Originally Posted by
mikehallam
Dear Genghis,
I'll have one more try at being objective.
I wrote 'responsive' and not the other three pejorative words you have quoted.
If you have personal experience of the -116 model then you may have a hands on opinion. Lumping it in with the 5 ft. greater wingspan generic S6 range because you read some reports is misleading to the O.P.
One analysis of the accidents of this very popular(& with many in use) light 'plane finds the causes are elsewhere.
Regards,
mike hallam.
Mike,
I took a bit of time to review the records I have access to about Rans S6 aeroplanes before replying.
Yes, I take your point and missed the distinction that you were separating out Rans S6 models.
Whilst the S6-116 remains a relatively old design, it's clear when I look at it that the problematic low speed S6 accidents are all to ES/ESD models of the S6, and not to the -116 whose track record is pretty flawless.
I stand educated.
G