sandiego89 wrote:
So what others are on your 5 worst list? Love hearing it from those that have actually flown them.
People sometimes ask what the worst ones are, and I always say, "Before I answer, I want to say that I loved flying them!"
The worst one would be the replica 1911 Curtiss Pusher, a replica of the first aircraft to land on and take off from a ship. It had a more modern Continental 125 flat six engine, but was otherwise authentic in aerodynamics, weight, and structure. The original used a shoulder yoke and the pilot leaned to work the ailerons, and the wheel worked the rudder. There was a foot throttle. We modified the controls so that they worked normally, with rudder pedals and a hand throttle. The rudder was quite normal, and the ailerons were very heavy and slow to react. It had everything wrong in pitch, highly sensitive and also very effective, with almost no feedback. The wing loading was very light, and hitting wake turbulence from a Piper Cub could be a problem. Also extremely high drag, if you pulled the throttle back to idle it would decelerate even in a very steep dive. In less than 5 mph winds it wasn't too bad, but I used to say that if the winds were more than about 8 or 10 and you flew for a half hour or more at some point you would be scared.
I had an aileron cable jump a pulley and jam the ailerons once, it was a high stress situation that ended up with no harm to pilot or airplane.
We did the Blue Angels homecoming show at Pensacola in 2011 and for a video I was allowed to beat up NAS Pensacola like nobody has in years, flying over Admiral's Row, the officer's club, the tower, and anything else I could think of.

Next might be the replica 1917 Rumpler built in England by Slingsby in the 1960s for the movie "Lawrence of Arabia", but not used in the filming. It's actually about 7/8 size. Terrible flying airplane.

Another bad flying airplane is the Nicholas Beazley NB-8G, you would think that by 1931 they would've come up with something better.

-