Good evening all....

Well your logic is interesting specter177....now would an aircraft with a solid metal frame versus a hollow metal frame still be a rag and tube?
Let's look at a bomber from World War One "WW1".
Would the size of the aircraft and the two or more engines support a hollow metal tube construction? Not sure myself, I would think the structure would be made of solid stamped metal to make it stronger than let's say a hollow metal tube welded together. I don't know...just my thought.
So let me think about this now, to be truly rag and tube the metal frame must be hollow like a water pipe...right? Help me out here now....

Hi Doug...dang glad you jumped in because I need your expertise.
The DH.60M Metal Moth was for service in the colonies if I remember correctly and it makes no sense to me. Canada taking our climate which changes four times a year, would the plywood construction not have been just as good and kept the cost of repairs down. The aircraft must have spent a lot of time on skis and floats, hard on a fabric covered steel tube fuselage I would think.
Just my thoughts folks...

Cheers...Happy Landings...Doug