Four-Seat Blunders...and Why They Failed

[@taxiway207]

Correction. Mooney still exists although right now they’re not building new aircraft and for the time being are just supplying parts for existing aircraft. They hope to restart production however in the long term.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Gotcha! I should have worded it like that. And man I hope they fire up production again.

[@stevelindley8386]

Can't wait to pay a million five for one. Well wait. 2.5 for the deluxe model.

[@taxiway207]

@@stevelindley8386 Ha! True!

[@calvinnickel9995]

They’ve been bankrupt like 5 times… lol.

[@taxiway207]

@@calvinnickel9995 I’m honestly surprised for how good their planes are.

[@patrickrameau]

My wife and I owned a Darter a few years ago, and we loved it. True, the cruising speed was closer to a two-seat Cessna 152 rather than a four-seat 172, but in nearly every other aspect we preferred it. We would tell people that it had "95% of the of what you're looking for... at 50% of the cost. Where we come from, that's called winning." Cheaper, with better visibility, and great handling.

[@skyboy1956]

The LARK was more comparable to the 172.

[@57hound]

“Subaru” means “unite” in Japanese. It is also the Japanese name for the constellation Pleiades. Please note the logo of the Subaru automobile is a depiction of the Pleiades constellation.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Yup, I read about that too. I always thought their logo looked kinda out-dated but now I understand the background.

[@julianprice1587]

Aka the Matariki constellation, somewhat further south.

[@bearlemley]

Interesting. I didn’t know the Japanese word for the Pleiades.

[@jimbower9268]

I had my first series of flying lessons in a Darter Commander in 1970. My first solo was in December of that year. It was the only airplane I ever flew, so I had nothing to compare it to. In later years, when I flew Cessnas, I appreciated their electric flaps, differential braking, and better performance.

[@Paladin1873]

As a kid I took a ride in a brand new Aero Commander 100 Lark in the mid 1960s when my Dad and a friend flew up from Florida to visit an old service buddy who worked at the plant. He gave us a full tour of the facility, which had been bought by Rockwell and relocated to Albany, GA. They were in the process of renaming everything to reflect the new ownership. In addition to the Lark, they were attempting to build the Aero Commander 200 (Meyers 200D), but he told us the plane was not well suited to mass production techniques and as a result they had to sell them below cost ($35K) to compete with the Beech Bonanza. Before we left I was given a large poster of the Lark which I hung on my bedroom closet door for several years. Like the company, it's long gone now and just a fading memory.

[@nilsmertens6253]

Hi, non pilot here. My first flight was on the Ruschmeyer R90. It's a one of a kind plane.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

That's cool you got to fly that!

[@skyboy1956]

The German airplane with an AMERICAN made Lycoming Engine ! !

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

@@skyboy1956 if you watched the video you’ll see they tried to go with a GERMAN engine. (Porsche).

[@skyboy1956]

@@aircraftadventures-vids yeah, key word is tried. Key result was failure. Mooney tried to use the the same engine. Also failed.

[@brianmerz6070]

I flew an American AA5B, which is a low wing, fixed gear, four seater with a sliding bubble canopy. It was a good handling plane.

[@nattybumpo7156]

Avionics tech here. This airplane is absolute Hell to work on. I hate them for that reason. Also the fuel tanks always leak, and the wing skins are so thin that they can easily be damaged with your bare hand. The canopies leak in the rain all over the front seats and panel. I would rather own literally anything else.

[@bravetiger2567]

@@nattybumpo7156also the fuel tanks don’t always leak and the skins on whatever tiger you had must have been fkd, ours our fine.

[@jonasbaine3538]

@@nattybumpo7156 isn’t the wings woods or something

[@nattybumpo7156]

@jonasbaine3538 They are metal, but have a fairly unique method of construction. The wing skins are so thin. Very fragile.

[@KarlBeeThree]

One of my favorite planes from when I was growing up that wasn't included in this review was the Ryan Navion. To me that was the all-time classic design that got swept aside by its contemporary competitor in the 1950s, the Beech Bonanza.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

While they certainly didn't enjoy the success or spotlight like the Bonanza, I wouldn't really deem them a failure. Love me a Navion.

[@michaeldavid6284]

Such a great little ship, and no surprise since it was designed and built by the same company that gave us the P-51, B-25, AT-6, and the F-86. But you already knew that...

[@ralphkassing6821]

I actually flew the Mooney Mustang once. I delivered the airplane from LAX to DEN. It was a wild ride but what a beast to fly. I could see that if you owned one and got used to it, it would probably be fine.

[@ChrisA7X89]

The Ruschmeyer R90 is such a beautiful plane. Only saw one once and never again ever since

[@petefroehling8704]

Didn't he make strange movies in the 60s

[@Kimoto504]

That and the Subie were the best of the bunch.

[@broko336]

weirdly enough, i saw one two days ago, which is right when this vid was uploaded

[@JStryker7]

The sound radials produce is glorious…

[@kamakaziozzie3038]

I love the cartoon spring sounds 😀 they are in the perfect spots

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

At least someone likes em (lot of curmudgeons around here don't, lol)

[@geraldscott4302]

I got my license in 1982, in a Cessna 150 and two Cessna 172s. I currently have a 1974 Cessna 172M, with the original panel. I love the looks of the high wing Cessnas. I also love the visibility. You can look out the side window, and see what is below you. In a low wing plane all you see is the top of the wing. The high wing Cessnas are also much easier to get in and out of, which is important to me because I am 65 and have arthritis.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Once i got my license, most of flying was in the M

[@arthurbrumagem3844]

The low wings are a lot easier to fuel - at 75 I enjoy that capability. Cardinals are the best for getting in and out imo

[@mattpaulson1044]

When having verbal battle over what plane was best with all my flyboy chronies, an instructor once told us the following to shut us up: ‘Every airplane design is a compromise’. Nuff said…

[@arthurbrumagem3844]

@@mattpaulson1044 great advice

[@chuckcawthon3370]

Excellent Presentation all around. Well Done Sir.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Glad you liked it, and thanks!

[@mikehopkins8350]

Loved my Darter. Had a little over 1300 hrs in it. Now have a Mooney M20F.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

A slightly different experience, I bet? Didn't mean to sound like I'm slamming the Darter, I love rare planes.

[@larrysmith6603]

I've flown 172, AA5 Tiger , Piper warrior . Loved the Grumman above all else but these 4 seat singles have noticeable performance drop with two pax in back ! I liked flying with just one in the R/H seat .

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Yeah, you could argue most of the 4-seaters out there are in fact 2 with luggage. (unless you skimp on fuel)

[@randym7511]

Very informative and very well presented. Thank you!

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@charliemonster42]

The only airworthy Aries is at my home airport - Livermore, CA. Still owned by the original owner, he loves the plane and enjoys the attention it gets. Very cool plane.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

That's awesome! I'd love to see it.

[@charliemonster42]

He had it out flying today, actually! Thought of your video. I’ll see about getting some video of it

[@BotanistOnDuna]

There's one for sale somewhere I'm not telling y'all, please don't buy it because it's my dream plane!

[@quantomic1106]

I don't think anyone can compete with Cessna. Their name is so deeply ingrained in aviation that every non-aviation person thinks every small plane flying around is a Cessna.

[@martingarciagarcia3739]

Such a pity that some of these didn't work out.

[@drifter503]

I would love to see one of those Mooney mustangs in person. Great video as always bud

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Thank you!

[@rescue270]

I've seen two of them.

[@SteveD328]

I actually have time in one of them, there were 2 of them on the North Little Rock Airport (KORK) for a while back in the 80s. I gave a guy a couple of biannual flight reviews in one. It was indeed heavy, but i thought it flew pretty nice. Also Mooney built 36 of them.

[@BobbyGeneric145]

It looks like an Antonov!

[@Sturzi]

We used to have one in the Hangar on "my" airfield. We always called it "the steam locomotive" because of its look.

[@Sturzi]

Nice video! We used to have a few of the featured aircraft on our airfield, like the Mustang, the Fuji and a Ruschmeyer! Personally, I used to fly a rather unknown 4-seater, the Robin R3000. Not your typical Robin, because it was a T-Tail, full metal bird with fantastic view, very agile controls, easy to land and very efficient (130kts cruise with 180HP) - a joy to fly! Also capable to operate from a 700m airfield with 4 adults + full tanks! I miss this airplane since someone crashed it in a french forest.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

I love the Robin designs, very sleek and agile looking. But, 4 adults + full tanks was safe? Passengers must have weighed 50 lb!

[@Sturzi]

@@aircraftadventures-vids Just had a (sentimental) look at the AFM: 685kg empty, 164kg fuel, left you almost 80kg/seat (177lb) to reach the max weight of 1150kg. Sorry for the kilograms (I fly planes with kts, mph and km/h...) On a warm summer day, full MTOW would use some 520m ground roll for T/O. Fun fact of the Robin were also the writings in the cockpit: "Feu d'Atterissage" was landing light "Feu de Roulage" was Taxilight, "Phare" was the beacon, "préchauffage du carburateur" was carb heat and so on...

[@DanielaHltb]

every tip you shared is a gem, thanks for being so generous!

[@bradalgra8088]

Another great episode. Thanks Richard! Missed you at Airventure last week.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Yeah this year looked an amazing turnout of interesting planes (and people!). Hoping for next year...

[@SoloPilot6]

14:55 -- uh, no . . .only Bellanca WINGS were wood. The fuselage was steel tubing, with a fabric covering.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Oops, good catch.

[@TheCitationEncore]

I truly enjoyed that video. I was waiting to see the Extra EA-400

[@Gizmo4PS]

I fly two seaters. At least in Europe, in two seater market, tecnam is the omnipresent company. Looking forward seeing a bit more diversity

[@Triple_J.1]

What? Europe has dominated the LSA (EU Ultralight) category. There must be ten options. And half of them can do almost 200ktas.

[@daszieher]

There is way too much diversity. It would be better to have just a couple of manufacturers churning out much higher numbers to drop unit prices.

[@officialbritishtaxpayer5609]

I really like your good humoured approach to this video. Subscribed and looking forward to more.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

More forthcoming!

[@michaelhoffmann2891]

As for Rockwell Commanders, you didn't mention the 112 and 114. While hardly run-away successes, they did produce some 1000+ of them, and they are quite good aircraft (albeit not trainers, but rather complex/high-performance). Also, one could argue that the Ruschmeyers were simply ahead of their time, and today the legacy is very successfully carried on by Diamond (yes, I know they're Austrian not German).

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

I've been called out on omitting the 112/114 but the story wasn't focused on Commander aircraft per se. Plus, you could argue it was moderately successful (while the Darter /Lark were not)

[@tonymetalfan]

I do like the way the Aries looks. I am a fan of the boxy 80's styling

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

There's always something for everyone!

[@beyondmiddleagedman7240]

My dad bought a 200 Commander new and I eventually learned to fly in it. N2998T. Fantastic airplane.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Awesome! If you have some time check out my video on the 200. kzbin.info/www/bejne/rYC9pI2Ijb2pfJY

[@airsideadrian]

Great video! One of the R90s (D-EECR) and FA200s (D-EIDU) in your video fly out of my nearby airports too. I thought about getting a rental checkout - they're one of a kind! 😄

[@vyironszenithx4197]

LOVING the GA content! Great video!

[@Flies2FLL]

For years in Vero Beach, we could see across the field and in a hangar was "A Big Mooney". That was one of the few Mooney Mustangs, and the wealthy owner never got it flying. I heard from a local FAA designated examiner that he simply would not spend the enormous amounts of money it took to get it airworthy, yet refused to sell it.

[@alexmelia8873]

The M22 Mustang was technically a 5 seater. But the Mooney M20L with the same Porsche PFM engine as the Ruschmeyer would’ve been another good highlight

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Definitely, that’s an amazing story in itself, the PMF mooney.

[@MyFabian94]

Fitting the Birddog Wing to the Civilian Models was the Move that made Cessna the Leader in the "Platzgeier" Market. In a Market full Plain a Split-Flaps those Fowler Flaps gave it such widespread utility from 2 to 7 Seats and 90 to 150kts all using the same Wing albeit slight differences in Washout and Fuel Capacity, that they basically could do no wrong after that.

[@julianprice1587]

Very good video, really interesting. I half expected to see the Grumman Traveller and Robin DR400 too.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Thanks! Grumman series of 4-seaters were quite successful, if you put the family together.

[@drumswest5035]

Very interesting video, i enjoyed it.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@cstacy]

I flew a later model Commander 114, and it was my favorite. I think the type had been acquired by Beechcraft by then. I loved having 2 doors, and it performed great. Better and nicer than the Piper Cherokee 180s and Arrows that I mostly flew back then (late 80s).

[@ThePorkyPilotShow]

Shout out to Wellesbourne EGBW in that first clip, used to fly with take flight.

[@SM-wt8gd]

Excellent video. Thank you for making it!

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Thanks for watching!

[@dannyphantom1232]

Great video as usual!!! 👏🏻👏🏻

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Thanks, bud!

[@JesseOaks-ef9xn]

My Dad had a Stinson 108-1. The company was bought out by Piper.

[@michaelspunich7273]

Very good documentary.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Thank you!

[@tatojanc]

Another great video 👏👏👏👏

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Thanks, Tato! 👍

[@downwindchecklist6567]

The Subaru is actually very nice to fly. Also great for aerobatic and very good for UPRT. Very docile and flies like a low wing 172. It has also very sturdy landing gear which is great for grass runways.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

It's a pleasant-looking design, plus I'd love a big canopy over me.

[@solefinder3708]

@@aircraftadventures-vids Yep, the large canopy kind of gives it that 'Jetson''s' cartoon space buggy feel and look.

[@jmwintenn]

turn that AG-14 into a single seat and you've got a little porsche in the sky. that thing looks slick.

[@Legionshost]

The Wing Derringer would be a good subject for s video.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Agree. And at 00:18 it makes a very brief appearance...

[@rescue270]

​@@aircraftadventures-vids All two of them.

[@AlexSandroRocha-l8w]

Thanks for sharing

[@ivandenisovich6005]

Very interesting and entertaining. Always thought the Aero-Subaru was a rather neat machine. Great video, keep up the good work!

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Thanks!

[@rescue270]

Looks kinda like a Zenair homebuilt.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

@@rescue270 I does actually!

[@triskellian]

Pretty neat presentation of rare private airplanes! In my hometown airport in Southeast Texas, we have an owner flying his Bellanca Aries T250. We'll see it every year during our small fly ins. Also, another local pilot owned a Bellanca Viking. I got to fly it as my first complex/high performance plane!

[@Gizmo4PS]

Great as usual! But 172 is still omnipresent

[@natehill8069]

7:40 Cessna P-210 anyone? Preceded Piper Malibu.

[@Paladin1873]

I'd like to see a review of the Windecker Eagle, Rockwell Commander 112, Culver Cadet, Bellanca 14, and Piper PA-14.

[@TobinTwinsHockey]

Great video

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Thanks!

[@flybobbie1449]

What happened to the Bellanca Skyrocket? Saw a picture in those pocket book of planes. Looked pressurised with rounded windows.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

That was an amazing design! Name was absolutely fitting. Sadly, it fell victim to the 80s recession and failed. It's now at a museum in Dover, NJ.

[@tonylam9548]

Just for information, for a light plane, the propeller generate about half the noise or more. The engine can easily be muffled, just like a car down to almost nothing. You will not even have to bother with a muffler if you have a turbo downstream of the exhaust gas, the turbo is an effective muffler. The other way Rotax used was to gear down the engine and slow the prop, and add blades.

[@robertgary3561]

That’s why in the new Cessnas our max govr rpm is only 2400 rpm. Because most noise comes from the near supersonic blade tips.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Agree 100%, and that's how the R90 was designed. Slow, 4-blade prop. There are exceptions of course, like the old augmented Lycomings which were WAY louder than props, but otherwise yes the props are the main noise makers.

[@tonylam9548]

@@aircraftadventures-vids No matter how loud piston engines are, they have to take second place to turbine when you consider noise. The straight through turbines like Garrett in some Cessna Conquest are the worse. If one is at your local airport at ground idle, just about everything within 200 ft have to stop, because you cannot hear anything. This is where a PT-6 is superior and I feel the slight loss of efficiency are worth it. The worse are the early engines in the 60s.

[@leedaero]

For Part 2 add the Windecker Eagle which was certified.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

I actually did a video on the Windecker last year, it's part of a compilation video on rare planes.

[@rescue270]

The Mooney M22 Mustang did not use a Continental engine. It actually used a very weird Lycoming TIO-541 engine similar to those found in Beechcraft Dukes.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Correct, in fact I corrected myself on the video right at the time I mentioned it. (I didn't want to re-record my voiceover again).

[@Sylver9898]

I love how you added goofy sound effects

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Thank you!

[@yucannthahvitt]

13:00 Grumman owners have an answer to that question.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Tru dat!

[@bravetiger2567]

I was literally about to reply with this too lol. AA5 and AA1 operator here ;)

[@Jon.......]

14:53 | "Carved" from wood? NO .... more like "built" from wood, perhaps with a few carved parts involved.

[@bearlemley]

In the late 70’s product liability insurance shot up by THREE orders of magnitude! It seem the US legal system allowed the US ambulance chasing attorneys mine gold from the manufactures. In 78, Product Liability Insurance was $56.00 for every serial number from one manufacturer, and by 1991 the same insurance was $72,000.00 and rising. How could anyone make an IFR 4 place for less than $50k when suddenly the PLI cost more than the plane? If you wonder why you have to fork out over $400k for a 4 place single, this is the reason. This is the reason very few aircraft are selling in what was the largest market in the world and why flight training is so costly. ‘Well, airplanes must be getting more and more dangerous than? ‘ Nope, the accident rate continues to drop as well as the number of mechanical failures per/1000 nautical miles. (For new planes) pilot error remains the number one cause accidents. The US legal system is allow to ignore these fact and extort millions from the manufacturers insurance companies who have to raise their rates to pay for liability cases. All the plaintiffs have to do when suing everybody involved, is to name the manufacturer at least one percent at fault. Then when a $30 million judgment is handed down it goes to the deep pockets as pilots don’t have any money.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Sadly, all correct. It killed also killed lot of amazing designs that were established, like the Cessna 210.

[@jonasbaine3538]

Love flying socata tb21gt on msfs

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

The Trinidad is a sweet-looking plane for sure

[@bleiben1]

My dad had a Mooney Mustang when I was a kid…. Not only was it pressurized, but it was fast for a single engine piston…

[@natehill8069]

13:00 What other plane can you slide back a bubble canopy? A whole slew of Grummans (Tr-2, Cheetah, Tiger)

[@DennisGentry]

The Mooney Mustang wasn't a success on its own, but lessons learned contributed to the Mooney 301 (prototype only) and TBM 700 (the M stands for Mooney) and later TBM aircraft.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Very true!

[@fantabuloussnuffaluffagus]

I would have liked to see the Windecker Eagle on this list.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

I covered it in another list video from last year.

[@SteveD328]

The Bellanca Viking had a wooden wing, the rest of the airplane was tube and fabric.

[@randykelso4079]

Please tell us about the Temco Swift aircraft.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

That's actually my next video! Stay tuned (am hoping for Friday....)

[@TheSportFlyer-xy6sn]

I love the Lark, Higher useful load than a 172, a little slower but more room inside if you are over 6". You can get them at about 2/3 the price of a 172. Edit: not slower, but uses a bigger engine to go same speed as 172.

[@michaelsteiger8509]

I flew the T250 prototype. Cleo Bickford invited me to tag along . It flew great! The T-tail was in vogue at the time but most really did not work out… not true for the T250. 13 ft span on the tail and it was fingered flown. It actually held 5 with full tanks. The prototype jet was bought and just left our field in a truck. Ballanca bought it off AG and after 5 built realized it would compete too much with the Viking series and squashed the deal.

[@clydekawasaki1703]

I’ve flown the Super Viking, 690 Commander and wish more of them were manufactured. But one of my dream airplanes that I have never flown is an MU-2. Guess I’m just gonna have to be content with my Super Swift.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Well hold on the next video....the story behind the Globe Swift!

[@rescue270]

@@clydekawasaki1703 I'm told that, in order to be truly proficient in the MU-2, you need to fly one on pretty much a daily basis. They are not very forgiving in an engine-out scenario.

[@steveturner3999]

No mention of the Rockwell 112 and 114.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Nope, there were more Rockwell models but the video focuses on the 100 series. The 112/114s were moderately successful actually.

[@ReflectedMiles]

Most of the successful brands you mentioned have failed, too, sometimes more than once. The common single-engine and light-twin GA referred to in the video is not exactly a sustainable, profitable, "happening" market for most applications. Cessna's bread-and-butter, for example, is in bush planes required for life or work in the outback and in large, turbine-powered versions operated as fleets by cargo operators, not in common, public GA. If that was all they had, they would be barely hanging on or defunct like the others that have been dependent on the latter market.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

That's true, it's a niche. But you can also argue that general aviation in general was much healthier in the 60s/70s and could sustain more manufacturers, which is nearly impossible today. And Cessna's bread and butter and flight school trainers, not bushplanes.

[@ReflectedMiles]

@@aircraftadventures-vids Give Textron the choice between flight-school sales and multi-use (not cargo-only) Caravan sales outside the US and watch what happens….

[@AB3-74]

Cessnas and Pipers only? Here at my location, It used to be Zlin. And now Diamond has dominated for some time.

[@soundknight]

Forward swept wings create unusual flight behaviours.

[@arthurbrumagem3844]

For 22 yrs I have enjoyed my Archer. Flown all over the US ( other than the SW which I have no interest in )

[@marks2166]

Cool video

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Thanks!

[@rotol]

Society killed the 4 seaters. Family then was 2+2 and all within healthy weights.

[@nunyabidness3075]

There were several conspirators. The IRS and Congress changed the way taxes for business aviation worked. Ostensibly aimed at Bizjet abuse, the actual changes destroyed deductibility of piston planes for businesses. Along with the ripping up of GA airports everywhere, this greatly reduced the utility of piston planes for travel.

[@dafyddllewellyn6636]

The typical swept tail with a low-set tailplane on a low-speed aircraft is a poor stylistic feature, because the vertical tail is blanketed by the tailplane in a spin, thus often causing difficulty in recovery from a spin. Sure, you don't HAVE to put an aircraft in a spin - and there are a lot of aircraft out there that you had better NOT let get into a spin. People like the swept fin because it makes the aircraft look faintly like an F86. But the "reverse tail" is there on Mooneys for a very good reason. Beech made a bad mistake when they put out the F33C as an "aerobatic" aircraft; their Australian agents tried to sell it to the RAAF as a primary trainer - and it killed a champion aerobatic pilot when he tried to demonstrate that it would recover from a fully-developed spin. The Beech "Mentor" did not need to have such a gimmick; it has a non-swept fin for this reason.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

So what's your thought on the Cessna 172? From what I read Cessna chose to "sweep" it purely for aesthetics. I for one love the old look of the straight tail (as well as the old Cessna 310s)

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Interesting point. Come to think of it, Vans kitplanes also have straight tails and they have terrific performance. As to the Mooney, take a look when you have a chance: kzbin.info/www/bejne/r2jFh5h8fM1nfrs

[@dafyddllewellyn6636]

@@aircraftadventures-vids Yes, the straight-tail ones were generally better, but the Continental 0-300 engine became a parts problem. I flew a Beech V-35A quite a bit - it was one of those aircraft you would not want to spin, but that didn't stop it from being a good cross-country aircraft. BTW, Cessna replaced the 0-300 engine with a "cheapened" Lycoming, with lousy valve rocker arms. The PA28 with a Lycoming 0-320-E2A was slower, but much more reliable.

[@StupidusMaximusTheFirst]

It's not just 4 seaters... it's the whole of GA. Well, they didn't exactly fail, they did and they didn't. What I mean is that the way I see it, this was the early era, they had to try things, and most wouldn't be as successful, they paved the road for further knowledge, innovation, designs etc. If nowadays we got new materials, extensive aerodynamic knowledge in regards to small GA planes, what works what doesn't, is because they tried things. Where GA failed though, is that since the early era can get expensive, only the mega rich were the customers, only they were involved in using those planes, not unlike the jet set era of commercial aviation. The thing is, while the jet set era was gone super fast, since airlines saw the potential of being approachable to everyone, GA never went through that step, and that's mainly because those same people involved, wanted those toys for themselves only. This has happened in many other things, oil companies delaying engine progress, motorsport, where the mega rich would again like to keep tracks and the sport for themselves only. At least there's some hope for GA, I seen amazing innovations, both in design and materials, light sport aircraft on the sub 100k buying cost, and little maintenance costs, could make them approachable to people who love aviation, but they are not mega rich. All in all, the whole thing worked for America, as GA helped massively in knowledge, whether aero or materials or anything, just as the state funded research aerospace programs did. This is the reason the US has all those advanced jets and all, everything played a part, its role, including GA. And this is exactly what they needed to do to become pioneers in aviation, state aerospace research while it was the backbone of innovation in this sector, GA contributed to a large degree, even the experimentals people would build themselves in their garage, you never know where a breakthrough will come from. So the US has done the right thing, gave the necessary freedoms to all, to work on aviation, whether a business or a hobbyist, and it payed off. And that's the right attitude. Writing expensive checks and buying ready made things all while restricting anyone else (whether this is national insecurity reasons or the pretense of safety) from working on aviation and claiming the skies as yours, is the exact opposite, and this is what my country has done. Anyway, GA didn't quite fail, if it did in some degree, blame the rich - they delayed progress in GA, even for the US. I think the future of GA is gonna be amazing, in this video, examples of what they consider failures will be overcomed easily nowadays, eg the heavy reinforced pressurized cabin in GA... they are building a cheap inflatable space station, stronger than metal, I'm certain this tech could be useful there. And those strange highly efficient designs, laminar flow airframes and wings, really powerful yet inexpensive engines, not so much different to your SUV engine, or at least in fuel consumption... I think the future of GA is bright... as well as that of commercial aviation. Probably. At least GA despite its failures, has done its job successfully, and the US is at the forefront of aviation. Maybe at a cost to the rest who fell behind, maybe those countries shouldn't put morons at the wheel. Or the yoke in this case.

[@KevinKearney]

You skipped over the Rockwell Commander 112/114 a 4 seat low wing

[@michaeldickerson9428]

The mustang had a turbo Lycoming, not a Continental.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

You are correct, in fact I read it was related to the Duke engine. (I realized my mistake but didn't want to re-record my voiceover)

[@AZREDFERN]

Imagine losing a head gasket at 10,000’

[@fantabuloussnuffaluffagus]

Better at 10,000 than 500.

[@fjp3305]

Good video

[@M_MTsc]

With the Grumman Tiger you could also open the canopy in flight. It was faster, more roomy and easier to fly than a 172. Shame it failed as well.

[@tfarris7113]

Failed? How?

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

I wouldn't say a production run of over 3,000 AA-5s was a failure. Obviously not even close to Piper or Cessna, but pretty respectable.

[@ditto1958]

The Tiger was a fairly successful airplane.

[@calvinnickel9995]

The Cessna Cardinal sold over 4200 units and was considered a failure by Cessna with a mere ten year production run, requiring numerous modifications (Cardinal Rule to fix the gear, wing, and stabilator, 180 HP mod, constant speed prop, and eventually 200 HP and retractable gear) plus forced Cessna to restart production of the 172 and modify it to accept the 150 HP Lycoming that was inadequate for the Cardinal.

[@tfarris7113]

@@calvinnickel9995 yeah but no canopy you can open in flight, so... who cares?

[@terryboehler5752]

Nice. Bellanca Viking was ALL wood?

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Well at least the most important part...the wing.

[@terryboehler5752]

@@aircraftadventures-vids steel tube fuselage.

[@timduggan1461]

The Cessna 172 is the most produced 4-seat airplane .

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Indeed it is.

[@allwinds3786]

No Navion?

[@terrystonitsch6569]

Navion is a great handling plane and fast enough if flown correctly.

[@mp-xt2rg]

Mooney mustang did just fine. They are still being built highly sought after. Maybe you have heard of the tbm line of aircraft. The m in tbm stands for Mooney and the tbm 700-900 are built on the Mooney mustang.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Not quite right. Yes on the TBM part but it was based on the Mooney 301, a creation by Roy Lopresti. That plane eventually morphed into the TBM series of turboprops. Not the Mustang.

[@soundknight]

Moral of the story: Bad companies with good employees produce bad commercial aircraft without reading the market and soon learn to feed at the trough of public money. Thereby the government becomes it's CEO with a bloated civilian command chain underneath.

[@hud86]

Aviation slowed down in the US in the 1980’s because of liability insurance and lawsuits

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

1000% yes. And it's still slow, when compared to the 60s/70s

[@AC-jk8wq]

Psssst…. Mooney is still around… supporting the existing owners with spare parts and services. Not building new planes. Mooney Mustang’s next step was the M30 and became the predecessor of the joint project with a French manufacturer… and built the Tarbes Mooney aka TBM700… much bigger and more expensive than an ordinary four seater…. Saying Mooney isn’t around anymore, is just untrue… Saying Mooney doesn’t currently build new planes would be more accurate…. 😃

[@ADAPTATION7]

I wasn't aware that Mooney went bankrupt. Oh well. I guess another one bites the dust.

[@rescue270]

@@ADAPTATION7 I've lost track of how many times Mooney has gone bankrupt.

[@smark1180]

Wut?

[@RobertHollander]

QUESTION: “How do you make a small fortune designing and building airplanes?” ANSWER: “Start with a large fortune and quit before you lose it all.”

[@AndyIsHereBoi]

Is this why jet lag the games colors are like that? I always thought they just picked some

[@CountCraigula]

You forgot the Rockwell commander.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

I didn't, just that the main focus of the video was on the 100 series. The Commander (if you referring to the 112/114) did pretty well actually.

[@CountCraigula]

@@aircraftadventures-vids The 112 and 114 was what I was referring to ,yes. Thats a really cool airplane. Unfortunattely it was unerpowered. We have a local pilot who owns a beautifull 114. Looks brand new. He has an uprated engine and prop. Says it has transformed the airplane from mediocre to outstanding.

[@genxpilot69]

Love that Ruschmeyer R90! (7:50)

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

Cool looking plane!

[@CarlGlassmeyer-jj5qw]

Wnen you speak of aircraft with a sliding canopy, you forgot American aviations aa1 2 place, aa5 the 4 place and the aa8 twin.

[@aircraftadventures-vids]

True, it's not the only one, but those were comparatively successful designs.

[@CarlGlassmeyer-jj5qw]

@@aircraftadventures-vids I owned both an AA 1 and an AA 5. Really fun aircraft. The AA 8 was a really underpowered dog.