So, you're saying it was meant to be a demo flight, but Zoom hit the silk?

Paul

If the plane suffers structural damage from a ballistic landing, I imagine it could cause broken bones, internal hemoraging too?

I believe that the seats are designed to mitigate this. But people who have pulled the chute have both died and been injured, back injuries being common.

My impression is that the deaths occurred when the chute was pulled too late or at too high a speed.

I believe that the seats are designed to mitigate this. But people who have pulled the chute have both died and been injured, back injuries being common.

My impression is that the deaths occurred when the chute was pulled too late or at too high a speed.

So, you're saying it was meant to be a demo flight, but Zoom hit the silk?

Paul

Just in case anyone cares. Campbell and ANN on one side and Cirrus on the other have settled their lawsuit. He gave Cirrus the airplane back and everyone pays their own (substantial) lawyers bills. The basic deal was made verbally in front of a court reporter when both Dale Klapmeier and Campbell ended up in the courthouse for a deposition at the same time.

Still some sniping going on between the respective attorneys on who has to sign what, they exchanged similar pleasantries at a prior deposition :

I don't care if it's all truth or all lies I will never own a Cirrus. I consider the Cirrus a Focus (no offense to FMC) and the Bonanza a Ferrari in looks alone, don't care about the speed or the glass either. I care about the quality, looks and feel of the Bonanza, nothing else comes close. But the Cirrus is another choice and there's nothing wrong with that.

Now I feel better, this is BeechTalk BTW.

Whew! Dodged that one a few years ago.

You are entitled to your opinion. But the airplane buying public overwhelmingly disagrees with you.

By the way, since you've never owned a Cirrus, your opinion is simply your non-owner impression. They're actually nice airplanes.

And I, for one, don't see any reason to bash other brands of airplanes ---> general aviation has enough trouble already without us turning to cannibalism around here.

You are entitled to your opinion. But the airplane buying public overwhelmingly disagrees with you.

By the way, since you've never owned a Cirrus, your opinion is simply your non-owner impression. They're actually nice airplanes.

And I, for one, don't see any reason to bash other brands of airplanes ---> general aviation has enough trouble already without us turning to cannibalism around here.

For those who have owned/flown Cirrus, can you comment on the validity of the following rumors which have been perpetuated about it:

1. Cirrus is difficult to hand fly (e.g. due to lack of manual trim, controls interconnects, etc.)

2. Fit and finish is/was poor, particularly for the earlier models.

3. It does not age gracefully. 5 - 10 year old Cirrus looks like crap, rattles, shakes, and feels like it's about to fall apart.

4. Cirrus' laminar flow wing is very intolerant of icing. Without TKS, you are in a world of hurt if you pick up any ice.

What is that southern expression again 'them's fighting words'

Absolutely true.

For those that are interested in the Zoomie-Cirrus legal saga, there is a very long and entertaining thread over on POA in the Hangar Talk section. http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/sh ... hp?t=44813

It even has copies of the various motions, depositions, etc. that have been filed.

Back to your regularly-scheduled Cirrus bashing now.

Absolutely true.