Jos Heyman said:Can you remember the title of the book so that we read more about this? Because somehow, this attack/fighter stuff seems unlikely to me.
Here's a pretty good Jim Bede story.
In the early 80's a rigid wing ultralight named the NAC Dream showed up at Oshkosh. This little airplane was virtually the first conventionally configured Part 103 vehicle that looked like a real airplane, not a lawn chair. The thing was a hit.
Then word spread around that Bede was associated with the project. Two things happened, the airplane was an instant commercial failure, and lots of people that were still pissed off about losing their deposits for BD-5's were hunting for Bede with intent to give him a thumping. Thousands of people lost deposits for kits and production versions, roughly 12000.
Jim Bede is a hell of a speaker, dreamer, and not a bad airplane configurator. But the trail of shoddy business following him is long, and virtually unbroken. While he was in the St. Louis region working on the BD-10 and a couple of other projects I went to his shop a few times and was stunned about some details I saw on the jet. The tail problems were predicted, that was a no brainer. The wing skin assembly was a real surprise; aluminum honeycomb sandwich tooling board, while not necessary a problem in itself, the connection at the edges of the skins is unacceptable. Only the outermoldline skin was fastened, the inner skin was terminated without attachment. This defeats the advantage of honeycomb construction and long term fatigue life is severly compromised whether or not the static strength is sufficient.
djfawcett said:The BD-12 was a 2 place side by side pusher recip powered general aviation aircraft. The BD-14 was the 4 place version. The BD-12 crashed on the take off of its first flight. The BD-14 was never built.
One can say that about practically every design of Bede's. Remember when the BD-5 was supposed to do 210 mph on 40 hp and be able to be built in your garage in a few weekends and flown by anyone? Or the Bede Car that was supposed to get 120 mpg?Foo Fighter said:The impression is that Jim Bede and his company were making claims that could not be achieved
NTSB is the wrong agency to supervise a production airplane. Normally, NTSB only gets involved after a crash. NTSB is more likely to be involved in investigating a locomotive crash or ship sinking.The impression is that Jim Bede and his company were making claims that could not be achieved, and of kits being ready with no such kits existing and no agreements to supply material for the level of kits being advertised. With the build/structural problems coming to light on the interweb, how did he get the go ahead to release the product? Perhaps there is a need for a greater involvement by the NTSB when any new products are promoted. How would the structure of the BD-10 have stood up to mach 1.4 as the aircraft is claimed to be able to achieve?