On Jun 30, 9:12*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Jim Logajan writes:
According to that article the Cirrus models exhibit 1.42 to 1.76 fatal
accidents per 100,000 hours (depending on the time period selected - the
lower number was from a later period.) But the GA single engine fleet
exhibits about 1.86 fatal accidents per 100,000 hours.

Some quick research turns up numerous other sources that make the opposite
claim, i.e., that Cirrus aircraft have significantly more accidents than other
aircraft. One claims that Cirrus has more than three times the number of
fatalities as Cessna with reference to hours flown.

Lastly, it is interesting to note that the article indicates that members
of the Cirrus Owners and Pilots Association have dramatically fewer
normalized accident rates than non-members.

Well, the article certainly wouldn't say that they have dramatically more,
would it?

I don't have reason to believe that Cirrus builds unsafe aircraft, but I feel
strongly that its very aggressive marketing to certain demographic profiles
encourages people to buy and fly these aircraft who in fact shouldn't be going
near them or any other aircraft.

It'd my admittedly uninformed opinion that research would demonstrate
the performance characteristics of this airplane are more like those
of a complex high performance single than a Pa 140 and pilots need
more training than a simple sign off.