Flying on the Cheap - Wood

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
...
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
...
I must dissagree. "Fred" appears to have settled on what could be
termed
a
light, single seat, ELSA which should need roughly 30 to 45 HP. The VW
should be ideal for the purpose.

No matter what he builds from Home Depot lumber it isn't ever going to be
an
ELSA.


Perhaps, and perhaps not.

At the moment, they appear to still be pretty busy working on kit
certification. However, it appeared (by reading between the lines in an
interview with Marion Blakely) that plans built ELSA is in the future. It
would then be "out of character" for custom built aircraft and/or small
designers of plans to be specifically excluded.

Besides, I think you know what I meant in terms of performance--even if
Fred
chooses to apply only for the traditional amateur built experimental
category.

Peter


The entire basis of the E-LSA is that it is built exactly to "factory"
standards with no deviation. Otherwise it is a Exp-Amateur that just happens
to be legal to fly by an LSA.

There is nothing to be gained by builders, manufacturers, pilots or the FAA
by a change such as you describe and many things to lost so where is the
motivation for such a move?

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
...
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
...
I must dissagree. "Fred" appears to have settled on what could be
termed
a
light, single seat, ELSA which should need roughly 30 to 45 HP. The
VW
should be ideal for the purpose.

No matter what he builds from Home Depot lumber it isn't ever going to
be
an
ELSA.


Perhaps, and perhaps not.

At the moment, they appear to still be pretty busy working on kit
certification. However, it appeared (by reading between the lines in an
interview with Marion Blakely) that plans built ELSA is in the future.
It
would then be "out of character" for custom built aircraft and/or small
designers of plans to be specifically excluded.

Besides, I think you know what I meant in terms of performance--even if
Fred
chooses to apply only for the traditional amateur built experimental
category.

Peter


The entire basis of the E-LSA is that it is built exactly to "factory"
standards with no deviation. Otherwise it is a Exp-Amateur that just
happens
to be legal to fly by an LSA.

There is nothing to be gained by builders, manufacturers, pilots or the
FAA
by a change such as you describe and many things to lost so where is the
motivation for such a move?


We seem to be working our way around to agreement as we iron out the
nomenclature.

Now, if we can just get rid of those damanble dolly launches to transfer the
amphibians from airport to seaplane base--and the belly landings coming
back...

Peter
;-)

Peter Dohm wrote:

...

Now, if we can just get rid of those damanble dolly launches to transfer the
amphibians from airport to seaplane base--and the belly landings coming
back...


They're working on it.

Meanwhile your options include repostionable floats (leaving the
gear fixed) and motorgliders, which are allowed retracts. Actually,
I haven't found a prohibition against multiple engines for
motorgliders either.

--

FF