Not specifically noted in the article, but certainly a factor, is the reporting of the accident rate of any kit.

To be fair to a company designing and selling a kit, that rate can be skewed by mishaps the result of deviations from the original design and also by reckless pilot activities.

Neither of these accident factors is related to the basic design of a particular kit airplane.

This has be a concern of all. Over zealous regulators will look at the situation and conclude something has to be done about "these kit airplanes".

The problem of a high accident rate is not the kits, its the pilots building and flying them.
 
Like Pierre & David said...

"If it ain't broke, why fix it"?:D
My tour last week of both Vans & Oregon Aero confirmed my belief that they certainly know more of aeronautical design and test than this 'ol boy ever will.
PS As a former quality engineer, I found it very refreshing that ANY employee working on the various phases of the kit, can shut down the line if they feel anything is amiss. From my personal experience, I am the one who has made the mistakes and corrected them after oversight by a tech counselor. Just my .02
 
This cracked me up:
Dan Horton says:

August 19, 2011 at 07:35


Mac,
At what point does modifying our Sport Aviation magazine create a whole new publication, one which no longer reflects the values of the organization’s core group?
Click to expand...

I've said it before, I do not like the direction the EAA is taking. They should have hired a homebuilder to head up their magazine, someone like Marc Cook.
 
N941WR said:
This cracked me up:


I've said it before, I do not like the direction the EAA is taking. They should have hired a homebuilder to head up their magazine, someone like Marc Cook.
Click to expand...

A different observation. I like what Mac writes. Always have. I have no problem with it.

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
N941WR said:
This cracked me up:

Dan Horton says:

August 19, 2011 at 07:35


Mac,
At what point does modifying our Sport Aviation magazine create a whole new publication, one which no longer reflects the values of the organization?s core group?


I've said it before, I do not like the direction the EAA is taking. They should have hired a homebuilder to head up their magazine, someone like Marc Cook.
Click to expand...

What core values are Dan and you referring to?

Take a poll on any issue regarding homebuilding and there are as many "core values" as those responding. This latest poll on OB is an example of the diversity here. We don't much agree on anything.

There is a sense it would be nice to be back in the days when the organization was founded, as advocated by the founder. But that is not going to happen. The camp fire is out and most everyone has moved on. Our airplanes come from kits today, not a plan on paper and raw materials.

"We" may well be the enemy in not adjusting to current times. The accident rate has caught the attention of the NTSB and the FAA. Going back to the good old days, or wishing we were there, is not the answer.
 
David-aviator said:
What core values are Dan and you referring to?
...
Click to expand...
I took his comment to mean "Home Building", not how to buy a light twin or the flying qualities of a C-182.

While Mac is a good writer, he is not a homebuilder. Thus, IMHO, he is not qualified to head up a magazine about homebuilders.
 
I agree

N941WR said:
I took his comment to mean "Home Building", not how to buy a light twin or the flying qualities of a C-182.

While Mac is a good writer, he is not a homebuilder. Thus, IMHO, he is not qualified to head up a magazine about homebuilders.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think it should be Paul Dye.
 
N941WR said:
I took his comment to mean "Home Building", not how to buy a light twin or the flying qualities of a C-182.

While Mac is a good writer, he is not a homebuilder. Thus, IMHO, he is not qualified to head up a magazine about homebuilders.
Click to expand...

....or EAA, if such qualification is appropriate.

It was PAUL POBEREZNY who set the precedent and screwed up the works by anointing his son Tom to be his successor. He is a great pilot but not a homebuilder.

I'd vote for Paul Dye if he ran for anything, including President of the USA.

That's what we need, a homebuilder in charge of it all especially one from VAF. :)
 
David-aviator said:
...That's what we need, a homebuilder in charge of it all especially one from VAF. :)
Click to expand...

I spoke to some warbird frinds of mine at OSH and commented that the EAA had lost its way and they needed to put a homebuilder in the head office. Their reply was, "Hightower is a homebuilder, he restored his Stearman."

Oh man, they don't have a clue!
 
Last edited:
N941WR said:
I spoke to some warbird frinds of mine at OSH and commented that the EAA had lost its way and they needed to put a homebuilder in the head office. Their reply was, "Hightower is a homebuilder, he restored his Stearman." Oh man, they don't have a clue!
Click to expand...

Gotta be careful here....

A full Stearman restoration requires a far larger skill set than assembling an RV. And the word is Hightower really did the job himself. Let's give him a chance.

McClellan? Hmmmm......
 
DanH said:
Gotta be careful here....

A full Stearman restoration requires a far larger skill set than assembling an RV. And the word is Hightower really did the job himself. Let's give him a chance.

McClellan? Hmmmm......
Click to expand...

I had the pleasure, like others, to hear Hightower talk through his visit to our EAA Chapter in Columbus this week. I came away with a high opinion, especially with his business accumen. Make no mistake, Hightower is on a crusade to build the pilot population, builders or not. He definately supports homebuilding and is very familiar with the 'EAA has lost it's way' remarks, but at the same time, he is going to move the whole thing forward, not just homebuilding. He made reference to the % of homebuilders against the overall membership of EAA - something we have heard before. I think it is up to the homebuilders to keep the torch alive, not headquarters. They aren't going to do it for us.

I also agree that Paul Dye would be way better than Mac...
He crow'd about how he personally brought Mac on board and I almost vomitted into my mouth - I'm not a Mac fan. You can see that he is looking at the big picture and homebuilders are just another division, like warbirds, antiques/classics, etc.
 
Last edited:
DanH said:
Gotta be careful here....

A full Stearman restoration requires a far larger skill set than assembling an RV. And the word is Hightower really did the job himself. Let's give him a chance.

McClellan? Hmmmm......
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying but there is a BIG difference between a restoration and a build. All the decisions, wiring, etc. are already made for you when doing a restoration. For a build, it is up to the builder, even with a kit like ours, to make all those choices.

It too met Hightower when he came to Charlotte and he has a grand plan but that plan is all about the certified guys, not E-AB builders.
 
N941WR said:
I understand what you are saying but there is a BIG difference between a restoration and a build. All the decisions, wiring, etc. are already made for you when doing a restoration. For a build, it is up to the builder, even with a kit like ours, to make all those choices.
Click to expand...

I know some people that are restoring a Douglas A-26 Invader. The type as used in the movie "Always". It's all in pieces. If I was to compare that project to an RV..............then well, the RV would seem like a one day jig puzzle. Of course a A-26 isn't a Stearman, but then I don't know the extent of the Stearman restoration.

L.Adamson
 
David-aviator said:
I'd vote for Paul Dye if he ran for anything, including President of the USA.
Click to expand...

"I do not seek, nor can I accept, the nomination of the VAF Party for....:p"

Besides, I already have a government job - no, I am not a politician, I'm a Civil Servant - I work for a living!

Thank you for the kind words however - maybe someday, I'll have time to do a bit more (than I have time for now) in the aviation writing world.


Paul
 
L.Adamson said:
I know some people that are restoring a Douglas A-26 Invader. The type as used in the movie "Always". It's all in pieces. If I was to compare that project to an RV..............then well, the RV would seem like a one day jig puzzle. Of course a A-26 isn't a Stearman, but then I don't know the extent of the Stearman restoration.

L.Adamson
Click to expand...

You missed the point. You are correct, any restoration, be it an A-26, PT-17, or J-3 is a lot of work; however, the big decisions are already made for you because of the type certificate and there are usually drawings telling you exactly how to do things. With a homebuilt, that isn't always the case and it is up to the builder to select the crucial components and make sure they all work together.

Then there is the flight testing thing. While the flight characteristics of an A-26 or Stearman are well known, that isn?t the case with a homebuilt, even an RV. Take my original build for example, no one had built an RV-9 with an O-290 before and I couldn?t get any data on prop size and a bunch of other little items. A restorer doesn?t have those issues.
 
N941WR said:
I took his comment to mean "Home Building", not how to buy a light twin or the flying qualities of a C-182.

While Mac is a good writer, he is not a homebuilder. Thus, IMHO, he is not qualified to head up a magazine about homebuilders.
Click to expand...

Small correction here...Mac does not head up SA, Mary Jones does. Mac is a contributing editor...
 
David-aviator said:
I'd vote for Paul Dye if he ran for anything, including President of the USA.

That's what we need, a homebuilder in charge of it all especially one from VAF. :)
Click to expand...

I SECOND the nomination and will also vote LIKE WISE. We need someone that WORKS. Yes I read the following posts and think his wife would make a good Vice President. She can do two jobs. :)
 
I wrote a response - then deleted it

It is clear that we are under a magnifying glass and it is not wise to draw attention to ourselves. I have read "Poberezny The Story Begins ..." and it is clear to me that Paul and Audrey were unique and what they developed cannot be sustained by the general run of risk averse designers, engineers, pilots, mechanics and bureaucrats that have sucked their way into titled blocker positions based on paper, money, personality, influence, etc. EAA as I have know it is gone - probably never to return - and that's the way it is. Mine is to enjoy my airplane and strive to make it faster.

Bob Axsom
 
Used to be.

I used to be an EAA member until the "E" became a footnote. The homebuilt community was pushed aside by a bunch of dollar hungry, big stick, cool dudes. Ever since, I've held a grudge. It's not that I don't like antiques & warbirds, etc. It's just that I feel that "Oshkosh" was subverted by "Airventure" and sorta taken from us. Along with the rest of the EAA. Paul formed it to advance homebuilding and if that is no longer it prime directive, then they should be stripped of the name. They've kinda ripped us off.
 
N941WR said:
You missed the point. You are correct, any restoration, be it an A-26, PT-17, or J-3 is a lot of work; however, the big decisions are already made for you because of the type certificate and there are usually drawings telling you exactly how to do things. With a homebuilt, that isn't always the case and it is up to the builder to select the crucial components and make sure they all work together.

Then there is the flight testing thing. While the flight characteristics of an A-26 or Stearman are well known, that isn’t the case with a homebuilt, even an RV. Take my original build for example, no one had built an RV-9 with an O-290 before and I couldn’t get any data on prop size and a bunch of other little items. A restorer doesn’t have those issues.
Click to expand...

It's all tinkering with airplanes for the enjoyment of it. Let's not try to say one type of tinkerer is better than the other.
 
EAA

Tom did claim to have built half of his Pitts S1. The wings were built by Curtis Pitts. As for the Stearman, Stearman wings are frequently built around a set of metal fittings. Everything else built from scratch. I can built a SET of Pitts S1 wings in the time it takes to build one Stearman wing panel. So I will give Mr. Hightower the benefit of doubt for now.
Having "restored" a rather simple factory airplane I can absolutely say that I can build a Pitts S1 from scratch in less time than the restoration took.
As for Mr. McClellan, he is completely full of himself. He is an elitist. One engine on his Baron costs more than my entire built from scratch homebuilt. Yes Mr. McClellan, there are still a few of us out there building airplanes from scratch. Your statement "virtually all of these airplanes are from kits" is a bunch of B.E.
Paul Muhle from Columbus NE has built from scratch three airplanes, all of which were Oshkosh Grand Champion Plans Built Winners. Mr. McClellan is oblivious to people like Paul.
I cast a vote for Marc Cook for Sport Aviation Editor.
 
My experience restoring and maintaining an all metal
Luscombe for 35 years and building a quickbuild RV-7A
5 years ago are like night and day. I don't know about
Stearmans but building with new sheetmetal where
most everything is fastened with nutplates or new rivets in new
holes was much easier for me. I had sheetmetal screw
holes in my Luscombe that you could put a #2 pencil through.
Replacing these oversize holes meant hole-finding every
hole where the new sheet met the existing skin.
And after the work was all done, I would pay big money
for someone to inspect and sign off the work that didn't
know how to spell the word 'Luscombe'.

I admire restorers and don't want to go back,
Tom
 
tomwebster said:
I admire restorers and don't want to go back,
Tom
Click to expand...

This.

I've got a Champ project I've been working on for a couple of years. Lots more work and headscratching than building the RV. Why? Because everything on the Champ has to be taken apart, cleaned, and repaired before you can attach it to the last part or assembly you restored.

If Hightower rebuilt a Stearman, my hat is off to him.
 
EAA

I am a LIFETIME EAA member. I plan to fly my airplane to AirVenture every year as long as the aircraft is safe to fly and I am healthy enough to fly it safely.

IMHO, EAA is like the title of the magazine says: SPORT AVIATION.

If you go to the EAA web site, it says:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]January 1953
Paul Howard Poberezny, the leader of a small group of aviation enthusiasts who had been assembling at his home on an irregular basis, founded the Experimental Aircraft Association and is elected its first President. On January 26th, 1953, Poberezny calls the first official meeting of EAA at Curtiss-Wright (now Timmerman) Field in Milwaukee. The group originally gathered together to aid and assist amateur aircraft builders. However, its purposes quickly encompassed the promotion of all facets of aviation - especially sport aviation, the preservation of Americas rich heritage of personal flight - and the promotion of aviation safety. The organization derives its name from the Experimental Aircraft category, which is assigned to airplanes used for recreational and educational purposes only. One of the keys to the associations constant growth is the fact that its membership is open to everyone interested in aviation.

IMHO, without bring in other parts of the SPORT AVIATION community, we would not have a strong of a voice as we do for EXPERIMENTAL Amateur Built Aviation. All the Amateur Builders that I know are FRUGAL. If they were not frugal, they would have when out and purchased a flying airplane. I once told a fuel attendant at an airport that the cheapest thing about flying is the person sitting at the controls of the aircraft. EAA needs to have some income to be able to be the advocate of Amateur Built Aircraft. I am happy that they were able to get someone else to pay for the benefits that help all of us in the Amateur Built Community. By having others help pay the bill, it lowers what I need to put in for the organization to have the same voice with Government.

BTW. All the WARBIRDS that I know of are EXPERIMENTAL aircraft but they just are not Amateur Built. Civilians operate the old military aircraft as Experimental Aircraft with operating limitations that are MORE restrictive that the one we have as Amateur Built. We have EAA to thank for the freedom that our Operating Limitations give us in the Amateur Built category. Retired Joe Norris was a huge help to all of us when he worked at EAA. I hope that EAA is able to get two people to fill his shoes. He left a HUGE void to be filled.

What category were the TWO largest aircraft at AirVenture 2011 licensed in? If you look up the tail numbers, they were both in the EXPERIMENTAL category but they were not Amateur Built.

Like Paul Rosales said today: "EAA helped me get [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]my aircraft [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]flying and AOPA helps me keep it flying." Yes there is some overlap in both organizations.

Thank you EAA for giving me the book: "Nine Lives" by Malvern J. Gross. I am almost through reading the book and have to say that it is right up there with being one of the best Aviation Books that I have ever read. The quote on the EAA web site is in the book on page 378-379. I read those pages last night and felt it was appropriate to put in this thread. I will be giving this book away to another pilot after I read the final 80 pages.

Just my 2 cents.


[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Gary, I can't deny that EAA has grown into a great thing. It is what it is and you are right in saying that we would not have some of the advances & freedoms we enjoy without it. Its just that I still feel hacked.
So, where is "mecca" for homebuilts today?

P.S. I've done work on a fair handful of "experimental" warbirds that have shown and even won at "the show" and that's all great, but its not homebuilding, its something else.
 
That is not true for me Gary

RV6_flyer said:
...If they were not frugal, they would have when out and purchased a flying airplane.

[/SIZE][/FONT]
Click to expand...

Gary I respect you highly but I had a great flying airplane for 22 years before I built and flew my RV-6A. It is about performance and the ability to improve it with my own two hands and mind.

Bob Axsom
 
At 7400 flying aircraft and several hundred/thousand more being built maybe we should form our own governmental advocacy group. I would say if everyone who owns or is building an RV were a member we would have a large enough voice to be heard. Personally, I am a member of both the AOPA and the EAA.
The fact that you have to walk to the back of OSH to see Vans aircraft...walk past the Pipers, Cirrus, Cessnas, Pilatus, and Jets to get the the EXPERIMENTAL aircraft at the Experimental Aircraft Associations event about says it all. However, the general public can't relate to homebuilders and I feel this is why the EAA has brought out the expensive aircraft. To show the side of flying that everyone knows. The general public knows what a Cessna is....not what an RV is. However the general public who wants to get into aviation soon discovers the aircraft are so expensive that they can only afford to build one.
Homebuilding is the most successful niche in aviation today. The law of economics will continue to advance the success of homebuilding. For me why would I spend 350K on a slow new Cessna 172 when I could build a new fast RV...for less than a third of the price. If I wanted a certificated, new aircraft with the performance of an RV, I would be spending close to a HALF MILLION DOLLARS!! No way. Its that mentality that is driving the RV success. We need to organize ourselves and quit looking to other organizations to do it for us. We are the ones with the financial and personal interest in homebuilt aircraft. We need to become our own advocacy group. Now...who's going to be president?:D
 
I've said it before and I'll say it again: STARKEY FOR PRESIDENT.
When he assembles his "tool" cabinet (as opposed to kitchen cabinet) I would like to be secretary of spin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.