Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

In order to get a somewhat valid comparison.

What's invalid about comparing all Cessnas?

As the airplane gets older, the odds that it is not flying gets higher.

The numbers of both built are in the same ballpark and the ages are comparable
so the same percentage of both are likely still flying.

What evidence is there that older aircraft are not being flown?

Simple observation at any GA airport.

Because no one knows how many of them are still flying.

Nobody knows how many of the new aircraft are flying, either.

By comparing comperable age aircraft, the likelyhood is that the non-flying
fractions are both smaller and more likely equal.

If you had ever visited any real airports you would know there are lots of
airplanes that exist on the records but don't fly, or even exist anymore.

Why would Cessnas produced before Cirrus was around be especially prone to
non-flying status?

Because they are old, because the owners are likely old and have stopped
flying.

By comparing aircraft produced during the same period those differences
go away and you get a true comparison.

How about comparing Cirrus with Diamond?

Why?

Are you finally realizing your statements are not backed up by fact and
now you want to change the subject?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.