When better lightplanes are built, will we have to build them ourselves?

BY J. JEFFERSON MILLER continued

GIASAIR

_ Inside the Stoddard-Hamilton factory, I Spending time at Stoddard-Hamil• alistic few would choose the hard road have the strange feeling I am witness• ton can lead you to speculate about the of building their own airplane. The ing something important. The feeling is future of the lightplane industry. Glasair offers an almost irresistible strange because no one else is around Maybe that is because at Stoddard• combination of qualities. It is sleek, fast (the workers have gone home for the Hamilton they believe the industry has and nimble, yet very sparing with a gal• day) and nothing seems to be happen• a future. The airplane produced there, lon of gas (achieving 29 nautical miles ing on the shop floor-a space about the Glasair, makes you question the as• per gallon at 11,000 feet and 174 knots, the size of two indoor tennis courts. sumption put forth by some industry according to factory figures). The re• But something is happening. An air• observers that the market for two- and tractable version of the Glasair offers all plane is being built, or more precisely, four- place light is virtually of these qualities for about $40,000, IFR cured. I can smell the boatyard aroma dead. equipped, if you do all of the building of resin kicking off. A Glasair fuselage In the past three years, Stoddard• yourself. is solidifying in two female molds, and Hamilton has built a solid business Stoddard-Hamilton estimates that it a wing spar is being mated to a bottom based on the proposition that pilots are takes 1,200 hours to build a Glasair. wing skin. It all happens so quietly I looking for better performance and The Glasair comes with much of the almost can hear the fiberglass economy than are available today from work that requires special machinery or stiffening. the airplanes offered by Beech, Cessna, skills already accomplished. All of the Funny, this does not look like an air• Mooney and Piper. controls are pre-welded and the metal craft factory: There are no sheets of alu• Since the Glasair's introduction at parts pre-stamped. minum, rivet guns or welding equip• Oshkosh in the summer of 1980, 475 The fuselage goes together in two ment-just rolls of fiberglass, barrels of kits have been sold, and 30 now are halves like a Revell model. The wings resin, autoclaves and molds. This, I flying. More than 100 kits were sold in arrive with the fiberglass main spar al• think to myself, is what the light air• the first 11 months of 1983, slightly ready fastened to the lower wing skin. craft factory of the future will look like. fewer than the 129 Bonanzas sold by The builder installs the wing tanks, But instead of kits being produced as Beech or the 136 aircraft sold by control push rods, autopilot servos (if they are here, completed airplanes will Mooney. desired), plumbing lines, wiring and be the end product. It is not hard to see why an individu- wing ribs before sealing up the wing.

28· MARCH1984 All of the components are bonded to• dubbed the Pocket Rocket. It suffered gether with fiberglass and a vinylester from several shortcomings directly re• resin, a petroleum-based substance that lating to the tandem seating arrange• gives shape and rigidity to the fi• ment, according to Hamilton. Flying berglass cloth. from the front seat placed the center of The moment of truth for a Glasair gravity very far forward. Visibility was builder comes when he has to make the limited when flying from the rear seat. first incision into the fuselage for the Baggage space almost was non-exist• windows or the wing insert area. A bad ent. And the airplane's handling quali• cut could ruin the fuselage. ties were disappointing. "It wasn't eve• Putting the pieces of the kit together rybody's airplane," Hamilton actually accounts for only a few hun• explained, then added with a wry dred hours of the process. Most of the smile, "It stunk!" construction time is devoted to detail The Pocket Rocket took to the air work, such as filling in the gaps be• only a few times and then was burned, tween trailing edges and , mak• intentionally, by its creator. But out of ing the gear doors seal tightly, connect• the ashes rose a new and better design. ing the engine controls and running By summer 1979, after two more wiring and plumbing. years of toil, the prototype Glasair was The recommended engine for the completed. It differed from the cur• Glasair is the Lycoming 0-320 150- to ble. The origins of the airplane go back rently marketed production taildragger 160-hp model. Some builders have in• to 1975, the year Thomas Stoddard in only two main regards. The proto• stalled 180-hp engines, and at least one Hamilton, age 22, decided to design type's canopy was three inches lower, builder is using a 200-hp engine. and build an airplane. giving the airplane a low-slung, racer• Building a Glasair requires a large After taking a couple of aeronautics like profile, and the engine was a 115• commitment of effort and time (virtu• courses at the University of Washing• hp Lycoming 0-235. ally every spare moment if you want to ton, Hamilton set up shop at the Cedar Side-by-side seating was chosen to finish the airplane within a couple of Grove Airport, a small grass strip south alleviate some of the weight and bal• years). Not surprisingly, many Glasair of Seattle affectionately referred to by ance problems that manifested them• owners have hired others to do part or Stoddard-Hamilton employees as the selves in the Pocket Rocket. Hamilton all of the construction work. Pig Farm, because, it once was one. also found that this arrangement pro• During its short time on the market, Two-and-a-half years later, in the vided plenty of space for an IFR panel the Glasair has evolved from a fixed• summer of 1977, Hamilton had com• and saved some weight by eliminating gear taildragger to a tricycle-gear re- pleted his first aircraft, a fiberglass, low the need to duplicate some of the in• o tractable. Both versions now are availa- wing, two-place, tandem design, struments and controls. continued

AOPA PILOT • 29 continued

A NASA-designed GA(W)-2 airfoil (the same airfoil employed on the Piper Tomahawk) was selected because, ac• cording to Hamilton, it provides a coef• ficient of lift more than 10 percent higher than other airfoils used on light aircraft, while creating a relatively low amount of drag. The airfoil's high coef• ficient of lift enabled Hamilton to keep the wing area relatively small without sacrificing tolerable stall speeds. Hamilton's brother, Steven D. Ham• ilton, a Boeing engineer, lofted the de• sign with the aid of a computer. By us• ing the computer to determine numerous points on the airframe, the brothers were able to plot perfect conic curves for the fuselage. The result was an airplane that delivered a 75-percent GlASAIR cruise speed of 174 knots from a 115-hp engine. gear door is used for the nosewheel to not so much climb into the Glasair as The payoff for five years' effort came minimize gaps. After initial installation slip into it-by stepping onto the for• at Oshkosh '80. As a result of contacts of the gear doors, they were examined ward part of the wing where it runs made at the air show and information in flight and then recontoured until a through the cockpit, bracing yourself packets distributed there, Hamilton tight seal was achieved. on the window frame and seat back netted 100 orders for the Glasair. The retractable costs $6,000 more and easing your legs under the instru• In order to meet increasing produc• than the fixed-gear version, but it is ment panel. Once situated, the position' tion demands, larger facilities in an in• outselling the taildragger 4:1. The pref• is quite comfortable. According to dustrial park in Kent, Washington, erence for the retractable version is Stoddard-Hamilton, the cockpit can ac• were leased shortly after Oshkosh. due, in large part, to it offering the commodate pilots up to six feet four Then, in September 1982, Stoddard• ground handling advantages of tricycle inches in height. Very broad pilots, Hamilton moved again, this time to a gear. But it probably is perceived by all though, may find the fit a little tight. complex on the Arlington, Washing• but the die-hard tailwheel advocates as The cockpit is three inches wider than a ton, airport. the sportier model. Cessna 152, but four-and-a-half-inches Also in mid-1982, the company intro• It is difficult not to think of the Gla• narrower than a Mooney 201. Baggage duced the retractable model of the Gla• sair as an aerial sports car-a small, space is limited, but sufficient for each sair. Hamilton selected an electrically fast, responsive machine that sacrifices occupant to take a soft travel bag. actuated hydraulic retraction system. spaciousness for performance. The im• A relatively small cabin is the neces• There are three doors for each main pression of the Glasair as a sports car is sary trade-off for a fast airplane. Never• gear-one to cover the strut, the other formed as soon as you unbutton the theless, Hamilton has taken pains to two to enclose the wheel. Only one canopy and climb in. Actually, you do leave enough room for comfort, but

30. MARCH1984 nothing more. Glasair RG Model Glasair TD The Glasair does not have a steerable $19,475 Base price $ 13,400 Price as tested nosewheel (nor does the Glasair TO $40,000" $25,000" IFR Panel" VFR Panel" have a steerable tailwheel). Taxi turns Variable Current market value Variable are accomplished by working the Specifications main wheel brakes. The can be Lycoming 0-320 160 hp Powerplant Lycoming 0-320 160 hp used to steer during a fast taxi. 2,000 hr Recommended TBO 2,000 hr Initial rate of climb in the Glasair is Hartzell, constant speed Propellers Fixed pitch wood 18ft7in Length 18 ft 7 in impressive. With the gear up, full 6 ft 6 in Height 7 ft power still in and about 100 knots indi• 23 ft 3 in Wingspan 23 ft 3 in cated, the Glasair was climbing at 1,800 81.2 sq ft Wing area 81.2 sq ft fpm with two on board. A cruise climb 22.2 lb/sq ft Wing loading 18.5 Ib/sq ft 11.25Ib/hp Power loading 9.4lb/hp at 120 knots provided better visibility 2 side-by-side Seats 2 side-by-side over the nose and about 1,000 fpm on Seat to pedals, 45 in Cabin length Seat to pedals, 45 in the way up to 10,000 feet. (Granted, on 39 in Cabin width 39 in the two occasions I flew the Glasair, the Seat to canopy, 37 in Cabin height Seat to canopy, 37 in 1,090 Ib Empty weight (approx.) 925 Ib temperature was approximately 20°F 1,091 Empty weight, as tested 9451b and we were under gross, but I still had w/o oil the impression that, on high-density• 1,800 Ib Max ramp weight 1,5001b altitude days, the airplane will not have 1,800 Ib Gross weight 1,500 lb 7001b Useful load 5751b too much trouble getting off the run• 700lb Useful load, as tested 540lb way.) 4481b Payload w /full fuel 423 Ib The company's promotional litera• 448 lb Payload w /full fuel, as tested 388 Ib ture claims that the Glasair is the 1,8001b Max takeoff weight 1,600 lb world's fastest kit-built aircraft. That 1,800 Ib Max landing weight 1,500 lb 1,1061b Zero fuel weight w/oil 960lb mayor may not be true, but there is no 252 Ib (252 lb usable) Fuel capacity, std 252 lb (252 lb usable) question that it is fast. A 200 knot cruis• 42 gal (42 gal usable) 42 gal (42 gal usable) ing speed is not unreasonable, but 8 qt Oil capacity, ea engine 8 qt some Glasair owners will no doubt con• 801b, 10 cu ft Baggage capacity 80 Ib, 10 cu ft Performance sider it sinful to burn the 10 gallons per 630/380 ft Takeoff distance, ground 790/390 ft hour required to achieve that speed. roll, gross/solo Many will opt to power back to 55 per• 1,200/755 ft Takeoff distance, over 1,425/755 ft cent and amble along at 174 knots 50-ft obst. gross/solo Max demonstrated 17.4 kt while burning only 6.1 gph. 22 kt crosswind component In a descent it is hard to keep the 1,400/2,300 fpm Rate of climb, sea level 1,300/1,900 fpm airspeed out of the yellow arc (174 to gross/solo 217 knots) without making a fairly sub• 210 kt Max level speed, sea level 200 kt stantial pow~r reduction. Pulling the 204 kt, 10gph Cruise speed, fuel flow, 195 kt, 10.5 gph manifold pressure back to 17 or 18 endurance std/opt fuel @75% power 8,000 ft inches will allow about an 800 fpm rate 183 kt, 7.2 gph Cruise speed, fuel flow 174 kt, 7.5 gph of descent at 174 knots. The airplane endurance std/opt fuel slows up for pattern entry surprisingly @65% power, 8,000 ft well once the power is pulled back be• 174 kt, 6.1 gph Cruise speed, fuel flow 154 kt, 6.3 gph endurance std/opt fuel low 15 inches and the prop is moved to @55% power, 8,000 ft flat pitch. The gear can be dropped at 20,000 ft Service ceiling (gross) 20,000 ft 117 knots, and then the airplane can be 1,100/795 ft Landing distance over 50-ft 1,200/875 ft slowed to about 85 knots for down• 530/435 ft Landing distance ground 550/475 ft wind-slower if you need to give your• roll (gross/solo) Limiting and Recommended Airspeeds self space for traffic, but you still will 65 KIAS Vx (Best angle of climb) 65 KIAS need to keep an eye out to avoid run• 87 KIAS Vy (Best rate of climb) 113 KIAS ning down any Aeroncas. Final ap• 126 KIAS Va (Design maneuvering) 126 KIAS 96 KIAS proach can be made at 65 to 70 knots. 96 KIAS Vfe (Max extended) 117 KIAS Vie (Max gear extended) You might imagine that the little Gla• Vlo (Max gear operating) sair bobs through the air in even the 117 KIAS Extend lightest turbulence. But, in fact, it han• 117 KIAS Retract dles the bumps rather well, due in large 217 KIAS Vne (Never exceed) 208 KIAS 57 KIAS measure ~to the airplane's high wing 57 KIAS Vr (Rotation) 56 KIAS VsI (Stall clean) 56 KIAS loading. At gross weight the RG model 56 KIAS Vso (Stall in landing has a higher wing loading than a configuration) Beechcraft B-36TC Bonanza-22.2 All specifications are based on manufacturers calculations. All performance figures are based on stan• pounds per square foot versus 20.72 dard day, standard atmosphere, at sea level and gross weight, unless otherwise noted. "Operations/ Equipment Categories are defined in June 1983 Pilot, p. 96. The prices reflect the costs for equipment pounds per square foot. recommended to operate in the listed categories. Stoddard-Hamilton Aircraft, Incorporated, 18701 58th The Glasair is very responsive, just Avenue, N.E. Arlington, Washington 98223; 206/435-8533

AOPA PILOT " 31 continued

as an aerial sports car should be. The the pilot. (And while steeply banked, GIASAIR controls are light and sensitive in both you will be able to ~ee where you are roll and pitch. Fingertip flying is essen• going by looking through the top of the leverage and by using push rods and tial; a death grip on the stick will lead to canopy.) bearings for control linkages, rather overcontrolling. Unlike some high per• According to company President than pulleys and cables that would cre• formance singles that require a ham• Theodore E. Setzer (Tom Hamilton is ate more friction. merlock on the yoke in a steep bank the company's chairman), light stick Power-on and power-off stalls gave turn, the Glasair will hang in a 60-de• forces were achieved by giving the con• fair warning of a break. Stall strips gree bank with hardly any effort from trol stick a high moment arm for good along the inboard leading edge of the wing cause the inboard sections to stall first. Without the strips installed, how• ever, (and at least one builder I know PEOPLE IN GIAS HOUSES has chosen not to install them) the stall characteristics are unpredictable. Intentional spins are prohibited by To find out how Glasair owners were comfort ranged from "snug" to "excel• Stoddard-Hamilton. According to the faring with their kit-built airplanes, we lent." Most said that the cockpit is com• conducted a telephone survey between fortable for a small airplane cockpit. Five owner's manual: "The slightest devia• January 16 and January 29. We at• individuals compared the cockpit to the tion or change from our prototype tempted to contact the owners of the 30 front seat of a sports car. All five agreed N89SH could cause adverse char• Glasairs (out of 475 kits sold) that have that it is difficult to get in ,!nd out of the acteristics, and because of our lack of reached flying status, and succeeded in Glasair, but once you are settled inside it control over the way builders construct contacting 20 of them. Nineteen of the is comfortable .. their aircraft, we must prohibit inten• owners who were contacted had pur• • Use. Eighteen pilots use their Glasairs tional spins." chased the taildragger version of the for cross-country flying; two use them Setzer elaborated on the rationale be• Glasair. The retractable version of the for local flying. Nobody mentioned aero• hind the prohibition, saying that many Glasair was introduced more recently, batic use. owners have made modifications (such and only one of the RGs has flown. • GroUl/d hal/dling. Seventeen pilots re• We did not ask about company sup• ported no difficulties, saying that the as extending fuel tanks farther ouf• port for builders in the field, but most of Glasair handles Ii~e a typical taildragger. board) that could alter the aircraft's the owners with whom we talked The owner of the RG version also re• spin characteristics in ways it would be brought up the subject of their own ac• ported no problems. One pilot stated, "I impossible for the company to deter• cord, saying that Stoddard-Hamilton had wasn't completely satisfied with the mine. In spin tests conducted by Stod• been exceptionally helpful when they fixed tail wheel in landing because you dard-Hamilton, the Glasair recovered called for advice on the construction of have to use a lot of brake." He modified from three-turn spins to the left and their airplanes. his airplane' with a steerable tailwheel right within three quarters of a turn. Questions were asked about various and is pleased with the performance. Several aerobatic maneuvers, includ• aspects of the Glasair's construction and Another pilot' modified his TD version ing barrel rolls, rolls, loops and performance, and the results follow. with fixed tricycle gear. • Construction. The majority of builders • Cruise perforll/al/ce. Speeds ranged hammerhead turns, are permitted. The indicated that the instructions were ade• from 165 knots at 75-percent power airplane is rated by Stoddard-Hamilton quate and that they did not encounter with a 150-hp engine, to 200 knots at at six Gs positive and four Gs negative. any major problems. Several pilots said 65-percent power with a 200-hp engine. According to the company, roll rate is they never had built an airplane before. The average cruising speed is 178 knots 140 degrees per second, a figure that Most of the pilots said that they had to at 75-percent power. seemed to be about right according to make several calls to the factory, where • Additional rell/arks. One pilot has bro• my observations in flight. Maneuvers their questions were answered promptly ken four propellers and believes this that place high torsional loads on the and adequately. One paraplegic pilot happened because the gear is too fuselage, however, such as snap rolls, stated, "If I can build this airplane, with springy. The same pilot also expressed a tail slides and lomcovaks are advised the problems encountered getting in and problem with the fuel 'tanks. "You can't against. out of a wheelchair, anybody can build fill the fuel tanks; [the fuel] runs out the it; it's a great experience." pants on both sides of the wings. Any• The kit price for the Glasair retract• • Handling. One owner cited roll insta• time you' get in an asymmetric flight able gear is $19,500 and for the taildra• bility as a problem, but the remaining 19 with the airplane, there's fuel over• ger, $13,400. Neither kit includes en• pilots are very pleased with the way the board." He has reported the problem to gine or propeller. Stoddard-Hamilton airplane handles. The most frequent re• the company. plans to make both aircraft available in sponse was, "The Glasair is quick and Four pilots reported poor forward visi• a series of four kits, each of which can responsive." One pilot stated, "[The bility, and two pilots mentioned that the be purchased separately. Glasair] is fun to fly because it's so re• airplane is noisy. A factory-built Glasair will not be a sponsive," but cautioned, "you can't When asked if they generally were reality any time soon, if ever. The cost take someone who's used to flying a 150 pleased with their Glasairs, the majority or a Cherokee and put them in [a Glas• of the owners said that they wouldn't of obtaining type and production certif• air] without any training." trade their airplanes for anything on the icates is simply too high for a small • Cockpit COli/fort. The owners range in market. One pilot even is beginning company such as Stoddard-Hamilton. size from five feet eight inches and 155 work on his second Glasair. Then again, if the Federal Aviation pounds to six feet four inches and 220 Administration adopts a new set of pounds. Comments about the cockpit -Eril/ L. Harll/an standards that would make it less ex• pensive to put a "basic" airplane in

32. MARCH1984 production, as AOPA has petitioned lot of people would like an airplane dard-Hamilton's present room temper• the agency to do, Stoddard-Hamilton such as ours, but don't have the time to ature curing technique. "But would and other kit makers could consider build it. I would like to see them be able you pay $4,000 more to take 150 making complete airplanes. In Novem• to complete the Glasair in 200 hours. pounds off the airplane?" Hamilton ber 1983, FAA representatives met to Building an airplane need not be the asks. "Or how about $10,000 more for discuss such a set of rules with repre• draining, demanding experience it is an all carbon airplane? I don't know sentatives of AOPA, the Experimental now." that we can afford the tooling for that Aircraft Association, the General Avia• For the present, Hamilton is not very kind of airplane, or whether there is a tion Manufacturers Association, Air concerned about competing with market for it." Transport Canada and kit aircraft and Beech, Cessna, Mooney and Piper. He Whether or not Hamilton builds his engine manufacturers. (See: "Pilot is more interested in improving his kits carbon airplane, he is at least thinking News: FAA Solicits Rules for New Pri• and staying competitive in the home• about new light aircraft designs. And mary Aircraft" by Mark Twombly, Jan• built market. Asked what his dream that in itself is refreshing. Cessna may uary 1984 Pilot, p.1?) airplane would be, Hamilton answers never develop a successor to the Sky• Another possibility is that the FAA quickly, a 200-hp airplane made of fi• hawk, nor Beech an heir to the Bo• may change the rules to allow home• berglass cloth pre-impregnated with nanza. If new, faster, more efficient builders to do less than 51 percent of resin and cured in an oven. The result• small airplanes are produced, they will the work on a kit-built aircraft, as now ing airplane could be produced more have to come from somewhere else. is required. "I would like to see the per• quickly and would be 150 pounds Some may be coming out of Tom Ham• centage changed," said Hamilton. "A lighter than one produced by Stod- ilton's oven. 0 ONE MAN'S GIAS In many ways, Charles D. (Chuck) Mason, AOI'A 132799, typifies the pilot who has owned a succession of aircraft over the years as the size of his family and paycheck has grown. Mason learned to fly in a )-3 Cub in 1945. In 1956, a year after he married, he bought a ten-year-old Ercoupe for $1,750. He and his wife, Elsie, traveled around the country in the little two-seater. After their first child was born, they would nestle the baby girl in a hammock in the baggage space behind 'the seats, where she would sleep through much of a flight. But it was clear to Mason that more room soon would be needed, and in 1958 he bought a Piper Tri-Pacer for $4,650. A year later the Masons' second child was born. In 1971 Mason bought, with a partner, a 1957 Cessna 182 Skylane, an airplane big enough to carry the whole family (three Perhaps "pondering the best way to do something," Mason sits in his unfinished Glasair. children now). He has incorporated many of his own modifications into the building of his Glasair. Then, in 1974, he sold his share in the 182 and bought his own Skylane, a 1964 duced a$4,648$6,085$4,275$4,380$5,375$5,273gallon$0.73$0.70flighthour$0.90$0.76$0.81$1.72$1.84$1.32$6,138perspread$5,52124.5119.2hours$46total$31$20$13$26$36$49197337268206cost215129 sheet that costhelps explain The cost of gasoline, of course, turns out 1982198019771979198119761978year model. 1975for $10,000.per With the help of a costwhyingN28CMforpeopleflyingmoreVisicalcexcerptedhassuchaffordablebecomeasspreadfromChuckwayssheet.soChuckMasonexpensiveto fly.Mason'sare look-and to be the major culprit in the rising cost of friend, he overhauled the engine. On his Expense record for Cessna Skylane flying. According to Mason's data, the av• own he installed new wing tanks, strobes erage price he paid for avgas rose from 70 and $15,000 worth of avionics, including an cents per gallon in 1975 to $1.84 in 1982. But autopilot and new navigation radios. (Ma• other costs rose too. His insurance pre• son is an electrical engineer and project mium climbed from $386 in 1975 to $660 in manager at NASA's Goddard Space Flight 1982. And his tiedown cost rose from $230 Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. One of his to $480. recent responsibilities has been to super• The inflationary spiral did not mean that vise the installation of remote sensing Mason no longer could afford to own his equipment in a Lockheed ER-2, a new, airplane, but that he could not afford to fly larger version of the U-2, for severe storms it as much as he would like. In 1975 he flew research.) 215 hours at a total cost of $4,275, or $20 per Mason owned his 182 for eight years, av• hour. In 1982 he flew 124.5 hours at a total eraging about 200 hours of flight time per cost of $6,138, or $49 per hour. While the year. Over that span of time he kept a very Apple II Plus had no trouble swallowing accurate record of his expenses. Using a Vi• those numbers, they were hard for Mason sicalc program, he fed his expense figures to accept. If the trend continued, he real• into his Apple II Plus computer and pro- ized he would fly fewer and fewer hours

AOPA PILOT • 33 continued ONE MAN'S GLAS

and pay more and more money. He became dricks in his shop to see the Glasair kit and ing cruise altitude.) determined to find a more economical way decided it was the airplane for him. "The Mason also has developed dual sliding to fly. Glasair was more expensive," said Mason, canopies for pilot and passenger. (Stod• He briefly considered buying another "but more capable. I put a $500 deposit on dard-Hamilton offers a sliding canopy only used airplane. A Mooney, he thought, the Glasair in March 1982 and decided to on the pilot's side; the passenger side has a would offer sOl}1e savings in fuel but not as see it that year at Oshkosh. If [ had not gull-wing canopy.) He has worked out an much as he would like, and with the chil• liked it, [ would have forfeited the deposit. installation for the Century] autopilot he dren grown up the rear seats would be su• But when I saw the airplane fly, ] fell in love took from his Skylane. Mason will install perfluous. It ought to be a two-seater, he with it." dual nav/coms, a transponder, an ADF, a decided, and a machine that could travel Mason's kit arrived in September 1982, DME, a Loran C unit, a fuel totalizer, a digi• long legs through IFR weather. and he has been spending several hours in tal thermometer and carburetor air temper• In late 1981 he saw a picture of the his basement workshop most evenings ature gauge, and a CHT/EGT. Quickie 2 on the cover of Popular Mechallics since then. His is an early kit, a taildragger He plans to have his airplane finished and thought that the Quickie kit might be a version, requiring Mason to do all the and ready to fly by the end of 1984. The key solution to his problem. He had considered welding and to fabricate many of the metal to completing such a demanding project, restoring an aircraft years earlier and had parts. He expects to spend about 2,500 he says, is not technical knowledge, but re• actually designed his house around such a hours building his Glasair. "Not all of the sourcefulness in solving problems and the project, first laying out the basement/work• time I spend on the project is fruitful build• will to stick with it. Once he has his air• shop/garage area, then designing the rest ing time, though," Mason said. "] can plane flying, Mason estimates that his of the house. spend several hours pondering the best hourly operating costs will be less than $20. The Q2 appealed to Mason because, he way to do something. And] plan to add a Mason's example demonstrates that you said, "It looked like a piece of exotic sculp• lot of extras." can own an airplane, tailor-made to your ture." But after visiting a Quickie distribu• In the fashion of many homebuilders, needs, if you are willing to expend an ex• tor in Pennsylvania, he decided that the Q2 Mason has come up with his own modifica• traordinary effort to get it. Not everyone was not quite large enough or powerful tions. He has extended the fuel tanks and will be inclined to make that effort. Chuck enough for his needs. Still, he felt a kit• has added a fuselage header tank. (Mason Mason is one of those relatively rare indi• built aircraft might best fill his needs. plans to cut operational costs by filling the viduals who will build something himself if. Through a friend, Mason met Mike Hen• wing tanks with autogas and the header he cannot find it or cannot afford it. dricks of Columbia, Maryland, who was tank with avgas. He intends to take off with His next project-building an energy ef· building a Glasair. Mason visited Hen- avgas and to switch to autogas when reach- ficient house. -JJM

34. MARCH1984