This is awesome. We need more people on RU-vid (and other platforms) exhibiting affordable bushplanes and affordable airplanes in general. That's how we get more people into general aviation. I'll be following along, cheers!
I'm building my Quicksilver MX Sport into a bushplane right now. Just got the VG's installed and putting big tires on as soon as they come in. Also considering some storage options for gear.
I was looking into the Chinook a couple weeks ago. I have been chasing the aviation dream for 3 years now. With the Chinook all you need is a sport licence.
Kudos to you for taking on this project. Cost is the biggest reason I see people not venturing into aircraft ownership or flying in general. But it's totally possible to do it right for not a lot of cash. Big part of why I took on the Sonex project instead of spending more for something RTF.
Awesome! After watching your Yamaha Phazer wiring video I thought that it would make a perfect match for the Chinook. I look forward to watching your progress.
I am so glad to see that you’ve gone for the Chinook! I’ve been prepping for a chinook build and researching the Yamaha phazer engine. I’m happy I’m not the only one out there who can see the potential for a little backcountry beast!
Same here!! I live in Kelowna. The Chinook was originally out of Vernon with ASAP. What a fantastic ultralight. The phaser is a game changer. Four strokes are the new way. I'm looking for a Chinook I might buy and rebuild.
I was writing off becoming a pilot due to the expense of the airplane, this video has me rethinking my options! Great idea and I am really looking forward to what you do with this!
@@JustPlaneSilly Haha.. dammit Bryan i remember watching all your videos in 2 days after finding your channel... and here I'm getting replies from you.....Unbelievable. I got a humorous guy, Jimmy, like you on Yt.. working on his Piper PA32/300 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-8M42B379apE.html I asked him in comments to check your channel.. hope you are doing fine too.
Hi Ian, Your harness on My Yamaha is working great! Thanks. I'm sure you have spoken with Dan, If not, he is very approachable. I spent so time with him at the Lone Star STOL Comp this spring. He was a wealth of information! One more item to add........Slats. Dan has them. Cheers!
You have Profile Brotherhood and Nashbro all cool rc groups that I belong also. The Chinook is an awesome airplane. Fly it! Changes are getting expensive
Wow it's like you read my mind, I've gone through the same process of figuring out an affordable back country option. I've been looking in the direction of a 4 stroke DR version of the Chinook. Can't wait for future videos!
With all the added mods Heaver landing gear, bigger tires, heavier engine and mount's ,2 fuel tanks, fittings. I calculate 50 to 60 lbs heavier. Weight is not your friend in a airplane. But on the plus side. 4 strokes are better and chinook's have strong airframes. Thumbs up!
I been looking at the new DR and SJ model Chinooks with the 80hp 912. I would Love to find a used 2+2 model.. That plane is always over looked because it looks like a Ultralight. But the truth is it has a 600lb payload. Show me another LSA with that payload and performance... Great Find..
A Chinook Plus 2 would be my first choice, Phazer also, the engine install will be an interesting journey, most of your mods too. C2 is badly under represented on YT, glad you're changing that! Subscribed.
Go ahead & beef up the lg. It's weak, take my word...bent mine 3 times. I still love that bird! Has a geo. 1.5 gph @ curse. Kinda heavy though. I flew myself, my brother & 7-8 gl of fuel. It flew!
Love the plan! Hope you can keep it under 20k. You're building it almost exactly like I've been dreaming. I too have a partnership airplane,but would like to have my own chinook. Maybe someday I'll buy a phazer loom from you!
Getting it flying under $20k shouldn’t be much of an issue. I do suspect that someday my modifications and improvements will wander past the $20k mark but I don’t really see that as violating the spirit of things. We all spend money improving our planes over time. So long as it fills the mission under 20 to start with in happy.
I looked at this before. I would add a static nose wheel embedded into the nose that comes into play only when you do some heavy breaking and pivot the aircraft axis forward that can brake instead of relying on the skid pan form up front. I don’t like absolutely the look of the front and that mod with wheel half in and half out using the front as the axle would look much better and different. Might have to offset the axle back and down a bit to get the wheel nested well though.
I am taking Light Sport Pilot Training out of Gloster Field in Sealy, Texas were the Chinook kit is manufactured. They now have a new kit called the SJ. The SJ has a tall landing gear that is good for back country landings. I am sure you have seen the test flights posted on RU-vid. Maybe you can take a drive out there and get some ideas from the SJ?
I'm wondering, has anyone considered the Yamaha triple cylinder four cycle liquid cooled snowmobile engine? I know the apex four cylinder is a ripping thing. But maybe the triple weights as much, idk. And I imagine someone has to fab up a reduction unit for it. I understand your preference for the twin yammy for the Chinook though.
@@GotTrq naw I don't think so. The three cylinder two cycle snowmobile engines are silky smooth. Even the ones that didn't have balance shafts were smoother than a twin. I remember a friend had an old 750 four cycle triple Yamaha street bike that I rode that was good too. Yamaha still builds triple cyl street bikes as well. Besides it's a Yamaha:)
Looking forward to this series! Beggars can't be choosers but I've always been skeptical of pushers because of having a heavy item (i.e. engine) behind the cockpit in the event of a crash.
Just found this series. Definitely gonna watch all available episodes today lol. Ian, this is honestly awesome. It's like watching Mike Patey's Scrappy videos but for normal people who aren't billionnaire and no carbon fiber lol.
I think there is a whole class of planes like this that have potential, the Kolb MKIII, Tierra 2, Quicksilver 500, Rans S-18? They could all be fitted with ATV type tires, and similarly modifier.
I should have mentioned it but I’d like this to be more of an inspiration than plans to follow. There’s a lot of low buck planes out there that aren’t the usual Kitfox/Highlander/Cubs that you see.
Its still in the background. We had some trouble fitting everything in and there's a new shop in the works. We'll get back on it when we have the room to do so!
If you're going to add additional fuel tanks additional way to tail will additional storage area you better put maybe a little bit larger motor than what you're intending due to the weight restrictions
Great videos, Ian! I have a Challenger II CWS I built and I love the way it flies. But I and my wife are in our 70s and my wife has stopped flying with me because of the difficulty of getting in and our of the plane. So far I don't have an issue, but I am getting older every year😀 How is ease of getting in and out of the Chinook?? If you have flown a Challenger, how found you compare the flight experiences? Thanks, Lanny
I love what you're planning...let me see if I've got this right...you're gonna ad a bigger engine ,beefier heavier gear, double fuel carried, add hardware and such to split the flaps, add cargo...and STILL plan to carry a passenger and fly into short strips in the "backcountry"....hmmm...I'm really interested to see how this turns out...I own C2...oh...and do it all for less than 8 thou to bring it up to the goal of less than 20....man...I really hope you can pull it off...the D.R. gear is gonna set you back between 5500 and 6 thou...I've subscribed and will be cheering you on...good luck...!!!
I'm sure you are aware of the fuel tank UV degradation issue that caused a crash in Alaska. Sounds like the strut tanks should be replaced, yours are looking a bit sunburnt. Looking forward to watching this take shape!
A mod I see on a lot of chinooks up here especially with heavier 912s and floats, is moving the horizontal stab up to the midpoint of the rudder. I understand it increases the effectiveness of the elevator. Not on floats it would be up out of the weeds.
I’m actually considering that. I didn’t include it on my list but that’s one of my long term modifications. I have a collection of photos from one that was done that way for inspiration.
@@russellsmith3825 Oh I agree. Very cool affordable plane. I've been a fan for a long time. I was just poking fun at the fact that a youtube video can spark a run away train of value of pretty much anything. More so on airplanes here lately.
Since you bought this aircraft in a completed condition will you still have to have an A&P do your annuals or will you (by doing all the mod's) be able to obtain a Repairman Certificate? I'm interested in either buying one of these or scratch building one. I'm leaning toward buying a completed one but I would love to do my own annual condition inspections ultimately. Can you get a repairman certificate on a prebuilt aircraft if you didn't do 51% of the original build? (are you an A&P?)...very cool aircraft!
I'll post them up as I go along. The engine shouldn't change much weight-wise. The gear will add some, exactly how much we will see. I'm hoping to stay within 20-40lbs of as it arrived.
Love your video's. I'm a little concerned about splitting the flaperons. This vastly differentiates from the original engineering design, changes wing stresses and control authority. Not to mention, outboard aileron effectiveness might require a change in dihedral for maximums effectiveness. I hope you are consulting the manufactures on this Major wing design change?
So I have to ask. Is there anything like this in the slsa area. Considering that as far as I know, an experimental need a full GA license, not a sport pilot
Hi, what other aircraft had you considered, besides the Chinook? What's your opinion of other aircraft like Merlin Lite? What about the Sparrow? What about the SuperStol? Have you heard of the Airbike, or the Solo?
I’ve always been interested in the chinook. That said I did consider others. That’s a lot of airplanes so I’ll keep my answers short... Merlin? Very cool, lots of potential Sparrow, don’t know it Superstol, cool plane, very expensive, different class entirely due to cost. Air bike, cool, not common Solo, cool, but not very “real airplane” like. Never going to take it far. Chinook is a real airplane with real range which is different from the 103 ultralights you’ve listed.
@@ianslife210 I'd heard about the Boxer 220s engine, which is a 36hp 2-cylinder 2-stroke engine for paramotors. Since it's a boxer engine, that means it's a 2-cylinder radial engine with opposed cylinders. I'd heard that it can cruise on just 1 cylinder for greater fuel economy, while using both cylinders for greater power during takeoff. Another paramotor engine I'd heard about is the upcoming EOS Quattro engine, which is a 4-stroke engine capable of something like 30hp. Do you think lightweight engines like these have any potential for lightweight bush plane purposes? (For example, the Merlin Lite uses a Polini Thor engine). Or do you think that only a Yamaha-sized 80hp engine will do for that kind of flying?
@@ianslife210 what do you think about multi-cylinder engines where you can shut off some of cylinders, to cruise with more economical fuel consumption, and then use all of the cylinders fully for takeoff? Do you know of any engines that do this? To me, this should be a natural goal for small aircraft engines, to try and give the best of both worlds.
We don't have an apples to apples comparison yet. I actually bought a new hang scale to get this exact figure! Once the gearbox is in I'll take a weight on both of them.
One of the only things I don't really like about the Chinook is how close the horizontal is to the ground. It is just a little too exposed to rocks and stump in the back country.
I may move it up a bit but honestly any plane with guide wires that go down to the bottom of the fuse are equally vulnerable. If you lose one of them your horizontal stab is compromised anyway. I may move my stab up eventually, time will tell.
The only reason I can think of is getting training specific to very light aircraft. The flight characteristics and speed range are vastly different from an average Cessna or similar, so much so that I would suggest conversion training in something in between before jumping in one. Otherwise no, they’re proven extremely tough designs and people have walked away from some nasty crashes in them when things went wrong.
It’s a pity AM won’t work out a deal with Dan and cut him in on a full DR edition kit. His mods are the only reason there is modern day interest in these, but currently they only offer his gear, not the wing, tail, flap, chord mods etc.
We're running into issues with space. Even the chinook dominates my little shop and its a solid 6-8' shorter than the rockhopper. I'm working on larger space to work in shortly and then I'll continue that project.
Dude. I like your enthusiasm with your modifications but be very careful. Your adding a lot of weight and your CG is going to change if your not keeping track. Also, with this being a pusher your thrust angle is critical and please try to stay away from trim tabs on your elevator. Any plane needing trim tabs to achieve neutral flight has an issue that should be addressed. I was involved with these ultralights from the beginning in Wetaskewin, Alberta with Vladamire’s design of the first single seat wing warping model to the twin seat version with the updated wings. Then many years later I had the opportunity to retrofit the new chinook version with the 582 rotax motor when they shipped us ( Kodiac Research in Vernon, BC ) the first one with the redesigned wing ( Challenger copy ) that had the flapperon nightmare. Flaps in the down position should help for short field take offs and slow approach landings. Not at that time when I did the first test flight with the engine retrofit. Take off with flaps on and full power glued the plane to the runway and as soon as I started running out of runway and cut power the plane jumped off the runway like no tomorrow and adding power again forced the plane towards the runway just about faster than I could crank the flaperons to neutral and gain control back. It took us quite a bit of redesign where we remounted the motor and change of the thrust angle to get the plane flying correctly. So please be careful and when your going to do your first test make sure you have a lot of runway and just do short bunny hops till your familiar with any quirks you need to address before actual flight. Also, notice that you have no vibration dampening between your engine and motor mount or motor mount to the air frame. This could turn into an issue with vibration doing damage to the airframe as well as no torque dampening. The Chinook is one heck of a good design though and I’ve flown every design of them including the Monsoon version prototype that was a bullet in the air and had phenomenal flight characteristics and speed with its all aluminum mono spar designed wing. Maybe try changing one thing at a time and test to see what improvements it does or doesn’t before moving on to another change in your redesigns. Some good ideas but take small steps to be as safe as possible and maybe look at buying a BRS parachute for added security. Happy flying.
Appreciate the in depth information! We’ve addressed everything you’ve pointed out so far. We’re keeping a close track on the balance and the aircraft will have to pass a final w/b at the end before it flies. The engine is mounted at an identical thrust line to the original 582 and has rubber mounts on the engine itself that don’t really show on camera. If anything it runs smoother than the 582 it replaced. There are definitely unknowns that we’ll be carefully evaluating as we get into the flight test phase but I think we’ve addressed your concerns as they were things we have been thinking about since day 1.
I’m most often on the Yamaha aircraft conversion group. I have a very old page from when I used my channel name for non aviation stuff but I haven’t updated it yet.
Ok but what I don't get is how you can say you don't have the money to buy even a $50,000 plane but don't you own 3 planes? A rans S, the "Frankenstein" that your piecing together to make whats suppose to be a flying airplane and now this plane. Regardless of how little a plane may cost people who have "Families" just can't apply this to there budget. I am all for the little guy but we have to be realistic here. I do love your videos and I too plan on owning my own piece of the sky one day but for now, my dream is put on hold because of lack of funds. Keep up the good work...
A little at a time and a lot of luck is the answer to that one. I'm not a majority owner in the rans and the rest of them have been fairly inexpensive. Aviation also dominates my life to the expense of other things. If I was on my own without partners in any of them I'd be lucky to have any of them!
Actually really good. The guy who owns the factory now is about that height and the weight should be doable as well. The chinook is much bigger than it looks from the outside!
I'm sure that you are already taking into account the increased weight from all these mods and reinforcing the aircraft to take the extra fuel and cargo. Looking forward to seeing the build progress Ian! Congratulations on the new aircraft!
You weren't the builder, so unless you have an FAA Airframe & Powerplant License, how are you going to do all you plan on doing affordably? I know the FAA is fairly strict on what they will and will not allow on modifications to airframe & powerplant items. Without being the builder, you're even more limited economically, needing a licensed mechanic to implement you modifications. Wiskey, Tango, Foxtrot.. this all seems kinda shectchy dude! Is there some kind of weight & size factored into FAA Regs that allows you to do all of this? What about insurance, etc, etc?
There's a common misconception that you can't work on your own airplane without either the maintenance license you get by being the builder or an A&P cert. This isn't strictly true. You can't sign off on your own work, however that work can be done under the supervision of someone who holds an A&P cert and they can sign it off.
Just to be a little devils advocate here, There is a zenith 701 and a series 1 kitfox on Barnstormers right now for under $20K that you don't have to completely rebuild to get to this level. Just saying. Chinooks are kind of cool but your little upgrade list quickly spiraled into a full rebuild. New power plant, added trim, internal wing gas tanks, conventional flaps and aileron conversion and new suspension, wheels and brakes? All of that just took it out of most peoples ability level. This plane at your spec will cost most of your viewers $30K-$50k to achieve. At $30K-$50K, I'm buying a pimped out Zenith or a pretty decent rans/kitfox over a chinook. Sorry to come off like a wet blanket but I just believe that most people don't have these skills to just tear into an airplane and rebuild it like this which means hiring an A&P which means big dollars.
One thing I need to make clearer in my next video is that you don’t need to follow my formula or buy the same airplane to accomplish the same thing, I just want to inspire people to consider different airplanes and power plants. I’d be surprised if someone doesn’t start selling the parts for early kitfoxes to run the two cylinder Yamaha engines if people want to go four stroke. I don’t fit in the early birds or I would be considering that exact combo. I also don’t like tri gear or the zeniths would be a great option. I just want to show off how far you can get with a little hard work and some non standard thinking.
Almost bought a highlander kit but if you run the numbers it’s hard to justify. Complete build cost best case is about $60-75k and that’s pinching ever penny. Get good stuff and a more expensive engine and it’ll be $100k. There’s a reason they sell for $120k used.
