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 » Aviation Marketplace
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 20th 08, 07:50 AM posted to rec.aviation.marketplace,rec.aviation.homebuilt
Victor Bravo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 89
Default Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS

Aeronca 11AC Chief groundloop project just received. Have flying
Taylorcraft so this is surplus to my needs. Groundlooped, but welding
is 90+% done already. Fabric removed. Needs engine, struts, possibly
spars. Some paperwork is there, but it is pretty light. Have good bill
of sale, no ownership chain problems. Airplane has the large vertical
fin, possible to convert up to 100 or 115HP. Was flying a couple of
years ago, stored indoors in dry AZ heat. LSA compliant. Asking $6000
OBO. Contact me at 818-701-6801. Los Angeles area.

Bill Berle
Ads
  #2  
Old June 21st 08, 04:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.marketplace,rec.aviation.homebuilt
RST Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,147
Default Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS

Wow, there's a hell of a deal. "Welding done" implies that the fuselage was
severely tweaked, and busted up so bad it needs an engine, struts and
"possibly" spars. Not a hell of a lot of paperwork. Sounds like it was
"groundlooped" into a bridge abutment.

I'll bet you've got 'em standing in line for this one, eh Berle?

Jim

--
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought
without accepting it."
--Aristotle


"Victor Bravo" wrote in message
...
Aeronca 11AC Chief groundloop project just received. Have flying
Taylorcraft so this is surplus to my needs. Groundlooped, but welding
is 90+% done already. Fabric removed. Needs engine, struts, possibly
spars. Some paperwork is there, but it is pretty light. Have good bill
of sale, no ownership chain problems. Airplane has the large vertical
fin, possible to convert up to 100 or 115HP. Was flying a couple of
years ago, stored indoors in dry AZ heat. LSA compliant. Asking $6000
OBO. Contact me at 818-701-6801. Los Angeles area.

Bill Berle



  #3  
Old June 22nd 08, 10:10 PM posted to rec.aviation.marketplace,rec.aviation.homebuilt
Victor Bravo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 89
Default Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS

On Jun 21, 8:59 am, "RST Engineering" wrote:
Wow, there's a hell of a deal. "Welding done" implies that the fuselage was
severely tweaked, and busted up so bad it needs an engine, struts and
"possibly" spars. Not a hell of a lot of paperwork. Sounds like it was
"groundlooped" into a bridge abutment.

I'll bet you've got 'em standing in line for this one, eh Berle?

Jim


You really are a putz, Mr. Weir.

The airplane was groundlooped without any bridge abutments nearby.
Most any groundloop will do some damage to a steel tube fuselage. If
you had been around old airplanes to any degree you would already know
that. You'd also know that the damage from a groundloop RANGES from
"severely tweaked" to just a few tubes bent around the gear mounting.
This one's not severley tweaked.

The struts were bent. One or two may be usable, I'll see when I get
them. I figured that I would just position it as needing struts to be
conservative. An idiot or a dishonest person would not mention bent
struts in a for sale listing, and an honest person would mention it.

The engine was removed for use on another airplane.You do know that
engines get removed and reinstalled occasionally, don't you?

The spars are probably save-able but will need some repairs. An honest
person reports this. You know, minor spar damage happens when you drag
a wingtip in a groundloop.

If you had been around old airplanes for a while, you know that the
majority of them have less then perfect paperwork. An honest guy
reports this up front. There is an airworthiness certificate, a clean
bill of sale, and some paperwork, but not all logs and papers.

As far as a hell of a deal, if you didn't already know it the 11AC
Chief meets the LAS rules at the same time as being a classic, at the
same time as being a certified aircraft, at the same time as being a
very economical aircraft to operate. The new cookie-cutter plastic
LSA's go for $80K to 150K. A good rebuilt Chief goes for $25-30K, uses
LESS fuel and has LESS engine troubles than the Rotax powered euro
LSA's.

At anything less than six or seven thousand, for a fairly easy to fix
one, the Chief is a very reasonably priced project.

Have a look at the Zenair 601XL, where an airframe KIT costs you $20K.
Now look at the unfortunate and tragic problems the 601 is having with
the wings folding in flight, and compare it to an airplane with a 60
year safety record, full commercial FAA certification, and tell me
that this is not a reasonable bargain.

Before I insulted any of your statements or products for sale with
regard to aviation electronics, I'd have made sure I had my facts
straight.

If you want to challenge me to a duel with words, I think you'd better
bring some more class, brains, and aviation experience to the game.
This is not a debate about Ohm's Law, you might be out of your depth.

Bill Berle

  #4  
Old June 22nd 08, 10:38 PM posted to rec.aviation.marketplace,rec.aviation.homebuilt
cavelamb himself[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 474
Default Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS



You really are a putz, Mr. Weir.

The airplane was groundlooped without any bridge abutments nearby.
Most any groundloop will do some damage to a steel tube fuselage. If
you had been around old airplanes to any degree you would already know
that. You'd also know that the damage from a groundloop RANGES from
"severely tweaked" to just a few tubes bent around the gear mounting.
This one's not severley tweaked.



No need to get huffy, Bill.

A while back we got a nice Chief with a questionable engine for just
over $10k.

No airframe damage - the airplane was flyable - and indeed I flew it
from Florida to Texas.

$8k for a bent airframe and questionable wings? No engine?
Sounds like, like it or not, a basket case.

For 6K?

I'd have to agree with Jim on this one...

Richard
  #5  
Old June 22nd 08, 10:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.marketplace,rec.aviation.homebuilt
RST Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,147
Default Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS

Perhaps so. I failed to include the whole sig.

Jim
A&P, IA
2500 hours in taildraggers without a groundloop.
45 years in the airplane fixin' business.




If you want to challenge me to a duel with words, I think you'd better
bring some more class, brains, and aviation experience to the game.
This is not a debate about Ohm's Law, you might be out of your depth.

Bill Berle



  #6  
Old June 22nd 08, 10:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.marketplace,rec.aviation.homebuilt
Jay Maynard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 521
Default Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS

On 2008-06-22, Victor Bravo wrote:
At anything less than six or seven thousand, for a fairly easy to fix
one, the Chief is a very reasonably priced project.


Assuming someone has an A&P-IA handy to supervise the work, yeah. here are
probably worse projects out there.

Have a look at the Zenair 601XL, where an airframe KIT costs you $20K.
Now look at the unfortunate and tragic problems the 601 is having with
the wings folding in flight, and compare it to an airplane with a 60
year safety record, full commercial FAA certification, and tell me
that this is not a reasonable bargain.


There are lots of Zodiacs flying. There have been a few recent accidents,
but there is no common thread among them as to the apparent cause. AMD
tested the Zodiac XL with a full FAR 23 certification schedule, even though
it wasn't required. Further, after the only crash of an AMD-manufactured
aircraft, a thorough investigation was made of the materials, processes, and
design of the aircraft - and nothing at all was found to be wrong.

At this point, it appears that the crashes are likely due to either pilot or
builder error. The Zodiac has light and responsive controls, and it's very
easy to overcontrol it (as I know from humbling experience).

I put over 30 hours on N55ZC in the past week and a half, and flew it from
Georgia to Charlotte to southern Arkansas to Houston to College Station to
Austin to Dallas to Oklahoma City to Topeka to Fairmont. If I had any doubt
that it would have gotten me here safely, I wouldn't have attempted the trip
- let alone paid $133K for it.

Before I insulted any of your statements or products for sale with
regard to aviation electronics, I'd have made sure I had my facts
straight.


Too bad you had to challenge his statements by insulting *MY* new airplane.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (got it!)
  #7  
Old June 23rd 08, 12:20 AM posted to rec.aviation.marketplace,rec.aviation.homebuilt
clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS

On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:10:15 -0700 (PDT), Victor Bravo
wrote:


Have a look at the Zenair 601XL, where an airframe KIT costs you $20K.
Now look at the unfortunate and tragic problems the 601 is having with
the wings folding in flight, and compare it to an airplane with a 60
year safety record, full commercial FAA certification, and tell me
that this is not a reasonable bargain.


Wings folding in flight??
New one on me. The ONE I'm aware of had bolts not properly installed.
The other one, the wings were torn off when a couple of
drug-compromized idiots put it into a dive or something that GREATLY
exceeded VNE and tried to pull it out, or something like that.
The Aeronca Champ would have suffered the same fate in both cases.

That said, the Champ IS a great plane, at can be a great value as
well.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
  #8  
Old June 23rd 08, 12:22 AM posted to rec.aviation.marketplace,rec.aviation.homebuilt
cavelamb himself[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 474
Default Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS

RST Engineering wrote:
Perhaps so. I failed to include the whole sig.

Jim
A&P, IA
2500 hours in taildraggers without a groundloop.
45 years in the airplane fixin' business.




Show off!

In 450 taildragger hours I have exactly one ground loop.

And in an 11AC at that.

Sanded through the skin under the wing tip bow.
A little duct tape and flew it home.

Like they say, there's them that has,
and them that's gonna...


Richard
  #9  
Old June 23rd 08, 12:33 AM posted to rec.aviation.marketplace,rec.aviation.homebuilt
Jim Logajan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,958
Default Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS

"RST Engineering" wrote:
Perhaps so. I failed to include the whole sig.

Jim
A&P, IA
2500 hours in taildraggers without a groundloop.
45 years in the airplane fixin' business.


Hmmm, none of that explains your initial post. I think you need to add this
to your sig:

ESP that gives you the ability to provide the history of an aircraft that
was described in a single paragraph.

I'd be interested in knowing the quality of the welds - and which bridge
the aircraft ran into. ;-)

(Okay, the above is not particularly diplomatic, but I think you over-
reached and could have done a better job diplomacy-wise yourself and still
managed to raise legit condition issues. It isn't like the Usenet aviation
groups are currently overflowing on the decency/diplomacy front so much so
that a bit of snideness is needed to balance it.)
  #10  
Old June 23rd 08, 01:39 AM posted to rec.aviation.marketplace,rec.aviation.homebuilt
RST Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,147
Default Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS

Jim ...

In the first place, this thread belongs in rec.aviation.marketplace. It is
NOT a homebuilt and it is off-topic. I didn't say anything about that.

In the second place, this fellow has a history of abusing this newsgroup
trying to peddle sows' ears at silk purse prices. An 11AC with a possible
busted spar isn't a bargain at giveaway prices, much less the asking price.

So, we have to come up with an engine, some more welding (or re-welding,
depending as you say on the quality, and a question in the back of my mind
as to how the "90% complete" number came to be and why the last 10% hasn't
been done), either a lot of woodwork or a hell of a lot of woodwork
depending, struts, and a complete fabric cover. Plus a lot of bits and
pieces to hold it all together. Would'ja say, roughly, $15k in work?
That's my best estimate, figuring that the spar is a 50-50 proposition.
Somewhere between $12 and $18?

Jim

--
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought
without accepting it."
--Aristotle


"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .



Hmmm, none of that explains your initial post. I think you need to add
this
to your sig:

ESP that gives you the ability to provide the history of an aircraft that
was described in a single paragraph.

I'd be interested in knowing the quality of the welds - and which bridge
the aircraft ran into. ;-)

(Okay, the above is not particularly diplomatic, but I think you over-
reached and could have done a better job diplomacy-wise yourself and still
managed to raise legit condition issues. It isn't like the Usenet aviation
groups are currently overflowing on the decency/diplomacy front so much so
that a bit of snideness is needed to balance it.)



 




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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Aeronca 11AC Chief Project FS Victor Bravo Home Built 56 August 10th 08 11:25 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.