"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
The only way to turn is using the brakes.
That is why they had brake fires on several aircraft.


No, that's not why. The reason for that is utter pilot incompetence.

I'm not convinced that's a fair assessment. Utter instructor incompetence,
perhaps, or maybe utter manufacturer incompetence.

It's true that operated correctly, the free-castoring nosewheel is no
trouble at all. But it's also true that otherwise competent pilots,
unfamiliar with the design, need a proper introduction to taxiing
techniques. If the manufacturer of the airplane is not correctly
emphasizing this issue to new owners, or if the instructors introducing
these new owners to their airplanes are not pointing out the necessary
techniques, then how should the pilot be held entirely to blame for the
consequences of their incorrect use of the brakes?

There are a number of factors that led to the brake fires, and the fact is
that the root factor -- the one factor that led to all the others -- is
indeed the design of the airplane. That's not to say that the design is
inherently faulty, but it IS to say that one cannot discount the influence
of the design itself in the problems that arise from that.

Owning an airplane with a free-castoring nosewheel myself, I am very
familiar with the training issues surrounding the proper use of brakes while
taxiing. Taxiing an airplane without a steerable nosehweel requires a
certain amount of planning, sometimes delicate technique, sometimes
forceful, and above all a certain degree of experience before it becomes
natural.

I myself had my brakes smoking once the first day I was training in it.
Thankfully, in my airplane one can actually see the wheels, and my
instructor let the problem get just bad enough so he could show me why taxi
technique was so important. Did I lack complete competence? Of course...I
was still learning the airplane. Do I think calling me "utterly
incompetent" would be fair? Absolutely not...that implies a degree of
ineptitude that goes far beyond simple lack of training, as does your
accusation do so as well when applied to all Cirrus pilots who had brake
fires.

And in a Cirrus (as opposed to an airplane like mine where an instructor can
watch the wheels), it's much harder for an instructor to monitor the pilot's
brake use and resulting effect on the wheels. Brakes can overheat and catch
stuff on fire, with no visible evidence until things have gotten WAY out of
hand.

I realize that, for whatever reason, you have set yourself up as the
defender of the Cirrus no matter the accusation. But in this case, you go
too far. You unfairly malign pilots who are guilty of nothing more than not
having been properly trained (and possibly who were actually in the process
of being properly trained), and you entirely ignore the very real causative
effects due to the design of the airplane (and of course, lack of any
warning devices to alert the pilot to a hazardous condition).

Pete