Search results

I'm a Grifter.

Keep me posted on what you decide. :thumbsup:

Thanks! Sounds like stocking up like you did will keep me ahead of it's maintenance. Do you ever plan to rebuild the canopy? Didn't you lose it in a flight or something or am I confusing you with Ron or someone else? Also, do you plan to ever paint it?

Jesse, when you were updating or restoring your Flybaby, was there a kit you could buy from Aircraft Spruce, or did you just make an inventory list and shop around for the best deal for parts?

Interweb?

:needpics: Okay, maybe not useless, but it'd be cool to see actual pics of "Sirius George", outside of the envelope with the various locations as a backdrop.

Not that it would easy, but are you allowed to manufacture them or are they considered part of the engineering operation of the 162?

Are 150 parts interchangeable with a FlyBaby or is it just a generic enough plane? :dunno:

Isn't there a Continential 85/200 conversion that's supposed to have some advantages? I think I read that somewhere.

What power plant would you suggest, Ron? Which is the most efficient for a 220 lb payload?

I want to build a Bower's Flybaby and I'm back and forth between building from scratch and restoring an existing one. I have two viable options: A. Scratch building the plane would insure that I'd know every inch of it. B. Completing a "work in progress" or possible restoration project...

mercy.... :drool:

Wow. No disrespect intended, but with backgrounds like that, I would be vigilant checking those dental records.

Okay, I'll rephrase my question. Any GA history of folding wings failing?

I have no issue with removable wings. It's the ones that have some patented mechanism that in one position is rigid enough to handle positive and negative Gs and in another can collapse with little effort. Maybe if I acquaint myself with the locking technology it won't bug me so much.

Is there much history in the way of failing folding wings? There's something about flying behind a wing with an intentional break in it that's nagging my brain. The ONLY thing I don't like about the Onex, that happens to be aerobatic, is the folding wing. Is my apprehension irrational?

Oh well, thought I was on to something. The Mite is a charming little plane and its sort of like an all metal version of the Fly Baby, which would allow me to store it outside. Hangar fees here will kill my future fixed income. Once again, I'm leaning Onex, but the Fly Baby is just so damn...

...and if so, is there a list of certificated airplanes that naturally comply with the LSA guidelines? A friend of a friend just came into a Mooney Mite and is trying to decide if he should restore it or just sell the project. Is the retractable gear the only thing that disqualifies it?

Yeah, you want term. The rest of that stuff is shady.