On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 19:07:08 -0700, "Rich S."
wrote:

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
.. .

I personally think you'll have a tough row to hoe. You're asking for a
*200-pound* reduction in the gross weight of the aircraft. That's going
to
take some fast talkin' to explain *why* such a choice is necessary...other
than to dodge FARs.

Hmmm..... You could say that you lust after a single-place airplane like
that Wanttaja guy has, so you've ripped out the bench seat and installed a
single bucket seat right in the middle.

Actually, I think you'd have to take an approach like that. Anybody
looking at the plane is going to assume you're going to fill it up, and a
Kitfox 7 has ~300 pounds of useful load left once the seats and tanks are
filled. Most pilots know enough not to stuff 300 pounds of baggage into a
compartment designed for only 100. But if the compartment is merely
*placarded* for 100, and the same plane (unchanged) can legally and safely
fly with 200 additional pounds in there, I don't think I'd hesitate to pack
in a few more brewskis.

If you redesigned and rebuilt the plane as a single-seater, with no
obvious/easy way to reconfigure it back to a two-seater, you'd have a
chance... and a pretty roomy ride.

Rich "No, I didn't infer you have a butt shaped like a bucket!" S.

And I wouldn't be too offended, as long as you're referring to buckets made
by Rubbermaid instead of Massey-Fergusson. :-)

http://lynn-machine-tool.com/rebuilding.htm

Ron Wanttaja