asa wrote:

29singlespeed wrote:Very nice, Asa. I reached out to you about your Scout but was not prepared to pull the trigger (finances/taxes). Did the past owner let you know why he barely flew the plane?

He also owned a 7GCBC and since most/all of his flights were local hops, the 7GCBC was just easier. He was thinking the Scout might replace both of them, although he didn't have immediate plans to sell the 7.


Also, big development, today I purchased an M6 fuselage, powdercoated, all the mods welded in, ready to cover. It is used but was rebuilt by Maule in their jig, all float mods, super skylight, large rear patroller windows, metal stringers, etc. When I get back from Alaska in late summer, this plane will be transformed into a unicorn - the longest Maule wings on a light M6 fuselage. Will be covering it in Oratex, overhauling the engine, and building what I hope to be a fire breather. Many people will say I shouldn't deprive the world of a long wing M7. I say I am not depriving the world of a long wing M7, I'm birthing a long wing M6. Maule factory "mod kits" are a wonderful thing.

The airframe is a big commitment! Are you sure you will still have the Maule in the fall when you come back from Alaska?

RC5280 wrote:
The airframe is a big commitment! Are you sure you will still have the Maule in the fall when you come back from Alaska?

I am not at all sure. This whole airframe cost the same as your horizontal on your 180 though so in the scheme of things... not a big deal! hahahahahaha

ouch

asa wrote:

RC5280 wrote:
The airframe is a big commitment! Are you sure you will still have the Maule in the fall when you come back from Alaska?

I am not at all sure. This whole airframe cost the same as your horizontal on your 180 though so in the scheme of things... not a big deal! hahahahahaha

As your financial advisor, I would like to point out that airplane parts are hard assets and make a sound addition to a well-diversified portfolio.

Felix wrote:

asa wrote:

RC5280 wrote:
The airframe is a big commitment! Are you sure you will still have the Maule in the fall when you come back from Alaska?

I am not at all sure. This whole airframe cost the same as your horizontal on your 180 though so in the scheme of things... not a big deal! hahahahahaha

As your financial advisor, I would like to point out that airplane parts are hard assets and make a sound addition to a well-diversified portfolio.

You're hired!

Felix wrote:
As your financial advisor, I would like to point out that airplane parts are hard assets and make a sound addition to a well-diversified portfolio.

Words to live and invest by.

A couple people have mentioned that this would go experimental, but it's staying certified. I'm getting my own Maule factory mod kit for the project - Mod Kit 94. I like the company more and more as I work with them. No charge to develop a legal pathway for me to do a stupid conversion on my airplane.

I've flown M-4, M-5, M-6 and M-7 Maules, some fair bit, others only fifteen or twenty hours. But, the M-6 was definitely my favorite, hands down. If I were ever looking to purchase a Maule, I'd try to find a good M-6 that's had the fabric replaced.....

Oh, yeah, then there's the wing riveting.....double that in some places.....

And, you'd have.....what you're planning, basically. Good on you!

MTV

mtv wrote:I've flown M-4, M-5, M-6 and M-7 Maules, some fair bit, others only fifteen or twenty hours. But, the M-6 was definitely my favorite, hands down. If I were ever looking to purchase a Maule, I'd try to find a good M-6 that's had the fabric replaced.....

Oh, yeah, then there's the wing riveting.....double that in some places.....

And, you'd have.....what you're planning, basically. Good on you!

MTV

Thanks. From what I've gathered, the general population seems to value M7's a little more than M6's - everyone wants a long wing M7. But the people operating Maules the way I will be actually see the M6 as the most desirable Maule. And they are rare which has an inherit value in them - people seem to hold onto them once they get them. Long wing, light fuselage, same gross weight.

M7's have a higher ceiling in the rear seat area, which is why they're the ugliest Maule. People claim their cabin is 5" longer as well, but it is only partially true. The "station" (plane of tubes) making up the read of the cargo section is simply angled differently. So at the floor, the M7 has 5" more cabin length. At the top, it is the same as M5/6. Fuselages are the same length overall. I'm measured this myself. Coming from a Scout, any Maule is cavernous.

asa wrote:...which is why they're the ugliest Maule.

It's so ugly you have to hide bacon in the baggage just to get your dog inside.

It's so ugly that GoPros only work from inside the cabin.

It's so ugly, the guy who painted Swirly Girl won't comment.

I'm not very good at this.

Just curious, how are the M6 and MX7 different? The MX7 is missing the hump of the M7, so I assume it would be a tad lighter. I always assumed the rest of the MX7 dimensions mirrored the M7, but I never measured, or checked any drawing to be sure. I fly an MX7 and am very happy with it, but I'm not pushing any boundaries of the flight envelope. Just an occasional camping trip and a bunch of flights with my bicycle. The Maule fulfills those missions splendidly. I've also grown attached to an airplane that doesn't fly any faster than I think, and is robust enough to protect me if/when I get stupid.

Flyhound wrote:Just curious, how are the M6 and MX7 different? The MX7 is missing the hump of the M7, so I assume it would be a tad lighter. I always assumed the rest of the MX7 dimensions mirrored the M7, but I never measured, or checked any drawing to be sure. I fly an MX7 and am very happy with it, but I'm not pushing any boundaries of the flight envelope. Just an occasional camping trip and a bunch of flights with my bicycle. The Maule fulfills those missions splendidly. I've also grown attached to an airplane that doesn't fly any faster than I think, and is robust enough to protect me if/when I get stupid.

M6 and MX7 are the 'same' fuselage. MX7 has the 'universal' wings, whereas the M6 came with the same overall length wings but they had more flap and less aileron. Through mod kits, it's possible to have the exact same airplane labeled as either an MX7 or M6 depending on what parts you started with.

Jeremy's chronology is very helpful. One thing not shown but of interest is flap/aileron length. Lots of airplanes on here are labeled with 32'11" wing however they are different. Also, MAule mod kits allow another layer of complexity since airplanes can be converted between models and drastically altered to resemble other models.
http://maules.com/chronology.html

Both of these are indeed a 'tad' lighter than M7 fuselage. Not a lot though, I can't imagine it being over 10lbs, there just a few tubes different.

I have all of the Maule drawings and have spent many hours reviewing so many tiny details about these airplanes. The "Optional Accessories" section is notably interesting. Are you aware that you can install front and rear external rotating searchlights via only a logbook entry? Camera hole? logbook entry. External PA/loud speaker? Logbook entry. It's truly wild.

ASA, I’ve been patiently waiting to see your new extended landing gear. Was hoping to see a pic of a new gear leg next to an old one. Did you decide to not install it on the M7?

I’m getting ready to build some extended landing gear for my Bearhawk and was looking at the Maule gear as an example. 4” longer gear means ~2” taller and I was wondering if that really made much difference.

whee wrote:ASA, I’ve been patiently waiting to see your new extended landing gear. Was hoping to see a pic of a new gear leg next to an old one. Did you decide to not install it on the M7?

I’m getting ready to build some extended landing gear for my Bearhawk and was looking at the Maule gear as an example. 4” longer gear means ~2” taller and I was wondering if that really made much difference.

Airframes botched my order and forgot to make them I think. I ordered them, paid, told them what color, then they said they will ship in 2 weeks. 3 weeks later I called and they said they were having difficulty but they would be out of fab the following week and to powder coat. That was 1/29. I’m fairly sure they just lost my order and then started on it when I called to check. Whatever, we all make mistakes.

As for the difference, everyone I’ve talked to who does short stuff in maules says the extended gear and bushwheels are a game changer and make maules into what they were meant to be. Guess I’ll see soon hopefully.

One has to take into account where the wingspans are measured.
M5 has a span of 30'10" measured at wingtips. These are droop tips which also delta outwards at tips so not all lifting surface but faster cruise as the vortices are less than the squared off tips found on later models of M6 MX7 M7 M8 M9.
The early M6 had droop tips and span measured 32'11" to the tip but small aileron and rudder.
Later M6 from 1986 also 32'11" but measured on squared tips thus a tad more lifting surface. Ailerons and rudder are larger than early M6.
The early MX7 (1985) had squared tips and 30'10" span like M5 but a tad more lift area because of tips.
Later MX7 and MXT7 and M8 got the squared tips and 32'11" span from 1993 on. This wing became named the universal wing and is also the wingspan of later M7.
M8 had the early wide aluminum gear. Only half a dozen were built.
Early M7 has squared tips and 33'8" span (long wing designation).
Later MX7 and M7 have optional oleo or wide aluminum gear.

maules.com wrote:One has to take into account where the wingspans are measured.
M5 has a span of 30'10" measured at wingtips. These are droop tips which also delta outwards at tips so not all lifting surface but faster cruise as the vortices are less than the squared off tips found on later models of M6 MX7 M7 M8 M9.
The early M6 had droop tips and span measured 32'11" to the tip but small aileron and rudder.
Later M6 from 1986 also 32'11" but measured on squared tips thus a tad more lifting surface. Ailerons and rudder are larger than early M6.
The early MX7 (1985) had squared tips and 30'10" span like M5 but a tad more lift area because of tips.
Later MX7 and MXT7 and M8 got the squared tips and 32'11" span from 1993 on. This wing became named the universal wing and is also the wingspan of later M7.
M8 had the early wide aluminum gear. Only half a dozen were built.
Early M7 has squared tips and 33'8" span (long wing designation).
Later MX7 and M7 have optional oleo or wide aluminum gear.

Jeremy, it blows my mind how much you have stored in your brain, and how much you've contributed to the Maule community. Thanks as always

I suppose there is no turning back now. M6 fuselage is in my garage ready to go...

How much of a weight saving are you anticipating by using Oratex ?

Mapleflt wrote:How much of a weight saving are you anticipating by using Oratex ?

I have no idea really. Not necessarily doing it for weight savings but that will be a bonus