Quantcast

Aircraft *designs* available for sale?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

aeromomentum

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
124
Location
Stuart, FL USA
What was the reason for the second version?

Did the first version meet the forecasted performance specs?

Any information on the cause of thecrash?

Thanks,


BJC
The second version had a much larger fuselage. But the same wing.

Of course the first version did not meet the forecasted performance. Do they ever? But it was not way off. The main issue was weight like with most prototypes. There are lots of areas where weight could be reduced. For example they used a laminated glass windshield from a car instead of much lighter acrylic.

Version 2 crashed on the second flight. The first flight had an experienced test pilot and was successful but with areas for improvement. The second flight was with the company owner as the pilot. He was a very low time pilot (about 300 hours) and had almost no hours in the last 10 years. In the previous year he had about 5 hours. Aircraft 2 had high span loading, low aspect ratio main wing, even lower aspect ratio canard, a wide nose and a higher aspect ratio horizontal tail in the back. All of these are destabilizing. But I think the root cause was the pilot pitching too much nose up in an attempt to climb and getting way behind the drag curve. He just needed to push the stick forward and gain airspeed.

Version 1 is good to go. Just built it light with all molded parts. Version 2 would need changes. Molds are included for both. There are even some carbon fiber already made.
 

1Bad88

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2012
Messages
553
Location
Bellville, TX
The Davis DA-3 is for sale as an aircraft and the rights to it. You need to reverse engineer the plans from the aircraft though.
 

FokkerDVII

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
50
Location
USA
"Someone should take the Cassutt rights, and promote and support it.

A non-racing fuselage, with the upper longerons built in one plane, would be slightly heavier, but would be much easier to build, and could have more room below the spar for taller pilot.

Three wings could be offered; the traditional wing, a larger sport wing, and a tapered all-out race wing."

That's already being done: https://www.cassuttaircraft.com/ Creighton King is promoting the Cassutt now.
I believe Creighton King sold the Cassutt rights over two years ago. The current owner is not answering emails. He is doing nothing with the design. The website is old.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BJC

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
7,699
Location
Fort Walton Beach, Florida, USA
As has been said before, aircraft plans can and are copyright protected, but the designs are not. There is nothing to prevent someone from reverse-engineering from existing plans or a real-life example a Cassutt or any other, drawing up new plans, and selling them as the "Smith Special" or what have you. Personally, I don't think I could ever leave well enough alone and the new design would end up with substantial differences from the original one in any case.
 

bmcj

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
13,516
Location
Fresno, California
Two thoughts...

  1. Luscombe was revived and in (slow) production at Flabob Airport years ago, but I don’t recall seeing anything lately, so that might be one to research availability.
  2. I’ve not seen any recent ads or promotion for the Avid Flyer line... perhaps that could be a candidate.
 

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
7,296
Location
Rocky Mountains
There is nothing to prevent someone from reverse-engineering from existing plans or a real-life example a Cassutt or any other, drawing up new plans
If the current rights holder is dead or is simply setting on the plans. The Cassutt seems like it is a good example for someone to step in and revive the design - if they really WANT to. I'd call the result this case the Catsuit.

Personally, I don't think I could ever leave well enough alone and the new design would end up with substantial differences from the original one in any case.
This is really hard to do. There is just so much new knowledge and recently introduced methods that have been introduced to the HBA world since these designs were first conceived to not try to update. But that also means that the updating has to be a step better than the old "That looks about right. Let's go fly and see if it works"
 

ScaleBirdsScott

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
1,271
Location
Uncasville, CT
This is really hard to do. There is just so much new knowledge and recently introduced methods that have been introduced to the HBA world since these designs were first conceived to not try to update. But that also means that the updating has to be a step better than the old "That looks about right. Let's go fly and see if it works"
Ideally if one is doing it for commercial purposes, I'd wager the sanest and safest thing is to really try and leave as-is, knowing the downsides, but to satiate the desire to tweak things keep a running log of the stuff to update. Start off with a few unchanged examples and then after some success is built consider investing the extra resources (and bringing in required experience as needed) to throw down the bulk of those updates.

But then there's always the "well it needs a current engine" and "certain safety standards are out of date" and so-on which prevents such an easy-road from being followed in the first place.
 

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
7,296
Location
Rocky Mountains
Start off with a few unchanged examples and
But then there's always the "well it needs a current engine" and "certain safety standards are out of date" and so-on which prevents such an easy-road from being followed in the first place.
In my case the second precludes me from doing the first - at least and still be able to sleep nights. I could have simply transferred the English text to the cleaner French version of the plans and started selling.

The original plans are just too hard to follow (there must have been a severe paper shortage in France in the 50's !?) and the result too hard to build for all but the most determined. Keeping the aerodynamics and basic structure unchanged wile updating things like seat belt mounts and canopy mechanisms can do a lot to bring an old design closer to modern standards.

Trying to sell 60 or 70 year old plans for a design with virtually no updates doesn't do either the seller or the builder any good.

I think the sweet spot is to find a design to revitalize that is something that the person doing it wants to do for satisfaction rather than being motivated by pure profit - though being able to make minimum wage for the time spent would be nice :rolleyes:
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
7,699
Location
Fort Walton Beach, Florida, USA
...there must have been a severe paper shortage in France in the 50's !?
LOL, if you think that's bad, check out these Mignet HM.290 plans from 1946. All the drawings are on one page! Not the most user-friendly arrangement, though I am thinking of having the 23 MB high-resolution file reproduced like a blueprint and framed.

hm290 one page 1200.jpg
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
7,882
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
I think one of the most "common sense" tests to apply to this question is to make an honest determination of whether the aircraft has a real-world advantage or "secret sauce" that justifies it being brought into the 21st Century.

For example, the Fauvel wings are clearly a unique looking series, and historically significant.... but a test should still be applied to ask whether it would be a useful or viable thing in today's environment.

In the case of the Fauvel, the answer IMHO is yes, it is compact and efficient, shown to be safe, and is a viable basic platform for several uses, from a neat little minimalist aircraft to a reasonably high performance motorglider. So in my mind, updated plans and laser cut wood kits would be worthwhile.
 

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
7,296
Location
Rocky Mountains
I think one of the most "common sense" tests to apply to this question is to make an honest determination of whether the aircraft has a real-world advantage or "secret sauce" that justifies it being brought into the 21st Century.
Now you are just being practical! That doesn't fit with EABs and those of us crazy enough to partake of this 'hobby'. :p

I actually kind of disagree with your assessment of the Fauvel. As much as I think it is a good fit for me, and maybe a few others, it is still a fringe of the fringe design and suffers from the stigma that all flying wings seem to have. I'm afraid it's market share will be limited for quite some time. o_O

If the AV-36 can be updated to be relevant in the post 2020 HBA world than there should be plenty of lesser known, but still proven, designs that could be similarly updated.

However..................
I am finding that updating is probably as involved and as much work as creating a new design from scratch. The only advantage is that the result is based on the proven design. I spent the last 2 days calculating aileron loads and the resulting stress on my updated wing fold mechanism. I had only one less variable to consider than I would have with a clean sheet design - the size and configuration of the aileron.

Further, most of these old designs fall into the 'thousandth of sticks" category. As you noted a partial kit with CNC cut parts and some of the more complex sub-assemblies would probably help bridge the gap from the old days to modern builders that want it done this weekend. But even this is going to have a limited impact on the amount of labor needed to build the old designs.

Basically there are 2 very different paths:
Buy the design and just sell the plans as is - maybe with some prefab parts and builder support.
or
Realize just how slippery the slope is once you make that first change.
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
7,699
Location
Fort Walton Beach, Florida, USA
I have often said that the options are really "replica" (build it as it exactly as designed) and "inspiration" (build your own design to the same concept). Something in between is likely to draw the ire of fans of the original as a "rip off" and not quite fulfill your own vision of what you want it to be. That was my point with the "21st century Volksplane" thread, not how to improve the VP-2, but how to build a modern design to the same "looks easy and affordable, is easy and affordable" brief as the original.
 

Tiger Tim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
3,377
Location
Thunder Bay
The 737 may come up for grabs in the next year or so, you’re just going to have a hard time getting any of your customers to reach 51% on the thing. Come to think of it, you may have on your hands a design with a perfect safety record.
 

Hephaestus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
1,788
Location
YMM
The 737 may come up for grabs in the next year or so, you’re just going to have a hard time getting any of your customers to reach 51% on the thing. Come to think of it, you may have on your hands a design with a perfect safety record.
Doesn't Boeing own Embraer? Watch for the announcement and a cosmetic change :)
 

Pilgrim69

Active Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
30
Location
Paraguay
Two thoughts...

  1. Luscombe was revived and in (slow) production at Flabob Airport years ago, but I don’t recall seeing anything lately, so that might be one to research availability.
  2. I’ve not seen any recent ads or promotion for the Avid Flyer line... perhaps that could be a candidate.
As I followed the thread was thinking about exactly those lines! I think Luscombe was really one of the best planes of its vintage, plus it has the Monocoupe roots, but I understand the TC revival ended really bad and is still being disputed. Sad for a so sweet flying and looking bird. How hard could it be to reverse engineer maybe for 6061 and pulled rivet construction? Or even T&G! And Wilson's designs are also worth preserving I think. The Avid Flyer, the Catalina, the Private and Global Explorers. Probably not much market for the later...
Sorry if I did chime without introducing, this is my first post in HBA.
Regards,
Ezequiel
 
Top