On Aug 27, 6:49*am, Stealth Pilot wrote:
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 19:17:36 -0700 (PDT), Mark





wrote:
On Aug 26, 7:30*am, Ron wrote:
And the point of this copyright infrigement is?

Well, sorry for posting it in it's entirety.
Selected paragraphs would've been better.

The point was to ask whether tractor vs pusher
is simply a matter of personal taste, or really a
matter of performance.

You don't see that many people talking about
Cozys and Velocities. The Long ez kit isn't
offered anymore.

---
Mark

problem with pushers is one single dropped anything in the engine bay
will eventually impact the prop in flight.
I can point you to an mt prop with the perfect impression of an
aircraft washer about 6" out from the hub..

the other problem is that a canard can never extract as much
performance from the wing.

sideslips in a tractor aircraft are easy. you never hear of the
deviations from heading that occur in a canard. I'm told they can be
attention getting.

crashworthiness of an aircraft is directly related to the speed at
landing/impact. a tractor aircraft can extract more from the wing and
can be landed slower than a canard.

separately from that the pushers were all composite aircraft.
the crashworthiness of some composite aircraft has been a little less
than tin aircraft shall we say.

so without the evangelists out *there doing the sell on the designs
interest tends to focus back on the aspects that are less than ideal.
plus also vans has produced some good flying aircraft that almost
anyone can build with assurance that they will end up with an aircraft
worth the build.

the lightest aircraft you can build has a prop up front.

Stealth Pilot- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thank you very much.

---
Mark