This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
We should also mention that the reported cruise speeds are higher than what the aircraft actually seem capable of. There are numerous stories about owners quoting the manual's speed as their own, but then being easily outperformed by "slower" designs. Maury14:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good point on the performance capabilities- can you incorporate it into the text? (BTW, our friend in the Amelia Earhart controversy has resurfaced. She/he is a delight to watch, I should pull up a chair and get popcorn.) {:)} Bzuk18:12, 13 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]
I'd love to, but the only ref I can find is a newsgroup post (= no no). I'll do some poking about for better refs. In the meantime, would you mind giving the new Bede BD-10 article a look-see? I've been meaning to do that one for a while. Maury20:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
1) The aircraft shown in the upper right corner is not a BD-4.
2) In regards to the performance discussion: The values from the manual have been achieved by many builders. Others have gotten less performance. The reasons for the differences vary from aircraft to aircraft. The BD-4 is hardly "easily outperformed" by other designs with a smaller powerplant. As much as that would be appreciated by some.
3) Powerplant: up to 350HP have been installed and flown. Also, the most used engine is a IO-360.
4) Maximum speed depends on the powerplant, but for a 234 mph you'd need more than 300HP. Refer to http://bd-4.org/specs.html for the 'book' values.
I don't know what that photo shows, sorry. Looks a little like a Glasair Sportsman, but that's not it, either. Definitely is not a BD-4 though. Saltoricco05:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It matches up with the latest BD-4 profile including the spats. I took the photo and had identified it at the time as a BD-4, but I have been known to be wrong... Bzuk06:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]
The more I stare at the photo, the less sure I am... This is the latest incarnation of the Bede Bd-4. Compare it to the photo, there are some similarities but I can also see Glasair Sportsman there. Bzuk06:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]
OK, as an experimental the BD-4 can be built as one pleases, i.e. mine is longer, higher has different wings and what not. The original BD-4 has a completely flat wind shield (although many use a curved one), no wing struts, no kink in the leading edge (but one on the horizontal stab.), the landing gear is straight and the fuselage is does not have any compound curves besides the cowling. All attributes of the plane in the picture. The one in the photo appears to have a composite airframe with metal wings. It does look familiar, I'd like to say I've seen it in Europe, but can't quite put my finger on it. Saltoricco14:16, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now, here's a solution; do you have a photo of your Bede BD-4 that can be accessed for the article? Upload the image file to replace the infobox photograph. IMHO Bzuk15:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]
My aircraft is not yet flying, plus it is too modified to be representable. But when the author of the article contacted me to provide a photo I had sent in the one that is also seen, on the left side. That BD-4 is very close to stock. Saltoricco16:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm hardly an expert on the type, but the BD-4's fuselage is slab-sided, which doesn't seem to be the case with Bzuk's photo... --Rlandmann02:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am looking for another photo, in the meantime, I will replace the infobox photo with one that works. Bzuk03:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Right you are, an amendment to the article needs to be made. Perhaps the Bede BD-4 represents the first "modern" successful kitplane. Bzuk02:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Googling around, the Heath Parasol was offered complete ready built, without an engine, as a kit, or as plans. It could be the Parasol was primarily a ready-built aircraft that was also available as a kit. The BD-4 is primarily or exclusivly a kit. The Parsol also, as you say, predates the FAA and modern regulations. Ferritecore02:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nevertheless (and the Heath Parasol, circa 1929, WAS primarily sold in kits, by the hundreds), it is clear that the assertions that the BD-4 was the "first kit plane" are flatly false, and should not be made in this article, or any other. I've corrected it.
I have just modified 2 external links on Bede BD-4. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
YAn editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
The text indicates that the BD-4 was, in part, an outgrowth of the BD-1 and BD-2. Arguably true about the BD-1, but no obvious relation to the BD-2, which (as I seem to recall) was just a Schweizer glider, that Bede put an engine into (for a transatlantic-crossing stunt). Correct me if I'm wrong; correct the text if I'm right.
Frankly, the text in this article seems borderline promotional rather than strictly encyclopedic. See articles on other homebuilts for comparaison. ~ Zxtxtxz (talk) 10:40, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The text actually says Based on his previous work with innovative light aircraft, the BD-1 (eventually developed into the American Aviation AA-1 Yankee) and BD-2, Jim Bede designed the BD-4 to be the first real "kitplane" in the world. It is unsourced, but probably not an unreasonable assertion that the experience gained working on the BD-1 and BD-2 projects allowed Bede to create the BD-4. It doesn't say that the design was actually derived from, or based upon those previous designs. - Ahunt (talk) 17:59, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This article is corrupted by the abusive over-reliance on sources with a clear conflict-of-interest in this subject. Too many of the assertions are made only with reference to materials from Bede, his affiliate enterprises, his cult-like fans and customers, and their support enterprises. Very little of this material is from comparatively independent and neutral sources, in violation of WP:NPOV. This article reads like a Bede advertisement.
The above-noted false statement that the BD-4 was the "first" kitplane -- twice repeated in the article prior to my edits this evening -- is an echo of notorious Bede's continuous stream of falsehoods, and exaggerated and deceptive promotions, harking back to the earliest days of his business activities. There are two simple reasons that Jim Bede was THE most distrusted pariah in general aviation: chronic dishonesty and unreliability.[1][2][3][4]
And it doesn't help that many of his very recklessly designed aircraft (and their derivatives) have terrible safety records, as well.[1][5][6][7][3][8] General aviation is fraught with mischief and dishonesty, but Bede raised it to an infamous art form.
Consequently, ANY article touching on him or his aircraft should be scrutinized, carefully, for falsehoods, and should NEVER rely solely on Bede's own communications (nor those of his affiliated enterprises, echo-chamber fan base, or their support enterprises) as sole supporting references -- EVER. For the facts about Bede and his planes, there are plenty of credible, reputable, independent major-media and industry-media sources to cite, instead. Use them, please.
^"AGAC AA-1." February 26, 2001, updated October 29, 2019, Aviation Consumer, retrieved June 24, 2023; notes: "The AA-1 started life in 1963 as the BD-1," and "The flight characteristics of the original airplane were, in general, quite bad," and "the AA-1 has a safety record much worse than average for this class of airplane."
This is the latest incarnation of the Bede Bd-4. Compare it to the photo,
Fixed. - Ahunt (talk) 15:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
