are there any hidden gems out there in the experimental market anymore?

Jay Honeck said:
The POA signal to noise ratio WRT experimental aircraft is often unbearably high. Get used to it.
Click to expand...

Too many other good forums to contribute to bother with this one. Catch you on VAF... Or somewhere worth a damn.
 
peevee said:
Too many other good forums to contribute to bother with this one. Catch you on VAF... Or somewhere worth a damn.
Click to expand...

Another one bites the dust.

It's been kind of sad, watching POA follow the rec.aviation path WRT new posters. There is a hard core of half a dozen posters here who are simply unable to write non-snarky responses -- and they never seem to sleep.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Another one bites the dust.

It's been kind of sad, watching POA follow the rec.aviation path WRT new posters. There is a hard core of half a dozen posters here who are simply unable to write non-snarky responses -- and they never seem to sleep.
Click to expand...

The early stuff was just random internet chatter that should be expected. Due to the inability to grasp that snark was deserved.
 
I have been told something I didn't want to hear! OMG! DELETE MY ACCOUNT!!!! :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Let me give you a hint, if you want your posts to disappear, you'll have to go disappear them yourself.
 
peevee said:
before or after I told you to go **** yourself and the "210 knot" 310 you rode in on? It'd be a real shame if your nose gear collapsed, wouldn't it? Oh, wait, no, no it wouldn't. I've run into a lot of stupid ****s around aviation, but some I've seen here really take the cake. Shoulder harnesses are for *******, leave yours off and do us all a favor.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter to me lol. One little thing about aviation, it kills cheap people quickly. I don't base my decisions on how cheap I can do something, that is what leads to $10,000 annuals on certified planes and wings falling off experimentals. BTW, I don't fly my 310 that hard, I fly it at 180 so it's loafing along, I run hard LOP, and I am careful. That's my method of cost control, not buying cheap. There is no value in cheap.
 
Last edited:
peevee said:
After 5+ years on vans airforce I'll just stick to that. Aside from a slight bias towards vans designs you can at least have an honest and interesting discussion.
I'll see if the admin will purge this account.
Click to expand...

So mentioning that EAB is going to cost more than 1/4 the cost of an equivalent certificated plane isn't honest?

Remember, that is what touched this whole thing off
 
peevee said:
Ohhhhh I get it now, he got his commercial in 2010, that explains SOOOOO much. Come back when you have some experience kiddo, is the ink even dry?
Also, who is dumb enough to put their certificate number on their website, I can have some fun with this. N number, certificate number, address though old, phone numbers, yyyyyyyeah this will be fun.
Click to expand...

I got my commercial in 2010:confused: I got my CMEL in 1992 followed by my CSEL/S later that year. I got my CMES in 2010 yes, I decided to get it after the FAA sent me a letter that said I could no longer use my paper ticket for flying and had to get a plastic one. Since I had the cash and was looking at the opportunity of getting some time in a Twin Otter on amphibs, I decided to get my CMES rating at the same time as my plastic.

Have all the fun you want, karma is a stone cold ***** though....
 
peevee said:
oh, is it?
Click to expand...

Why did you edit your post? Yes, it is, and "if I'm about to find out", oh well, won't be a new lesson for me. That's why I don't get mad at people who tell me things I don't want to hear. I was just trying to save you from making an expensive mistake, I wasn't trying to steer you away from experimentals, I named several, even ones you truly hadn't considered that you would be able to afford. I have nothing against experimental, I was just pointing out that the logic you were using that an experimental was much cheaper to operate and maintain was false.
 
Go for that hot air balloon, you could inflate it with anger.
 
Folks, we've cleaned up a number of posts in this thread that involved personal attacks, slurs, obscenities, and other violations of our Rules of Conduct.

We'll reopen the thread for comments, but would ask that we keep this on topic of the value of experimentals and costs of same. Personal attacks & slurs will not be tolerated.
 
Looks like bad timing. The OP is a goner. Oh well, did my best.
 
I believe there is a reason the Glasair taildraggers are so cheap. These planes are fast and less forgiving of mishandling than the typical certified aircraft. Add to that the conventional gear which many of us are intimidated by, and in a glasair I would presume to be even more demanding.
It would appear the accident rate of these bears this presumption out:
"Since the first kit-built Glasair flew
in April of 1982, approximately 30%
of all TD's have suffered some degree
of damage incurred in a ground roll
accident."
http://www.glasair.org/Site/Members/Newsletter/Issues/13_2_84.pdf
 
FORANE said:
I believe there is a reason the Glasair taildraggers are so cheap. These planes are fast and less forgiving of mishandling than the typical certified aircraft. Add to that the conventional gear which many of us are intimidated by, and in a glasair I would presume to be even more demanding.
It would appear the accident rate of these bears this presumption out:
"Since the first kit-built Glasair flew
in April of 1982, approximately 30%
of all TD's have suffered some degree
of damage incurred in a ground roll
accident."
http://www.glasair.org/Site/Members/Newsletter/Issues/13_2_84.pdf
Click to expand...

Eesh, it's hard to really make a solid conclusion from that as there are three factors, the design, the builder, and the pilot. There is also no comparison given to other types. 'Some Degree of Damage' is quite vague as well, it would have been better had they used a threshold of damage.

I have only flown one Glasair TD, and it handled fine to me, but I have a fair amount of tailwheel time. I have no reason to doubt the quality of the Glasair design or kit construction. That takes us to another variable, the builder. The amount of guys I've talked to about toe out on the mains of a tailwheel plane leaves me with the impression that more than 30% of them don't understand the geometry involved, I have even had them argue that you want toe in. This is opposite of what you want. Toe out counters the swing moment while toe in will accelerate it.

Then we have the pilot, regretfully, many builder pilots are far from proficient when they are climbing into their new plane the first time which is why we have the high rate of accidents across the entire ExAB fleet in the early stages of testing.

Regardless, there's no real reason to fear the type.
 
Last edited:
You mods take all the fun out of the forum. Watching someone have a psychotic break in real time is why I come here. :rofl:
 
FORANE said:
I believe there is a reason the Glasair taildraggers are so cheap. These planes are fast and less forgiving of mishandling than the typical certified aircraft. Add to that the conventional gear which many of us are intimidated by, and in a glasair I would presume to be even more demanding.
It would appear the accident rate of these bears this presumption out:
"Since the first kit-built Glasair flew
in April of 1982, approximately 30%
of all TD's have suffered some degree
of damage incurred in a ground roll
accident."
http://www.glasair.org/Site/Members/Newsletter/Issues/13_2_84.pdf
Click to expand...

You seem to be on to something there. However, 'ease of landing' or some reasonable facsimile thereof was not a function of the OPs OP.

would seem to be moot now anyway.:D
 
Last edited:
Guys, lets keep it about the subject, NOT about the poster.
 
wsuffa said:
Guys, lets keep it about the subject, NOT about the poster.
Click to expand...

Can you be less subtle pls. Are post 61 and 63 not suitable? Partially suitable? Suitable? Exemplary?

Bueller?
 
peevee said:
Too many other good forums to contribute to bother with this one. Catch you on VAF... Or somewhere worth a damn.
Click to expand...

That may not save you. There's actually a rump ranger here that has been known to take the time to repost what you write here over there -- and vice versa. lol

Luckily, the VAF site administrator brooks no such nonsense, and the guy's posts are usually deleted within the hour.

It always amazes me how much free time the mentally ill have on their hands. I mean, really -- who else would care enough about what is said in an internet forum to bother with such nonsense?
 
FORANE said:
I believe there is a reason the Glasair taildraggers are so cheap. These planes are fast and less forgiving of mishandling than the typical certified aircraft. Add to that the conventional gear which many of us are intimidated by, and in a glasair I would presume to be even more demanding.
It would appear the accident rate of these bears this presumption out:
"Since the first kit-built Glasair flew
in April of 1982, approximately 30%
of all TD's have suffered some degree
of damage incurred in a ground roll
accident."
http://www.glasair.org/Site/Members/Newsletter/Issues/13_2_84.pdf
Click to expand...

Its not that hard. Actually, looking at the Glasair, I wouldn't peg it as a squirrely design. Spring Steel main gear helps a lot.

How many trikes have been damaged in a PIO? I've seen lots of wrinkled firewalls and bent propeller tips.
 
Last edited:
Jay Honeck said:
That may not save you. There's actually a rump ranger here that has been known to take the time to repost what you write here over there -- and vice versa. lol

Luckily, the VAF site administrator brooks no such nonsense, and the guy's posts are usually deleted within the hour.

It always amazes me how much free time the mentally ill have on their hands. I mean, really -- who else would care enough about what is said in an internet forum to bother with such nonsense?
Click to expand...

It must suck being a victim.
 
There is a Hiperbype in the classified section - that probably qualifies as a "hidden gem".
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
There is a Hiperbype in the classified section - that probably qualifies as a "hidden gem".
Click to expand...

A Hyperbipe more like a full aerobatic (think Pitts-like) plane that happens to have capability to haul two persons cross country pretty fast if needed... As opposed to somethig like an RV or Glasair which is primarily a fast cross country cruiser for two that happens to have capability for mild acro.

Methinks a 'bipe might be a bit of a handful of a plane for someone who's not intentionally looking for the mostly punch-wild-holes-in-the-sky kind of mission. I looked into one before buying my RV-6 and decided even though it would be a really cool and unique plane to have around my airport, that I just don't like acro enough to do the plane justice. BTW the one in the classifieds looks to be a nicer plane and for even less money than the one I was looking at two years ago.
 
I found this unadvetized gem. Jay was having so much fun "zooming" I had to step up my search for an RV-8. :D

RV-81.jpg


IOX-360, cold air induction, 195hp, CS Hartzell
Fast back option with tip over canopy (no bar)

205 mph cruise. :yes:
2500' FPM climb out :eek:
Over head break certified (I made that up :redface:)
Rated +6,-4 Gs :yesnod:

Got about 3 hours in it now, a few rolls, hammer heads, etc. Landings are interesting, as I haven't found the right combination of speed and technique. I have a couple of very nice 3 points, but the 8 prefers a wheel landing in a cross wind. The heater sucks!!! :mad: :lol:
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
I found this unadvetized gem. Jay was having so much fun "zooming" I had to step up my search for an RV-8. :D
Click to expand...

Copycat... :)

Congrats on the new ride -- I'm glad to hear you got it! We flew Amelia today in the brisk 40-something degree temps, and holy shiite, I was at pattern altitude in a blink, while pushing forward and rolling in nose down trim. And I thought performance was amazing in 90 degree temps!

There are few things in this world as much fun as an RV-8. Enjoy!
 
Congrats, sweet looking plane, Can you post a picture of the side view of the canopy area?
I miss having an 8, You have the perfect combo.
Tim


Geico266 said:
I found this unadvetized gem. Jay was having so much fun "zooming" I had to step up my search for an RV-8. :D

RV-81.jpg


IOX-360, cold air induction, 195hp, CS Hartzell
Fast back option with tip over canopy (no bar)

205 mph cruise. :yes:
2500' FPM climb out :eek:
Over head break certified (I made that up :redface:)
Rated +6,-4 Gs :yesnod:

Got about 3 hours in it now, a few rolls, hammer heads, etc. Landings are interesting, as I haven't found the right combination of speed and technique. I have a couple of very nice 3 points, but the 8 prefers a wheel landing in a cross wind. The heater sucks!!! :mad: :lol:
Click to expand...
 
Geico266 said:
I found this unadvetized gem. Jay was having so much fun "zooming" I had to step up my search for an RV-8. :D


IOX-360, cold air induction, 195hp, CS Hartzell
Fast back option with tip over canopy (no bar)

205 mph cruise. :yes:
2500' FPM climb out :eek:
Over head break certified (I made that up :redface:)
Rated +6,-4 Gs :yesnod:

Got about 3 hours in it now, a few rolls, hammer heads, etc. Landings are interesting, as I haven't found the right combination of speed and technique. I have a couple of very nice 3 points, but the 8 prefers a wheel landing in a cross wind. The heater sucks!!! :mad: :lol:
Click to expand...

What's the skinny on those IOX Engines?
 
The "X" simply means experimental. A hotrodded ECI brand IO-360 that doesn't require all the extra paperwork to be certificated, and can have extra performance goodies like cold air induction, high compression pistons, experimental fuel injection system, roller tappets and special ground cam profile, cyl head port and valve work, etc, typicially put out around 15 extra horsepower over a normal Lycoming parallel valve IO-360.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top