Building a Bearhawk kit for someone else

[Mark Goldberg]

Ever since the AOPA Pilot magazine article came out, I have had a TON of calls from individuals who would like a Bearhawk but do not want to build. It is kind of what I expected from the AOPA membership. If you are interested in building for someone else, get in touch with me. Of course you are better suited to take on a task like this if you have already built a BH yourself. Our kit is a piece of cake to build compared with scratch building. N95MF@hotmail.com
Mark

[Hewko]

Just curious Mark, which model is getting the most requests to be built?

[Mark Goldberg]

Model B four place mostly with also lots of Model 5's and some Patrols.

[svyolo]

I know there are some strongly held opinions on whether to go down this road. There be dragons there, and several types of dragons. I wouldn't touch custom building an airplane in a million years. If I wanted to get into that type of market, I would look at what works, for both the business, and customer. It seems like the TWTT program makes money for the business, gives the customer a cookie cutter, quality airplane. Custom? I used to have a small automotive business. I met a lot of people in the business. Custom stuff is the worst. I made and sold cookie cutter stuff, that were huge improvements on what they had. I knew the costs, and the revenue. With custom, both are continuously moving targets.

Until the recent spike in airplane prices, there have been guys building RV's quick build kits and selling them for years. Looking at their asking prices, they weren't making a lot of money until recently.

[predragvasic]

I always get a bit of a chill and cringe a little when I come across these scenarios (someone hiring a professional builder, or a factory offering some "Builder Assistance" service, where the builder oversees the process and poses for pictures, while the workers build the plane). On the one hand, when done correctly, a team of experienced builders who had already built the same plane many times will likely be able to do a great job doing everything right (avoiding first-time mistakes), but on the other hand, those are essentially breaking the spirit of the E-AB laws.

The main reason why the homebuilding community is so vibrant in the USA (and elsewhere) is because the community was able to convince the government(s) that we are making these airplanes for our own enjoyment, for the value of the learning experience, so the laws give us all the freedom we need to design, build and fly these planes without onerous restrictions and regulation. However, once those in the government start seeing planes build around this loophole (factory-build, but certified as E-AB), we may lose that hands-off approach, and additional restrictions may be placed on our build process, as well as the ability to sell our homebuilts to someone else (once we become too old to fly them).

[Mark Goldberg]

I have never understood how the factory assist "two weeks to taxi" type programs follow the spirit of the regs. But there are individuals who just enjoy building and are good at it. As opposed to others, who for a variety of reasons, just can not build. A builder can sell the plane when finished to the person who wanted it. The person who bought the plane from someone else would have no right to request to be the "repairman of record" for the plane. Since they did not build it. Mark

[whee]

I agree with what you are saying predragvasic but I also agree with Mark. I dislike the TWTT type programs and we all know that while the written rules are followed, or at least they pretend to follow them, the intent of the rules are left far behind. I fear this will cause a major change to EAB rules to take place.

To me this is different than someone that likes to build and has the ability to build airplanes then sell them. IMO, this meets the intent of the rules even though they are making a profit on the sale. Actually, I doubt they are making much of a profit; they could probably take a part-time job at Home Depot and make more money for less effort. I’d love to build airplanes and sell them but I don’t have the capital to buy kits and at this point in my life I can’t spend my free time building so I’d have to sell the planes for enough to quite my other side gigs.

[svyolo]

I don't like the TWTT myself either. I believe it was the FAA being pragmatic. They know stuff like that was going on anyway, so at least regulate it a bit, and know at least the final product was a quality airframe.

[zkelley2]

With any luck and the LSA expansion, well developed kit planes like an RV10, a bearhawk, carbon cub, lancair will all become certified under ASTM and people that don't want to build can just go buy one. At least the one's that go to the effort to certify.

I'm also not a fan. Usually these people don't help the Experimental community and don't really belong in it, except to help resale value and sell kits, which to be fair is quite important.

[tailwind]

I am at the stage in my life where I could build for another party but probably would chose not to for several reasons.
You could also look at the twtt program as a positive in that the owner should get a better built safer plane. I do expect the owner to be actively involved in the build. He should still have acquired the skills and understanding needed to maintain the plane at a safe level. Hopefully no factory approved build center would be willing to compromise methods or materials that would lead to an unsafe plane. Our planes are still experimental aircraft and do not have the privileges given a certified plane. You might think of it like the engines we fly behind. Very few even in this select group have the skill and knowledge to rebuild an O 320 much less the IO 540 without supervision but we are as builders given the right to maintain the engine and the airframe. Few of us have the skills to draw up a pin out diagram for a glass panel with a nav system and autopilot but we have the right to troubleshoot and maintain the system. A builder assist program could be viewed as a way to improve the safety of “your” experimental aircraft. Having said that, building a Bearhawk in two weeks is going to be a challenge.

[svyolo]

Does someone who does TWTT get a Repairmen's Certificate? It is not for me, not interested in being a participant, either as a customer or setting one up. I wouldn't say that it is a bad thing, for both the customer, and the kit manufacture/TWTT program, whether they are the same or separate.

Some scratch builders might look down on people who buy quick build kits as "cheating" as well.

[BravoGolf]

I know pilots that should never pick up a tool. They just couldn’t be builders. I know builders that have built 12 RVs, they just love building. I guess don’t see an issue with those two groups working together to build a well built, safe aircraft. If I build a Patrol and sell it, and then build a 4 place who is harmed if the new owner to be asks me to install Garmin or Dynon or some other customization. How many aircraft could I turn out; one a year? Only if Mark keeps me supplied with a steady stream of QB kits. And even then one a year is pushing it. I don’t think I’d be a threat to Cessna.

[predragvasic]

I don’t have a problem with the idea either. The rules for manufacturing and certifying aircraft have this special exemption, for which the amateur builders fought hard, and which allows us to build, register, certify, fly and maintain our planes.

My only concern is that some of these “Builder Assist” operations go a bit too far and end up taking advantage of our exemption in order to circumvent the certification rules. And because of such operators, we could end up losing the ability to do a lot of things that are currently allowed.

Self-regulation is most desirable, but there may be a point where it won’t quite work anymore, and the feds might step in.

[zkelley2]

The Feds do occasionally step in. There was a shop out in California turning out a couple lancairs a year, didn't meet the requirements for E-AB despite a DAR signing off on them, they went in after the fact and revoked the airworthiness certificates of all the airplanes they built. Made a bunch of $300k paperweights.

It's kind of like when the feds find out a DER has been giving out certificates like candy, they go many everyone they gave a checkride to go re-test. Same happens with medical examiners on occasion.

[svyolo]

I think most Lancair IV's were built that way, and with the price RV-10's are going for now, I would be surprised if a large number of them are built that way as well.

[John Bickham]

Beyond a doubt, I get fired for for "too slow".

[AKKen07]

I think I’d enjoy it too, then wind up broke and divorced…

[Sir Newton]

Invest in a build centre? Sounds like a real good way to lose money & create a pile of headaches for one's self. imho. I hate to be a rain cloud on a sunny day. 1st, No one is going to pay you a fare price for your labour. 2nd, You get in to business to make money not headaches. 3rd, there is plenty of product on the market already. That no one can afford to buy. Pilots are cheap! It is best to keep hobbies A hobby.

[AKKen07]

I think it was partly cloudy at best

[spinningwrench]

The completion centers for VANS aircraft have pretty good backlogs. From a discussion at Oshkosh this year I gleaned that an RV-10 builder is willing to pay an additional $80K for a full hand holding builders assist. The rep I talked to indicated they are quite careful with the 51% rule and insist the builder log the required number of hours. This was from the leading VANS completion center.

[Utah-Jay]

From a business perspective, charging $50+ an hour for your labor would equate to about $50,000 to build a BH from what I can tell for someone that knows what they are doing. If you treated it like a job, 40 hour weeks you could knock out two Bearhawks a year. IF you outsourced the panel/avionics you could knock the hours per build down which would lower the hours but possibly average 2 1/2 to 3 units per year.

Mark would have to give a pretty good idea of demand before jumping in a business venture like this.

[Ed.Meyer]

It seems people are assuming Mark is looking to get into a "business venture". I did not get that at all from his post. I have built a Bearhawk from a kit and very much enjoyed the process. After reading the OP, I thought that might be something I would do if circumstances were favorable and was once asked by a friend if I would build one for him if he bought a kit, which I considered. He hasn't bought a kit yet. If I were to take on a task like this, it would mostly be for the fun of it and certainly not a business venture. After thinking about it, I decided not to volunteer to Mark due to my age and the time commitment I would feel obligated to. I suspect that others would consider it for the joy of building rather than making a bunch of money even though nobody would want to lose money.