Cirrus down, Chapel Hill NC

On Jul 16, 9:36*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Jim Logajan writes:
So your dataset shows the Cirrus is the safer airplane.

I've already pointed out that the opposite appears to be true when all the
data is considered.

SHOW US THE DATA YOU CONSIDERED.

SEE MY OTHER POST.

I WANT THE DATA YOU USED TO COME UP WITH YOUR CONCLUSIONS.

WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ON MY QUESTION????????????

In article ,
says...


The advertisement fails to make any mention of the fact that flight in icing
conditions is dangerous, even if the aircraft is certified for flight into
known icing conditions. (BS clipped)


The advertisement fails only to conform to your own completely misinformed
conception of what icing is all about. This is a real example of why the fact
that you do not fly airplanes disqualifies you from forming meaningful
opinions and insights into the potential dangers of flying. It’s all about
experience. (Here’s your cue to set us all laughing by stating that experience
is of no importance in safe flying).

I don’t fly the Rockies, but I fly all the time in the mountains of the
Northeast, all seasons, IFR mostly. Icing is a concern for a good portion of
the year. Forecasts are of limited value, as to cover their a***s they
forecast very wide-ranging icing probability at a broad range of altitudes.
Someone like you has to take these forecasts at face value, because you don’t
know any better, but those of us with experience know that we’re just as
likely to not see any ice at all, and if there’s ice at 7000, we’ll likely be
clear of it at 4000 (terrain permitting) or at 10000 (climb rate permitting).
The recent ADDS icing tools help a lot, as do pireps, but if you’re launching
early, there may not be very many of the latter, and some are not pertinent.
If I’m flying from Albany to Buffalo, a B747 descending through 15000 over
Bradley inbound to JFK reporting moderate rime doesn’t help me, and neither
does a CRJ at FL200 right over ALB reporting nil. What matters is having an
idea of when and where we might encounter ice, and most of all, a plan for
what to do about it. It is not instant death, as you believe, if you see some
ice collecting in the corner of the windshield. You just have to be ready, and
know what to do about it. In this respect the anti-icing packages in the
Mooney and now Cirrus are just a HUGE benefit and allow you to file and fly
almost anywhere with confidence. Your statement that this is _diametrically
opposed_ to reality shows only that you and reality are not even distant
acquaintances!

You have confirmed, through your last post, your complete ignorance of the
subject, which comes as no surprise to most of us because there is no
substitute for experience in this matter. If you try to trump experience with
silly platitudes, you end up with a complete flight ban, due to _potential
risks_ which is what you have imposed on yourself, to the benefit of all
humanity certainly.

Go ahead - we’re all waiting for you to label my attitude cavalier and angry
young male endangering lives, but it’s really only the voice of a moderate
amount of experience (many here have much more) countering your timid whimper
of ignorance. Go for it. Give us a nice, pithy statement about _bad things
happening_ and _lives at risk_. You’re on!

What I didn't like in the video portion of the advertisement was the fact he
said "weather was bad, so we needed to get off quickly" and later "we had to
get in". I have been in both situations, but I consider them learning
experiences, and I certainly wouldn't advertise them.

All the stuff they say about ice protection with these systems is true, not
that you would know that.



In article ,
says...


The advertisement fails to make any mention of the fact that flight in icing
conditions is dangerous, even if the aircraft is certified for flight into
known icing conditions. The latter certification gives you an extra margin
for
escape from the icing conditions; it is not a blank check that allows you to
flying through icing conditions whenever and wherever you wish with impunity.

I notice that "flight into" is even omitted at certain points, as if to hide
the fact that FIKI isn't designed for continuous arbitrary icing conditions.

FIKI allows you to enter icing conditions within certain narrow limits and
continue flying indefinitely within those narrow limits. That doesn't mean
that it's a good idea to fly in icing conditions. And icing conditions can
change within seconds from something your aircraft can tolerate to something
that will bring your aircraft down in just a few minutes.

The only prudent way to deal with icing is to avoid it. FIKI gives you less
reason to panic if you find yourself in icing conditions, but no more.

The article makes it sound like you can just sail through any type of icing
conditions without a care in the world. It doesn't explicitly say this, it
just does just about everything _but_ explicitly say it.

I do agree
that the video portion of the ad glorifies flight with reduced margins, and
this is probably irresponsible advertising.

I haven't seen the video part. I'll have to take a look at it, although that
will probably only worry me more.

There is considerable discussion as to whether Cirrus is over-represented
in
accident and fatality statistics, some of it quite well formulated, unlike
your comparisons with wildly different airplane populations (C172/Diamond)
which are quite meaningless. It will take more analysis to determine if,
and
the extent to which Cirrus’ wide popularity has put too many
inexperienced
pilots at the commands of too fast and too demanding an aircraft, with
resultant degradation of accident statistics. Today, such a statement is at
best an oversimplification, and your assertion that this is due to an
advertising campaign luring inexperienced pilots to their graves is hasty
and irresponsible.

No more hasty and irresponsible than asserting that any Cessna 172
manufactured before Cirrus starting building airplanes can be ignored in
statistics because it's probably no longer flying.

T182T writes:

It is not instant death, as you believe, if you see some
ice collecting in the corner of the windshield.

I don't believe that it is instant death. But I also know that it's not a good
idea to fly blissfully on through icing conditions, no matter what equipment
you have on board.

You just have to be ready, and know what to do about it.

And what exactly do you do about it?

In this respect the anti-icing packages in the
Mooney and now Cirrus are just a HUGE benefit and allow you to file and fly
almost anywhere with confidence. Your statement that this is _diametrically
opposed_ to reality shows only that you and reality are not even distant
acquaintances!

An icing package gives you more time to get out of icing conditions, that's
all.

Go ahead - we’re all waiting for you to label my attitude cavalier and angry
young male endangering lives, but it’s really only the voice of a moderate
amount of experience (many here have much more) countering your timid whimper
of ignorance.

It sounds like the voice of someone who has encountered icing but hasn't been
nearly killed by it yet. The more often you get away with something, the more
you tend to assume that you'll always be able to get away with it.

Jim Logajan writes:

It doesn't matter what you have pointed out, as the discussion concerns
aviation, not individuals. Why do you insist on making this discussion
about you?

There are three occurrences of "you" in this post, and only one mention of
aviation. Does that answer the question?

You just have to be ready, and know what to do about it.

And what exactly do you do about it?

YOU KNOW THIS ANSWER, WHY DO YOU ASK?????????????

On Jul 17, 6:45*am, Mxsmanic wrote:

It sounds like the voice of someone who has encountered icing but hasn't been
nearly killed by it yet. The more often you get away with something, the more
you tend to assume that you'll always be able to get away with it.

WRONG.

WHAT IS YOUR REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE TO BACK YOUR STATEMENT UP?

Mxsmanic wrote:
T182T writes:

It is not instant death, as you believe, if you see some
ice collecting in the corner of the windshield.

I don't believe that it is instant death. But I also know that it's not a good
idea to fly blissfully on through icing conditions, no matter what equipment
you have on board.

"fly blissfully on"?

That's an inane and ignorant thing to say.

You just have to be ready, and know what to do about it.

And what exactly do you do about it?

Even student pilots know what to do about it.

Take some lessons and find out.

In this respect the anti-icing packages in the
Mooney and now Cirrus are just a HUGE benefit and allow you to file and fly
almost anywhere with confidence. Your statement that this is _diametrically
opposed_ to reality shows only that you and reality are not even distant
acquaintances!

An icing package gives you more time to get out of icing conditions, that's
all.

A fire extinguisher will put out a fire and that's all.

Go ahead - we’re all waiting for you to label my attitude cavalier and angry
young male endangering lives, but it’s really only the voice of a moderate
amount of experience (many here have much more) countering your timid whimper
of ignorance.

It sounds like the voice of someone who has encountered icing but hasn't been
nearly killed by it yet. The more often you get away with something, the more
you tend to assume that you'll always be able to get away with it.

You sound like someone who hasn't a clue what they are talking about.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Jul 17, 12:18*pm, wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
T182T writes:

It is not instant death, as you believe, if you see some
ice collecting in the corner of the windshield.

I don't believe that it is instant death. But I also know that it's not a good
idea to fly blissfully on through icing conditions, no matter what equipment
you have on board.

"fly blissfully on"?

That's an inane and ignorant thing to say.

You just have to be ready, and know what to do about it.

And what exactly do you do about it?

Even student pilots know what to do about it.

Take some lessons and find out.

In this respect the anti-icing packages in the
Mooney and now Cirrus are just a HUGE benefit and allow you to file and fly
almost anywhere with confidence. Your statement that this is _diametrically
opposed_ to reality shows only that you and reality are not even distant
acquaintances!

An icing package gives you more time to get out of icing conditions, that's
all.

A fire extinguisher will put out a fire and that's all.

Go ahead - we’re all waiting for you to label my attitude cavalier and angry
young male endangering lives, but it’s really only the voice of a moderate
amount of experience (many here have much more) countering your timid whimper
of ignorance.

It sounds like the voice of someone who has encountered icing but hasn't been
nearly killed by it yet. The more often you get away with something, the more
you tend to assume that you'll always be able to get away with it.

You sound like someone who hasn't a clue what they are talking about.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Certainly it's someone who has no need to monitor forecasted freezing
levels and real time pilot reports when flight planning when
meteorological conditions are favorable for ice formation. It is very
rare for me to cancel a planned flight for weather related reasons
unless those conditions include reported ice at reasonable altitudes,
penetrating an active warm front with a temp inversion that includes
freezing rain, or embedded thunderstorms. Airports simply don't go
below minimums that often -- my last weather caused missed approach
was years ago on a non precision approach into an uncontrolled airport
in the mountains of PA and I'd bet very few of us SEL or light twin
pilots here have flown more than one or two in the past half dozen
years.

On Jul 17, 7:32*pm, a wrote:

Airports simply don't go
below minimums that often -- my last weather caused missed approach
was years ago on a non precision approach into an uncontrolled airport
in the mountains of PA and I'd bet very few of us SEL or light twin
pilots here have flown more than one or two in the past half dozen
years.

Actually, A it may be a regional thing but it's very common for my
airport KMBO to go below approach minimums especially in the morning
when low stratus moves up from the gulf.. ILS KJAN minimums are very
common in fall and spring here as well.

I would have shot lots of those ILS approaches myself however, that
meant not coming home to my own non precision approach airport (KMBO)