We been over this before. Whilst the out side may look old materials have change. The reason why they look the same is they got it right the first time. Power verses weight verses reliability. 1000 hours we'll manufactures say 500 you can't beat the humble Mag for reliability verses weight verses performance. But I sure you all will think you can.

so, what your saying, because its works, we should just stop advancing and developing new technologies.? but, if you service it right, then it will be reliable as ever, well, theres the problem, you have to service it to keep it reliable.....


why is it the aviation industry is so adverse to new advances in technology?
why am i driving the last generation of internal combustion engined cars, yet fly a "new" cessna with an engine designed in the 40's and an airframe in the 60's?

i guess the real reason is litigation.... :* but a big part is a perceived fear... just take the Lean of peak arguments... the technology exists to prove otherwise, data doesnt lie, but we refuse to let go of the old in the face of overwhelming evidence...

i remeber the crap i got for flying the then new Jabiru LSA... the plastic fantastic.. will never last, will be useless in 10 years.. so what do you do with it when it gets to 500 hrs? if it lasts that long...

well, 9,000 hours later, i can still hire that same jabiru..

i guess the new tech nockers will refuse to board a 787?