Joe Feise wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote on 10/12/06 21:27:

Jay Honeck writes:

Heck, that means that in, um, er, something like 151.5 years there will
be NO Cirrus SR-20s left flying at all!
The aircraft seem like the type that might appeal to low-time pilots
who think that special gadgets will keep them safe and/or free of
accidents (or surviving accidents). Naturally this would result in
higher accident numbers, even if the aircraft is not fundamentally
unsafe.

Also, it seems like the aircraft is actively marketed to precisely
this type of buyer, which makes things even worse. It looks like Carl
Lidle fell for it (in more ways than one).



Bull. He did the right thing, realizing that he was a low-time pilot, and had a
flight instructor with him.


But did the flight instructor believe he was at any risk? Here's a blurb
I took from one of the many stories:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/12/plane.crash/index.html

"""
In a 2004 article in the San Gabriel Valley (California) Tribune,
Stanger said that flying is very safe.

"The most dangerous part about flying is the drive to the airport," he
said. "It's a wing. It's very safe. It's the wing that flies, it's not
the engine."

"""

Seems like the instructor believed that the drive to the airport was
more dangerous. Isn't that only true for commercial flight?

--
Mike