"Understanding Aircraft Composite Construction"

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 18:08:04 +0000, Ernest Christley wrote:

snip

I agree that this thing is a tank, and I like it that way. A double steel
cage protects you if you go down in the trees, vs the layer of aluminum
foil that you'd have in a Cessna 150.

I'm confused about that FAA comment, though. It's my understanding that
the FAA can laugh all they want, but they don't really have the power to
say yay or nay in regards to material choice. Of course, that may have
been the case 40yrs ago when the design first came out; however, glass
has progressed quite a bit since that time and it is my understanding that
the FAA has progressively moved to a 'just check the paperwork stance' and
is less into checking the actual details.

snip

I personally chose Jyhn Dyke's design because it's primary structure is
not composite. Just a personal preferance tho'.

I did hear that the reason John did'nt design it in glass is that it is
just much easier to do a structural analysis on tube than glass.

Thats my bit,

Mike