Jump to content

rgmwa

First Class Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,316

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

 Content Type 

Everything posted by rgmwa

  1. rgmwa
    I'm probably the wrong person to ask as I've only ever seen one up close and it later crashed (engine failure, but that can happen to any aircraft). I've read about them and have no reason to think they're less safe that any other homebuilt when they're properly built and maintained. As they are a single seater, you'll be learning to fly in something else anyway, so I'd be focussing on getting your licence or certificate first. If/when you do start, contact SAAA and have them appoint a technical counsellor to look over your shoulder.
  2. rgmwa
    Only 2-3 weeks? Have a look on eBay or Amazon and see if you can pick up a copy of `Sportplane Construction Techniques" by Tony Bingelis. He was a very well known builder from a few years ago (more than a few years ago now), but his books are a goldmine of great information, especially for scratchbuilders. That book and others he wrote will give you a good insight into what's involved.
  3. rgmwa
    Have a look on the internet. There are plenty of blogs by people documenting their builds, including on this site: Marty d's CH-701 build log And a Savannah S in Sweden. and of course: The XPB Stage 1 underway. and DooMaw - building a STOL However, don't be in too much of a rush to start ordering sheets of aluminium or plywood. Building takes a lot of time and your engineering studies will keep you very busy for a few years. Do the research and find out as much as possible now, so that when you do start you will have made the right choice of aircraft and have the resources (time and money) to finish it.
  4. rgmwa
    There's always next year.
  5. rgmwa
    Come down to the Serpentine Fly-in on the 24th September and have a wander around the hangars. You'll be able to talk to some builders and get an idea of what's involved in scratch building or building a kit aircraft. rgmwa
  6. rgmwa
    I wasn't trying to talk you into an RV-12, just saying that Vans do make a factory-built aircraft (mine is VH by the way). I agree that for what you have in mind, the RV-14 would be a better fit. Not cheap, but then you get what you pay for. rgmwa
  7. rgmwa
    Vans sell the RV-12 as a factory-built aircraft with either a 912 ULS or iS engine, but if you want an RV-14 then it will come in crates only. rgmwa
  8. rgmwa
    They should probably be paying you for beta-testing the engine for them. You haven't had a good run with it so far.
  9. rgmwa
    RV-12 spin testing: rgmwa
  10. rgmwa
    I thought it was OK, but not great. Wouldn't see it again. The storyline was disjointed and they must have shot the same poor old Me109 down three times. I read the book by Joshua Levine who was a historian/advisor for the film. They did land the Spitfire (owned by Dan Friedkin) on the beach. After it landed, the plane got stuck in the soft sand, and the crew had to run over to help push it out before it was able to take off ahead of the in-coming tide and before it got dark. rgmwa
  11. rgmwa
    As a point of interest, Vans have just introduced the 912iS in their RV-12 as the standard engine for this plane, although the ULS is also available. A few weeks ago they flew both their 912ULS equipped RV-12 and the iS version side by side from Oregon to Oskosh. The ULS used 60 gallons for the trip and the iS used 45 gallons under as near identical real world conditions as you could probably get. rgmwa
  12. rgmwa
    The annual Fly-in at Serpentine is on again on 24 Sept. Worth a visit if you'd like to see a good selection of RAAus and VH homebuilts and other interesting aircraft. rgmwa
  13. rgmwa
    Reminds me of this thread from a few years back started by djpacro: Lecomber's Spin rgmwa
  14. rgmwa
    And it's still flying.
  15. rgmwa
    What does it cost to build something that size? Can't be cheap. rgmwa
  16. rgmwa
    But can it run?
  17. rgmwa
    Bex, surely you should simply pick the best tool for the job. If a lifting body works best for this technology then use that. What may come across as an unusual shape now may well be seen as mainstream for electric aircraft down the track. Something that looks like a space shuttle might even attract potential buyers of this technology. It's performance and utility that matters far more than shape in my view. rgmwa PS. It may also help keep you out of jail in 6 years time if you come up with something that doesn't look like a Cessna.
  18. rgmwa
    Up elevator would push the tail down and add load on the main wheels (by taking load off the nose wheel) as well as producing drag. rgmwa
  19. rgmwa
    Full flap would increase lift (likely more than drag) and reduce brake effectiveness? I'd go for no flap, brakes and back elevator below flying speed to increase drag. Happy to be corrected. rgmwa
  20. rgmwa
    Assuming that this well intentioned and generous effort results in him building something that will actually fly, who's going to teach him to fly it? It would be tragic if he ends up killing himself because he's been shown how to build something that will actually get off the ground. At the moment, his biggest risk of a crash is probably from on-coming traffic on a back country road. rgmwa
  21. rgmwa
    I believe the space shuttle is/was classed as an experimental aircraft. rgmwa
  22. rgmwa
    Around 12,500 pulled rivets in an RV-12 plus probably another 500+ standard rivets. rgmwa
  23. rgmwa
    That's how Vans do it. Makes it easy to check that all the required parts are there. The builder can then put all the common small items like nuts, bolts, rivets etc together in something like this:
  24. rgmwa
    You could try: 82, 120, & 130 Degree Countersink Cutters | Brown Aviation & Aircraft Tools or Counter Sink Cutters - Cleaveland Aircraft Tool It would be a good idea to get a countersink cage too. rgmwa
  25. rgmwa
    First takeoff was jumping off the garage roof with a potato sack as a parachute at the age of 8 or 9. The flight was pleasant but the landing wasn't. I started again 50 years later, but this time in a 152 with an instructor. Completed my PPL in a 172 about 18 months later, and went on to build my own plane over the next 4 years. Been flying about 7 years now. rgmwa
×
×
  • Create New...