Forgot about this but I’m not sure what any report can recommend that isn’t already fairly obvious.
So you have an aircraft, designed to be at the cutting edge of technology 70 years ago then gets cut and shut to a point where the people doing the cutting and shutting are accepted as the experts. There is a question over regulation. There is also a huge question over the amount of testing that was done. There should be a question over the physiological affects and what airmanship is demonstrated allowing 70+ year olds to compete. Then the positioning of the grandstand finishes it all off.
Last edited by Pittsextra; 1st August 2012 at 11:38.