# What are you designing, building, flying or interested in?

### Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

#### BJC

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
We seem to have quite a few newer members of HBA; enough to warrant a roll call of member’s interests. This thread invites members to share what their interest is as well as what they might be working on.

I’m slow building a Glasair Super II FT. My primary interests are aerobatics and light weight (600 pounds or less empty weight) airplanes.

BJC

#### Tiger Tim

##### Well-Known Member
I’m chipping away at a Gipsy Moth restoration that’s bordering on a scratch build. Ninety percent done with only ninety percent to go. On the side I’m resurrecting a one-off racer that never got to race. I help care for a fleet of antiques and at some point I’d like to design and build an ultralight styled on a late twenties/early thirties lightplane.

I try to keep my comments on HBA to things I’m knowledgeable on, questions to better understand, and/or often dry humour. Maybe too dry sometimes.

#### gtae07

##### Well-Known Member
I'm working on a slow-build RV-7, with about 2-2.5 years to go. Primary interests with it are formation and travel, with perhaps an instrument rating and maybe more formalized aerobatics in the future.
Growing up, I helped my dad build an RV-6, which I still fly on occasion when we're visiting.

I've long had a desire to design and build something but time and existing projects are always in the way. I wanted to do either a four-cylinder four-seater, or a motorglider; lately my interest (if I get to it) would be a self-launching Part 103 floater--think of an electric Goat.

Professionally, I'm an aircraft systems engineer, and in general I have an interest in just about anything that flies, from Part 103 to orbital launch vehicles.

#### Mcmark

##### Well-Known Member
Rehabbing FWF on 2 projects.
Super Starduster SS101 or SA101. The plans say SS, Aircraft Spruce lists it as SA. Had first extended run last weekend. Hope to fly it before end of year.
Wittman Tailwind W-8. Rebuilt engine mount and landing gear. Previous rebuilder was obviously a plumber as it had copper/brass/steel fittings through out as well as redundant fuel systems. Witt designed the airplane to be simple. Working on weight reduction and KISS principle.
Being on this forum has opened my eyes to a number of interests and neat designs. I've got more projects than I can finish as it stands so anything more will put the little woman over the top, maybe a good thing?
Love competition aerobatics, and got the TW to be able to travel efficiently.
A bureaucrat project manager by profession, with an A&P to fall back on.

BJC

#### Yellowhammer

##### Well-Known Member
I am steadily building a Pulsar.

However, I am interested in a few different projects..

The first,

I have been studying for quite some time now about the processes of constructing m own homebuilt axial flow jet engine. Things such as the specific types of metal for specific application within the engine itself.
Static Vane alignment and separation, cooling and lubrication and all the ins and outs that accompany building a jet engine.

The second,

I have been researching the AHRS capability of the Raspberry Pi along with some of the other capabilities available. I have seen some very good examples from others doing the same. There are libraries of code already written for guys like me that are not able to write code. Thank the Lord they are available for download.

Throughout my research I have discovered that we are only scraping the surface of what is possible. My utmost goal is to eliminate the absurd high cost of cockpit instruments and avionics.
It is absolutely ridiculous the prices for these items. Sometime ago, I said to myself that there has to be a better and more cost effective way.
I have found hardware with 9 axis capability, =/-2,-16 g, built in barometric pressure, G.P.S., and other. I ever found one fellow that had built a crude transceiver in the beginning stages of development.

For those of us that fly in the experimental category, I do not feel there is as much experimenting going on throughout the community as there should be. We should be the leaders in technology transfer as well as the ones who prove what can be acceptable for safe air operations in all aircraft. When a new product comes out it should say that it was proven viable in the experimental aviation community.

There is way too much innovation in technology available for us not to drive costs down from the main stream companies. Even items listed as non certified are ridiculous in cost. I recently noticed that GRT raised the cost on both glass panels they sell by adding a 1,000 dollar increase on both panels. Amazing.

Belite and Radiant Technologies has the right idea but still have some higher cost associated with their products.

For example, The other day I was conducting research on fuel senders and came across a type of sensor that mounts on the outside of the fuel tank that can determine the level of any type of liquid. They have adapted for aircraft use just as I was planning on doing. Perfect for composite tanks as well..

So you can see a couple of projects I am in the research and development stage and would love to see others with similar ways of thinking share their thoughts on the subject particularly the instruments aspect.

Fly safe and build right!

Yellowhammer

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Nice one, Yellowhammer! I thoroughly agree. I know next to nothing about Arduino and Raspberry Pi but Ive seen stuff built by amateur homebuilder friends that are cheap, easy to 3d print and assemble and work just fine for airspeed, AoA,fuelquantity and so on......apart from that,Im an Inspector of homebuilts and currently involved in getting a Spezio back flying.

#### Bigshu

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
I've started cutting parts for a Hummel H5. I've also got an airdrome aeroplanes Fokker D8 project waiting for pickup on the west coast. I've bought plans for a Graham Lee Nieuport, a Volksplane VP-1, a Bower's flybaby (downloaded from website), and a Taylor Mini-IMP. Looks like the common thread is that they're all single seaters. The plans were mostly bought to see how different designers handle common structural demands. I'm a firm believer in studying different solutions and synthesizing the results, then testing to verify performance. It's not experimental if you aren't experimenting, and I've always felt kits took most of the learning out of home building airplanes. I guess that puts me more in the builder than flyer category, but since I've yet to actually build one, that identity is tenuous at best.

Last edited:

#### Bigshu

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
For those of us that fly in the experimental category, I do not feel there is as much experimenting going on throughout the community as there should be. We should be the leaders in technology transfer as well as the ones who prove what can be acceptable for safe air operations in all aircraft. When a new product comes out it should say that it was proven viable in the experimental aviation community.
Completely agree.

#### Hot Wings

##### Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Hardly a new member but I feel like a new builder in some ways. Been without a shop for a few years. Long story..................
I'm currently building a new small shop. It was originally a chicken coop that my grandfather built sometime in the '40s and later converted for his pottery hobby. Vandals and neglect took their toll.

I've got it all cleaned out and new, to code, electrical in. I should have the windows and doors finished today. Waiting for the tree guy to come and remove the tree so I can install the new roof without fear of the tree guy dropping a limb through the new roof. That still leaves insulation, heat/AC and finishing the wiring/lights.

CAD says I - might - be able to get the Quickie through the door with the fuselage tail unbolted and no engine attached.
My first project is going to be converting my B+S 810 for the Quickie.

It may still be small but it sure beats a card table in our single car garage - when the wife's car isn't there. Got to start somewhere.

#### BJC

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
I'm currently building a new small shop. It was originally a chicken coop that my grandfather built sometime in the '40s and later converted for his pottery hobby.
I love a workshop with character. More photos, please, when you have completed the rehab.

BJC

#### Hot Wings

##### Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
I love a workshop with character. More photos, please, when you have completed the rehab.
I plan to keep a photo log. Right now I'm just trying to get it dried in before the snow starts. Details and extras will have to wait till spring.
I'll not be opening up the chicken holes in the brick. But I would like to get some next year - in their own coop.

#### Victor Bravo

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
I am about to start flying an antique Cessna 172 (1956) again after almost a year down due to a medical issue. Also refurbishing a Rocky Mountain Wings Ridge Runner model 2 as an off-airport STOL bush-beater for the Mojave Desert just on the other side of the hills from my home airport. Also interested in the same kinds of small "minimalist" airplanes like the Luciole, SD-1, and have developed a growing interest in some ultralights.

#### Aerowerx

##### Well-Known Member
In spite of my efforts to suppress it, the idea of a pure small-LSA class pure flying wing keeps popping up in the back of my brain.

Doubt I will ever do it, though. If anything maybe a 8-12 foot span "proof of concept" electric RC model.

#### Mcmark

##### Well-Known Member
VB, if there is one airplane that I've had in the past that I would love to have again, it would be my '56 172. For a certified airplane I'd put up with the regs for that.

#### Victor Bravo

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
I've had a bunch of airplanes, and this 172 is the longest-running one I've ever had, over 11 years now. Surprisingly capable when flown as a 2 seater with the rear seat out and a medium pitch prop. There are afew airplanes I'd trade this for, but only because of my need to chase after my lost youth. Not because those other airplanes are as good of an all-around usable airplane. I really don't like running 8 gallons an hour of 100LL through my wallet, but I can't blame an airplane that was designed back when 87 octane was 40 cents a gallon.

#### pwood66889

##### Well-Known Member
Since some of the not-so-new guys chimed in, I figured I might as well.
I'm interested in most anything that flys. As well as history and fine wine... This group is the most "Bang for the Buck" that I have found on the Net.
Right now, I'm restoring a 1946 (most of em were built that year) Ercoupe. Not zactly "ground up," cause we left the main gear on.

BJC

#### rbarnes

##### Well-Known Member
The second,

I have been researching the AHRS capability of the Raspberry Pi along with some of the other capabilities available. I have seen some very good examples from others doing the same. There are libraries of code already written for guys like me that are not able to write code. Thank the Lord they are available for download.

Throughout my research I have discovered that we are only scraping the surface of what is possible. My utmost goal is to eliminate the absurd high cost of cockpit instruments and avionics.
It is absolutely ridiculous the prices for these items. Sometime ago, I said to myself that there has to be a better and more cost effective way.
I have found hardware with 9 axis capability, =/-2,-16 g, built in barometric pressure, G.P.S., and other. I ever found one fellow that had built a crude transceiver in the beginning stages of development.

For those of us that fly in the experimental category, I do not feel there is as much experimenting going on throughout the community as there should be. We should be the leaders in technology transfer as well as the ones who prove what can be acceptable for safe air operations in all aircraft. When a new product comes out it should say that it was proven viable in the experimental aviation community.

There is way too much innovation in technology available for us not to drive costs down from the main stream companies. Even items listed as non certified are ridiculous in cost. I recently noticed that GRT raised the cost on both glass panels they sell by adding a 1,000 dollar increase on both panels. Amazing.

Belite and Radiant Technologies has the right idea but still have some higher cost associated with their products.

For example, The other day I was conducting research on fuel senders and came across a type of sensor that mounts on the outside of the fuel tank that can determine the level of any type of liquid. They have adapted for aircraft use just as I was planning on doing. Perfect for composite tanks as well..
Avilution is doing some interesting stuff along these lines.

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
I am primarily interested in small single-seaters flown just for fun. I especially like older, classic homebuilts, including many of the all-wood, VW-powered variety. I plan to start building something next summer, after I finish restoring my 1966 VW Beetle. Front runners at the moment are the Luton LA.4a Minor and the Taylor Monoplane.

On a slightly different note, I have been very slowly designing a little racing-inspired sport monoplane, based on Raceair's Supervee rules. This may be a really looooong-term project for the future. I had one semester of calculus 35 years ago, so I am having to re-learn a bunch of math as I go. I fully concur with Billski's recent remarks that building an existing design is a far, far easier path for the non-engineer. But I plod along, because it's fun to keep learning.

BJC

#### N804RV

##### Well-Known Member
I own and fly a Sonerai IIL. You may have seen it before, its the cover plane at Sonerai & Sonex Community Forum. there was also an article about it, written by the previous owner, in Kitplanes. ("Born Again" TX Sonerai - KITPLANES). Although I didn't build it, maintaining it day to day has taught me a lot about the EAB community and aircraft ownership.

I'm also building an RV-8. I actually bought the tail kit way back in 1999. But, didn't start building until 2014. I'm still 1.5 to 2 years away from first flight.