Right, lets say you've decided the world needs a cheap, good airframe into which to put the latest avionics and engines and what-not...
You don't want to re-invent the wheel, you just want the end-user to get the most bang for their buck, whilst shifting 2 - 4 people (your choice!) in an aircraft designed to certifiable standards. Your "cunning" plan is to persuade some firm that's already done the hard design work to flog it to you for pennies on the dollar.
I have to confess I've left the question very open because I'm as curious about how people define 'bang', as well as the airframe candidates people put forward. It doesn't even absolutely *have* to have been produced; for example the BD-4C is designed to meet FAR part-23 requirements, and it's demonstrably a worthy candidate for a kit-plane that'd seem to to deliver a lot of bang for one's buck...
My pick would be the Republic Fairchild RC-3 Seabee. Would anyone else care to throw an airframe into the ring?
You don't want to re-invent the wheel, you just want the end-user to get the most bang for their buck, whilst shifting 2 - 4 people (your choice!) in an aircraft designed to certifiable standards. Your "cunning" plan is to persuade some firm that's already done the hard design work to flog it to you for pennies on the dollar.
I have to confess I've left the question very open because I'm as curious about how people define 'bang', as well as the airframe candidates people put forward. It doesn't even absolutely *have* to have been produced; for example the BD-4C is designed to meet FAR part-23 requirements, and it's demonstrably a worthy candidate for a kit-plane that'd seem to to deliver a lot of bang for one's buck...
My pick would be the Republic Fairchild RC-3 Seabee. Would anyone else care to throw an airframe into the ring?
Attachments
Last edited:
