BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Jun 2014, 15:18

Username Protected wrote:

n terms of Aviation Consumer, go back and read the article. ...
Around the time of the article, COPA and Cirrus made a massive change and emphasis on training. (I have no idea if there is any linkage.) The emphasis and training has paid off with incredible safety stats for Cirrus which now rival Diamond as the safest airplane in the sky.

Paul Bertorelli wrote that Aviation Consumer article in the fall of 2011 and published in January 2012. I reviewed his draft and contributed several data points. The article arose after the COPA safety keynote "Consider CAPS" in the summer of 2011, the widespread coverage of Dr. Richard McGlaughlin's CAPS deployment in the Bahamas, and in response to continued misinformation about the Cirrus safety record.

From about 2007, Cirrus and COPA were highly active in addressing pilot training issues. The first was a joint letter about icing accidents, then two years later a joint letter about landing accidents, and then the push to consider CAPS during emergencies.

Fortunately, the recent accident statistics show a welcome trend. Only 1 presumed fatality in Brazil in the last 221 days, over 7 months.

Cheers
Rick

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Jun 2014, 15:30

Username Protected wrote:

Cirrus did not lose a plane doing spin testing. I do believe I recall a crash during early test flying and they lost a test pilot.

Arlen, as Paul responded, this is not accurate.

Cirrus test pilot Scott Anderson died while flying the prototype SR20 when testing an aileron issue in 1999. The test involved changes to the aileron hinge position, such that it bound in flight, rending the aircraft very difficult to control. Scott made it close to the runway but crashed about 1/4 mile away. Regrettably, the prototype SR20 did not have a CAPS parachute recovery system installed. I don't know if he had a personal parachute, but he was about pattern altitude close to the airport when he crashed.

Scott flew the SR20 during CAPS testing, in which they deployed the parachute 8 times.

Scott is memorialized by the ANDOE waypoint on the ILS RWY09 approach into Duluth International Airport.

Cheers
Rick

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Jun 2014, 15:32

Username Protected wrote:

The other two parts of the Cirrus propaganda or that most spins are not recoverable because they happen unplanned and too low, and also that the chute makes up the best recovery method.

Turns out that what you call Cirrus propaganda was developed by the FAA and NASA during research into stall/spin prevention.

Did you know that the FAA removed demonstration of spin recovery from the Practical Test Standards for private pilots in 1949?!? One reason apparently, too many instructors or examiners were being killed during low-altitude recoveries.

If you wish to understand more completely, let me refer you to the summary of the FAA Equivalent Level of Safety certification found in the EASA report on certifying the SR20 in Europe. Typical of European skepticism of things American, they insisted on conducting a partial spin-test matrix of at least 60 spins. They concluded that the FAA Equivalent of Safety was suitable for satisfying the spin requirements of their certification process.

Cheers
Rick

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Jun 2014, 15:35

This is a fun thread. Twin vs single is not an argument anymore. It is parachute vs no parachute with spin testing. Before long it will be diesel vs gas. The old gear heads will hold onto their love for gasoline until they die regardless of the performance. The diesels will have some very bad growing pains, but once they are perfected they will be the norm. I can hear it all now in 2024. "Why would I want one of those plastic planes that need a parchute and have an engine that sounds like a bus? I was pissed when Beech quit building round engines!"

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Jun 2014, 15:39

Username Protected wrote:

Cirrus test pilot Scott Anderson died while flying the prototype SR20 when testing an aileron issue in 1999.

Rick,
Are you saying that Scott WAS doing SPIN testing when that crash occurred? That was not my understanding. If so, I stand corrected.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Jun 2014, 16:20

Username Protected wrote:

This is a fun thread. Twin vs single is not an argument anymore. It is parachute vs no parachute with spin testing. Before long it will be diesel vs gas. The old gear heads will hold onto their love for gasoline until they die regardless of the performance. The diesels will have some very bad growing pains, but once they are perfected they will be the norm. I can hear it all now in 2024. "Why would I want one of those plastic planes that need a parchute and have an engine that sounds like a bus? I was pissed when Beech quit building round engines!"

Crikey, when you gonna learn..........

It will be petroleum vs electric. Gas/Diesel/JetA gonna go the way of the 'dodo bird'.

That being said, twins are safer than singles, plastic is better than metal, and a chute is better than no chute.

And don't worry about the round engine......it's coming back. It will be a round electric one

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Jun 2014, 16:44

Username Protected wrote:

Paul Bertorelli wrote that Aviation Consumer article in the fall of 2011 and published in January 2012. I reviewed his draft and contributed several data points. The article arose after the COPA safety keynote "Consider CAPS" in the summer of 2011, the widespread coverage of Dr. Richard McGlaughlin's CAPS deployment in the Bahamas, and in response to continued misinformation about the Cirrus safety record.

From about 2007, Cirrus and COPA were highly active in addressing pilot training issues. The first was a joint letter about icing accidents, then two years later a joint letter about landing accidents, and then the push to consider CAPS during emergencies.

Fortunately, the recent accident statistics show a welcome trend. Only 1 presumed fatality in Brazil in the last 221 days, over 7 months.

Cheers
Rick

Rick,

Interesting, I only started flying in Dec 2009. Over the next two years, the marketing/training material was pretty consistent from what I recall. After selling my SR20 in Nov 2011 it seemed like the marketing/training material I got seemed to change in emphasis. A much higher emphasis on ADM, proper use and pilot proficiency....

Tim

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Jun 2014, 17:12

Username Protected wrote:

This is a fun thread. Twin vs single is not an argument anymore. It is parachute vs no parachute with spin testing. Before long it will be diesel vs gas. The old gear heads will hold onto their love for gasoline until they die regardless of the performance. The diesels will have some very bad growing pains, but once they are perfected they will be the norm. I can hear it all now in 2024. "Why would I want one of those plastic planes that need a parchute and have an engine that sounds like a bus? I was pissed when Beech quit building round engines!"

Crikey, when you gonna learn..........

It will be petroleum vs electric. Gas/Diesel/JetA gonna go the way of the 'dodo bird'.

That being said, twins are safer than singles, plastic is better than metal, and a chute is better than no chute.

And don't worry about the round engine......it's coming back. It will be a round electric one

Cirrus convert