A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

BD5B



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 14th 03, 06:10 PM
Gig Giacona
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"RobertR237" wrote in message
...
In article , Ron Wanttaja
writes:


Total homebuilt accident rate: 10%
Total certified BD-5 rate: 21%
Total all-listing BD-5 rate: 8.5%

So whether the BD-5 is twice as bad as the main fleet or a little bit
better really depends on your interpretation of the certification data.

By
the FAA and EAA's interpretation, the BD-5's accident rate is twice that

of
the main homebuilt fleet.

Ron Wanttaja



What would be more telling would be the accident rate per hours flown.

Even if
the 236 BD-5s were accurate, I suspect the accident per hour would be
significantly higher for the BD5 than your figures indicate.

Unfortunately,
there is no available database that would give that information.


I haven't spent that much time looking at the accident reports but it seems
that TTAF and TTE might be listed somewhere on, if not all, a good number of
accident reports. While you wouldn't get a total time for the fleet you
could get a total time for the accident involved fleet. Might be telling.


  #2  
Old November 14th 03, 10:23 PM
- Barnyard BOb -
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Gig Giacona" wrote:

I haven't spent that much time looking at the accident reports but it seems
that TTAF and TTE might be listed somewhere on, if not all, a good number of
accident reports. While you wouldn't get a total time for the fleet you
could get a total time for the accident involved fleet. Might be telling.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Any body ever see a BD5 flying cross country?
Anybody ever see a BD5 fly?

I'd ask jaun for some figures, but I doubt he
would ever confirm that most flying BD5's have
far less than 50 hours TT on 'em.....
and this would be a lot of taxi time. g

At one time jaun did claimed there was one
with over 350 hours. However, if credibility is
an issue, the figure should be considered bogus.


Barnyard BOb -- over 713 hours TT on my RV3


  #3  
Old November 14th 03, 11:34 PM
Bart D. Hull
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yo Bob,

There was a BD-5J that was used as the "Coors Silver Bullet" and then was used
for shows at Oshkosh, etc. I could see that particular BD-5 as having more than
350 hours on it. I don't know if this particular bird is still flying.

After each airshow, the wings were pulled off and it was put in a trailer. Makes
sense as far as having a car and tools at the airshow as well as your plane.

I think a BIG indication of how difficult it is to fly is that a Ex- Blue Angel
was flying it for the demos! There is a gentleman in my EAA chapter that has one
and is rebuilding it after bleeding too much speed and ending up a bit high on
landing. He did mention that he really couldn't see the ground from the almost
fully reclined position that is the pilot seat. His BD-5 uses a Turbomecha
turbine with a PSRU prop reduction for power.

As with all things if it goes hellishly fast it probably doesn't do slow very well.

--
Bart D. Hull

Tempe, Arizona

Check
http://www.inficad.com/~bdhull/engine.html
for my Subaru Engine Conversion
Check http://www.inficad.com/~bdhull/fuselage.html
for Tango II I'm building.


- Barnyard BOb - wrote:

"Gig Giacona" wrote:


I haven't spent that much time looking at the accident reports but it seems
that TTAF and TTE might be listed somewhere on, if not all, a good number of
accident reports. While you wouldn't get a total time for the fleet you
could get a total time for the accident involved fleet. Might be telling.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Any body ever see a BD5 flying cross country?
Anybody ever see a BD5 fly?

I'd ask jaun for some figures, but I doubt he
would ever confirm that most flying BD5's have
far less than 50 hours TT on 'em.....
and this would be a lot of taxi time. g

At one time jaun did claimed there was one
with over 350 hours. However, if credibility is
an issue, the figure should be considered bogus.


Barnyard BOb -- over 713 hours TT on my RV3




  #4  
Old November 15th 03, 01:05 AM
- Barnyard BOb -
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:34:32 -0700, "Bart D. Hull"
wrote:

Yo Bob,

There was a BD-5J that was used as the "Coors Silver Bullet" and then was used
for shows at Oshkosh, etc. I could see that particular BD-5 as having more than
350 hours on it. I don't know if this particular bird is still flying.


Hmmm.
Come to think of it....
I've seen the Coors Silver Bullet fly.
Maybe it has 350 hours, maybe it doesn't...
given the trailering operation.

After each airshow, the wings were pulled off and it was put in a trailer. Makes
sense as far as having a car and tools at the airshow as well as your plane.


By any stretch of the imagination, the
BD5J is hardly an amateur endeavor and
it's value is mostly as an oddity. As you have noted,
it ain't no poor boy or rich boy cross country machine.

I think a BIG indication of how difficult it is to fly is that a Ex- Blue Angel
was flying it for the demos! There is a gentleman in my EAA chapter that has one
and is rebuilding it after bleeding too much speed and ending up a bit high on
landing. He did mention that he really couldn't see the ground from the almost
fully reclined position that is the pilot seat. His BD-5 uses a Turbomecha
turbine with a PSRU prop reduction for power.


I've been told that the "B" wing is NOT at all difficult to fly.

Keeping a liquid cooled engine running without it spewing it's
contents on the inhabitant is but one of the many frightful engine
reliability challenges. Landing out with tiny wheels and NO
crush room rounds out the rest of a very plague ridden machine.

The reclined position is no big deal for any high performance
sailplane jockey.

The BD5 in the hangar next to me does not recline as much
as my old sailplane. This is a beautiful BD5 that is just waiting to
hurt anybody that dares think its untested Kawasaki watercraft
engine is worth risking life and limb in lieu of a proven engine.

As with all things if it goes hellishly fast it probably doesn't do slow very well.


How fast is hellishly fast?
A prop powered SX 300 can do 300...
and actually GO SOMEWHERE.... RELIABILY.

From what I've read about the "B" wing,
it's pretty much of a pussycat with a nice
stall around 65 mph?

For me, the problem is that no proven cost
effective engine exists for this aircraft, and landing
out dead stick is very risky business since you wear
this little rascal without an inch of room to spare.
None for your feet. None for ass. None for your
rib cage. None for your head... and the engine
sits at the back side of it. Hardly engineered
for human longevity in case of emergency.

Barnyard BOb -- over 50 years of successful flight
  #5  
Old November 15th 03, 06:54 AM
Jeff Schroeder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

A few comments from a BD-5 builder & pilot.

I know of at least two with 300+ hours on them as I've talked with the
owners. One is in Canada with turbo Honda power, the other back east
somewhere with a KFM engine. Two in N. California are at 140 or so. Another,
with a VW engine, had well over 100 as I recall. However, most that have
flown, like mine, have just a few hours on them.

General BD-5 advice:

Difficult and fussy to build. However, kits, parts, and support are
available. NOT a beginner project. Not a practical airplane due to
limitations in size, safety, and reliability.

Easy to build overweight. (the BIG problem with most alternative engines
used in it) Most BDs are from 50 to 250# over the original design empty
weight. Bede says 450 pounds E.W. should be the max. Few have achieved this.
Imagine tossing a couple bags of cement into something as small as a BD-5,
and how that would change the flying qualities!

Original airfoil has hysterisis in stall recovery. You have to reduce angle
of attack well below the stall angle to get the airflow to reattach. Most
BDs being built today have a thicker % section or a L.E. cuff to prevent
this.

No crashworthiness.

Difficult to get most engines to cool properly with the mid-fuselage buried
location. Several early crashes were caused by overheat seizures in
overgross planes. This was exacerbated by a pitchup at power failure that
would put the plane near or in a stall if not corrected by forward stick and
retrimming! . (high thrustline)

A very easy plane to fly! Delightful handling and control harmony. (at a
reasonable weight) Very stable. It can also outmaneuver a hummingbird on
amphetamines. Has a nearly 15/1 glide ratio at 120 mph.

Posters disclaimer! I've had four deadsticks in my 5. I think that I
finally found the problem in the fuel system and corrected it. I am being
careful not to fly again until ground testing convinces me that everything
is fine. The plane flies great, but the silent birdman thing has gotten
really old. One was into a field where I hit an irrigation pipe (hidden in
weeds) and ripped off the gear. Plane has flown several times since that
one.

Jeff Schroeder
N525JS


"- Barnyard BOb -" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:34:32 -0700, "Bart D. Hull"
wrote:

Yo Bob,

There was a BD-5J that was used as the "Coors Silver Bullet" and then was

used
for shows at Oshkosh, etc. I could see that particular BD-5 as having

more than
350 hours on it. I don't know if this particular bird is still flying.


Hmmm.
Come to think of it....
I've seen the Coors Silver Bullet fly.
Maybe it has 350 hours, maybe it doesn't...
given the trailering operation.

After each airshow, the wings were pulled off and it was put in a

trailer. Makes
sense as far as having a car and tools at the airshow as well as your

plane.

By any stretch of the imagination, the
BD5J is hardly an amateur endeavor and
it's value is mostly as an oddity. As you have noted,
it ain't no poor boy or rich boy cross country machine.

I think a BIG indication of how difficult it is to fly is that a Ex- Blue

Angel
was flying it for the demos! There is a gentleman in my EAA chapter that

has one
and is rebuilding it after bleeding too much speed and ending up a bit

high on
landing. He did mention that he really couldn't see the ground from the

almost
fully reclined position that is the pilot seat. His BD-5 uses a

Turbomecha
turbine with a PSRU prop reduction for power.


I've been told that the "B" wing is NOT at all difficult to fly.

Keeping a liquid cooled engine running without it spewing it's
contents on the inhabitant is but one of the many frightful engine
reliability challenges. Landing out with tiny wheels and NO
crush room rounds out the rest of a very plague ridden machine.

The reclined position is no big deal for any high performance
sailplane jockey.

The BD5 in the hangar next to me does not recline as much
as my old sailplane. This is a beautiful BD5 that is just waiting to
hurt anybody that dares think its untested Kawasaki watercraft
engine is worth risking life and limb in lieu of a proven engine.

As with all things if it goes hellishly fast it probably doesn't do slow

very well.

How fast is hellishly fast?
A prop powered SX 300 can do 300...
and actually GO SOMEWHERE.... RELIABILY.

From what I've read about the "B" wing,
it's pretty much of a pussycat with a nice
stall around 65 mph?

For me, the problem is that no proven cost
effective engine exists for this aircraft, and landing
out dead stick is very risky business since you wear
this little rascal without an inch of room to spare.
None for your feet. None for ass. None for your
rib cage. None for your head... and the engine
sits at the back side of it. Hardly engineered
for human longevity in case of emergency.

Barnyard BOb -- over 50 years of successful flight



  #6  
Old November 15th 03, 08:52 AM
- Barnyard BOb -
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



"Jeff Schroeder" wrote:

A few comments from a BD-5 builder & pilot.

I know of at least two with 300+ hours on them as I've talked with the
owners. One is in Canada with turbo Honda power, the other back east
somewhere with a KFM engine. Two in N. California are at 140 or so. Another,
with a VW engine, had well over 100 as I recall. However, most that have
flown, like mine, have just a few hours on them.

General BD-5 advice:


Absolutely great stuff snipped only for brevity

A very easy plane to fly! Delightful handling and control harmony. (at a
reasonable weight) Very stable. It can also outmaneuver a hummingbird on
amphetamines. Has a nearly 15/1 glide ratio at 120 mph.

Posters disclaimer! I've had four deadsticks in my 5. I think that I
finally found the problem in the fuel system and corrected it. I am being
careful not to fly again until ground testing convinces me that everything
is fine. The plane flies great, but the silent birdman thing has gotten
really old. One was into a field where I hit an irrigation pipe (hidden in
weeds) and ripped off the gear. Plane has flown several times since that
one.

Jeff Schroeder
N525JS

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Kudos, Jeff...
For what gotta' be the most forthright post I've
ever read from a BD5 builder - owner - pilot.
You got big 'balls', my man.
My hat's off to ya'. g

This post is a KEEPER fer me.
Outstanding and a pure delight to read.
[Even if you're pulling my leg.]

You will keep us posted on how things go, right?


Barnyard BOb - over 50 years of successful flight


  #7  
Old November 16th 03, 03:43 AM
Jeff Schroeder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

With all of the invective, misinformation, pie in the sky hope, personal
grudges, and ignorant opinion that has made its way into the BD-5 dialogue
over the years, I've tried to state the facts as I know them, and help
others avoid mistakes. (like choosing to build a 5 in the first place,
rather than something more useful for the labor involved)

This plane, regardless of its faults, will be with us for some time as it
is one of the most facinating , notorious designs ever created. As many of
us have discovered, a rational examination of your abilities and needs has
little to do with the homebuilt design chosen. For example, I mostly fly
locally, but still want a ViperJet, Turbine Legend, or L-39. I ended up with
the 5 because I got the basic Bede incomplete kit for $ 500 from someone
who never started it. I figured it was like a big model, and could be
finished in a year or so. I was bullheaded enough, (and had a lot of shop
experience) to be able to keep going until it was done. I was curious
enough, and fortunate, to research it fully, and make several critical mods
during construction. This plane REQUIRES that the builder thoroughly
understand its history, and the experiences of others over the years, before
doing your own.

For photos of mine, and some experiences testing it, go to the
HomebuiltAirplanes.com site and look under the Completions and Flying
Techniques forum headings.

I'm not sure how big mine are by comparison, but want to keep them just the
same! ;-)

Jeff Schroeder



"- Barnyard BOb -" wrote in message
...


Kudos, Jeff...
For what gotta' be the most forthright post I've
ever read from a BD5 builder - owner - pilot.
You got big 'balls', my man.
My hat's off to ya'. g

This post is a KEEPER fer me.
Outstanding and a pure delight to read.
[Even if you're pulling my leg.]

You will keep us posted on how things go, right?


Barnyard BOb - over 50 years of successful flight




  #8  
Old November 16th 03, 06:54 PM
Richard Isakson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Bart D. Hull" wrote ...
There was a BD-5J that was used as the "Coors Silver Bullet" and then was

used
for shows at Oshkosh, etc. I could see that particular BD-5 as having more

than
350 hours on it. I don't know if this particular bird is still flying.

After each airshow, the wings were pulled off and it was put in a trailer.

Makes
sense as far as having a car and tools at the airshow as well as your

plane.

There's a dirty little secret about the Microturbo TRS 18 engine used in the
BD-5J that the owners don't like to talk about. It only gets 50 hours
between hot section overhauls and a hot section overhaul costs $5,000. The
plane is trailered to airshows because the owners don't want to pay the $100
per hour in maintenance costs for the hot section. Well, that and the fact
that the airplane doesn't even have enough fuel for VFR reserves when it
takes off.

Juan's engine, the Microturbo Cougar, on the other hand is a different sort
of animal. It was designed for target drones and has a much lower thrust
rating. Basically it's a disposable engine but if he ever gets it flying
he'll sell it and the airframe to you for $100,000.

Rich



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.