Thanks Kevin!!

Since I posted this AM I talked to Bob and you are correct...<750 is probably not realistic with an 0-200 or C-85. Very nice fellow and he convinced me to at least take a look at his plans so I bought a set. He is very happy with the design and the flush rivet wing should be a fair amount faster than a Cub and still land pretty slow. Apparently, he doesn't think the flap are necessary since it looks like they were omitted on the LSA.

I'm pretty impressed with the Patrol but want to get an LSA in the air and sell my '48 C-170 since I never fly with more than one other anymore and I'm not getting any younger either. If FAA would get off their duff and approve the "no med" rec pilot I would build a Patrol too, but I keep hearing the LSA community is putting a lot of pressure on them to leave things the way they are. I understand that from a business standpoint but there are a ton of good under 180 HP planes around that could be flown if it were like the LSA ticket.

Do you have a web site for your Patrol build?

If you haven't already seen it, the jan 2013 issue of Kitplanes has a write up and photos of the Bearhawk LSA. It is an impressive airplane and they are already offering a rib and spar package for the scratch builder. If you love to weld and fabricate then Bob Barrows designs are for you. There is plenty of that in all of his airplanes but everything on the airplane can be built with basic tools as the designer has only basic tools in his shop, I've been there. I like the all aluminum wings and they borrow many features from Van's RV series. Hard to argue with that success. There is a yahoo board for each design if you like yahoo boards, I don't and only check in there once in a while. I try to stay off the internet and in the shop except when I'm stuck on the road in my day job. I don't have a builders web site but if you PM your personal e mail I will share some pics of my project. Bob's airplane's perform and they are roomy. I'm no spring chicken and as soon as I can retire and give up getting first class medicals for my job I'm ready for self certification. The most fun for me so far in 42 years of aviation has been in airplanes with 100 hp or less, I'm ready for that.

Kevin wrote:If you love to weld and fabricate then Bob Barrows designs are for you.

Bearhawk aircraft are also working hard to get a Quickbuild kit into the market place, which obviously completes all the welding and fabrication for you to finish out as you like it. I think many of the major milestones have already been passed, as tidbits of news comes onto the builders group now and then. Watch this space.

corsica coatings wrote:Since I posted this AM I talked to Bob and you are correct...<750 is probably not realistic with an 0-200 or C-85. Very nice fellow and he convinced me to at least take a look at his plans so I bought a set. He is very happy with the design and the flush rivet wing should be a fair amount faster than a Cub and still land pretty slow. Apparently, he doesn't think the flap are necessary since it looks like they were omitted on the LSA.

It's pretty difficult to build as light as Bob does. He builds his airplanes with no electrical system or avionics - that's prob'ly 100 lbs there. I've got plans for both the Patrol and LSA. Other than being slightly smaller, there's quite a few small changes that save weight on the LSA vs. the Patrol. I've heard that omitting the flaps saves 60 lbs. The wing is a higher ratio Riblett, which allows slower landing speeds w/o flaps, but also slower cruise. The wing spar doublers are shorter and thinner on the LSA. LSA has no baggage door. The LSA uses only one elevator hinge vs two on the Patrol - the fuselage elevator mount doubles as a second hinge. Ribs are generally thinner material. Fuel tanks are smaller. The LSA plans even detail cutting off the non-structural front of the nose ribs after the wing skin is fitted. Lots of small weight saving changes that add up. Lastly, a small Continental is lighter than an O-320/360.

If you join the LSA Yahoo group(there's a web only option), there's lots of photos of the LSA prototype.

A careful S7 build can come in under 700 lbs while still having all the goodies. A few in my area just have. Lots more goodies then the extremely bare boned Patrol prototype anyway. 100 horse also of course. I believe the wing structure is the biggest difference in how it compares to the various cub knockoff LSA's and even the LSA Patrol. As there are not any S7's falling out of the sky that I know of, you may want to investigate how they do their wings. Like the Kitfox, Highlander, etc. the tubular spars are the big difference. Yes, just like a big old ultralight wing, big aluminum round tubes. Proven now for a lot of years and fleet hours, (I think Jim Bede used the same idea in some his designs) it may offer a better strength to weight ratio then the traditional flat spars. Ain't saying it's better, but other's more in the know then me tell me the S7 wing is hard to beat for it's weight/strength ratio. They seem to hold up long term, a great safety record anyway, since the mid 80's. Not 60 or 70 yrs, time will tell I guess.

I saw a Husky the other day, a bare airframe, and I was surprised to see how much it looked like an S7 fuselage as per general tube sizing, a closer look confirmed this until I started asking about the wall thickness's. Mostly .049 and .058 for the Husky, where the 7 was .035, but very similar outside dia. tubing in a lot of places.

The newer super light weight digital basic panels could save a significant amount of weight, check out www.beliteaircraft.com for one example. wish I had known about these when I built in '07, I have traditional steam boat anchors in my panel. The under 700 lb S7 I saw recently had one of those new batteries also, so small it fit up under the panel (!) so nice short cables going to the starter. this thing had equeal power to more traditional sealed types but was, I think, 2 or 3 lbs?

Forgive me if I have this wrong - but I think comparing a fabric covered wing to a flush-riveted semi-monocoque wing is apples and oranges, if you want to talk Patrol LSA vs. Rans S7, naturally the Rans S7 fabric wing is lighter, the fabric makes a huge difference.

But there is a price to pay there too, life has no free lunches! This is in terms of efficiency.
The "achieved aerofoil" of a semi-monocoque wing much much closer to the designed aerofoil than with a fabric covering. This puts it ahead of a fabric covered design in terms of lift production vs. drag created for the same design shape, so in theory you cruise faster for a similar class of aircraft (ceteris paribus).

Recessed rivets....NO rivets, which is less drag?

The airfoil of a rag wing in flight is not as good as an all metal wing? I'd assume in flight characteristics of a rag wing are taken into consideration when the airfoil is chosen, as opposed to at rest. And a light metal wing won't balloon between the ribs a little also? Trying to get a full featured airplane with 100 hp at 750 lbs or less was the question. The Patrol LSA with all the goodies, by Barrows own assessment, would be pushing or over 800. I still really like it however, and hope to it first hand. I like the amount of sq ft it has, a lot.

cessnaford wrote:Also does anyone have a Rocky Mountain Ridge Runner 3 (tandem seating)? They seem a bit light for windy days, but.......Thanks for the info.

byeBill

Yes, I have a model 3 in the Philippines and it's a great performer.