"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

What's wrong with high wings. There's others besides the cub, namely
the immensely popular Cessna 150/152 (and it's taildragging predecessor
the 120/140).



Absolutely nothing wrong with high wings. It's just my personal preference.

For what I have seen high wings in my price range tend to be sturdier (nice
to land on soft fields, at least if you kick up some stones you won't dig a
hole in your high wing, you could potentially do that in a low wing), a tad
more stable (not for nothing most trainers are 172) but a bit slower and
with less range. At least that's what I have seen around.

Again, just a question of preference, really (and I like the looks of low
wings ). As someone replied in this thread, some of these low-wing 2
seaters are like little sports cars. No Lamborghini Diablo, that's for sure,
but they look slick and perform decently (for planes in the 30k range)

--
Marco Rispoli - NJ, USA
You can read my flight training diary at
http://www.tranceweb.net