Pulsar

"Richard Riley" wrote in message
...

No, my objection is that you would be giving money to a rat *******
that killed a lot of people with inadequate engineering in the BD-5
and 10

Riley, you're still clueless after all these years. The BD-10's crashed
AFTER Bede was removed from the program by the investors, and virtually ALL
the BD-5 crashes are due to pilot error and doing some very stupid things
that stupid pilots do in all kinds of homebuilts (like trying to be a test
pilot after four years of building and zero flying).

destroyed a generation of homebuilders and set the industry back 20 years.

What bull****. I guess Van's should have had 8,000 airplanes flying by now
and EAA should have twice the number of members, and Bede is to blame, eh?
What drugs are you on this week?

The 5 remains a deadly airplane, with a sharp and unforgiving stall, no
occupant protection and an unreliable engine.

More bull****. There are people with 800 to 1500+ hours on their BD-5's. No
BD-5 with a properly shaped wing skin has a sharp stall and the BD-5 stall
even with the _wrong_ skin has NEVER been "unforgiving". Most homebuilts
have as much or as little protection as a BD-5, but obviously you're still
whining about the few bucks you lost so it's not enough. And which
"unreliable" engine are you talking about? The Rotax 582? The Subaru EA-81?
The Honda EB-1 or EB-2? Or are you talking out of your butt yet again?

mercy snip

If it came down to flying a product from Bede and not flying at all, I
would not fly at all.

So stay on the ground and spare us your BS about things of which you don't
have a clue.