Jay Honeck wrote:
: Just curious. In your view, how is a Cessna "better engineered" than a
: Piper?

: I've flown them both, seen the insides of both, and both brands appear to be
: almost identical in both performance and design, other than the wing being
: in the wrong place on Cessnas. And they have both proven, over time, to be
: extremely durable, classic designs.
: --

Basically, Cessna made every model specific to its own target engineering
specs. For example, the 170/172/175/177 are all different in many ways other than
engines. Even within a specific model, things were changed a lot, resulting in lots
of trial/error. Some design tweaks were good, some notsomuch. Ignoring the high/low
wing issue, a 172 with 150hp engine is a lot better on a grass strip than a
PA-28-140/150 since it's a little lighter and has a better airfoil. By the book,
however, I believe a -140 cruises a bit faster, even though it takes more runway to
get off.

If you look at what Piper did, they had a design and pretty much stuck with
it, changing things only as necessary. Consider the stabilator on Arrows vs. older
-140's. Just additional chunks riveted on to make them wider. The -235 uses the same
wing, just with fueltank/wingtip/wing extensions added. Consider:

Pacer/Tri-Pacer/Colt
Apache/Aztruck
PA24-180/250/260/400/twin - all have the same wing spar, for example
PA28-140/150/160/180/235
etc

... just bolt on the changes you need and pump 'em out. It makes for a
less expensive product that may not be an optimal design for any one, but is adequate
for all.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************