Experimentals

BrewMaster said:
Ok, talked to the guy at work again today. He sounds very knowledgeable, and seems to know a lot about his plane. Originally I thought it was the tailwheel version of the Quickie, but I found out it has a tricycle gear. He said he pampers it very well and has flown with different CFI's who have had no problem with it. I'm starting to lean towards doing it because it is feeling a little safer. Thanks for the input though, I was surprised how many people had no issue with it.
Click to expand...

Feel free to question him all about his baby. He'll probably talk your ear off, and by the end of the day you'll realize that he knows more about his airplane than you do your skyhawk.

If I were a builder/owner I would expect any CFI to be a little hesitant and give my plane a VERY through review before flying one. You're not going to hurt his feelings by saying "I have no experiance with anything like this plane before, so I want to be completely prepared."
 
USMCmech said:
Feel free to question him all about his baby. He'll probably talk your ear off, and by the end of the day you'll realize that he knows more about his airplane than you do your skyhawk.

If I were a builder/owner I would expect any CFI to be a little hesitant and give my plane a VERY through review before flying one. You're not going to hurt his feelings by saying "I have no experiance with anything like this plane before, so I want to be completely prepared."
Click to expand...

I'm already preparing to turn it into him mostly teaching me everything about his plane. Obviously I will cover the required material, but he is a low-time pilot and I think the majority if not all his time is in the Quickie. He was very cool about letting me take some time to decide, he even urged that I do so. Like I said, he sounded like a smart guy, we even got into a little discussion on it's aerodynamics and he seemed to know what he was talking about. Thanks for the help!
 
BrewMaster said:
I'm already preparing to turn it into him mostly teaching me everything about his plane. Obviously I will cover the required material, but he is a low-time pilot and I think the majority if not all his time is in the Quickie. He was very cool about letting me take some time to decide, he even urged that I do so. Like I said, he sounded like a smart guy, we even got into a little discussion on it's aerodynamics and he seemed to know what he was talking about. Thanks for the help!
Click to expand...

I'm not a big experimental guy (no duh hu?) but that says a lot about the guy. If you got a good feeling that probably is enough. I'd add, again, ounce of caution isn't bad.
 
Re: Experimental

jrh said:
Thanks for all the insightful advice from everyone in this thread. I've certainly learned a few things. I still don't see any reason to categorically avoid experimental. To me, they're well within the "acceptably safe" range of the risk spectrum, but YMMV. Fly safe everyone!
Click to expand...

The ONLY reason I can come up with is insurance. Just make sure that if anything goes wrong you are covered and if there is a way to "sign away" rights as PIC I would go for that. In my overall opinion, an airplane is an airplane no matter who or how it was build, but you shouldn't ignore the political aspects (insurance) involved with flying them.
 
Since it is a Q-200, find out what airfoil the canard has - hopefully the LS. The Q-200 should have an O-200 in front so that should ease some of the engine questions. Personally, there are aircraft I won't fly due to the engine. Also, check the paperwork. Find out when its last condition inspection was, who did it, etc. Is the owner also the builder? Do your homework on this one. I'm a big fan of experimentals, but personal experience has taught me to be skeptical. Just because you know the builder and trust him, doesn't mean he is a good builder.
 
Oh....It's a GO!!

bob-the-builder.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top