Metal, low-wing, plansbuilt

[Oliver Arend]

I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction by
getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the full
education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up with
everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for. My
choice is metal since I'm more confident with this (my skills)+
(material) combination than with others. Wading through the Kitplanes
directories I have a couple of candidates:

Hummel Bird, UltraCruiser
Mustang Aero Midget, Mustang II
Sonex
Zodiac CH 601, 650, XL
DCS Mini Coupe, Teenie Two
Thorp T-18
Emile Lucas L5, L6, L8, L11/12
Pazmany PL-1, PL-2, PL-4
Thatcher CX-4
(oh yeah, then there is also the Ryan ST-R replica, but that's
probably too much to ask for right now)

Judging from my very limited experience, the Sonex plans seem to be
very detailed and complete, but also steep in price ($600 according to
Kitplanes). Zodiacs, T-18s, and Pazmany designs seem to be very
popular, so the plans can't be all that bad? On the lower end, there
are the Hummel, Mustang and DCS, but they get very little coverage,
apart from the occasional mention of the Hummel Bird or the Teenie Two
by VW aficionados (I do like the Mini Coupe, though). Just looking at
the price, the plans can't be as detailed as others. CX-4, L5, L6 etc.
I've never heard of.

So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
aircraft) and can recommend a set?

Oliver

[Scott[_7_]]

Oliver Arend wrote:
> I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction by
> getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
> either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the full
> education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
> I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up with
> everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for. My
> choice is metal since I'm more confident with this (my skills)+
> (material) combination than with others. Wading through the Kitplanes
> directories I have a couple of candidates:
>
> Hummel Bird, UltraCruiser
> Mustang Aero Midget, Mustang II
> Sonex
> Zodiac CH 601, 650, XL
> DCS Mini Coupe, Teenie Two
> Thorp T-18
> Emile Lucas L5, L6, L8, L11/12
> Pazmany PL-1, PL-2, PL-4
> Thatcher CX-4
> (oh yeah, then there is also the Ryan ST-R replica, but that's
> probably too much to ask for right now)
>
> Judging from my very limited experience, the Sonex plans seem to be
> very detailed and complete, but also steep in price ($600 according to
> Kitplanes). Zodiacs, T-18s, and Pazmany designs seem to be very
> popular, so the plans can't be all that bad? On the lower end, there
> are the Hummel, Mustang and DCS, but they get very little coverage,
> apart from the occasional mention of the Hummel Bird or the Teenie Two
> by VW aficionados (I do like the Mini Coupe, though). Just looking at
> the price, the plans can't be as detailed as others. CX-4, L5, L6 etc.
> I've never heard of.
>
> So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
> aircraft) and can recommend a set?
>
> Oliver

I don't have experience with the Thatcher CX-4, but it is a pretty ship
and I sat in the cockpit at Oshkosh a couple years ago and it's quite
roomy for a one-holer. I talked with the designer and he sure seems to
be a nice guy. The design looks simple enough without a lot of complex
shapes that one would need to force the aluminum into compliance ;)

http://www.thatchercx4.com/

[cavelamb[_2_]]

Oliver Arend wrote:
> I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction by
> getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
> either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the full
> education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
> I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up with
> everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for. My
> choice is metal since I'm more confident with this (my skills)+
> (material) combination than with others. Wading through the Kitplanes
> directories I have a couple of candidates:
>
> Hummel Bird, UltraCruiser
> Mustang Aero Midget, Mustang II
> Sonex
> Zodiac CH 601, 650, XL
> DCS Mini Coupe, Teenie Two
> Thorp T-18
> Emile Lucas L5, L6, L8, L11/12
> Pazmany PL-1, PL-2, PL-4
> Thatcher CX-4
> (oh yeah, then there is also the Ryan ST-R replica, but that's
> probably too much to ask for right now)
>
> Judging from my very limited experience, the Sonex plans seem to be
> very detailed and complete, but also steep in price ($600 according to
> Kitplanes). Zodiacs, T-18s, and Pazmany designs seem to be very
> popular, so the plans can't be all that bad? On the lower end, there
> are the Hummel, Mustang and DCS, but they get very little coverage,
> apart from the occasional mention of the Hummel Bird or the Teenie Two
> by VW aficionados (I do like the Mini Coupe, though). Just looking at
> the price, the plans can't be as detailed as others. CX-4, L5, L6 etc.
> I've never heard of.
>
> So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
> aircraft) and can recommend a set?
>
> Oliver


You may want to take a look at Bruce King's little plane.

http://www.bkfliers.com/

Dunno if he has plans out for it yet, but wouldn't hurt to check.
It goes together vey much like the Hummel, but has a larger wing
(needed, IMHO) and full (1825?) VW engine.

richard

[Jim Logajan]

Oliver Arend > wrote:
> I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction by
> getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
> either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the full
> education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
> I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up with
> everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for.
[...]
> So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
> aircraft) and can recommend a set?

You listed a lot of good options that I elided - just to make it harder:

A couple years back, I ordered the preview plans for Vans RV-9A for $55.
They are still that price (RV-3 is $45.) As far as I know, the only
difference between Van's Aircraft preview plans and the final set is that
the preview plan drawings are reduced in size by half (I think) - but they
are all there and quite readable. Also, you get the complete build
instructions plus other material. It's a fabulous deal education-wise even
if you design or build something else.

[Orval Fairbairn[_2_]]

In article
>,
Oliver Arend > wrote:

> I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction by
> getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
> either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the full
> education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
> I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up with
> everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for. My
> choice is metal since I'm more confident with this (my skills)+
> (material) combination than with others. Wading through the Kitplanes
> directories I have a couple of candidates:
>
> Hummel Bird, UltraCruiser
> Mustang Aero Midget, Mustang II
> Sonex
> Zodiac CH 601, 650, XL
> DCS Mini Coupe, Teenie Two
> Thorp T-18
> Emile Lucas L5, L6, L8, L11/12
> Pazmany PL-1, PL-2, PL-4
> Thatcher CX-4
> (oh yeah, then there is also the Ryan ST-R replica, but that's
> probably too much to ask for right now)
>
> Judging from my very limited experience, the Sonex plans seem to be
> very detailed and complete, but also steep in price ($600 according to
> Kitplanes). Zodiacs, T-18s, and Pazmany designs seem to be very
> popular, so the plans can't be all that bad? On the lower end, there
> are the Hummel, Mustang and DCS, but they get very little coverage,
> apart from the occasional mention of the Hummel Bird or the Teenie Two
> by VW aficionados (I do like the Mini Coupe, though). Just looking at
> the price, the plans can't be as detailed as others. CX-4, L5, L6 etc.
> I've never heard of.
>
> So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
> aircraft) and can recommend a set?
>
> Oliver

I have had a Mustang II "kit" for the past 25 years and have built some
of it (wings, tail, control surfaces).

Unless Chris Tieman has updated the plans and instructions, it is a huge
step to build one. Van's airplanes have the best plans and instructions,
but still require a fair amount of skills.

Two pieces of advice:

1. Get with your local EAA Chapter and develop friendships. You will
meet people who have solved a lot of the problems and puzzles that you
will encounter.

2. NEVER countersink .032 aluminum in hopes of a good structure. ALWAYS
dimple anything up to .040 for AN-3 rivets.

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

[flybynightkarmarepair]

> > So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
> > aircraft) and can recommend a set?
>
> You listed a lot of good options that I elided - just to make it harder:
>
> A couple years back, I ordered the preview plans for Vans RV-9A for $55.
> They are still that price (RV-3 is $45.) As far as I know, the only
> difference between Van's Aircraft preview plans and the final set is that
> the preview plan drawings are reduced in size by half (I think) - but they
> are all there and quite readable. Also, you get the complete build
> instructions plus other material. It's a fabulous deal education-wise even
> if you design or build something else.

I've got copies of many of those you've mentioned.

The absolute gold starndard for learning are the Pazmany PL-2A and
PL-4 plans. Extremely well designed details, very well organized, and
very clear. The acompanying manuals are worth buying even if you
build something else. The RV plans and the Sonex plans are very close
to that in quality. I would guess the Thorp plans are similar; he
made his living consulting for "REAL" airplane companies, so was
familar with standards of practice as they existed at the time.

The Ultracruiser plans are a step down from that in terms of clarity
and presentation, but are still quite nice.
The CX-4 plans, another step down, from an "Art History" standpoint,
but the details are very good. The CX-4 plans are also nice in that
they have a lot of details, like firewall forward stuff, that most
other plans leave as "an exercise for the builder". But the sheets
are not well organized, it's hard to figure out the "next higher
assembly", etc.

The Teenie plans are a total joke. I have not heard good things about
Zenith plans; most of their planes are built from kits, with the
tricky bits, the ones hardest to document, already done.

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Oliver Arend" > wrote in message
...
> I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction by
> getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
> either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the full
> education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
> I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up with
> everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for.

Then you might want to narrow down your list just a bit towards what you
might actually want to build / fly - there is a world of difference from
one end of your list to the other.

FWIW I thought the T-18 plans were good - it was designed to be built from
sheet stock - not a kit with a bunch of pre-built parts supplied.

Many start. Few finish.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[Rocky]

Oliver Arend wrote:
> I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction by
> getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
> either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the full
> education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
> I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up with
> everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for. My
> choice is metal since I'm more confident with this (my skills)+
> (material) combination than with others. Wading through the Kitplanes
> directories I have a couple of candidates:
>
> Hummel Bird, UltraCruiser
> Mustang Aero Midget, Mustang II
> Sonex
> Zodiac CH 601, 650, XL
> DCS Mini Coupe, Teenie Two
> Thorp T-18
> Emile Lucas L5, L6, L8, L11/12
> Pazmany PL-1, PL-2, PL-4
> Thatcher CX-4
> (oh yeah, then there is also the Ryan ST-R replica, but that's
> probably too much to ask for right now)
>
> Judging from my very limited experience, the Sonex plans seem to be
> very detailed and complete, but also steep in price ($600 according to
> Kitplanes). Zodiacs, T-18s, and Pazmany designs seem to be very
> popular, so the plans can't be all that bad? On the lower end, there
> are the Hummel, Mustang and DCS, but they get very little coverage,
> apart from the occasional mention of the Hummel Bird or the Teenie Two
> by VW aficionados (I do like the Mini Coupe, though). Just looking at
> the price, the plans can't be as detailed as others. CX-4, L5, L6 etc.
> I've never heard of.
>
> So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
> aircraft) and can recommend a set?
>
> Oliver
Try the Sonerai from Great Plains AC. Plans are /were $125.00
and $13K to $15K finished!
Rocky
Sonerai SII LTS

[Brian Whatcott]

Orval Fairbairn wrote:

> NEVER countersink .032 aluminum in hopes of a good structure. ALWAYS
> dimple anything up to .040 for AN-3 rivets.
>

:-)

I could almost see the dollar bills floating by, as I read that!

Brian W

[Orval Fairbairn[_2_]]

In article >,
brian whatcott > wrote:

> Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>
> > NEVER countersink .032 aluminum in hopes of a good structure. ALWAYS
> > dimple anything up to .040 for AN-3 rivets.
> >
>
> :-)
>
> I could almost see the dollar bills floating by, as I read that!
>
> Brian W

Yes. Although the depth of AN3-426 rivet heads is exactly 0.032 in., it
leaves zero errors in countersinking. Also, it will not take the shear
stresses that a dimpled skin will take.

A friend of mine bought an RV-4 a number of years ago. As he liked to
put it, "There were only four things wrong with it: Structure, Controls,
Systems and Electrical."

One of the problems was that the original builder had countersunk,
rather than dimpled, all of the rivets in the fuel tanks.

Result: lots of leaks. I ended up shepherding him through building a
pair of brand-new wet cell tanks.

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

[Scott[_7_]]

Rocky wrote:
> Oliver Arend wrote:
>> I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction by
>> getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
>> either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the full
>> education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
>> I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up with
>> everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for. My
>> choice is metal since I'm more confident with this (my skills)+
>> (material) combination than with others. Wading through the Kitplanes
>> directories I have a couple of candidates:
>>
>> Hummel Bird, UltraCruiser
>> Mustang Aero Midget, Mustang II
>> Sonex
>> Zodiac CH 601, 650, XL
>> DCS Mini Coupe, Teenie Two
>> Thorp T-18
>> Emile Lucas L5, L6, L8, L11/12
>> Pazmany PL-1, PL-2, PL-4
>> Thatcher CX-4
>> (oh yeah, then there is also the Ryan ST-R replica, but that's
>> probably too much to ask for right now)
>>
>> Judging from my very limited experience, the Sonex plans seem to be
>> very detailed and complete, but also steep in price ($600 according to
>> Kitplanes). Zodiacs, T-18s, and Pazmany designs seem to be very
>> popular, so the plans can't be all that bad? On the lower end, there
>> are the Hummel, Mustang and DCS, but they get very little coverage,
>> apart from the occasional mention of the Hummel Bird or the Teenie Two
>> by VW aficionados (I do like the Mini Coupe, though). Just looking at
>> the price, the plans can't be as detailed as others. CX-4, L5, L6 etc.
>> I've never heard of.
>>
>> So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
>> aircraft) and can recommend a set?
>>
>> Oliver
> Try the Sonerai from Great Plains AC. Plans are /were $125.00
> and $13K to $15K finished!
> Rocky
> Sonerai SII LTS

I thought the Sonerai was tube and fabric and thus, probably a wood wing?

[Anyolmouse]

"Scott" > wrote in message
.. .
> Rocky wrote:
> > Oliver Arend wrote:
> >> I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction
by
> >> getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
> >> either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the
full
> >> education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
> >> I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up
with
> >> everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for. My
> >> choice is metal since I'm more confident with this (my skills)+
> >> (material) combination than with others. Wading through the
Kitplanes
> >> directories I have a couple of candidates:
> >>
> >> Hummel Bird, UltraCruiser
> >> Mustang Aero Midget, Mustang II
> >> Sonex
> >> Zodiac CH 601, 650, XL
> >> DCS Mini Coupe, Teenie Two
> >> Thorp T-18
> >> Emile Lucas L5, L6, L8, L11/12
> >> Pazmany PL-1, PL-2, PL-4
> >> Thatcher CX-4
> >> (oh yeah, then there is also the Ryan ST-R replica, but that's
> >> probably too much to ask for right now)
> >>
> >> Judging from my very limited experience, the Sonex plans seem to be
> >> very detailed and complete, but also steep in price ($600 according
to
> >> Kitplanes). Zodiacs, T-18s, and Pazmany designs seem to be very
> >> popular, so the plans can't be all that bad? On the lower end,
there
> >> are the Hummel, Mustang and DCS, but they get very little coverage,
> >> apart from the occasional mention of the Hummel Bird or the Teenie
Two
> >> by VW aficionados (I do like the Mini Coupe, though). Just looking
at
> >> the price, the plans can't be as detailed as others. CX-4, L5, L6
etc.
> >> I've never heard of.
> >>
> >> So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
> >> aircraft) and can recommend a set?
> >>
> >> Oliver
> > Try the Sonerai from Great Plains AC. Plans are /were $125.00
> > and $13K to $15K finished!
> > Rocky
> > Sonerai SII LTS
>
> I thought the Sonerai was tube and fabric and thus, probably a wood
wing?
>
The Sonerai's are tube and fabric fuselage with metal wings.
http://www.greatplainsas.com/sonerai.html He probably confused it with
the Sonex http://www.sonexaircraft.com/aircraft/sonex.html

--
A man is known by the company he keeps- Unknown

Anyolmouse

[Rocky]

Scott wrote:
> Rocky wrote:
>
>> Oliver Arend wrote:
>>
>>> I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction by
>>> getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
>>> either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the full
>>> education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
>>> I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up with
>>> everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for. My
>>> choice is metal since I'm more confident with this (my skills)+
>>> (material) combination than with others. Wading through the Kitplanes
>>> directories I have a couple of candidates:
>>>
>>> Hummel Bird, UltraCruiser
>>> Mustang Aero Midget, Mustang II
>>> Sonex
>>> Zodiac CH 601, 650, XL
>>> DCS Mini Coupe, Teenie Two
>>> Thorp T-18
>>> Emile Lucas L5, L6, L8, L11/12
>>> Pazmany PL-1, PL-2, PL-4
>>> Thatcher CX-4
>>> (oh yeah, then there is also the Ryan ST-R replica, but that's
>>> probably too much to ask for right now)
>>>
>>> Judging from my very limited experience, the Sonex plans seem to be
>>> very detailed and complete, but also steep in price ($600 according to
>>> Kitplanes). Zodiacs, T-18s, and Pazmany designs seem to be very
>>> popular, so the plans can't be all that bad? On the lower end, there
>>> are the Hummel, Mustang and DCS, but they get very little coverage,
>>> apart from the occasional mention of the Hummel Bird or the Teenie Two
>>> by VW aficionados (I do like the Mini Coupe, though). Just looking at
>>> the price, the plans can't be as detailed as others. CX-4, L5, L6 etc.
>>> I've never heard of.
>>>
>>> So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
>>> aircraft) and can recommend a set?
>>>
>>> Oliver
>>
>> Try the Sonerai from Great Plains AC. Plans are /were $125.00
>> and $13K to $15K finished!
>> Rocky
>> Sonerai SII LTS
>
>
> I thought the Sonerai was tube and fabric and thus, probably a wood wing?
>
The fuse is tube and fabric but the wing is 100% aluminum, spar - ribs
and skin
Rocky

[Orval Fairbairn[_2_]]

In article
>,
Oliver Arend > wrote:

> Thanks for the input, guys, the RV-9 preview plans and the Tony
> Bingelis book arrived in the mail recently and I've got lots of
> "looking at" (and drooling over, sometimes) to do.
>
> For a first plane, I might opt for a small, inexpensive one-seater
> kit, though. We'll see.
>
> Oliver

Advice: If you are going to go to the effort of building a plane, build
one that fulfills your desired mission. You cannot take a passenger
along in a single-seater.

It is really hard to beat Van's planes and kits. He has improved
everything he has produced in the last 30 years.

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

[Oliver Arend]

Thanks for the input, guys, the RV-9 preview plans and the Tony
Bingelis book arrived in the mail recently and I've got lots of
"looking at" (and drooling over, sometimes) to do.

For a first plane, I might opt for a small, inexpensive one-seater
kit, though. We'll see.

Oliver

[Tom De Moor]

In article <o_r_fairbairn-ABEA2C.14252806112009@70-3-168-
216.pools.spcsdns.net>, says...
>
> In article
> >,
> Oliver Arend > wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the input, guys, the RV-9 preview plans and the Tony
> > Bingelis book arrived in the mail recently and I've got lots of
> > "looking at" (and drooling over, sometimes) to do.
> >
> > For a first plane, I might opt for a small, inexpensive one-seater
> > kit, though. We'll see.
> >
> > Oliver
>
> Advice: If you are going to go to the effort of building a plane, build
> one that fulfills your desired mission. You cannot take a passenger
> along in a single-seater.
>
> It is really hard to beat Van's planes and kits. He has improved
> everything he has produced in the last 30 years.



If you wanna build, build.

If you wanna fly, buy.




The numbers of flying kitplanes in the 'for sale'-departement are just
enormous, some of them are even cheaper than the components.

Can't really comprehend why somebody puts 10 years of work, 80 kUS$, a
broken marriage in a kitplane, then flies it for about 100 hours and
goes on to sell it for 50 kUS$... in order to buy a new kit.

I bought mine: metal, low-wing, O-200 2-seater. I kinda like it :-)

Tom -wants to fly- De Moor

[Jim Logajan]

Tom De Moor > wrote:
> If you wanna build, build.
>
> If you wanna fly, buy.

If you wanna design ... then what? (The opine needs to rhyme.)

(From the OP: "I'm looking into educating myself ... then to
either design my own plane....")

> The numbers of flying kitplanes in the 'for sale'-departement are just
> enormous, some of them are even cheaper than the components.

Why do you suppose they are cheaper? ;-)

> Can't really comprehend why somebody puts 10 years of work, 80 kUS$, a
> broken marriage in a kitplane, then flies it for about 100 hours and
> goes on to sell it for 50 kUS$... in order to buy a new kit.

If that were the norm, it would indeed be a psychological puzzler. But of
course that combo isn't anywhere near the norm.

> I bought mine: metal, low-wing, O-200 2-seater. I kinda like it :-)

Good for you! Nothing like owning - except maybe building. :-)

[Tom De Moor]

In article >,
says...
>
> Tom De Moor > wrote:
> > If you wanna build, build.
> >
> > If you wanna fly, buy.
>
> If you wanna design ... then what? (The opine needs to rhyme.)
>
> (From the OP: "I'm looking into educating myself ... then to
> either design my own plane....")
>
> > The numbers of flying kitplanes in the 'for sale'-departement are just
> > enormous, some of them are even cheaper than the components.


Didn't catch the design-desire. Designing your own would indeed be the
sole reason why I could ever imagine building a plane.

>
> Why do you suppose they are cheaper? ;-)

Do not know: some of the experimentals -mine too- sport avionics with a
price tag that would make some grown-ups weep. Yett these items did not
influence the selling price by a lot.

With homebuilts there are indeed also buckets but then some homebuilts
are made to standards where Piper and other Cessna can only dream about.

I was rather hesitant into buying an 'experimental'. So I looked for
certified airplanes: I found situations on certified airplanes that
maked the most fraudulent used car dealers look like angels.

On the first (certified) plane I bought, I had to send a lawyer with a
big stick in (the seller didn't twitch an eyelid), shortly there after
followed by the CAA of the land in question. The last move proved the
right one: got my money back and they retook the plane with all its
defects.

>
> > Can't really comprehend why somebody puts 10 years of work, 80 kUS$, a
> > broken marriage in a kitplane, then flies it for about 100 hours and
> > goes on to sell it for 50 kUS$... in order to buy a new kit.
>
> If that were the norm, it would indeed be a psychological puzzler. But of
> course that combo isn't anywhere near the norm.

I've been actively looking for the last year and for some reason the
planes on my 'go and check'-list turned out to be in that categorie.
>
> > I bought mine: metal, low-wing, O-200 2-seater. I kinda like it :-)
>
> Good for you! Nothing like owning - except maybe building. :-)

Definitely not building. Designing and then building: maybe but you'll
sure spend far more time and money. But then there are always exceptions
proving the opposite.

It's like the old days: we used to make racing cars. When we got it
right (2-3 seasons after commencing) our cars were indeed better than
the competition as we eyed the details much more. But it turned out that
we were working at around 5 US$ per hr... and winning races didn't earn
the differance :-)

It may be a bit crude but if some-one is thinking that building a plane
will land him a cheaper plane than buying one, he is probably fooling
himself.

Just my 2 (euro)cents, a pity that the Atlantic Ocean is so wide as for
the moment US-pricing seems so sweet to us ;-)

Tom De Moor

[rv7charlie]

On Oct 14, 9:54*am, Jim Logajan > wrote:
> Oliver Arend > wrote:
> > I'm looking into educating myself about metal aircraft construction by
> > getting a set of plans for a low-wing airplane. The idea is then to
> > either design my own plane (no, looking at the plans is not the full
> > education, there's also a master's degree in aerospace engineering,
> > I'm more looking for detail solutions so I won't have to come up with
> > everything by myself) or just build the one I got the plans for.
> [...]
> > So my question is, who has experience with these plans(-built
> > aircraft) and can recommend a set?
>
> You listed a lot of good options that I elided - just to make it harder:
>
> A couple years back, I ordered the preview plans for Vans RV-9A for $55.
> They are still that price (RV-3 is $45.) As far as I know, the only
> difference between Van's Aircraft preview plans and the final set is that
> the preview plan drawings are reduced in size by half (I think) - but they
> are all there and quite readable. Also, you get the complete build
> instructions plus other material. It's a fabulous deal education-wise even
> if you design or build something else.

A correction is needed on the Van's plans. While the earlier kits can
be built from scratch using the plans, the newer models are intended
to be sold only as kits. The plans/manual is basically an assembly
manual. Parts that must be fabricated by the builder have full
construction details, but parts supplied in the kit ready to assemble
are not detailed on the plans with enough info to scratch build the
parts.

Having said that, it's unlikely that you will find a better plane to
own & fly once it's built.

Charlie
(somewhat biased; flying a -4 & building a -7)