Yes I'm a pilot, I have the complete airframe kit.

The 701 is a sweet flying little machine.

 

CH701, I learned to fly in a J3 Cub. Just something about a tail dragger. I received the video from Heinz demonstrating the short field capabilities of the 701, I was very impressed. I am hoping to interest two other friends in buying a kit. Maybe in time we will. Happy Skies,jlewis

 

Kit planes seem to be getting popular . My Bro in law is building an Vans RV 7. Seems like a cool plane . The turbo Subaru engine makes sence to me but I think he will put in a Lycoming . I don't know much about the subject but I do find it interesting .

Rick

 

Hey Rick, Welcome to planes and thangs! The cost of certified aircraft is now so expensive that the best option is build your own. Van's of Oregon is a very popular airplane. The have sold thousands of kits and are well regarded in general aviation. General aviation is pilots of all hours and experience away from commercial endeavor. We are people who love to fly our own planes. One thing that is very popular here in the northwest states are taildragger style plane. They are much better suited for off airport activities; Landing and takeoffs from unimproved strips: wheat fields and dirt roads. Your Bro-in-law is probably building an aircraft more suited to asphalt. No better or worse, just different priorities. The Lycoming engine is a well tested, certified aviation engine. Subaru is a great engine manufacturer but Lycoming has a prove track record in airplanes. I have read lots about other engines being put into aircraft categories but with a homebuilt, I too, want an engine with ultra reliable records.
Lycoming on Continental etc. They cost more initially but one less thing to worry about.
Tell your Bro-in-law Happy Flying, jlewis

 

That is what I gathered on the engine choice aswell. I just kind of liked the idea of a turbo for picking up the lost power when at altitude.

I also saw a *new* design that has been resurrected by another maker that I can't recall. It runs on Jet fuel. I think it is basically a two-stroke diesel. I don't think that I would care for that in a plane.

He was thinking about a tail dragger but I believe for the surfaces he is on he is putting on a nosewheel. He is recently licenced and thinks he will be best off this way. I understand that a tail dragger does require more skill to operate.

I'll pass along your kind regards.

Rick Ritter

 

You are right Rick, turbo for high altitude. I noticed your home state as Ill. and just assumed you boys would be a lower elevations. A silly mistake on my side. I am still thinking about a turbo-charged Rotax for the ch701. I recall they are about 13000. without prop, spinner and reducer. I think the Subaru is all aluminium. Light-weight and very powerful. I applaud your engine choice. When you fellows get the fuselage and wings built -please post a pic. As far as more skill required in nose vs tail dragger, it's all in what you learn. Personally I would rather land on a 400' rutted dirt field than go through ATC flying in larger more populous areas.
I can go through a full year with out squawking, jlewis

 

So where did you get the shocks for the phoenix at.And at rickritter they dont have a pipe that fits the phoenix axact so did you use the 250 tb

 

They wern't really quadsprings they were just springs from my dads work place. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif[/img]

 

hi i was wondering if the cams are ready yet and the price on them

 

ttt