Serge; I agree with you except any aircraft's major percentage of costs ocur with the engine and aviaonics. It really doesn't matter if you're building a KR, a F/A-18, a C-17, a 777 or MD-10. The point that I wasmaking had to do with someone "producing" a KR series airplane as a complete airplane, as implied or stated by General Locker. If that were the case, then he(the aircraft producer) would be required to certify the aircraft as type, and either certify an engine that is commonly being used with this aircraft(VW) or equip this aircraft with a certified engine(O-200). If he (the aircraft producer) were to assemble this aircraft outside of the United States, as further stated by General Locker, then he would also be rquired to obtain an Import Airworthiness Approval. The bottom line being this: He(the aircraft producer) would then pass those costs onto the customer. Thus making the aircraft unobtainable for many perspective KR pilots. Having participated in the design of the MD500 Notar, and the MD900 Explorer, I can assure you that certifying an aircraft is no easy task, and takes years to accomplish, and the dedication of a whole team of engineers, designers and managers to accomplish. I'm not saying that that Gen. Locker doesn't have these types of resources, I'm stating that it's very unlikely. --- "Serge F. Vidal" <serge.vi...@ate-international.com> wrote: > According to me, the answer is a bit more complex. > Up to these liability > lawsuits, aircraft and aircraft parts were almost > mass-produced, hence > keeping costs low. And all things considered, > airframes, which are very > labour-intensive items, still come at a reasonable > price. Engines and > avionics don't.
===== Scott Cable KR-2S # 735 Linden, MI s2cab...@yahoo.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
