Oshkosh 2025

[tsts4]

Could be an EAB 172. Not saying his is, just noting that I didn't see anywhere that described how his ended up experimental, so it's possible.

No such thing. There are 8 categories of experimental airworthiness certification and in no world could a 172 or anything similar be certified under the E-AB category.

 

[WDD]

There was that C172 EAB that they used to develop the Corvette V8 engine (which I haven't heard anything about lately).

https://airfactsjournal.com/2022/10/the-20-hour-cessna-172-experiment-update/

 

[kyleb]

There was that C172 EAB that they used to develop the Corvette V8 engine (which I haven't heard anything about lately).

https://airfactsjournal.com/2022/10/the-20-hour-cessna-172-experiment-update/

That is not an EAB. That is a plane jane 172 flying under an experimental R&D or experimental exhibition temporary certificate. It is in no way a homebuilt. EAB implies that you built an airplane, not swapped an engine into a certified airframe and applied for a renewable exemption.

 

[WDD]

Ah - I thought EAB meant experimental exhibition. So it’s an experimental - but not EAB.

 

[rwellner98]

No such thing. There are 8 categories of experimental airworthiness certification and in no world could a 172 or anything similar be certified under the E-AB category.

I think that might be too firm a statement.

But what do I know, I only fly an EAB Maule M7. Specifically one that passes the 51% rule and parks in HBC.

I don't know if this 172 is EAB or not, but I do know that it's possible to have an EAB that is based on a certificated design.

 

[tsts4]

I think that might be too firm a statement.

But what do I know, I only fly an EAB Maule M7. Specifically one that passes the 51% rule and parks in HBC.

I don't know if this 172 is EAB or not, but I do know that it's possible to have an EAB that is based on a certificated design.

Not going to quibble. AC 20-27G is pretty clear on the subject. Not sure how your Maule got certified under E-AB but would be interested in hearing about it. And there’s a big difference between a certified design that someone built off plans or whatever vs a plane that was factory built and actually held a standard airworthiness certificate at one time and was then modified and reissued an experimental certificate under one of the other experimental categories, such as R&D.

 

[sourdough44]

‘EAB’ used to be ‘earn a buck’ in Wisconsin. They were trying to get deer numbers down, so you had to shoot an anterless(some areas) before shooting a buck.

 

[EvilEagle]

Still digging on the simple things, like "how does someone get fuel?". A month away...

Bassler is easy to deal with. On the other hand, they mark up their fuel a RIDICULOUS amount for Airventure. Might not be a big deal for those who show up and buy one tank of gas to fly out on but it's killin us in warbirds when it's $7.69 a gallon!

 

[kyleb]

Bassler is easy to deal with. On the other hand, they mark up their fuel a RIDICULOUS amount for Airventure. Might not be a big deal for those who show up and buy one tank of gas to fly out on but it's killin us in warbirds when it's $7.69 a gallon!

Warbird guy complaining about fuel prices. Sheesh. ;-)

But Basler's prices are rather "opportunistic". I minimize my fuel buy from them.

 

[flyingron]

So does the cutoff for VINTAGE progress every so often? IOW will my 1978 Bellanca become eligible someday, or am I forever cursed to be modern?

The camping rules follow the judging rules. It's changed from 65 back when I first started at OSH in 1992 and is now through the end of 1970. I've not heard any rumors that it is going to change anytime soon.

 

[flyingron]

Ah - I thought EAB meant experimental exhibition. So it’s an experimental - but not EAB.

No EAB means "EXPERIMENTAL -- AMATEUR BUILT." It means that it was primarily constructed for recreation or education purposes. ExEx is often used for Warbirds. Ex R&D, Ex Market, Ex Prove Compliance are other variants. Typical only EAB has the more lenient operating restrictons. And again, only EAB can camp in HBC/HBP. (Well, I guess if an amateur built it and certificated it as ExEx or whatever, they'd let him in, but they're not letting in some spam cam that just has an experimental engine).

 

[tsts4]

Warbird guy complaining about fuel prices. Sheesh. ;-)

But Basler's prices are rather "opportunistic". I minimize my fuel buy from them.

Bassler is easy to deal with. On the other hand, they mark up their fuel a RIDICULOUS amount for Airventure. Might not be a big deal for those who show up and buy one tank of gas to fly out on but it's killin us in warbirds when it's $7.69 a gallon!

It’s realative. I paid $7.29 a gal at Osh last year. At my homedrome to start the trip I paid $6.51 so about $35 difference between the two topoffs.

 

[kyleb]

It’s realative. I paid $7.29 a gal at Osh last year. At my homedrome to start the trip I paid $6.51 so about $35 difference between the two topoffs.

And you "camp" in a luxurious trailer in a private campground while I'm in a dome tent under the wing. You're just a high rent kinda guy.

See you in about 4 weeks...

 

[tsts4]

And you "camp" in a luxurious trailer in a private campground while I'm in a dome tent under the wing. You're just a high rent kinda guy.

See you in about 4 weeks...

Absolutely! I’ll buy you a beer at SOS and help you feel better.

 

[Pugs]

The 1st webinar is tonight @ 7pm CDT. If you're brand new you really want to attend/watch the replay later. Everyone should attend/watch it based on the retardation we see in the arrival every year.

Great presentation and answered a lot of questions for me. Well worth bringing it up when they have it in the EAA video library.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

So does the cutoff for VINTAGE progress every so often? IOW will my 1978 Bellanca become eligible someday, or am I forever cursed to be modern?

The camping rules follow the judging rules. It's changed from 65 back when I first started at OSH in 1992 and is now through the end of 1970. I've not heard any rumors that it is going to change anytime soon.

It used to progress more often. In addition to what Ron posted above, I went and looked through all my old NOTAMs, and found that it was prior to 1967 in 2002 and 1968 in 2005 (I don't have the 03/04 NOTAMs so not sure when it changed), and then it got bumped to 1971 all at once in 2010 and there it has remained. Note that aircraft *prior to* that year are the ones that can park in Vintage, so you still can't park a 1971 there.

I would imagine that the "formula", if there is one, is based on how much of the existing fleet would qualify for vintage. I'm sure they don't want the majority of aircraft to qualify, and since most certified GA aircraft were made in the 60s and 70s, I wouldn't expect it to change for a LOOOOOOONG time.

Bassler is easy to deal with. On the other hand, they mark up their fuel a RIDICULOUS amount for Airventure. Might not be a big deal for those who show up and buy one tank of gas to fly out on but it's killin us in warbirds when it's $7.69 a gallon!

Anything that could make it to Berlin and back should be able to make it to Clintonville and back.

 

[EvilEagle]

Anything that could make it to Berlin and back should be able to make it to Clintonville and back.

My T-6 couldn't make it to Berlin and back.

Also, we fly pretty much every morning at Osh. If it was one tank, ok that's the cost of doing business. I burned about 35 gallons a day every day at Osh last year. Conveniently the fuel price isn't posted anywhere so I got the fuel bill for $1500 at the end of the week. Yowza!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

My T-6 couldn't make it to Berlin and back.

I know, I just figured it was a pretty good joke. Then again, I'm a dad, so I have lost the ability to detect whether jokes are good or not.

Also, we fly pretty much every morning at Osh. If it was one tank, ok that's the cost of doing business. I burned about 35 gallons a day every day at Osh last year. Conveniently the fuel price isn't posted anywhere so I got the fuel bill for $1500 at the end of the week. Yowza!

How much does your plane hold?

That is a helluva fuel bill. Yikes.

 

[EvilEagle]

I know, I just figured it was a pretty good joke. Then again, I'm a dad, so I have lost the ability to detect whether jokes are good or not.


How much does your plane hold?

That is a helluva fuel bill. Yikes.

Standard T-6 holds 110 gallons, G models (and Harvard IV's) hold 144 gallons (* both numbers are book numbers, I'd bet on 5-10 gallons less in actual conditions)

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Standard T-6 holds 110 gallons, G models (and Harvard IV's) hold 144 gallons (* both numbers are book numbers, I'd bet on 5-10 gallons less in actual conditions)

So if you're keeping an hour reserve on board, you can really only fly a couple of days at a time and then refill. Up to you whether it's worth the time to save the money.

That is one advantage of having a plane that carries 7.3 hours of fuel... I can wait to fuel until I get somewhere cheap!

 

[WDD]

Great presentation and answered a lot of questions for me. Well worth bringing it up when they have it in the EAA video library.

I liked the clarification on the “little things” that can trip you up. Things such as parking availability, parking request signs, etc. And the not so “little” , such as how to abort a landing if needed, turning at the gravel pit, when to slow in the pattern, etc.

 

[tsts4]

I liked the clarification on the “little things” that can trip you up. Things such as parking availability, parking request signs, etc. And the not so “little” , such as how to abort a landing if needed, turning at the gravel pit, when to slow in the pattern, etc.

Yep. I highly recommend newbies spend some time on the EAA AirVenture website. Wealth of information there:

EAA Fly In: Flying to Oshkosh | EAA AirVenture Oshkosh

Join more than 10,000 pilots flying to Oshkosh for the annual EAA fly-in. Flying your aircraft to EAA AirVenture Oshkosh is an experience like no other!

www.eaa.org

Plan Your EAA AirVenture Trip | EAA AirVenture Oshkosh

Find information on where to stay, maps, food and concessions, services, sharing a ride to Oshkosh, and more. Plan your EAA AirVenture trip today!

www.eaa.org

 

[Lowflynjack]

Well, officially it is 32 days until Oshkosh! I'll head out the Thursday before, so 27 days for me. It's getting real!

 

[Lowflynjack]

I liked the clarification on the “little things” that can trip you up. Things such as parking availability, parking request signs, etc. And the not so “little” , such as how to abort a landing if needed, turning at the gravel pit, when to slow in the pattern, etc.

I teach the NOTAM to local pilots every year. It's very stressful for someone who hasn't been there. I print and highlight the NOTAMs for them, etc. I always tell everyone, the most helpful thing you can do is watch the EAA videos and any others you can find on YouTube. I watched so many before my first flight in that when I saw the landmarks, I felt like I'd been there before.

 

[rwellner98]

Not going to quibble. AC 20-27G is pretty clear on the subject. Not sure how your Maule got certified under E-AB but would be interested in hearing about it.

Already answered in my original post, since it's what everyone asks.

From that circular:

"""
The major portion of the aircraft is defined as more than 50 percent of the fabrication and assembly tasks, commonly referred to as the “51-percent rule.”
"""

The builder used some factory parts, like a kit build, but built the thing himself, like any more commonly available EAB kit build. Someday I'll fly it to Oshkosh and when I do, I'll bring build photos. As I've said before, I don't know anything about the 172 in question, but wanted to point out that the statements here stating that it couldn't be EAB aren't accurate. I don't know how to get an accurate count on Maule's, but I have good reason to believe that there are somewhere between 5 and 7 EAB Maules floating around out there.

 

[tsts4]

Already answered in my original post, since it's what everyone asks.

From that circular:

"""
The major portion of the aircraft is defined as more than 50 percent of the fabrication and assembly tasks, commonly referred to as the “51-percent rule.”
"""

The builder used some factory parts, like a kit build, but built the thing himself, like any more commonly available EAB kit build. Someday I'll fly it to Oshkosh and when I do, I'll bring build photos. As I've said before, I don't know anything about the 172 in question, but wanted to point out that the statements here stating that it couldn't be EAB aren't accurate. I don't know how to get an accurate count on Maule's, but I have good reason to believe that there are somewhere between 5 and 7 EAB Maules floating around out there.

OK, wasn't aware that Maule's could be built from plans/pre-fab'd parts from the factory-learned something and that's a completely different situation than the aforementioned 172. Definitely the exception in the E-AB world as it's rare outside of LSA/E-LSA to have both a type certified version and an E-AB version from the same company. Usually if it exists it's a clone like the Cub and its number of look-alikes. AC 20-27G clearly lays out the limits, and they are strict, on using pre-fab'd components, components off of type-certified aircraft or converting type-certified aircraft to amateur-built aircraft so I stand by my stance on the 172 example. YMMV....

 

[rwellner98]

OK, wasn't aware that Maule's could be built from plans/kit parts-learned something and that's a completely different situation than the aforementioned 172.

No, it's no different. You cannot go to the maule factory and buy a kit. It is exactly the same as a 172 from that perspective.

Definitely the exception in the E-AB world as it's rare outside of LSA/E-LSA to have both a type certified version and an E-AB version from the same company.

There isn't an EAB from Maule. If there was, there would be more than 5 in existence as proven by the existence of an entire company (bear hawk) making essentially EAB Maules. Mine was cobbled together with some factory parts, some fabricated parts and built by an amateur under the 51% rule that is also used to qualify conventional kits. There is no reason the same process couldn't be used to make an EAB modeled off pretty much any certificated airplane if one was sufficiently motivated (and in some cases, had sufficiently deep pockets).

 

[WDD]

So, if I bought a couple of wrecked 172s for parts, fabricated lots of parts, and out of that built one flyable 172, would that be eligible for EAB status?

 

[tsts4]

No, it's no different. You cannot go to the maule factory and buy a kit. It is exactly the same as a 172 from that perspective.


There isn't an EAB from Maule. If there was, there would be more than 5 in existence as proven by the existence of an entire company (bear hawk) making essentially EAB Maules. Mine was cobbled together with some factory parts, some fabricated parts and built by an amateur under the 51% rule that is also used to qualify conventional kits. There is no reason the same process couldn't be used to make an EAB modeled off pretty much any certificated airplane if one was sufficiently motivated (and in some cases, had sufficiently deep pockets).

OK so what you have is Maule clone, but not a Maule which is a type certified design not offered by the company in a E-AB fashion be it plans or kit, A distinction in certification. However, an important one because while what you say is true,that any plane can be cloned given the resources that almost never happens, and plans builders are a dying breed as Kits have completely taken over the E-AB segment.

 

[tsts4]

So, if I bought a couple of wrecked 172s for parts, fabricated lots of parts, and out of that built one flyable 172, would that be eligible for EAB status?

Maybe, but you' have to fab a lot otherwise the FAA would deem it a restoration or repair which would render it E-AB ineligible. 20-27G provides guidance on this.

 

[Ed Haywood]

Maybe, but you' have to fab a lot otherwise the FAA would deem it a restoration or repair which would render it E-AB ineligible. 20-27G provides guidance on this.

Seems like the type of construction would make a difference in how hard it is to meet the FAA guidance for fabrication.

It would be hard for a homebuilder to make structural parts for an aluminum monocoque aircraft like a Cessna or Piper.

But a tube and fabric aircraft like a Maule would be easy. Building a frame from scratch is challenging without a jig, but once the frame is laid out, removing and replacing individual members is fairly simple. Other than the frame, stamped wing ribs, and a few other things, most of the rest is just standard AN stuff, wood, and fabric.

 

[tsts4]

Seems like the type of construction would make a difference in how hard it is to meet the FAA guidance for fabrication.

It would be hard for a homebuilder to make structural parts for an aluminum monocoque aircraft like a Cessna or Piper.

But a tube and fabric aircraft like a Maule would be easy. Building a frame from scratch is challenging without a jig, but once the frame is laid out, removing and replacing individual members is fairly simple. Other than the frame, stamped wing ribs, and a few other things, most of the rest is just standard AN stuff, wood, and fabric.

Absolutely which is typical of plans only designs. Unfortunately, the amount of effort, and in some cases acquiring the necessary construction skills, coupled with the proliferation of easy to build kits has relegated plans building to a very niche activity in the E-AB world. It still occurs, but on a very low scale, at least compared to the number of kits started and completed each year. The plans builders garner my utmost respect.

 

[EvilEagle]

So if you're keeping an hour reserve on board, you can really only fly a couple of days at a time and then refill. Up to you whether it's worth the time to save the money.

That is one advantage of having a plane that carries 7.3 hours of fuel... I can wait to fuel until I get somewhere cheap!

Yes, and if one of those is for the show, that's a long (& very thirsty) flight so you have to be topped off. Flying daily at Osh, you need to have plenty of fuel for when someone shuts down the runway(s). I try to be on the ground by 1/2 tanks at Osh - too many things can happen to you.

 

[flyingron]

So, if I bought a couple of wrecked 172s for parts, fabricated lots of parts, and out of that built one flyable 172, would that be eligible for EAB status?

You could try. Again, you'd have to show primarily for recreation/educaiotn and at least 51 percent of the tasks involved. I suspect the FAA would give a lot of scrutiny to an franken-Skyhawk.

But again, you have to meet the EAA requirement:

It has to be be plans or kit build and regisered as such. Plans built must be constructed without the aid of purchased major subassemblies. It must be registered EAB. Kit built just be one of the FAA approved kits. There's also a classic category there, but that's even more restricted.

 

[TCABM]

You could try. Again, you'd have to show primarily for recreation/educaiotn and at least 51 percent of the tasks involved. I suspect the FAA would give a lot of scrutiny to an franken-Skyhawk.

But again, you have to meet the EAA requirement:

It has to be be plans or kit build and regisered as such. Plans built must be constructed without the aid of purchased major subassemblies. It must be registered EAB. Kit built just be one of the FAA approved kits. There's also a classic category there, but that's even more restricted.

So, the simple answer is the AWC has to say Experimental Amateur Built?

 

[flyingron]

So, the simple answer is the AWC has to say Experimental Amateur Built?

Plus it has to meet the other judging guidelines. You don't have to have your plane judged but it has to fit into one of their categories.

 

[WDD]

So, the simple answer is the AWC has to say Experimental Amateur Built?

"Simple Answer" - I don't think that's allowed under the POA guidelines.

 

[baboss]

The recording of the "Tips for Flying Into EAA AirVenture 2025" EAA webinar is available to EAA members.
Some interesting tidbits:
- The new FBOLink/Airtext app allowing digital ATIS retrieval via phone/tablet
- Arrival ATIS broadcast power will be increased from 5 to 10 watts, enabling reception out to 60 miles at 3,000ft.
- New lateral separation procedure on the Fisk Approach. During the webinar Q&A a question popped up about a new lateral separation procedure that Controllers may use, ONLY IF ASSIGNED BY ATC. This does not appear to be in the NOTAM/Notice that I have found yet and the presenter (Fred Stadler - the father of the arrival NOTAM) seemed surprised by this in the webinar. It doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies that the right hand and left hand might not be on the same page at EAA when it comes to this. Fred seemed to think maybe the controllers might be trying this out this year before it becomes an official part of the procedure.
This lateral separation procedure is apparently only mentioned in this EAA video released 3 days ago (about 2:12 into the video):

It sounds like they might try to separate slower traffic on one side of the railroad tracks and faster traffic on the other side. As stated in the YouTube video, controllers may use this procedure but is only to be used IF ASSIGNED BY ATC.
I hope this lateral separation procedure works out because as many have commented over the years, a slow mover in the conga line just creates a ripple effect.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I teach the NOTAM to local pilots every year. It's very stressful for someone who hasn't been there. I print and highlight the NOTAMs for them, etc. I always tell everyone, the most helpful thing you can do is watch the EAA videos and any others you can find on YouTube. I watched so many before my first flight in that when I saw the landmarks, I felt like I'd been there before.

The most important thing, IMO, is how to spot Fisk. The controllers can't see you until you're within about a mile of Fisk, and I've seen a bunch of people accept instructions that weren't for them because they weren't yet at Fisk, and then they either screw things up farther down the line or they realize they screwed up and have to go back to the beginning.

When the tracks and the road come back together, you're at Pickett. When they split apart again, you're approaching Fisk. Follow the tracks, not the road... And if you know what you're doing, you'll be able to see the pink shirts by a trailer up on the hill on the N-S road just as you get to Fisk. It's even on Google Maps: https://maps.app.goo.gl/z9mbRexzZZTzxGuP6

 

[WDD]

Good tip - hadn’t thought about that. I see FISKE is even on the sectional chart. And seems like it can be loaded into your FF flight plan and your GTN/Nav as a double check / aid to situational awareness to confirm what you’re staring at outside the window.