How not to do it

[Zzz]

Don't spend too much time sitting on the toilet...

http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?44323-Lowrider-LSA

[OhioLSA]

I read a few of his posts where he was advocating flaps and O-320 for the LSA. The nice thing about the LSA is simplicity and light weight. Adding flaps, not to mention drooping ailerons (yikes!) and a big engine, just gives the worst of both worlds. If ya need that power and flaps, the Patrol would be a fine choice, rather than butchering the LSA.

[epapa]

I have always felt that innovation is the thing that makes Americans a little different and have always encouraged it. I am always looking at ways to do something better and would never criticize someone for trying something different. When mine is done, I sure will have considered several things....forward, aft, and vertical adjustable seats, wet wing, push-pull tube elevator controls, tie down anchors attached to the spar, rear seat brakes, just to name a few.

[Battson]

I think innovation is great too! I made a range of changes to my plane, which suit my mission really nicely. However, there is innovation, and then there's re-purposing an apple as an orange.... Why not just buy an orange?

Just responding to the comments above - personally, if I wanted a high powered, STOL modified two-place, with extra mods and stronger frame, etc. which fit into LSA category... then I would buy a Patrol and build it light as an LSA. Bob has said it can be done, and it's probably easier than trying to make the LSA into something bigger. I guess if you really, really, wanted that lighter tube fuselage and wings... maybe then it's your best choice.

But I make those comments with no understanding of the OP linked thread on SuperCub.org or what that builder is doing, and why he's doing it.

[JimParker256]

If you read the entire thread over on SuperCub.org, I think you would understand the concern that most of us feel. Innovation is one thing. Making reckless changes without regard to engineering aspects is quite another. The internet is a great place to get advice, but you have to be careful to vet the people providing it. When you routinely reject the advice of qualified engineers, and routinely accept the advice of anyone who says *Sounds good to me!*, you're playing with fire.

My biggest fear is that at some point some unsuspecting person who thinks it's a Bearhawk LSA (as designed / engineered by Bob) will fly it, and wind up hurting himself or someone else as a result of the changes he's making. Frankly, I wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole.

Minor modifications are one thing, but I agree with Battson - if you want a high-performance 2-place airplane, the Patrol is a much better place to start than the LSA... Starting with the LSA plans, and changing virtually every aspect of the aircraft without doing any of the engineering analysis is just flat-out foolish and dangerous. I know of another designer / kit-building company that is refusing to sell anything to this guy, for fear of the "damage to the brand" that he might do. The airplane he's building has almost zero Bearhawk DNA left... That's probably why he says the designer of the original plans (presumably Bob) requested that he no longer refer to his project as a "modified Bearhawk LSA" and call it something else entirely.

I have to admit that I follow his progress - much as one might not be able to avoid looking at the 3-car pile-up in the lane beside you as you pass the accident scene... Reminds you that aviation is inherently dangerous - something we all need to remember - and that the air is even more unforgiving than the sea. We can manage our risk, but not completely eliminate it. My goal is to build as safe an airplane as I can, by following Bob's plans meticulously, and making modifications only for safety, cosmetic or convenience reasons. Anything that has the possibility of creating different stress patterns, or changing the structure of the plane will be reviewed with Bob.

An example: I consider shoulder harnesses mandatory for all passengers, so Mark G discussed it with Bob, and he came up with a way to add rear-seat shoulder harness fittings by attaching them to a cross-member using a wrap-around aluminum fitting. Simple and easy way to add safety - but "approved" by Bob for his design.

[epapa]

As a graduate Registered Professional Engineer with 40 years engineering experience, and having built an RV4, I consider my engineering knowledge as able to make decisions about the safety of a modification. I said nothing about any high performance modifications, just my own preferences. Wet wind tanks, rear seat brakes, an airbox that uses the incoming air velocity to increase the air pressure, push-pull elevator tubes, adjustable seats, and groves type landing gear to name a few. Vans never would approve mods either so Harmon went ahead and made them himself. Had he not, the Harmon Rocket and F-1 Rocket would never have been hatched.

[JimParker256]

EPAPA,

My comments were not aimed at your mods, but at the guy this whole thread is about... The one with no engineering background who is making significant engineering / design changes to what started out as a BH LSA... Sorry if my comments appeared to be directed towards what you're doing. That was absolutely NOT my intent.

As you rightly point out, the beauty of "experimental" is the ability to make changes to customize to your own needs / preferences. The responsibility we take on is to do so in a safe manner. Clearly, you have the background and education to make informed decisions about what you're doing. The other guy? Well, not so much... And his "consulting team" is whoever responds to his posts... As long as they agree with him, anyway.If you go read the entire thread on SuperCub.org, you would probably understand the concern.

[davzLSA]

I like the William saying " gravity, physics and chemistry" are the laws aviation lives by and they respect no one and mead out equal justice to all. I hope no one dies.

[Glenn Patterson]

It is fine to put innovation and improvements into anything that we build. We all learn good things from one another. It has helped the BH family evolve and grow. There is no worse situation than the arrogance to refuse to listen to others. The welds shown are substandard. The majority of this builder's welds may hold just adequately but it only takes a failure or two to become a serious event.

Innovation is to be applauded. The failure here is to not perform quality welds or to take the time & pride to learn the proper techniques for any of the construction processes. Ignorance is a recipe for disaster. The majority of builders want to build the safest product possible and have become well educated on the build process as their project grows to completion. Forums like this also foster growth & learning to the benefit of all.

The serious risk with this builder is that in his arrogance that he decides that the build does not need to be registered, inspected or certified for flight. Circumventing the inspections would prevent the regulatory processes to ensure that the person's aircraft is properly built, tested & safe for flight.

[davzLSA]

Watching train wrecks can be spell binding!!!