I think that UK aviation has always been blighted by dogmatic, outdated thinking - consider QNH & QFE, the OHJ, signals square, painfully slow acceptance of GPS etc etc etc. As I pointed out earlier, in most respects the PT-26 is superior to the Chipmunk, yet it was out of production before the Chipmunk entered production! Compare the Auster AOP.9 with the Cessna O-1 Bird Dog. With its all metal, stressed skin construction and horizontally-opposed engine, the Cessna certainly looks a lot more modern than the fabric-covered Auster and its inverted, in-line engine. Yet, incredibly, the Bird Dog flew before the AOP.9!
Ever seen a Supermarine Attacker? Its a jet fighter, but has the 3rd wheel at the back!!
Oh and before anyone else says "the C in DHC means Canada" - I know.
The DH bit means de Havilland, that well-known British company.
Janie's post was spot on - vive le difference! Dan's post is valid (although it does still highlight the UK aviation industry's predelection to look backward, not forward.)
SSD - if the Chipmunk's brake system is the best for aerobatic aircraft, why isn't it fitted to the Pitts/Eagles/Extras and Sukhois of the world? Serious question - and I'd be grateful for an answer. Thanks.
Last edited by Thud105; 7th Dec 2012 at 09:04.