Talk:Homebuilt aircraft

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Homebuilt aircraft article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

While offering a great deal on the French aspect of homebuilt aircraft, this article forgoes any American designs, and the writer is a little cavalier in his attitude towards ignoring the rest of the world. Yes, the flying flea was designed by a Frenchman, but no, it was not a tremendous success. The flying flea was closer to an aerodynamic disaster created by an ignorant designer.

[this last statement shows, that the reputation after mishaps with the initial HM14 Flying Flea live long. A well informed writer would have known that this issue was dealt with and solved and that numerous succesful and save Flying Fleas were subsequently designed, built and flown. By the way, the Frenchman mentioned even has a name, would you believe it? Henri Mignet... ]

So, is there anyone out there with enough knowledge on Long-EZ, KR, Mini-Maxes, volksplanes, RVs, and other popular homebuilt (or home assembled) designs that can write some more on this article?

i've been following this article since my push towards documenting homebuilt aircraft on the wikipedia began, and i'll see what i can do. the translation of the french homebuilt article was pasted in here a few months back, and i've not had the patience to slog through it yet. -eric ✈ 30 June 2005 17:11 (UTC)

Contents 1 Homebuilt, home-built or home built? 2 Not at home? not by amateur? 2.1 What's in a word? 3 External link deletion

[edit] Homebuilt, home-built or home built?

Let's be sure the word exists before we write homebuilt. And then let's be consistent throughout the article. Paul Beardsell 12:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

"Homebuilt" seems to be pretty widely used in the magazines on the topic. --Robert Merkel 13:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll change home-built to homebuilt in the article. Paul Beardsell 18:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Not at home? not by amateur?

But what if I rent a hangar and build my aircraft there? Not at home. What if I am a professional aircraft designer/engineer/mechanic? Not amateur. I reckon we should use the terms used by the various aviation authorities. (e.g. "experimental" in the USA.) I don't think it is useful to lump together a one-off experimental with a kit for an aircraft of which hundreds are flying.

I reckon if this article is to survive then best we make it a short one with a series of links to other articles on "permit to fly" aircraft (UK), "experimental" aircraft (US, NZ, ...), ...

Paul Beardsell 12:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

In general usage by the industry & enthusiasts, "home" is accepted to mean "not (at) a factory" (even when assembling kits which are from one) & "amateur" to mean "owner-builder" (which, agreed, might be a better term); also, re "amateur", recall the definition of "professional": is the owner-builder being paid to build his aircraft? Trekphiler 06:30 & 06:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's in a word?

The article says "homebuilt aircraft may be licensed Experimental under FAA regulations." I've always understood by FAA reg it was must be, because they're owner-built, not factory-built. Trekphiler 06:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External link deletion

I have deleted an external link for a commercial homebuilt aircraft website from this article for the second time. This external link fails to meet the Wikipedia Links Guidelines in three areas:

• It does not does not "provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article"
• It was posted "strictly to promote a website".
• It was posted by the owner of the website who is in a Conflict of Interest

Additionally it does not provide any reference material for the article.

The initial deletion was reverted by the owner of the website who posted it in the first place. Please do not re-post this link without discussion and a consensus decision from the editors working on this article that it is appropriate to re-post it. - Ahunt (talk) 20:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)