want to design/built my own plane

[Tater Schuld]

been to oshkosh for the past 4 years and would like my own airplane.

until i saw the sticker prices.

then I saw the one could build their own planes cheaper.

after looking at the available price designs, I started thinking "how int
the world would a person at minimum wage afford a plane?"

found the affordaplane and legal eagle.

went back to a spruce aircraft catalog and looked in there, saw plans for
the breezy......

now the breezy appeals to me. it looks possible to modify, easy to build,
and can be used with a number of different airfoils (whol wind assy's
actually)

anyone build one?

[Morgans]

"Tater Schuld" > wrote in message
...
> been to oshkosh for the past 4 years and would like my own airplane.
>
> until i saw the sticker prices.
>
> then I saw the one could build their own planes cheaper.
>
> after looking at the available price designs, I started thinking "how int
> the world would a person at minimum wage afford a plane?"

You can't. Flying is for smart people. Smart people get more education, so
they can get above minimum wage jobs.

On the troll-o-meter, this one isn't even a three.
--
Jim in NC

[Tater Schuld]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>> after looking at the available price designs, I started thinking "how int
>> the world would a person at minimum wage afford a plane?"
>
> You can't. Flying is for smart people. Smart people get more education,
> so they can get above minimum wage jobs.

seems kind of self defeating then doesn't it? avaiation groups want more
people in their groups, but price planes in the tens to hundreds of
thousands of dollar categories.

> On the troll-o-meter, this one isn't even a three.

troll? Ha.

Tater Schuld
A.S. of E.E.
Member of EAA
Member of NAR (not nra)
President of MARS (mars-rocketry.com)

[xSoldier]

"Tater Schuld" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Morgans" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> after looking at the available price designs, I started thinking "how
int
> >> the world would a person at minimum wage afford a plane?"
> >
> > You can't. Flying is for smart people. Smart people get more
education,
> > so they can get above minimum wage jobs.
>
> seems kind of self defeating then doesn't it? avaiation groups want more
> people in their groups, but price planes in the tens to hundreds of
> thousands of dollar categories.

It sounds like you think they just pull the price tag outa their ass.
Besides, "Aviation Groups" don't control the "dollar categories". I think
your mommy is calling you.

[Morgans]

Careful how you trim posts, buttwipe. I did not write the following, you
did.
>>
>> You can't. Flying is for smart people. Smart people get more education,
>> so they can get above minimum wage jobs.

--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Morgans" > wrote

OOps. I trimmed the wrong stuff. What I meant to say was that I did not
write the following attributed to me:

>> after looking at the available price designs, I started thinking "how int
>> the world would a person at minimum wage afford a plane?"
--
Jim in NC

[Tater Schuld]

such a useful and helpful crowd here...full of well thought out comments

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Careful how you trim posts, buttwipe. I did not write the following, you
> did.
>>>
>>> You can't. Flying is for smart people. Smart people get more
>>> education, so they can get above minimum wage jobs.
>
> --
> Jim in NC

[Lou]

I agree, designing it won't be safe for any beginner.
On the other hand, start looking for a kr-1 that has been started. I
think I saw
one on barnstormers for $2500. You will have more than that in
materials anyway.

[[email protected]]

Morgans wrote:
> "Morgans" > wrote
>
> OOps. I trimmed the wrong stuff. What I meant to say was that I did not
> write the following attributed to me:
>
> >> after looking at the available price designs, I started thinking "how int
> >> the world would a person at minimum wage afford a plane?"
> --
> Jim in NC

If you go back and read xSoldier's article in the original (e.g.
correct)
UseNet format:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.homebuilt/msg/33875d21d27ea297?dmode=source

It is clear that was not attributed to you. Perhaps your newsreader is
configured
incorrectly.

The proper attribution was cut off the top, but the '> >>' makes it
clear to a human reader that the statement was from a previous
article.

--

FF

[[email protected]]

Flying cheap - CAN - be done. Check out the Yahoo group FLY5K. If
cheap is the primary goal, I'd forget designing your own. It just
takes a lot more time than you think it will - especially when you
start thinking about something that has more performance than the
average ultralight. Trust me. Been there, done that. I like the
designing as much as building so for me it works out. But if you want
to actually fly the thing use the cookie cutter method.

My brother has a nice Tailwind project going right now and It looks
like it may actually get in the air for under $5K if he doesn't get
sidetracked by buying back our old Aeronca. He ran into some really
good deals and spends lots of time looking at eBay. The hurricanes in
Florida helped some to. Got a 600hr O-320, delivered, for $1300 off
Barnstormers. The add had been up for only 20 minutes when he called
and said "I'll take it". Sometimes you just have to be in the right
place at the right time.............with the cash.

So don't give up. Just make a reasonable plan, gather up what cash you
can, and start shopping. Buying anothers abandonded project can pay
off as well - if the workmanship was good. My brother found his
Tailwind fuselage, mostly finished, for just a bit more than the cost
of the steel. 'course it cost me a fender on my truck, a tire, and an
alignment............but thats another story.
=======================
Leon McAtee
Need to take my advice more often

[Morgans]

> wrote

> The proper attribution was cut off the top, but the '> >>' makes it
> clear to a human reader that the statement was from a previous
> article.

We disagree on that point. If it says "Morgans wrote:" then it has my
words, it is attributed to me. The number of ">>>'s" makes it possible for
a knowledgeable reader to tell it was not me, but it may not be clear for
the inexperienced "newsgroupie." <g>

It is still incorrect practice, and I might have let it go, had the
statement been less of an abomination, or the writer a less of a moron. As
it was, (both) I felt the need to object, and I did.

Clear enough? See, we can disagree, here in the groups, without it
resulting in insults and name-calling. :-)
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Tater Schuld" > wrote in message
...
> such a useful and helpful crowd here...full of well thought out comments

Try posting a well thought out post. You might be surprised how much help
this group can be.
--
Jim in NC

[wright1902glider]

You could always build something with remarkable historic and astethic
(sp?) apeal, then put it on the airshow circut and make it pay for
itself... wait, that's my gig. Get your own.


Saw a breezy way back in '74, when i was, well, um I was little.
Helluva lot of welding...

Harry



Morgans wrote:
> "Tater Schuld" > wrote in message
> ...
> > such a useful and helpful crowd here...full of well thought out comments
>
> Try posting a well thought out post. You might be surprised how much help
> this group can be.
> --
> Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"wright1902glider" > wrote

> Saw a breezy way back in '74, when i was, well, um I was little.
> Helluva lot of welding...
\\
Sure looks that way, doesn't it? I wonder what a bare fuselage weighs? Oh,
that's right, they all are bare! And calling it a fuselage, that's, well,
questionable. ;-)

It looks to my eye, that it would be heavy. I'm sure most of it is really
thin tube, though.
--
Jim in NC

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Tater Schuld" > wrote in message
...
> been to oshkosh for the past 4 years and would like my own airplane.
>
> until i saw the sticker prices.
>
> then I saw the one could build their own planes cheaper.
>
> after looking at the available price designs, I started thinking "how int
> the world would a person at minimum wage afford a plane?"
>
> found the affordaplane and legal eagle.
>
> went back to a spruce aircraft catalog and looked in there, saw plans for
> the breezy......
>
> now the breezy appeals to me. it looks possible to modify, easy to build,
> and can be used with a number of different airfoils (whol wind assy's
> actually)
>
> anyone build one?

Well, a lot depends on what you want to do. If you want to fly, probably the
best thing is to find something to buy. If you want to build for the sake of
building, then for sure, build. If you enjoy the design process, design. But
from the sound of your post, it sounds like your objective is to fly at a
lower cost.

One way to save money would be to look for something used - could be a used
breezy if that't what you really want. A runout Cessna 150 that needs some
work might be the ticket if you can find an aircraft mechanic that will sign
off on your work. Used homebuilts ususally go for less than certified
aircraft. Assuming that your objective is to save money, of course.

Another "middle" option is to find a partially done "project" to save time
and money. There are a lot of airplanes that are started and never
finished... :-( You can often find projects that are 90% done (leaving only
50% left to do.) for not much more than the cost of materials.

You can save money by building, but you will have to work at it. A "fast
build" kit with everything done for you won't save much over buying
something used.

Other lower cost options include partners, renting or joining a club - many
can be a lot more reasonable than single ownership. You can find lower
performance gliders for a lot less than a new car if you really want to own
your own. Glider clubs can be even more economical - downright cheap
compared to most other options. Assuming, of course, that your primary
objective is flying - not building.

If you want't to fly on minimum wage, well, the sad fact is that you are
going to have to get creative. Real creative.

The trick is to decide what you really want to do. Then go for it.

Good Luck.

--
Geoff
the sea hawk at wow way d0t com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
Spell checking is left as an excercise for the reader.

[[email protected]]

Damn you are a jerk, Jim in NC. Do you have a J.D from a top tier
school and four offices making loot like it was being printed there? I
do. You got a Hawker 800. I do. You don't deserve to fly. Flying is for
people with more education than you have!

[Morgans]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Damn you are a jerk, Jim in NC. Do you have a J.D from a top tier
> school and four offices making loot like it was being printed there? I
> do. You got a Hawker 800. I do. You don't deserve to fly. Flying is for
> people with more education than you have!

I don't know what your problem is with me, but you sure showed your butt
with this post.

I was not addressing you; you are not part of this poster coming in showing
his ignorance, like the troll that he is. I do not suffer fools gladly.
Are you one of the fools; a 2nd rate troll?

As far as your education, and your money, and your plane that you have? So
what? Am I supposed to be impressed? Not.

Next time you want to come and post, argue specifics. I don't even know
what post you are replying to, since you included none of the post that got
your panties in a wad. You surely are not worth the effort to go back and
figure it out.

So I'm a jerk? Why? I am so uneducated that I don't deserve to fly? What
leads you to that conclusion?

Wow. I really didn't think rational people reacted to me so badly.
--
Jim in NC

[[email protected]]

Your post to the guy looking for a cheap plane. " You can't. Flying is
for smart people. Smart people get more education, so
they can get above minimum wage jobs. "

[Morgans]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> Your post to the guy looking for a cheap plane. " You can't. Flying is
> for smart people. Smart people get more education, so
> they can get above minimum wage jobs. "

OK, fair enough. I'll play.

Yep, I was a smart ass. Have you been in this group very long? There are a
lot of kids who get on mommy's computer, and post, without ever using their
brain, and I do treat them rudely.

So do a lot of other people. I'll not speak for other people, but I for one
am tired of them. When I first started on this group, I read for 6 months,
before I ever made my first post. Others should read and learn, then post.

Lets look at what he posted, and more importantly, how he posted.

OP > been to oshkosh for the past 4 years and would like my own airplane.
OP > until i saw the sticker prices.


Note, that there is no subject in the sentence, no commas, no capital
letters. It looks like a kid, without even looking at the content. Let's
look at that.

So he has been to Osh for the past 4 years, and is just now is discovering
that airplanes are expensive? Wake up and smell the coffee. Yeah, every
kid wants his own plane. How about learning to fly one, or saving up for
one? Get realistic, huh? For that matter, I doubt that he has been to OSH,
unless he lives there, and rode his bike over.

How about that subject, too? He "wants to design/build his own plane"

There is a good thought. Someone who no doubt has never been a pilot, has
been around airplanes so little, that he does not even know that they are
expensive, and he wants to design his own plane. He obviously needs a big
reality check.


OP > then I saw the one could build their own planes cheaper.

Still going on like he is on instant messenger, with no sentence structure,
no capitals, words that don't even make sense, in context.

So now he has the bright idea that he can get the bottom line down, by
building his own. There is another realistic thought. With his lack of
experience, he does not have a clue what would be involved. Building is
cheap? Ha!

OP > after looking at the available price designs, I started thinking "how
int
OP > the world would a person at minimum wage afford a plane?"

Now he does more I.M. writing crap, with an easy to catch typo, and lack of
commas.
Now, let's look at content. He sees the prices, and finds even homebuilt
designs are too much money, not realizing that the price of the kit is only
half of the cost.

Let's be honest. How many people in GA are flying, earning minimum wages?
None? Not many, if any. This is an expensive hobby. Anyone with half of a
brain would quickly figure that out. Not *our* rocket scientist. I
suggested that he was not smart and should get education to get a job above
minimum wage. Good advise, even for people not interested in flying.
People living on minimum wage, are living below the poverty line. There is
no money left for RC planes, and *no* chance of flying full scale, and less
chance of owning.

OP > found the affordaplane and legal eagle.

The affordaplane is vaporware, and the Legal Eagle is the most realistic
thing he mentioned.

OP > went back to a spruce aircraft catalog and looked in there, saw plans
for
OP > the breezy......

OP > now the breezy appeals to me. it looks possible to modify, easy to
build,
OP > and can be used with a number of different airfoils (whol wind assy's
OP > actually)

More I.M. crap. "whol wind assy's" ???? Modify the Breezy, it looks easy
to do, huh?
Easy to build? Not! Perhaps the most welding to do, of any kit or plans
built airplane. Does he have a shop? Does he know how to gas weld? Does
he have enough money to even buy the tube? Does he realize the fact that
it will take a real airplane engine, that will cost more than the whole
Legal Eagle? Most likely, no to all of the questions.

Now he suggests using different airfoils, different wings. A person of his
limited knowledge would be a good candidate for the Darwin Award, if they
were to try messing around with that set of variables.

OP > anyone build one?

First good question he has asked, but still, he has not found the shift key.

So yes, I am guilty of being a smarts, and of being rude. I am only slightly
sorry for that.

I hope I sent him a wakeup call, to 1) converse (type) like an adult on an
adult group 2) be realistic about your goals, and what it will take to
achieve them 3) be aware of your abilities, and operate within your
abilities 4) learn to listen and be patient, while learning a new subject
area, so you do not embarrass yourself when you open your mouth 5) while in
newsgroups, it is best to not appear as though you are a troll, because if
not me, someone will flame you for it 6) grow a thick skin in newsgroups,
or you will not last very long.

There it is. That is about all I can say about the subject.

Have a nice day.
--
Jim in NC

[[email protected]]

"Plane"? I have 19 . Anytime you want to take a look or get a ride in a
Pitts, Sukhoi or an Extra the # is 206 350 ACRO.

[Chris Wells]

Want to fly cheap, and have more fun than the "real" pilots?

Hang glide.

1-800-HANG-GLIDE

[Richard Lamb]

Chris Wells wrote:

> Want to fly cheap, and have more fun than the "real" pilots?
>
> Hang glide.
>
> 1-800-HANG-GLIDE
>
>

on that thought...

Anybody have plans for the old Icarus hang glider
that they might part with?

The tail-less swept wing biplane ?

Or better yet, a complete airframe?


Richard

[Tim Ward]

"Richard Lamb" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Chris Wells wrote:
>
> > Want to fly cheap, and have more fun than the "real" pilots?
> >
> > Hang glide.
> >
> > 1-800-HANG-GLIDE
> >
> >
>
> on that thought...
>
> Anybody have plans for the old Icarus hang glider
> that they might part with?
>
> The tail-less swept wing biplane ?
>
> Or better yet, a complete airframe?
>
>
> Richard

IIRC, the Easy Riser kit just went back into production. You might search
the 'Oz Report'. I think that's where I saw it.

Realistically, buying a modern single-surface flex wing would probably be a
better choice for someone who wants to fly cheap and easy. Better
performance, more convenient, and instruction is available.

Tim Ward

[Chris Wells]

The Easy Riser is indeed in production. John Moody is taking care of business for Larry Mauro. His email is

I'm thinking of getting one myself. No powerplant or undercarriage options are available yet, but help is readily available. If I get an Easy Riser I'll definitely have both.

[Tater Schuld]

"Chris Wells" > wrote in message
...
>
> Want to fly cheap, and have more fun than the "real" pilots?
>
> Hang glide.
>
> 1-800-HANG-GLIDE
> --
> Chris Wells

hmmm, aside from not having anyplace to launch. how are these cheaper?

hang gliders $3-5K
affordaplane $3-5K
legal Eagle $2300 plus vw engine and prop

[Percival L Mincer]

Have you seen the Legal Eagle and Double Eagle plans? Literally the
WORSE I have ever seen. They look like Jethro Bodine did them in crayon
and the spelling is WORSE. They are on copy paper. Anybody want a set,
I traded a guy a Montecristo #4 cigar for the plans and you are welcome
to them.

[Morgans]

"Tater Schuld" > wrote

> hmmm, aside from not having anyplace to launch. how are these cheaper?
>
> affordaplane $3-5K

Ph, tader shouldn't, how many of those are flying? How much was the final
cost, and what was the performance?
--
Jim in NC

[Tater Schuld]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tater Schuld" > wrote
>
>> hmmm, aside from not having anyplace to launch. how are these cheaper?
>>
>> affordaplane $3-5K
>
> Ph, tader shouldn't, how many of those are flying? How much was the final
> cost, and what was the performance?
> --
> Jim in NC

no idea, hence the original reason for this thread.

[Tater Schuld]

"Percival L Mincer" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Have you seen the Legal Eagle and Double Eagle plans? Literally the
> WORSE I have ever seen. They look like Jethro Bodine did them in crayon
> and the spelling is WORSE. They are on copy paper. Anybody want a set,
> I traded a guy a Montecristo #4 cigar for the plans and you are welcome
> to them.

yes I am interested, soley to see what the plans are like. bad plans usualy
need a good engineer to fix them.

I sent you a private email. reply with what you want for shipping and how
you want payment. I think i can get a few #4 cigars but no idea how USPS
will treat them

[Tim Ward]

"Tater Schuld" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Chris Wells" > wrote in
message
> ...
> >
> > Want to fly cheap, and have more fun than the "real" pilots?
> >
> > Hang glide.
> >
> > 1-800-HANG-GLIDE
> > --
> > Chris Wells
>
> hmmm, aside from not having anyplace to launch. how are these cheaper?
>
> hang gliders $3-5K
> affordaplane $3-5K
> legal Eagle $2300 plus vw engine and prop

Well, it's a little-known secret, but I guess I can tell you...
You don't have to buy a new hang glider.
A nice single-surface glider like a Falcon can be had for a thousand to
fifteen hundred bucks, used.
For boating around and having a good time, they're hard to beat.

[Tater Schuld]

"Tim Ward" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tater Schuld" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Chris Wells" > wrote in
> message
>> ...
>> >
>> > Want to fly cheap, and have more fun than the "real" pilots?
>> >
>> > Hang glide.
>> >
>> > 1-800-HANG-GLIDE
>> > --
>> > Chris Wells
>>
>> hmmm, aside from not having anyplace to launch. how are these cheaper?
>>
>> hang gliders $3-5K
>> affordaplane $3-5K
>> legal Eagle $2300 plus vw engine and prop
>
> Well, it's a little-known secret, but I guess I can tell you...
> You don't have to buy a new hang glider.
prices for plane kits were NEW
prices listed for hang gliders were USED

or at least from the classified website i looked at.

[Rob S.]

In article t>, Richard Lamb > wrote:

>
>on that thought...
>
>Anybody have plans for the old Icarus hang glider
>that they might part with?
>
>The tail-less swept wing biplane ?
>
>Or better yet, a complete airframe?
>
>
>Richard

We actually have an old Icarus II kit with plans up in the loft. Not sure we
want to part with the kit, but I might be convinced to run a copy of the
plans.

Rob Sinclair
Sport Flight Aviation
www.sport-flight.com

[Checkursix]

Yeah, they are rough. Not CAD. Definitely a "builder's" plan-set. A lot has
to be researched and filled in, but you learn! You want a good, honest
flying, true FAR 103 Ultralight, here's the plane! You LEARN to build with
this and for a very small cost.

Just remember that when you point one finger, you have three more pointing
back at yourself! Make sure you know of which you speak!


Bob Severance - LEU #64H
"Percival L Mincer" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Have you seen the Legal Eagle and Double Eagle plans? Literally the
> WORSE I have ever seen. They look like Jethro Bodine did them in crayon
> and the spelling is WORSE. They are on copy paper. Anybody want a set,
> I traded a guy a Montecristo #4 cigar for the plans and you are welcome
> to them.
>

[wright1902glider]

As far as hang-gliding goes, you can do it pretty cheap. An
interductory weekend package at a eastern school like Lookout Mountain
or Kitty Hawk Kites should still be under $500 and that'll get you a
hang-1 rating. Not much, but enough to foot-launch from a 60-ft hill
and fly for 30 seconds or more. Quite a thrill to this pilot. I'm
still a proud hang-1. Working up to a hang-2 rating will set you back
about another $500, but then you can mountain launch from a 1/4 mile
up, and even a sled-ride will last 5 minutes at Lookout Mountain. Once
you learn to thermal, its up to the weather (hehe, pun!)

As far as a wing goes, look for a good used training ship from one of
the schools. LMFP and KHK usually sell theirs off every year and you
stand a good chance of buying the wing that you've been learning on,
which will be appro. for a beginner's skill level, for $1200-$1500.
You'll still need a harness, helmet, and a few other goodies, but I
think it could be done for under $2500. So that's $3500 total, for
training, gear, and a wing. Not bad compared to the $7k my local flight
school is asking to teach me to drive a spam-can.

Beyond that, yes new gliders average $3-5k for something nice like a
Wills Wing U2 or a topless ATOS. But if you're that into hang-gliding
by then, you're likely to stick with it just b/c you enjoy it as
another form of flying.

[Joe Brophy]

In it's day IMO the Icarus IIb was one of the best hang gliders
available, the Seagull V was a close second. fond remembrances....
Joe.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:51:45 GMT, (Rob S.)
wrote:

>In article t>, Richard Lamb > wrote:
>
>>
>>on that thought...
>>
>>Anybody have plans for the old Icarus hang glider
>>that they might part with?
>>
>>The tail-less swept wing biplane ?
>>
>>Or better yet, a complete airframe?
>>
>>
>>Richard
>
>We actually have an old Icarus II kit with plans up in the loft. Not sure we
>want to part with the kit, but I might be convinced to run a copy of the
>plans.
>
>Rob Sinclair
>Sport Flight Aviation
>www.sport-flight.com

[ChuckSlusarczyk]

In article >, Joe Brophy says...
>
>In it's day IMO the Icarus IIb was one of the best hang gliders
>available, the Seagull V was a close second. fond remembrances....
>Joe.


I had an IcarusII and later I built an Easy Riser which I eventually powered.
The riser was a bit better especially in a stall due to it's larger diameter
LE.But they were very similar in performance.There wasn't a kite type Hang
glider that to come close to the performance. Seagull V was a real good floater
,you could soar in light winds that wouldn't support other rigs. They did lack
penetration in stiff winds though. But still fun :-)

Chuck (Chuck's Glider Supplies) S

[Michael Pilla]

"ChuckSlusarczyk" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Joe Brophy
> says...
>>
>>In it's day IMO the Icarus IIb was one of the best hang gliders
>>available, the Seagull V was a close second. fond remembrances....
>>Joe.
>
>
> I had an IcarusII and later I built an Easy Riser which I eventually
> powered.
> The riser was a bit better especially in a stall due to it's larger
> diameter
> LE.But they were very similar in performance.There wasn't a kite type Hang
> glider that to come close to the performance. Seagull V was a real good
> floater
> ,you could soar in light winds that wouldn't support other rigs. They did
> lack
> penetration in stiff winds though. But still fun :-)
>
> Chuck (Chuck's Glider Supplies) S

I still have some of the first issues of "Low and Slow" somewhere in the
basement; skimmed them a few years ago and that definitely was a blast.

Whatever happened to the Icarus designer, Taras Kiceniuk?

Michael Pilla
(Manta wing at Coyote Hills Regional Park in Fremont - now that was a looong
time ago.)

[ChuckSlusarczyk]

In article >, Michael Pilla says...
>
>I still have some of the first issues of "Low and Slow" somewhere in the
>basement; skimmed them a few years ago and that definitely was a blast.
>
>Whatever happened to the Icarus designer, Taras Kiceniuk?
>
>Michael Pilla
>(Manta wing at Coyote Hills Regional Park in Fremont - now that was a looong
>time ago.)

Last time I talked to Taras he was working with Dolphins with the Navy somewhere
in Florida,but that was about 10 years ago.
I still have most of the issues of Low and Slow and a bunch of early Ground
Skimmers and Midwest Hang Glider News.
Boy that was a looong time ago ,we all were a bunch of young studs and now we're
just a bunch of ol' Pharts LOL!!

Chuck (Chuck's Glider Supplies) S

[Richard Lamb]

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote:
> In article >, Michael Pilla says...
>
>>I still have some of the first issues of "Low and Slow" somewhere in the
>>basement; skimmed them a few years ago and that definitely was a blast.
>>
>>Whatever happened to the Icarus designer, Taras Kiceniuk?
>>
>>Michael Pilla
>>(Manta wing at Coyote Hills Regional Park in Fremont - now that was a looong
>>time ago.)
>
>
> Last time I talked to Taras he was working with Dolphins with the Navy somewhere
> in Florida,but that was about 10 years ago.
> I still have most of the issues of Low and Slow and a bunch of early Ground
> Skimmers and Midwest Hang Glider News.
> Boy that was a looong time ago ,we all were a bunch of young studs and now we're
> just a bunch of ol' Pharts LOL!!
>
> Chuck (Chuck's Glider Supplies) S
>


Oh man, Chuck, you had to bring THAT up!

When I was young, all my joints were limber, except one.
Now all my joints are stiff, except one...


Richard

[wright1902glider]

< Stormy Petrel 1 at Panama City Beach, FL in 1997 (SP 1 was a very
close copy of Batso, complete with parallel bars)

<Stormy Petrel 2 & 2a at Piedmont Park in Atlanta (rebuilt versions of
SP1, but with a larger sail and trapese-bar control)

<Stormy Petrel 3 at Kill Devil Hills Beach (the hump) ...it flew, but
I didn't (SP3 was also a bamboo ship, but was wire-braced.)

I got the bug after reading Dan Poynter's book: Hang Gliding. A great
read, and lots of great photos from back in the day when I was 2, and
some people had WAYYYY more hair!

"Its only fun until you take off vertically without a run, climb to 20
ft, fly backwards for 40 yards, pass over a Rastafarian playing a
guitar, and make a vertical stand-up landing that completely shatters
your 3" dia bamboo keel." ...Me


yep, that's a true story.

[Rob S.]

In article >, ChuckSlusarczyk > wrote:
>In article >, Joe Brophy says...
>>
>>In it's day IMO the Icarus IIb was one of the best hang gliders
>>available, the Seagull V was a close second. fond remembrances....
>>Joe.
>
>
>I had an IcarusII and later I built an Easy Riser which I eventually powered.
>The riser was a bit better especially in a stall due to it's larger diameter
>LE.But they were very similar in performance.There wasn't a kite type Hang
>glider that to come close to the performance. Seagull V was a real good floater
>,you could soar in light winds that wouldn't support other rigs. They did lack
>penetration in stiff winds though. But still fun :-)
>
>Chuck (Chuck's Glider Supplies) S
>

Just a note to those that were interested in a copy of the Icarus II plans. I
haven't forgotten you, just have been too busy to dig them out yet.

Rob Sinclair
Sport Flight Aviation
www.sport-flight.com

[Richard Lamb]

Rob S. wrote:
> In article >, ChuckSlusarczyk > wrote:
>
>>In article >, Joe Brophy says...
>>
>>>In it's day IMO the Icarus IIb was one of the best hang gliders
>>>available, the Seagull V was a close second. fond remembrances....
>>>Joe.
>>
>>
>>I had an IcarusII and later I built an Easy Riser which I eventually powered.
>>The riser was a bit better especially in a stall due to it's larger diameter
>>LE.But they were very similar in performance.There wasn't a kite type Hang
>>glider that to come close to the performance. Seagull V was a real good floater
>>,you could soar in light winds that wouldn't support other rigs. They did lack
>>penetration in stiff winds though. But still fun :-)
>>
>>Chuck (Chuck's Glider Supplies) S
>>
>
>
> Just a note to those that were interested in a copy of the Icarus II plans. I
> haven't forgotten you, just have been too busy to dig them out yet.
>
> Rob Sinclair
> Sport Flight Aviation
> www.sport-flight.com

That's cool, Rob.
I'm a patient person.
(tap,tap,tap,tap,tap...)

Richard

[[email protected]]

If these are "real" plans, with the drawings for the prefabricated kit
parts, I'm still interested. Ihave a copy of the assembly directions
but one would have a real job building from them :-(
=======================
Leon McAtee