:
You sound like a good candidate to purchase a flying RV. There are plenty available. Then just spend as much or as little time as you want becoming intimately familiar with it. Take it apart, put it back together (with oversight), poke it, tinker with it, review the plans in detail, put eyeballs on each and every nut, bolt, and rivet, build a relationship with it... and eventually, it will become YOUR RV. You still won't be the builder, but we all have the choice to be as educated as we choose. Heck, even order the practice kit for the heck of it after your purchase, just to have a tiny appreciation of the process?
I too have to come home after a five beer conversation with Dan H. and crack open the physics and calculus text references on my shelf
. I choose to be educated.Someone who purchases an already flying Experimental is allowed, per the letter and spirit of the law, to make these exact decisions. As I'm sure you know, the only thing they cannot do is sign off the yearly Conditonal Inspection.
Phil
Well Known Member
But that doesn't mean you have the experience to make those decisions. You are driving home my point.
Without having your own builder experiences to rely on it doesn't matter what the spirit of the regulation says. You aren't actually qualified even though you're perfectly legal.
Last edited:
DarylT
Well Known Member
Ditto to that Phil! I like Scotts as well.
For me its the journey... sure I want to be done already and flying my butt off, but when I am think of what I will know about every little part and place on this plane. And all the different phases I went thru to get there.
But I'm not going to fault anyone else that took a short cut and bought their way there. Having the freedom to fly is something we all need to remember.
Maybe when Doug gets back from all the fun he had this week at Osh he can knock out that "Like" button for us.
Now lets get back to building!
For me its the journey... sure I want to be done already and flying my butt off, but when I am think of what I will know about every little part and place on this plane. And all the different phases I went thru to get there.
But I'm not going to fault anyone else that took a short cut and bought their way there. Having the freedom to fly is something we all need to remember.
Maybe when Doug gets back from all the fun he had this week at Osh he can knock out that "Like" button for us.
Now lets get back to building!
Flyfalcons
Well Known Member
I imagine the same could be said by standard-kit builders regarding your work on the QB.
