162 Skycatcher crashes

"JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe wrote in
news:8a70a94ecb314@uwe:

Kingfish wrote:
Luckily the pilot was able to bail out before it spun in. Just read
this on AvWeb.

Since it was introduced, I've always wondered why they put the doors
of the
162 on backwards. They open at the front. It always seemed to me
that if the door became unlatched in flight (not unusual), that it
would then be ripped off by the airstream. I guess now I see the
value in it. If you need to bail out, it works almost like the
quick-release latches on aerobatic aircraft. Pop the door handle and
the door flies away.


As long as it isn't the cause of you having to get out!



Bertie

On Sep 19, 3:46*pm, "JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe wrote:

* Since it was introduced, I've always wondered why they put the doors of the
162 on backwards. * They open at the front. * It always seemed to me that if
the door became unlatched in flight (not unusual), that it would then be
ripped off by the airstream. * *I guess now I see the value in it. *If you
need to bail out, it works almost like the quick-release latches on aerobatic
aircraft. * Pop the door handle and the door flies away.


Not sure what airplane you're talking about here, the 162's doors are
hinged at the top to open upwards, like on jump planes. Check out
Cessna's site for pics.

Kingfish wrote:


Not sure what airplane you're talking about here, the 162's doors are
hinged at the top to open upwards, like on jump planes. Check out
Cessna's site for pics.

You're right. My mistake. I had seen the prototype last year and the
door latch on the forward part of the door threw me off.

Given that, the jump-style door is even better for bailing out :-)

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200809/1