WOW


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk because I'm still working and can't get my damned aircard connected.

That's genius EZ! It turns out that I have 12 neighbors that need something aviation related to put in their hangers. If I parted the thing out into 12 baskets, then sold raffle tickets to pull the cord on that ballistic parachute, I could come out on this deal. IN all seriousness, I probably could come out close enough by some sort of donation. Maybe courier guys' beer can recycling ministry is a non profit, he showed a keen interest in the Hopper. Surely if there was 30,000 discerning buyers of such equipment, there's one more.

No problem and no charge for whatever that advice may be worth... but realize that this is in the yellow airspeed arc of the naughty versus nice spectrum, slightly above the green arc. I've flown in the high side of the yellow arc once or twice and it was not worth the worry and risk and tap dancing to stay out of the red. That would be especially true with only small amounts of monetary gain or loss at stake as in this situation.

So I would say that three separate donations, all of them not that close to the non-appraised limit, and donated to three different charitable organizations throughout the year, might be reasonable and not a big risk. Making twelve donations of 12 bags of pop rivets, each valued at $4999... would be unwise. There is a rather muscular and intolerant pit bull a few feet away, that should be allowed to sleep peacefully at all cost.

Remember the original reason for my sticking my nose into this... see if there is a local educational museum, or school program, or EAA chapter, or Aviation Explorers post with a 501 (c) 3 charity status who can use the airframe as an educational tool.

And I am available as a pro bono federal funding grantwriting consultant to courierguy's beer can ministry...

EZ- I owe you at least the first basket full of airplane parts, course I'll need a receipt . The current owner would call off the deal if he knew I was seriously considering "recycling" his little hangar Queen. What is the TBO on those little 503's? That might soon belong in the beer can bin too.

I actually can find a use for that 503, and I'd be happy to have it if it works out. I have no idea on the TBO, but I think they are easily overhaul-able. Apparently they're not bad engines if operated within their parameters. Plenty of interesting little airplane projects around that can make use of that engine... just nothing that I want to fly across a cold lake with

If you're serious I have an organization here that has a 501 (c) 3 certification that can issue a donation receipt for the engine, prop and related stuff, I'll barter and tap dance with them for use of it. But you are certainly not "obliged" to do that in any way.

The original Chotia engine that was on the original Weedhopper... no interest. I've heard that it's best use is an artificial reef.

Nosedragger wrote:What is the TBO on those little 503's? That might soon belong in the beer can bin too.

Rotax says 300 hours for crankshaft replacement but many run longer. Five year recommendation on crankshaft seals. And of course if it's not been used regularly, there could be rust pitting inside - including on rod and crank bearings.

Mark J

marcusofcotton wrote:

Nosedragger wrote:What is the TBO on those little 503's? That might soon belong in the beer can bin too.

Rotax says 300 hours for crankshaft replacement but many run longer. Five year recommendation on crankshaft seals. And of course if it's not been used regularly, there could be rust pitting inside - including on rod and crank bearings.

Mark J

Ah, this deal just gets better and better. 50 hours from TBO and 27 years young, it's surpassed the crank seal test by 5.5 times.

EZFlap wrote:I actually can find a use for that 503, and I'd be happy to have it if it works out. I have no idea on the TBO, but I think they are easily overhaul-able. Apparently they're not bad engines if operated within their parameters. Plenty of interesting little airplane projects around that can make use of that engine... just nothing that I want to fly across a cold lake with

If you're serious I have an organization here that has a 501 (c) 3 certification that can issue a donation receipt for the engine, prop and related stuff, I'll barter and tap dance with them for use of it. But you are certainly not "obliged" to do that in any way.

The original Chotia engine that was on the original Weedhopper... no interest. I've heard that it's best use is an artificial reef.

I might be calling you, I'm going to contact the two local museums that I know of today but both of them are warbird related, so I doubt they'd have much interest. If I don't get excommunicated from my big hangar on Friday, I may not pursue this other deal anyway.

Mark J[/quote]

marcusofcotton wrote:

Nosedragger wrote:What is the TBO on those little 503's? That might soon belong in the beer can bin too.

Rotax says 300 hours for crankshaft replacement but many run longer. Five year recommendation on crankshaft seals. And of course if it's not been used regularly, there could be rust pitting inside - including on rod and crank bearings.

Mark J

This is the story I was told by an experienced Rotax repairman. The two stroke Rotax's used to have longer TBO. Many 503's were commonly making 1000 plus hrs and the engine was considered Rotax's most bullet proof design but certain two blade props combined with the solid drive psru's ("B box") produced feed back vibrations to the crank and bearings, causing premature failure. Not taking chances while figuring out the cause and a fix Rotax responded by dropping the TBO on all their two strokes to 300 hrs. When it turned out not to be an engine issue but was found to be a gearbox one from vibration, Rotax came out with a rubber cushioned style gear box called a C box and the E box (electric start) that actually eliminated that problem but Rotax left the lowered TBO in place, likely for liability reasons, and encouraged by parts sales which picked up dramatically with the lower TBO. They also had no close engine competitor to push them so it stayed at 300. Being 27 years old makes this one likely the original B solid drive. The 503 itself might still have good value to someone who knows their Rotax engines and knows what prop applications to avoid, provided it does not have rust issues.

Just to put this on the table, it should be possible to register that thing as Experimental Exhibition. In my opinion, parting it out is a better idea, but just letting you know.

Donate it to the ISU vo-tech school out at KPIH. They will accept it and give you the proper receipts........ a great bunch of instructors out there and a great local resource for us locals.

If your warbird museums do not have any sort of kids program that can use this airframe, then tell them they should damn well start one, and here is the airframe to do it.

If they still do not have an interest, and especially if they give you any "wrong side of the tracks" attitude, then tell them they're stupid pig-headed idiots, and they're digging their own grave.

That yacht club exclusive elitist mentality is not good for aviation, and it is not going to make them any friends in the community. They need aviation to survive as much as the poor boys with duct-taped Aeroncas do. Actually the warbird guys need it more... there have been a lot of warbird accidents where an airplane took out a house, or killed someone, they use up a lot of expensive leaded fuel, and they make a lot of noise that anti-airport people love to use as ammunition. The big iron needs friends and supporters as much or more than the bug smashers do.

Now don't get me wrong... I love, cherish and appreciate the warbird airplanes as much as anyone else here. I know that not all of the warbird type guys are snobs. Most of them are probably great. My point is that IF the warbird museum is not interested in an active youth education and community outreach program, they would be very wrong.

Sorry to rant, this is a sore spot with me... I've lived both sides of the elitist snob thing and I got the sour grapes to prove it. Anyone who's not doing their part to save aviation by making friends of all ages for private flying, is helping sink the boat for everyone.

UPDATE: just saw courierguy's post... that looks like a great option. give 'em the engine, prop, the whole shebang. Again, two or three donations over the course of the year would be ideal IMHO

I failed to call anyone today but will include the Pocatello guys on my list tomorrow. (I think PIH is Pocatello, I'll check that too) It is interesting though that my non-pilot buddies want the thing now, one's a rancher, one's a pig hunter, and one's an idiot. They all think it would be fun to fly without the bothersome training process, I'm beginning to understand how they sold so many of them. It now appears that the best spot to unload an uncertified ultralight is on a Texas redneck boar hunting forum, the thought of the Hopper being used to haul beer in and pigs out of a private game ranch is a little amusing and slightly tempting, I don't know that it would shorten the life of anyone that would otherwise be holding an AR, strapped to a tractor seat welded to Bubba's mushroom bar, while chasing animals through the brambles at twice the Weedhoppers V-ne.

Nosedragger wrote:It is interesting though that my non-pilot buddies want the thing now, one's a rancher, one's a pig hunter, and one's an idiot. They all think it would be fun to fly without the bothersome training process, I'm beginning to understand how they sold so many of them. It now appears that the best spot to unload an uncertified ultralight is on a Texas redneck boar hunting forum, the thought of the Hopper being used to haul beer in and pigs out of a private game ranch is a little amusing and slightly tempting, I don't know that it would shorten the life of anyone that would otherwise be holding an AR, strapped to a tractor seat welded to Bubba's mushroom bar, while chasing animals through the brambles at twice the Weedhoppers V-ne.

HAHAHA!!! For some reason I thought that was really funny. I vote for selling it to a pig hunter.

The guys at ISU are really cool and will probably take it but they won't inflate the value for you.

Hi All,
just reading through this thread and the main thing i suggest is that you do a google, if you have not already, and find the yahoo groups forum and the weedhopper forum. I followed both for some time a while back and was amazed at how popular the Weedy still is. There is lots of information and some talented owners, rebuilders that can tell you what you have and if it is safe/worth putting back in the air.
having been involved here in Australian U/Ls since '76 I too remember the original and even then would not touch one. None of the later models made it here and i was surprised at their following and after watching some of their videos (couple on skies) was impressed at the rotax powered models, never been a fan of two axis but they looked like they had no trouble in the different conditions.
Before righting it off do some real research. Maybe you can still do the backyard thing.
I'd love to fly my lazair on skies but we lack the main ingrediant here Downunder
Ozzie

Nosedragger wrote:......... It is interesting though that my non-pilot buddies want the thing now, one's a rancher, one's a pig hunter, and one's an idiot. They all think it would be fun to fly without the bothersome training process.....

It's amazing how many people equate "no license required" with "no training required".

Hi guys,
I would just like to be the one person here who happens to LOVE the Weedhopper for what it is, a low, slow, knockabout, very easy to fly ultralight.
I own a 1940 bc65 T-craft, half own a 1946 Cessna 140 with my sweetie pie, and SIX Ultralights. All the other ultralights are more crosswind capable, fly faster, and farther on 5 gallons of fuel, but if all I want to do, is kick around at 2,000 feet AGL over the far west Texas grasslands, I can fly her trimmed up with just my feet. By the way, I have had her at 9,000 feet MSL on a summer day just fine with her KFM flat twin.
I think that the Weedhopper is the Ercoupe of the Ultralight world, a fine little basic fun to fly VFR airplane as long as you don't try to fly it like it is something else.
Brie

taylorcraftbc65 wrote:Hi guys,
I would just like to be the one person here who happens to LOVE the Weedhopper for what it is, a low, slow, knockabout, very easy to fly ultralight.
I own a 1940 bc65 T-craft, half own a 1946 Cessna 140 with my sweetie pie, and SIX Ultralights. All the other ultralights are more crosswind capable, fly faster, and farther on 5 gallons of fuel, but if all I want to do, is kick around at 2,000 feet AGL over the far west Texas grasslands, I can fly her trimmed up with just my feet. By the way, I have had her at 9,000 feet MSL on a summer day just fine with her KFM flat twin.
I think that the Weedhopper is the Ercoupe of the Ultralight world, a fine little basic fun to fly VFR airplane as long as you don't try to fly it like it is something else.
Brie

Bless you sir. PM me if you'd be interested in acquiring that sweet little flying machine.

Well, the critics were right: http://www.localnews8.com/news/plane-cr ... index.html
Didn't kill him, but the plane is ready for the beer can recycling ministry now.

Did you end up selling the ultralight to the person that crashed?

I hope he is OK.