Cirrus and Lancair Make Bonanza Obsolete?

Tom S. ) wrote:

The roport said (IIRC) that they actuator lever was erratic and stiff
(OWTTE).

Perhaps you were stating that but one interpretation of your post could be
that the deployment system failed, which was not able to be proven.

The report said they tried to deploy and it didn't; then the investigator
tried and it still wouldn't.

Tom, regarding the fatal spin accident only, your recollection of the
report is incorrect. The accident aircraft was so damaged by collision and
fire that the CAPS system was not able to be tested by the investigation
team in the manner your recall.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1D723A86

The report did note that the parachute itself was found still in a packed
state, the safety pin of the deployment handle could not be located, and
the deployment rocket propellent had been expended. There was no damage to
the inside of the composite cap that covered the parachute system.

Additionally, the report indicates that the aircraft was in compliance with
service bulletin that addressed the difficulty of deployment issue that the
SR22 had in early 2002, a fact I hadn't known until rereading the report
(this aircraft was based at my home airport).

Again, my only point was to mention that the accident investigators could
not determine why the chute did not deploy. I interpreted your original
post to imply that they did.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"R. Hubbell" wrote in message
news:L5Ysb.1806$iS6.66@fed1read04...
On 13 Nov 2003 09:44:05 -0800
(gross_arrow) wrote:

"R. Hubbell" wrote in message
news:tRNsb.1659$iS6.406@fed1read04...
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:32:02 -0800
Jeff wrote:

If I had 300k to spend I would get a Barron


You'll find two engines means you are twice as likely to loose one.
Kaaaaaching!


R. Hubbell



perhaps, but the odds of losing (not loosing) _all_ of your engines
simultaneously go up by several orders of magnitude.

But it's the wallet that I was talking about. Those twins will wreck a
good wallet in no time.

Almost worse than having kids (twins, no less).

"markjen" wrote in message
news:bt%sb.146600$ao4.476588@attbi_s51...
prices. I was in the market for about an '85 model Bo or 210 a while
back, but now I'd seriously think about spending a little more and
getting a Cirrus.

A little more? How about double!

Let's see: Cirrus SR22's going about $350K; a 1988 F33A going about $189K.

One an "untested" rookie, the other a hardened veteran.

Thanks, no, I'll stick with the "tried and tested".

Add some updated avionic and some engine work (GAMI, Millennium Cyls/TA
Turbos) and I can get a machine that'll be flying long after I'm worm food.

"markjen" wrote in message
news:jH%sb.145396$275.449178@attbi_s53...
I dont agree with fixed gear being safer in IMC, I have a turbo arrow
and
putting the gear down is second nature.
By the time you get to your FAF you have it in landing configuration, no
problems..

The issue is not forgetting to put your landing gear down. This is not a
serious safety concern in retracts because leaving the wheels up on
landing
is damaging only to the pilot's pocketbook. There are almost never any
injuries.

The safety issue is loss of control, something casual, non-professional
pilots do all too often. Retracts are MUCH more susceptible to loss of
control accidents due to the much quicker speed buildup when control is
lost. (Retract pilots should be trained to lower the landing gear the
first
sign of an upset -- gear damage due to excessive speed be damned -- but
they
typically don't.)

Cite?

Retract singles have approximately twice the fatal accident rate of
fixed-gear singles. This trend holds generally and holds for comparable
aircraft which are otherwise identical except for their gear (e.g., C182
vs.
C182RG, Cherokee Six vs. Saratoga, etc.). A retract is much more likely
to
kill you.

Cite?

"markjen" wrote in message
news:mP%sb.146791$ao4.476746@attbi_s51...
Why? The Cirrus is roomier than the Bo and has better designed seats.

This reminds me of the ridiculous argument that the Mooney folks use to
make
about their planes being wider and roomier than a Bonanza. I've flown
hundreds of hours in Mooneys and hundreds of hours in Bonanzas. There is
NO
comparison - the Bonanza is much more comfortable. I haven't flown
hundreds
of hours in a Cirrus, but I've sat in them for 20-minutes at a stretch at
Oshkosh. They're very well-designed, have nice seats, and are quite
comfortable, but there is no comparison on room. And you can get seats
that
match a new Cirrus in comfort by spending a couple grand, which you can
easily afford with the $150K you saved in acquisition costs.

Don't be get me wrong - the new designs have their merits. But don't
drink
the kool-aid and think these planes have made some quantum leap ahead in
anything other than avionics.

Quite so. But their changes are more than avionics; their entire design and
structure is different.

I think the people that gravitate towards the Cirrus and Lancair are the
same ones that have to have the "state of the art" on the rest of their
toys... :~)

Man it's a good thing you're around Tom since every once else is a fool....

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

I'm guessing that most (all?) talking down the SR22 haven't even flown
one.
Try them all, do your homework and get the one that strikes your fancy.
BTW, Cirrus is selling around 50-60 planes per month. 16 delivered week
before last. Something's clearly going right there.

Fads?

Here, try this: http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm

"markjen" wrote in message
news:7V%sb.142619$mZ5.992614@attbi_s54...
And by the way, Bonanzas certainly don't have
anything to brag about, safetywise.

Well, I don't know about that. The numbers for Bonanza are actually
pretty
good. Overall, they're right in the averages for single-retracts.
Exclude
the early v-tails (up to about 1960) and they're better than average.
Include just the F33A and A36 straight-tails, and they're about best in
the
fleet, only slightly below the best (C182RG). The rates are noticeably
better than the C210 and big Cherokee retracts.

Someone is probably going to cry foul over excluding the early Bonanzas,
but
pre-1960 airplanes have very poor accident rates in general and it doesn't
make sense to me to compare the accident rates of a brand new design with
one first produced in 1947. A 1980 Bonanza is quite a different airplane
from a 1947 V-tail.

And the V-tail is VERY DIFFERENT than the F33's and the A36/B36's...

"Flynn" wrote in message
news:i36tb.148992$275.451795@attbi_s53...
Man it's a good thing you're around Tom since every once else is a
fool....

Well, just yourself in the fool categoy. You and Borchardt.

Go to hell, ****.


"Tom S." wrote in message
...

I'm guessing that most (all?) talking down the SR22 haven't even flown
one.
Try them all, do your homework and get the one that strikes your
fancy.
BTW, Cirrus is selling around 50-60 planes per month. 16 delivered
week
before last. Something's clearly going right there.

Fads?

Here, try this: http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm

The accident rates of retracts vs. fixed-gears are well-documented.

You're saying you're a pilot who can handle it, fine. But the accident
rates support the contention that average pilots are suffering from
loss-of-control relatively often and that they fare worse in retracts.

BTW, I have several hundred hours "in the goo" in many aircraft but mostly
Bonanzas. I can handle it too, but I don't kid myself - my risks would be
lower in a fixed-gear 182.

- Mark

Tom,

Go to hell, ****.


Are we out of arguments yet? Jeeze!

Oh, and note the spelling of my name, if you please.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)