Turbine Prescott Pusher Builder new to this site

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Icehrinder1

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
9
Hello, I’m new here although I built my aircraft 30 years ago. I still have it although do you Covid and money I will be selling it. It flys and it’s awesome, Currently I’m completing an annual on it see attached pictures
 

Attachments

Bigshu

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2020
Messages
1,089
Hello, I’m new here although I built my aircraft 30 years ago. I still have it although do you Covid and money I will be selling it. It flys and it’s awesome, Currently I’m completing an annual on it see attached pictures
What kind of fuel burn with the Allison?
 

vhhjr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
230
It's interesting to see a flying Prescott Pusher. I worked with Tom Prescott at the Aero Union Corp. in the late 90's for a couple years. Over the years after talking with people at Oshkosh I definately got the opinion that Tom was a controversial character. It was interesting to get his side of the story of the birth, life and death of the Prescott Pusher company. He continued to promote the PP over the years and around 2000 I worked a few days on one he was promoting as an unmanned Pacific offshore weather drone. Don't think it ever happened as he was always a dollar short on his projects. He passed away last year.

Vince Homer
 

Toobuilder

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
5,562
Location
Mojave, Ca
Would be interested to hear about it more too. I admit I didnt follow the design much, but I have picked up on its reputation as one of the epic failures in the homebuilt world. It would be nice to hear from an actual owner/builder/pilot perspective. Going by the "lore" alone, one would think these airplanes were structural and aero deathtraps.
 

speedracer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
320
I have a 12" prop extension off a Prescotte Pusher given to me by Sam James (the wheel pant guy). I'm still trying to get up the guts to bolt it on my LongEZ.
 

Icehrinder1

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
9
The Prescott Pusher had a poor climb rate from underpowered or overweight. (Or both?)
A heavier engine was not an option for a pusher. Does this sound familiar?
Not true with the Allison 250 , as I have flown my aircraft and typically climbed out at 1500 FPM at 140 Kt’s burning 24gph for about 5 min then cruise at 170-180kt burning 16gph Jet A
Sorry you must part ways with such a nice bird! Where are you located and what price point are you aiming for? Is she IFR capable?
View attachment 837A6F1C-1A9C-48AF-BF69-4AC935D4DC2A.MOV
View attachment 837A6F1C-1A9C-48AF-BF69-4AC935D4DC2A.MOV
 

Attachments

Icehrinder1

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
9
Use to be IFR however for seeing
Sorry you must part ways with such a nice bird! Where are you located and what price point are you aiming for? Is she IFR capable?
It use to be, I sold off the Collins Silver line radios 20 years ago and flew VFR with GPS/Argus 5000 and HSI basic Steam 6 pack with a Garmin SL40. Recently installed ADSB In & Out using a panel mounted IPad with cooling.
Aircraft is located KSMO
 

Icehrinder1

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
9
I talked to the owner of a piston engined PP years ago. He didn’t like the flying qualities (IIRC, high thrust line and far aft main gear placement) and was trying to sell it.


BJC
He simply had the wrong power plant install, I love the way my bird flys. Flies off the ground Like any Turbine Powered Aircraft should. And is the to push her there is no P factor. When in the airplane easy your flight to the ground flatten the prop and you stop..
 

Icehrinder1

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
9
Would be interested to hear about it more too. I admit I didnt follow the design much, but I have picked up on its reputation as one of the epic failures in the homebuilt world. It would be nice to hear from an actual owner/builder/pilot perspective. Going by the "lore" alone, one would think these airplanes were structural and aero deathtraps.
Flying an experimental Is a different breed of experience. The testing such as harmonic testing That goes into a certified aircraft
Sorry you must part ways with such a nice bird! Where are you located and what price point are you aiming for? Is she IFR capable?
$220,000 KSMO
 

vhhjr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
230
Would be interested to hear about it more too. I admit I didnt follow the design much, but I have picked up on its reputation as one of the epic failures in the homebuilt world. It would be nice to hear from an actual owner/builder/pilot perspective. Going by the "lore" alone, one would think these airplanes were structural and aero deathtraps.
I am not aware of any in-flight structural failures in a Prescott pusher. I do know the airframe was welded square steel tubing and, according to Tom (Prescott) a lot of structural analysis went into the design. A large scale RC model was built and was completely instrumented to obtain in-flight data.

All that said, all of Tom's designs needed nose ballast to get the CG into range and, particulalry the Pusher, was very short coupled. Tom claimed it was managable with pilot training. I never got to fly in one as the company was long gone when I worked with him and he didn't own one at the time. Some years later while living near Aan Antonio, TX, he had obtained two complete airframes and was trying to develop them as drones for long mission, offshore weather data collection. I don't think that endeavor went anywhere and have always wondered what happended to the two aircraft.

In the late 90's, he designed two pusher configuration RC models that were built in my shop while we were working for Aero Union, a company flying multi-engine forest fire fighting aircraft based in Chico, CA. Yes, both RC models had a lot of nose ballast.

It would seem the turbine conversion would be a good answer to some of the CG and climb rate problems the original design had. The fuel burn would be the only downside.

Tom was definately a salesman first and always had some project looking for investors. His biggest disappointment was the loss of control of the Precsott Pusher aircraft company and the subsequant loss of all the original tooling and tech support. He spent an lot of time trying to put the company back together without much success. I last saw him in the 90's in Texas with the drone project and would get a call every few years about the latest, "investable," project he was working on.

Vince Homer
 

Icehrinder1

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
9
I am not aware of any in-flight structural failures in a Prescott pusher. I do know the airframe was welded square steel tubing and, according to Tom (Prescott) a lot of structural analysis went into the design. A large scale RC model was built and was completely instrumented to obtain in-flight data.

All that said, all of Tom's designs needed nose ballast to get the CG into range and, particulalry the Pusher, was very short coupled. Tom claimed it was managable with pilot training. I never got to fly in one as the company was long gone when I worked with him and he didn't own one at the time. Some years later while living near Aan Antonio, TX, he had obtained two complete airframes and was trying to develop them as drones for long mission, offshore weather data collection. I don't think that endeavor went anywhere and have always wondered what happended to the two aircraft.

In the late 90's, he designed two pusher configuration RC models that were built in my shop while we were working for Aero Union, a company flying multi-engine forest fire fighting aircraft based in Chico, CA. Yes, both RC models had a lot of nose ballast.

It would seem the turbine conversion would be a good answer to some of the CG and climb rate problems the original design had. The fuel burn would be the only downside.

Tom was definately a salesman first and always had some project looking for investors. His biggest disappointment was the loss of control of the Precsott Pusher aircraft company and the subsequant loss of all the original tooling and tech support. He spent an lot of time trying to put the company back together without much success. I last saw him in the 90's in Texas with the drone project and would get a call every few years about the latest, "investable," project he was working on.

Vince Homer
Vince, everything above is correct. My plane has nose ballast as the prop is a steel hub Hartzell aluminum three blade weighing approx 70# if I remember correctly. The plane itself flys beautiful, I will say in heavy chop the short couple aspect to its design, you do need to get use to it feel, I do slow down to the 140 indicated range. That withstanding the plane does not deserve the bashing it received, I do believe that props and materials have offered new options these days I just don’t have the energy or monies to advance the aircraft into the 2020’s . I do know if I did have that energy I would open the wings and add more fuel capacity as I currently have three hour of fuel.
 

Cardmarc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2021
Messages
78
Hello, I’m new here although I built my aircraft 30 years ago. I still have it although do you Covid and money I will be selling it. It flys and it’s awesome, Currently I’m completing an annual on it see attached pictures
Let me know the specifics. I’m interested
 
Top