That’s true but my original Q, per threat title, was different. If £500 would break the bank, you really do need to do everything yourself, or have a very handy friend 
No engine/prop TBO on experimentals? Interesting.
We had a case in Switzerland where an experimental owner was forced by the FOCA to pull a cylinder on his engine to check for corrosion because it was more than 12 years old without overhaul. The engine failed on one of the following flights. Switzerland does not honour ELA1 in terms of TBO but demands rigorous checks after calendar TBO and will not allow engines older than 24 years to run on condition. So obviously this also extends to experimentals.
With the massive restrictions experimentals face in Europe, I don´t see how they are useful at all other than as a VFR joyride plane. Clearly there are people who try to go around these restrictions by simply flying IFR anyhow but obviously there is a inherent risk of retribution to that. Unless EASA drops the VFR day restriction and forces it´s member states to honour their orders, I don´t see the usefulnes of non certified planes other than for expensive toys.
This is certainly true. I spent about £1000 on a lathe and associated tooling. I also bought a mill and tooling for about £1500. And I also had a glimmer of an idea in advance as to how to use them. On the other hand, I’ve found myself turning simple parts for other people. I’m getting a new cowling in return. I’m not currently working on a Luciole but I gather there are a lot of jigs doing the rounds.
One difference between a homebuilt and something that’s built in a factory is that the former should be designed to be fairly straightforward to build – simple jigs; no exotic parts. You look at the plans and they tell you what materials you need to use. Something that’s geared for mass production can incorporate e.g. sophisticated castings that are never going to be simple to replicate, even if you operate in a regime that gives you the right to do so.
In practice I’ve spent a fair amount of time milling 5mm spring steel strips down to 4mm etc… it’s not always easy to get hold of materials to 1950s specifications. Homebuilts are clearly not for everybody.
No engine/prop TBO on experimentals? Interesting.
There isn’t a mandatory engine TBO on certifieds, in most of Europe, either. The UK CAA enforces the 6 year prop overhaul. I don’t know about the LAA…
However the engine fund, based on 2k hrs, is of the order of 20% of the DOC, so not a massive factor, and the saving by going to say 2.5k hrs is negligible. What would be a massive factor is forcing an engine OH at 12 years; that would limit GA acitivity to those with plenty of money, which probably works a bit better in Switzerland than some other places
sophisticated castings that are never going to be simple to replicate
Well, one “can” mill “anything” It could just take you a bloody long time (days)… What one can’t do is replicate the grain of a forged high-stress component.
Homebuilts are clearly not for everybody.
Hence my question. I actually don’t see how it would work in that scenario, if you are looking at saving money.
Silvaire wrote:
A decent finished RV7A costs $70-80K, climbs at 2000 fpm, cruises substantially faster than the typical GA retractable and does aerobatics, on 9 US gallons per hour. Or throttle and lean back to 6.5 GPH and still go fast up high.
That was also the main criterion for me. You simply don’t find anything like a Europa (lives in a trailer and rigs in 40 minutes single hand, thus saving me hangarage in the order of 4000 EUR p. a., refuelling on my way home at the car station for 1,25 EUR/l instead of AVGAS for double the price, sipping only <20l/h at a solid 125 KTAS, climbing FL 180 and higher without effort, handling 600 meters grassstrips at 30°C in summer at MTOM, real 250 kg useful load, ca. 200 EUR p. a. for the authorities, only checks of static system and instruments every second year etc etc.) among the certified aircraft.
My mechanic changed the sprag clutch of my Rotax and I paid him 2500 EUR material included (the engine had to be taken out for this). Okay, Peter, you’d argue, that a Lycoming doesn’t have a sprug clutch to be replaced
And after all, IT’S FUN TO FLY, not at all comparable with a spam can!
Works with the certified Fascination VLA in the same way, except the trailering, of course.
And the refuelling for 1,25 EUR/l 
And FL 180+ and 200 EUR p. a. administration fee, and maintaining at home and……
And the refuelling for 1,25 EUR/l
Why should that not work? It’s the same engine.
And FL 180+ and 200 EUR p. a. administration fee, and maintaining at home and……
FL180+ doesn’t work in a non-turbo-Europa, too. Since we’re talking about Peter’s initial proposal maintenance at home isn’t a factor anyway. But Maintenance can be done by anyone on any ELA aircraft and I am very happy to trade a little “administration fee” (I assume you are talking about issuing the ARC) against the freedom to fly at night, IFR (okay, not in a Fascination) or throughout Europe without getting Country-PPR.
It’s all about what you are happy to trade something for, isn’t it?
After the trips I regulary do I have to uplift about 50 l (directly into the fuel tank on the trailer) and this is quite a hassle, if you do this with jerry cans. But you are right, if you take the fuel from a car Station in Jerry cans, the Fascy will happily run on the same fuel.
FL 180 was only an (one more) example, why this aircraft is not available on the certified sector.
200 EUR Administration fee is for radio/Transponder/ELT frequency fee AND the CAA PTF.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
I don´t see the usefulnes of non certified planes other than for expensive toys.
The exact same applies to at least 90% of certified planes (in Europe, at least), so I consider this point irrelevant, true though it may be.
