In your opinion ?

Tom-D said:
Is there such thing?
Click to expand...

Apparently. I was talking to a guy a few weeks ago who was restoring a Champ. Sent the fuselage to AC since they had the jig and were willing to do the repairs. After assessing the tube structure, they told him for as much as it would cost to fix the existing fuselage, they could sell him a new one. He opted for the new.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Apparently. I was talking to a guy a few weeks ago who was restoring a Champ. Sent the fuselage to AC since they had the jig and were willing to do the repairs. After assessing the tube structure, they told him for as much as it would cost to fix the existing fuselage, they could sell him a new one. He opted for the new.
Click to expand...

I'd love to know a round number for a replacement fuse for a 7AC. A new one should incorporate a lot of upgrades that are in the service letters.
 
Anything experimental.

For sure not de Haviland, Beechcraft, Mooney, or Cirrus.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Apparently. I was talking to a guy a few weeks ago who was restoring a Champ. Sent the fuselage to AC since they had the jig and were willing to do the repairs. After assessing the tube structure, they told him for as much as it would cost to fix the existing fuselage, they could sell him a new one. He opted for the new.
Click to expand...
Is it PMAed replacement part. or do they call it a repaired fuselage, by using a piece of the old ?
 
wanttaja said:
Pietenpol, with a Continental engine and Grove 6" wheels. Plane doesn't get any simpler. Engine *can* be more expensive to maintain, but if you use a ~C85 or O200, it's a bit more modern and parts are easier to find. PLUS you see the reliability advantages over many conversions. No one can afford an unreliable engine.

Tires are cheap, there's no electrical system and the avionics likely consists of a single $200 handheld. Lots of them out there, if you can't make a part yourself you can find someone to help you.

All the above applies to Fly Babies as well, but I figure most folks would prefer a plane that at least *pretends* to have a second seat. :)
piet_header.jpg

http://www.bowersflybaby.com/stories/piet.html

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...
Sure, they're both cheap to acquire and operate, but the wooden airframes are going to require a hangar of some sort which ups the cost of ownership greatly. Metal airframes can be left tied down outside for decades with the proper care, open cockpit wooden structures, not so much.
 
rtk11 said:
What’s your mission? 2 or more seats? Speed? Endurance?

LSA are pretty low maintenance and fuel efficient aircraft (mostly because of the durability of the Rotax 912) but don’t expect to get anywhere fast (though it’s fast enough for 90% of most people’s missions.)
Click to expand...
This, especially if you have a repairman certificate. They're simple airplanes with fixed gear and fixed pitch prop, and 110-115 knots on 5 gph ain't too shabby.
 
I’ve had both a c150 and a tomahawk for a number of years and the tomahawk was cheaper (granted from my small sample). But then neither could compete with my experimental, in both cost and performance.
 
N659HB said:
Certified? A straight tail 172, or a 170.
Click to expand...
You'd best be certain the guy before you had it restored.. Let me tell ya how much you can spend on a 170
 
N659HB said:
Speaking of restorations, how is your 150 project coming along?
Click to expand...
After the rude and crude and assuming statements made here the project was parted out .
 
Nope, why should I provide his entertainment?

He makes up lies then swears to them.
GlennAB1 said:
Sorry. I must have confused you with another member that posted a question about having to allow the FAA visit, or something like that.
Click to expand...
see how it works?
 
My little Sonerai burns 3.5 gph on MOGAS. It has a VW engine and $350 wood prop. The tailwheel is a 4" caster wheel that is direct steering (no chains or springs). And there's no avionics other than a handheld radio. I think its a contender.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
After the rude and crude and assuming statements made here the project was parted out .
Click to expand...
Really? Rude and crude statements by people you only know on the internet caused you to discontinue a restoration? I'm not buying that. Or are you finally admitting the ones making the comments were right? No, you'll never do that. Just like you admitted you threw the rudder pedals out, but never admitted someone else on here was right.
 
What makes lanes expensive to maintain is mechanic hours. If you do your homework, get to understand your systems, get a mechanic that will work with you then you can cut down on those hours. A mechanic charges the same rate for removing all the inspection plates on your plane as he does for the inspection. If you have extra hours that you can put into your plane then you won't pay the mechanic for those hours.
 
I don't bill annuals by the hour. You want to open panels, go ahead, it's not going to make any difference to the cost of the inspection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top