Teenie Two

bigred177

bigred177

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
1,014
Location
Round Rock, TX
Display Name
Display name:
bigred
I have come across a Teenie Two project that is about 50% complete and was doing some pondering. I was wondering if anyone here has any experience with them and also, could a 6'3" 245 pounder fit in the cockpit?
Thanks
 
There used to be one at the airport I worked at. The Pilot/builder was probably 130 lbs, 5 foot 6inches. A friend flew this airplane once,
Said it was a religious experience. (not a good one)
Dave
 
Absolutely, I had a friend of mine who is a very talented metal worker excited to help me finish it up too. But if I'm going to learn all kinds of new prayers while flying it I don't think I want to go that direction. Plus, from pictures and videos it looks like little people wear this plane instead of sit in it. So I don't think I would be able to fit. I would love t build a plane though, that would be amazing fun.
 
bigred177 said:
I have come across a Teenie Two project that is about 50% complete and was doing some pondering. I was wondering if anyone here has any experience with them and also, could a 6'3" 245 pounder fit in the cockpit?
Thanks
Click to expand...

The Teenie Two was a development of the Jeanie's Teenie. The Teenie was a killer, and the Two was only a little better. The Hummelbird gets its ancestry from the Two, via the Windwagon, and Bruce King's BK-1 is a development of the Hummelbird.

If the Two project is 50% done, that means there's 90% to go. And who knows what questionable workmanship you'll find in it? Better to build the BK-1 if you want a VW-powered all-metal single-seater. Personally, I'd be tempted by the Midget Mustang, though the engine will cost more. It's a beautiful airplane and goes like a scared cat, too. I read an article many years ago about a big fellow who built one for himself, and made retracts for it as well. Now that was an airplane!

Dan
 
That sounds pretty good. I like the idea of the VW powered plane for costs but don't have any requirement for that, although the lowest price is always best. I just think it would be fun to build a 1-2 place plane to go burn holes in.
 
bigred177 said:
That sounds pretty good. I like the idea of the VW powered plane for costs but don't have any requirement for that, although the lowest price is always best. I just think it would be fun to build a 1-2 place plane to go burn holes in.
Click to expand...

Did I just hear you say "Flybaby"?
 
bigred, you might look at the Thatcher CX4.

It's single place VW powered homebuilt that is developing a following.

http://www.thatchercx4.com/

And there is a fairly active group on Yahoo.
 
That is a sweet lookin airplane. I wonder how the performance would increase if you put the 2100cc engine one there instead of the 1600cc.
 
bigred177 said:
That is a sweet lookin airplane. I wonder how the performance would increase if you put the 2100cc engine one there instead of the 1600cc.
Click to expand...
Most of the folks I know of are putting the bigger 2100cc motor in. IIRC, they picked up 5 or 10 mph.
 
Google "Jim Butler, Midget Mustang" for picturs and article by Budd Davisson
on a piece of art in metal. Words don't describe it.
Dave
 
And it's still in the FAA registry, owner in Whitesboro TX... halfway between Gainesville and Grayson Co. Airport. I wonder if it's actually at either field? Would love to catch a glimpse of it, or even take a close look.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Did I just hear you say "Flybaby"?
Click to expand...

Best idea in the thread. The Flybaby is a very neat airplane and has the advantage of an aircraft engine.

There are plenty of VW engine supporters, but it is very rare to see VW powered aircraft at SnF or Osh. Beyond that, the folks I know who have VW powered aircraft end up working on their engines a lot more than flying behind them. Also, they typically don't get much outside the pattern. These things tell me something.
 
The only real problem I've found with the Fly Baby design is the seating. And today, at Blakesburg I met a hulking big guy who owns 2 of them plus 3 more at his airfield in MI, ALL with a seat back bulkhead mod that allows the seat to recline 4 more inches! This pretty much makes the Fly Baby the perfect cheap fun machine.

I think that CX4 looks great too but I'd be happier with something besides a VW motor in it.
 
kyleb said:
...There are plenty of VW engine supporters, but it is very rare to see VW powered aircraft at SnF or Osh...
Click to expand...

I saw a bunch of VW powered aircraft at Oshkosh. Were there as many VW powered planes as there were RVs? Of course not, but there were several. Most of the Sonexes at Osh that I saw were VW powered. All of the Sonerai's that I saw were VW powered. The Thatcher CX4s were VW powered. The BK1 was VW powered. These are just the planes that I saw on the few days I was at Oshkosh.

One of the biggest reasons why you see a disproportionate number of RVs at Oshkosh and SnF is the same reason why you see a disproportionate number of Long-ezs at these events. both planes are excellent long cross-country machines. My bet is that 90% of all of the flying RVs and EZs in the lower 48 states could have reached Oshkosh in 1 day.

As another example. The Zenith STOL CH701 has an outstanding safety record, and is fairly popular. It is used around the world in missonary work. Yet there were only a handful of CH701s at Osh, but many more Zodiac 601XLs. Why? Is the CH701, which has only had 3 fatal accidents worldwide and actually used in a working enviorment inferior to the Zodiac 601XL? No. The problem is that the plane cruises at 70kts. It is a much bigger trek to fly something like that to Oshkosh or SnF from California, than it is to fly an EZ or an RV or a Lancair.

To put Oshkosh in perspective. There were just over 1,000 homebuilts at oshkosh. Over 450 of them were RVs. My bet is that if you added the EZs, the Lancairs, and other fast glass planes that would account for over 60% of the homebuilt fleet at Oshkosh. Are they superior to the biplanes? no. Are they faster and do the make cross countries easier? yes.
 
mcjon77 said:
I saw a bunch of VW powered aircraft at Oshkosh. Were there as many VW powered planes as there were RVs? Of course not, but there were several. Most of the Sonexes at Osh that I saw were VW powered. All of the Sonerai's that I saw were VW powered. The Thatcher CX4s were VW powered. The BK1 was VW powered. These are just the planes that I saw on the few days I was at Oshkosh.
Click to expand...

Check on how many of the out-of-town VW aircraft are trailered in. You might be surprised. ;-)
 
Yup. The Zenith line is not known for its fast qualities.. It took me forever to fly my 801 to OSH. It ended up in the Zenith booth and the trip home... well, lets just say at one point over SD heading west fighting a frontal passage I had a groundspeed of 29.:loco::loco::idea:.

Ben.




mcjon77 said:
I saw a bunch of VW powered aircraft at Oshkosh. Were there as many VW powered planes as there were RVs? Of course not, but there were several. Most of the Sonexes at Osh that I saw were VW powered. All of the Sonerai's that I saw were VW powered. The Thatcher CX4s were VW powered. The BK1 was VW powered. These are just the planes that I saw on the few days I was at Oshkosh.

One of the biggest reasons why you see a disproportionate number of RVs at Oshkosh and SnF is the same reason why you see a disproportionate number of Long-ezs at these events. both planes are excellent long cross-country machines. My bet is that 90% of all of the flying RVs and EZs in the lower 48 states could have reached Oshkosh in 1 day.

As another example. The Zenith STOL CH701 has an outstanding safety record, and is fairly popular. It is used around the world in missonary work. Yet there were only a handful of CH701s at Osh, but many more Zodiac 601XLs. Why? Is the CH701, which has only had 3 fatal accidents worldwide and actually used in a working enviorment inferior to the Zodiac 601XL? No. The problem is that the plane cruises at 70kts. It is a much bigger trek to fly something like that to Oshkosh or SnF from California, than it is to fly an EZ or an RV or a Lancair.

To put Oshkosh in perspective. There were just over 1,000 homebuilts at oshkosh. Over 450 of them were RVs. My bet is that if you added the EZs, the Lancairs, and other fast glass planes that would account for over 60% of the homebuilt fleet at Oshkosh. Are they superior to the biplanes? no. Are they faster and do the make cross countries easier? yes.
Click to expand...
 
Can anyone tell me what the CG Range should be for the Teenie Two.
A friend is building one and has asked me to complete his Wt and Bal. He cannot find this info in his plans, etc.
You may e mail me directly.
Thanks,
Ed
 
I had a Teenie Two nicknamed the Green Hornet. I flew it over 600 hours and enjoyed it. It had a 1600 cc VW engine. I bought 4 new cylinders including pistons through JC Whitney for 100.00 . It was fun to fly but I had to be careful with it. It stalled at 60 mph indicated and had a high rate of sink when the power pulled back. I cruised it at 3100 rpms and it was about 100 mph. I liked doing lazy 8's with it. Never wanted to do any stress acrobatics since I didn't trust the strength of the structure. I always made the approaches with power and at 80 mph. Mine had a single Slick Mag and it worked fine. The carburator was a zenith and probably out of a Harley MC. Personally, there are many other homebuilds that might safer especially if the engine would ever quit. By the way I always pray before take off and the Lord has helped me fly safe in my over 40 years of flying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top