If anyone is still watching this forum or sees this post, I am trying to find a copy of the 13m wing version of the Woodstock plans. Please let me know if you have access to them in any format (including any CAD format at all, DWG or other).

My email is just my first name and then the @ followed by bradleyventures and the dot com .

Thanks,
Stephan

Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
Thank you in advance.

El martes, 14 de febrero de 2023 a las 6:43:28 UTC+1, Capt.Stephan Bradley escribió:
> If anyone is still watching this forum or sees this post, I am trying to find a copy of the 13m wing version of the Woodstock plans. Please let me know if you have access to them in any format (including any CAD format at all, DWG or other).
>
> My email is just my first name and then the @ followed by bradleyventures and the dot com .
>
> Thanks,
> Stephan

On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> Thank you in advance.

The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
JJ

El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > Thank you in advance.
> The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> JJ

Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.

El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > JJ
> > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> JJ

Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.

The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.

It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know.
If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.

But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.

What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?

El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > JJ
> > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> JJ

El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > Thank you in advance.
> > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > JJ
> Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.

I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.

NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
>
> The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
>
> It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know.
> If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
>
> But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
>
> What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it..
> > > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > > JJ
> > > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> > > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> > There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> > I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> > I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> > JJ

First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!

I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!

You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
JJ

On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > JJ
> > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.

There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
JJ

Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.

Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license.
Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link

El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg.. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
> >
> > The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> > The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
> >
> > It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know.
> > If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> > I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
> >
> > But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
> >
> > What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > > > JJ
> > > > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> > > > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> > > There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> > > I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> > > I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> > > JJ
> First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
>
> I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
>
> You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
> JJ

On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.
>
> Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license.
> Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link
> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
> > >
> > > The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> > > The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
> > >
> > > It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know.
> > > If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> > > I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
> > >
> > > But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
> > >
> > > What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> > > > > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> > > > There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> > > > I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> > > > I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> > > > JJ
> > First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
> >
> > I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
> >
> > You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
> > JJ

Your pictures show what I’m sure is epoxy glue, the designer recommended Hughs Epoxy which is white. Anyway, let’s assume the glue is OK, because epoxy doesn’t degrade much over time! The real issue I would have is your approximately 65 Kg (143 #) OVER design gross weight which is 205Kg (450#).
Empty weight……180Kg ( your figure)
Fuel…………………..3kg
Pilot & parachute…….87Kg
Total flying weight……270 Kg

The Maxim Recommended Gross Weight is 205 Kg! Your 65 Kg (143#) over the design gross weight !
BTW, Here a Woodstock came apart in moderate wave conditions, both wings departed and the pilot was killed! The accident Report didn’t mention anything about ship being overweight or pilot flying in excess of design airspeed limits

Food for thought,
JJ

Thank you for your reply.
The guy who selled the Woodstock to me said me 180kg, in 99% is a lie or the first thought crossed his mind. He didn´t made the glider, and everything he told me about the glider was fantasy. He said he built the woodstock, made the integral cabin prototype, said was Private Pilot, said traveled on the Woodstock, all that was lie. When I met the aerodrome owner told me the whole story. This guy just bought the glider to the family of the real builder and never flied on it. Just finished the license requirements with another pilot colaboration.
So forget the 180kg.
The original design is 107 kg. I´ll try to find out a way to know the "real" weight.
On the aviation registration data of this glider say what you say 205 max weight, and that was the registry on 1993 when the builder started the build, so it should be no sense it may weight 180kg, that must be a random invention from the guy who selled it to me. I´ll try to find a method to weigh the woodstock. Thank your for the point.

El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 1:50:07 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.
> >
> > Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license.
> > Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link
> > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
> > > >
> > > > The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> > > > The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
> > > >
> > > > It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know.
> > > > If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> > > > I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
> > > >
> > > > But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
> > > >
> > > > What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > > > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > > > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > > > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used..
> > > > > > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> > > > > There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> > > > > I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> > > > > I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> > > > > JJ
> > > First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
> > >
> > > I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
> > >
> > > You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
> > > JJ
> Your pictures show what I’m sure is epoxy glue, the designer recommended Hughs Epoxy which is white. Anyway, let’s assume the glue is OK, because epoxy doesn’t degrade much over time! The real issue I would have is your approximately 65 Kg (143 #) OVER design gross weight which is 205Kg (450#).
> Empty weight……180Kg ( your figure)
> Fuel…………………..3kg
> Pilot & parachute…….87Kg
> Total flying weight……270 Kg
>
> The Maxim Recommended Gross Weight is 205 Kg! Your 65 Kg (143#) over the design gross weight !
> BTW, Here a Woodstock came apart in moderate wave conditions, both wings departed and the pilot was killed! The accident Report didn’t mention anything about ship being overweight or pilot flying in excess of design airspeed limits
>
> Food for thought,
> JJ

Another deail I forgot,

The real owner flew the plane motorized 60 hours before get ill with provisional license, till around 2015.
Later the second owner changed the motor for another one (same or litle less weight, one cylinder instead 3), and ended the license process.
He made a video on that time. The pilot is the colaborator. Data of the video is around 2018. But the thing is that the woodstock was already motorized, so I think must be similar to the 107kg (this one is 13.2 version), maybe a little bit more.
Motor 11kg.
Balistic parachute, around 8kg
Lets consider a pilot of 70kg that should be
107+11+8+70= 196

The guy said me it had 30l for fuel on the wings, probably also lie. But anyway should be not much bandwith for fuel to fit the 205kg, should be theorical 226kg, so you are right, issues to think about

Here is the video: https://youtu.be/GLpCE_QlYk8

Thank you for your tips.

El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 1:50:07 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.
> >
> > Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license.
> > Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link
> > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
> > > >
> > > > The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> > > > The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
> > > >
> > > > It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know.
> > > > If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> > > > I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
> > > >
> > > > But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
> > > >
> > > > What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > > > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > > > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > > > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used..
> > > > > > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> > > > > There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> > > > > I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> > > > > I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> > > > > JJ
> > > First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
> > >
> > > I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
> > >
> > > You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
> > > JJ
> Your pictures show what I’m sure is epoxy glue, the designer recommended Hughs Epoxy which is white. Anyway, let’s assume the glue is OK, because epoxy doesn’t degrade much over time! The real issue I would have is your approximately 65 Kg (143 #) OVER design gross weight which is 205Kg (450#).
> Empty weight……180Kg ( your figure)
> Fuel…………………..3kg
> Pilot & parachute…….87Kg
> Total flying weight……270 Kg
>
> The Maxim Recommended Gross Weight is 205 Kg! Your 65 Kg (143#) over the design gross weight !
> BTW, Here a Woodstock came apart in moderate wave conditions, both wings departed and the pilot was killed! The accident Report didn’t mention anything about ship being overweight or pilot flying in excess of design airspeed limits
>
> Food for thought,
> JJ

On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:50:14 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> Another deail I forgot,
>
> The real owner flew the plane motorized 60 hours before get ill with provisional license, till around 2015.
> Later the second owner changed the motor for another one (same or litle less weight, one cylinder instead 3), and ended the license process.
> He made a video on that time. The pilot is the colaborator. Data of the video is around 2018. But the thing is that the woodstock was already motorized, so I think must be similar to the 107kg (this one is 13.2 version), maybe a little bit more.
> Motor 11kg.
> Balistic parachute, around 8kg
> Lets consider a pilot of 70kg that should be
> 107+11+8+70= 196
>
> The guy said me it had 30l for fuel on the wings, probably also lie. But anyway should be not much bandwith for fuel to fit the 205kg, should be theorical 226kg, so you are right, issues to think about
>
> Here is the video: https://youtu.be/GLpCE_QlYk8
>
> Thank you for your tips.
> El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 1:50:07 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.
> > >
> > > Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license..
> > > Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link
> > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> > > > > The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
> > > > >
> > > > > It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know.
> > > > > If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> > > > > I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
> > > > >
> > > > > But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
> > > > >
> > > > > What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > > > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure..
> > > > > > > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > > > > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > > > > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > > > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> > > > > > > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> > > > > > There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> > > > > > I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> > > > > > I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> > > > > > JJ
> > > > First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
> > > >
> > > > I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
> > > >
> > > > You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
> > > > JJ
> > Your pictures show what I’m sure is epoxy glue, the designer recommended Hughs Epoxy which is white. Anyway, let’s assume the glue is OK, because epoxy doesn’t degrade much over time! The real issue I would have is your approximately 65 Kg (143 #) OVER design gross weight which is 205Kg (450#).
> > Empty weight……180Kg ( your figure)
> > Fuel…………………..3kg
> > Pilot & parachute…….87Kg
> > Total flying weight……270 Kg
> >
> > The Maxim Recommended Gross Weight is 205 Kg! Your 65 Kg (143#) over the design gross weight !
> > BTW, Here a Woodstock came apart in moderate wave conditions, both wings departed and the pilot was killed! The accident Report didn’t mention anything about ship being overweight or pilot flying in excess of design airspeed limits
> >
> > Food for thought,
> > JJ

There’s one more factor to ponder……….the original Woodstock was a 12 meter sailplane. The builder of your ship poked the span out to over13 + meters! If he didn’t strengthen the spar…….???

Over here, we have a small claims court where one can take a misrepresented sale like yours to a judge!

Good luck,
JJ

don´t understand the desire to criminalize me,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maupin_Woodstock_One

There are 3 variants, 11.9, 12,5 and 13,1 winspan
Plans and shems are on the web. The builder registered it on the spanish aerial security from start. After years of test and official procedures got the licence from the goverment: https://www.seguridadaerea.gob.es/

If sale a aircraft the have passed all that official procedures and it´s wrong, so my goverment and the own state arerial ageny should be to judge.. not me.
Today I have beening replying from them that is categorized as microlight aircraft and can be piloted with the respective official license must be got and examined from the own agency.

Curious that you claim me going to court, while you confess there is absolute no control in your country, so anyone can fly whatever he likes? You are making a judgement wrong. Anyone on your contry can built whatever wants and fly it, and die, so is no crime because is not sale, right? but the fly can crash over a home and kill other people.
You cannot do it here. You must have license to pilot the aircraft, the aircraft must have license, and must have accident insurance for third party cold damage.
I suppose you are on USA, and seem you feel like that, you are the law and the morality over the world where the others are criminals, while on USA anyone can carry a gun or fly anything. Ironic.

El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 16:35:09 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:50:14 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > Another deail I forgot,
> >
> > The real owner flew the plane motorized 60 hours before get ill with provisional license, till around 2015.
> > Later the second owner changed the motor for another one (same or litle less weight, one cylinder instead 3), and ended the license process.
> > He made a video on that time. The pilot is the colaborator. Data of the video is around 2018. But the thing is that the woodstock was already motorized, so I think must be similar to the 107kg (this one is 13.2 version), maybe a little bit more.
> > Motor 11kg.
> > Balistic parachute, around 8kg
> > Lets consider a pilot of 70kg that should be
> > 107+11+8+70= 196
> >
> > The guy said me it had 30l for fuel on the wings, probably also lie. But anyway should be not much bandwith for fuel to fit the 205kg, should be theorical 226kg, so you are right, issues to think about
> >
> > Here is the video: https://youtu.be/GLpCE_QlYk8
> >
> > Thank you for your tips.
> > El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 1:50:07 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license.
> > > > Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link
> > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> > > > > > The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know..
> > > > > > If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> > > > > > I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > > > > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > > > > > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > > > > > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > > > > > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > > > > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> > > > > > > > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> > > > > > > There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying.. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> > > > > > > I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> > > > > > > I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
> > > > >
> > > > > I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
> > > > >
> > > > > You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
> > > > > JJ
> > > Your pictures show what I’m sure is epoxy glue, the designer recommended Hughs Epoxy which is white. Anyway, let’s assume the glue is OK, because epoxy doesn’t degrade much over time! The real issue I would have is your approximately 65 Kg (143 #) OVER design gross weight which is 205Kg (450#).
> > > Empty weight……180Kg ( your figure)
> > > Fuel…………………..3kg
> > > Pilot & parachute…….87Kg
> > > Total flying weight……270 Kg
> > >
> > > The Maxim Recommended Gross Weight is 205 Kg! Your 65 Kg (143#) over the design gross weight !
> > > BTW, Here a Woodstock came apart in moderate wave conditions, both wings departed and the pilot was killed! The accident Report didn’t mention anything about ship being overweight or pilot flying in excess of design airspeed limits
> > >
> > > Food for thought,
> > > JJ
> There’s one more factor to ponder……….the original Woodstock was a 12 meter sailplane. The builder of your ship poked the span out to over13 + meters! If he didn’t strengthen the spar…….???
>
> Over here, we have a small claims court where one can take a misrepresented sale like yours to a judge!
>
> Good luck,
> JJ

Mr. Sinclair here was trying to help you solve your problem.
You don't seem to want to hear any advice. Instead to go into politics. That's nasty.
Next time don't ask for advice from people who live in a country with "absolutely no control" regarding aviation.

Dan G
On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 11:00:08 AM UTC-4, jose ferreira wrote:
> don´t understand the desire to criminalize me,
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maupin_Woodstock_One
>
> There are 3 variants, 11.9, 12,5 and 13,1 winspan
> Plans and shems are on the web. The builder registered it on the spanish aerial security from start. After years of test and official procedures got the licence from the goverment: https://www.seguridadaerea.gob.es/
>
> If sale a aircraft the have passed all that official procedures and it´s wrong, so my goverment and the own state arerial ageny should be to judge.. not me.
> Today I have beening replying from them that is categorized as microlight aircraft and can be piloted with the respective official license must be got and examined from the own agency.
>
> Curious that you claim me going to court, while you confess there is absolute no control in your country, so anyone can fly whatever he likes? You are making a judgement wrong. Anyone on your contry can built whatever wants and fly it, and die, so is no crime because is not sale, right? but the fly can crash over a home and kill other people.
> You cannot do it here. You must have license to pilot the aircraft, the aircraft must have license, and must have accident insurance for third party cold damage.
> I suppose you are on USA, and seem you feel like that, you are the law and the morality over the world where the others are criminals, while on USA anyone can carry a gun or fly anything. Ironic.
> El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 16:35:09 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:50:14 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > Another deail I forgot,
> > >
> > > The real owner flew the plane motorized 60 hours before get ill with provisional license, till around 2015.
> > > Later the second owner changed the motor for another one (same or litle less weight, one cylinder instead 3), and ended the license process.
> > > He made a video on that time. The pilot is the colaborator. Data of the video is around 2018. But the thing is that the woodstock was already motorized, so I think must be similar to the 107kg (this one is 13.2 version), maybe a little bit more.
> > > Motor 11kg.
> > > Balistic parachute, around 8kg
> > > Lets consider a pilot of 70kg that should be
> > > 107+11+8+70= 196
> > >
> > > The guy said me it had 30l for fuel on the wings, probably also lie. But anyway should be not much bandwith for fuel to fit the 205kg, should be theorical 226kg, so you are right, issues to think about
> > >
> > > Here is the video: https://youtu.be/GLpCE_QlYk8
> > >
> > > Thank you for your tips.
> > > El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 1:50:07 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license.
> > > > > Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link
> > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> > > > > > > The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know.
> > > > > > > If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> > > > > > > I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it.. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > > > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > > > > > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > > > > > > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > > > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > > > > > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> > > > > > > > > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> > > > > > > > There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> > > > > > > > I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> > > > > > > > I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> > > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > > First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
> > > > > > JJ
> > > > Your pictures show what I’m sure is epoxy glue, the designer recommended Hughs Epoxy which is white. Anyway, let’s assume the glue is OK, because epoxy doesn’t degrade much over time! The real issue I would have is your approximately 65 Kg (143 #) OVER design gross weight which is 205Kg (450#).
> > > > Empty weight……180Kg ( your figure)
> > > > Fuel…………………...3kg
> > > > Pilot & parachute…….87Kg
> > > > Total flying weight……270 Kg
> > > >
> > > > The Maxim Recommended Gross Weight is 205 Kg! Your 65 Kg (143#) over the design gross weight !
> > > > BTW, Here a Woodstock came apart in moderate wave conditions, both wings departed and the pilot was killed! The accident Report didn’t mention anything about ship being overweight or pilot flying in excess of design airspeed limits
> > > >
> > > > Food for thought,
> > > > JJ
> > There’s one more factor to ponder……….the original Woodstock was a 12 meter sailplane. The builder of your ship poked the span out to over13 + meters! If he didn’t strengthen the spar…….???
> >
> > Over here, we have a small claims court where one can take a misrepresented sale like yours to a judge!
> >
> > Good luck,
> > JJ

First, I didn´t know this google group owned by an specific contry.
Second, I didn´t said, even I didn´t know about the control there.. He said it, not me.
I just asked if any knowledge about glue. I received same feedback from Sinclair and a guy here. Both say it´s epoxy, so ok, thank you.
I was blamed several times. First, bucket of worms, I should burn it, then the motor should be removed, then its not ok because 13.1 (there are three variants winspan).., whatever I said, the advice is I should be going to court for selling this. Still don´t know why. The only "suspect" was about the "glue" used by the man who built it, and two persons said me was Epoxy.
In the other hand, I asked a glider school on Spain and reported me an story of a Schleicher ASK 13 model. A well known recognized glider manufacturer in Germany. Seems that, this model ASK 13 with 40 or 50 years old, have some accidents. He said me the investigation arrived to a conclusion of the glue used sometimes. They don´t know what serial number used that less good glue, date. Next day I was searching about gliders schools here in Spain and saw that one of that have a ASK 13, so I emailed him again asking why still was using this model. He replied me.. still there are world competition of this model, so I got shocked. There is a known issue with this model because of the years old and some ramdom glue used, but still used on schools, on competition ..., so I guess why no one send Schleicher to court? Regarding the Woodstock, I just received from the local owner aerodrome the advices of "I don´t know what glue he used, the builder died", so its just wonder, research, but seems it doesn´t matter. If Tesla have accidents because some cars accelerete and can´t top till crash, it´s ok, just a software problem. If Schleicher ASK 13 has a know issue related to age and glue discovered on accidents, seems doesn´t matter to stop using them. But.., if I just ask opinion about the glue used on one Woodstock, so I should be judged as soon as posible, because of the motor, the winspan, or whatever? So you say I reply about politics. I´m trying to find out any light about security (neutral), but seems that is more important if the seller is a millionaire or bilionaire company so they are innocent just after paying a penalty fee, but seems I´m presumed guilty. I´m open to any neutral advice, if exists that.

El viernes, 14 de abril de 2023 a las 17:57:22 UTC+2, Dan Goldman escribió:
> Mr. Sinclair here was trying to help you solve your problem.
> You don't seem to want to hear any advice. Instead to go into politics. That's nasty.
> Next time don't ask for advice from people who live in a country with "absolutely no control" regarding aviation.
>
> Dan G
> On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 11:00:08 AM UTC-4, jose ferreira wrote:
> > don´t understand the desire to criminalize me,
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maupin_Woodstock_One
> >
> > There are 3 variants, 11.9, 12,5 and 13,1 winspan
> > Plans and shems are on the web. The builder registered it on the spanish aerial security from start. After years of test and official procedures got the licence from the goverment: https://www.seguridadaerea.gob.es/
> >
> > If sale a aircraft the have passed all that official procedures and it´s wrong, so my goverment and the own state arerial ageny should be to judge.. not me.
> > Today I have beening replying from them that is categorized as microlight aircraft and can be piloted with the respective official license must be got and examined from the own agency.
> >
> > Curious that you claim me going to court, while you confess there is absolute no control in your country, so anyone can fly whatever he likes? You are making a judgement wrong. Anyone on your contry can built whatever wants and fly it, and die, so is no crime because is not sale, right? but the fly can crash over a home and kill other people.
> > You cannot do it here. You must have license to pilot the aircraft, the aircraft must have license, and must have accident insurance for third party cold damage.
> > I suppose you are on USA, and seem you feel like that, you are the law and the morality over the world where the others are criminals, while on USA anyone can carry a gun or fly anything. Ironic.
> > El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 16:35:09 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:50:14 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > Another deail I forgot,
> > > >
> > > > The real owner flew the plane motorized 60 hours before get ill with provisional license, till around 2015.
> > > > Later the second owner changed the motor for another one (same or litle less weight, one cylinder instead 3), and ended the license process.
> > > > He made a video on that time. The pilot is the colaborator. Data of the video is around 2018. But the thing is that the woodstock was already motorized, so I think must be similar to the 107kg (this one is 13.2 version), maybe a little bit more.
> > > > Motor 11kg.
> > > > Balistic parachute, around 8kg
> > > > Lets consider a pilot of 70kg that should be
> > > > 107+11+8+70= 196
> > > >
> > > > The guy said me it had 30l for fuel on the wings, probably also lie.. But anyway should be not much bandwith for fuel to fit the 205kg, should be theorical 226kg, so you are right, issues to think about
> > > >
> > > > Here is the video: https://youtu.be/GLpCE_QlYk8
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for your tips.
> > > > El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 1:50:07 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license.
> > > > > > Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link
> > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> > > > > > > > The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know.
> > > > > > > > If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> > > > > > > > I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> > > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> > > > > > > > > > > El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > > > > > > > > > The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> > > > > > > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > > > > > > > Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> > > > > > > > > > I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> > > > > > > > > There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> > > > > > > > > I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> > > > > > > > > I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> > > > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > > > First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
> > > > > > > JJ
> > > > > Your pictures show what I’m sure is epoxy glue, the designer recommended Hughs Epoxy which is white. Anyway, let’s assume the glue is OK, because epoxy doesn’t degrade much over time! The real issue I would have is your approximately 65 Kg (143 #) OVER design gross weight which is 205Kg (450#).
> > > > > Empty weight……180Kg ( your figure)
> > > > > Fuel…………………..3kg
> > > > > Pilot & parachute…….87Kg
> > > > > Total flying weight……270 Kg
> > > > >
> > > > > The Maxim Recommended Gross Weight is 205 Kg! Your 65 Kg (143#) over the design gross weight !
> > > > > BTW, Here a Woodstock came apart in moderate wave conditions, both wings departed and the pilot was killed! The accident Report didn’t mention anything about ship being overweight or pilot flying in excess of design airspeed limits
> > > > >
> > > > > Food for thought,
> > > > > JJ
> > > There’s one more factor to ponder……….the original Woodstock was a 12 meter sailplane. The builder of your ship poked the span out to over13 + meters! If he didn’t strengthen the spar…….???
> > >
> > > Over here, we have a small claims court where one can take a misrepresented sale like yours to a judge!
> > >
> > > Good luck,
> > > JJ

I think this is just a question of misunderstanding each other's languages.
I think I read Mr. Ferreira saying that the man who sold the glider to
him told him lies about the condition of the glider.
Mr. Sinclair said that, in this country (USA) we have small claims court
where an injured party, Mr Ferreira, can have a judge award him justice
in the form of compensation.
I think Mr Ferreira misunderstood Mr Sinclair thinking he had been
accused of some wrong doing. That was not the case.
And, for the record, rec.aviation.soaring, also known as RAS, is not a
google group. Google just picked it up.
Dan
5J
On 4/14/23 10:34, jose ferreira wrote:
> First, I didn´t know this google group owned by an specific contry.
> Second, I didn´t said, even I didn´t know about the control there. He said it, not me.
> I just asked if any knowledge about glue. I received same feedback from Sinclair and a guy here. Both say it´s epoxy, so ok, thank you.
> I was blamed several times. First, bucket of worms, I should burn it, then the motor should be removed, then its not ok because 13.1 (there are three variants winspan).., whatever I said, the advice is I should be going to court for selling this. Still don´t know why. The only "suspect" was about the "glue" used by the man who built it, and two persons said me was Epoxy.
> In the other hand, I asked a glider school on Spain and reported me an story of a Schleicher ASK 13 model. A well known recognized glider manufacturer in Germany. Seems that, this model ASK 13 with 40 or 50 years old, have some accidents. He said me the investigation arrived to a conclusion of the glue used sometimes. They don´t know what serial number used that less good glue, date. Next day I was searching about gliders schools here in Spain and saw that one of that have a ASK 13, so I emailed him again asking why still was using this model. He replied me.. still there are world competition of this model, so I got shocked. There is a known issue with this model because of the years old and some ramdom glue used, but still used on schools, on competition ..., so I guess why no one send Schleicher to court? Regarding the Woodstock, I just received from the local owner aerodrome the advices of "I don´t know what glue he used, the builder died", so its just wonder, research, but seems it doesn´t matter. If Tesla have accidents because some cars accelerete and can´t top till crash, it´s ok, just a software problem. If Schleicher ASK 13 has a know issue related to age and glue discovered on accidents, seems doesn´t matter to stop using them. But.., if I just ask opinion about the glue used on one Woodstock, so I should be judged as soon as posible, because of the motor, the winspan, or whatever? So you say I reply about politics. I´m trying to find out any light about security (neutral), but seems that is more important if the seller is a millionaire or bilionaire company so they are innocent just after paying a penalty fee, but seems I´m presumed guilty. I´m open to any neutral advice, if exists that.
>
>
> El viernes, 14 de abril de 2023 a las 17:57:22 UTC+2, Dan Goldman escribió:
>> Mr. Sinclair here was trying to help you solve your problem.
>> You don't seem to want to hear any advice. Instead to go into politics. That's nasty.
>> Next time don't ask for advice from people who live in a country with "absolutely no control" regarding aviation.
>>
>> Dan G
>> On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 11:00:08 AM UTC-4, jose ferreira wrote:
>>> don´t understand the desire to criminalize me,
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maupin_Woodstock_One
>>>
>>> There are 3 variants, 11.9, 12,5 and 13,1 winspan
>>> Plans and shems are on the web. The builder registered it on the spanish aerial security from start. After years of test and official procedures got the licence from the goverment: https://www.seguridadaerea.gob.es/
>>>
>>> If sale a aircraft the have passed all that official procedures and it´s wrong, so my goverment and the own state arerial ageny should be to judge.. not me.
>>> Today I have beening replying from them that is categorized as microlight aircraft and can be piloted with the respective official license must be got and examined from the own agency.
>>>
>>> Curious that you claim me going to court, while you confess there is absolute no control in your country, so anyone can fly whatever he likes? You are making a judgement wrong. Anyone on your contry can built whatever wants and fly it, and die, so is no crime because is not sale, right? but the fly can crash over a home and kill other people.
>>> You cannot do it here. You must have license to pilot the aircraft, the aircraft must have license, and must have accident insurance for third party cold damage.
>>> I suppose you are on USA, and seem you feel like that, you are the law and the morality over the world where the others are criminals, while on USA anyone can carry a gun or fly anything. Ironic.
>>> El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 16:35:09 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
>>>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:50:14 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
>>>>> Another deail I forgot,
>>>>>
>>>>> The real owner flew the plane motorized 60 hours before get ill with provisional license, till around 2015.
>>>>> Later the second owner changed the motor for another one (same or litle less weight, one cylinder instead 3), and ended the license process.
>>>>> He made a video on that time. The pilot is the colaborator. Data of the video is around 2018. But the thing is that the woodstock was already motorized, so I think must be similar to the 107kg (this one is 13.2 version), maybe a little bit more.
>>>>> Motor 11kg.
>>>>> Balistic parachute, around 8kg
>>>>> Lets consider a pilot of 70kg that should be
>>>>> 107+11+8+70= 196
>>>>>
>>>>> The guy said me it had 30l for fuel on the wings, probably also lie. But anyway should be not much bandwith for fuel to fit the 205kg, should be theorical 226kg, so you are right, issues to think about
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is the video: https://youtu.be/GLpCE_QlYk8
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your tips.
>>>>> El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 1:50:07 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
>>>>>>> Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license.
>>>>>>> Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link
>>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
>>>>>>>> NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
>>>>>>>>> The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know.
>>>>>>>>> If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
>>>>>>>>> I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
>>>>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
>>>>>>>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you in advance.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> JJ
>>>>>>>>>>>> Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
>>>>>>>>>>> I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
>>>>>>>>>> There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
>>>>>>>>>> I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
>>>>>>>>>> I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
>>>>>>>>>> JJ
>>>>>>>> First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
>>>>>>>> JJ
>>>>>> Your pictures show what I’m sure is epoxy glue, the designer recommended Hughs Epoxy which is white. Anyway, let’s assume the glue is OK, because epoxy doesn’t degrade much over time! The real issue I would have is your approximately 65 Kg (143 #) OVER design gross weight which is 205Kg (450#).
>>>>>> Empty weight……180Kg ( your figure)
>>>>>> Fuel…………………..3kg
>>>>>> Pilot & parachute…….87Kg
>>>>>> Total flying weight……270 Kg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Maxim Recommended Gross Weight is 205 Kg! Your 65 Kg (143#) over the design gross weight !
>>>>>> BTW, Here a Woodstock came apart in moderate wave conditions, both wings departed and the pilot was killed! The accident Report didn’t mention anything about ship being overweight or pilot flying in excess of design airspeed limits
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Food for thought,
>>>>>> JJ
>>>> There’s one more factor to ponder……….the original Woodstock was a 12 meter sailplane. The builder of your ship poked the span out to over13 + meters! If he didn’t strengthen the spar…….???
>>>>
>>>> Over here, we have a small claims court where one can take a misrepresented sale like yours to a judge!
>>>>
>>>> Good luck,
>>>> JJ

Thank you, for clarify the language confusion.

There are two persons. The seller and the aerodrome owner.
The seller said lots of lies but he has no job no money. The own woodstock proprietary was hes "wife".
I paid him on December and kept the money. Going to justice should be more waste of money.
The aerodrome owner convinced me to go on and get the woodstock and the trailer.
But he advised me it was no good for a beginner and he don't know about the glue used.

Asked ultralight schools and also advised me about was no good for a beginner.

So I'll try to sale it to a user with experience in "experimental aircraft" , "as it is". A guy sai it was nice to change the motor to electric (even that means restart the license aproving).
Don't know. Maybe if no interest I'll keep around for a year or I don't know.

Im just a newbie so just Im finding new things and stories everyday. Seems that amateur aviation is an expensive hobby in every aspect. And with problems I didn't imagine before.
Justice in Spain is a waste of time and money.
Aviation is complicated and expensive.
Thank you for clear me the misunderstanding.

El viernes, 14 de abril de 2023 a las 19:35:20 UTC+2, Dan Marotta escribió:
> I think this is just a question of misunderstanding each other's languages.
>
> I think I read Mr. Ferreira saying that the man who sold the glider to
> him told him lies about the condition of the glider.
>
> Mr. Sinclair said that, in this country (USA) we have small claims court
> where an injured party, Mr Ferreira, can have a judge award him justice
> in the form of compensation.
>
> I think Mr Ferreira misunderstood Mr Sinclair thinking he had been
> accused of some wrong doing. That was not the case.
>
> And, for the record, rec.aviation.soaring, also known as RAS, is not a
> google group. Google just picked it up.
>
> Dan
> 5J
> On 4/14/23 10:34, jose ferreira wrote:
> > First, I didn´t know this google group owned by an specific contry..
> > Second, I didn´t said, even I didn´t know about the control there. He said it, not me.
> > I just asked if any knowledge about glue. I received same feedback from Sinclair and a guy here. Both say it´s epoxy, so ok, thank you.
> > I was blamed several times. First, bucket of worms, I should burn it, then the motor should be removed, then its not ok because 13.1 (there are three variants winspan).., whatever I said, the advice is I should be going to court for selling this. Still don´t know why. The only "suspect" was about the "glue" used by the man who built it, and two persons said me was Epoxy.
> > In the other hand, I asked a glider school on Spain and reported me an story of a Schleicher ASK 13 model. A well known recognized glider manufacturer in Germany. Seems that, this model ASK 13 with 40 or 50 years old, have some accidents. He said me the investigation arrived to a conclusion of the glue used sometimes. They don´t know what serial number used that less good glue, date. Next day I was searching about gliders schools here in Spain and saw that one of that have a ASK 13, so I emailed him again asking why still was using this model. He replied me.. still there are world competition of this model, so I got shocked. There is a known issue with this model because of the years old and some ramdom glue used, but still used on schools, on competition ..., so I guess why no one send Schleicher to court? Regarding the Woodstock, I just received from the local owner aerodrome the advices of "I don´t know what glue he used, the builder died", so its just wonder, research, but seems it doesn´t matter. If Tesla have accidents because some cars accelerete and can´t top till crash, it´s ok, just a software problem. If Schleicher ASK 13 has a know issue related to age and glue discovered on accidents, seems doesn´t matter to stop using them. But.., if I just ask opinion about the glue used on one Woodstock, so I should be judged as soon as posible, because of the motor, the winspan, or whatever? So you say I reply about politics. I´m trying to find out any light about security (neutral), but seems that is more important if the seller is a millionaire or bilionaire company so they are innocent just after paying a penalty fee, but seems I´m presumed guilty. I´m open to any neutral advice, if exists that.
> >
> >
> > El viernes, 14 de abril de 2023 a las 17:57:22 UTC+2, Dan Goldman escribió:
> >> Mr. Sinclair here was trying to help you solve your problem.
> >> You don't seem to want to hear any advice. Instead to go into politics.. That's nasty.
> >> Next time don't ask for advice from people who live in a country with "absolutely no control" regarding aviation.
> >>
> >> Dan G
> >> On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 11:00:08 AM UTC-4, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>> don´t understand the desire to criminalize me,
> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maupin_Woodstock_One
> >>>
> >>> There are 3 variants, 11.9, 12,5 and 13,1 winspan
> >>> Plans and shems are on the web. The builder registered it on the spanish aerial security from start. After years of test and official procedures got the licence from the goverment: https://www.seguridadaerea.gob.es/
> >>>
> >>> If sale a aircraft the have passed all that official procedures and it´s wrong, so my goverment and the own state arerial ageny should be to judge.. not me.
> >>> Today I have beening replying from them that is categorized as microlight aircraft and can be piloted with the respective official license must be got and examined from the own agency.
> >>>
> >>> Curious that you claim me going to court, while you confess there is absolute no control in your country, so anyone can fly whatever he likes? You are making a judgement wrong. Anyone on your contry can built whatever wants and fly it, and die, so is no crime because is not sale, right? but the fly can crash over a home and kill other people.
> >>> You cannot do it here. You must have license to pilot the aircraft, the aircraft must have license, and must have accident insurance for third party cold damage.
> >>> I suppose you are on USA, and seem you feel like that, you are the law and the morality over the world where the others are criminals, while on USA anyone can carry a gun or fly anything. Ironic.
> >>> El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 16:35:09 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> >>>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:50:14 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>>>> Another deail I forgot,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The real owner flew the plane motorized 60 hours before get ill with provisional license, till around 2015.
> >>>>> Later the second owner changed the motor for another one (same or litle less weight, one cylinder instead 3), and ended the license process.
> >>>>> He made a video on that time. The pilot is the colaborator. Data of the video is around 2018. But the thing is that the woodstock was already motorized, so I think must be similar to the 107kg (this one is 13.2 version), maybe a little bit more.
> >>>>> Motor 11kg.
> >>>>> Balistic parachute, around 8kg
> >>>>> Lets consider a pilot of 70kg that should be
> >>>>> 107+11+8+70= 196
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The guy said me it had 30l for fuel on the wings, probably also lie.. But anyway should be not much bandwith for fuel to fit the 205kg, should be theorical 226kg, so you are right, issues to think about
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here is the video: https://youtu.be/GLpCE_QlYk8
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for your tips.
> >>>>> El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 1:50:07 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> >>>>>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>>>>>> Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license.
> >>>>>>> Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link
> >>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> >>>>>>>> NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> >>>>>>>>> The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know..
> >>>>>>>>> If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> >>>>>>>>> I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> >>>>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you in advance.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> JJ
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> >>>>>>>>>>> I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> >>>>>>>>>> There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> >>>>>>>>>> I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> >>>>>>>>>> I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> >>>>>>>>>> JJ
> >>>>>>>> First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
> >>>>>>>> JJ
> >>>>>> Your pictures show what I’m sure is epoxy glue, the designer recommended Hughs Epoxy which is white. Anyway, let’s assume the glue is OK, because epoxy doesn’t degrade much over time! The real issue I would have is your approximately 65 Kg (143 #) OVER design gross weight which is 205Kg (450#).
> >>>>>> Empty weight……180Kg ( your figure)
> >>>>>> Fuel…………………..3kg
> >>>>>> Pilot & parachute…….87Kg
> >>>>>> Total flying weight……270 Kg
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The Maxim Recommended Gross Weight is 205 Kg! Your 65 Kg (143#) over the design gross weight !
> >>>>>> BTW, Here a Woodstock came apart in moderate wave conditions, both wings departed and the pilot was killed! The accident Report didn’t mention anything about ship being overweight or pilot flying in excess of design airspeed limits
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Food for thought,
> >>>>>> JJ
> >>>> There’s one more factor to ponder………..the original Woodstock was a 12 meter sailplane. The builder of your ship poked the span out to over13 + meters! If he didn’t strengthen the spar…….???
> >>>>
> >>>> Over here, we have a small claims court where one can take a misrepresented sale like yours to a judge!
> >>>>
> >>>> Good luck,
> >>>> JJ

On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 1:35:20 PM UTC-4, Dan Marotta wrote:
> I think this is just a question of misunderstanding each other's languages.
>
> I think I read Mr. Ferreira saying that the man who sold the glider to
> him told him lies about the condition of the glider.
>
> Mr. Sinclair said that, in this country (USA) we have small claims court
> where an injured party, Mr Ferreira, can have a judge award him justice
> in the form of compensation.
>
> I think Mr Ferreira misunderstood Mr Sinclair thinking he had been
> accused of some wrong doing. That was not the case.
>
> And, for the record, rec.aviation.soaring, also known as RAS, is not a
> google group. Google just picked it up.
>
> Dan
> 5J
> On 4/14/23 10:34, jose ferreira wrote:
> > First, I didn´t know this google group owned by an specific contry..
> > Second, I didn´t said, even I didn´t know about the control there. He said it, not me.
> > I just asked if any knowledge about glue. I received same feedback from Sinclair and a guy here. Both say it´s epoxy, so ok, thank you.
> > I was blamed several times. First, bucket of worms, I should burn it, then the motor should be removed, then its not ok because 13.1 (there are three variants winspan).., whatever I said, the advice is I should be going to court for selling this. Still don´t know why. The only "suspect" was about the "glue" used by the man who built it, and two persons said me was Epoxy.
> > In the other hand, I asked a glider school on Spain and reported me an story of a Schleicher ASK 13 model. A well known recognized glider manufacturer in Germany. Seems that, this model ASK 13 with 40 or 50 years old, have some accidents. He said me the investigation arrived to a conclusion of the glue used sometimes. They don´t know what serial number used that less good glue, date. Next day I was searching about gliders schools here in Spain and saw that one of that have a ASK 13, so I emailed him again asking why still was using this model. He replied me.. still there are world competition of this model, so I got shocked. There is a known issue with this model because of the years old and some ramdom glue used, but still used on schools, on competition ..., so I guess why no one send Schleicher to court? Regarding the Woodstock, I just received from the local owner aerodrome the advices of "I don´t know what glue he used, the builder died", so its just wonder, research, but seems it doesn´t matter. If Tesla have accidents because some cars accelerete and can´t top till crash, it´s ok, just a software problem. If Schleicher ASK 13 has a know issue related to age and glue discovered on accidents, seems doesn´t matter to stop using them. But.., if I just ask opinion about the glue used on one Woodstock, so I should be judged as soon as posible, because of the motor, the winspan, or whatever? So you say I reply about politics. I´m trying to find out any light about security (neutral), but seems that is more important if the seller is a millionaire or bilionaire company so they are innocent just after paying a penalty fee, but seems I´m presumed guilty. I´m open to any neutral advice, if exists that.
> >
> >
> > El viernes, 14 de abril de 2023 a las 17:57:22 UTC+2, Dan Goldman escribió:
> >> Mr. Sinclair here was trying to help you solve your problem.
> >> You don't seem to want to hear any advice. Instead to go into politics.. That's nasty.
> >> Next time don't ask for advice from people who live in a country with "absolutely no control" regarding aviation.
> >>
> >> Dan G
> >> On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 11:00:08 AM UTC-4, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>> don´t understand the desire to criminalize me,
> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maupin_Woodstock_One
> >>>
> >>> There are 3 variants, 11.9, 12,5 and 13,1 winspan
> >>> Plans and shems are on the web. The builder registered it on the spanish aerial security from start. After years of test and official procedures got the licence from the goverment: https://www.seguridadaerea.gob.es/
> >>>
> >>> If sale a aircraft the have passed all that official procedures and it´s wrong, so my goverment and the own state arerial ageny should be to judge.. not me.
> >>> Today I have beening replying from them that is categorized as microlight aircraft and can be piloted with the respective official license must be got and examined from the own agency.
> >>>
> >>> Curious that you claim me going to court, while you confess there is absolute no control in your country, so anyone can fly whatever he likes? You are making a judgement wrong. Anyone on your contry can built whatever wants and fly it, and die, so is no crime because is not sale, right? but the fly can crash over a home and kill other people.
> >>> You cannot do it here. You must have license to pilot the aircraft, the aircraft must have license, and must have accident insurance for third party cold damage.
> >>> I suppose you are on USA, and seem you feel like that, you are the law and the morality over the world where the others are criminals, while on USA anyone can carry a gun or fly anything. Ironic.
> >>> El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 16:35:09 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> >>>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:50:14 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>>>> Another deail I forgot,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The real owner flew the plane motorized 60 hours before get ill with provisional license, till around 2015.
> >>>>> Later the second owner changed the motor for another one (same or litle less weight, one cylinder instead 3), and ended the license process.
> >>>>> He made a video on that time. The pilot is the colaborator. Data of the video is around 2018. But the thing is that the woodstock was already motorized, so I think must be similar to the 107kg (this one is 13.2 version), maybe a little bit more.
> >>>>> Motor 11kg.
> >>>>> Balistic parachute, around 8kg
> >>>>> Lets consider a pilot of 70kg that should be
> >>>>> 107+11+8+70= 196
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The guy said me it had 30l for fuel on the wings, probably also lie.. But anyway should be not much bandwith for fuel to fit the 205kg, should be theorical 226kg, so you are right, issues to think about
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here is the video: https://youtu.be/GLpCE_QlYk8
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for your tips.
> >>>>> El jueves, 13 de abril de 2023 a las 1:50:07 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> >>>>>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>>>>>> Can´t sent it back, too late. I asked a friend, showed a pic from the fuselage and said is Epoxy, although he say Epoxy is not white, is transparent. I have Epoxy at home for home figures and is transparent, not white.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regarding Spain , to fly legal must pass a large time inspection to get the license, that started 8 years ago. Even you cannot change any other part, like motor, if you do it without the supervision you lost the license.
> >>>>>>> Here are two pics https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OuTicJgLihwi6Qx_hgDPB0kDGJ7l9m_q?usp=share_link
> >>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 21:54:23 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> >>>>>>>> NOn Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 8:31:50 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you. The motor weights 11 kg. The entire Woodstock is about 180kg. I think that 11kg could be the weight difference of a pilot of 80kg or another pilot.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The Woodstock was in a aerodrome for some years since 2015.Climate is quite hot and dry on the south of Spain.
> >>>>>>>>> The glider got the licence to fly date 2022, so I´m not sure if there existe a "known" problem, or instead just "unkown", just because the original builder died between 2015- 2018 so is not posible to ask him what glue used or not. So is not posible to find out if there is any risk or if there isn´t.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> It´s supposed that the glider passed some resistence testing to get the goverment licence, that was 8 years ago. So legally it has the oficcial licence to fly date 2022. Is it secure? I really don´t know..
> >>>>>>>>> If it´s not, its supposed they should not give the glider the licence, but I don´t know how they strict evaluate experimental aircrafts.
> >>>>>>>>> I was just adverstised about the age of the unit, and the unknown glue used, just because the man died.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> But you are right, he should might advertise me before buy it. Now I have the doubt and must burn it? I have no experience. Have contacted to other peple and seem nobody seem to know if there is some security thing to be afraid or not.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> What is the key to consider it a " bucket of worms"?
> >>>>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 15:56:57 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2023 at 5:57:33 AM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 14:54:53 UTC+2, jose ferreira escribió:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> El miércoles, 12 de abril de 2023 a las 1:06:26 UTC+2, John Sinclair escribió:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 3:05:18 PM UTC-7, jose ferreira wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, I have bought a motorized woodstock one. Builder started it at 1993, but he died around 2015 disease.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The man on the Aerodrome, had doubts about the flying security because he said he didn't know the glue was used and since its 30 years old from the start project other is no warranty about flying it secure.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any of you have knowledge about the construction of this glider, so if could be glue degradation depending? I have no idea how to check it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you in advance.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The recommended glue was Hughs Epoxy which is white in color and does not degrade over time.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> JJ
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Don´t know if can be supervised or restored. If anyone want one already built, I have one for sale. Have no idea what glue was used.
> >>>>>>>>>>> I could be flying it, but instructors say could be risky since construction started on 1993, so parts of the glider are 30 years old, so no warranty about the security, I really don´t know.
> >>>>>>>>>> There are wooden gliders more than 90 years old, still flying. The real issue is how it has been maintained and stored, dry-rot is the main issue + the old animal based glue, that hasn’t been used since epoxy glues arrived 50 years ago.
> >>>>>>>>>> I would be more concerned about the addition of a motor to a light weight ship. It has got to be way over gross weight. Nobody in their right mind is going to buy into that bucket of worms!
> >>>>>>>>>> I’d remove the motor, prop, battery and instruments and sell them separately and consider burning the rest. I believe there is liability associated with selling anything with known undisclosed problems!
> >>>>>>>>>> JJ
> >>>>>>>> First things first…………go look at any glue seam on the ship………….if it’s white in color, it’s probably epoxy glue that doesn’t deteriorate!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I don’t know anything about Experimental licensing in Spain, but in the US, there is no testing done by the government, they might try and steer you in a safe direction, but in the end, you’ll be allowed to fly anything in the Experimental Amateur Built category ………..solo!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You said you recently purchased the ship, I’d take it back!
> >>>>>>>> JJ
> >>>>>> Your pictures show what I’m sure is epoxy glue, the designer recommended Hughs Epoxy which is white. Anyway, let’s assume the glue is OK, because epoxy doesn’t degrade much over time! The real issue I would have is your approximately 65 Kg (143 #) OVER design gross weight which is 205Kg (450#).
> >>>>>> Empty weight……180Kg ( your figure)
> >>>>>> Fuel…………………..3kg
> >>>>>> Pilot & parachute…….87Kg
> >>>>>> Total flying weight……270 Kg
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The Maxim Recommended Gross Weight is 205 Kg! Your 65 Kg (143#) over the design gross weight !
> >>>>>> BTW, Here a Woodstock came apart in moderate wave conditions, both wings departed and the pilot was killed! The accident Report didn’t mention anything about ship being overweight or pilot flying in excess of design airspeed limits
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Food for thought,
> >>>>>> JJ
> >>>> There’s one more factor to ponder………..the original Woodstock was a 12 meter sailplane. The builder of your ship poked the span out to over13 + meters! If he didn’t strengthen the spar…….???
> >>>>
> >>>> Over here, we have a small claims court where one can take a misrepresented sale like yours to a judge!
> >>>>
> >>>> Good luck,
> >>>> JJ
Thank you Dan for a succinct explanation of the confusion of this thread.
I never saw a "dig" on the OP (Mr. Ferreira), but I can see how things "got lost in the translation".

That is true everywhere!

Good luck on your journey into soaring.

Dan
5J

On 4/14/23 12:01, jose ferreira wrote:
> Aviation is complicated and expensive.

On 4/14/2023 11:35 AM, Dan Marotta wrote:
> I think this is just a question of misunderstanding each other's
> languages.
>
> I think I read Mr. Ferreira saying that the man who sold the glider to him
> told him lies about the condition of the glider.
>
> Mr. Sinclair said that, in this country (USA) we have small claims court
> where an injured party, Mr Ferreira, can have a judge award him justice in
> the form of compensation.
>
> I think Mr Ferreira misunderstood Mr Sinclair thinking he had been accused
> of some wrong doing. That was not the case.
>
> And, for the record, rec.aviation.soaring, also known as RAS, is not a
> google group. Google just picked it up.
>
> Dan 5J

Excellent summary by Dan M. It exactly matches my sense of "where & how this
RAS discussion has gone..."

It's true aviation is technical...as are airplanes/sailplanes/etc. Things
quickly can get complicated, as Mr. Ferreira is learning to his dismay. Get
things wrong and it's easy to kill yourself.

That noted, I'm mildly surprised no one has yet mentioned to Mr. Ferreira the
ancient aviation industry axiom: One test is worth 10,000 considered opinions.
It would be complicated to properly do, but a proof-load-test of wings of the
Woodstock in question would be highly instructive, while simultaneously
generating Real World Data - and maybe even some peace of mind.

Good luck going forward!

Bob W.

The seller had videos on youtube with the load testing. Tons of weight over the wings. That was 8 years ago in the goverment aerial license process. The Woodstock only flied for license testing from then.
Anyway I made a wrong decision purchasing this glider. Teachers and ultralight school have their own interested. I haven´t found no support or interested to fly the Woodstock. I even still don´t know how to set firm the parachute (the seller gived all me disarmed on the trailer).
It´s single seat, rare unit. Guys with experience fly expensive modern gliders or motorgliders, or rent the shool ones. Ultralight schools don´t fly gliders, and there are very few glider school at 600km or 1000km from me, with other license and higher price.
My wife don´t like me to fly anything. So what was easy on my imagination converted on a large list of problems.
It should be better me got in to this world in a easier way. Theare are Ala Delta motorized that can fly at 30-35kmh that should be enough for start. You can take off and land anywhere a clean meadow. The Woodstock should be a rara avis, 1 hour and a half, or more aerodrome from my home, difficult to fly, take off and land with one wheel, and I should be alone, no support of help.
And in addition, is difficult to resale, nobody wants buy this glider, that is like a "do-it-yourself" one. Most users go for know high priced ones, or renting, and that may be way (if can afford it).
Thank you for your replies.

El sábado, 15 de abril de 2023 a las 1:18:26 UTC+2, BobW escribió:
> On 4/14/2023 11:35 AM, Dan Marotta wrote:
> > I think this is just a question of misunderstanding each other's
> > languages.
> >
> > I think I read Mr. Ferreira saying that the man who sold the glider to him
> > told him lies about the condition of the glider.
> >
> > Mr. Sinclair said that, in this country (USA) we have small claims court
> > where an injured party, Mr Ferreira, can have a judge award him justice in
> > the form of compensation.
> >
> > I think Mr Ferreira misunderstood Mr Sinclair thinking he had been accused
> > of some wrong doing. That was not the case.
> >
> > And, for the record, rec.aviation.soaring, also known as RAS, is not a
> > google group. Google just picked it up.
> >
> > Dan 5J
> Excellent summary by Dan M. It exactly matches my sense of "where & how this
> RAS discussion has gone..."
>
> It's true aviation is technical...as are airplanes/sailplanes/etc. Things
> quickly can get complicated, as Mr. Ferreira is learning to his dismay. Get
> things wrong and it's easy to kill yourself.
>
> That noted, I'm mildly surprised no one has yet mentioned to Mr. Ferreira the
> ancient aviation industry axiom: One test is worth 10,000 considered opinions.
> It would be complicated to properly do, but a proof-load-test of wings of the
> Woodstock in question would be highly instructive, while simultaneously
> generating Real World Data - and maybe even some peace of mind.
>
> Good luck going forward!
>
> Bob W.

> My wife don´t like me to fly anything.

Maybe you should listen to your wife!
JJ

Happy wife, happy life!

On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 7:44:41 PM UTC-7, John Sinclair wrote:
> > My wife don´t like me to fly anything.
> Maybe you should listen to your wife!
> JJ