# What is a good two seater without spending big$? Discussion in 'The light stuff area' started by CALL911, Jun 2, 2010. ### Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating: 1. Jun 3, 2010 ### CALL911 ### CALL911 #### Well-Known Member Joined: Oct 29, 2009 Messages: 238 Likes Received: 4 Location: Columbus AFB, MS Thanks Mike! Early on I thought about getting an old Bi-plane but lost interest when I found most of the good condition ones were well out of my price range. 2. Jun 3, 2010 ### Robby ### Robby #### Well-Known Member Joined: Apr 8, 2010 Messages: 123 Likes Received: 3 Location: Texas Call911 - Tedlar is clear - that's why I call it 'glorified SaranWrap'. I think at the time it was used because it's light, relatively inexpensive and the 'see-through' wings looked good to someone !! Problem was ultraviolet exposure ( few plastics stand up well to that ) and the 'double-sticky tape' - really that's what is was/is !! - used to apply it deteriorates to the point that it just crumbles/falls apart. You can recover the wings yourself with Ceconite. There are several different procedures for doing this ( I will be doing it my self shortly ) and you can find videos and documentation of various procedures to do it. For what it's worth, remember that both the UL and the XP originally had Tedlar covered wings so going from the XP to the UL will not necessarily save you the 'recover labor/expense' !! Take a look at Falcon ultralight, used Falcon UL aircraft, Falcon XP, Tedlar and Falcon parts. for more information, classified listings etc. 3. Jun 3, 2010 ### CALL911 ### CALL911 #### Well-Known Member Joined: Oct 29, 2009 Messages: 238 Likes Received: 4 Location: Columbus AFB, MS Thanks Robby. I am familiar with the website. Again, I am not looking to get into something that isn't in good flying condition. One because I don't have the time or know how to fix up a project. And the bigger reason being I would really just like to get into something I can fly, and not have to work on and wait to fly. That being said, it seems that most of the ones I find for sale still have the original Tedlar on them. Is there anywhere in the US I could take the Falcon to have it recovered in Ceconite? I also have heard of people recovering them in Dacron and even Stits 1.7oz fabric and Stewarts waterborn system thru ecofill. All of these I know nothing about. 4. Jun 3, 2010 ### kent Ashton ### kent Ashton #### Well-Known Member Joined: Aug 15, 2008 Messages: 723 Likes Received: 214 Location: Concord, NC Get associated with your local EAA Chapter. Sounds like you need their advice and they'll know who does "annual condition inspections" on experimentals in your area. The inspection on an Experimental-Amateur Built can range from a case of beer to hundreds of dollars. If I were you I would either find a project I could finish and obtain the Repairman certificate so you can do your own condition inspections, or buy something like a Mustang II or other experimental--you can still do your own maintenance--and find a reasonable A&P to do your condition inspections. The Mustang II offers a lot of bang for the buck, right now. Since you have the PPL, why bother with Light Sport or Ultralights Experimental / Mustang There is also a non-airworthy Long-EZ on Barnstormers.com now that could be flying cheaply. -Kent 5. Jun 3, 2010 ### CALL911 ### CALL911 #### Well-Known Member Joined: Oct 29, 2009 Messages: 238 Likes Received: 4 Location: Columbus AFB, MS Is there a place where I can find info on my local EAA chapter? I like the Mustang II, I just don't care for its average price of$30,000+. That Midget Mustang in the link I looked at recently and seems to be a fun plane for the $, but again, I want a two seater that costs around$10,000 that sips fuel and I can takeoff from my back yard in and fly slow at tree top level. Doesn't really sound much like the Mustang II. I fly plenty fast for a living, and it definatly is and can be fun, however this is just to relax and go slow in (and keep the maintenance and fuel costs down).

I appreciate the help, and the info. Having that being said, I would rather have this thread build info rather than people trying to talk me out of what I already want.

6. Jun 4, 2010

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Feb 5, 2008
Messages:
1,266
516
Dana should have said "cannot be registered as an E-LSA". Such a plane can still be registered as an experimental-amateur built if the proper paperwork exists, or as an experimental-exhibition if not.

Charlie

7. Jun 4, 2010

### Dana

#### Super ModeratorStaff Member

Joined:
Apr 4, 2007
Messages:
8,831
3,178
Location:
CT, USA
Try here

That pretty much limits you to an N-numbered used 2 seat Quicksilver or perhaps a new Weedhopper kit.

Correct. Experimental-Exhibition is very limiting, though.

-Dana

End rush hour traffic now! Legalize vehicular weaponry!

8. Jun 4, 2010

### CALL911

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Oct 29, 2009
Messages:
238
4
Location:
Columbus AFB, MS
Dana, it ends up the local EAA is at a small airport I am familiar with. I will check with them for some more specifics.

So far I have found a few that would work in my price range besides those you listed. For example the Falcon (obviously), the Titan Tornado, and thanks to glidermike the Pietenpol also fits the bill. So far, I really like the simplicity and design of the Falcon the best. But I am still trying to learn more to make a good decision when the time comes.

The biggest thing about the Falcon seems to be the Tedlar. Most of the ones in my price range still have the original Tedlar. I would need to get that recovered with one of the previously menitoned substitutes, but still have no idea on how much something like that would cost, and again, don't really want to make this a "project". The Falcons I am seeing mostly list as experimentals, so that should let me work on it when it needs minor repairs, but looks like I'll still need an A&P for the annual inspections.

One more question I have for a Light Sport Experimental class, do I need a mode 3 transponder? Or anything else beyond a PPL and an annual inspection?

9. Jun 4, 2010

### Elmog

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Apr 10, 2010
Messages:
98
6
Location:
Anaheim
Removed my ignorance. Sorry!

Last edited: Jun 4, 2010
10. Jun 4, 2010

### TFF

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Apr 28, 2010
Messages:
12,039
3,469
Location:
Memphis, TN
IA is not required, just the A&P for a homebuilt experimental. That is why they call them Condition Inspections instead of Annuals for homebuilts.

11. Jun 4, 2010

### Dana

#### Super ModeratorStaff Member

Joined:
Apr 4, 2007
Messages:
8,831
3,178
Location:
CT, USA
I don't know much about it, but quite a few Lazairs are still flying with the original Tedlar, which apparently held up quite well. The original designers chose it over conventional Stits or Ceconite for a reason (mainly weight). You might get more information on it by searching Lazair groups, since even though they went out of production years ago they're still quite popular.

I can say that hiring somebody to do a recover job, even if you can find somebody who would work on an odd old plane like that, would cost a lot... possibly more than the plane was worth. I know when I was looking at options for my T-Craft, a recover job would cost about what the plane would be worth... after it was recovered.

, and again, don't really want to make this a "project". The Falcons I am seeing mostly list as experimentals, so that should let me work on it when it needs minor repairs, but looks like I'll still need an A&P for the annual inspections.

You only need a transponder if you're going to fly in (or under) Class C or B airspace. And you don't even need one to fly under (the Mode C veil) if the plane doesn't have an engine driven electrical system. You only need a SP, not PP, to fly it.

And just to be clear, remember that you're talking about Exerimental-Amateur Built. Experimental-Light Sport is ONLY for approved ELSA kits, or aircraft that were converted from fat ultralight during the now expired transition period.

I'm pretty sure that's not correct. That's one of the advantages of a used experimental over a factory built plane; anybody can work on it and an A&P, not just an IA, can do the annual.

-Dana

PADDLE FASTER!! I hear banjo music!!

12. Jun 4, 2010

### kent Ashton

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Aug 15, 2008
Messages:
723
214
Location:
Concord, NC
Find EAA Chapters: EAA - Chapters

BTW Elmog, ANYONE can work on Experimental-Amateur Built aircraft, even your Mom. The ill-informed say: "Huh? Show me the regulation!". But it is permitted because there is no regulation forbidding it. You do not need permission to do what is not by law forbidden.

13. Jun 4, 2010

### CALL911

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Oct 29, 2009
Messages:
238
4
Location:
Columbus AFB, MS
I am a newb here and still don't understand many things. What is a SP and a PP? And what is the difference in class between an experimental amateur built vs an experimental light sport. And which category does the Falcon fall under? In many pictures I see "experimental" written on the Falcon. Also what are people talking about when they say "N" number for the plane. I am guessing it means some kind of registration number like when registering a car.

Low, slow, and cheap yes. But a two seater, no.

14. Jun 4, 2010

### TFF

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Apr 28, 2010
Messages:
12,039
3,469
Location:
Memphis, TN
Light sport aircraft have maximum speed, weight, HP, and a few other things that must be required with for the FAA to recognize the airplane as light sport; they must be proven by the manufacturer. The experimental part is the same for normal EXP or LSA; aircraft put together for educational purposes. What draws people to LSA is they dont have to have a medical to fly; the provision is if they get a LSA license they can only fly LSA planes. A PPL can fly anything, with standard airman restrictions. N number means the plane is licensed through the FAA just like any 747, Piper Cub, Helicopter, what ever. The FAA does not call an UL an aircraft it is a vehicle; lawyer mumbo jumbo. If your Falcon is not already classified as an LSA EXP, it is just an EXP; With a PPL with will not matter to you.

15. Oct 27, 2010

### macdonca

#### Active Member

Joined:
Jan 25, 2010
Messages:
29
1
Location:
Nowhere
You have a lot of unknown varibles in here

1) How big is the strip in your backyard? You have to dicern what can atually safely fly in/out of your field.

2) A C-150 and many others are STC's to run on pump gas. an o-200 burns what 4 gal an hour? All has to be factored into your budget. an experimental can become more expensive when it comes down to the bottom line.

16. Oct 27, 2010

### Topaz

#### Super ModeratorStaff Member

Joined:
Jul 30, 2005
Messages:
13,964
5,587
Location:
Orange County, California
Yeah, but AFAIK all the auto-fuel (mogas) STCs specifically prohibit ethanol in the auto fuel being used. In many states (including mine), ethanol is mandated in all auto fuel. You can't get mogas without it; not even the bulk-rate agricultural stuff. Therefore you can't run mogas under the STC. We had to switch back to avgas in the towplanes at my soaring club this year because of this. The engines are STC'd for mogas, but not for mogas with ethanol.

That trend is spreading. More states are mandating ethanol in fuel. If you want to run mogas in a certified airplane engine that has an STC for it, you'll need to check that the fuel you're pumping doesn't contain any ethanol, to make sure you're still within the STC.

17. Oct 28, 2010

### CALL911

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Oct 29, 2009
Messages:
238
4
Location:
Columbus AFB, MS
My landing strip although not built yet should be around 400 yards or just under 1,200 feet. Most ultralight or experimental planes I have looked at state they need around 300 feet to become airborne.

I've done my homework here. I have way more distance than I need for this size and weight of an airframe.

I just wanted advice on what a good two seater was without spending a ton.

18. Oct 28, 2010

### Dana

#### Super ModeratorStaff Member

Joined:
Apr 4, 2007
Messages:
8,831
3,178
Location:
CT, USA
Depending on the plane, 1200' may or may not be adequate. 300' ground roll is be one thing, but how much distance do you need to clear trees at the end of the field?

Very light aircraft may also adequate for a short strip when flown solo, but become marginal if you're carrying a passenger.

-Dana

But it's NOT an ASSAULT Weapon, it's a DEFENSE weapon!

19. Oct 28, 2010

### CALL911

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Oct 29, 2009
Messages:
238
4
Location:
Columbus AFB, MS
Since there is nothing but open fields for as far as the eye can see, and no power lines, I would say it should be fine.

20. Oct 28, 2010

Joined:
Jan 25, 2010
Messages:
29