Hello From Port Aransas, on Mustang Island, TX

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .
Martin Hotze wrote:
Am 27.10.2010 20:41, schrieb sambodidley:
Then all I can get there are those 150 bucks an hour C172 rides with
a CFI. There are several small airports nearby I could use if I owned
my own LSA.

Maybe a Skyranger is within your budget:
http://www.volksflugzeug.eu/Preisliste.html (sorry, most of the
content there is in German)

but there are for sure some other options within similar price range,
maybe there are used ones available, too.

Or perhaps do a web search for "ultralight helicopter". Check out:
http://www.experimentalhelo.com/
One of the publishers, Stu Fields, hangs out in rec.avaition.rotorcraft,
so
you could post a question there asking whether an ultralight helicopter is
viable for someone only having airplane experience.

LOL
I'd probably come just about as near to getting a whirly as I would
building a kit plane. g
Sam in Milam

Am 28.10.2010 03:46, schrieb sambodidley:
I'd probably come just about as near to getting a whirly as I would
building a kit plane.g

ths Skyranger is available as a kit or fully assembled and ready to fly

#m
--
"What would I do with 72 virgins? That's not a reward,
that's a punishment. Give me two seasoned whores any day."
(Billy Connolly)

Harbor Inn's website. WTF??? I learned a whole new program to
build that new website! What's wrong with it?

Business. Yeah, it's been a terrible couple of years for the hotel
industry. The worst, ever, so they say. That's why we bought when we
did -- prices are also at an all-time low. It's been a tough row to
hoe, but I have faith that things will rebound...someday.

Oil? Here? Nah. That blowout happened 500 miles NE of us, and the
currents in the Gulf are clockwise, so everything went away from us.
Thankfully!
--
Jay Honeck
Port Aransas, TX
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856



On Oct 27, 11:34*am, Martin Hotze wrote:
Am 26.10.2010 17:44, schrieb Jay Honeck:

That one took 8 years to build. *Now, we have bought another motel on
Mustang Island, in Port Aransas, TX. * *We're converting it to the
aviation theme, too. *Seewww.HarborInnPortA.com

Hi Jay,

well, the design is the same awful design as it is on the other
hotel-site; sorry. :-)

but: "bonne chance!" for your business. It must be tough in the tourism
industry these days.

Are there any effects at your place in TX from the oil leak?

#m
--
"What would I do with 72 virgins? That's not a reward,
that's a punishment. Give me two seasoned whores any day."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *(Billy Connolly)

Hi Ron! Glad to see you're still here.

IMHO, the C-150/152 class of aircraft was excluded from LSA for
political reasons. I'm sure Cessna lobbied hard to keep those
aircraft OUT of the category, since -- with many thousands of them in
the fleet -- they knew that would kill their hoped-for entry into the
field.

Of course, as it's worked out, the Skycatcher hasn't been the hot
seller they hoped for anyway -- but that's more related to the economy
than any regulatory rules.

The LSA rules WRT to Ercoupes are completely absurd. My E model,
identical in every way (except for paperwork) to a C/D model, can
NEVER be LSA. Funnier still: C models that have been STC'd for the
higher useful load (because, remember, the plane's are identical --
it's only a paperwork "mod") can NEVER be "un-STC'd". They are
FOREVER banned from the LSA category by that single sheet of paper.

No, this has nothing to do with "common sense" or "logic". The fact
that the FAA refuses to even look at these problems illustrates the
REAL problem.
--
Jay Honeck
Port Aransas, TX
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856


On Oct 27, 10:08*am, Ron Wanttaja wrote:
On 10/26/2010 11:58 PM, Jay Honeck wrote:



I have to say, I can't find too much wrong with their logic.
Especially when combined with the fact that the FAA has applied the
LSA rules completely arbitrarily (Examples: Why is an Ercoupe 415-C
LSA, while a 415-E is not? *Why is a C-150 not LSA, but a Champ is?
Etc., etc.), it's hard to argue with an old guy who just wants to fly,
and isn't risking anyone else's life or property.

*Any* selection of limits would be arbitrary. *Their original limit was
1200 lbs, and they got talked into raising it. *If they'd picked 1600
(allowing Cessna 150s), SOMEbody would point out a plane with a 1650
gross weight and complain that the rules were stupid and arbitrary. *It
was a no-win situation for the FAA.

I thought the explanatory document the FAA put out at the time Sport
Pilot was announced was pretty clear. *The LSA limits and Sport Pilot
were *not* instituted so that older pilots and planes could have a few
more years in the sun. *It was intended to make it easier for new people
to learn to fly, and to encourage the production and sale of new,
ready-to-fly aircraft.

I agree it is tough on the guys who had failed their medicals prior to
Sport Pilot, and can't qualify under the new regs. *But if you take the
long view (and rare it is that any government person DOES take the long
view) this is a problem that will correct itself over time. *Anyone
flying now knows that flunking a medical will keep them from going Sport
Pilot. *I haven't taken an FAA medical since the rules were instituted.

Keep in mind, though, that Sport Pilot DOES have medical requirements.
If you have a medical condition that would cause you to fail a Class III
medical, you cannot legally fly as a Sport Pilot.

However, I do agree with Jay on one point: *Single-seat aircraft...up to
a limit...shouldn't require any sort of medical.

The question is, what *is* the limit? *Should a pilot be able to fly an
unlimited racer without a medical? *How about an F-104?

And it you put a limit in...sure as heck, someone will complain that it
was arbitrary and stupid....

Ron Wanttaja

Am 28.10.2010 18:28, schrieb Jay Honeck:
Harbor Inn's website. WTF??? I learned a whole new program to
build that new website! What's wrong with it?

with the program? no idea. :-)
with the website: everything. ;-)

Business. Yeah, it's been a terrible couple of years for the hotel
industry. The worst, ever, so they say. That's why we bought when we
did -- prices are also at an all-time low. It's been a tough row to
hoe, but I have faith that things will rebound...someday.

anticyclical ... good.

Oil? Here? Nah. That blowout happened 500 miles NE of us, and the
currents in the Gulf are clockwise, so everything went away from us.
Thankfully!

good to hear.

#m
--
"What would I do with 72 virgins? That's not a reward,
that's a punishment. Give me two seasoned whores any day."
(Billy Connolly)

"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...
Am 28.10.2010 03:46, schrieb sambodidley:
I'd probably come just about as near to getting a whirly as I would
building a kit plane.g

ths Skyranger is available as a kit or fully assembled and ready to fly

#m
--
"What would I do with 72 virgins? That's not a reward,
that's a punishment. Give me two seasoned whores any day."
(Billy Connolly)

Where can I find some info on it in English?

Am 28.10.2010 21:36, schrieb sambodidley:
"Martin wrote in message
...

ths Skyranger is available as a kit or fully assembled and ready to fly

Where can I find some info on it in English?

http://www.volksflugzeug.eu/Preisliste.html states:
fully assembled, for towing, with rescue system, 100HP:
EUR 43.168,44 incl. VAT within Germany. (about USD 60 grand or 60 AMU)
this seems to be the top version

a little bit in english
http://www.volksflugzeug.eu/Technology.html

technical details:
http://www.volksflugzeug.eu/2.html

contact:
http://www.volksflugzeug.eu/kontakt.html
there is also an emailaddress at the bottom.


I am NOT associated with them, I only read an article about the plane. I
have no detailled information about the plane.


HTH, #m
--
"What would I do with 72 virgins? That's not a reward,
that's a punishment. Give me two seasoned whores any day."
(Billy Connolly)

Personally, I completely agree with you.

Assuming that Cessna really did that lobbying, which is very likely, they
were fools. Flight schools, flying clubs, and nearly anyone who puts enough
hours on an aircraft to justify it, nearly always buy new and retire the
equipment while it is still recent vintage--simply because it makes economic
sense to do so.

Peter


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
...
Hi Ron! Glad to see you're still here.

IMHO, the C-150/152 class of aircraft was excluded from LSA for
political reasons. I'm sure Cessna lobbied hard to keep those
aircraft OUT of the category, since -- with many thousands of them in
the fleet -- they knew that would kill their hoped-for entry into the
field.

Of course, as it's worked out, the Skycatcher hasn't been the hot
seller they hoped for anyway -- but that's more related to the economy
than any regulatory rules.

The LSA rules WRT to Ercoupes are completely absurd. My E model,
identical in every way (except for paperwork) to a C/D model, can
NEVER be LSA. Funnier still: C models that have been STC'd for the
higher useful load (because, remember, the plane's are identical --
it's only a paperwork "mod") can NEVER be "un-STC'd". They are
FOREVER banned from the LSA category by that single sheet of paper.

No, this has nothing to do with "common sense" or "logic". The fact
that the FAA refuses to even look at these problems illustrates the
REAL problem.
--
Jay Honeck
Port Aransas, TX
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856


On Oct 27, 10:08 am, Ron Wanttaja wrote:
On 10/26/2010 11:58 PM, Jay Honeck wrote:



I have to say, I can't find too much wrong with their logic.
Especially when combined with the fact that the FAA has applied the
LSA rules completely arbitrarily (Examples: Why is an Ercoupe 415-C
LSA, while a 415-E is not? Why is a C-150 not LSA, but a Champ is?
Etc., etc.), it's hard to argue with an old guy who just wants to fly,
and isn't risking anyone else's life or property.

*Any* selection of limits would be arbitrary. Their original limit was
1200 lbs, and they got talked into raising it. If they'd picked 1600
(allowing Cessna 150s), SOMEbody would point out a plane with a 1650
gross weight and complain that the rules were stupid and arbitrary. It
was a no-win situation for the FAA.

I thought the explanatory document the FAA put out at the time Sport
Pilot was announced was pretty clear. The LSA limits and Sport Pilot
were *not* instituted so that older pilots and planes could have a few
more years in the sun. It was intended to make it easier for new people
to learn to fly, and to encourage the production and sale of new,
ready-to-fly aircraft.

I agree it is tough on the guys who had failed their medicals prior to
Sport Pilot, and can't qualify under the new regs. But if you take the
long view (and rare it is that any government person DOES take the long
view) this is a problem that will correct itself over time. Anyone
flying now knows that flunking a medical will keep them from going Sport
Pilot. I haven't taken an FAA medical since the rules were instituted.

Keep in mind, though, that Sport Pilot DOES have medical requirements.
If you have a medical condition that would cause you to fail a Class III
medical, you cannot legally fly as a Sport Pilot.

However, I do agree with Jay on one point: Single-seat aircraft...up to
a limit...shouldn't require any sort of medical.

The question is, what *is* the limit? Should a pilot be able to fly an
unlimited racer without a medical? How about an F-104?

And it you put a limit in...sure as heck, someone will complain that it
was arbitrary and stupid....

Ron Wanttaja

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
Of course, it's easy to blame anything on a Vast High-Wing Conspiracy.
And impossible to disprove.

Sooooo...let's hit the wayback machine and step to Wichita, 2004. The
Cessna Secret Cabal (CSC) is meeting to discuss which way to lean on the
FAA, as far as the proposed weight limits for Light Sport Aircraft.

There's fatal flaw in your story: the minions are generally too rational.

;-)

So any insights that the wayback machine can reveal for what Eclipse
Aviation and the rest of the VLJC (Very Light Jet Cabal) were thinking and
plotting?

On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 17:50:41 -0700 (PDT), Jay Honeck wrote:

PofA is okay, but I miss the old days of rec.aviation. I think I'll
stick around a bit and see if any of the other "old-timers" are still
around!
:-)

And here I thought you might be coming back because you needed to
advertise a new hotel.
--
A fireside chat not with Ari!
http://tr.im/holj
Motto: Live To Spooge It!