For many years at Oshkosh, I visited with Van in the dormitory where he and his employees, and I, stayed. Just a quiet one-on-one for 30 or 45 minutes. I usually was asking about his motorglider project, the latest RV, some engineering detail, etc. In turn, he continually asked me what I liked about his designs and what I would like to see in future Vans designs. He always was doing market surveys.I'm far more of a 'salesman personality' than Van is, but I'll bet he has marketing and sales and advertising people like me tucked away in a drawer someplace.
Lol it’s your brag I kinda think it’s your responsibility to back it up with numbers .Yes, I do know how to do a search on the NTSB website. Start with just Idaho if you'd like. You can play dumb but the truth is there are many accidents and incidents occuring in the back country.
Essentially there are two types of back country performance.
Oh honey I’ve gained weight and I am up to 80 pounds soaking wet but I still manage to land in 3 1/2 inches
The fat man’s of America moose hunting convention Will be held on a mountaintop in western Alaska 600 miles from fuel, be sure to bring supplies for a week and due to parking limitations four per plane are required .
Didn't say it wouldn't or couldn't. Look back. I never said that at all.Yeah, you're probably right. Cantilever won't hold up to back country use
Bingo. Lots of screwing around and complexity to do what a simple fat(ish) wing does and for what? A little extra speed? A clean low drag design and a simple wing wins in my book.If we focus on the low-and-slow corner of the envelope ....Which is better?
A: Cub wing much modified with slats, slots, flaps, drooped ailerons, drooped leading edges, vortex generators, spoilers, dive brakes, spoilers, vortex generators, etc.
B: A wing optimized for low-and-slow with a thick airfoil, large leading edge radius, significant camber, etc.
Hint: both airplanes start with massive wings which significantly blower wing-loading.