|
|
Hi, Ed.
Did youo get in on the start of this thread?
That was where I came in, to comment that we should not blame pilots for every mishap, but that sometimes it was the design of the airplane that was at fault.
I have personally designed, built, and flight tested three original designs, and also modified to make safe the Mitchell B-10 flyign wing, nad a Dragonfly tandem wing.
Ed, I also founded and personally designed and rand a type certifiction program for a 6-seat light plane, and was complimented by the FAA Central Region for successsfully obtaining a Provisional Type Certificate, A19CE.
I keep tryping to tell pilots who are not airplane designers that they should coonsider improving the ploane, and not blame themselves all the time, and that they should use AOAs for more safety.
I have been published many times in Kitplanes on safety issues.
Like you, I was Navy trained, starting in SNJs in 1953, and carrier quialified in them before the program went to Beechcrafts.
I trained in nav in P4Y-2s at Hutchinson and then instrument trained in P2Vs in 1954, and flew my active duty in Patron Four, in which I qualified as a PPC, and as ECM Officer during deployment to Iwakuni in ComFairPac 1955 got our squadron awarded a trip around Australia, enroute back to Whidbey Island.
I'm impressed by and respect your experience.
But you are taking offense where none was intended; I was only defending myself from Jeff's (like you) taking personally some comments about pilots being blamed, where I was trying to explain that it was the designer and the FAA at fault.
The comment about the FAA 'b aby-sitting' the airliners was not directed at the pilots, but at the fact that you have this extra protection and GenAv pilots in the safety statistics do not ... but still maintain a good safety level.
I suggest you try to be more objective, and get in on the discussion from the start.
I think pilots are very well trained, and the FAA overdoes it to the extent that a lot of my pilot-friends have stopped flying because of the cost and regulation.
Do you think you can handle that point of view?
What did you train in?
Most of my pre-flight class went single-engine,and I always regretted that I didn't, because I thought I could have qualified for jets...
I've been doing airplane design since before college and aero-engineering; and was a charter member of NASAD, the national sport aircraft designers ass'n, along with Whitman, Bede, Rutan, Pazmany, Schreder, and those guys.
I've met a lot of pilots who have lots of hours who still do not understand that AOAs are the most basic flight instrument, after the horizon, and do not understand that airplanes still can be made a lot safer ... by modifying them to improve their high AOA.stability moments.
I hope these comments cool your defensive ardor, and that you re-read my earlier posts on this thread.
I envy your hours in the air. I've probably spent as many in the shop or hangar, trying to m ake airplanes safer.
Best,
Terrence O'Neill
L235/320
N211AL
FAA Commercial, SMEL, Instrument, CFI
Restored and showed the ast Waco tail-prop Aristocraft; designed,built and flightt ested the Winner, Jake, Magnum-V8 Pickup; modified the Mitchell B-10 and Dragonfly; assisted sons building 5 EZ Risers; designed and have flown AOAs on my a/c since 1964, and sold more than 130 to 'enlightened' pilots. Researched 800 experimental and GenAv stall-spin accidents for an article in Kitplanes, and recommended AOAs, addign that the Navy adopted them in 1956 and cut accident to half, the first year.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: "Lancair Mailing List" <lml@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2006 12:11 AM
Subject: [LML] Re: response to Terrence O'Neill's posting...
Posted for "Ed Kary" <captainboris@bellsouth.net>:
Dear Terrence,
Regarding your comments in reply to Jeff's e-mail:
I found your comments fairly uninformed in response to Jeff Edwards' well
thought out e-mail that brought up a trememdous amount of valid safety points.
I am confident of Jeff's adroitness with safety statistics; this is his
"bread and butter".
Specifically, as to your comment about "airline piklots" (sic) being
"baby-sat from taxi clearance to shut down", I take exception and I find your
comment way out of line.
If you think that I need to be baby sat, I wish I could invite you on one of
my typical trans-Pacific or inter-Asia flights to observe and see for yourself
from my cockpit jump seat just how demanding the job is and why my experience
and safety training come into play on a daily basis. I don't know what you
base this comment on, unless you were a Part 121 Captain yourself who actually
needed to be "baby-sat" as you conducted your duties.
Perhaps instead of picking apart another individuals comments about low
flight time pilot error and it's relationship to possible causal factors of
high performance aircraft mishaps, you might instead take a healthy dose of
humility and attempt to learn something that just might save your own bacon
someday in your modified experimental aircraft.
Regards,
Ed Kary, Captain, Part 121, ratings: ATP, CFI, CFII
Type Ratings: 757, 767, 747, DC-10, A-330
Total Flight time: over 20,000 hrs
Former US Naval Aviator: single-seat carrier aviator; over 3000 hrs; 678
carrier landings (138 night)
Proud builder: IV-P (~65%)
--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/lml/
|
|