A few minor corrections: 1. Once the original builder had an airworthiness inspection done and received the aircraft's operating limitations, there was no need for a second inspection. All that's necessary is to contact the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) that issued the operating limitations and apply to have them amended to change the Phase 1 testing area to suit the new owner. 2. Anyone can modify an Experimental aircraft, but there's no legal requirement for an A&P to inspect the work. If it's a major modification (affecting flight characteristics), the FSDO should be notified and they'll assign a new Phase 1 test period. Once that's complete, the owner simply makes a logbook entry to return the aircraft to Phase 2. 3. An A&P mechanic is only required to sign off condition inspections on Experimental aircraft if the owner doesn't hold the Repairman Certificate for that aircraft (only one Repairman Certificate can be issued for each homebuilt, and it must be issued to someone who was involved in the build; it cannot be transferred to another person). The A&P does not need to have inspection authorization (A&P/IA).
In Canada the owner of the homebuilt/experimental can sign off repairs and annual inspection whether they built it or not. A little more freedom in Canada .
@@waynevanhardeveld4707 The human freedom index ranks Canada 6 and the USA 15 out of 165 countries. They are very close . Personal freedom is a little higher in Canada. Most owners of experimental/homebuilt aircraft maintain them to a high standard without the government scrutinizing them.
Same in the US. I know most viewers here already know this, but if an owner of an E-AB, whether they built it or not, holds an Repairman's ticket, they can work on their own bird. An A&P ticket holder can do any aircraft. It is good that Transport Canada has very similar regulations as we do here; it is very good for our community!
You can do any mod you want and no A&P sign off required. Only need A&P to conduct the annual condition inspection. For mod you make just need a logbook entry signed by you.
120 is slow? Compared to what? You fly Jets during the week? Hah! For LIGHT AIRCRAFT 120mph ( or anything near it) is quite common and respectable. If you are stalling at 120 you must be a Jet Pilot. COOL! Military or Corporate or Airlines?
Agreed. I understand however that the PLANS to build these offer a "Belly Flap/Spoiler" that does act as a Speed Brake and also slightly changed the angle of attack on approach. So....there 's that. 😂
Thank you very much! Not sure if KC is monitoring the comments from his end. I believe some have done light "unusual attitudes" in these. Best inquire with Glen at the web link provided in the Description Below for the fine details though.
G, day from Sydney Australia. The experimental has really got some wing surface. Would be nice to have a look at the VW engine (1300-1600) and carburettor. 🌏🇭🇲
Hello from Down under and Thanks for watching! We love put AUS Aviation Family. Most are in fact using the Revmaster. You can still find them on the web.
If Casey, or someone else see's this, can you share where you bought/got your flight suit? Over the last 6 years I had a big, intentional weight loss. From 370 to 205 lbs. Obviously, nothing fits anymore! Shirts went from 5X to 2X (still have big shoulders LOL) Levis, jeans & cargo from 54-56 to 40-42. But my beloved old flight suits are like tents now. At 71 I've had them so long none of the stores are open anymore. 8( Appreciate any suggestions!! Thanks much! --gary
@@ExperimentalAircraftChannel I was building a Moni motor glider and a Sonex. Had a change of profession and a relocation. So, new plan is to build either the Panther or the REVO! Rumor is REVO is on final prototype and kits may be available in November.
Is all-metal a plus if hangaring will not be available/affordable? I realize hangaring is always preferable, but there are aircraft that are decades old and spent their entire lives on the ramp and are still flying today. The performance seems a bit lackluster, but if it means an inexpensive airplane that’s easy to build, who cares? Not everyone necessarily needs to tear across the sky at high speeds, or be able to takeoff & land on a helipad. Some of us just want affordable flying.
There are MANY slices of the pie in Aviation. The more money you can spend on it the more slices you can enjoy. And... there isn't a Swiss Army Kife design Aircraft put there that does it all anyway. So yes.... for economy flying then choose your slice(s). This one... you can build yourself.
This is so cool. I've got a couple of RC airplanes that look a lot like this. Wonder where I can get servos big enough to operate it? Just kiddin', but it is almost at that level, right there inbetween, Wish I was younger. Thanks for posting.
There are FAR MORE Sonex Aircraft completed and flying out there that these. And most of the Sonex are two seaters (the Onex is the single seat). That might make a difference. They look at the number in the "fleet" flying.
@@ExperimentalAircraftChannel Makes sense. I would have thought, though, that they would be less strict about a single seat airplane. Sometimes it does seem that the FAA is more concerned with passengers than the pilot.
Turn the BASS down a little! :-) I too... love the RUMBLE on most movies. I admit... the MIC was a little punchy at times (if that is what you were referening to).
There is an MX5 which is built in the same manor and is planned as a 2-seater tandem. But... it is a little tight in the back seat. Smaller people etc. The Sonex (older kits especially) and maybe a Zenith CH701.
@@ExperimentalAircraftChannel CX5. the CX5 is a tandem(front/back) 2 seater. The CX7 is a sidebyside 2 seater. The Thacher design is quite conservative and should build to a sturdy aircraft. Problem is some parts are realyl expensive if you can even get them anymore, like a Canopy. All Thachers are PLANS only, so you have to fabricate all the parts yourself.
Other good choices are Kolb and Hummel. These may cost a tiny bit more, but both are complete kits with company support in things like spare parts and technical support. Plus $12-20,000 for getting your pilots license.
Better come standard with instruments. You shouldn't risk your life hoping there will always be visibility. Too many died trying to make out of the clouds or fog
Not sure exactly on that, you do sit on the spar on most of these designs so that CG is not affected. Small baggage area will certainly. On an Aircraft this small. You can probably lean forward and enter a gentle dive.
I was into a prebuy inspection in one in AR about a month ago and the weight and balance on that airplane couldnt weigh more than 180lbs. At 230lbs with minimum fuel it fell outside of the aft cg
![Tee Grizzley - Detroit (Feat. 42 Dugg) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/aeKfTtt0x14/mqdefault.jpg)
A few minor corrections: 1. Once the original builder had an airworthiness inspection done and received the aircraft's operating limitations, there was no need for a second inspection. All that's necessary is to contact the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) that issued the operating limitations and apply to have them amended to change the Phase 1 testing area to suit the new owner. 2. Anyone can modify an Experimental aircraft, but there's no legal requirement for an A&P to inspect the work. If it's a major modification (affecting flight characteristics), the FSDO should be notified and they'll assign a new Phase 1 test period. Once that's complete, the owner simply makes a logbook entry to return the aircraft to Phase 2. 3. An A&P mechanic is only required to sign off condition inspections on Experimental aircraft if the owner doesn't hold the Repairman Certificate for that aircraft (only one Repairman Certificate can be issued for each homebuilt, and it must be issued to someone who was involved in the build; it cannot be transferred to another person). The A&P does not need to have inspection authorization (A&P/IA).
God bless you, Bryan, for making content of different airframes. I never heard of the CX4 until today!
I am happy to see so many others share my passion for all things that FLY! Thank you for supporting here by watching and engaging. Much appreciated.
In Canada the owner of the homebuilt/experimental can sign off repairs and annual inspection whether they built it or not. A little more freedom in Canada .
But…but…Freedom is made in the USA??
@@waynevanhardeveld4707 The human freedom index ranks Canada 6 and the USA 15 out of 165 countries. They are very close . Personal freedom is a little higher in Canada. Most owners of experimental/homebuilt aircraft maintain them to a high standard without the government scrutinizing them.
Happy to hear that is available to you there. (Provided that the ones doing the work have the mechanical aptitudes). :-)
@@wburtney5154LOL I know I'm Canadian 😋
Same in the US. I know most viewers here already know this, but if an owner of an E-AB, whether they built it or not, holds an Repairman's ticket, they can work on their own bird. An A&P ticket holder can do any aircraft. It is good that Transport Canada has very similar regulations as we do here; it is very good for our community!
Super looking aircraft !
One recently sold in Joplin, Mo. for $12,000
Hopefully a large tornado won’t hit the airport (waaay off topic, I just know that the most damaging tornado ever recorded took place there).
Wow! What a deal!
Just the materials alone and engine costs.
You can do any mod you want and no A&P sign off required. Only need A&P to conduct the annual condition inspection. For mod you make just need a logbook entry signed by you.
That’s my grandpa😂
Nahhhhh. Really?
Thanks for making me aware of this plane BrYan. Love your channel!
Thank You! Very much appreciate the support! Hope you are Building or Flying!
Loved this interview! Wish he could have shown us the engine
Agreed.
100%
He was trying to be put before the thermals start really rising. Quite bumpy in such a light Aircraft.
That's a good looking airplane design too 👍
Looks great.
Thanks for putting this out! I hope to build the cx-4 or 7 in the future and enjoy getting others take on the plane/s.
Thats a cute looking mini plane.
And it looks nice
Saw the ad on a fan in Pensacola. Looking into this!
It’s impressive.
Cool little unit
Nice little plane, engine sounds nice also.
Cool little airplane. Love the RAF paintjob too.
He did it himself
It actually looks quite nostalgic YES! 😊
Looks great .. just like a WW2 fighter replica .. 👍👍 ✌
Them scheme matches the SHAPE of the Airplane well....doesn't it? Thanks for watching.
Great interview and production! Keep it up…
Thank you! Will do!
Top speed is a stall speed but 3.5 gallons per hour is highly impressive 😮
What do you mean top speed is a stall speed?
@@tomcoryell 120 knots is slow......just being mindful thats all.....beautiful aircraft
120 is slow? Compared to what? You fly Jets during the week? Hah! For LIGHT AIRCRAFT 120mph ( or anything near it) is quite common and respectable. If you are stalling at 120 you must be a Jet Pilot. COOL! Military or Corporate or Airlines?
Would rather have a hummelbird :)
Intersting Aircraft as well. Almost build one from plans long ago. Now they have a kit available too. Very light Aircraft. Certainly.
Impressive airplane. Only downside is the no flap or spoiler floating design which eats up runway.
Agreed. I understand however that the PLANS to build these offer a "Belly Flap/Spoiler" that does act as a Speed Brake and also slightly changed the angle of attack on approach. So....there 's that. 😂
Great looking aircraft! Is it aerobatic at all? Sure seems to have the right power to weight ratio.
Well, done, Bryan!
Thanks for sharing, Casey.
Can it be put through gentlemanly rolls and loops?
Thank you very much!
Not sure if KC is monitoring the comments from his end. I believe some have done light "unusual attitudes" in these. Best inquire with Glen at the web link provided in the Description Below for the fine details though.
Oh, I like that a lot!
Nice! Happy you enjoyed learning about it today!
Cute plane.
Haha! Right! Single seats aren't for everyone. But it performs well because it's so light weight.
G, day from Sydney Australia.
The experimental has really got some wing surface. Would be nice to have a look at the VW engine (1300-1600) and carburettor.
🌏🇭🇲
Hello from Down under and Thanks for watching! We love put AUS Aviation Family. Most are in fact using the Revmaster. You can still find them on the web.
If Casey, or someone else see's this, can you share where you bought/got your flight suit? Over the last 6 years I had a big, intentional weight loss. From 370 to 205 lbs. Obviously, nothing fits anymore! Shirts went from 5X to 2X (still have big shoulders LOL) Levis, jeans & cargo from 54-56 to 40-42. But my beloved old flight suits are like tents now. At 71 I've had them so long none of the stores are open anymore. 8( Appreciate any suggestions!! Thanks much! --gary
I got the flight suit in that Video from eBay used AF suit.
New goal!! Fly my project to you one day..
Sounds like a great plan to me! What... are you building?
@@ExperimentalAircraftChannel I was building a Moni motor glider and a Sonex. Had a change of profession and a relocation. So, new plan is to build either the Panther or the REVO! Rumor is REVO is on final prototype and kits may be available in November.
I'll take it
Great! Hope to see you out flying one day soon then! :)
Is all-metal a plus if hangaring will not be available/affordable? I realize hangaring is always preferable, but there are aircraft that are decades old and spent their entire lives on the ramp and are still flying today.
The performance seems a bit lackluster, but if it means an inexpensive airplane that’s easy to build, who cares? Not everyone necessarily needs to tear across the sky at high speeds, or be able to takeoff & land on a helipad. Some of us just want affordable flying.
There are MANY slices of the pie in Aviation. The more money you can spend on it the more slices you can enjoy. And... there isn't a Swiss Army Kife design Aircraft put there that does it all anyway. So yes.... for economy flying then choose your slice(s). This one... you can build yourself.
Yah know, for 75hp i think it preforms pretty well.
Aluminum can weather much better than wood construction.
This is so cool. I've got a couple of RC airplanes that look a lot like this. Wonder where I can get servos big enough to operate it? Just kiddin', but it is almost at that level, right there inbetween, Wish I was younger. Thanks for posting.
When I bought my SONEX the insurance company only wanted 10 hours of dual time , in the airplane, to insure me. 40 hours seems a bit much.
There are FAR MORE Sonex Aircraft completed and flying out there that these. And most of the Sonex are two seaters (the Onex is the single seat). That might make a difference. They look at the number in the "fleet" flying.
@@ExperimentalAircraftChannel Makes sense. I would have thought, though, that they would be less strict about a single seat airplane. Sometimes it does seem that the FAA is more concerned with passengers than the pilot.
It's all math isn't it? Even risk.
I think many, at this price point investment, might just self insure or just get liability anyway.
watching on my computer with 5.1 surround sound. this sounds like somebody beating on a floor tom.
Turn the BASS down a little! :-)
I too... love the RUMBLE on most movies. I admit... the MIC was a little punchy at times (if that is what you were referening to).
What's the cheapest 2-seat do you think?
There is an MX5 which is built in the same manor and is planned as a 2-seater tandem. But... it is a little tight in the back seat. Smaller people etc.
The Sonex (older kits especially) and maybe a Zenith CH701.
@@ExperimentalAircraftChannel CX5. the CX5 is a tandem(front/back) 2 seater. The CX7 is a sidebyside 2 seater. The Thacher design is quite conservative and should build to a sturdy aircraft. Problem is some parts are realyl expensive if you can even get them anymore, like a Canopy. All Thachers are PLANS only, so you have to fabricate all the parts yourself.
Other good choices are Kolb and Hummel. These may cost a tiny bit more, but both are complete kits with company support in things like spare parts and technical support. Plus $12-20,000 for getting your pilots license.
Toy Spitfire.
Better come standard with instruments. You shouldn't risk your life hoping there will always be visibility. Too many died trying to make out of the clouds or fog
Its a plans built experimental plane, you can put whatever instruments you want in it.
Cant weigh more than 180lbs to meet weight and balance
Not sure exactly on that, you do sit on the spar on most of these designs so that CG is not affected. Small baggage area will certainly. On an Aircraft this small. You can probably lean forward and enter a gentle dive.
Wrong. The weight and balance sheet on mine lists the max pilot weight as 250.
I was into a prebuy inspection in one in AR about a month ago and the weight and balance on that airplane couldnt weigh more than 180lbs. At 230lbs with minimum fuel it fell outside of the aft cg