|
|
|
I sure have to say in my opinion there is nothing wrong with any of the
Lancair models that I have flown and the only one I have not is the fixed gear.
It is all in practice and knowing your plane, if you don't fly it every week,
don't go IFR for one thing and they are very hard to fly in IMC anyway, yea it
can be done but it takes a lot of experience. Ron
www.ronsflying.com
In a message dated 8/22/2008 9:46:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
vtailjeff@aol.com writes:
You are
kidding, right? Go to youtube.com and type in "Lancair low pass"
and watch at the knuckleheads buzzing sailboats, etc. The
responsible Lancair pilot is not in that airplane.
What we should
be asking is what do the pilots with more than 1000 Lancair hours in type have
in common. Why don't they have any accidents? I think you will find that they
approach flying very differently than the accident pilots.
We have
had a number of Lancair pilots who have attempted IMC without being current or
even having an instrument rating; Lancair pilots have run their airplane out
of fuel and crashed; Lancair pilots have attempted areobatics in the traffic
pattern with fatal results, etc. Three accident pilots this year flew into
thunderstorms. Airplane design problem? Hardly. Responsibility? Sorely
lacking. But the same is true of all GA. GA pilots do not want to abide
by the thin veneer of regulation in Part 61 or 91. Most GA pilots do not even
know a modicum of the regs that affect their flights. Think I am pulling this
out of thin air?... take a checkride tomorrow... would you pass? Would
more regulation change things? No.
Does the FAA really care that
Lancairs have had a few too many accidents this year (and btw-- what is
the standard of measure) ? Answer No. They don't enforce the regulations in
place now. Does the insurance industry really care? No. If the loss rate
is unacceptable they will not insure the market. Everyone (Dave
included--so rry to be picking on you) thinks the FAA, EAA, insurance
industry, someone else will fix the problem. Got a BIG clue here --they won't.
The person that will fix the problem is the one that flies your
airplane.
The longer I am in this business (accident investigation and
flight training) the more I think the responsible pilot is the exception
rather than the rule.
Is it riskier to fly a Lancair than a spam can?
Probably not. What type of aircraft stalled and crashed the day before the
Legacy at Osksoh? A Piper Tri Pacer--certainly not your average high
performance aircraft. I don't hear anyone complaining that the Tri Pacer is
"dangerous" because of its stall characterisitics. Only 12 reported Tri PAcer
accidents so far this year. 21 RV's. Just about every aircraft will stall and
when you do it at less than a couple hundred feet the results are as
advertised. Can we make the Lancairs stall proof? No. Would improving the
stall characteristics of the Legacy have changed the outcome of the Oshkosh
accident? No.
There is way too much speculation on this subject here.
The NTSB reports speak for themselves. I have read all 146 reports and they
are not a good reflection of our Lancair communirty. Go to www.ntsb.gov Read
them. Be informed.
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From:
Taylor, David <dtaylor@crescentpark.com>
To:
lml@lancaironline.net
Sent: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 6:53 pm
Subject: [LML] Re:
some thoughts on accidents
Everybody
keeps saying the same thing about training and taking these airplanes
seriously and then proce eds to chastise the Lancair population for
carelessness and lack of judgement.
I
do not understand this. Each and every Lancair pilot I know is extremely
serious about his plane and takes flying and planning and weather and training
extremely seriously. (Anyone who can afford these things is by
definition responsible.)
In
other words, THIS IS NOT THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM AND ALL THESE WARNINGS
WILL DO NOTHING TO REDUCE CRASHES.
I
think that the problem lies elsewhere………..
David
T.
Legacy
RG
How many pilots out there have 1000 hours in
type? Not many, but by now they know their airplanes and they have
been making good decisions, so far! Most of us who own a Lancair
today will not keep the airplane long enough to fly 1000 hours. It
will be sold to someone and the clock will start ticking again.
Then the new owner has to get through that first 200 hours where they
are at the greatest risk.
Everyone who has commented so far seems to
recognize that training is probably the answer to reducing
accidents.
0 pilots > 1000
hours in type Lancair
of the 108 reorted Lancair accident
pilots 40.7% had less than 51 hours time in type; 75.9% had less than
201 hours time in type.
if you have more than 1000 hours time in
type-- keep on doing what you are
doing.....
Regards,
Jeff
Edwards
|
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here. |
|