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

Cirrus has a poor rating. You can
make excuses all day, but the facts are the facts. They have killed too
many people in too short of time with too few planes.


Well, then why have we been having this long, long thread? It ain't that
simple. "The Cirrusses have killed..."??? Come on, you know better. The
statistics may not look too good for the Cirrus at the moment, depending
on how you interpret them. Are those statistics significant already with a
new aircraft? Some doubt it. Are the underlying reasons clear? Not at
all. Do we know it is something to do with the aircraft? Nope. Do we know
it is the kind of pilots/owners that are attracted by this aircraft?
Possibly. Have we seen this before with other conceptually new aircraft?
Yes.

So, your conclusions are a wee bit too simplistic, IMHO.


Perhaps they are. At what point do we say its relevant, and how long do we
take to see if the trend is improving based on training or other changes.

I think a million hours is a good number, and if there is not significant
improvement by the third set of a million hours then they had best change
the design. That is admittedly a simplistic approach, but I have not seen
anyone set a more scientific objective standard.

I hope you are paying attention to all your fellow owners who are dying

And statements like that, frankly, tend to drown all the sensible things
you might have to say.


Mea Culpa, my only excuse is that he aggravated me.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)