MU2 accident

Mike

NTSB accident report. See another MU2 went in 25 March near
Pittsfield, MA under strange circumstances.

As I said prior, if you keep breaking they will be all gone before
long.

Big John

"Big John" wrote in message
...
[...]
As I said prior, if you keep breaking they will be all gone before
long.

What do you fly? Is it still in production? If not, how is it not true for
that type of aircraft that "if you keep breaking they will be all gone
before long"?

Even the Cessna 152 has a finite number in the fleet, and they continue to
be involved in accidents now and then. Eventually they will all be gone
too.

What's your point? How is the MU2 any different from any other aircraft not
still in production?

Pete

Strange indeed. At the current rate, all the MU-2s will be gone around the
year 2305 or about 150yrs after there is no petroleum to fuel them anyway
:-).

Mike
MU-2


"Big John" wrote in message
...
Mike

NTSB accident report. See another MU2 went in 25 March near
Pittsfield, MA under strange circumstances.

As I said prior, if you keep breaking they will be all gone before
long.

Big John

Big John

I sent you an email regarding the T-33.
Did you get it? Thx,
VL

In article .net,
Mike Rapoport wrote:
Strange indeed. At the current rate, all the MU-2s will be gone around the
year 2305 or about 150yrs after there is no petroleum to fuel them anyway

By that time the MU-2 will be the Cub of aviation. People will be dredging
lakes just to get the data plate from an MU-2 and then building one from
scratch... Their buddies back at the hangar will still be harassing them
the whole time about what a dangerous airplane it is...

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

VL

No. Probably to my throw away address? Try jhncal at hal-pc.org

John


On 04 Apr 2004 00:02:12 GMT, (MLenoch) wrote:

Big John

I sent you an email regarding the T-33.
Did you get it? Thx,
VL

Pete

MU2 had a relatively limited production run not like the 150/152 which
has been built for ever and in the thousands.

MU2 is a relatively high performance turbo prop and not normally seen
as plane of the average GA pilot. You will find them in commercial
service of some kind.

Some general specs.

580 built (1963-1986) That's about 25 a year average during production
life.
About 500 on books in 2000.
300 mph normal cruise
7 passenger two pilot pressurized. (Some with big fuselage could carry
11 passengers)
Listed on market today for about $300,000.+/-

Accident in question, pilot had routine communication with ATC and 9
minutes later came out of clouds in flat spin and hit ground with no
forward movement.

There was some icing in clouds but may or may not have been at his
cruising altitude? Pitot and Stall heat were on. Rest of 'heat'
switches were off.

All of airframe was at crash site.

I posted as a jab at Mike (MU2) who stands up for the bird even with
these 'strange' type of accidents. Flying one, he may have some feed
back on this accident?

Hate to see these accidents both for crew and A/C (

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ``````````````````````````````````````````````


On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 13:26:33 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

"Big John" wrote in message
.. .
[...]
As I said prior, if you keep breaking they will be all gone before
long.

What do you fly? Is it still in production? If not, how is it not true for
that type of aircraft that "if you keep breaking they will be all gone
before long"?

Even the Cessna 152 has a finite number in the fleet, and they continue to
be involved in accidents now and then. Eventually they will all be gone
too.

What's your point? How is the MU2 any different from any other aircraft not
still in production?

Pete

Mike

See my answer to Pete on msc.

Any feed back through MU2 channels on what may have happened? Wing
iced up and stalled and bird spun in????

Fly safe and stay lucky.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ``````````````````````````````````````

On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 23:50:48 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
wrote:

Strange indeed. At the current rate, all the MU-2s will be gone around the
year 2305 or about 150yrs after there is no petroleum to fuel them anyway
:-).

Mike
MU-2


"Big John" wrote in message
.. .
Mike

NTSB accident report. See another MU2 went in 25 March near
Pittsfield, MA under strange circumstances.

As I said prior, if you keep breaking they will be all gone before
long.

Big John

"Big John" wrote in message
...
MU2 had a relatively limited production run not like the 150/152 which
has been built for ever and in the thousands.

So? The 152 still has a finite supply. Keep crashing them, they will
eventually disappear from the fleet.

[...]
I posted as a jab at Mike (MU2) who stands up for the bird even with
these 'strange' type of accidents. Flying one, he may have some feed
back on this accident?

Why would you post a jab at Mike? Why shouldn't he stand up "for the bird"?
There are many types of aircraft that require specialized training and
careful handling. I've heard nothing about the MU2 that suggests it's
anything other than a high-performance airplane that requires close
attention. The same things could be said of the P-51, but I don't see you
posting jabs at the folks who fly them.

Not all airplanes are as docile as a Cessna. That doesn't make them bad
airplanes, nor does it justify crowing about accidents that occur in them.

Hate to see these accidents both for crew and A/C (

I hate to see any kind of accident. But when a type crashes that is the
same as that flown by someone I know of, I don't go poking them in the face
about it.

Pete

I live near Pittsfield. The article I saw mentioned that he was hauling
screws, I think. I was thinking that possibly some of the load shifted in
flight and went aft. One witness said he looked like he was coming down
backwards. Another said he was in a flat spin. Figure screws are a pretty
dense cargo. If they somehow shifted back, do you think it could make him
tail heavy enough to get him in trouble even at cruise speed? He had fuel as
the wreckage was burning. Said last contact was at 17K feet and radar showed
him losing 12k feet in 60 seconds.

mike regish

"Big John" wrote in message
...
Pete

MU2 had a relatively limited production run not like the 150/152 which
has been built for ever and in the thousands.

MU2 is a relatively high performance turbo prop and not normally seen
as plane of the average GA pilot. You will find them in commercial
service of some kind.

Some general specs.

580 built (1963-1986) That's about 25 a year average during production
life.
About 500 on books in 2000.
300 mph normal cruise
7 passenger two pilot pressurized. (Some with big fuselage could carry
11 passengers)
Listed on market today for about $300,000.+/-

Accident in question, pilot had routine communication with ATC and 9
minutes later came out of clouds in flat spin and hit ground with no
forward movement.

There was some icing in clouds but may or may not have been at his
cruising altitude? Pitot and Stall heat were on. Rest of 'heat'
switches were off.

All of airframe was at crash site.

I posted as a jab at Mike (MU2) who stands up for the bird even with
these 'strange' type of accidents. Flying one, he may have some feed
back on this accident?

Hate to see these accidents both for crew and A/C (

Big John

`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ``````````````````````````
````````````````````


On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 13:26:33 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

"Big John" wrote in message
.. .
[...]
As I said prior, if you keep breaking they will be all gone before
long.

What do you fly? Is it still in production? If not, how is it not true
for
that type of aircraft that "if you keep breaking they will be all gone
before long"?

Even the Cessna 152 has a finite number in the fleet, and they continue
to
be involved in accidents now and then. Eventually they will all be gone
too.

What's your point? How is the MU2 any different from any other aircraft
not
still in production?

Pete