(Taking off from 2008 Arlington Fly-in, photo by Bob Johnson)

It was imported to the U.S. in November of 1975 by Collin Gyenes' father (Charles) and his partner (Phil Paul) of Aerosport in Long Beach, CA.

Over the years, the owners have been (according to FAA public records):

November 1975	Phil Paul/Charles Gyenes (Aerosport)	Long Beach, CA
March 1976	C.C. Holt (Glider Aero)	Houston, TX
July 1977	David Hassenmiller	Dallas, Texas
August 1978	Joan L. Boesch dba Jovic Leasing	New Farfield, CT
August 1981	Doreen O'Connor, VP, Long Island Motor Gliding, Inc.	Lindenhurst, NY
December 1983	Dennis T. Guilfoyle	Stratham, NH
May 1998	Terry Thornton	Salina, KS
March 2004	Alexander Rossulek	Ferryville, WI
June 2006	James Bavendam	Mercer Island, WA

So, it seems that there are no famous previous owners that would wildly inflate its value. Too bad. Early in its life, it was sold every few years. The most recent owners have tended to keep it the longest. Thornton and Rossulek both had a number of airplanes, so N99809 was an occasional distraction. Since 2006 it has been my sole aircraft, so it has probably been flown more in the past few years than it had been for many years.

In late 2005 or early 2006, I found N99809 through a web search. I had been looking for my own airplane for almost a year. I knew that most of my flying would be just a few hours on nice afternoons, but I did want to be able to go a longer distance if I wanted. With many short flights, it seemed that any typical airplane would get boring. Within a year or two, I would have gone everywhere I could go within a few hours…multiple times. So, I was concerned about buying a typical 172.

Eliminating alternatives
Ok, so what I really wanted was a 1929 TravelAir or Waco biplane. But talking to the owners made it clear that they spent most of their time working on the airplanes (although some of that may have been a personal choice). You had to slip on final if you were going to see the runway at all. I kept reading how parts were getting harder to get for the older radial engines, and there were fewer people to rebuild them. Fuel consumption was high. And the 4:1 L/D was a concern. At one point, I paid for a ride in a Waco. While flying along, I asked the age-old-CFI question, "If the engine went out, where could we land." The pilot just laughed and said, "Hell, just throw a brick over the side and we'll fly formation with it to the ground. Don't expect to be glidin' anywhere." So, smash a dream (for now) and find something more efficient and practical. [sigh]

My interest in biplanes made it clear to me that I did like vintage construction. While some pilots really like composite or metal, I tend to be drawn to wood and rag, or tube and rag construction.

I had grown up sailing and knew that you could keep your interest in a sailboat on a small lake far longer than you can keep your interest in a small motorboat on the same lake. Soaring was a possibility. But there were no glider clubs within a reasonable driving distance and a glider (in my own mind) really wasn't a traveling machine. But a motorglider seemed like an interesting possibility.

A glider with a sustainer engine, with just enough power to take off and gain enough altitude to shut off, would give me the best gliding experience. But it wasn't an airplane you would choose for a cross-country trip. But a touring motorglider (like a Ximango or Diamond Xtreme) would actually let me go somewhere. Not fast, but doable.

I liked the Xtreme a little better, but the wings didn't fold well (at that time), so it had to be tied down outside or put in a ridiculously large hangar. The problem was that both of those gliders were expensive ($80K - $180K). Even if I had the money in the bank, spending that much money on entertainment made me uncomfortable. So, a Grob 109 seemed more likely. But many of them were left outside and were pretty rough. So….more searching.

Found it
I'd love to claim that I found N99809 through a careful, strategic search of design alternatives. Uh...not really. Via one of many general Internet searches for "motorgliders," I happened across N99809 on its sales website. [cue, wolf whistle] What a looker! I thought it was just great looking…but assumed it was too exotic and would cost too much. Finally, I decided to call Dave McConeghey, the sales agent listed in the ad. Dave turned out to be a great guy, a many-thousand-hour ATP and a CFI-G representing Alex Rossulek. The price was more reasonable than I expected; the design and construction more interesting than I expected.

The fuselage was wood. Wings were wood with cloth covering. So, it had a vintage feel to it, yet it was constructed in 1975, so it would use current materials, parts and glues. The engine was a Limbach, so rebuilding it would be cheaper than a Lycoming. It flew about 85-95mph at 2.5-3 gph. So it was economical and had the overall performance right in line with some of the vintage aircraft that I found acceptable. With a 28:1 L/D, it was much safer in an engine-out situation. One issue for me are landing and stall speeds. If you have to come in fast, off-airport landings are going to hurt: at least your pocket book and most likely, you. But the RF5B stalled at 42 mph, so it could come in quite slowly. No significant AD's. It all looked really good. Why weren't there more of these?

Partly, motorgliders have never been popular in the U.S. (Historically, the U.S. market has preferred aircraft that can travel long distances at high speeds.) But the RF-5B, while certificated in Europe, was Experimental Exhibition in the U.S. So, it had no commercial use and, depending on how its Airworthiness Certificate was written, might need permission every time you want to leave a prescribed area. N99809 had no such limitations. While you couldn't use it for commercial activities and couldn't fly over congested areas (other than approaching or departing an airport), there were no other specific limitations. As an experimental, modifications and maintenance would be easier. Excellent!

Dave helped me contact other present and former owners to get their feedback. Everone I talked to uniformly loved the aircraft. If they didn't love the one they owned, they wish they had never sold the one they used to own. The biggest problem I ran into was that the RF-5B was so unique, I couldn't find a local A&P to do a pre-purchase inspection. So, I had to resign to having the A&P who had been doing the work on the aircraft to do an annual on it. That turned out to be a somewhat rubber stamp affair. But as luck would have it, nothing was so wrong on the aircraft or so expensive, that it couldn't be replaced or rebuilt. This may be an odd distinction, but I was not looking for 'cheap flying.' I did want the airplane to be reasonably economical (as I had met a number of pilots over the years who sold their aircraft due to high fixed or operating expenses). I wanted an aircraft I could use into retirement. But, I wanted something that was high quality. I had no interest in 'cutting corners.' The RF-5B fit that criteria.

We get our first look at N99809 as it taxies in for the first time

Alex and James taxi out for the demo flight

The air show meant we taxied among very different aircraft than you'd usually find on the ramp