Would you fly a plane built by school students?

[rodgerc]

 

[facthunter]

Negative If the Rego on the tail is any Indication. Nev

[onetrack]

The build quality is all down to the quality and level of supervision. A lot of factory aircraft come with build errors.

 

In WW2, the Australian-built Beauforts and Beaufighters were notorious for major construction faults, with things like hammers being left inside wing structures.

I guess that's what you get, when speed of build is pursued over QC checks, when railway workers are utilised to build aircraft, and when you have a workforce with minimal previous aircraft construction experience.

[facthunter]

Women's Labour was used on a lot of WW2  aircraft in the USA. Douglas Aircraft had a Good Build Quality. In fact I've never heard any criticisms of any of the Major US Builders. . As OT above correctly states the Bristols mentioned were not Perfect that were Built here at GAF (I think) I knew a Bloke that worked there (now deceased. but he Made over 100 years) who was disappointed, however we did manage a lot with what we had it must be said. They were desperate times. . The Liberators were not a good design with handling and structural faults but were Mass produced unmodified for ease of servicing and training.. Consolidated Vultee Corp Built Catalina's.. In Australia Cabinet Makers built  Mosquitoes.  One of my Wood work Lecturers at Tighe's Hill Tech Did that. Claude Lamb I think his Name was...  Nev 

[440032]

Completely off topic by the third post! New record?

[onetrack]

Well, the question was put - would you buy an aircraft built by school students? That falls into the category of aircraft being built by people with minimal skills, which has happened many times before in Australia.

[rgmwa]

RV-12 school builds are well-established in the US. Some in NZ as well that I'm aware of. I was one of about 15 or more mentors on the SAAA's build a few years ago that involved about 5 schools across Australia. In Perth, they ran two build sessions per week. I only helped out once a fortnight but one or two dedicated mentors were there for virtually every session and really made the project happen. The students were 15/16 year old's divided into about half a dozen teams. Our build started half way though the year and went into the next year with a new lot of students so they had to start from scratch to learn the basic skills.

I was surprised by how awkward and uncoordinated some of the boys were in handling basic tools. They could barely use a screwdriver and we had a pretty high attrition rate as they soon realised that building a plane was essentially a slow and boring process with lots of repetitive tasks. A few were interested enough to see it though, and one young kid in particular was very keen and capable and was still there at the end.

In the first year we had two girls in the group and they ran rings around most of the boys. They listened, read the plans, followed instructions and were careful and precise in their workmanship. The same could not be said for some of the boys who were careless and disinterested and didn't take it seriously, but they didn't last long. We built the main fuselage and firewall forward while other schools did the tail cone, empennage, and wings. Some SAAA Chpt 24 members at Jandakot jumped in at the end to finish off the engine, avionics and fibreglass work. The students weren't allowed to do fibreglassing or priming due to the hazardous materials issues. Overall I'd say the quality of workmanship was probably no better or worse than many other homebuilt aircraft. It was obviously assessed as being airworthy anyway. These were just my observations and I don't know how the other schools went. It eventually all came together thanks to the hard work of a small core group of mentors.  The plane was/is called `Miss Tori". I don't know who owns it now but it was a very well equipped aircraft with dual Garmin G3 screens, autopilot, lights etc. 

Edited 17 hours ago by rgmwa

[Moneybox]

I'd feel quite confident after seeing the quality control an supervision. Nothing would be hidden, every difficulty along the way would have a solution worked out by a group of experienced aviators. It's great to see this sort of initiative. Programs such as this should have full government support in a wide range of industries.