scott sanford wrote: > > FlyBaby > > I don't think that it will surprise anyone that the FlyBaby will be my first > attempt at building a (real) airplane, so this question is more on the > general side. BTW, before we get into the main questions themselves, I'd like to mention that I hope to dig up and scan in a set of panel photos...I'll put 'em up on the web site. > > How does "licensing" work? I have read things that allude to each set of > plans being serialized and that is your plane's serial number and you have > to purchase extra sets of plans if you want to build more than one. Am I > reading that correctly ? (not that I have a problem with that, for the $65 > "license" the FlyBaby is well worth it, and when I design my plane I will of > course want some sort of royalty for the trouble) There are two aspects of licensing here; you're referring to the "license" to build a set of planes from Bowers' plans. You *should* buy a second set if you're going to build a second airplane. The serial number Pete assigns is an attempt to put things in a logical order; in reality, when you register your airplane, you can assign whatever serial number or even name you wish. You could build a dead-stock Fly Baby and call it a "Clodhopper Mark V, S/N 1" if you wish. If you design your own plane and use Fly Baby elements, it's really your call if you want to pay for a set of Fly Baby plans. Seriously, the $65 is so utterly minor in relation to the whole cost of an airplane, there's no reason not to buy a set if you have any questions on it. The other aspect of licensing is with the FAA, CAA, or whatever organization regulates flying in your country. FAA licensing involves an application, some small amount of money, and an inspection by either an FAA FSDO employee or a Designated Airworthiness Representative. > One more; How does the FlyBaby perform on the A-65? I have done a little > digging and it seems that I could get a Lyc O-235 (100-110 HP) for about the > same price. I can't seem to find any 85-90 HP engines in any condition, > should I infer that they are more popular? Any recommendations? (price is a > factor of course, I have been looking at engines in the $2000-$4000 range > that require various amounts of work) > > Ok, sorry this is long but one more ;| > The Lyc O-235 weighs in at 213-218 lbs (according to Textron Lycoming home > page) how much does the A-65 weigh? Will my CG be ok as-is? The bigger engines weight more, and the O-235 seems to be a fat puppy. It's hard to get reliable data on engine weights, since manufacturers don't necessarily include things like magnetos, carburetors, etc. in the officially published weights. I've got tables from two separate sources on my web page at: http://www.halcyon.com/wanttaja/engines.html Anyway, from the web page: A-65 (65 HP): 173 lbs C-85 (85 HP): 207 lbs O-200A (100 HP): 190 lbs/220 lbs (depending upon the list you look at) O-235 (115 HP): 215 lbs/240 lbs " For the O-200 and O-235, I'd believe the higher numbers. So the O-235 would weigh almost 75 lbs more than an A-65. That's a wee bit excessive.... Ron Wanttaja ron@wanttaja.com