Iced up Cirrus crashes

Richard Collins wrote about this type of things 10 years ago. He looked
at why us Mooney owners pay more in insurance than Arrow pilots and why
Mooneys have more wx accidents. His opinion was that the Mooney was
made to be a traveling machine, just like the Cirrus. When you have a
fast traveling machine you go places. When you go places you encounter
more weather. 172's don't encouter as many wx related accidents because
if your mission is to cross the Sierras 10 times per year, you don't
buy a 172.
Perhaps the Cirrus appeals to less experienced pilots as well.
Personally, I don't see the chute as a selling point. Most accidents
happen close to the ground where the chute doesn't help and most wx
accidents happen after the plane has over stressed and come apart,
again something the chute doesn't really address (obviously since you
can't even use the chute when you're in an uncontrolled high speed
decent typical of TS or ice encounters).However, that's just my
opinion. I'm sure newly minted pilots see it as more of a benefit and
perhaps there, they attrack more inexperienced pilots.

-Robert CFI and Mooney driver

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
Richard Collins wrote about this type of things 10 years ago. He looked
at why us Mooney owners pay more in insurance than Arrow pilots and why
Mooneys have more wx accidents. His opinion was that the Mooney was
made to be a traveling machine, just like the Cirrus. When you have a
fast traveling machine you go places. When you go places you encounter
more weather. 172's don't encouter as many wx related accidents because
if your mission is to cross the Sierras 10 times per year, you don't
buy a 172.
Perhaps the Cirrus appeals to less experienced pilots as well.

I wonder if new(er) pilots see it as a fixed gear single and automatically
equate it to a 172 or a 182 at most. The analogy is only remotely linked.

Just wondering.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Richard Collins wrote about this type of things 10 years ago. He
looked
at why us Mooney owners pay more in insurance than Arrow pilots and
why
Mooneys have more wx accidents.

This is all well and good, but the reality is that the Mooney is a
significantly different airplane. It's 10-15 kts faster than an
equivalent Arrow on the same engine and fuel burn, and it actually has
a higher useful load. In fact, even the Comanche 180 is faster than an
Arrow and has a higher useful load and a bigger cabin - on 20 hp less.
That's because, as I've mentioned before, the Arrow isn't really a
complex airplane - it's a Cherokee with a couple of extra levers. It
handles like a Cherokee - stable and docile. The Mooney is more
demanding to fly, and will overload a pilot faster.

In other words - it's not just the mission, it's the airplane too.

Michael

I think the plane is the mission. The reason you get into more Wx in a
Mooney is because its faster with a higher load. It becomes the
airplane of choice for people who want to fly long distances. If it had
shorter legs like an Arrow, it wouldn't cross as many wx systems.

But getting into weather is not in and of itself enough to cause an
accident. You also need to make bad decisions and/or mishandle the
airplane. The higher the workload, the more likely you are to do that,
all else being equal.

The workload of flying a Mooney is higher than the workload of flying
an Arrow. It's not as forgiving. Thus I would expect that the same
pilots flying the same airplane in the same conditions would
nonetheless have more accidents in a Mooney.

Michael

I don't follow the workload issue. Yes, the Mooney may require a bit
more skill to land but in cruise I've not noticed it flying much
different than an Arrow (just faster). I've had both, I love my Mooney
best. The Mooney is the ideal plane for tall guys like me. My partner
is of average size and finds it difficult to find the rabbit on the ILS
and see over the glareshield as well as trying to reach the rudders.
Short guys beware.

-Robert

I don't follow the workload issue. Yes, the Mooney may require a bit
more skill to land but in cruise I've not noticed it flying much
different than an Arrow (just faster).

I realize that once you reach a certain level of experience it is hard
to tell the difference, but flying in cruise (IMC) is, IMO, more
difficult in the Mooney. It takes more cycles to have a good overall
scan going and hold altitude and heading, especially in turbulence.
Also, going faster means that you have less time to make decisions as
you proceed into bad weather. Those two issues, IMO, would lead to a
higher accident rate in the Mooney, especially for low time pilots.

Michael