Jump to content

looking for unfinished aircraft frame or kit


Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, facthunter said:

What (roughly) is the % of planes owner built recently?  Outside the SAAA. I bet it's low and reducing.. It's got to be a goer for some. I'd check all with the RAAus. I DID all the way but still got dudded. I don't blame the RAAus. I would say THEY are now less qualified to give hands on advice though, than back a while. Nev

I could never build a kit even if I wanted to, being late to the aviation party I am too old and the kit would never get finished, let alone flown.  

My only chance on a kit machine would be something like this....

A U.S.A FAR Part 103 model machine that takes 100+ hours to build from these guys.

 

https://phantomaero.com

 

But this aviation category is hated with a vengeance in Australia.  Sad as it’s a foundation stepping stone into aviation where our RAAus machines are morphing into pseudo GA......

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

If it was new from lycoming it would have come inhibited with instructions for on going storage. Probably in better shape than one used irregularly for 23 years, there are many like this doing just fi

Once you run them they are more trouble to look after. You have to "re-invigorate " the treatment after a while.. Combustion by products are very chemically active particularly with moisture around,.

Half a dozen of them for 2-5k each & you'd have enough bits to keep one going for a fair while. A new windscreen though would probably cost as much as a couple of them.

Posted Images

1 hour ago, jackc said:

I could never build a kit even if I wanted to, being late to the aviation party I am too old and the kit would never get finished, let alone flown.  

My only chance on a kit machine would be something like this....

A U.S.A FAR Part 103 model machine that takes 100+ hours to build from these guys.

 

https://phantomaero.com

 

But this aviation category is hated with a vengeance in Australia.  Sad as it’s a foundation stepping stone into aviation where our RAAus machines are morphing into pseudo GA......

 

 

 

Not sure what you mean "hated with a vengeance in Australia." 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

Not sure what you mean "hated with a vengeance in Australia." 

I won’t say it here,  but phone calls I have made prove otherwise,  there IS a level of support but no point in getting into a scrap  here.

Just form another association and start lobbying:-)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

STILL WAITING !

Who IS going to take on the Might of RA Australia. ?

Would have to be a Legal eagle type, to even read what they dream up as corrispodence. 

(  big word for me, five tries at it ! )

spacesailor

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

Be the bargain of the century if the trailer came with it!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, spacesailor said:

STILL WAITING !

Who IS going to take on the Might of RA Australia. ?

Would have to be a Legal eagle type, to even read what they dream up as corrispodence. 

(  big word for me, five tries at it ! )

spacesailor

No,  RAAus continues to work along the lines it always has,  it’s working on projects to further Recreational Aviation as it stands.  The 760 MTOW is getting a bit closer to GA but that’s OK.

 I just see foundation Aviation missing out, the old AUF days should be restarted, using the U.S. FAR Part 103 system.  This could incorporate electric drive technology that many Part 103 aircraft manufacturers are now developing.

Airframes have come along way in the last 40 years or so, safety has never been better.

The formation of another organisation to lobby CASA etc for the category is probably best,  RAAus won’t be interested too much, it’s another workload they won’t want.

They may not even agree with the ‘Foundation Aviation’ principle.....

I don’t want to get into a scrap over this, it’s just an opinion I have.....

PM me if you like, on the subject.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The grass roots side of RAA still exists but it has never been like FAA Part 103 in the US where anything goes up to 254lbs empty weight 5 US gallon fuel max, 1 seat, 55 knots max speed & 24 knots stall. No inspection or licence required, no radio or transponder.

 

The main issue here is the lack of enthusiasm by people to get back to this grass roots type of flying. Back in 2013 we organised a 95.10 rally at South Grafton and got 2 blokes & their wives turn up with their Campers & no aircraft at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

The grass roots side of RAA still exists but it has never been like FAA Part 103 in the US where anything goes up to 254lbs empty weight 5 US gallon fuel max, 1 seat, 55 knots max speed & 24 knots stall. No inspection or licence required, no radio or transponder.

 

The main issue here is the lack of enthusiasm by people to get back to this grass roots type of flying. Back in 2013 we organised a 95.10 rally at South Grafton and got 2 blokes & their wives turn up with their Campers & no aircraft at all.

 One way to look at it is,  your rally was 8 years ago and since then we have had many things happen under the auspices of RAA.

With the cost of training for the RPC in excess of $300 per hour in some cases,

Maybe time to revisit the days of the AUF?

It was just an idea I had, that people may be interested in the future?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...