Ok, what about the BD5

"anon" wrote in message
m...

"wesley maceaux" wrote in message
...
It's a good looking little plane..The rotax 912uls should give this plane
a real boost in performance .Always wanted one but the stall speed was
way too high for me.A stall of 40knts would be great but no dice.

My father had a friend that owned one and he loved it. I'm not sure what
powerplant he used, but the fact that he probably didn't weigh over
160lbs, was an Air Force pilot, and built light - probably helped the
cause.

I think a lot of Cessna 150/172 guys found more they could handle in the
BD-5, especially after losing an engine. I think if more BD-5 pilots
were less concerned about getting back to the airport after an engine
failure and more concerned with maintaining airspeed, we'd have a few more
BD-5 pilots.

Do the stats back that up in any way?

MOST DEFINITELY. And it never ceases to amaze me how many people flying ANY
type of aircraft buy the farm because of this.

That said, designing around an unproven engine is probably a bad place to
start. Designing around an engine that hasn't been produced, probably a
bigger problem. I forget the details. What did the prototypes fly with?

It's all on my website's library.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com