Fri Aug 16, 2019 10:17 am
#1713218
@stevelup said,
How about :-flown in Auster pleasure-flight in late 1950's Aeronca Chief
Yep, I'm a competent Armstrong -starter Rans s6 Cessna s;- 152 ,172
Quik Flexwing.
The suggestion that all the reams of paperwork and resultant expense are applied to shoddy design and execution does not bear scrutiny. Formula 1 cars are also built ultra-light,but they have strength and engineering-integrity. One could also argue they have superior crash-resistance to the average light aircraft.
Personal impressions.
Aeronca...tough, stood the test of time. Spamcans took full advantage of materials and technical advances from war. Again, tough as old boots,weight and strength where it mattered.
Rans...built down to a weight and it showed. like a F1 -car, not built for longevity (small wear-margins)
Quik. Surprisingly strongly built,capable of over 100 mph. (manufacturer P&M gone bust,partly due to regulatory cost-burden making them too dear.I suspect)

Have you seen a typical light aircraft close up?
How about :-flown in Auster pleasure-flight in late 1950's Aeronca Chief
Yep, I'm a competent Armstrong -starter Rans s6 Cessna s;- 152 ,172
Quik Flexwing.
The suggestion that all the reams of paperwork and resultant expense are applied to shoddy design and execution does not bear scrutiny. Formula 1 cars are also built ultra-light,but they have strength and engineering-integrity. One could also argue they have superior crash-resistance to the average light aircraft.
Personal impressions.
Aeronca...tough, stood the test of time. Spamcans took full advantage of materials and technical advances from war. Again, tough as old boots,weight and strength where it mattered.
Rans...built down to a weight and it showed. like a F1 -car, not built for longevity (small wear-margins)
Quik. Surprisingly strongly built,capable of over 100 mph. (manufacturer P&M gone bust,partly due to regulatory cost-burden making them too dear.I suspect)