Newbie announcement

[nondem]

Hello all!

I'm a newbie...So I've got my asbestos suit on...

I've decided it's time for me to build an aircraft and maybe even fly
it
one day.
I've been eyeballing this and similar groups and the usenet trying to
make some good decisions on where to start.
I've got the complete plans to the Affordaplane and it looks like
something I am capable of and can afford.
None of the other planes I've looked at are anywhere near this easy or
cheap. Also, it's capabilities are within my specs (6' 2" tall 260lbs).
I also have not found any qualified detractors of this design(so far).

Does anyone here have a suggestion of a design that might be a better
fit? Does anyone have any thoughts on this build at all?

Thanks for the input - good/or bad.

-Randy

[Jim Logajan]

"nondem" > wrote:
> I've got the complete plans to the Affordaplane and it looks like
> something I am capable of and can afford.
> None of the other planes I've looked at are anywhere near this easy or
> cheap. Also, it's capabilities are within my specs (6' 2" tall 260lbs).
> I also have not found any qualified detractors of this design(so far).
>
> Does anyone here have a suggestion of a design that might be a better
> fit? Does anyone have any thoughts on this build at all?

There are many other possibilities that seem to fall in the same ballpark.
Here's a few other you may or may not have considered (mostly as kits; some
prices include engines but most don't):

http://fisherflying.com/fleet/TheAvenger/specs.php
http://www.jdtmini-max.com/1100rc.html
http://www.weedhopperusa.net/WEEDHOPPERUSA/Weedhopper_40_Model.html
http://www.quadcitychallenger.com/

[John T]

There's also the Headwind B.

www.stewartaircraft.com

Its a single seat, wood ribs, tube and fabric fuse, uses a 65hp
engine. I bought a set of plans for it just to have them! only $50.00
for the plans. Some sub-kits are available.

[nondem]

There are lots of similar comments on the thing. There are a few around
- I notice lots of them seem to be fitted(and flying) with much heavier
engines and accessories than the original plans call for. Makes me
think the plane is more robust than you might think considering it's
recommended engines and weights. I like the idea of the thing being
stronger than it has to be.
As far as I can tell it's the only no-weld,bolt together airplane that
doesn't require a finish carpenters skills and/or a big bucket of
money.

Financially - it looks like I'll be able to build the fuselage main
structure w/under $400 in materials. That includes using all AN quality
hardware. Being able to build the thing in $200-$300 increments fits
right in w/my situation.

I have found no information on any design flaws and all the owners I
can find references from are positive. There are ski and float versions
flying.
Can you(or anyone) find any real technical reasons for avoiding the
design?
I have the plans in hand and you can tell it's a one man show - but you
can also tell the guy did his homework and believes in the plane.

[anon]

You might not have found any "qualified" detractors, but a Google search
might yield some concerns. Why don't you look at something established
like the TEAM/Ison Himax/Minimax aircraft?

> I also have not found any qualified detractors of this design(so far).

[anon]

When you do that Google search, search newsgroups. It doesn't look
especially appealing.

I haven't glanced at their website in a couple of years, it doesn't look
too appealing to me.

There was one thing in their FAQ that made me giggle:

"What is the resale value of an Affordaplane?

Answer: We have had offers for the prototype, upwards of $6,000. But we
really don't know, because of all the ones that have been built and
flown, their owners don't want to let go of them! That's why you don't
see many A-Planes for sale in the public marketplace. Many of our
customers decide to build another one, so they can fly with their
friends and family! Many EAA chapters build two at once. "


I would be curious how many customers have built two of these planes and
what EAA chapters he's talking about.

It might have turned into a nice little plane, but I have a big problem
with a designer selling plans and kits before his prototype has flown,
let alone flown off its hours, let alone flown 100-500 hours.

Kinda reminds me of Dreamwings on budget.

[nondem]

anon wrote:
> You might not have found any "qualified" detractors, but a Google search
> might yield some concerns. Why don't you look at something established
> like the TEAM/Ison Himax/Minimax aircraft?
>
> > I also have not found any qualified detractors of this design(so far).

I did the obligatory google when I first found the design. The lack of
wide acceptance is of course a concern and part of the reason I'm
asking these questions.
The people who have actually built/flown the thing are very pleased
with it afaict. The minimax might be a future project for me as well,
but the entire affordaplane can be build for the cost of just the wings
of the minimax.
Also, I'm no engineer but the wing design of the Affordaplane appears
to be more stable than the minimax.

[cavelamb]

nondem wrote:
> There are lots of similar comments on the thing. There are a few around
> - I notice lots of them seem to be fitted(and flying) with much heavier
> engines and accessories than the original plans call for. Makes me
> think the plane is more robust than you might think considering it's
> recommended engines and weights. I like the idea of the thing being
> stronger than it has to be.
> As far as I can tell it's the only no-weld,bolt together airplane that
> doesn't require a finish carpenters skills and/or a big bucket of
> money.
>
> Financially - it looks like I'll be able to build the fuselage main
> structure w/under $400 in materials. That includes using all AN quality
> hardware. Being able to build the thing in $200-$300 increments fits
> right in w/my situation.
>
> I have found no information on any design flaws and all the owners I
> can find references from are positive. There are ski and float versions
> flying.
> Can you(or anyone) find any real technical reasons for avoiding the
> design?
> I have the plans in hand and you can tell it's a one man show - but you
> can also tell the guy did his homework and believes in the plane.
>

Just for grins and giggles...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/texasparasol/

[nondem]

Thanks for the link! I hadn't seen that design before and it does look
interesting. I've still got a couple of weeks before I have to commit
to a specific design so I'll be studying that one.
One thing that stands out right off to me is it appears to be of more
light-weight construction than the Affordaplane even though it has very
similar specifications. It also requires access to a metal brake and
lathe. While thats not a big issue - the Affordaplane doesn't and is
almost totally bolt-together as opposed to riveting.
The Parasol does look more like a "real airplane"....

[dodger]

You might also check out the "Poorboy". It's not part 103 legal, but
looks like a robust design. http://www.poorboyaviation.com/
The plans are available free for download so you can check it out
without cost.

Roger

[Adam Aulick]

Jim Logajan wrote:
> http://www.weedhopperusa.net/WEEDHOPPERUSA/Weedhopper_40_Model.html

In the picture, it looks an awful lot like the engine exhaust is pointed
directly at the pilot's head. Is this true, or just a trick of perspective?

~Adam

[Jim Logajan]

Adam Aulick > wrote:
> Jim Logajan wrote:
>> http://www.weedhopperusa.net/WEEDHOPPERUSA/Weedhopper_40_Model.html
>
> In the picture, it looks an awful lot like the engine exhaust is
> pointed directly at the pilot's head. Is this true, or just a trick
> of perspective?

I assume the exhaust pipe is offset to the right or left of the engine and
therefore out of the pilot's face, but I really don't know.