I think my frustration is that, when questions about the design have come up it seems to all get swept under the rug or chalked up to builder or pilot error. I've read several discussions about how to deal with specific problems, as can happen with any plane. I really was interested in reading how others dealt with this stuff but, in one instance the posts were burried in another thread (not Gary's doing). Some other questions that came up, that posters were looking for solutions to, didn't seem to get suggestions for ways to fix them, but questioned what the poster was doing wrong.
The fuse braking behind the wing is a good example. The reply was, "The plane is designed to fly, not crash, and not to land on a wingtip, or sideways". Some posters did offer ideas for adding strength to weak points to avoid this.
There was a also question about a gap between the fuse and the wing, which again other posters offered their ideas for fixing because they had the same thing happen, but it got chalked up to oversanding on the builder's part. Then someone else wrote a post saying that none of the tabs were lining up, but I never saw a response as to how to fix this, so I just trimmed mine. I don't know what the other guy did with his.
I wasn't trying to trash Gary's design and I don't have any problems with him personally. I just feel if you are going to design a plane, you should be straight-foward with answers on how to improve or modify things that might not have been worked out in the design process.

BTW Paul, whether someone who bought a plane can design one really has nothing to do with the discussion. It's true not everyone would be a great designer. That's why most people pay for kits or plans that someone else designed. Whether I can design a plane or not, shouldn't we expect to get what we pay for?
Start at page 11 for mods.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...Products+Q%26A

Don