Best homebuilt for ~700 nm commute

On Jul 7, 1:48�am, es330td wrote:

Are there any good alternatives outside the canard family?

Check out the Tango 2 at www.teamtango.com. The standard
configuration carries 58 gallons which will give you an approximate
1,100 nm ifr range at 175-180 KTAS. You can go with the 90 gallon
full wet wing and make your 1,400 nm round trip without refueling, or
fly LAX-to-JAX nonstop if you can stand it. Useful load is 800lb or
1,000 with the wet wing. Basically, it will carry what ever you can
pack in for luggage. I have an older version with 40 gallon tanks and
consider 750 nm a comfortable day vfr range, no wind. I have several
trips over 800 nm, with some tail wind, burning 33-35 gallons. The
owner of the first wet wing airplane has one trip of 1,540 nm on 65
gallons.
I just passed 1,550 hours in my airplane, N99GE, using it
primarily for business trips, many matching your profile. I average
about 7.5 gallons per hour, switch on to switch off. I routinely
operate off a grass strip.
The panel is big enough to put in about anything you want or can
afford. Our EFIS 1200 has been popular. We are currently fitting up
the first airplane with Precise Flight speed brakes, which been a
perfect fit. We are testing an affordable laser horizon line, like
the SR-71 used to have. I am now flying with our new plenum chamber
for engine cooling, which is working almost too well, giving CHTs in
the low 300s. Autopilots are optional.

Denny Funnemark
Team Tango

On Jul 7, 8:17Â*am, denny wrote:
On Jul 7, 1:48�am, es330td wrote:



Are there any good alternatives outside the canard family?

Â* Â* Â*Check out the Tango 2 atwww.teamtango.com. Â*The standard
configuration carries 58 gallons which will give you an approximate
1,100 nm ifr range at 175-180 KTAS. Â*You can go with the 90 gallon
full wet wing and make your 1,400 nm round trip without refueling, or
fly LAX-to-JAX nonstop if you can stand it. Â*Useful load is 800lb or
1,000 with the wet wing. Â*Basically, it will carry what ever you can
pack in for luggage. Â*I have an older version with 40 gallon tanks and
consider 750 nm a comfortable day vfr range, no wind. Â*I have several
trips over 800 nm, with some tail wind, burning 33-35 gallons. Â*The
owner of the first wet wing airplane has one trip of 1,540 nm on 65
gallons.
Â* Â* Â*I just passed 1,550 hours in my airplane, N99GE, using it
primarily for business trips, many matching your profile. Â*I average
about 7.5 gallons per hour, switch on to switch off. Â*I routinely
operate off a grass strip.
Â* Â* Â*The panel is big enough to put in about anything you want or can
afford. Â*Our EFIS 1200 has been popular. Â*We are currently fitting up
the first airplane with Precise Flight speed brakes, which been a
perfect fit. Â*We are testing an affordable laser horizon line, like
the SR-71 used to have. Â*I am now flying with our new plenum chamber
for engine cooling, which is working almost too well, giving CHTs in
the low 300s. Â*Autopilots are optional.

Denny Funnemark
Team Tango

This looks like a great plane and well within my idea of a reasonable
budget with full IFR avionics installed. Reading your review really
piqued my interest; I grew up in San Antonio, TX, within sight
distance of the flight patterns for Randolph AFB where the T-38s flew
while I was growing up. I loved watching them fly and while I will
never get to fly a T-38/F-5 the fact that someone who has thinks so
highly of this plane definitely makes me interested in the Tango 2.

"es330td" == es330td writes:
es330td As I have past
es330td experience as an auto mechanic, being able to work on the
es330td plane to keep costs down is important so I'm going to
es330td have to go with something I build myself.

Just curious, any build will take a year or two at least, will you
have time for this living away from home?
--
Mom always told me I could be whatever I wanted to be when I grew
up, 'within reason.' When I asked her what she meant by 'within
reason,' she said, 'You ask a lot of questions for a garbage
man.'
- Jack Handey

On Jul 7, 6:32*pm, Bob Fry wrote:

Just curious, any build will take a year or two at least, will you
have time for this living away from home?
--

Living by myself, I think I should. I am assuming that the time I
spend now on the "honey-do" list at home (lawn, dishes, errands) will
be mine since I simply won't be there. I usually spend an hour or so
each night playing with my kids so I get that time back too. I am most
likely going to go with something that is kit built, rather than plans
built, to reduce my build time. I am not going to be one of the
homebuilders that in reality pays somebody to build a plane but I am
going to base my choice in part on getting one that I can buy major
pieces already constructed so this rules out the Cozy. I know someone
at both airports who is an A&P mechanic so I'll have expertise
available for hire as needed. Even if it takes me 3 years, I still
get an airplane at the end of it.

"es330td" wrote in message
...
On Jul 7, 6:32 pm, Bob Fry wrote:

Just curious, any build will take a year or two at least, will you
have time for this living away from home?
--

Living by myself, I think I should. I am assuming that the time I
spend now on the "honey-do" list at home (lawn, dishes, errands) will
be mine since I simply won't be there. I usually spend an hour or so
each night playing with my kids so I get that time back too. I am most
likely going to go with something that is kit built, rather than plans
built, to reduce my build time. I am not going to be one of the
homebuilders that in reality pays somebody to build a plane but I am
going to base my choice in part on getting one that I can buy major
pieces already constructed so this rules out the Cozy. I know someone
at both airports who is an A&P mechanic so I'll have expertise
available for hire as needed. Even if it takes me 3 years, I still
get an airplane at the end of it.

___________new messages begins___________

It appears that you might be moving both to and from locations with multiple
EAA chapters, and they are a very good source of second hand experience.
Visit each chapter a couple of times; because every member does not attend
every meeting. You can then gain a lot of additional information by
visiting some of the builders and/or participating in the chapter's "hangar
invasions".

As to some of wheat you might look for:
1 Kits are not all equal--some kits take more time than some plans and
some need different kinds of workspace.
2 Builders are not all equal--both skills and priorities vary. Some
builders have good three dimensional thinking and manufacturing skills--and
they can build a good solid aircraft in a few hundred hours. Others will
spend a tremendous amount of time staring at the project and reinventing one
wheel after another--so that the project takes thousands of hours if it is
ever finished.

All the best for your project--even if you only buy a slower airplane are
convert part of what would have been your building time to be used as
commuting time instead.

Peter

es330td wrote:
On Jul 7, 6:32 pm, Bob Fry wrote:
Just curious, any build will take a year or two at least, will you
have time for this living away from home?
--

Living by myself, I think I should. I am assuming that the time I
spend now on the "honey-do" list at home (lawn, dishes, errands) will
be mine since I simply won't be there. I usually spend an hour or so
each night playing with my kids so I get that time back too. I am most
likely going to go with something that is kit built, rather than plans
built, to reduce my build time. I am not going to be one of the
homebuilders that in reality pays somebody to build a plane but I am
going to base my choice in part on getting one that I can buy major
pieces already constructed so this rules out the Cozy. I know someone
at both airports who is an A&P mechanic so I'll have expertise
available for hire as needed. Even if it takes me 3 years, I still
get an airplane at the end of it.

That last sentence you wrote is as close as I've seen you say the one
thing you need to say before you start a build project but it isn't
quite there yet.

Building itself needs to be one of your goals otherwise you probably
won't ever finish and then at the end of 3 years you will have a pile of
very expensive aluminum.

The old saying "If you want to build, build. If you want to fly, buy."
is as true as it ever was even if the quick build kits make the building
easier.

On Jul 7, 1:48�am, es330td wrote:
I
Are there any good alternatives outside the canard family?
This discussion seems to have come down to whether you should
build with aluminum or composites, leaving out wood and tube &
fabric. The way I see it, if you build your own composite airplane,
you are the manufacturer and should be pretty good at repairing hanger
rash by the time you are ready to fly. I know of at least one
compostite airplane that flipped over and was damaged, as one would
expect. The spar and wings were intact. The insurance adjuster said
repair it. Had it been an aluminum airplane he would have scrapped
it. What does all this prove? Not much. If one method was clearly
superior, the other would disappear. Sunlight may not bother
aluminum, but corrosion sure does. Until we start mining
nonobtainium, you're stuck with compromises. Take your pick.
More important in picking your plane is your mission
requirement. When you start your IFR training you will find the true
meaning of the old saying "The only time you can have too much fuel on
board is when you are on fire". You need to plan on at least a 20
knot headwind for some of those trips to TX, sometimes both ways,
(like the day you actually get to go). If the destination is imc, you
need altenate fuel plus 45 minute reserve (minimum). If you have a
barely 700 nm, no wind, VFR range, you will need to make an enroute
fuel stop on some trips. A five hour duration becomes more like three
if you have to plan the whole trip IFR. Better to land with two hours
fuel in your tanks than zero while diverting. Fuel exhaustion is
still a leading cause of accidents. Your four hour trip just became
closer to six.
Good luck in your research.

Denny

Have you given Budd Davidson's BEARHAWK a look?

http://www.bearhawkaircraft.com/

"John Smith" wrote

Have you given Budd Davidson's BEARHAWK a look?

http://www.bearhawkaircraft.com/

The problem is that you have to be using the 260 HP engine to get that 150
MPH, where you could be doing closer to 200 MPH (or more) on a 180 HP
engine.

With fuel prices, that would be a significant difference.
--
Jim in NC

" With fuel prices, that would be a significant difference.
--
Jim in NC


Following that I would suggest Airtran to DFW. They can handle almost any
weather that you couldn't and a ticket is about the same as 25 gal of avgas.
Alot more practical and a lot less likely to make a smoking hole due to got
to get there pressure. If you want to fly a homebuilt do it, just don't try
to reliably commute in it.
My 2 cents worth.
Jim Stockton