When do you use autopilots?

Steve Foley wrote:

Please cite a source for this comment.


Perhaps you want to shoot the messenger, but it is true.

Transport catagory aircraft are safer than GA aircraft.

Dual load paths, for instance. Many critical loads carried by the
airframe are dual load paths, one can actually fail. I think there are
only 2 bizjets certified to the older part 25 standards. Before they got
watered down. Or was it 23? No I think 25. I am Canadian and not up you
your certification standards. But it seems, more-so than you.

Bird strike testing. I have seen birds come off the glass of transport
aircraft, and pictures of birds entering the cocpits of ga aircraft.

Lightning strike protection. Discharge paths, no I am not talking about
the static wicks. I have a friend in a large jet that took a hit that
would no doubt would blow apart a ga plane.

I will simpify this part. One thing that makes turbines safer than
pistons. A turbine (okay yes, there are ga turbines now) never flies out
of the green arc (30 fps). Many piston operators fly (moonies of course)
and decend letting the airspeed build up into the yellow in smooth air.
Aside from not beeing painted, but addressing the certification
standards, a turbine redline(parber pole) allows for the same gust load
tolerance as the top of the yellow arc (15 fps). Pistons are allowed to
fly faster such that less of a gust load and break them. Why? Well so
they can go faster and be popular? Perhaps. Then this was changed for
pistons somewhat but also was the way it was calculated resulting in
little change overall.

Out of time. I am supposed to be working on something.

Cite a source? Ha! Too basic to bother. Get educated.

Adding to safety, dual and triple, "this and thats" (technical phrase
for things like actuators and means to split controls or disconnect).
Plus the way they are required to be operated. I am sure though all this
would go out the window if the pilot training was the same as for GA. I
think is some parts of the world it is.

John

The Visitor wrote in news:V24%g.172855
:



Steve Foley wrote:

Please cite a source for this comment.

Perhaps you want to shoot the messenger, but it is true.

Transport catagory aircraft are safer than GA aircraft.

The disturbing comment from Manix is that GA aircraft are less safe because
of "their questionable maintenance records."

I believe the comment to be innacurate, biased, and inflammatory.

Judah wrote:

The disturbing comment from Manix is that GA aircraft are less safe because
of "their questionable maintenance records."


Ha! We've seen that applied to large jets too. Remember the seat belt
holding the fan blade picutres. About 1990 I went shopping for a 172
(and it kinda grew an extra engine), I found all kinds of aluminium
sins. 2000 hour airplanes with foot holes worn in origional carpets. And
around the airport I see all kinds of things that shouldn't be
happening. Everybody means well enough and much of the mods happening
are basically okay but some things that shouldn't happen also. People
getting carried away. Then again on the other end, operators would not
snag something because they don't have maintenance, and can't do the
take off so the part fails in the air and they can continue to the next
stop.

Design can only do so much, what people do with it trumps all else I guess.