Experimental Aviation good or bad

Experimental (EAB) Pilots

  • Good for GA

    Votes: 63 100.0%

  • Bad for GA

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    63
  • Poll closed .
K

Ken Kopp

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
14
Display Name
Display name:
Kenneth Kopp
Curious how the GA population at large views EAB pilots.

Try to keep it civil...
 
I view them as generally good. Except the RV groups that have a 50 plane fly-in and make a straight-in approach, one after another, when a student is in the pattern. I'm hoping they are a small minority.
 
Every contact with builders has been a very positive.

Pilots on the other hand, not so much..
 
I wonder if there was a way to provide for a more mainstream way for Experimentals to be used for limited business purposes, if some of the stigma apparently associated with them might go away. I've seen a few "experimental aircraft" that would be really good for say a fast, efficient freight service - and that would not really endanger passenger lives. As it is, you have the aircraft generally restricted to a group of pilots that are on the recreational / travel side.
I'm generally for Experimental stuff, with some exceptions - such as when it is done in a haphazard manner.

Ryan
 
Experimental is very good. It allows people to do innovations that the certified world probably will never see. Plus, it means that one day I might be able to put some of those ideas together into a plane that I want to without the hassles of certification.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Experimental is very good. It allows people to do innovations that the certified world probably will never see. Plus, it means that one day I might be able to put some of those ideas together into a plane that I want to without the hassles of certification.
Click to expand...

Many of the new things we see on certified airplanes were developed by experimenters and found on homebuilts long before manufacturers appropriated them. Winglets. Glass panels. Synthetic vision. Composite construction. I'm sure there are more. The Cessna Corvalis started out as a homebuilt/kitplane (Lancair), as did the American Aviation/Grumman singles (Jim Bede's designs). The Pazmany PL-2 was a homebuilt that India's air force produced in quantity as a trainer.

Dan
 
I've always thought of experimental as good although there's no way I would build an airplane, or anything else.
 
Most EAB pilots are tolerable, but some have given aviation a bad name - like Orville and Wilbur Wright. High school dropouts have no business designing airplanes!
:wink2:
 
Good.

(Yeah we're having that other thread on certain folks doing stupid things with their heads up-and-locked in traffic patterns, but they're not the majority of Experimental folk.)
 
I am not an EAB, nor do I aspire to ever be one. I likely wouldn't fly in anything I've built with my own two hands (and ten thumbs) :D

I am in awe of what EAB pilots/builders achieve, often singlehandedly.

I think they are the only innovators currently within GA. While I enjoy nearly everything at Osh, it is always a new/exciting EAB design that sizzles in my brain for weeks and months after the flight home.

I can't fathom what arguments could even be made for "EAB is bad for GA", and I'm glad the poll, as of this moment, is unanimously pro-EAB.

It may be the only viable GA option left in 10 years.
 
In spite of the tone of that other thread, the issue is not 'GA Vs EAB'.

I notice the poll results are currently 38 in favor, 0 against. The EAA counts among it's membership many who fly other than EXP aircraft. There is strong support fror EAB. It's easy to keep this civil.
 
Richard said:
In spite of the tone of that other thread, the issue is not 'GA Vs EAB'.

I notice the poll results are currently 38 in favor, 0 against. The EAA counts among it's membership many who fly other than EXP aircraft. There is strong support fror EAB. It's easy to keep this civil.
Click to expand...


Yep, and I'm an EAA member also.

Of course experimental anything is "good," as long as it does not precipitate harm -- then costs and benefits have to be considered.

IMHO civil aviation stagnated once government oversight was imposed. The designer of the first Aeronca bought an airplane and taught himself to fly it (with attendant crack-ups).

He later designed the C-2 (and more successful C-3) -- the first GA airplane and progenitor to all personal, light aircraft. "Government oversight" was non-existent then, but ended all production of the C-3 in 1937 when new airworthiness standards made the C-3 "non-airworthy."
 
I have owned 2 certified airplanes and 2 EAB's, I will never own another certified airplane. I have looked at some certified airplanes that were for sale that people were flying and they really needed to be in the salvage yard. If you know what you are doing or have a good A&P/IA, there is no problem with an EAB aircraft.
 
I have owned 2 certified and 2 experimentals and loved all 4 of them. I have flown 6 different homebuilts and probably a dozen different certified including 3 twins.

There are some certified I would not buy and definately a lot of homebuilts I would not even go for a ride in.

If nothing else homebuilts have made GA designers start to think outside the box a little more.
 
I am abstaining from voting - way too many variables and way too many types of experimental aircraft.

EA category covers everything from small GA homebuilts to warbirds.

I will say this though.....I think the EAA is extremely valuable to GA.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I am abstaining from voting - way too many variables and way too many types of experimental aircraft.

EA category covers everything from small GA homebuilts to warbirds.
Click to expand...

EAB = Experimental Amateur Built.

Warbirds = Experimental Exhibition, if they're Experimental category at all. Right?

The poll states EAB.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
EAB = Experimental Amateur Built.

Warbirds = Experimental Exhibition, if they're Experimental category at all. Right?

The poll states EAB.
Click to expand...

Actually the poll states "Experimantal Aviation good or bad" and doesn't specify EAB. That is what I was responding to. Ken put the EAB comment in his post, which I originally did not notice.

Even if you limit it to EAB, I still say that it is too broad to categorize with a simple poll.

And yes, there are still a fair amount of warbirds in the Experimental category. They are becoming fewer these days, however, because they can't sell rides.
 
Good pilots are always good for GA and aviation in general. Bad, reckless, egotistical douchebag pilots are bad for GA. It is just that simple and has nothing to do with what they are flying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top