"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
...

It is a case by case basis. I've got an acquaintance (sp?) who is a true
perfectionist and is plans building a Falco. His airframe is more or less
complete. Heck, if he stained and sealed the thing, it could pass for the
finest furniture. Anyway, I believe he has purchased a couple of items
such as the cowl and the canopy, but as you alluded to, the subkits are
enormously expensive, and he's chosen to spend time instead of dollars.
Despite the fact that he's purchased a part or two, I'd list it as a plans
built. Shoot, the guy even welded up his own engine mount...

I'm sure there are individuals who are going the other route too, and even
folks who pay to have aircraft built for them, and will proudly claim they
plans built the thing in their own garage. I don't see a way to avoid
that, other than the hollow feeling someone would have to get if s/he won
a Grand Champion award and only participated at the level of writing
checks and flying the completed airplane to the show. There was an RV-6 a
few years ago that won a bunch of awards, but after talking to the owner
and reading an article on the airplane in Sport Aviation, it was obvious
that the airplane, beautiful as it was, was professionally built, and the
owner was trying to hide that fact. Jerk.

Kyle.............

You're probably right and the people who try to pass off kit or pro-built
airplanes are in the minority. There's probably not too many who would lay
out the bucks for the complete Falco kit - not in my circle, that's for
sure.

The blurred line between plans built, kit built and even pro built is
getting foggier every day. It would be enormously tiresome to try to
classify airplanes in that manner. "Well! He had his upholstery sewn by a
vendor? Toss his butt out!" I guess that doesn't work. It's like trying to
enforce the 51% rule.

Sorry I even brought it up.

Rich S.