# Best Bang for the Buck STOL

### Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

#### akwrencher

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Yep. If Pops had the drawings, I'd be building one.

#### Pops

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
And up hill.

I have used it down to a 450' farm strip.
Instead of the 1835 cc engine you could go to the 2180 with just a 2 lb increase. Going from 60 hp to about 75 hp.

#### N804RV

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
And up hill.

I have used it down to a 450' farm strip.
Instead of the 1835 cc engine you could go to the 2180 with just a 2 lb increase. Going from 60 hp to about 75 hp.
Pops, how is that 2180 equipped with only a 2lb increase? Is that a Force One prop hub and larger crank? Flywheel, starter?

I'm asking because if I keep 4SP, i'm gonna build a 2180 for it. I'm planning on no starter or flywheel, just a 20amp alternator and a single Slick mag. I thought it would still weigh about 8 - 10 lbs more than my 1835 similarly equipped.

#### WonderousMountain

##### Well-Known Member
No Idea what you want, but I want that Wag-a-Bond touring edition.

#### JohnB

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Let me respond to the statement that someone made about the 750 kit arrangement.
I'm scratch building a 701 (for a LONG time) but the first thing I did was to knock out all the parts the factory provides as the "kit". I assume it's a similar package for the 750.
Full disclosure, I built RV #12 (about 50 yrs ago, my how time flies !!) , an early Glasair and have welded up approx 40 fuselages so my learning curve wasn't too steep. However, the drawings are top notch. Jon Croake has videos of assembling EVERY part. It's an easy build. It will land and take of from just about anywhere, have ridden with RockyDog in his, amazing plane, pilot not to shabby either.

Anyway, I knocked out all the "kit" in about a month, saving about $5000. The only thing I didn't build was the engine mount and firewall as I wasn't sure about engine choice (now I am). I won't throw rocks at the Bearhawk however, next door neighbor scratchbuilt a 4 seat w/ 0-540 and that was a SWEET ride. (Think of a hot rod C-180) I Imagine the LSA is the same. I LIKE side by Side, my SO of 53 yrs doesn't like the back seat, also better for showing newbies how things work in an airplane. Good Luck whichever way you go THANK YOU for your Service to our country !! John B #### Pops ##### Well-Known Member HBA Supporter Log Member Pops, how is that 2180 equipped with only a 2lb increase? Is that a Force One prop hub and larger crank? Flywheel, starter? I'm asking because if I keep 4SP, i'm gonna build a 2180 for it. I'm planning on no starter or flywheel, just a 20amp alternator and a single Slick mag. I thought it would still weigh about 8 - 10 lbs more than my 1835 similarly equipped. Just the added weight of the Force one prop hub and the small added weight of the crank. No, starter, no alternator, Slick mag only. IF making it a flywheel drive engine when you are not using the Force one prop hub and using the lighter car distributor over the mag and mag drive, it will be close to the same. If you are just using a slick mag and no starter why are you using a alternator? #### rv7charlie ##### Well-Known Member Everybody has their preferences (I know I do). But I haven't seen any mention of flight characteristics (not just short field ability). Best I can say is that the OP should get some stick time in the planes he's considering, before picking one to build. I haven't flown everything mentioned, but I have flown a few of them, and there are some significantly different flying qualities in the list. Charlie #### narfi ##### Well-Known Member Log Member Anyway, I knocked out all the "kit" in about a month, saving about$5000. The only thing I didn't build was the engine mount and firewall as I wasn't sure about engine choice (now I am).
So was that a month of evenings or a 160+hr month?

I have pretty much narrowed my choice down to the 701, 750, or 750sd (choice to be made primarily on engine choice and fuel burn vs capacity)
90% sure I'll build from plans not from kit, so interested in gathering information on that experience.

#### xjgary

##### New Member
The Belite is an interesting option, but their factory burned down and he's trying to sell the rights to the airplane. Someone has to buy the rights and get it going again. I'm building a Ragwing Stork RW-20 (side by side seating)., with extreme STOL capability if kept light. The RW-19 is tandem seating, but the same length, so the airframe is lighter, but less baggage capacity. It was first designed as a UL 2 seat trainer, but the plans show the UL version and an EAB option which is stronger. But it's ultralight roots show and most people re-engineer it into a real airplane, which makes for a more complicated/much longer build and heavier airplane. At last count, there were only 9 flying, which says something. Also, the airframe was designed around the 2 stroke 2-Si engine that is no longer sold. It weighed 110 pounds. So engine options are limited. I think it will be great once finished, but the build is difficult and long for a first time builder like myself. I'm now wishing I had purchased a Just Highlander kit, as I'd have been flying years ago.

#### ddoi

##### Member
The Wittman Buttercup as another scratch/plans built STOL option. The builder/owner group for the Wittman designs is knowledgeable/helpful. This is Jim Clement's version of the Buttercup:

If you need folding wings, the Raven is a plans only copy of the early Avid Flyer/Kitfox. If you can swing it, unfinished Kitfox kits come up for sale somewhat regularly - could save you time. Good luck! Dai

PS: even though it looks like a Tailwind, it's a Buttercup - there are 2 lift struts and the wing behind the spar is only fabric covered. He built this to get into/out of places he couldn't with his Tailwind.

#### cluttonfred

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Two quick thoughts...

First, given the mission you describe you'd probably be better off with something like a Legal Eagle XL for messing around and a rented Cessna or Piper for when your son is home one leave.

Second, if you are committed to two seats, then consider any rugged, relatively simple project with lots of wing area, then build as light as possible and give it as much power as possible. A carefully-built Pober Junior Ace with a 125 hp engine and sporting some fat tires would look 1930s cool but be a great little STOL machine.

#### N804RV

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
....If you are just using a slick mag and no starter why are you using a alternator?
The "alternator" I speak of is actually the little generator that GPAS sells with the Diehl accessory case and mag drive adapter set up. Its enough to keep the small battery intended for the fuel boost pump charged and not much more. Also, I like having 12vdc to power the handheld radio and iPad through a cigarette lighter adapter.

I probably don't need a fuel boost pump. But, the builder installed it and its in the builder's POH, so...

#### N804RV

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
The Wittman Buttercup as another scratch/plans built STOL option. The builder/owner group for the Wittman designs is knowledgeable/helpful. This is Jim Clement's version of the Buttercup:
View attachment 100369
If you need folding wings, the Raven is a plans only copy of the early Avid Flyer/Kitfox. If you can swing it, unfinished Kitfox kits come up for sale somewhat regularly - could save you time. Good luck! Dai

PS: even though it looks like a Tailwind, it's a Buttercup - there are 2 lift struts and the wing behind the spar is only fabric covered. He built this to get into/out of places he couldn't with his Tailwind.
Beautiful airplane! I love the Cessna spats!

#### JohnB

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
So was that a month of evenings or a 160+hr month?

Probably 120 or so but I have shear , brake, and almost every tool necessary and access to the rest of them. If you choose the 701 consider making the rear spar one piece like the 750, easier, stronger than 7 pieces scabbed together and easier to keep straight. Will have wet wing instead of tanks. Do research on stolspeed.com, John is a straight shooter no bs. Also consider the longer wing mod approved by CH to accommodate weight creep over the yrs

#### narfi

##### Well-Known Member
Log Member
but I have shear , brake, and almost every tool necessary and access to the rest of them
I do as well, been my carrier for the last 20 years, so what I cant do at home, I can bring to work and do in the evening or lunch breaks, weekends, whatever.

#### Daleandee

##### Well-Known Member
I do as well, been my carrier for the last 20 years, so what I cant do at home, I can bring to work and do in the evening or lunch breaks, weekends, whatever.
We have an A/C crew in our building with a nice shop and a couple of large bending brakes. Just be careful as to the bend radius of the brake unit as not all bends are created equal ...

#### Mike W

##### Well-Known Member
I have been looking at the STOL competitions on YouTube being held in the USA these days. The Chinook is very impressive. The very short TO and landing distances achieved look amazing and with the shortage of suitable flying fields available these days in the UK, such an aircraft could be capable of operating out of any short local field.

At the moment I am committed to sorting out my Plank tailless aircraft, but would love to have a go at a dedicated STOL light aircraft maybe a bit optimistic with my advancing years. We will have to see.

My thoughts are to get an abandoned MW5 single seat Microlight and modify the wing with a full span leading edge slot and a large TE flap and with a few mods to the fuselage and undercarriage it could make a good STOL aircraft.

I have attached a couple of MW6 videos which show that with an experienced pilot and without high lift devices or brakes, that short take off's and landings are possible. Note that the pilot increases the angle of attack of the wing to act as an air brake.

#### cluttonfred

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Very cool, Mike. Personally, I would love to see you update any of your MW-5/6/7 designs to get around the requirement for the special 4″ x 16 swg HT30TF aluminum tube. With the trend in LSA and microlight rules to allow higher weights and speeds, I think something like the MW-6 (tandem or side-by-side) set up as a rugged "big boy" single-seater with a four-stroke engine would attract a lot of interest as a fun flyer if it weren't for the trouble in locating the special tube.

#### Mike W

##### Well-Known Member
Very cool, Mike. Personally, I would love to see you update any of your MW-5/6/7 designs to get around the requirement for the special 4″ x 16 swg HT30TF aluminum tube. With the trend in LSA and microlight rules to allow higher weights and speeds, I think something like the MW-6 (tandem or side-by-side) set up as a rugged "big boy" single-seater with a four-stroke engine would attract a lot of interest as a fun flyer if it weren't for the trouble in locating the special tube.
Thank you Matthew.

HT30 TF the aluminium spec we used in the 1980's became 6082-T6. We have used all this and no stockiest has replaced it in the UK. However in America 6061-T6 is available and is satisfactory for MW aircraft. Some dealers listed 6082-T6 in their catalogs which was actually 6063, much lower strength. Very dangerous. I tell people to insist on a copy of the release note.

Should there be a revival of interest in my aircraft, I will need to get electronic copies done of the drawings. The originals were pencil drawn and cost an arm and leg to reproduce these days.

#### flywheel1935

##### Well-Known Member
My thoughts are to get an abandoned MW5 single seat Microlight and modify the wing with a full span leading edge slot and a large TE flap and with a few mods to the fuselage and undercarriage it could make a good STOL aircraft.
Hi Mike W ,Thats what I plan for my LMA build, here in the UK.