Talk me out of this.

How many planes had you built previously? Using your 1,500 hours as the measuring stick, how much more time would have been required for the first one?

yakdriver said:
I built my RV7 quickbuild in 14 months working about 25hrs a week with no other help. Don
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
How many planes had you built previously? Using your 1,500 hours as the measuring stick, how much more time would have been required for the first one?
Click to expand...

That seems to be a typical number for many 'fast build' kits even for first timers with decent hand skills.
 
Having seen the pilot logbooks of some builders, I'm a bit skeptical of reported build times.

Henning said:
That seems to be a typical number for many 'fast build' kits even for first timers with decent hand skills.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Having seen the pilot logbooks of some builders, I'm a bit skeptical of reported build times.
Click to expand...

Well, considering I know a guy who does RV kits as a side gig and puts em together in about 400 hrs with about 120hrs of a second persons help, hearing 1500 isn't that far out of my realm of belief. The fast build kits have all the tricky bits already done.
 
yakdriver said:
I built my RV7 quickbuild in 14 months working about 25hrs a week with no other help. Don
Click to expand...

The amazing part is usually on online forums, you divide the hours by the reported number of hours per week and laugh at the inability of most builders to do simple math, since their build time never matches.

Amazingly, yours does. 60 weeks.

No wonder you had a leg up on the typical builder! ;)
 
I've been building and restoring airplanes for 30 years and yes I know my way around a rivet gun. That was my first RV and it took 1200hrs not 1500. I have a time clock in my hangar so it is very accurate. I did a Backcountry Super Cub after the RV and that took a little over 1200 hrs. It took almost three years as I was flying a lot in the summers. Current project is finishing a RV7 for a guy. I'm much faster on this one as I have done everything before so don't have to think about it. Looks like I have another super Cub coming up in the fall. Oh and I also have a Dental Lab that is my main income. I love to build and fly and get plenty of both. As I said before, anyone with good basic mechanical skills can build a nice RV. Don
 
yakdriver said:
I've been building and restoring airplanes for 30 years and yes I know my way around a rivet gun. That was my first RV and it took 1200hrs not 1500. I have a time clock in my hangar so it is very accurate. I did a Backcountry Super Cub after the RV and that took a little over 1200 hrs. It took almost three years as I was flying a lot in the summers. Current project is finishing a RV7 for a guy. I'm much faster on this one as I have done everything before so don't have to think about it. Looks like I have another super Cub coming up in the fall. Oh and I also have a Dental Lab that is my main income. I love to build and fly and get plenty of both. As I said before, anyone with good basic mechanical skills can build a nice RV. Don
Click to expand...
So, Don, would you guess that 2 years for me (a first time builder) to build a quick-build RV9 would be a reasonable goal? Once started, I'd be able to average between 20 and 30 hours a week on it.

One of the prerequisite items for me would be to finish up any ongoing or promised projects. For example, I just spent the entire weekend cleaning out the garage -- in part to see if it would be at all practical to use part of it for a workshop, while still having my wife's car parked inside. In the process I lined up three woodworking resto projects that need to be done, and a long-pending scooter repair/upgrade that's been languishing for lack of a place to work on it. In the end, I figure I'll have enough room to do the majority of the work in the garage.

What I have seen about the QB kits tells me 2 years should not be unreasonable. I figure it would take 4 or more if I went with the regular kit; the extra cost seems well worth it.
 
From what I have seen, if you have decent basic hand skills and tool sense, 2 years later at 20-30hrs (as well as the resources to buy parts and equipment at will) a week will have a flying plane from most any of the QB kits. For those without confidence and experience, I cannot recommend more to get a model that has a 'Build it at the Factory" builder assist program.
 
DaleB said:
So, Don, would you guess that 2 years for me (a first time builder) to build a quick-build RV9 would be a reasonable goal? Once started, I'd be able to average between 20 and 30 hours a week on it.

One of the prerequisite items for me would be to finish up any ongoing or promised projects. For example, I just spent the entire weekend cleaning out the garage -- in part to see if it would be at all practical to use part of it for a workshop, while still having my wife's car parked inside. In the process I lined up three woodworking resto projects that need to be done, and a long-pending scooter repair/upgrade that's been languishing for lack of a place to work on it. In the end, I figure I'll have enough room to do the majority of the work in the garage.

What I have seen about the QB kits tells me 2 years should not be unreasonable. I figure it would take 4 or more if I went with the regular kit; the extra cost seems well worth it.
Click to expand...

If you can work on it that much you should be able to finish it easily in two years. If you can find a couple of builders that have finished their RVs in your area that can mentor you through the project it would be a big help. With Van's matched hole tooling construction is a breeze. Also you can do almost all of the work yourself without a helper. There are a few places you need another person to buck rivets. If you decide to build I am just a phone call away for any questions you have. I'm the local tech adviser and I have half a dozen guys working on their RVs right now that I'm helping. Don
 
FYI, I used your 14-month X 25 hrs/week (4.3X14X25) to calculate 1,500-hour build time.

yakdriver said:
I've been building and restoring airplanes for 30 years and yes I know my way around a rivet gun. That was my first RV and it took 1200hrs not 1500. I have a time clock in my hangar so it is very accurate. I did a Backcountry Super Cub after the RV and that took a little over 1200 hrs. It took almost three years as I was flying a lot in the summers. Current project is finishing a RV7 for a guy. I'm much faster on this one as I have done everything before so don't have to think about it. Looks like I have another super Cub coming up in the fall. Oh and I also have a Dental Lab that is my main income. I love to build and fly and get plenty of both. As I said before, anyone with good basic mechanical skills can build a nice RV. Don
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
FYI, I used your 14-month X 25 hrs/week (4.3X14X25) to calculate 1,500-hour build time.
Click to expand...

I usually worked 25hrs a week. Sometimes more sometimes less. I kept track of my time and it was 1200hrs. For someone who has never built an airplane you sure have a negative opinion on homebuilding. Dale sounds like he has the skills and attitude to do an RV. Vans airplanes have the highest completion rate of all of the kitplanes offered on the market. Face it a lot of first time builders overestimate their skills and just don't have the drive to work on the project day in and day out. As I said in other posts the secret to finishing a kitplane is to work on it every day even if only for a half hour to keep the momentum going. There is nothing like flying a nice airplane that you built with your own hands. Plus you know everything about it and can do any repair work yourself. Don
 
I keep seeing the metric 25 hours per week. Anyone looking to build has to ask if that is reasonable for their schedule. That's a big chunk of time for a working man, of course I still have kids at home and juggling family but there is no way. Yard work? Time to fly? Sleep? Have to know your personality. I need variety even if I had 24 hours to give.
 
Sportsman said:
I keep seeing the metric 25 hours per week. Anyone looking to build has to ask if that is reasonable for their schedule. That's a big chunk of time for a working man, of course I still have kids at home and juggling family but there is no way. Yard work? Time to fly? Sleep? Have to know your personality. I need variety even if I had 24 hours to give.
Click to expand...
I spend more than that now on various non-essential projects I'd give up if I had something better to do. I'm a full time telecommuter, so I have some slack time once in a while... and I can do what I do pretty much any time of day or night. I would, however, have to finish up everything I'm working on now before starting -- that will take a while. But once it's going, I don't think between 20 and 25 hours average per week is unreasonable.
 
Sportsman said:
I keep seeing the metric 25 hours per week. Anyone looking to build has to ask if that is reasonable for their schedule. That's a big chunk of time for a working man, of course I still have kids at home and juggling family but there is no way. Yard work? Time to fly? Sleep? Have to know your personality. I need variety even if I had 24 hours to give.
Click to expand...

First requirement of aviation... Let the yard die unless it's big enough to land on. :)
 
DaleB said:
I spend more than that now on various non-essential projects I'd give up if I had something better to do. I'm a full time telecommuter, so I have some slack time once in a while... and I can do what I do pretty much any time of day or night. I would, however, have to finish up everything I'm working on now before starting -- that will take a while. But once it's going, I don't think between 20 and 25 hours average per week is unreasonable.
Click to expand...

In this thread I have seen you rationalize this build in many ways, But I'v not seen you give the proper reason to build any aircraft.
 
Tom-D said:
In this thread I have seen you rationalize this build in many ways, But I'v not seen you give the proper reason to build any aircraft.
Click to expand...
I guess that depends on who's judging what meets the definition of a "proper reason". I suppose "the proper reason" for anything could boil down to, "I want to do it". Some supporting reasons I can think of off the top of my head:

  • Experience
  • Repairman's certificate - able to do any maintenance, repairs or modifications at will
  • Flexibility to use non-certified avionics - EFIS, autopilot, etc for a fraction of the cost of certified
  • Better performance than any available certified aircraft in the same price range
  • Ability to update to newer technology (engine, GPS, radios, etc) at will
  • Lower operating cost - per hour, per year, however you slice it.
  • Bragging rights
Face it, there are things you can do with an experimental that you simply cannot do in a certified aircraft -- even if you do hold an A&P ticket, which I don't.

But in the end, by some people's standards I guess there is no proper reason, under any circumstances.
 
DaleB said:
But in the end, by some people's opinions I guess there is no proper reason, under any circumstances.
Click to expand...

FTFY. You asked to be talked out of it... indirectly asking for opinions.

If you want to do it, do it. No outside affirmation or confirmation required.
 
DaleB said:
I guess that depends on who's judging what meets the definition of a "proper reason". I suppose "the proper reason" for anything could boil down to, "I want to do it".
Click to expand...

That comes pretty close.


the FAA quotes only two reasons, do you know what they are?
 
So far I've heard a number of arguments against building a kit plane, or an experimental in general. Most have fallen into one of three categories...

  1. It will take too much time
  2. It will cost too much
  3. You won't be able to fly while you're building
The third, really, is just a fusion of the first two.

I'm not seeing any new arguments against building. I've already considered the time it will take to build, have a pretty good handle on the expense involved. I've got a plan for flying enough to maintain proficiency while building.

I'm really not seeing any show stoppers. While I haven't decided for sure that I'll build, I'm actually leaning more toward it than before. Some of the questions, comments and arguments have been very reasonable and thought provoking, and the few things I hadn't considered thoroughly before I have now. For example, I'd originally thought about building in a rented hangar; after input from people who have done it I think that's a horrible idea - and I've now got a workable space at home. Even if I don't build an airplane, that one thing alone will be a huge benefit over the over-stuffed, cluttered and unusable space I had before.

In general -- thanks for the input, I do appreciate it. A year ago I wouldn't have considered flying in an experimental. Six months ago I wouldn't have considered building. You live and learn.

And Tom, 14 CFR 12.191 lists a bunch of reasons (I count nine) for issuing an Experimental certificate, I don't know which two you like best.
 
denverpilot said:
FTFY. You asked to be talked out of it... indirectly asking for opinions.

If you want to do it, do it. No outside affirmation or confirmation required.
Click to expand...
Quite so. I was looking for any major obstacles that I hadn't considered, and/or cautionary takes or "For God's sake, don't do it" from people who have done it.
 
FWIW Dale -- I'm seriously considering the purchase of an already built experimental that is like 40 years old :)
 
I didn't start the thread, have no dog in the fight and don't care if he builds a full-scale replica of the Enola Gay.

What I know from fielding the calls that are part of the appraisal and buyer rep practice is that building an airplane comes with a mixed bag that cannot be ignored or glossed over. A high percentage of buy vs. build threads include references to the exceedingly high number of unfinished kits that languish in the back of erstwhile builders' workshops as well as the dismay of the owners who did not anticipate the events that led to their partially-completed project being left in the dark.

Some of those same people call me each year, usually when the builder throws in the towel. The questions aren't all that different than those about completed airplanes and center on "how do I get out without getting skinned?" The obvious issue is that partially completed airplanes are difficult to sell, as they have already discovered before they call me.

As another poster with direct experience mentioned, build time of less than two years is exceedingly rare but very few builders who order a tail kit think their project will fall into this slow-go category.

As Hank Haney told Ray Ramano during the celebrity golf show "We've been keeping stats on putting for 50 years, and know without question that 85% of the putts miss on the low side. We also know that 100% of the guys who hit those putts thought they had played enough break."

Caveat emptor.





yakdriver said:
I usually worked 25hrs a week. Sometimes more sometimes less. I kept track of my time and it was 1200hrs. For someone who has never built an airplane you sure have a negative opinion on homebuilding. Dale sounds like he has the skills and attitude to do an RV. Vans airplanes have the highest completion rate of all of the kitplanes offered on the market. Face it a lot of first time builders overestimate their skills and just don't have the drive to work on the project day in and day out. As I said in other posts the secret to finishing a kitplane is to work on it every day even if only for a half hour to keep the momentum going. There is nothing like flying a nice airplane that you built with your own hands. Plus you know everything about it and can do any repair work yourself. Don
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
In this thread I have seen you rationalize this build in many ways, But I'v not seen you give the proper reason to build any aircraft.
Click to expand...

"I want to learn and have the experience" is the best reason there is to do anything at all.
 
wabower said:
I didn't start the thread, have no dog in the fight and don't care if he builds a full-scale replica of the Enola Gay.

What I know from fielding the calls that are part of the appraisal and buyer rep practice is that building an airplane comes with a mixed bag that cannot be ignored or glossed over. A high percentage of buy vs. build threads include references to the exceedingly high number of unfinished kits that languish in the back of erstwhile builders' workshops as well as the dismay of the owners who did not anticipate the events that led to their partially-completed project being left in the dark.

Some of those same people call me each year, usually when the builder throws in the towel. The questions aren't all that different than those about completed airplanes and center on "how do I get out without getting skinned?" The obvious issue is that partially completed airplanes are difficult to sell, as they have already discovered before they call me.

As another poster with direct experience mentioned, build time of less than two years is exceedingly rare but very few builders who order a tail kit think their project will fall into this slow-go category.

As Hank Haney told Ray Ramano during the celebrity golf show "We've been keeping stats on putting for 50 years, and know without question that 85% of the putts miss on the low side. We also know that 100% of the guys who hit those putts thought they had played enough break."

Caveat emptor.
Click to expand...

We are talking RV kits here. If it was just about any other kit on the market he wanted to build my answer would be much different. One smart thing Vans does is make everyone build the tail kit first. It gives the builder a chance to experience what the rest of the airplane will be like at a small price. Vans probably sells twice the tail kits as the people who buy the rest of the kit. Yes, building an airplane is not easy. Restoring a car or building a hot rod is not easy either but people build them all the time. Building in 2 years or under if you are working on it 25hrs a week is pretty normal. Building time for a quick build averages under 2000hrs for a nice airplane. Don
 
> Chick's dig it?

Don't be sexist. Chicks hate that. <g>

>> It gives the builder a chance to experience what the rest of the airplane
>> will be like ...

Yes & no. I've got a who is building a RV9. It's kind'a his fourth build ...

#1: Luscome 8A was disassembled and an incomplete barn relic
#2: Sonerai II; scratch built
#3: Tri-pacer was a disassembled and an incomplete barn relic. Re-mfg'd as a Pacer
#4: RV9 Quick Build

His observations regarding your conjecture ... the early kits are good confidence
builders. As you proceed thru the build, the information is less and less complete
and results in substantive head-scratching and VAF visits. He (and other local
builders) all seem to mutter and swear about fitting the cowl & canopy.

I know another RV7 Quick Build(er) ... that put 3,100 hours into his airplane before
prep & paint. I'm guessing this is some kind of record. Note: He's and engineer,
machinist and is meticulous. I'm guessing that if he ever took the plane to OSH, he'd
probably take home a trophy.
 
If you want to build .. build. Experimental has lots of advantages that have been stated already. It comes down to education and recreation. If you think you'll enjoy the process .. then go for it.
I'm building a Sonex. It'll be my third Exp/AB. I built a Titan Tornado a few years ago and flew it around for 3 yrs. Fun plane. My GF wanted something side by side .. so I bought an already completed Sonex. It's a fun plane .. so now that I'm retired I'm building another one. I'm working on it full time so that should make it go a little faster .. but it takes up all your extra time when you have work and family to juggle too.

RT
 
Well, last night was my first EAA chapter meeting. Lots of nice guys there, fairly interesting and lively meeting. I'd estimate there were 40-50 people attending.

I got to talk to several RV builders and flyers who are flying and/or building a range of planes including a -7, -7a, -8, and I think there was a -9 builder or flyer too. I lost track. I've got a couple of offers for rides in a -6 and a -7A, which I plan to take them up on. Part of the decision process will be finding out if I even fit in the thing, if it's reasonably comfortable flying, etc. One guy is offering to take me and my wife both up when there's a fly-in at his home airport in a few weeks.

After looking at the pros and cons, I'm thinking the -7 or -7a might be a better way to go. While I don't plan on any serious aerobatics, it would be nice to have that option available. There doesn't seem to be a lot of practical differences between the -7 and -9, other than I could hang a 180HP IO-360 on it and cruise at 200 MPH. Stall speed is a little higher, but not enough to be a real factor. And, I've seen some pretty simple solutions for the baggage space issue -- it looks like adding an extended baggage area for storing lightweight but bulky items like pillows and jackets would be quite simple and not cause big balance problems.

I telecommute full time, and it would be a trivial matter to set up another IP phone in the garage so I could be doing work (deburring, cleco-ing, etc) while listening to conference calls. That would add a few hours of build time per week.

Still holding off on a decision for a while. I've got more projects to finish up and one or two very expensive things that have to be done first (complete bathroom remodel, for one) if there is to be continued matrimonial bliss. That's kind of a big requirement. I'm still not seeing any real impediments, though.
 
DaleB said:
So far I've heard a number of arguments against building a kit plane, or an experimental in general.
Click to expand...

There are no arguments for or against. It's an intensely personal decision that revolves around what motivates you as an individual and what you want to accomplish.

If you want to build - build. It's that simple.

If you want to fly - buy.

If you want to save money - buy.

Modifying an existing E-AB or buying a 90% complete project (leaving only 50% of the work for you to do) can be a decent compromise if you want to do some building, but not that much.

At the end of the day you want to be able look to back at what you have done, and what you have learned and be happy.
 
I thought I wanted to build until I spoke to a Zodiac 601xlb builder who described it as an extra marriage. That was all I had to hear. I'm looking to purchase an RV6/6a or 7/7a and based on what I hear building costs, I have a better chance of spending less, which for me means flying more.
 
LandSickness said:
I thought I wanted to build until I spoke to a Zodiac 601xlb builder who described it as an extra marriage. That was all I had to hear. I'm looking to purchase an RV6/6a or 7/7a and based on what I hear building costs, I have a better chance of spending less, which for me means flying more.
Click to expand...

You can often buy a completed experimental for a fraction of the cost of the components and kit and not spend years of your free time building.

Again I say the only reason to build an experimental is because you want to build, not because you want to save money or anything else. Building is an excellent form of recreation if you like that sort of thing and gives you the satisfaction of the creation process. If that is not why one desires to build, they are typically making an expensive and discouraging mistake. If that is why they want to build, then an airplane is one of the most rewarding projects one can take on. Nothing wrong with building, just make sure you're doing it for the right reason.
 
Last edited:
An RV-9(A or taildragger) is quite a bit easier to land than a -7. The -9 has a much tamer airfoil, but a -7 isn't really all that bad either. The fuselage is the same.

I helped friends build 5 different RVs over the past 8-10 years, so when I finally got to where I could afford one myself, I bought an already flying RV-6. Building does indeed consume a lot of your life/time. I wanted to fly. :wink2:
 
yakdriver said:
We are talking RV kits here. If it was just about any other kit on the market he wanted to build my answer would be much different. One smart thing Vans does is make everyone build the tail kit first. It gives the builder a chance to experience what the rest of the airplane will be like at a small price. Vans probably sells twice the tail kits as the people who buy the rest of the kit. Yes, building an airplane is not easy. Restoring a car or building a hot rod is not easy either but people build them all the time. Building in 2 years or under if you are working on it 25hrs a week is pretty normal. Building time for a quick build averages under 2000hrs for a nice airplane. Don
Click to expand...

And a lot of people's skills mature over the course of building the kit... starting with the tail... some of the perfectionists end up buying a second tail kit at the end of the project - in order to have a better looking/better built tail using the skills they developed over the build.
 
I think Dale what it mostly comes to is, do you have a passion for building? Do you enjoy fixing things? Some people build plane after plane and really don't care much about the flying. They just enjoy working with their hands. For me, I've bought two completed homebuilts so I'm more about the flying. I've worked on them as far as Part 43 will allow and gotten satisfaction in that but I also know I just don't have the time or patience to build an entire aircraft. I don't care much about personalization when it comes to the panel or paint either so a completed kit was for me.

I've read many, many reports from builders who completed their kits and a common feeling they all had was there is nothing like building something with your own hands. To take raw materials (non OB) and make it into something that leaves the ground must be an overwhelming feeling.

Build or no build, if you buy a homebuilt like an RV you'll never regret it. Just an awesome GA flying experience. :)
 
What do you want to do? spend the next five years building the plane of your dreams? Or spend the next five years flying to the places of your dreams? I built too many cars & bikes before I became a pilot. Now , nearing the 60 mark I only want to fly, not build anymore. Your desires may be different. Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top