Legal Eagle airplane

Let'sgoflying!

Let'sgoflying!

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
20,872
Location
west Texas
Display Name
Display name:
Dave Taylor
Have noticed this aircraft on the ramp the last few days (kpsn), apparently flown regularly by a local gal.
I’ve never hear of it:

legaleagleairplane.com

DIY Airplane Plans | Legal Eagle Airplane

Build your own aircraft today using excellent cylinder engine plans and high-quality kits from Legal Eagle Airplane.
legaleagleairplane.com legaleagleairplane.com
 

Attachments

Nice pictures.
I've seen advertisements for them in EAA Experimenter and Kitplanes. They have a 2-place version too. One powerplant is a 1/2 VW engine (a Volkswagen Beetle engine cut down to two cylinders). I think that is what she is using since the propeller appears to rotate counter-clockwise as viewed from the cockpit, I think that is the opposite for most of our planes. They are supposed to be inexpensive to build.

Another type of inexpensive plane is the Affordaplane: https://www.affordaplane.com/
 
Cap'n Jack said:
One powerplant is a 1/2 VW engine (a Volkswagen Beetle engine cut down to two cylinders).
Click to expand...
I am told that it is.
Hate to see that corrosion on the crankshaft. And being out on the ramp, the fabric as well.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Wow, not many mfg's can say "backed by a perfect safety record" after 25 years and "hundreds flying".
Click to expand...
In the EAB world, I suspect designers do more than a little bit of puffery. Many years ago, it seemed like it was difficult to get them flying- I saw youtubes of people going down runways and just about getting into ground effect, so I suppose that is flying. I note that the plans have been modified sometime ago for an ultralight version, which seems to fly well now, and a LSA that seems to use the original plans (I could be wrong) and allows a stronger (heavier) engine. Starting with the April 2024 issue, Kitplanes had a series about the ultralight version. They made videos and posted them here:
At the end of the series, I note he didn't fly high either.
AvNavCom said:
Aw man, now you've done it. That looks doable for a fairly reasonable investment of funds, and might help me figure out whether I've got it in me to build a Kitfox or RV.
Click to expand...
Sorry about that :D

They had a sale on the planes for $5. I downloaded them with the same thought as you.
 
A friend bought a Legal Eagle that was a project and had never flown. We did quite a bit of work to get the wings straight and labored a long time to get the gear set-up correct as it was quite difficult to even taxi the thing. This was not a fault of the design but rather of the poorly built one my friend bought. It did have an excellent running Mosler 2 cylinder engine that looks very much like a 1/2 VW. Usually the tell-tale sign as to which engine it is can be known by the valve covers.

I did fly my friends LE down the runway at tree top level. He sold it shortly afterwards as it was tricky to handle with the wonky gear that was on it. We talked about rebuilding the gear but he decided to get a tri-gear ultralight instead.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
They had a sale on the planes for $5. I downloaded them with the same thought as you.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I should probably pony up the $10 and look through the digital plans before laying out $65 for the printed version, which I would definitely want were I to take this insane step. It does sound like a fun project, though. I wonder if I could make one with folding wings like the Kitfox. Then I could just chuck it on a trailer whenever I felt like flying and otherwise keep it covered at home.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Wow, not many mfg's can say "backed by a perfect safety record" after 25 years and "hundreds flying".
Click to expand...
I would question the "hundreds flying". I have no doubt the "affordable" name has sold them hundreds of copies of the plans, but there seem to be very few actually flying... and questions have been raised about its structural design (and its ability to be built within the 254# ultralight limit).

The Legal Eagle, OTOH, has a good reputation in the ultralight community.

AvNavCom said:
I wonder if I could make one with folding wings like the Kitfox. Then I could just chuck it on a trailer whenever I felt like flying and otherwise keep it covered at home.
Click to expand...
If that's what you want, build a Kolb Firefly or Ultrastar, which have an excellent track record... and handle like "real" airplanes.
 
Dana said:
I would question the "hundreds flying". I have no doubt the "affordable" name has sold them hundreds of copies of the plans, but there seem to be very few actually flying... and questions have been raised about its structural design (and its ability to be built within the 254# ultralight limit).
Click to expand...
If they were built as an ultralight, how would one know how many were flying? AFAIK, they don't need to be registered. As for the 254# limit, that's probably why there the plans list two ways to build it. One uses different materials to keep under 254 pounds (1x2 inch tubing and other changes) while another material list uses stronger material (2x2 inch tubing) and is built as a LSA. I think the original plans used the heavier materials, but I'm not sure. As for structural problems, many of those were reported to be from people welding the gussets to the frame rather than bolting them, and other such modifications. Some of this is alluded to in the Kitplanes link. I see more videos of them actually flying than only a few years ago. I don't have enough knowledge to recognize structural shortcomings of the design as presented in the plans, and I'd appreciate knowing about them.

Dana said:
The Legal Eagle, OTOH, has a good reputation in the ultralight community.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I just don't know enough about welding to build it.
Dana said:
If that's what you want, build a Kolb Firefly or Ultrastar, which have an excellent track record... and handle like "real" airplanes.
Click to expand...
What handling characteristics are bad in the A-plane? The A-plane seems to have conventional controls.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
If they were built as an ultralight, how would one know how many were flying? AFAIK, they don't need to be registered.
Click to expand...
There are comparatively few photos and videos of them in flight compared to other designs and the number of plans sold.
Cap'n Jack said:
As for structural problems, many of those were reported to be from people welding the gussets to the frame rather than bolting them, and other such modifications.
Click to expand...
I haven't heard of that, but there are aspects of the fuselage design that aren't properly triangulated for the best load path. Granted, I haven't heard of any actual failures, but again, there don't seem to be that many flying.
Cap'n Jack said:
What handling characteristics are bad in the A-plane? The A-plane seems to have conventional controls.
Click to expand...
I haven't heard about anything bad about the A-plane's flying characteristics; it's just that the Kolbs are all known to have excellent handling.
 
There are several in Texas. I've seen four fly and I've seen two of the four crash. Both were engine failures and both had opportunities to land safely and didn't. One of them was at Reklaw and his engine was sputtering as soon as he took off, but he continued down the runway until he ran out of options.

If you fly this type of aircraft, you have to know that if the engine quits, get the nose down instantly. Both of the ones I saw crash fell like a brick almost as soon as the engine quit. They don't glide well!
 
Dana said:
There are comparatively few photos and videos of them in flight compared to other designs and the number of plans sold.

I haven't heard of that, but there are aspects of the fuselage design that aren't properly triangulated for the best load path. Granted, I haven't heard of any actual failures, but again, there don't seem to be that many flying.

I haven't heard about anything bad about the A-plane's flying characteristics; it's just that the Kolbs are all known to have excellent handling.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your insights. I suspect the design has matured a bit over the past 25 years as there seem to be more videos of them posted only over the past few years. I noted the plans now have a part 103 and LSA version, but I don't know when this change was made. I got the impression that the early ones were heavy and would barely fly.

Again, thanks for your comments!
 
Lowflynjack said:
There are several in Texas. I've seen four fly and I've seen two of the four crash. Both were engine failures and both had opportunities to land safely and didn't. One of them was at Reklaw and his engine was sputtering as soon as he took off, but he continued down the runway until he ran out of options.

If you fly this type of aircraft, you have to know that if the engine quits, get the nose down instantly. Both of the ones I saw crash fell like a brick almost as soon as the engine quit. They don't glide well!
Click to expand...
Several what in Texas?

Low mass, high drag- it's well known that if the engine fails, look straight down for your landing site. As you noted, put the nose down immediately. The sight picture will be of the ground when established on best "glide". Engine outs in ultralights is more like "falling with style".
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Several what in Texas?

Low mass, high drag- it's well known that if the engine fails, look straight down for your landing site. As you noted, put the nose down immediately. The sight picture will be of the ground when established on best "glide". Engine outs in ultralights is more like "falling with style".
Click to expand...

Seems like something one should go practice a bunch of times.
 
texasclouds said:
Seems like something one should go practice a bunch of times.
Click to expand...
Yep. Both times I've seen them crash, it was scary how fast it happened. Engine quit, plane hit the ground. They were probably both at less than pattern altitude, but it was scary.
 
Lowflynjack said:
Yep. Both times I've seen them crash, it was scary how fast it happened. Engine quit, plane hit the ground. They were probably both at less than pattern altitude, but it was scary.
Click to expand...
texasclouds said:
Seems like something one should go practice a bunch of times.
Click to expand...
Yes-
Although not an ultralight, here is a video of an AVRO 504 at Old Rhinebeck with a power loss. The situation is similar to an ultralight- low mass and high drag. The pilot had just a second to put the nose down, and he was on the ground in about 5 seconds!
This happened in 2009, the pilot walked away. I thought there was a pilot's perspective video, but I can't find it quickly.
 
I think the affordaplane is brilliant. Engine choice seems pretty critical, and I would build it as an eab-lsa for cheap tailwheel time, flown from my back yard. I love two strokes in motorcycles...not sure about airplanes yet...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top