Questions from a newbie.

Hi All:

I've held my private cirt for a year now, and it's time to stop
renting, or time to start the process of stopping. Homebuilding is an
option. Which kit? The more I look, the more I see. I'd really like to
hear what you builders have to say as to which kits I should look at.

After about two hrs of reading on the BD-4, I have to admit I kind of
like it. A conventional design, lots of build options, all metal ( I have
a full machine shop ), and can be built from plans and raw materials.
However, I can't say that I'm too impressed of what I have read of Jim
Bede's operations, and his other designs don't push my buttons. I can't
seem to find how many were built, and I have not taken the time to
research the FAA accident archive. Does anybody know how many were built,
accidents etc? Any BD-4 builders/operators out there?

What's involved in getting a cirt for your own design? What would stop
me from basing a design on the C-172? How different must it be to escape
copyright infringment?

Any pointers would be helpful.

--
Andrew

What's involved in getting a cirt for your own design? What would stop
me from basing a design on the C-172? How different must it be to escape
copyright infringment?

You are pretty safe, as far as intellectual property rights are concerned.
What you want to avoid is an inspector looking at your finished product and
telling you that he is looking at an uncertified (or is that
"uncertificated") C-172. This doesn't seem to happen with copies of vintage
designs, but I fear that you would run the risk with more modern designs, if
anyone would dare call a C-172 a modern design.

Some builders have gone this route and there are many kits and plans that
are closely approximate certified designs. Copying a design and validating
your engineering decisions could multiply your build time by decades.

Don't give any money to Jim Bede. I believe you'll
find lots of people here that had deposits with him
for various airplanes he designed and didn't get anything
for their deposits.

As far as kits, your right, there are so many out there
that it will boggle your mind. I suggest Van's or Lancair
or Glasair for a kit. You want a company that has been
around a while and has the resources to deliver a complete
and well documented kit.

I bought a Team Tango kit and had to beg and threaten to
get all the parts I was due. I still don't have nor expect
documentation. The company has gone out of business and
other Team Tango kit builders have now taken over the
company. If I spent all the time building that I spent on
the phone I'd be 3/4's done by now.

Bart D. Hull

Tempe, Arizona

Check http://www.inficad.com/~bdhull/engine.html
for my Subaru Engine Conversion
Check http://www.inficad.com/~bdhull/fuselage.html
for Tango II I'm building.

Remove -nospam to reply via email.



Andrew Tubbiolo wrote:

Hi All:

I've held my private cirt for a year now, and it's time to stop
renting, or time to start the process of stopping. Homebuilding is an
option. Which kit? The more I look, the more I see. I'd really like to
hear what you builders have to say as to which kits I should look at.

After about two hrs of reading on the BD-4, I have to admit I kind of
like it. A conventional design, lots of build options, all metal ( I have
a full machine shop ), and can be built from plans and raw materials.
However, I can't say that I'm too impressed of what I have read of Jim
Bede's operations, and his other designs don't push my buttons. I can't
seem to find how many were built, and I have not taken the time to
research the FAA accident archive. Does anybody know how many were built,
accidents etc? Any BD-4 builders/operators out there?

What's involved in getting a cirt for your own design? What would stop
me from basing a design on the C-172? How different must it be to escape
copyright infringment?

Any pointers would be helpful.

Del Rawlins wrote:

I wrote ....

What's involved in getting a cirt for your own design? What would stop
me from basing a design on the C-172? How different must it be to escape
copyright infringment?

Besides, if you were to go this route you would basically have to
disassemble completely a 172 in order to duplicate the parts, and at
that point it would be easier to just restore the 172.

I would need to be a cirtificated A & P to do this right? I've
considered it. Would refurbing a manufactured airframe be another route to
a repairmans license?

BTW, nice aircraft, thanks for the link!

Andrew

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 04:04:19 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Tubbiolo
wrote:

After about two hrs of reading on the BD-4, I have to admit I kind of
like it. A conventional design, lots of build options, all metal ( I have
a full machine shop ), and can be built from plans and raw materials.
However, I can't say that I'm too impressed of what I have read of Jim
Bede's operations, and his other designs don't push my buttons. I can't
seem to find how many were built, and I have not taken the time to
research the FAA accident archive. Does anybody know how many were built,
accidents etc? Any BD-4 builders/operators out there?

Forget that ugly thing, and build a Bearhawk if you want a 4 seater
that is actually a 4 seater that can carry a good amount of stuff too.
Somewhat slower than the BD but with the larger engines it is
certainly no slouch in the speed department, compared to similar
designs. And it is also available as plans only or kit. Of course, I
am not at all biased.... 8^)

What's involved in getting a cirt for your own design? What would stop
me from basing a design on the C-172? How different must it be to escape
copyright infringment?

Nothing stopping you except for the fact that Cessna designed it to be
built in volume, and it wouldn't really lend itself to one off
construction. In the time that you spend reverse engineering it and
just getting the tooling set up, you could probably complete one of
the more popular homebuilt designs from start to finish.

Besides, if you were to go this route you would basically have to
disassemble completely a 172 in order to duplicate the parts, and at
that point it would be easier to just restore the 172.


================================================== ==
Del Rawlins--
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply

Things to do:
1. Join EAA and the local chapter
2. Read a bunch of back issues of Sport Aviation and Kitplanes
3. Look at handling characteristics, not accident statistics
4. The old saying is, if you want to build, build. If you want to fly, buy.
5. Realize that selecting a plane to build is very often a wildly
dysfunctional process. Do some mission profiles and sanity checks along the
way.

enjoy!

Ed Wischmeyer

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 06:36:04 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Tubbiolo
wrote:

Del Rawlins wrote:

I wrote ....

What's involved in getting a cirt for your own design? What would stop
me from basing a design on the C-172? How different must it be to escape
copyright infringment?

Besides, if you were to go this route you would basically have to
disassemble completely a 172 in order to duplicate the parts, and at
that point it would be easier to just restore the 172.

I would need to be a cirtificated A & P to do this right? I've
considered it. Would refurbing a manufactured airframe be another route to
a repairmans license?

If you use the existing 172 parts as templates for new parts, you can build
your own "scratchbuilt" 172. If you can get the FAA to agree that you
performed at least 51% of the tasks required to build the aircraft, you
will be able to license it as Experimental/Amateur-Built. In this case,
you will be able to do all maintenance and can receive the Repairman
Certificate to allow you to perform the annual inspection.

If, instead, you decide to restore a 172, you may do all the work, but your
work must be supervised by a licensed A&P who is willing to be legally
responsible for your work. The aircraft remains in the Standard
airworthiness category, thus the annual inspection must be performed by an
A&P with an Inspection Authorization (IA).

You will have no maintenance rights on the aircraft beyond those granted to
any aircraft owner (i.e., minor preventative maintenance only, and work
performed under supervision of an A&P). You cannot receive a Repairman
Certificate for that aircraft. However, the restoration process will count
towards the practical experience required for an A&P license.


Ron Wanttaja

Homebuilt airplanes are a fine option. Most of my students who build their
own planes seem to settle on Van's RV 7s. These are solid airplanes that
rival anything produced by the certificated manufacturers.

Join EAA and get a copy of the latest Aerocrafter catalog. Stick with the
kits that sell the most and avoid the weird stuff that you were looking at.

http://bd-4.org/index.html?/home.php

The BD4 is a fine plane with a least a couple hundred flying. There are a unfinished 'kits' around that can get you
started. Some folks are getting 200 mph or so on 200 hp, something like 20 mpg, so it is efficient also. Won the cafe
race a while back. I would call it a 2+2, the back seat is kind of small.

Check out the web site for lots of details...

--
Dan D.
http://www.ameritech.net/users/ddevillers/start.html


..



"Andrew Tubbiolo" wrote in message ...
Hi All:

I've held my private cirt for a year now, and it's time to stop
renting, or time to start the process of stopping. Homebuilding is an
option. Which kit? The more I look, the more I see. I'd really like to
hear what you builders have to say as to which kits I should look at.

After about two hrs of reading on the BD-4, I have to admit I kind of
like it. A conventional design, lots of build options, all metal ( I have
a full machine shop ), and can be built from plans and raw materials.
However, I can't say that I'm too impressed of what I have read of Jim
Bede's operations, and his other designs don't push my buttons. I can't
seem to find how many were built, and I have not taken the time to
research the FAA accident archive. Does anybody know how many were built,
accidents etc? Any BD-4 builders/operators out there?

What's involved in getting a cirt for your own design? What would stop
me from basing a design on the C-172? How different must it be to escape
copyright infringment?

Any pointers would be helpful.

--
Andrew

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 06:36:04 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Tubbiolo
wrote:

Del Rawlins wrote:
Besides, if you were to go this route you would basically have to
disassemble completely a 172 in order to duplicate the parts, and at
that point it would be easier to just restore the 172.

I would need to be a cirtificated A & P to do this right? I've
considered it. Would refurbing a manufactured airframe be another route to
a repairmans license?

You would need to be supervised by an A&P, who would also have to sign
the log entries concerning all maintenance performed. Furthermore,
you would need an A&P with an inspection authorization to approve any
major repairs or alterations and perform the annual inspection when
the aircraft is ready for return to service. You should keep track of
all time spent working on the plane because as mentioned by another
poster, it counts towards the experience requirement if you decide to
get your A&P certificate later on.

The definition of what constitutes adequate supervision isn't really
spelled out in the FARs and will probably depend on how well the A&P
knows and/or trusts your work, and upon his level of paranoia.

One thing that I didn't mention in my previous post which has been
brought up by others, is if you just want something to fly, you are
FAR better off to buy something that is in good condition and just
fly/upgrade it as you go, as opposed to building a homebuilt or
restoring a factory built aircraft. The amount of time either takes
can be staggering, and life has a tendency to get in the way
frequently. I started forming ribs in 1998 and I drove the first
rivets in those ribs the day before yesterday.


================================================== ==
Del Rawlins--
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply