Re: Velocity vs SQ2000

[Peter Beaty <PETER.J.BEATY@usa.dupont.com>]

Geez, Dave, you forgot the various successors to Jim Bede's original design.
Besides being tiny, where are they today?  I keep seeing ads about BD-10,
12, 14, etc; but are they selling and flying any?

Look through the annual issue of KITPLANES magazine where they list 400 or
500 available homebuilts.  You'll see a lot of "onesy-twosy" type numbers
under the category "number of kits sold", and even less under the category
"number flying" (sometimes the number is "1", ie, the prototype is the only
one flying).  Studying that list in 1995 had a BIG influence on my
selecting the Velocity.

I just came back from OSH, and I'm still happy with my choice; I made a
great decision!  
[PS: the Glassic folks (SQ2000) weren't at OSH; imagine that].

Pete Beaty.

    ************
At 03:28 AM 7/30/98 -0400, Dave Black wrote:
>When I heard of his choice, I explained that getting in on the ground floor
>with any new design is VERY RISKY. The risk goes up exponentially if the
plane
>has not flown. The fuselage was not even built when he plunked down his
money.
>
>Oh, and the SQ2000 is TINY. That's why it's fast. They have not repealed the
>laws of physics.
>