I would have to say that any plane is relatively safe while in the hangar.

This may be a way to look at it, but it would not be a way to find out
anything.

I have read many of your posts, and consider you bright and well informed.
However, I have to disagree with you on this one.

It is only the risk involved in USING the plane that we are discussing here.
The risk of OWNING the plane would be more of a financial issue. I don't
much about Mr. Colins, but he seems to be stretching on this one.

There is a case to be made that Cirrus as a company has done a lot to
rejuvenate general aviation, and that by hammering them we are only creating
an environment where other innovators will just be scared away. I think
that many in the press are willing to listen to Cirrus' arguments, and give
them a break for this reason.

I think that this forum would be a good place to get the facts straight
though. We have better alternatives - Diamond and Lancair. It may not be
true that every Cirrus sale comes at the expense of one of the others, but I
would be much happier seeing more of the other two brands being sold
instead.



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

One way to look at it is total aircraft numbers versus aircraft with
fatal accidents - which is what Richard Collins does in the latest
issue of Flying. Cirrus is comparable to the 182S that way. Many other
planes are much worse. The one fatal accident after the mag appeared
doesn't change that.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)