Iced up Cirrus descends by BRS

Here are some stats for the US (from the NTSB database):

New Cessna 182: Fatal accidents 11 (18 fatalities)
Cirrus: Fatal accidents 15 (32 fatalities)

For this to be meaningful one had to know the number of airplanes in
the US (I believe there are similar numbers for new C182 and Cirrus),
or the numbers of hours flown or anything else to make the two groups
comparable. Just from the above numbers, though, Cirri crashed 27%
more with fatal results than new Cessna 182S/T, and 44% more people got
killed.

I do not quite understand why people always compare Cirrus with C182.
The Cirrus is quite a bit more expensive, has a lot more horsepower,
and has a much sleeker wing which much higher wing loading. A more
suitable comparison IMHO to all the above parameters would be Mooneys
or Lancair/Columbias.

Gerd

Gwengler,

Just from the above numbers,


They are meaningless, as you well know. The least you'd have to factor
in is fleet size. You would probably want to come up with a reasonable
estimate of hours flown, as is done regularly by aviation publication
safety reviews, and as was done in this case.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

as is done regularly by aviation publication safety reviews, and as was done in this case

Can you please quote the aviation publication safety review in "this
case"?

Gerd

Gwengler,

I think it was Collins in "Flying". I'll try to find it in the
basement.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)