BeechTalk - BT - Stunning Story about Cirrus - Aero-News Network [Merged]

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Oct 2011, 13:49

Username Protected wrote:

From my understanding of these disorders they are difficult to 'cure' and can worsen with time if not dealt with.
How did he get his medical back to fly the Cirus or did he?

The court order that was posted earlier provided only a two year suspension. After that he had the opportunity to receritfy. Whether that happened :shrug:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Oct 2011, 14:08

Username Protected wrote:

Maybe I'm running on the wrong track here, but besides all the comments made, how does a journalistic publication say they are independent when entering into deals like this with sponsors?

I understand the manner in which deals like this are normally done is to take the plane subject to a note and have the note reduced each year by an amount of equivalent services provided. But, how can a journalist maintain they are reasonably independent when subject to an agreement like this?

Well, in part2 of his rantings he explains that the free plane was for advertising service and in no way related to his editorial content and independence :liar:

. In a way he may be right, the moment he turned on the company in his editorial content, they evidently pulled the plug on the arrangement.

He is so hung up on the fact that Alan Klapmeier gave him the deal, it should be clear to him that it was 'Alan Klapmeier acting for Cirrus aircraft Inc' and that after the leadership changed, all he had to hold on to was the verbiage of the agreement itself, not what he thought he had as an agreement with Alan.

He has sued about 5 other companies that provided him with evaluation hardware for extended periods of time in the past. Given that history, it is mystifying why Alan would even talk to the guy.

Well, now Cirrus is foreclosing on his plane. There are going to be documents filed in that case and we may get a better picture as to what the deal was.

Quote:

I understand many sponsors provide things to docs, journalists, etc, but a multi year note for something of this value would sure make me question anything this party said about said vendor. Should something like this be disclosed to readers?

Well, I can tell you how it (is supposed) to work with docs. If I receive a 'free'* laser or cardiac balloon catheters and I write or talk it at a conference, page 2 of my presentation has to state 'The author received a free laser from ABC lasers' or 'The author has received an unrestricted educational grant from ABC lasers'. Conference organizers will enforce this, also a lot of these things have to be disclosed to HHS, particularly if equipment is used for any studies related to approval of the device or post approval data collection.

'Journalists' have no such restrictions, they can be entirely in the corporate pocket of someone and dont have to tell anyone.

* 0$ lease, ownership with a forgiveable note, 'demo unit', 'consulting agreement'

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Oct 2011, 14:34

Florian: Best laugh I've had in a long time. I didn't know we had that long nose icon <g>
Thanks for making my day!

Best,

Dave

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Oct 2011, 14:55

Username Protected wrote:

... how does a journalistic publication say they are independent when entering into deals like this with sponsors?...

He's crazy, Dave. Really, honestly crazy. :ahhh:

He has had a disabling psychiatric diagnosis and delusions of grandeur. "Ordinary people would have trouble making an honest evaluation in light of this deal, but not me...."

We're nuts for reading, much less discussing, anything he writes.

This may or may not be my actual opinion and is offered for entertainment purposes only. When I say "he" above, I'm talking about a close relative. I am absolutely not talking about anyone who has ever published a magazine.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Oct 2011, 18:38

Do you think any magazine has a solid wall between the marketting staff and editorial?
Closest in Aviation would be the AOPA and ABS, but you go to Flying, Plane and Pilot, etc and find a bad review of an advertisers products.
Barter or cash about the same thing. Start up companies are usually cash strapped, so a good barter deal is a good deal for them. Most publishers would really rather have the cash.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Oct 2011, 19:48

wow, a sad day in Duluth. If true, how did they slide this far.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Oct 2011, 21:47

Username Protected wrote:

I know Dale a pretty well, and Dale is a good guy...One thing for sure in Jim's diatribe, I haven't heard of anyone who is sad to see Brent Wouter's departure from Cirrus.

I don't know any of the players in this game very well, but I agree with DR (is THAT why he has a BO? :scratch:

). Ever since Alan Klapmeier left I thought Brent Wouters was a D-Bag.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Oct 2011, 22:26

Another voice heard from, this time the former VP of Columbia.

http://www.aero-news.net/Subscribe.cfm? ... 233af33977

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Oct 2011, 22:42

Username Protected wrote:

Another voice heard from, this time the former VP of Columbia.

http://www.aero-news.net/Subscribe.cfm? ... 233af33977

Some interesting thoughts on Cirrus' dominance over Columbia, but he doesn't offer much insight into the actual Jim Campbell - Cirrus tiff.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Oct 2011, 23:06

The actual legal filing was posted on another board if you want to see that. Sounds pretty simple. Plane was sold for what seems to be a premium for a demo. Note issued by seller. Purchaser didn't pay the note according to Seller and legal notice was given.

Best,

Dave

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Oct 2011, 06:26

Just FWIW, Campbell has told me at least twice that he was the test pilot that flew the Cirrus and pulled the chute for the test before the plane came onto the market. Possibly in this test.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/CAwET3Q9Og4[/youtube]

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Oct 2011, 06:38

Just wondering, how much damage to the plane after it hit the ground. I have read about many of these cirruses crashing, with fatalities. but not one with the chute being deployed?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Oct 2011, 07:15

I believe Cirrus says to expect the plane to be totaled after a chute deployment. I would imagine the lighter the plane is the slower it would descend and the better chance the damage is less, and repairable.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Oct 2011, 07:36

Username Protected wrote:

Just FWIW, Campbell has told me at least twice that he was the test pilot that flew the Cirrus and pulled the chute for the test before the plane came onto the market.

Yeah, that's likely. :roll:

Crazy, crazy, crazy.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Oct 2011, 08:02

Username Protected wrote:

I believe Cirrus says to expect the plane to be totaled after a chute deployment. I would imagine the lighter the plane is the slower it would descend and the better chance the damage is less, and repairable.

Actually, some have been repaired and have flown again.