Paul writes:

<<I'm not even saying that Brent's belief is necessarily incorrect -- until someone does the REAL science, no one KNOWS -- only that the foundation of that belief is suspect. I won't spend much time on the obvious double-think involved in vilifying twin throttles as dangerous, unnecessary weight and an unwarranted complication in a design that duplicates all other flight (and brake) controls. This is just an example of what can happen when we BELIEVE something and close our minds.>>

Paul is correct that I, or anyone, don't "know" if a particular pilot may be more proficient with one hand or the other. I did not say that my opinions were scientific fact. My opinions are simply my opinions and worth the price you paid for them. This opinion is based on experience, observation and extrapolation. For example, I believe that if Paul were to run full speed head first into a brick wall it would hurt. This is not a statement of fact, but rather, my opinion. I invite Paul to attempt to falsify my assertion (based on a reasoned truth) by using the scientific method. I am sure he will report "stunning" results.

My opinion that a left stick works just fine is based on about 750 hours of personal experience and anecdotal evidence supplied by all but one of the IV pilots I have discussed this with. My advice to pilots with little or no experience in the IV is not to worry about it and that they will likely adapt quickly. My advice to anyone considering changing the layout of the primary controls is "don't". Nonstandard or awkward controls have significant disadvantages (think John Denver). They have to be re- engineered, custom fabricated and installed. Your unique configuration may be more complex (unreliable) and heavier. You cannot learn from the failures of others as you have a unique configuration. You and your instructor will have to train for that specific aircraft. Other aircraft of the same type will be unfamiliar to you and other pilots will find your aircraft unfamiliar. If and when you want to sell your plane your market and /or your price will likely be reduced.

It would be unfortunate if someone undertook the task based on an unfounded personal fear that they would be unable to adapt to the aircraft as designed. If, however, after considering all the consequences you are still of the mind that you want something different then go for it. After all, the bottom line is this, for an experimental aircraft that you build there is one argument that trumps most others: "It is how I want to do it". That is all you need.

But remember, just because you can build a kit experimental aircraft does not mean that you are qualified to design an experimental aircraft. Know your limits or you may die finding them. Many have.

Regards
Brent Regan

PS.
Engine controls are not the same as flight controls so "double-think" is needed when considering them in context of the flight controls. After all, if they were the same wouldn't they need to be on the "good" hand side too? Flight controls directly control the dynamics of the airframe and in a IV the aileron and elevator require constant attention. Engine controls only determine if the sum of your kinetic and potential energy is increasing, decreasing or remaining static. Engine controls could be replaced with 5 buttons without significantly effecting flight operations. These buttons would be labeled: OFF, Idle, Low Power (50%), Cruise Power (75%) and Takeoff Power (not to be confused with "Take Off Power"). But that is just my opinion. I could be wrong.
BR