Member Support

  • Advertisement
0

ICON A-5

Technical Questions, Know How, Equipment, Tools......

ICON A-5

Unread postby RKittine » Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:15 pm

For those of you that are waiting for your new ICON A-5 LSA Amphib. The good news is that the FAA approved the addition of 250 pounds over the 1430 limit on LSA Seaplanes to allow for the addition of the anti-spin devise (VGs) as well as the Angle Of Attack Indicator and the Parachute Recovery System. The bad news is that the new current ESTIMATED Price is $189,000.00. Another good thing is that if you lost your Cirrus due to extensive damage after using the parachute to land in a perfectly good field, you should be ready for this one.
SUPPORTING MEMBER

Bob
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C. New York, New York - East Hampton, New York & Warwick, New York 631.374.9652
rkittine@aol.com WA2YDV
User avatar
RKittine
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 4761
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:02 am
Location: Manhattan and Sag Harbor, New York

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby jjbaker » Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:15 am

But Bob,

The Icon is supposed to be this catch all breath of fresh air into the Seaplane LSA market and attracts the right clientele. We poor suckers just don't live the right lifestyle! Questions such as: Porsche 911 GT3 or Icon A5 to go to work today? Why go to work at all today? How about a nice day on the luxury yacht in the Cayman Islands, instead? Why not send the old Wife dog to the Spa and jet (Gulfstream, please!) the Mistress to France for a Croissant with light salted butter and some French Coco? How about a gold-plated Lollypop?

So many choices, and still just 24 hours in a day to make it all happen...
User avatar
jjbaker
Owner/ Admin
Owner/ Admin
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Germany

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby RKittine » Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:49 am

One of the things that came up was how these type planes relate to the old Bonanza and its reputation. People with too much money and not enough experience. Look at the Cirrus, with at least 5 of them being totaled when ending up under a parachute in open fields where a dead stick landing probably would have resulted in both plane and pilot walking away. Also $190K for a Rotax powered craft?
SUPPORTING MEMBER

Bob
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C. New York, New York - East Hampton, New York & Warwick, New York 631.374.9652
rkittine@aol.com WA2YDV
User avatar
RKittine
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 4761
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:02 am
Location: Manhattan and Sag Harbor, New York

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby jjbaker » Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:36 am

RKittine wrote:One of the things that came up was how these type planes relate to the old Bonanza and its reputation. People with too much money and not enough experience. Look at the Cirrus, with at least 5 of them being totaled when ending up under a parachute in open fields where a dead stick landing probably would have resulted in both plane and pilot walking away. Also $190K for a Rotax powered craft?


The Dr. Killer was a real airplane and the V- Tail version of it I flew way back in the 90's was asking for some elevated respect, compared to other single low wing high performance complex planes at the time. The Cirrus somehow managed to take that spot, despite the fact that is really hasn't killed many people. One of the issues with airplanes in this pricerange is that they attract the wrong people into the industry. At 400- 500, 600, yeah, even 700K for one of these Mini Bugatti's of the skies, you don't get clients who place a lot of value on anything other than zooming around in style. When I flew my first Corvallis TT I was impressed with the airplanes handling, but absolutely unimpressed with all the buttons and electronic gadgets. The airplane screams "electronic push button monkey dependency". Then you fly it and watch the fuel flows and must essentially ask: How can something so sleek be such a pig on gas...? I mean could we really buy Columbia's design and never waste a single thought on giving this Ferrari a proper power plant and propeller? They are not exactly flying off the shelves I would assume...

RE: ROTAX Powered Airplanes

I know ROTAX is a sour subject in the USA. Had that engine be developed over here, we wouldn't see so much resistance against it. Same with Thielert, Porsche, Limbach and other manufacturers who refined efficiency, weight and reliability for a lighter airframe application. Without firms like this, General Aviation would be pretty much non existent in pretty much all of Europe, where AVGAS reaches upwards of $13.00 a gallon. Even at $5-6 dollars per gallon on High Octane car gas, you can't afford to run anything that swallows 10-12 or even 18 gallons an hour. There is simply no excuse left for using leaded gas, there's no excuse left for saying that fuelburns like this should be normal. The "Pilots Adventurous Lifestyle" and "Money Doesn't Matter" attitudes breed the same and the economy can't sustain the game, the industry is already dying from it. I remember the hick hack before Cessna announced that the Groundcatcher 162 Flopp-A- Doodle would/ could be powered by no less than a Lycoming 200 engine. Question: Why not a living room fan motor, its was already made in freaking China??!!

I remember flying a Porsche Remo, towing gliders. I remember towing with a Limbach powered Motorglider. I remember spending some 100 hours behind ROTAX 912/ 912S and don't have any aversion against the engines. The fear and hatred against those engines is stunning. I think we'll see many more of them in LSA's before too long. The Rotax is the one and only reason I would even remotely look at an airplane like the A5 Icon. At least it won't guzzle gas!

We should have a Cirrus "Float To Safety" thread one day.
I will never understand how a simple fixed gear housewife accelerator like this can end up underneath a chute so darn often.

The operator should always be more engaged and smarter than the equipment being used... :lol:
User avatar
jjbaker
Owner/ Admin
Owner/ Admin
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Germany

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby CFII » Fri Dec 20, 2013 1:56 am

jjbaker wrote:
RKittine wrote:One of the things that came up was how these type planes relate to the old Bonanza and its reputation. People with too much money and not enough experience. Look at the Cirrus, with at least 5 of them being totaled when ending up under a parachute in open fields where a dead stick landing probably would have resulted in both plane and pilot walking away. Also $190K for a Rotax powered craft?


The Dr. Killer was a real airplane and the V- Tail version of it I flew way back in the 90's was asking for some elevated respect, compared to other single low wing high performance complex planes at the time. The Cirrus somehow managed to take that spot, despite the fact that is really hasn't killed many people. One of the issues with airplanes in this pricerange is that they attract the wrong people into the industry. At 400- 500, 600, yeah, even 700K for one of these Mini Bugatti's of the skies, you don't get clients who place a lot of value on anything other than zooming around in style. When I flew my first Corvallis TT I was impressed with the airplanes handling, but absolutely unimpressed with all the buttons and electronic gadgets. The airplane screams "electronic push button monkey dependency". Then you fly it and watch the fuel flows and must essentially ask: How can something so sleek be such a pig on gas...? I mean could we really buy Columbia's design and never waste a single thought on giving this Ferrari a proper power plant and propeller? They are not exactly flying off the shelves I would assume...

RE: ROTAX Powered Airplanes

I know ROTAX is a sour subject in the USA. Had that engine be developed over here, we wouldn't see so much resistance against it. Same with Thielert, Porsche, Limbach and other manufacturers who refined efficiency, weight and reliability for a lighter airframe application. Without firms like this, General Aviation would be pretty much non existent in pretty much all of Europe, where AVGAS reaches upwards of $13.00 a gallon. Even at $5-6 dollars per gallon on High Octane car gas, you can't afford to run anything that swallows 10-12 or even 18 gallons an hour. There is simply no excuse left for using leaded gas, there's no excuse left for saying that fuelburns like this should be normal. The "Pilots Adventurous Lifestyle" and "Money Doesn't Matter" attitudes breed the same and the economy can't sustain the game, the industry is already dying from it. I remember the hick hack before Cessna announced that the Groundcatcher 162 Flopp-A- Doodle would/ could be powered by no less than a Lycoming 200 engine. Question: Why not a living room fan motor, its was already made in freaking China??!!

I remember flying a Porsche Remo, towing gliders. I remember towing with a Limbach powered Motorglider. I remember spending some 100 hours behind ROTAX 912/ 912S and don't have any aversion against the engines. The fear and hatred against those engines is stunning. I think we'll see many more of them in LSA's before too long. The Rotax is the one and only reason I would even remotely look at an airplane like the A5 Icon. At least it won't guzzle gas!

We should have a Cirrus "Float To Safety" thread one day.
I will never understand how a simple fixed gear housewife accelerator like this can end up underneath a chute so darn often.

The operator should always be more engaged and smarter than the equipment being used... :lol:


I've not flown Rotax but they're so common, how bad could they be? Any comparative engine failure/accident rate data?
CFII
Gold Wings II Member
Gold Wings II Member
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:13 am
Location: Seattle Amphibion

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby jjbaker » Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:35 am

CFII wrote:I've not flown Rotax but they're so common, how bad could they be? Any comparative engine failure/accident rate data?


I don't think there is, the engines just really have an exotic reputation which kills half of them and the other half is genuinely misunderstood.

The older Rotax engines often used in Tecnam P92E's and smaller light sport planes was a little fragile with cold idles, but there was also a choke.
Lots of people never ever figured that one out, and not giving the plane proper warmup times would often result in the engine not accepting full power without stalling out. I don't recall ever loosing one of those engines that wasn't related to choke and improper warmup. Of course when the fan stops with a engine like that and a composite propeller, the effect is harsh and sudden, good thing is that there's very little windmilling which reduces drag. Not everyone should work on them, I had my most trouble doing MX test flights after something was done to the fuel distribution, ignition and choke systems. In your common 172, your heavy metal prop often balances a rough engine out, whereas the light composite screwed to a 912S will just stop.

The rejection those engines experience over here is extreme and rather silly and I don't think it is based or supported by accident data. My grandmother used to say: The farmer don't eat what the farmer don't grow. These engines install easy, are light and sip gas, while being reliable. People dislike their sound, rattly startup and generally seem to object to non American made engines.

The U.S. could have produced and developed these kinds of engines easily and if done so early, you could fly a cabin class twin at reasonable cost.

Same with Diesel, common rail and direct injection engines. This stuff isn't rocket surgery, one just has to accept that the good old super-large gas guzzling rivet bomber engine days are unfortunately over. The leaded fuel debate has been going on ever since I got into aviation 25 years ago and still we haven't moved really. We still occasionally run into students who don't understand how excess gas could be necessary for "cooling" during takeoff, when you could have engine technology that flies on low octane, lead free gas, lean as a bean. Suddenly we even have capacity for water cooling, because we're saving so much weight on the rest of the engine. Eyes get big when people hear of 4500-5000 RPM engines, too. If the furnace of a house worked the Lycoming/ Continental way, we'd be burning through 1000 gallons a day to keep the house at slightly over OAT.

I've spent a lot of time with Rotax and Limbach modified engines, on of my best friends was a recognized EU converter and certified MX shop for Limbach motors and the resistance they experienced during development and certification was so bad that most testing was done in Italy. Since that loophole has been closed with EASA Idiocy Galore, developing a new engine under EU Flag has become an act of god that would put Monty Python to shame. Our government is rushing to make US General aviation just as much a past time experience here as it has already become in the EU, so we will see if/ when common sense gets restored. Things have since gotten way better in Europe. More development may spring up, after all.

The only way out for Rotax is forward and upwards. If not with GA, then their boom will come through drones or like always, from China.
User avatar
jjbaker
Owner/ Admin
Owner/ Admin
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Germany

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby RKittine » Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:59 am

Ever try to Hand Prop one when a battery dies? I do not have a lot of experience with them, but my old hanger mate had a 80 HP one in his kit fox, twin carbs that had to constantly go out for repair. With 11:1 compression you could not hand prop.

At 95 HP I will take my (Glenn's) old tried and true C-90. Starts on one blade in the summer and 1-2 in the winter. Runs on 80 - 100LL Octane and is easy to work on.

Bob
SUPPORTING MEMBER

Bob
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C. New York, New York - East Hampton, New York & Warwick, New York 631.374.9652
rkittine@aol.com WA2YDV
User avatar
RKittine
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 4761
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:02 am
Location: Manhattan and Sag Harbor, New York

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby jjbaker » Fri Dec 20, 2013 9:28 am

Never have hand-propped a Rotax. They have starters and batteries, but I don't imagine one of Icon's finest customers smiling too brightly when finding the Icon in need of a hand propping. 24/7 Icon Roadside Assistance will then probably rush to the rescue. At $200K that's expected minimum service. You bet that after spending that much money on an airplane, it would return to the factory fitting in a shoe box if it didn't start.

:lol:
User avatar
jjbaker
Owner/ Admin
Owner/ Admin
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Germany

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby RKittine » Fri Dec 20, 2013 10:09 am

It will be interesting to see if this is a less successful version of the Delorian. They did finally prodce some of them, but not very many and at a much increased price over the original $15,000 buy in at inception.
SUPPORTING MEMBER

Bob
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C. New York, New York - East Hampton, New York & Warwick, New York 631.374.9652
rkittine@aol.com WA2YDV
User avatar
RKittine
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 4761
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:02 am
Location: Manhattan and Sag Harbor, New York

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby KlausNW » Fri Dec 20, 2013 4:02 pm

The flight schools that operate the 912 and 914's are making money with them. Like any engine the more you fly it the more reliable and lower maintenance. If you have a bad habit of leaving the master on, you better carry a spare battery and jumper cables. There is nothing safe about hand propping a gearbox engine.
:shtf:

The Cirrus SR22's are one of the most idiot proofed engineered aircraft, so only the finest rich idiots can afford them. The cowlings on the Cirrus are a major effort to R&R so the engines receive a lot less attention then they should get. The reason I bring up the Cirrus is because these Icon A-5 builders are trying to make the most idiot proof aircraft ever made. More then likely the same rich idiots will buy the Icon and pull the parachute every time they sneeze. I'll be surprised if the engineers put any thought into maintenance.
:horsy:
Klaus Marx - Piper Pacer Pilot
Juneau, AK & Wenatchee, WA . . . . . . Click on Link Bar to view the 'non-profit' group.
Image Image
Image
User avatar
KlausNW
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 9:33 pm
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby RKittine » Fri Dec 20, 2013 5:10 pm

Amen
SUPPORTING MEMBER

Bob
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C. New York, New York - East Hampton, New York & Warwick, New York 631.374.9652
rkittine@aol.com WA2YDV
User avatar
RKittine
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 4761
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:02 am
Location: Manhattan and Sag Harbor, New York

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby CFII » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:14 am

On the speculation of hand propping a geared prop, would it even be possible to get the blade speed high enough to do any good? If so, why would it be any more dangerous than a direct driven prop?
CFII
Gold Wings II Member
Gold Wings II Member
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:13 am
Location: Seattle Amphibion

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby KlausNW » Sun Dec 22, 2013 3:20 am

CFII wrote:On the speculation of hand propping a geared prop, would it even be possible to get the blade speed high enough to do any good? If so, why would it be any more dangerous than a direct driven prop?


The gearbox mixes up the prop position, it's more difficult to find top dead center which makes it hard to get a good swing before the spark fires.

YES, the engine will fire at very slow RPM... don't bet your life on it, some already have. :cry:

I went to Rotax school a couple years ago, there's a little bit of disinformation passed around. One of the myths is that the engines won't start when you're turning them through before checking the oil. If the ignition is hot she's ready to run just like any engine.

:bomb:
Klaus Marx - Piper Pacer Pilot
Juneau, AK & Wenatchee, WA . . . . . . Click on Link Bar to view the 'non-profit' group.
Image Image
Image
User avatar
KlausNW
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 9:33 pm
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby CFII » Sun Dec 22, 2013 11:05 am

KlausNW wrote:
CFII wrote:On the speculation of hand propping a geared prop, would it even be possible to get the blade speed high enough to do any good? If so, why would it be any more dangerous than a direct driven prop?


The gearbox mixes up the prop position, it's more difficult to find top dead center which makes it hard to get a good swing before the spark fires.

YES, the engine will fire at very slow RPM... don't bet your life on it, some already have. :cry:

I went to Rotax school a couple years ago, there's a little bit of disinformation passed around. One of the myths is that the engines won't start when you're turning them through before checking the oil. If the ignition is hot she's ready to run just like any engine.

:bomb:


Almost like Russian Roulette hand propping with a PRU!! So I will NOT BE TRYING IT.
Good information, thanks.
CFII
Gold Wings II Member
Gold Wings II Member
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:13 am
Location: Seattle Amphibion

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby RKittine » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:39 pm

Yes, thanks for the information. In addition to the gear box there is also much higher compression then one of our old Continentals.
SUPPORTING MEMBER

Bob
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C. New York, New York - East Hampton, New York & Warwick, New York 631.374.9652
rkittine@aol.com WA2YDV
User avatar
RKittine
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 4761
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:02 am
Location: Manhattan and Sag Harbor, New York

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby jjbaker » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:29 pm

Back to the actual airframe, the ICON A-5... if we could for a minute...

Never having flown one, or even sat in one I wonder how much of a toy it feels like. The cockpit featured like a car, basically idiot proof design, except it will still be softer than terra firma and probably kill its occupants when flown into the right conditions. Of course it does have the ballistic "please sneeze and pull it quickly" parachute, but the whole shebang kind of like strikes me as if it's better off as a radio controlled airplane. ATOL, ICON, others which will sell at $400K+ supposedly able to land on water, snow and pavement, we seem to be trying to get average SUV drivers into flying. My grandfather called these types of airplanes egg laying, milk-giving, newspaper retrieving, whole milk dispensing, bacon- beef-ribs and he stayed the hell away from them, despite being "modern" in his ways of flying, even after 60 years.

I remember attending a Cessna Pilot Center seminar in San Diego a couple years ago, in which Cessna heavily promoted the Catchall 162 Super Spinsalot and their "dream" was to get highly affluent people from Luxury SUV to Citation 10 in multiple steps. According to doctrine, Joe Richerhuber would buy a 100K C162, learn how to push buttons and wiggle the aircraft around the pattern, then upgrade to 182/ 206 before getting the mighty Caravan, if not directly jumping into a Citation X. Money, cost of gas, insurance, MX isn't an object for those who can have the sparkly new airplane, so by all definition the plan should have worked out. Then we started to superglue the 162 in China, fired a bunch of good people (one of them still sells Christmas cards these days) and things went south. Of course, now the 162 has been declared what it was from the start, a dead bird in the nest.

How many $200K wonder-planes that look like Tonka toys can we really sell, here in the U.S.?
With China reverse engineering pretty much everything, 3 D printing on the rise and all the other things going on, how long will this hype last?

:flying:
User avatar
jjbaker
Owner/ Admin
Owner/ Admin
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Germany

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby RKittine » Sun Dec 22, 2013 3:49 pm

I have flown a SeaRay, which would seem somewhat of a lower priced / equipped, similar concept. Was not impressed especially in the wind.

Problem for the guy who was going to start with a BugCatcher C162 and work up to a Citation X is that most guys would have to be very careful hiring the right weight instructor to be legal. (Though I don't think that many C-150 went off into the air at or under gross weight in training in days gone by. )
SUPPORTING MEMBER

Bob
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C. New York, New York - East Hampton, New York & Warwick, New York 631.374.9652
rkittine@aol.com WA2YDV
User avatar
RKittine
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 4761
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:02 am
Location: Manhattan and Sag Harbor, New York

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby KlausNW » Thu Sep 24, 2015 6:05 pm

Bumping the Icon A5 because they are doing a big advertising campaign and you're going to see some main stream media reviews. Here is the Icon A5 youtube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/user/ICONA5/featured

There's a number of new promotion videos just produced this year.

:flying:
Klaus Marx - Piper Pacer Pilot
Juneau, AK & Wenatchee, WA . . . . . . Click on Link Bar to view the 'non-profit' group.
Image Image
Image
User avatar
KlausNW
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 9:33 pm
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby jjbaker » Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:46 am

Paying only the rich organizations for the advertising is clever marketing. Displaying the prospect buyer as a higher class of human being is stunning.

For me, the Icon A5 advertising strategy is equal to that of Akoya/ Lisa in that it happens primarily on the backs and on the wallets of small publishing outlets and in the form of "News Releases" which are nothing but hidden advertising campaigns. Then, when its time to answer questions to the press, the censorship filter is used to make sure that the multi million net worth customer doesn't get a clue about safety related issues with the planes.

Welcome to the new generation of General Aviation... I guess forgetting where this all comes from is all too normal.
User avatar
jjbaker
Owner/ Admin
Owner/ Admin
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Germany

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby Atoll » Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:10 pm

I have deposits on both the Lisa Akoya and Icon A5 (i can get the deposits back so don't hold back in your answer or opinions)

Interested in understanding the safety related issues with these planes please?
Atoll
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2015 1:30 pm

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby RKittine » Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:37 pm

Welcome to the forum. Nice to see a new post. :welcome: Please don't give your deposits back, we want to see how much you like them once you get them. Where are you located?

Cheers, Bob
SUPPORTING MEMBER

Bob
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C. New York, New York - East Hampton, New York & Warwick, New York 631.374.9652
rkittine@aol.com WA2YDV
User avatar
RKittine
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 4761
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:02 am
Location: Manhattan and Sag Harbor, New York

Re: ICON A-5

Unread postby KlausNW » Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:08 pm

The Cirrus was touted as the safest aircraft ever. The Cirrus aircraft have a spin recovery issue so they had to install a parachute. Avweb has an article on this topic:
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Cirrus_Safety_Record_Average_205914-1.html

http://cirrusaircraft.com/

My complaint with the Cirrus aircraft is the lack of access to the engine, it's way to complicated. Walking around an aircraft and shaking the controls is not enough, that's only half the aircraft the other half is the engine.

The problem with most every flying haul seaplane is porpoising. If the Icon and/or Lisa have solved that issue that's great, if they haven't then become knowledgeable of how to prevent it and what to do once porpoising starts.

Goto the promo videos, they are pushing "anyone can fly one of these"

Another famous saying in Aviation:
"When an aircraft is idiot proof, then we'll create a better idiot."
Klaus Marx - Piper Pacer Pilot
Juneau, AK & Wenatchee, WA . . . . . . Click on Link Bar to view the 'non-profit' group.
Image Image
Image
User avatar
KlausNW
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 9:33 pm
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest


Return to Technical & Aircraft Talk, Building & Restoration

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest