Rec.Aviation OSH report
"Ron Wanttaja" wrote
Don't know why it would make a difference, tax-wise.
My guess is that it's a combination of factors. "Prototype" implies it is
the
first aircraft of a series of aircraft, and Cessna may not yet have Board
of
Directors' approval to start production.
Also, if major changes have to be made (such as a switch to another
engine), the
"spin control" is easier with a "Proof of Concept." Big changes between
the
"Prototype" and the production aircraft implies some faulty decisions
during the
design process, but if you call it a "Proof of Concept" you can just
claim,
"Well, we were just trying different ideas, pushing the envelope, that
sort of
thing." Then you build a "prototype" that closely matches the production
model.
I can't figure out why they chose the Rotax. Wouldn't an O-200 work well in
that plane?
I'll bet the FBO's would be more comfortable with a regular 'ole engine in
it, that they know and understand how to work on.
--
Jim in NC
|