X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 11:26:08 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mta13.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.44] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.7) with ESMTP id 3112226 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 08:24:23 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.168.78.44; envelope-from=super_chipmunk@roadrunner.com Received: from Laptop ([74.75.176.139]) by mta13.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20080903122046.SEDI13193.mta13.adelphia.net@Laptop> for ; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 08:20:46 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <7582B19AA26F46BEAB5452302452BF3E@Laptop> From: "Bill Wade" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [LML] Lancair accidents X-Original-Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 08:23:45 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0089_01C90D9E.61DF0750" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6001.18000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6001.18049 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0089_01C90D9E.61DF0750 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I was also curious as to whether builders would have a better or worse = record than buyers and I've started going through the accident records. = At first I was thinking that the patience and persistance required to = spend years building might reveal a different mindset from a person who = wanted to buy (or hire construction of) the fastest plane they could = find or afford. Then it occurred to me that there's a certain amount of = risk-taking involved in the decision to commit large amounts of money = and time to a project that may never be completed. How might that = translate into flying behavior? The resulting plane may not handle the way the builder expected. A = buyer has the advantage of test flying a completed aircraft. How many = planes are sold because the builder didn't like the results and how many = are to get funds for the next project? Building can be addictive. = There's the effect of acetone and sanding dust on the brain and the Zen = of the long board. Some builders just want to get in the air and others = like the process. I'm not sure that any examination of records can = really get into the heads of builders or buyers. I'm about 1/3 through and haven't looked at the results yet. I'm not = sure how revealing the exercise might be. First off, the person listed = as "Manufacturer" may not have actually built the plane. Some have set = up LLC's that obscure the actual builder or owner. The accident pilot = may or may not be the registered owner. An accident may start as a = mechanical event such as loss of power on takeoff that leaves no time or = space to maneuver. To put things in perspective I also plan to look at = how many of each type have airworthiness certificates. This may take a while. On the issue of training I'd like to add formation flying to the list of = skill enhancements. My worst "Aw Sh_t" moment happened so fast there was not time to think, = only react. I hit serious wind shear when I dropped below tree line base to final = at a small grass strip (not in a Lancair). Until that point I was = consciously compensating for the conditions but I was unaware of the = most important factor in the scenario. I think the only reason I didn't dig a wing in was experience with the = plane. I just kept yanking to keep the plane upright. As it was I ended = up with a bent pitot tube and clover in an aileron hinge. I think I've improved my physical piloting skills the most from = formation flying. Not going up and flying near your buddy but structured = training like one of the FAST programs. I'm not ex-military and I had no idea the experience was out there = until stumbled across it and joined JLFC. It's hard work but I enjoy it. = What I got out of it is learning to fly a plane by feel, making minute = adjustments while your eyes are glued to your Lead. With a good (steady) = Lead you get immediate feedback for every move you make because you can = see the effect as your plane moves in relation to his. Changes of a foot = or two become obvious and you're constantly correcting. There's no other = way I can think of to get that kind of feedback. I think it's got to = build ingrained responses so that your body knows which direction and = just how much to move the stick to get a desired result. At the same time, aerobatics and spin training might help with the = disorientation. I haven't done enough to build up an automatic response = but I do know what it's like to be upside down and I have done some = spins. To expand on what John Halle said, I try not to get into something I = can't handle. I tend to be very cautious because flight conditions are = always changing and my ability (or lack) varies from day to day or = during the course of the flight depending on how I'm feeling. I don't = think judgement can be taught. It's the result of experience. Experience = comes from mistakes that you have survived and learned from. Some people = don't survive and some never learn. I agree that part of the problem with Lancairs is that there's no way = to train safely for those times when the envelope is exceeded. I don't = have a suggestion for that except to have an experienced test pilot = define the envelope for your plane then fly with you as you approach the = limits. -Bill Wade =20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Leighton=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 11:09 PM Subject: [LML] Lancair accidents I've been following this thread with interest and, while I certainly = don't have any thoughts that the professional pilots among us haven't = brought up, I have a couple thoughts/questions. First, I don't know if = it's proportional but it must be taken into account that there are a lot = more Lancairs getting into the air every year. We seem to have some = accomplished statisticians in the group and perhaps they can find out = how much the flying fleet is increasing year by year. Also, I'd be = interested in knowing whether the accident rate is higher for original = owners of the planes or is it biased to secondary owners. Another thing = that is changing a lot over the years is that more and more Lancairs are = being sold and I wonder if someone who'd rather buy than spend the time = building has a different mind set about flying than someone who is = involved enough to go through the challenge of building. Checking the = registration on Lancairs involved in accidents will show who the = original builder was. Perhaps second owners are less likely to get = appropriate training because they haven't been following all the = conversations we see on the LML and may regard a Lancair as just another = airplane. Just a thought. Another factor may be that in many cases = builders tend to not do much flying during the building process and may = not be as sharp during the initial flight testing as they should be. =20 As I said, I have more questions than answers. Perhaps others have = some numbers to apply to these situations. Might be interesting and = enlightening. Leighton Mangels ------=_NextPart_000_0089_01C90D9E.61DF0750 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
  I was also curious as to = whether=20 builders would have a better or worse record than buyers and I've = started going=20 through the accident records. At first I was thinking that the patience = and=20 persistance required to spend years building might reveal a different = mindset=20 from a person who wanted to buy (or hire construction of) the fastest = plane they=20 could find or afford. Then it occurred to me that there's a certain = amount of=20 risk-taking involved in the decision to commit large amounts of money = and time=20 to a project that may never be completed. How might that translate into = flying=20 behavior?
 
 The resulting plane may not = handle the way=20 the builder expected. A buyer has the advantage of test flying a = completed=20 aircraft. How many planes are sold because the builder didn't like the = results=20 and how many are to get funds for the next project? Building can be = addictive.=20 There's the effect of acetone and sanding dust on the brain and the Zen = of the=20 long board. Some builders just want to get in the air and others like = the=20 process. I'm not sure that any examination of records can really get = into the=20 heads of builders or buyers.
 
  I'm about 1/3 through and = haven't looked at=20 the results yet. I'm not sure how revealing the exercise might be. First = off,=20 the person listed as "Manufacturer" may not have actually built the = plane.=20 Some have set up LLC's that obscure the actual builder or owner. = The=20 accident pilot may or may not be the registered owner. An accident may = start as=20 a mechanical event such as loss of power on takeoff that = leaves=20 no time or space to maneuver. To put things in perspective = I also=20 plan to look at how many of each type have airworthiness=20 certificates.
 
 This may take a = while.
 
On the issue of training I'd like to = add formation=20 flying to the list of skill enhancements.
 
 My worst "Aw Sh_t" moment = happened so fast=20 there was not time to think, only react.
 
 I hit serious wind shear when I = dropped below=20 tree line base to final at a small grass strip (not in a Lancair). = Until=20 that point I was consciously compensating for the conditions but I was = unaware=20 of the most important factor in the scenario.
 
  I think the only reason I didn't = dig a wing=20 in was experience with the plane. I just kept yanking to keep the plane = upright.=20 As it was I ended up with a bent pitot tube and clover in an = aileron=20 hinge.
 
 I think I've improved my = physical=20 piloting skills the most from formation flying. Not going up and=20 flying near your buddy but structured training like one of the FAST = programs.
 
 I'm not ex-military and I had no = idea the=20 experience was out there until stumbled across it and joined = JLFC.=20 It's hard work but I enjoy it. What I got out of it is learning to fly a = plane=20 by feel, making minute adjustments while your eyes are glued to your = Lead. With=20 a good (steady) Lead you get immediate feedback for every move you make = because=20 you can see the effect as your plane moves in relation to his. Changes = of a foot=20 or two become obvious and you're constantly correcting. There's no = other=20 way I can think of to get that kind of feedback. I think it's got to = build=20 ingrained responses so that your body knows which direction and = just how=20 much to move the stick to get a desired result.
 
 At the same time, aerobatics and = spin=20 training might help with the disorientation. I haven't done enough to = build up=20 an automatic response but I do know what it's like to be upside down and = I have=20 done some spins.
 
  To expand on what John Halle = said, I try not=20 to get into something I can't handle. I tend to be very cautious because = flight=20 conditions are always changing and my ability (or lack) varies from day = to day=20 or during the course of the flight depending on how I'm feeling. I = don't=20 think judgement can be taught. It's the result of experience. Experience = comes=20 from mistakes that you have survived and learned from. Some people don't = survive=20 and some never learn.
 
 I agree that part of the = problem with=20 Lancairs is that there's no way to train safely for those times when the = envelope is exceeded. I don't have a suggestion for that except to = have an=20 experienced test pilot define the envelope for your plane then fly=20 with you as you approach the limits.  -Bill Wade
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Leighton
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, = 2008 11:09=20 PM
Subject: [LML] Lancair = accidents

I've been following this thread with interest and, = while I=20 certainly don't have any thoughts that the professional pilots among = us=20 haven't brought up, I have a couple thoughts/questions.  First, I = don't=20 know if it's proportional but it must be taken into account that there = are a=20 lot more Lancairs getting into the air every year.  We seem to = have some=20 accomplished statisticians in the group and perhaps they can find out = how much=20 the flying fleet is increasing year by year.  Also, I'd be = interested in=20 knowing whether the accident rate is higher for original owners of the = planes=20 or is it biased to secondary owners.  Another thing that is = changing a=20 lot over the years is that more and more Lancairs are being sold and I = wonder=20 if someone who'd rather buy than spend the time building has a = different mind=20 set about flying than someone who is involved enough to go through the = challenge of building.  Checking the registration on Lancairs = involved in=20 accidents will show who the original builder was.  Perhaps second = owners=20 are less likely to get appropriate training because they haven't been=20 following all the conversations we see on the LML and may regard a = Lancair as=20 just another airplane.  Just a thought.  Another factor may = be that=20 in many cases builders tend to not do much flying during the building = process=20 and may not be as sharp during the initial flight testing as = they should=20 be. 
 
As I said, I have more questions than = answers.  Perhaps=20 others have some numbers to apply to these situations.  Might be=20 interesting and enlightening.
 
Leighton = Mangels
------=_NextPart_000_0089_01C90D9E.61DF0750--