I took the liberty of checking the FAA database for the tail number. It is listed as "sale reported" with an address in Graham WA. Certificate issue date: none, expiration date: none, status: in question. Other owner names: sold to Hagie BF.
In my experience, a "sale reported" listing like this usually means the seller has reported the sale to the FAA, but the buyer has not reported the purchase. This is often done to avoid paying state sales tax. I'd suggest that you make extra sure that the paperwork is in order, a bill of sale signed by anyone other than the last registered owner might not be accepted by the FAA.
Good luck with it, looks like fun. You just missed the big Luscombe fly-in in Columbia CA by a couple weeks. Two friends of mine go every year. There's usually another one in Cottage Grove OR later in the summer.

hotrod150 wrote:I took the liberty of checking the FAA database for the tail number. It is listed as "sale reported" with an address in Graham WA. Certificate issue date: none, expiration date: none, status: in question. Other owner names: sold to Hagie BF.
In my experience, a "sale reported" listing like this usually means the seller has reported the sale to the FAA, but the buyer has not reported the purchase. This is often done to avoid paying state sales tax. I'd suggest that you make extra sure that the paperwork is in order, a bill of sale signed by anyone other than the last registered owner might not be accepted by the FAA.
Good luck with it, looks like fun. You just missed the big Luscombe fly-in in Columbia CA by a couple weeks. Two friends of mine go every year. There's usually another one in Cottage Grove OR later in the summer.

Yeah we're on that one. It might be a mess but solvable. I hadn't thought of the sales tax business. The next back previous owner is still around. The one before that was Bud Blanchard, the guy who started the BAS shoulder harness business. That was a huge relief. My mechanic was prepared to ground the airplane if the rear spar carry through structure had been compromised in any way by (say) the harness anchored with bolts through it. Anyway, Bud's gone West. The next guy up the chain has a huge pile of Luscombe newsletters he's going to give me when I get up there. The 150 seats need a 337 and some other stuff. There's no question that the airplane needs the paperwork whipped into shape but I think with Blanchard in the background it may be better than we at once thought. In any case it's currently in annual, so I got a year to get it sorted. I really need to get up there and stare at the pile of papers for a day. I'm trying to juggle family commitments to make that possible. I think with a clear paper trail the value of the airplane may go up. I gotta get me a case of Krylon......just kidding!

I knew Bud used to own a C170 before his 180, didn't know he owned a Luscombe too. One thing to keep in mind is the old saying "never buy an airplane from an A&P"-- just because Bud used to own it, it doesn't necesarily follow that everything is legit &/or squared away.
A friend (who's owned several Luscombes through the years) told me that the original 8C's were equipped with an A-75 Continental with the old excello fuel injection(fuselage tank standard, aux wing tanks available). That fuel injection might explain why the C model is placarded differently from the 8A regarding carb heat on takeoff.
Lots of good Luscombe info on the nternet. pilotfriend.com has a good page on Luscombe history.

Emory Bored wrote:......My mechanic was prepared to ground the airplane if the rear spar carry through structure had been compromised in any way by (say) the harness anchored with bolts through it. .......

Don't know what shoulder harnesses are in the plane or how they attach, but FWIW the Luscombe is STC'd for BAS harnesses. www.basinc-aeromod.com

If I remember right rivets are used to anchor the harness to the carry though. Analysis proved that as long as the rivets were in place then there were no stress risers of concern and the spar was safe. If the harness was removed the faa wanted rivets put back into the holes in the spar; it didn't necessarily need them but having the rivets in place reduces the stress risers.

whee wrote:If I remember right rivets are used to anchor the harness to the carry though. Analysis proved that as long as the rivets were in place then there were no stress risers of concern and the spar was safe. If the harness was removed the faa wanted rivets put back into the holes in the spar; it didn't necessarily need them but having the rivets in place reduces the stress risers.

Do you recall where you got that information?

Emory Bored wrote:

whee wrote:If I remember right rivets are used to anchor the harness to the carry though. Analysis proved that as long as the rivets were in place then there were no stress risers of concern and the spar was safe. If the harness was removed the faa wanted rivets put back into the holes in the spar; it didn't necessarily need them but having the rivets in place reduces the stress risers.

Do you recall where you got that information?

I'm trying to remember but I haven't yet. Did you talk with Doug? It seems like it was from a multiple 337 that he may have had.

whee wrote:

Emory Bored wrote:

whee wrote:If I remember right rivets are used to anchor the harness to the carry though. Analysis proved that as long as the rivets were in place then there were no stress risers of concern and the spar was safe. If the harness was removed the faa wanted rivets put back into the holes in the spar; it didn't necessarily need them but having the rivets in place reduces the stress risers.

Do you recall where you got that information?

I'm trying to remember but I haven't yet. Did you talk with Doug? It seems like it was from a multiple 337 that he may have had.

I just went over the major mod paperwork with the owner. We have a 337 on the harness by BAS as a part of the development of their STC. All the other weird stuff with the exception of the armor plated floor has a 337. There are 15 total going back to compliance with AD 50-37-3 about the fuel system. This is the only Luscombe in existence with a pair of Timm tanks signed off to comply with that AD note. And it's dated 1954 so that's going to be a heap of good news to a lot of Luscombe owners.

EB

Emory Bored wrote:This is the only Luscombe in existence with a pair of Timm tanks signed off to comply with that AD note. And it's dated 1954 so that's going to be a heap of good news to a lot of Luscombe owners.
EB

Very Cool! Good find.

I'm headed up Sunday for an eyeball but I'll have to fly back commercial after finalizing things and getting the airplane down from 86WA to Scappoose. We're going to give it a good looking over but we've decided that at the price with all the paperwork more or less in order, I'll be money ahead even if I have to part it out.

I don't have enough time to knock all the rust off my sorry pilot ass, get sufficient dual to keep the insurance company happy and get back before life requires me to be home. I'll head back up mid month and bring Patches to Reno.

It's strange really. I've been looking for the "perfect" airplane for so long and this damn thing sure ain't it, but I'm also convinced that it ain't out there. I'm trading my Harley for this one, more or less. Both machines weigh about the same but the Luscombe has a bit more power; it's just transferred different. I can barely touch the ground with both feet on the Harley. In the Luscombe I hope I never do.

Theres a lot of damn black water under the bridge since I last owned an airplane. A couple of times this week I've wondered what the heck I'm doing. I'm certain I can fly, I'm just not sure the "system" is ready for my participation again. The last time I flew into a controlled field the tower yelled at me because I didn't repeat their taxi instructions back before moving. Hell, they're looking at me out the tower windows for crying out loud, they can see where I'm going as well as I can. Things change don't they? I've never liked that.

A word of warning to all you young jacks out there. Stay current. I feel like I'm about to climb a mountain and I'm out of wind before I've even started. I used to be the smartest son of a biscuit on the beach you know? Not so much any more.

I need a GPS to come home on I guess. I'll get a Seattle, Klamath Falls and Frisco sectional and probably put a pencil line on there and keep a time distance speed log just because I always have. My current GPS is a Lowrance 100. You can google that. I think I'm going to get a Garman 696 with XM just because, but I don't want to buy it right away. Between the charts and the dinosaur GPS and the TDS log I'll probably not get too lost. I need an Airport directory too. What's the pattern altitude at podunk? I just haven't thought about this stuff for awhile. It's embarrassing. Headset, check, spare handheld radio, check, camera, check. Coffee thermos and a pisspot? I probably should get a Stealth 170 or similar so I can regale us all with my 600 mile +/- saga. That would be cool. One fuel stop. Montegue? Yeah, that's the ticket. Maybe I'll come down the east side through the gorge though. Bend, Klamath Falls then nothin'. Just all that beautiful country that's been outside too long. It's wore out. Or the west route. Salem, Eugene, Roseburg, Montegue, then follow 395 over the hill. Yeah. Nice ride. About 25 gallons of gas. Hard to beat that.

I'm just talking out loud here because it's late. There's probably two dozen places to stop for lunch. They'll have to roll me out of the airplane I'll be so fat. I'll keep y'all posted so you can keep a lookout. I'll be in the little 8C with the missing paint job. Me and Patches don't need no stinking paint.

EB

For certain it will be an experience. The control towers got whipped into shape partly to get in line with ICAO and their ways of phrasing things and partly because of too many runway incursions. No more "roger" when the tower says hold short of the runway, you have to read it back with your full call sign. They will very firmly tell you that every time you try to shorten up the readback. "Position and hold" is now "line up and wait", that is ICAO but what you still won't see in the US is "behind the landing 172 on short final line up and wait". The FAA is not that trusting.
Don't worry, it'll come back to you.

Emory Bored wrote:I've been looking for the "perfect" airplane for so long and this damn thing sure ain't it,
...... A couple of times this week I've wondered what the heck I'm doing.

First, Congrat's on acquiring your new ride EB.
I see two things in your post... bit of buyers remorse, and a bit of confidence questioning along with a lot of excitement.
Nothing is ever perfect all the time, but if you can come close most of the time, you've got it.
This is something you can (will) have good fun in, and can be sold quickly (I almost said flipped) when/if you find something "more perfect".
Welcome back in the air, lookin' forward to some entertaining reads!

NimpoCub wrote:

Emory Bored wrote:I've been looking for the "perfect" airplane for so long and this damn thing sure ain't it,
...... A couple of times this week I've wondered what the heck I'm doing.

First, Congrat's on acquiring your new ride EB.
I see two things in your post... bit of buyers remorse, and a bit of confidence questioning along with a lot of excitement.
Nothing is ever perfect all the time, but if you can come close most of the time, you've got it.
This is something you can (will) have good fun in, and can be sold quickly (I almost said flipped) when/if you find something "more perfect".
Welcome back in the air, lookin' forward to some entertaining reads!

No remorse yet other than there wan't enough money for a Highlander or Carbon Cub. No money out until Monday sometime. I think this little fart will be more than enough fun for now. The rest of your analysis is spot on of course.

Sure it isn't a carbon cub or a highlander but nothing flies like a luscombe; I'm completely biased. The instructor I go up with always comments on how much fun the Luscombe is. He's got time in lots of different planes, can do amazing things in a t-6, and can make a husky dance but he's got a little soft spot for the Luscombe...even though the husky is his favorite.

Emory Bored wrote:

NimpoCub wrote:

Emory Bored wrote:I've been looking for the "perfect" airplane for so long and this damn thing sure ain't it,
...... A couple of times this week I've wondered what the heck I'm doing.

First, Congrat's on acquiring your new ride EB.
I see two things in your post... bit of buyers remorse, and a bit of confidence questioning along with a lot of excitement.
Nothing is ever perfect all the time, but if you can come close most of the time, you've got it.
This is something you can (will) have good fun in, and can be sold quickly (I almost said flipped) when/if you find something "more perfect".
Welcome back in the air, lookin' forward to some entertaining reads!

No remorse yet other than there wan't enough money for a Highlander or Carbon Cub. No money out until Monday sometime. I think this little fart will be more than enough fun for now. The rest of your analysis is spot on of course.

The wife and I...

...will be camping and hiking in Utah, Arizona and New Mexico for about three weeks. Trying out the new/used camper and 2012 Grand Cherokee we bought to pull it with(360 hp Hemi engine.) About 4,000 miles of driving....two lane back roads all the way Looking forward to isolated, primative, camping on BLM land in southern Utah's canyon lands. This is our 5th trip out there(once with the Maule)....just love the isolation, beauty, peace and quiet.

Will look forward to hearing updates on your new(renewed love) when we get back. Have lots of fun. Don't worry about the rust...it will come off quickly. Very happy for you.

Bob

Bob

Update. During my trip up there a couple of weeks ago I noticed that the inspection after the prop strike only showed "magnaflux crankshaft gears" and "checked runout on crankshaft, OK"

On Continental engines SB 96-11B states that all rotating parts need to be magnafluxed after a sudden stoppage. Mandatory! As we know though SB are not mandatory under part 91. Anyway, I insisted on it or I was going to walk with some considerable financial loss.

So the magnaflux report came back today. "1/8th inch crack at the head of the keyway"

Let that be an object lesson to all.

New certified crank goes in with new gaskets and bearings all around. Before the teardown I said I'd buy new bearings if the crank checked out. Well, those were to be .010 over. Now it needs standard bearings. Oh well. I said I'd pay just to be sure that I get new rod bearings too.

Watch, the Feds will OK the medical exemption first of August. Then I'll be shopping for a Pacer.

EB

Emory Bored wrote:
Watch, the Feds will OK the medical exemption first of August. Then I'll be shopping for a Pacer.

EB

I can hook you up with a hell of an awesome 150hp Clipper...

Av8r3400 wrote:

Emory Bored wrote:
Watch, the Feds will OK the medical exemption first of August. Then I'll be shopping for a Pacer.

EB

I can hook you up with a hell of an awesome 150hp Clipper...

Even better..... I can't believe I'm already plotting my next escape. I'm pretty sure though that if the exemption goes thorough I'll be looking VERY hard for a 150hp fixed pitch Pitts. Just too much fun to live out a lifetime without having one even just long enough to wad it up.

Av8r3400 wrote:
I can hook you up with a hell of an awesome 150hp Clipper...

I'd be all over that if clippers had flaps.

whee wrote:

Av8r3400 wrote:
I can hook you up with a hell of an awesome 150hp Clipper...

I'd be all over that if clippers had flaps.

Pahh! Flaps are just a crutch for poor energy management.

Kick in a little rudder and slip it...