andytk58
New Member
Evening,
New member here, I'm a recently qualified microlight pilot in the UK (very similar to Sport Pilot in the USA, fixed wing MTOW 990lbs, stall <35kts etc day VFR only)
I've always been interested in aircraft and would love to buy either my own aircraft, or a share, perhaps next year. I have however been looking around at various homebuilt aircraft as this is a route I would maybe consider going down one day.
A while ago I stumbled across the AR-5 website, and ended up buying the construction video from the site.
As I understand, the AR-5 is the only aircraft to ever use the thin sandwich hotwire styrofoam construction technique for its fuselage. This seems like a good way to make a plansbuilt light aircraft (although it doesn't get you away from sanding...:dis
To be clear, this is quite different from the last-a-foam (urethane?) skinning method used on the Vision.
Next month, I'll be on vacation in San Fransico and if I've got the time, I'll visit the Hiller museum there to have a look at the AR-5.
My question, as per the title, is:
Why did Mike Arnold stop flying the AR-5?
And even then, why not sell it and allow someone else to continue using the aircraft prior to it being preserved?
Does anyone know how many hours its got on it, and if the structure is still sound.
As this method of construction is a one off, it would be interesting to know these things to see if its worth persuing.
Andy K
New member here, I'm a recently qualified microlight pilot in the UK (very similar to Sport Pilot in the USA, fixed wing MTOW 990lbs, stall <35kts etc day VFR only)
I've always been interested in aircraft and would love to buy either my own aircraft, or a share, perhaps next year. I have however been looking around at various homebuilt aircraft as this is a route I would maybe consider going down one day.
A while ago I stumbled across the AR-5 website, and ended up buying the construction video from the site.
As I understand, the AR-5 is the only aircraft to ever use the thin sandwich hotwire styrofoam construction technique for its fuselage. This seems like a good way to make a plansbuilt light aircraft (although it doesn't get you away from sanding...:dis
To be clear, this is quite different from the last-a-foam (urethane?) skinning method used on the Vision.
Next month, I'll be on vacation in San Fransico and if I've got the time, I'll visit the Hiller museum there to have a look at the AR-5.
My question, as per the title, is:
Why did Mike Arnold stop flying the AR-5?
And even then, why not sell it and allow someone else to continue using the aircraft prior to it being preserved?
Does anyone know how many hours its got on it, and if the structure is still sound.
As this method of construction is a one off, it would be interesting to know these things to see if its worth persuing.
Andy K