After my Breeezy trip to Tx and back, I want something that gives the same feeling, but is slightly more civilized.

So a bunch of Aircam questions?
I have taken the breezy up and down the sierra's and across the rockies 4 times. The breezy does really poorly with density altitude.
So how much additional cost is the 914 over the 912?
How much more gas does the 914 burn?

I have my breezy configured to put the passenger in the front seat,
If I wanted the same configuration in an aircam, how much forward ballast would I need to solo from the back seat? (I'm 220 lbs)
What is the general W+B /CG situation with an AirCam?

Alternatively how hard would it be to configure the plane to fly from either seat?
Modern Avionics with remote radio, transponder etc...probably help here, but things like the engine switches etc...

Buy vs build a new one... looks like Gen 1 are significantly lower cost than Gen 2/3?

What are the differences between the Gen 1, Gen 2 and Gen 3 Aircams?
Really like the idea of the full enclosure that can be removed...

I currently do not have much tailwheel time...
How is the aircam in that department?
(I first learned to fly a J3 on wheels, but that was aged 12 with my Dad.
before I started logging any thing in a logbook. First landing I ever did 100% without his input was a J3 on a gravel bar. ~48 years ago)

I've 100+ hours logged in Cubs, and C180/185, but all on floats.

Since you asked those questions here, My suggestion would be to call Phil Lockwood or Robert Meyers at Lockwood and ask them your questions.

They are probably THE experts on any and all type of Rotax engines and of course all things AirCam. You would receive expert answers and not potential speculation.

Martin

PS - I LOVE AirCams and am impressed you took your BREEZY over the Sierras!

I'll call lockwood when they are in the office next week....
When I bought the breezy I wanted an Aircam, but could not afford it...

Good idea to talk with Phil. You’ll get the answers to all your questions.

I’ve never seen one flown single pilot from the back seat. W&B dictates front seat or enough ballast in the front to come close to a person. I personally prefer being up front when flying with a passenger but others may prefer the back. I enjoy the view being out in front. The W&B calculation spreadsheets should be available on aircam.com.

The 912’s might be enough for what you want to do. There’s a lot of extra HP available during normal flight. Adding the big bore kits gets an extra 15 hp per side for a total of 230 hp.

I have mine on floats but flew the first 40 hrs on conventional gear. I did not have much tail wheel time and had no issues. You can get transition training in an AirCam at Lockwood in Sebring.

You can easily configure it with switches front and rear if you want.

Building vs buying will of course be up to you. I think most people are building gen 3’s now but I think you could still get the gen 2 if you wanted. I’ll do a gen 3 if I build another one (mines a 2).

Hope this helps! I think if you enjoy having the Breezy you’ll love the aircam!

Tom

I’m not familiar with the details on a gen 1. The gen 2 and 3 look almost the same with the main difference being the ability to have a third seat and higher gross weight with the gen 3. The gen 3 has increased structural strength to accommodate the extra weigh of the third person.

Tom

Paul,

I’m on my second AirCam, both on wheels, one with a full canopy and enclosure, one without.

You certainly can put the 914 on the AirCam, but I’ve had my open cockpit AirCam (Gen 1) to 10,500’ and my full enclosure (Gen 2) to 11,500’ with the 912 ULS engines.

Gen 1 was not designed for floats, Gen 2 designed for floats or wheels, Gen 3 can have 3 seats, floats or wheels and has strengthened gear and center box for the higher gross weight. Gen 1 and 2 MTOGW is 1,680, Gen 3 is 1,980.

Because the engines are on the rear of the wing, you would need a lot of weight (150#) to solo from the back seat, but most AirCams don’t have rear ignition switches, so you wouldn’t be able to shut down the engine if needed. An empty AirCam is WAY out of CG due to engine location, you need all solo weight in the front seat.

Most AirCams also don’t have a full avionics/radio panel in the rear seat, the stock airframe comes with a basic set of analog instruments in the back. My Gen 2 has a full Dynon 10” in the back which is really nice.

I don’t have the tools, skills or patience to build an AirCam. With about 300 on the street, I recommend you search barnstormers.com, they come up for sale quite often. Just the kit from Lockwood (unassembled) is about $150K.

Flying the AirCam maybe the easiest tail wheel to fly due to the weight on the tail. It takes some training and time, but it’s better than a Champ or a Cub in my opinion.

Go for it!

Butch

Well!!!?????!!!


What were the answers?

Inquiring minds…


Martin

Response I got today from an Email I sent Friday afternoon...
thank you for your interest in the AIrCam.

Wow! 2,500 miles in a Breezy. That’s quite a trip.

The power choices for the AIrCam are:
100hp Rotax 912ULS which can be modified with a big bore kit to produce approximately 115 hp.
100 hp Rotax 912iS (electronically fuel injected)
115hp Rotax 914 (turbo charged)
The 141hp 915iS is too heavy (X2) for the AIrCam and thus present weigh and balance and useful load issues.

The 914 engines will produce maximum continuous power up to 15,000 ft so they are a good choice for high altitude flying. The normally aspirated engines also do well up at altitudes of 10,000+ ft . The main difference is the single engine performance can be maintained at high altitudes with the turbos. The 914 engine package is priced on demand. I’ve copied Tish on this email and she can let you know the current price on that package this week. The 914 engines will burn about the same amount of fuel as the stock 100hp 912ULS which is about 3.5 gph per side at 85mph indicated ASI. That works out to 100 mph True ASI at 10,000 ft.

The 912iS engines do perform very well up high with fuel consumption of about 15% less than the carbureted 912ULS and the 914.

You solo the Aircam from the front seat which is the best place to be. You can fly from the second seat as long as someone is in the front seat. All Aircam’s have control stick, Rudder pedals (with toe brakes) and throttles in both the front and second seat.

The AirCam can be flown fully enclosed or totally open and can be converted from one to the other configuration in 30 min. The full enclosure is optional but recommended for high altitude flying.

Only two Gen 1 AirCams were built. One for the National Geographic reaserch project and cover story on the Ndoki rain forest in northern Congo and a second for testing and research. AirCam number currently resides in the EAA air museum in Oshkosh WI.

Most AirCams produced were gen 2 models. They have 2 seats and a max gross weight on wheels of 1,680 lbs. The gen 3 AirCams have the option for 3 seats with a max gross weight of 1,900 lbs.

If you go to our web page and view the second video there is a detailed explanation of the differences.

Best regards,
Phil

>I personally prefer being up front when flying with a passenger
>but others may prefer the back. I enjoy the view being out in front.

It all depends on the reason for the flight, going off solo I'd much prefer the front and the view... if the point is to give someone else a once in a lifetime experience, the front seat can't be beat. My breezy ownership has been 90% about giving other people a once in a life time experience. My recent trip to TX and back was only the 2nd time I've used the breezy for my own personal purposes.. The only other time I used the breezy from my own solo purposes was using the breezy to scout out a marginal landing site before taking the 182 there. Even on that trip I gave a bunch of rides before returning....

I ran into a fly in of Aircams on Long Island Bahamas a few years back. Amazing group of people and great stories. I was told in the non enclosed version the back seat gets a buffet that is uncomfortable on long trips. My wife and I both got a flight in one from the front seat. amazingly fun to be skimming the waves, idle an engine and climb out like nothing happened. Two engine climb feels like an elevator. Big fan of that aircraft.
Kevin

Paul,

Be advised that the bigger engines (I believe) come with constant speed props. This increases empty weight, for not a lot of benefit, unless you plan on flying really high or out west.

Most guys use Warp Drive ground adjustable props, not that expensive and very reliable.

Butch