Skycatcher crashes again

"Dan Camper" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:16:23 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:

"vaughn" wrote in message
...

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

And we know how much about that, exactly?

We know the Cessna is claiming to do more testing than is required
under
the LSA Industry Standards. It that biting them on the ass?

Are you privy to the testing syllibi of Cessna and "other LSAs?"

No,

Then how do you know "Cessna is claiming to do more testing than is
required
under the LSA Industry Standards"

but given the range of folks that post here, I would not be surprised to
get a useful answer.

Perhaps, but that is beside the point.

Do you have anything useful to add yourself?

Never claimed I did. I questioned your assertion that "Cessna is
claiming
to do more testing than is required under the LSA Industry Standards."

What is your basis for that assertion?

Cessna - the new GM
--

No, FORD made the Pinto.

On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:43:18 -0400, Darkwing wrote:

"Dan Camper" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:16:23 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:

"vaughn" wrote in message
...

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

And we know how much about that, exactly?

We know the Cessna is claiming to do more testing than is required
under
the LSA Industry Standards. It that biting them on the ass?

Are you privy to the testing syllibi of Cessna and "other LSAs?"

No,

Then how do you know "Cessna is claiming to do more testing than is
required
under the LSA Industry Standards"

but given the range of folks that post here, I would not be surprised to
get a useful answer.

Perhaps, but that is beside the point.

Do you have anything useful to add yourself?

Never claimed I did. I questioned your assertion that "Cessna is
claiming
to do more testing than is required under the LSA Industry Standards."

What is your basis for that assertion?

Cessna - the new GM
--

No, FORD made the Pinto.

Ill buy into that. Regardless, Cessna has got a hyooge problem with this
bird when you have two crashes with the best of the best test pilots on
board. Got to wonder what their doing with those depositors.

"Dan Camper" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:43:18 -0400, Darkwing wrote:

"Dan Camper" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:16:23 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:

"vaughn" wrote in message
...

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

And we know how much about that, exactly?

We know the Cessna is claiming to do more testing than is required
under
the LSA Industry Standards. It that biting them on the ass?

Are you privy to the testing syllibi of Cessna and "other LSAs?"

No,

Then how do you know "Cessna is claiming to do more testing than is
required
under the LSA Industry Standards"

but given the range of folks that post here, I would not be surprised
to
get a useful answer.

Perhaps, but that is beside the point.

Do you have anything useful to add yourself?

Never claimed I did. I questioned your assertion that "Cessna is
claiming
to do more testing than is required under the LSA Industry Standards."

What is your basis for that assertion?

Cessna - the new GM
--

No, FORD made the Pinto.

Ill buy into that. Regardless, Cessna has got a hyooge problem with this
bird when you have two crashes with the best of the best test pilots on
board. Got to wonder what their doing with those depositors.

Here's your new Skycatcher! Uh, don't try to spin it.

On Mar 26, 7:58*am, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
"Dan Camper" wrote in message

...



On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:43:18 -0400, Darkwing wrote:

"Dan Camper" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:16:23 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:

"vaughn" wrote in message
...

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

And we know how much about that, exactly?

* We know the Cessna is claiming to do more testing than is required
under
the LSA Industry Standards. *It that biting them on the ass?

Are you privy to the testing syllibi of Cessna and "other LSAs?"

* No,

Then how do you know "Cessna is claiming to do more testing than is
required
under *the LSA Industry Standards"

but given the range of folks that post here, I would not be surprised
to
get a useful answer.

Perhaps, but that is beside the point.

Do you have anything useful to add yourself?

Never claimed I did. *I questioned your assertion that "Cessna is
claiming
to do more testing than is required under *the LSA Industry Standards."

What is your basis for that assertion?

Cessna - the new GM
--

No, FORD made the Pinto.

Ill buy into that. Regardless, Cessna has got a hyooge problem with this
bird when you have two crashes with the best of the best test pilots on
board. Got to wonder what their doing with those depositors.

Here's your new Skycatcher! Uh, don't try to spin it.

they are calling it a basic trainer.
Basically stay away from stalling exercises and you'll get your
training

On Mar 21, 1:50*am, "vaughn"
wrote:
Is this plane snakebit? *Or is Cessna really testing their product better
than the other LSA manufacturers?

http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/article...cher.html?WT.m...

Vaughn

I can imagine the problem resides in a refusal of the plane to drop
its nose properly and build airspeed when one wing is more deeply
stalled than the other. I'd guess a tendency to be too flat in the
spin and adding more rudder is not the solution. One thing that stops
yaw increasing is body section and the center of aerodynamic
resistance as the spin progresses. It may be that the skinny aft
section and a lack of boxiness to increase drag for yaw (and a low
inertial nose) makes things worse in that regard. As yaw rate
increases the spin starts to flatten...

My 2c.

Cheers

I can imagine the problem resides in a refusal of the plane to drop
its nose properly and build airspeed when one wing is more deeply
stalled than the other. I'd guess a tendency to be too flat in the
spin and adding more rudder is not the solution. One thing that stops
yaw increasing is body section and the center of aerodynamic
resistance as the spin progresses. It may be that the skinny aft
section and a lack of boxiness to increase drag for yaw (and a low
inertial nose) makes things worse in that regard. As yaw rate
increases the spin starts to flatten...

My 2c.


I'll add another 1cent. worth.

Notice that most new designs that are spin resistant have their vertical tail
members well in front of the horizontals. That configuration places the fin
into clean air as the airplane is spinning and descending..

Where the fin is you could double it, and it would not do much better. It needs
to be out in clean air, not blanketed by the horizontal, IMHO.
--
Jim in NC

Helen wrote:
Unlike most of the other LSA manufacturers, Cessna hasn't designed a
piston single in more than 40 years and I doubt any of the engineers
involved in their last design are still working for them.

Helen


But one would think they would have left some notes around.