N-number inquiry turns up an Open-EZ in FAA registry, have any planes been completed from the templates?

[Mechanizoid]

I'm thinking about building an Open EZ. I've been wondering, though, if any actual airplanes have been completed using these drawings (especially considering the scaling confusion).

 

When I get interested in a design, I often run a make/model inquiry at the FAA Registry to see if any turn up. This isn't absolutely reliable since a plane could be registered under a different name, but it does turn up interesting info often. So I ran a inquiry for "open ez", and a result popped up!

 

N-number N871CG (http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=871CG) is assigned to a fixed-wing, single engine plane with the listed model "OPEN EZE". The number was assigned 12/14/2016, just a few months ago. Does anyone know if this plane is actually a completed canard built using the Open-EZ templates? I cannot find any other reference to this aircraft. If this is the first Open-EZ constructed from the drawings, congratulations to the builder.

 

Do you know of any planes that have been completed from the Open EZ templates? Might this be the first?

Edited May 22, 2017 by Mechanizoid

[Kent Ashton]

There are people building Open-EZs that don't call them that, or maybe they do call them a Long-ez or something else.  There is no rule saying what you have to name your airplane.

 

However, learn to fly before you get too involved in building.  Lots of people find they don't have the money to complete the process, or life gets in the way.  Experience with airplanes is also important in determining what you want to build.  For example, the Vans RV crowd is very big into social events and formation flying.  There are a lot of airstrips you can't really go with an EZ.  EZs are not generally aerobatic.  The Vans kits are very complete and easy to build.  This is the kind of stuff you would pick up as you get your ticket. 

[Jon Matcho]

However, learn to fly before you get too involved in building.

Good advice, but there are many, like myself, who are builders first then flyers. I am building and am still in pursuit of my certificate. It's not an uncommon situation, but I readily admit I'd much prefer to be a pilot.

 

Regarding this FAA registration, it's so far in a project state with the N-number reserved. You can tell by the blank A/W (airworthiness) date.

[Mechanizoid]

There are people building Open-EZs that don't call them that, or maybe they do call them a Long-ez or something else.  There is no rule saying what you have to name your airplane.

 

However, learn to fly before you get too involved in building.  Lots of people find they don't have the money to complete the process, or life gets in the way.  Experience with airplanes is also important in determining what you want to build.  For example, the Vans RV crowd is very big into social events and formation flying.  There are a lot of airstrips you can't really go with an EZ.  EZs are not generally aerobatic.  The Vans kits are very complete and easy to build.  This is the kind of stuff you would pick up as you get your ticket. 

 

Yeah, that's why N-number inquiries are not at all reliable for estimating how many of a certain type of experimental have been built. They could really be listed as anything (how about John's Canard, or Sally Racer? ).

 

I definitely want to learn to fly as soon as I can arrange it. Even though I think the EZ is one of the coolest birds around, I am aware that no airplane is able to be good at everything, especially not a canard. I have thought about the fact that it may turn out not to fit my preferred type of flying. Canards seem to optimized for flying fast from one paved, not to short airstrip to another  If it turns out I like flying to backcountry airstrips or fly acro all the time, an EZ may not be the best choice. Now, the RV series seems to aim at being good at a range of activities, rather than being really good at one thing (efficient long range cruising) like the canards.

 

That being said... there are three airports within driving distance of my home. All are paved, and the shortest is 4252 ft., AFAIK that is quite adequate for an EZ. I'm not worried about finding a place to fly the airplane. I like the build process for the EZ. Since it is basically scratch-built, I'll be able to tell people I made it all myself.  I'm not really the camping type. As far as determining the mission for my plane goes, I've been living in the same spot for quite a while. I would like an airplane that can take me a thousand miles from home. And while I do daydream about acro sometimes, I'm not at all sure I'll end up flying like Svetlana Kapanina all the time.

 

Good advice, but there are many, like myself, who are builders first then flyers. I am building and am still in pursuit of my certificate. It's not an uncommon situation, but I readily admit I'd much prefer to be a pilot.

 

Regarding this FAA registration, it's so far in a project state with the N-number reserved. You can tell by the blank A/W (airworthiness) date.

 

I started out assuming that I would get my certificate first and start building after, but since learning to fly takes quite a bit of time (and money) and I can start playing with composites for the price of a hundred-buck practice kit from Aircraft Spruce, it's quite possible I'll jump in before I'm a pilot. We'll see.

 

Thanks for the clarification! I did not realize it was still in project stage. Should have read more closely.

Edited May 22, 2017 by Mechanizoid