David Swason wrote: > Oh one other thing... have you were heard of a > dragonfly canopy stretching out to 44"?
44" is no problem for the Dragonfly. In fact, it's made for a plane about that width, but it's so floppy (before it's built into a frame) that it'd easily go to 48". I know there are a lot of folks who like the Todds canopy, and I suspect price is a big reason, but it simply isn't as streamlined as a Dragonfly, in my humble opinion. If you look at a Dragonfly and a Todd's canopy together from the side, you'll see what I mean. The Todd's has a distinct bubble look to the the front end, and is rounder at the top when viewed from the front. This leads to reduced headroom out near the edges, whereas a dragonfly is more squared off out at those corners. Not just my opinion, really, but obvious from looking at both, side by side. Although I don't have personal knowledge of the Pulsar canopy, it looks like it would be a pretty good fit too. And there's always the RR KR2S canopy, which may now be more economically attractive if the Dragonfly is really now only sold by Acrylform in South Africa, as was recently mentioned. I suspect Aircraft Windshields (or whoever used to make them in the US) would still make one for you though, unless they signed some kind of agreement to the contrary. I guess I need to call them today and find out for sure, because the Dragonfly is a perfect canopy for the KR2S. It is "incredibly similar" to the RR KR2S canopy, but 33% thinner, and therefore 33% lighter, and more flexible before framing... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford email to N56ML "at" hiwaay.net
