3 ms·

The regulations around airplane engines are nuts (for good reason). I would've been wary as well

ryandrake 8y ago
If he was building an experimental amateur-built (E-AB) category airplane, then there was likely no regulatory issue. Just lawsuit-scared lawyers. Not passing judgment--If I had lawyers I would want them to be conservative and cautious too. You can put pretty much any engine you want in an airplane you build yourself, as long as you comply with the (reasonably light) homebuilt regulations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homebuilt_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homebuilt_aircraft
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- kbenson 8y ago
  > If I had lawyers I would want them to be conservative and cautious too. For good reason. I imagine if a few people dies because the engine as sold didn't perform well/stalled under certain aeronautical conditions (upside down, low air pressure, etc) then it wouldn't take long for the lawyer hired by the kit maker to start pointing at the big auto maker at every chance they got, even if it ultimately was something the kit maker did.
- al2o3cr 8y ago
  If he was building an experimental amateur-built (E-AB) category airplane, then there was likely no regulatory issue. I have no idea how much these particular engines cost, but even at $100 a pop buying hundreds of them at once puts the applicability of "amateur" under some strain (or that of "experimental", TBH). OTOH, something about this story doesn't entirely make sense: who would get to the point they were ready to drop six figures on buying engines without, y'know, checking the regulations?
  - jshevek 8y ago
    For people on mobile, the quoted section is: > If he was building an experimental amateur-built (E-AB) category airplane, then there was likely no regulatory issue.
  - jsight 8y ago
    The story is that they would be sold as kits. I agree with you that this makes the story strange, though. While his plan involved extensive modification to the engine and resale, the easiest workaround is to have the customer order the engine and freight it to him for modification. It would be expensive, but I do not see how it would have been impossible. This kind of aircraft would have been expensive in any case. It sounds like other issues may have been just as big of a factor here as Ford's lack of interest.
  - twothamendment 8y ago
    "who would get to the point they were ready to drop six figures on buying engines..." Right, what kind of guy is this? The kind who built a full size, accurate working Stonehenge just for fun.
    - Phillipharryt 8y ago
      Working Stonehenge? Is it possible to have an accurate but not working Stonehenge?
      - sneak 8y ago
        Those won’t open portals to the ancient alien homeworld, they just sit on the ground on Earth and look cool.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
m463 8y ago
They are nuts when you carry passengers for hire. Experimental planes have less regulation. What I wonder is how well all the various car engines work upside down :)

If he was building an experimental amateur-built (E-AB) category airplane, then there was likely no regulatory issue. Just lawsuit-scared lawyers. Not passing judgment--If I had lawyers I would want them to be conservative and cautious too. You can put pretty much any engine you want in an airplane you build yourself, as long as you comply with the (reasonably light) homebuilt regulations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homebuilt_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homebuilt_aircraft

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
kbenson 8y ago
> If I had lawyers I would want them to be conservative and cautious too. For good reason. I imagine if a few people dies because the engine as sold didn't perform well/stalled under certain aeronautical conditions (upside down, low air pressure, etc) then it wouldn't take long for the lawyer hired by the kit maker to start pointing at the big auto maker at every chance they got, even if it ultimately was something the kit maker did.
al2o3cr 8y ago
If he was building an experimental amateur-built (E-AB) category airplane, then there was likely no regulatory issue. I have no idea how much these particular engines cost, but even at $100 a pop buying hundreds of them at once puts the applicability of "amateur" under some strain (or that of "experimental", TBH). OTOH, something about this story doesn't entirely make sense: who would get to the point they were ready to drop six figures on buying engines without, y'know, checking the regulations?
- jshevek 8y ago
  For people on mobile, the quoted section is: > If he was building an experimental amateur-built (E-AB) category airplane, then there was likely no regulatory issue.
- jsight 8y ago
  The story is that they would be sold as kits. I agree with you that this makes the story strange, though. While his plan involved extensive modification to the engine and resale, the easiest workaround is to have the customer order the engine and freight it to him for modification. It would be expensive, but I do not see how it would have been impossible. This kind of aircraft would have been expensive in any case. It sounds like other issues may have been just as big of a factor here as Ford's lack of interest.
- twothamendment 8y ago
  "who would get to the point they were ready to drop six figures on buying engines..." Right, what kind of guy is this? The kind who built a full size, accurate working Stonehenge just for fun.
  - Phillipharryt 8y ago
    Working Stonehenge? Is it possible to have an accurate but not working Stonehenge?
    - sneak 8y ago
      Those won’t open portals to the ancient alien homeworld, they just sit on the ground on Earth and look cool.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]

m463 8y ago

They are nuts when you carry passengers for hire. Experimental planes have less regulation. What I wonder is how well all the various car engines work upside down :)