Neil wrote:
It could be that the project was started in 2010; most home builds take years
Five years would be a pretty good estimate for this type, from plans… including several years from this to flying
The guy who owned the car used to buy off brand everything to save money. Its an AMC, he also had a Vega that he somehow managed to drive for years. He ended up very wealthy.
It could be that the project was started in 2010; most home builds take years
yes, something seems strange, i cant find it on the Swiss register. Might be deregistered…. hence the low price.
Anyway, i was once a aircraft engine engineer but it seems it’s also not ease to land and take off. And no baggage is also not ideal.
Thanks guys anyway.
Agree, the engine, prop and avionics are worth it alone. But flown 10h since new in 2011? This sounds very strange. It means it is not finished with the test period yet. You should definitely find out the history of it, why it hasn’t flown etc. Also if you need to (re)fly the test period.
Nothing specific to say about the type, though, sorry. Except I’d much like to have this one as my own! Except perhaps for some of Silvaire’s remarks, it seems “a little plane with a lot of character” so you might wish/need a good introduction by an able instructor, familiar with the type.
My dad built and flew one in the early 80s, although in its original design, not with a Rotax. I could tell you a lot of stories. Some key points in the here and now might be:
1) No baggage space, not a traveling aircraft except for one person.
2) Very limited panel space because the fuel header tank takes up half the panel. Modern flat panel avionics would help.
3) Excellent performance for the power, but in the original design that results in a plane that won’t come down. Extremely flat glide to landing.
4) Takes some practice to handle on takeoff and landing, no pitch control when the main gear is on the ground, flies off when it wants to, uses a lot of runway. In the air they fly very nicely.
5) Minor pitch change in the rain due to the canard airfoil, but not as much as other canards due to relatively low wing loading.
6) The little fixed trim tabs on the elevators are wood, delicate, and fly off occasionally. Nothing awful happens when they do. The whole plane is relatively delicate, but this is a good example.
7) Be careful to make sure all the control linkage connections have no play. Taper pins for example where concentric tubes join. Flutter may otherwise be the result.
8) Very comfortable seating
9) You will spend your free time fiddling with it, it will never be a low maintenance plane for a non-technical owner.
This looks like a very nice example.
there is a Dragonfly for sell in Switzerland since a while, http://www.planecheck.com?ent=da&id=25052 the price came down by 10’000.- on a other platfrom.
What do you need to know about this model ?
Regards
Lucas