Had a guy killed here in MI. a few days ago. Flying a 'singel engine 1989 Bushby Mustang'. Is this some sort of kit, P-51 type plane? Or is the name just a coincidence? Thanks,
Printable View
Had a guy killed here in MI. a few days ago. Flying a 'singel engine 1989 Bushby Mustang'. Is this some sort of kit, P-51 type plane? Or is the name just a coincidence? Thanks,
The Bushby Mustang is a small experimental single seat monoplane. Neat little thing, but nowhere near a P-51, maybe 150-180 horsepower, tops.
Dale
yes a kit plane
We had another guy here that was killed several years ago. He was in his 7/8 or 3/4 size home built plane that was a copy of a P-51, in looks only, I imagine. Just wondering if it may have been the same type plane?
experimental airplane> hope it works....aw crap,now I'm going to die.
no link there, if it was supposed to be.
Altitude is your friend.
I happen to building a Bushby Mustang II, the same model of aircraft as the one that crashed. It is a moderately popular two-place homebuilt, and was one of the first all-metal homebuilts when it came out in 1966. The Mustang II is known for its speed; even 40 years after it's introduction, there are few airplanes in its class that are faster.
The name "Mustang II" originates with the P-51 Mustang in a roundabout way. The M-II was derived from the earlier single place "Midget Mustang", which was a racer designed by Piper engineer David Long right after the war. People started to refer to his plane as a "Midget Mustang" and the name stuck. Long was killed as the result of an on-board fire in his midget and the plans eventually ended up in the hands of Bob Bushby who desinged the M-II. I believe at one point North American Aviation threatened to sue Bushby over his use of the name Mustang.
Plans, kits, and more information on the Mustang II can be found at http://mustangaero.com
I don't know any particulars of this recent crash, but the plane has a good overall safety record.
I've been involved in experimental aviation since I was a kid. I owned a Baby Lakes biplane. It would do plus or minus more G's than I wanted to experience, fully aerobatic. (I wasn't). The guy who built mine did a great job, better than any factory would have done.
"Experimental" or "homebuilt" aircraft are like handloaded ammo: you can make stuff you can't buy. The trouble is that SOME of the aircraft are not what relatively inexperienced pilots are ready for (he said, sitting in a cloud of dust) and are hotter and more sensitive to control. This can lead to problems.
Unlike handloads, homebuilt aircraft ARE subject to sign-off by the FAA.
At the Kalamazoo Air Museum they have a couple home builts, one is a "midget" Coursar FU-4 (or F4U?). All the engines are missing, removed by the builder, because of liability issues. Sign says builders are responsible, no matter who is flying it and even after it is sold or given away.
As a former military flyer, there is an old axiom in military aviation:
The three most useless things to a flyer are:
The runway behind you!
The altitude above you!
And the fuel that you just dumped!
PS, to a carrier aviator, when you are coming aboard a carrier, there are only two places you can wind up, and one of them is REAL BAD!:yikes:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...08/a3no5-1.jpg
More than likely the builder realized his design was unsafe. Hundreds of used homebuilts are traded every year. But there is a gotcha with product liability: You can always get a buyer (or passenger) to sign a waiver of liability, but an individual cannot sign away the rights of his heirs to sue. Since an airplane crash is very likely to be fatal, there's always a risk that the buyer's heirs will try to sue the builder if the buyer is killed in an accident.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
There is a true to form midget Mustang, the S51. This one is for sale for $225,000. Stewart 51 for sale
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...08/Start-1.jpg
Aw yes, that one does look like a real one, altho canopy is too large but necessary in a scaled down version. thanks for all the answers!
Great picture, John! I feel dizzy just looking at it! Did you take it? All my flying is done from the groud via radio control. I've walked away from every landing, good or bad! Carl
I was lucky to get many hours flying an old BT-13(15) and an L-5 Sentinal in the CAF. Most all the pilots are retired airline or military and most have CFI's.
All I did was start doing their newsletter in 2000 and they took me everyplace and to most air shows. I became the 'official' Wing photographer and got even more exposure. It was the time of my life and I had more hours in old planes than flying modern Cessna's.
I came down with spine disease about three years ago and my life kinda stopped, but had the time of my life for quite some time.
I've been a passenger in many different CAF aircraft including most bombers and I have no regrets. (It was sweet being well known for a while)
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...09/08/72-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...09/03/14-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...09/08/32-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...09/08/42-1.jpg
I became a crew chief for our Navy R4D (Army C-47) and had some real adventures.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1280x768-1.jpg
We spent most of the time working on the planes, but it was almost as much fun working with these older gentleman and hear all the stories. There was one very, very good pilot who flew C-47's in WWII and DC-3's after the war who could fly the R4D better than any pilot I've ever seen.
I have tons of photos taken from all the air shows we attended and many air-to-air photos. I seemed weird to that they did this stuff wing tip to wing tip and nobody ever took photos!
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...artsmall-1.jpg
Here's a photo I took on the flight-line and one of my buddies was working the Cavanaugh Museum's real P-51.
My Gosh he has one of the most pristine collections in the world. Check out his web site. Cavanaugh Flight Museum Home Page
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1280x768-1.jpg