| The Prescott Pusher was designed by Tom Prescott, an engineer
whose career had taken him from Sikorsky to Piper to LearJet.
With financial backing from several investors and partners, Tom
left LearJet in November 1983 to work full time on the construction
of the Prescott Pusher prototype. Tom immediately ordered a CAD/CAM
system. |
| The use of a CAD/CAM system was central to Tom's business plan.
Once his design was entered into the CAD system, the CNC machinery
would cut and drill stock with absolute precision. The system
would also be utilized to fabricate parts, production die, and
even whittle male molds for the fiberglass fuselage shells. Design
changes could be made quickly on the computer and be reflected
immediately in the CNC-produced parts. Engineering drawings for
the kit's plans would be a natural byproduct of the CAD system
as would inventory control. An example of the system's utility
and efficiency was in the manufacture of the dies used to form
the wing leading edges—the CNC machinery milled the leading edge
dies out of solid blocks of steel in a matter of days. Dies for
the stamped aluminum wing and tail group ribs were similarly fabricated.
With the help of the CAD/CAM system, the prototype was scratch
built in just 18 months along with virtually all the production
tooling for manufacture of the kit's parts. |
| The Prescott Pusher made its Oshkosh debut in 1985
and received a lot of attention and favorable publicity. Kits
began selling well. The Prescott Pusher was marketed and as a
pay-as-you-go kit plane. Builders would buy and build a series
of sub-kits in succession, 33 in all. Each sub-kit came with an
assembly manual and a step-by-step instruction video. Early builders
remarked of the quality and fit of the sub-kits. The step-by-step
instructions and the pre-drilled pre-cut parts made assembly relatively
easy. |
| Glowing write-ups in several magazines followed the plane's
Oshkosh debut. In the articles, much was made of the CAD/CAM system
used in the design and production of the kit. One author wrote,
"I believe I can safely predict that the Prescott Pusher will
become an institution in EAA, alongside many other names that
are synonymous with high quality flying machines." In speaking
of the company, the same author wrote, "They're here to stay ...
they have long term financing and they have expertise in design,
management and marketing, so don't sell Prescott Aeronautical
short." Unfortunately, the author was proved incorrect when Prescott
Aeronautical went tango uniform three years later in 1989. |
| So what went wrong? Well, despite Tom Prescott's genus in utilizing
the CAD/CAM system, his airplane was lacking in several respects.
The bulbous fuselage was draggy. The short landing gear mandated
a short and inefficient prop. The marginal prop to ground clearance
required that the main gear be placed further aft than otherwise
optimal so that the prop would have sufficient ground clearance
in rotation and flare. The stall speed was high. What ultimately
killed the market for the Prescott Pusher, however, was the negative
buzz generated after some early completions. The word was that
the planes not only had poor performance, but they had a some
spooky flying characteristics as well. |
| One owner with experience flying more than 50 different
aircraft wrote, "This is a demanding aircraft and if you are a
172 driver you should try something else." Some of the problems
reported were high takeoff (rotation) speeds, pilot induced oscillations
on takeoff, and uncommanded rolls on takeoff. |
| In 1991, Sport Aviation published a feature article on a recently
completed Prescott Pusher. The builder, an airline pilot, was
quoted as saying: |
| The only thing I can fault in the handling is the pitch sensitivity,
and that's something that can be dealt with. I have to get an
artificial 'feel' system in it, and that's a priority project.
Technique can compensate for the sensitivity, but the feel system
is needed. |
| The builder also claimed that he had successfully lowered the
stall speed from 75 mph to 60 mph by installing gap seals on the
ailerons and flaps. Unfortunately, one year later the builder
crashed his airplane in a go-around attempt gone bad. Fortunately,
he was only slightly injured. Here is the NTSB
report. |
| The Prescott Pusher story has this interesting footnote. The
Chief Operating Officer of Prescott Aeronautical was Linden Blue,
who was also a substantial investor in the company. Linden Blue
was the former President and CEO of Beech Aircraft. During his
tenure at Beech Aircraft, Linden Blue initiated and championed
the decidedly less than successful Beech Starship program. |