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

Texas Parasol Plans...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 11th 06, 03:14 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Texas Parasol Plans...

Rec.Aviation.Homebuilt special...

Eventually, these will be made available to everybody on Matronics, but for
the time being they are posted at http://www.home.earthlink.net/~tp-1/ just
for the nice boys and girls of RAH and RAU.

Enjoy...

Richard





Ads
  #2  
Old February 11th 06, 04:37 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Texas Parasol Plans...

now here is a perfect example of what I am looking for. free plans, a design
that looks like it could allow a number of different engines, both two
stroke and four, both aircraft and automotive AND other.

my only complaint with it is that the weight loads are tight. looks like a
great grasshopper type plane, with the possibility of using it for a bit
more.

now to find a similar design with a higher payload and room for an extra
seat.


"Richard Lamb" wrote in message
ink.net...
Rec.Aviation.Homebuilt special...

Eventually, these will be made available to everybody on Matronics, but
for
the time being they are posted at http://www.home.earthlink.net/~tp-1/
just
for the nice boys and girls of RAH and RAU.

Enjoy...

Richard







  #3  
Old February 11th 06, 05:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Texas Parasol Plans...

Bigger, faster, MORE!

They are never satisfied :-)
=================
Leon McAtee

  #4  
Old February 11th 06, 05:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Texas Parasol Plans...

Bigger, faster, MORE!

They are never satisfied :-)
=================
Leon McAtee

  #5  
Old February 11th 06, 05:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Texas Parasol Plans...

In article ,
"Tater Schuld" wrote:

now here is a perfect example of what I am looking for. free plans, a design
that looks like it could allow a number of different engines, both two
stroke and four, both aircraft and automotive AND other.

my only complaint with it is that the weight loads are tight. looks like a
great grasshopper type plane, with the possibility of using it for a bit
more.

now to find a similar design with a higher payload and room for an extra
seat.




Tater,

OK, you want to fly inexpensively. And, you've deduced that rolling your
own is one way to (possibly) reduce expenses. And, you've stuck around
here and maintained your composure in the face of some snotty comments
from some of the so-called participants here. Great.

I may have missed it, but I haven't seen you state your "mission
profile." Your comments above are a good beginning, but flesh it out a
little. Doing so may help get you further suggestions.

It may help you to make a list of your objectives, including total cost,
time line, skill set you have or are willing to acquire (kit vs.
plans-built), material preference (i love composite planes but wouldn't
want to build one), speed, range, payload, etc. ad infinitum.

Put down every thing you can think of, and then start sorting them out
in order of relative importance. Then post the top five here, and see
whether someone can pull a flying rabbit out of a hat for you.

Also, as others have suggested, there are many ways to get into the air,
including hang-gliding, soaring, powered parachutes, ultralights,
renting, joining a club, etc. When someone offers suggestions like that,
some feedback from you may help to narrow the field. If you *must* own
your own "real" airplane, say so, and let's take it from there.

The cost of flying doesn't just include the cost of the vehicle, it
also includes obtaining training and possibly a PPL, and a host of fixed
and per hour costs like fuel, storage, maintenance, insurance, etc.

Don't underestimate the power of action. Research is great, but once you
get started, magic happens. Join your local EAA chapter and go to
meetings. Buy the magazines that show 200 kitplanes in one issue. Take a
workshop or two.

If you're going to build, start doing it on your kitchen table if you
have to, with a file and a steak knife. If you wait until you have a
2500 square foot climate-controlled workshop with CNC machines and a
$200,000 bank balance, you're going to be walking until you're dead.
Start building, and things will happen that are completely beyond your
control.
  #6  
Old February 11th 06, 08:27 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Texas Parasol Plans...

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 15:14:18 GMT, Richard Lamb
wrote:

Rec.Aviation.Homebuilt special...

Eventually, these will be made available to everybody on Matronics, but for
the time being they are posted at http://www.home.earthlink.net/~tp-1/ just
for the nice boys and girls of RAH and RAU.

Enjoy...

Richard




Got the wing spar design updated yet? Or are we trying to thin the
herd?
  #7  
Old February 11th 06, 08:49 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Texas Parasol Plans...

Tater Schuld wrote:
now here is a perfect example of what I am looking for. free plans, a design
that looks like it could allow a number of different engines, both two
stroke and four, both aircraft and automotive AND other.

my only complaint with it is that the weight loads are tight. looks like a
great grasshopper type plane, with the possibility of using it for a bit
more.

now to find a similar design with a higher payload and room for an extra
seat.


Tater, despite what the America Bashing Third World (tm) thinks, ALL aircraft
are similarly restrictive on weights. You simply can not pile on excess
weight on any airplane and produce a successful flying machine.

There have been some twos built this way, but they are restricted to
Normal Category maneuvering limits. (That may change in the near future when
Al Robinson finishes his Texas Pete - A side-by-side two seater with a much
heavier built wing.)

This is a great little baby buggy. Inexpensive to build and fly, a great
flyer, and with a proven history.

I offer it as an excellent choice for a first time build.

Richard
  #8  
Old February 11th 06, 08:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Texas Parasol Plans...

clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 15:14:18 GMT, Richard Lamb
wrote:


Rec.Aviation.Homebuilt special...

Eventually, these will be made available to everybody on Matronics, but for
the time being they are posted at http://www.home.earthlink.net/~tp-1/ just
for the nice boys and girls of RAH and RAU.

Enjoy...

Richard





Got the wing spar design updated yet? Or are we trying to thin the
herd?


Nothing wrong with the wing, Clare.
But there IS something wrong with trying to overload it like you guys did.

The original agreement was that your fearless leader was to have a heavier
wing designed (by a "real" aero engineer) to handle a heavier airplane.
That was never done.

So if you think you have a bitch coming, point it back north.

Richard



  #9  
Old February 11th 06, 09:56 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Texas Parasol Plans...

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 20:58:17 GMT, Richard Lamb
wrote:

clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 15:14:18 GMT, Richard Lamb
wrote:


Rec.Aviation.Homebuilt special...

Eventually, these will be made available to everybody on Matronics, but for
the time being they are posted at http://www.home.earthlink.net/~tp-1/ just
for the nice boys and girls of RAH and RAU.

Enjoy...

Richard





Got the wing spar design updated yet? Or are we trying to thin the
herd?


Nothing wrong with the wing, Clare.
But there IS something wrong with trying to overload it like you guys did.

The original agreement was that your fearless leader was to have a heavier
wing designed (by a "real" aero engineer) to handle a heavier airplane.
That was never done.

So if you think you have a bitch coming, point it back north.

Richard

If built according to plans your wing will NOT withstand the G rating
listed in your info - and even YOU did not fly YOUR plane built
according to plans.
The jury strut is also CRITICAL, and as designed is an accident
waiting to happen.
So answer the question - have you upgraded the plans?
If the answer is no, everyone on the group is entitled to know the
plane is dangerous as designed, but can relatively easily be made into
a safe airplane.
  #10  
Old February 12th 06, 12:29 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Texas Parasol Plans...

Well, folks, there you have it.
The experts have again spoken.

Clare, I can understand your anger.
But it's misplaced.
You got had.
But not by me.
I did everything I could to warn you guys.
Although I wonder if Gary ever passed that on to you.

He took a design with a 350 pound recommended empty weight and
built something else. Beefed up fuselage structure, .065 wall
spars (which did nothing to add strength - just cheaper),
ALL METAL SKINS on the fuselage AND wing, and converted auto engines.

What was the final weight you guys came up with? 550? 650? Empty!

But the answer was always, "But that's the way we want it".

So Gary offered to hired an engineer to design a wing compatible
with your wants. But that gentleman died before finishing the
work - and now it's MY problem? Sorry, guy. No way.

That's why I finally bit down and asked you guys not to call
it by the Texas Parasol or Chuckbird name.
It's not - and you damned well know it.

Those drawings are straight from my first parasol.
And yes, I did fly it just as it is drawn, with the exception
of using a VW on it rather than a Rotax.

Rave if you must, Clare, but there are several dozen of these
planes _flying_ for over 20 years now. Doc, who has been
the test pilot on almost all of these, had over 650 hours on
his "Lucky Lady" when the airfield changed hands and he quit.
Doc loved to play acro with it. Loops (well, tall skinny ones),
spins, rolls. I'll trust my life to his test work because I've
seen what he can do with it.

As for you "analysis"?

So far we've seen NO structural failures, and only one fatality -
on a first flight, ran out of gas and spun it in.
(I can't tell you how hard that was to deal with.)



Changing the subject only a bit...

I went out to Kitty Hawk Airfield last weekend to look at a CGS
Hawk I was hoping to buy. The fellow I met with (Don) was very
knowledgeable about the design - AND that particular airplane.
I'm very impressed with Chuck's design, but I walked (ran?) away
from this airplane.

A few years ago some fool decided the plane needed more power
and mounted an 80 hp Rotax 912 on it. (anybody here familiar
with the Hawk?). On the first takeoff, the engine twisted plumb
off the mount, cut the tailboom off and (obviously) crashed, killing
the pilot.

Don was very up-front and honest about it - and the condition of
the rebuilt machine. The tailboom was extended, the nose also,
and a Rotax 582 installed. It weighs well over 350 pounds.
But many of the other local "experts" call it a POS death trap.

Unfortunately, it is still refered to as a CGS Hawk - and I'll bet my
bottom dollar that Chuck S absolutely hates that.

Just about the same way I feel about what you fellows have done.

Disgusted,

Richard
 




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
Richard Lamb and the Texas Parasol Plans ...and Sirius Aviation Richard Lamb Home Built 12 August 9th 05 08:00 PM
want to trade 601 plans for 701 plans [email protected] Home Built 0 January 27th 05 07:50 PM
bush rules! Be Kind Military Aviation 53 February 14th 04 04:26 PM
Texas Soars into Aviation History A Piloting 7 December 17th 03 02:09 AM
good book about prisoners of war Jim Atkins Military Aviation 16 August 1st 03 10:18 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.