Peter Dohm wrote:

The Ercoupe has one worse sin from my point of view -- the cabin in small!
At 6'1" I could ride in one, but really don't see why I should do so.
If it was 4" wider and 4" higher inside, it would be as comfortable as a
Tomahawk. ;-)

Peter
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Nonsense...
SMALL is relative and in the eye of the beholder.

Try a Mooney Mite, Luscombe 8A, Cessna 140 or Smith
Mini-Plane on for size, as just a few samples that are not 4 U.
If you can't fit, it sez more about you than it says about any plane.
With all that floorboard room and no rudder pedals getting in
one's way, I can stretch out more comfortably in a Coupe than
any other 65/85 horsepower airplane in its ancient GA class.

BTW....
The Tomahawk is better known as the Tramahawk
and has NO ardent supporters among the professional
pilots and flight instructors I get to talk to that fly 'em a lot.

Market prices for Tomahwaks are as much depressed
as the Ercoupe, so it's hardly a good example of what
the general flying public wants to put in their hangars.

P.S.
I'll leave any airplane that doesn't fit your frame up to
you cuss and fuss, while guys like me are happier
than a dead pig in the sunshine flying most anything
out there with wings.


Barnyard BOb -- 50 years of flight