Oh yes those wing bolts, I've just in the last few weeks had the privilege to remove quite a number of them
in the process of assisting in a major inspection on a Dak.
I say a privilege because it really is such to be able to work on, and fly, such a piece of history. A machine that has been almost everywhere it's possible for a 'plane to go and has proven itself in so many spheres of aviation, be it war, agriculture, freight and of course - most importantly - passenger services.
I've no idea just how many people the DC3 has safely carried but it's obviously in the millions. Given the lifespan of the Dak I'm sure it's possible to come to some sort of conclusion, from accident reports, just how much difference that extra 4" of height from the emergency exit makes. Perhaps with reports on other aspects of DC3 flying over the years it will be possible to demonstrate a reasonable “safety level equivalency” of the DC3 to other aircraft types. In addition to this anyone flying in them would be aware that they're unlikely to have the same sort of features as a plane 70 years its junior and so, just as in any aspect of life, there's an element of risk involved in stepping inside one. Pragmatically there ought to be some way of satisfying the EU safety requirements for such low annual hour historical machines, even if it's necessary to placard each seat with its comparable 'deficiencies'.
In any event I was pleased to read that the UK CAA are supportive of the DC3's. I trust they are able to find a way to allow the DC3 to continue flying in their present role and provide people with a real taste of early aviation history, rather than just get to read about it. If a picture paints a thousand words then the actual experience must surely be worth a great deal more and to those interested in such things it would be a very sad day if they were prevented from participating in that experience.