![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dallas writes:
Don't know about low time... but, yeah... his fault. Sec. 91.113 Right-of-way rules: However, an aircraft towing or refueling other aircraft has the right-of-way over all other engine-driven aircraft. There is no chance the accident is not the fault of the Cirrus pilot. The NTSB report will read: Failure to give right of way and failure to see and avoid. Yup. And the incredible thing is that the same thing has happened before, also with a Cirrus pilot clipping the tow line of a tow plane. In the previous case, the pilot pulled the parachute (I guess it didn't occur to him to fly the plane, although I'm not sure how much damage was done), and floated safely to earth. Obviously it was the Cirrus pilot's fault in that incident as well. Cirrus has a poor accident record. There's nothing wrong with the aircraft, but the company markets its aircraft very aggressively to very naïve, low-time pilots, emphasizing characteristics other than safety (e.g. prestige, comfort) and deliberately presenting certain things in a way that is clearly intended to inspire a false sense of security. This means that a lot of inexperienced and/or careless pilots buy Cirrus aircraft. For example, if you look at their marketing, they now talk about icing protection without mentioning the "entry into known" part, thus creating the impression that their icing protection allows you to fly through icing conditions with impunity, which is not at all what FIKI certification is all about. And they talk about their parachutes as if these can solve any problem and compensate for any lack of skill on the part of the pilot--without mentioning that they originally used the parachutes just to get the aircraft certified (rather than spin testing, if I recall correctly). There are some Cirrus pilots who are now dead who regularly reassured their entourage that flying the aircraft was safe because it had a parachute. Either those pilots were lying, or they had been seriously misled by someone. Cirrus is the "fork-tailed doctor killer" of our era. The old V-tailed Bonanzas tended to attract low-time, low-competence, high-income pilots, and Cirrus aircraft are doing the same thing. I don't know if Beechcraft ever deliberately tried to target that market as Cirrus is doing, though. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ohio midair crash kills 3 | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 33 | May 21st 07 11:38 AM |
Cirrus crash in NYC | SAM 303a | Soaring | 18 | October 16th 06 03:14 PM |
I think I know why so many Cirrus' crash | Ron Lee | Piloting | 103 | January 29th 06 05:32 AM |
Another Cirrus crash | James L. Freeman | Piloting | 42 | April 24th 04 11:21 PM |