jimboe
New Member
Hi. I just registered today out of interest in opportunities to start flying under the Sport Pilot rating. I've read most of the postings in the Beginner Questions and Rules & Regs forums and your comments have helped clarified some things, and raised some questions, as well. The process of writing this query will help me understand what I'm after, and your responses will be a great help to enlighten me about the realities of a commitment to go flying.
In my 49 years I have been a passenger in many aircraft, including an Aeronca Champ at 6 months of age, a Ford Tri-motor at age 10, a hot-air balloon, countless Cessnas and commercial jets, and most memorably, a Belanca Citabria.
While I have an interest in flying, I have not found the motivation to become a pilot for several reasons: 1) The cost and time investment of just getting a private license is high. 2) I lived in the San Francisco Bay area where air traffic is nearly as crowded as freeway traffic. 3) I have never been inspired by the thought of flying a Cessna 152. 4) I had other hobbies that I enjoyed that were cheaper, more accessable and quite fulfilling (motorcycling, skiing, kayaking, etc).
Actually, it wasn't until a friend took me up in the Citabria in the 1980s that I recognized the magic of flying. He introduced me to the graceful, 3-D sensations of simple, slow-motion aerobatics and I came away from those flights thinking that if I went to the trouble of getting a pilot's license it would be to fly that Citabria the same way - not to travel cross-country, not to rent a plane that would go 180 mph (a motorcycle can do that). I would pretty much just want to make turns (like I do in my other hobbies), and a few loops, some snap rolls and maybe a hammer-head once in a while. I would also like to see my local world from above.
Now I live in Southern Oregon, in a relatively unpopulated area of coastal mountains and the Cascade chain. The ocean is 75 miles away by air. There is a small municipal airport 4 miles from my house. And I'm getting weary of dodging SUVs on the logging roads where I ride my dirt bike.
Last year I looked at Ultralights and was intrigued by the idea of "contouring," or flying just above the contours of the landscape. But then I was told that the rule of ULs is that you never fly anywhere such that you can't land safely if you have a mechanical problem. That eliminated about 80% of southern Oregon which is covered with pine and fir trees. I am also concerned about the structural integrity of an aircraft that weighed 50 lbs less than my dirt bike.
When I heard about the Sport Pilot/Light Sport Aircraft plan I sensed an opportunity to get airborne in something more substantial and reliable than an UL. But after reading some of your comments that are critical of the Sport Pilot plan I'm not so confident about the class.
I read volumes of replies about which homebuilt kit or plan to build and got some good insight. My position is that I want to FLY the sucker much more than I want to build it. I've worked on motorcycles and cars most of my life and was a machinist for 12 years. The thought of spending 4 or 8 years to assemble a 600 lb airplane seems painfully tedious. Does that include weaving the fabric or mining the aluminium? I acknowledge the benefits of building the airplane myself - cost savings and knowing the quality of the work, but would prefer one someone else had spent years of their life laboring over it.
My main question is not so much, which plane to build? It's, which one to FLY? My first priority would be to have FUN while flying. My other number one priority would be to SURVIVE having fun while flying. And my third number one priority would be to be able to AFFORD having fun while flying.
I admit I've been attracted to fabric high-wing tail-dragging airplanes since my first trip in the Aeronca Champ. Yes, I know that tail-draggers are a challenge to fly on the ground and that those who master them make obnoxious comments about those who don't.
I would like folding wings so I can hide the plane in a trailer and invest the hanger rental money in a tropical time-share condo, or to pay for insurance. I would like a responsive, reliable 4-stroke engine and enough mass and structural strength to be able to fly when there is a little wind, and to do some basic aerobatics. I would like 2 seats in an enclosed cockpit that can be opened up when it's hot, kind of like a Piper Cub.
Actually, what I probably want is a Citabria with folding wings - but not for $30,000. I might be able to afford the $15,000 model, if I sold my motorcycles and got a second job (other than building a homebuilt airplane). I see website ads for Johnston Tiger Cubs, Fisher Horizons and the Kitfox. Do these models seem like reasonable options to fit my preferences or are there others that are MORE fun to fly that are more affordable?
One more question - would an original Aeronca Champ, or Piper Cub, or Belanca Citabria fit in the proposed Light Sport Aircraft limits?
If you made it all the way down to here, I am in your debt. Any feedback would be treasured. Thanks.
Jim
In my 49 years I have been a passenger in many aircraft, including an Aeronca Champ at 6 months of age, a Ford Tri-motor at age 10, a hot-air balloon, countless Cessnas and commercial jets, and most memorably, a Belanca Citabria.
While I have an interest in flying, I have not found the motivation to become a pilot for several reasons: 1) The cost and time investment of just getting a private license is high. 2) I lived in the San Francisco Bay area where air traffic is nearly as crowded as freeway traffic. 3) I have never been inspired by the thought of flying a Cessna 152. 4) I had other hobbies that I enjoyed that were cheaper, more accessable and quite fulfilling (motorcycling, skiing, kayaking, etc).
Actually, it wasn't until a friend took me up in the Citabria in the 1980s that I recognized the magic of flying. He introduced me to the graceful, 3-D sensations of simple, slow-motion aerobatics and I came away from those flights thinking that if I went to the trouble of getting a pilot's license it would be to fly that Citabria the same way - not to travel cross-country, not to rent a plane that would go 180 mph (a motorcycle can do that). I would pretty much just want to make turns (like I do in my other hobbies), and a few loops, some snap rolls and maybe a hammer-head once in a while. I would also like to see my local world from above.
Now I live in Southern Oregon, in a relatively unpopulated area of coastal mountains and the Cascade chain. The ocean is 75 miles away by air. There is a small municipal airport 4 miles from my house. And I'm getting weary of dodging SUVs on the logging roads where I ride my dirt bike.
Last year I looked at Ultralights and was intrigued by the idea of "contouring," or flying just above the contours of the landscape. But then I was told that the rule of ULs is that you never fly anywhere such that you can't land safely if you have a mechanical problem. That eliminated about 80% of southern Oregon which is covered with pine and fir trees. I am also concerned about the structural integrity of an aircraft that weighed 50 lbs less than my dirt bike.
When I heard about the Sport Pilot/Light Sport Aircraft plan I sensed an opportunity to get airborne in something more substantial and reliable than an UL. But after reading some of your comments that are critical of the Sport Pilot plan I'm not so confident about the class.
I read volumes of replies about which homebuilt kit or plan to build and got some good insight. My position is that I want to FLY the sucker much more than I want to build it. I've worked on motorcycles and cars most of my life and was a machinist for 12 years. The thought of spending 4 or 8 years to assemble a 600 lb airplane seems painfully tedious. Does that include weaving the fabric or mining the aluminium? I acknowledge the benefits of building the airplane myself - cost savings and knowing the quality of the work, but would prefer one someone else had spent years of their life laboring over it.
My main question is not so much, which plane to build? It's, which one to FLY? My first priority would be to have FUN while flying. My other number one priority would be to SURVIVE having fun while flying. And my third number one priority would be to be able to AFFORD having fun while flying.
I admit I've been attracted to fabric high-wing tail-dragging airplanes since my first trip in the Aeronca Champ. Yes, I know that tail-draggers are a challenge to fly on the ground and that those who master them make obnoxious comments about those who don't.
I would like folding wings so I can hide the plane in a trailer and invest the hanger rental money in a tropical time-share condo, or to pay for insurance. I would like a responsive, reliable 4-stroke engine and enough mass and structural strength to be able to fly when there is a little wind, and to do some basic aerobatics. I would like 2 seats in an enclosed cockpit that can be opened up when it's hot, kind of like a Piper Cub.
Actually, what I probably want is a Citabria with folding wings - but not for $30,000. I might be able to afford the $15,000 model, if I sold my motorcycles and got a second job (other than building a homebuilt airplane). I see website ads for Johnston Tiger Cubs, Fisher Horizons and the Kitfox. Do these models seem like reasonable options to fit my preferences or are there others that are MORE fun to fly that are more affordable?
One more question - would an original Aeronca Champ, or Piper Cub, or Belanca Citabria fit in the proposed Light Sport Aircraft limits?
If you made it all the way down to here, I am in your debt. Any feedback would be treasured. Thanks.
Jim
