The new Fork Tailed Doctor Killer

On Mar 17, 6:48*am, Denny wrote:
Time moves along... The old V-tails are no longer the status symbol...
It appears to me that the Cirrus line of aircraft has become the new
"fork tailed doctor killer", along with stock broker, dentist, lawyer,
etc...

http://tinyurl.com/yqt94a

denny

I note that the Nall Report doesn't have an accident factor category
"Flown By Doctor or Lawyer".

But since those people are more likely to be able to afford a GA
aircraft, they are naturally more likely to be killed by direct
proportion.

I think that is the only reason for the "doctor killer" reputation. No
one else can afford those planes. If they could, there'd be just as
many from other professions that would die.

On Mar 17, 3:34*pm, Denny wrote:
The facts are simple: He put his son into a single engine plane with
him and made a night takeoff into a no horizon black pit, directly at
a mountain... * This is a no margin gamble and he rolled craps...

Facts? The high terrain is more than two miles west of the field. The
destination was due east. The pilot is instrument rated, according to
the FAA database.

The available facts so far suggest that there should have been ample
margin to launch safely.

On Mar 17, 5:24 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 12:34:46 -0700 (PDT), Denny
wrote:

The facts are simple: He put his son into a single engine plane with
him and made a night takeoff into a no horizon black pit, directly at
a mountain... This is a no margin gamble and he rolled craps...

Just like JFK Jr. Tragic.

This sort of accident seems to happen all too often. I don't recall
anything in the private licensing curricula about horizonless night
flight hazards. Perhaps it got overlooked, and it's time the FAA took
steps to include it in pilot training.

It does seem to be addressed in thishttp://www.faa.gov/pilots/safety/pilotsafetybrochures/media/SpatialD_....

That said, it is pretty apparent that the pilot failed to plan his
flight on the ground as he was taught before departing. That's a bad
habit to get into.

It's smart practice to file IFR for any night flight, period.

VFR only pilots should be very wary of SEL operations at night.

Is it really worth the added risk?

Dan Mc

AJ wrote:
I've heard the therm "doctor killer" before, but I have no idea how it
came to be. Where did it come from? (I have an idea, but I've been
wronf sooooo many times ...)
The term had its origin during the time period after the initial release
of the Bonanza. The aircraft was and still is extremely clean
aerodynamically. It didn't suffer fools gladly in single engine IFR.
Unfortunately, its price tag and performance figured right in the range
where Doctors and other professional people had access.
What was unfortunately happening was that a lot of these pilots were
getting Instrument Ratings and buying these airplanes with minimum
actual instrument time. A lot of Bo's were lost due to structrual
failure caused by these low time pilots entering marginal or full IFR
conditions then allowing the nose of the airplane to lower in turns.
The Bo built up speed nose low like an express train. Many of these
pilots apparently tried to raise the nose without solving the bank issue
first, which of course tightened the spiral. This led to ultimate
failures of the airframe and subsequent fatalities.
I remember two such incidents personally.
The reputation of the Bo was in part the result of what I have described
above.

--
Dudley Henriques

wrote:
This sort of accident seems to happen all too often. I don't recall
anything in the private licensing curricula about horizonless night
flight hazards. Perhaps it got overlooked, and it's time the FAA took
steps to include it in pilot training.


Actually that is covered in PPL training. In particular the "Airplane
Flying Handbook" covers the many of the nighttime hazaards.

It's also covered in the checkride but only orally.

I wonder if Denny might enlighten us about what non-pilot profession
gets his thumbs up as far as accident rates go. If the Bonanza and
Cirrus are popularly referred to as "Doctor Killers", then I guess 30
year old C150s and C152s must be the "Average Working Stiff Killers".
Or maybe doctors and lawyers lead the charge there too?

I think the reason doctors and lawyers may seem to get into more trouble
is because more doctors and lawyers (and probably software developers
now) can afford slick aircraft and they also have jobs that they really
HAVE to be there on Monday morning (I'm sorry Mr. Smith, I can't do your
heart surgery I'm weathered in ...). Get there itis is a powerful
disease. I can call in that I'm weathered in and take a day of leave,
no problem.

Margy

Airbus wrote:
In article ,
says...


I donno... I've more than one instructor tell me that they hate "Doctor
students".




There could actually be a justifiable psychological basis for such
reasoning, and the stereotype it's engendered. In classical psychoanalysis,
the financial burden of the analysis is considered to play a real role in
the success of the process. Thus for those who can easily afford it, the
prognosis is poorer. One could argue that this philosophy is extremely
convenient for the practitioners who promulgate it, but it is a recognized
aspect of analysis.

Who has difficulty believing that the 20-year-old, mowing lawns and
cleaning pools to pay for flying lessons will have better success that the
doctor who escapes from his clinic for an hour, with patients waiting, and
snaps his instructor to attention for a few runs in the pattern . . . Yet
which of the two is a likely purchase candidate for a new SR22?

Yup, my instructor had a guy who we went up for an IPC with. Started
out after a full day in court, flew out to an airport with a good
restaurant, had dinner and then started to fly for real. He'd been at
work all day and flew until 3 in morning. Good idea?

Margy

Dallas wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:16:09 -0400, Bill Watson wrote:

As time moves along, I've begun to realize that the casual trashing of
Doctor/Dentist/Lawyer pilots is as distasteful and probably as
wrong-headed as other kinds of stereotyping.

I donno... I've more than one instructor tell me that they hate "Doctor
students".


Yep, my CFII said the students that drove him the most nuts were either
doctors or lawyers. One guy in our instrument ground school (the
lawyer) went out and bought himself a Trinidad as his tool of choice for
his IR lessons. Last I heard, he hadn't completed his rating.


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane
Student - CP-ASEL

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Bill Watson wrote:
Denny wrote:
Time moves along... The old V-tails are no longer the status symbol...
It appears to me that the Cirrus line of aircraft has become the new
"fork tailed doctor killer", along with stock broker, dentist, lawyer,
etc...

As time moves along, I've begun to realize that the casual trashing of
Doctor/Dentist/Lawyer pilots is as distasteful and probably as
wrong-headed as other kinds of stereotyping.

I used to do it but I've stopped voicing it. Like most prejudices and
beliefs, changing one's attitude is much more difficult than changing
what comes out of one's mouth... but I'm trying.

Thanks

The root cause behind the stereotyping is people with large wallets and
beginners skills... and a flippant attitude: I've finished grad school,
and this isn't rocket science! Sure.. there are lots of blue collar
people with flip attitude and poor skills, but they cant pay the ante to
get into the Cirrus/Bonanza/Mooney club...

I've met some very cavalier physician pilots, and I've met more than a
few deliberate, methodical physician pilots.

Dave

In article ,
says...


I donno... I've more than one instructor tell me that they hate "Doctor
students".



There could actually be a justifiable psychological basis for such
reasoning, and the stereotype it's engendered. In classical psychoanalysis,
the financial burden of the analysis is considered to play a real role in
the success of the process. Thus for those who can easily afford it, the
prognosis is poorer. One could argue that this philosophy is extremely
convenient for the practitioners who promulgate it, but it is a recognized
aspect of analysis.

Who has difficulty believing that the 20-year-old, mowing lawns and
cleaning pools to pay for flying lessons will have better success that the
doctor who escapes from his clinic for an hour, with patients waiting, and
snaps his instructor to attention for a few runs in the pattern . . . Yet
which of the two is a likely purchase candidate for a new SR22?

Denny,

Tom, don't have statistic 'one'... What I do have is a set of MK-I
eyeballs... And I know what I see at the airports, and I know what the
'professionals' in my area are buying...


Well, that's all fine and dandy, but it is not how statistics or
accident analysis work. The earth seems pretty flat when ssen with my
eyeballs, too...

All I'm trying to say is: Before dissing an airplane and its
manufacturer plus trampling on certain professions, I'd like to see the
facts.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)