Ooh, this is a good one; I've experienced the same grasping-to-grok stare at the word "Experimental" gracing the struts of my Speedster from some Young Eagles' parents at one time or another. I carefully grounded my answer around the disclaimer statement on the panel that says, "...This aircraft does not meet the construction criteria set for 'certified' aircraft...IT EXCEEDS THEM!" (Take THAT spam-canners!)

I have to agree with Flybyjim's very astute observation that the word "experimental" may be trending a tad toxic to our cause in the eye of the general public with the NTSB's widely broadcast concerns for GA's flight safety record. With the current touchy-feely trend in political correctness favoring assuaging "public perceptions" by using pre-chewed pablum to soften the news, we might want to dip in that direction a bit to assuage their collective fear of a garage-built aircraft falling on their backyard bar-be-ques. The general press hasn't been helping us with half-baked torts of misinformation designed to curry headlines instead of rational thought either.

While I think DF4's suggestion of "Dreamland" really sets my hair on fire (remind me to tell you about the real "Dreamland, aka R-4808 N, in the middle of Nevada some time...) I'm thinking more along Danzer1's lines by stressing the "custom" aspect over anything "experimental" that the non-flying public (the poor sensitive dears) might feel uncomfortable with.

Emphasizing the academic/educational aspects of our vocation/avocation (the difference lies between the McBeans and the rest of us! ) would seem to garner a more sophisticated stance in the public's eye. To that end I would add "Custom Campus" to Danzer1's list. Either that or name the area in question the "Developmental Division."

And the rest of us can just wink and call it "Dreamland" anyway!

"E.T."