Fb_Gumby

Don't know about eastern block designs but anything made in the west in the last 50 years or so the seat design has to meet certain crash standards. 

 

And that is why in my original post on this subject, I made and exception for the seats in an aircraft.  You are correct, the seats are designed to specific crash loads which I believe are 9G down and 9G forward.

Low speed STOL doesn't need to be "Normally" able to handle high negative G.    Strut or no strut the structure would have to achieve the design structural loads. A strut makes the wing more stiff but a normal strut doesn't work particularly well in a negative G situation. Having BOTH wings fail at the point of attachment to the fuselage without any obvious damage otherwise , shows a design weakness pretty clearly. Nev

 

Aircraft are designed to withstand specific flight loads, and except for the seats, they are not designed to withstand crash loads.  So it seems to me that attributing the damage to a design weakness in this case (a crash) misses the mark.  You cannot say there was a design weakness, because the wings were not designed to stay on in a crash.  No aircraft wing is designed to stay on in a crash.