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