There's nothing 'wrong' with the designs but there's not a design out there that can't be improved. It's just the nature of engineering. You learn from the first ones off the line (or out of the garages/hangars in this case) and then make a great design even better.Quote:
There is nothing the RV-7 structure need to be a safe and proven aircraft. There's a reason there are more RVs flying than any other homebuilt design.
Oh no, no more projects (I have 3 now) I have a soft spot for the war era aircraft but enough is enough!:PQuote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Boatright
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Boatright
Hard decision between the two classic biplanes. How about you buy Kyle's Hatz project, and then follow KDoersom's advice on the EAA staff build & magazine articles?Quote:
Originally Posted by KDoersom
There are some terrific choices on that list and I'd love to have one of each. But for practical purposes and to serve my own infectious love affair needs it's the Icon A5 for me.
Actually, anything on the list except the 182, ICON or the electric.
I already own an RV9A so the restored 182 would be my choice. And make it the good looking B model with swept tail and fastback fuselage. While we're dreaming, pay the taxes, too. Else it's "Airplane for Sale".
If a RV-10 is not available, I would go for the 182.
Gotta be the Icon A5 Amphibian for me! Remember it works on either land or water ... it has folding wings ... and you can trailer it and park it in your garage at home therefore no hangar fees! Or for the RV enthusiasts out there, take it with you on an RV trip around the country.
I've seen a lot of very nice aircraft that I've wanted go to a winner other than me. I can say with conviction that an ICON A5 would be a good option.
Why is that? I've never seen one in person let alone flown one so I'd be interested as to what makes it a good choice.Quote:
I can say with conviction that an ICON A5 would be a good option.