"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Stu,

Wow! That's **** poor, isn't it?


No, it's a wrong statement, that's all.

Coming back to the original thread subject, from the reactions here, at
least some owners of traditional aircraft must be really afraid of
value depriciation - how else could one explain the totally
non-rational reactions to the new aircraft?

Well, first of all, the subject line is stupid in itself. (Will a 2000
design replace a 1947 design? Well DUH!!!!)

When they come out and have incredible accident rates (more in a three year
period than the plane being compared to, even with 1/50th the numbers being
operated).

When the recommended spin recovery is a drough chute (most spins, IIUC, are
low altitude...during landing).

BTW, there is no such word as non-rational.

Also, the reactions are patently rational, it's the making excuses for the
new designs and pompously and patronizingly dismissing other peoples
OPINIONS as well as FACTS (the accident rates, etc) that's getting annoying.