Posted for "Rienk Ayers" <rienk.ayers@sreyaaviation.com>:

 A safer Lancair "record"?
 I would think that - by now - it would be obvious that what is needed is a
 safer "Lancair." We all know that Lancairs are neat planes, but they are
 also very hot to fly, with virtually no allowable margin for error.
 One only has to look at the statistics and the independent research to know
 it is an issue with the plane. In fairness, this is not unique to
 Lancairs... My very first plane (which I still have) is a Piper Comanche
 that is very difficult to insure because it doesn't have a good record (with
 cause)... And there are many others, both certified and experimental. It all
 comes down to static and dynamic stability and controllability designed into
 the plane during engineering - something that the Lancair series (and most
 experimentals) have never done. Probably the same reason that the Columbia
 was so difficult to certify.
 When all is said and done, design stability (verified by proper flight
 testing) is the only way to make a plane safe with great performance... It
 is difficult, but not magic.
 An incredible example of that (if it ever gets built) is the Phoenix by
FlightSciences.net (of which I am not a part of).
 Again, the Lancairs are a neat plane, and though maybe not "un-safe", they
 are definitely "not-safe", a reality that everyone that buys or builds one
 should recognize and be comfortable with.
 
Fly fast, but fly safe,
 RA