X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 01:40:59 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mxsf07.cluster1.charter.net ([209.225.28.207] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.2) with ESMTP id 1239452 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 00:14:46 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.225.28.207; envelope-from=troneill@charter.net Received: from mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net (mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net [209.225.28.140]) by mxsf07.cluster1.charter.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k6H4DxDa011514 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 00:13:59 -0400 Received: from 68-184-229-22.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com (HELO axs) ([68.184.229.22]) by mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net with SMTP; 17 Jul 2006 00:13:59 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.06,248,1149480000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="597185010:sNHT261541020" X-Original-Message-ID: <005901c6a957$6d776d30$6401a8c0@axs> From: "terrence o'neill" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Hmmm X-Original-Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 23:13:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0056_01C6A92D.83F7B7B0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2905 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0056_01C6A92D.83F7B7B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jeff, Let me comment on your opinions on my post. pretty good, just as all drivers are pretty good. We need to cut them = a little slack, like we do drivers, who are also us, and who handle = amazing complexity, without someone telling them 'Okay, you can pull out into = traffic now; and you gan climb that hill, and you can turn onto I-70..." And = they do it with an acceptable lev el of safety, and without medicals every two = years. Terrence, You said: Drivers are safe? Over 40,000 people are killed on our roads every = year. Over a million are seriously injured.=20 Floating statistics. How m any driver-hours per fatality? =20 Also, we who own our roads and cars find this level of safety = acceptable, adn don;t want any government agency telling us when to go, = when to turn, how to operate our cars, other than speed limits posted = too low, for the insurance lobbies, and for providing enforcers = justification for their cars and equipment... not that most of them = don;t do a good job of helping people in need, and catching obviously = unsafe drivers, drunks, etc. Why are posted speeds 10 to 20 mph = different for identical roads in two different states? GA Pilots are safe? Part 91 flying is 25 time more hazardous that = Part 121.=20 Another un-checked statistic. Have you researched accidetn data (like = I did) and found that the airlines report safety in terms of passesnger = miles? Is a 747 with 500 passengers 500 times safer than one with jujst = crew? And since that's abviously a lying statistic, one must ask why = the FAA and airlines report such data... and why pilots like yourself do = not question it, or see the fallicy of it. In truth, in terms of = pilot-hours flown, the GenAve aircraft are a little less (insignificant = percentasge) safe than airlines, even considering thet the airline = piklots have state of the art equipment, top training and proficiency, = and are baby-sat from taxi clearance to shut-down. Comapre that to the = average low time pilot, flying his ramp-roped 25-year-old airknocker = with steam gages and low compression thrice overhauled engines, etc. Come to Oshkosh and sit down with me and let's go over the Lancair = accident statistics. You show me where the airplane let down the pilot, = versus where the pilot let down the airplane. Be at the Lancair Forum at = 1730 Thursday. I've already done over the Lancair accident statistics, so you'll have = to do it yourself. I don't know if I'll arrive in time for the Forum, = but I'd like to. In the meantime, let me point out again several posts problems =20 1. I've noted on a number of previous posts: the 2-seat Lancairs haev = too-light a pitchcontrol, in lbs-per-G,a s documented by CAFE tests. = This was also complained about by a top AF test pilot, in detail. = Probably most Lancair piltos just disregard informatiojn they didn;t = want to hear, because they didn't know what to do about it.. I've = suggested a correction, and am doing it to my L235/320. 2. The horizontal tail is too small -- evidenced by very slow = stall-recovery. Everyone knows this but you, and I read many LML posts = confession fear of stalling, i guess. Austrailia required the tail be = enlarged. I've suggested a better cure, and will try it on my own. Airplanes have been improved immensely in the last ten years or so. I = have EFIS screens with moving map, datalink weather, a bitching betty = telling me when I get too close to stall. Sterling Ainsworth had that = and a turbine powered airplane.. but he flew into convective activity = because he did not pay for the Canadian WSI subscription, iced up his = pitot tube (which most likely had pitot heat off) and put the aircraft = into a full power dive until the tail departed. How much safer could = his airplane been designed? He purposely flew an airplane into = conditions he knew before hand were hazardous-- did it anyway and = somehow this kind of accident is the airplane's fault? I call it "free = will."=20 Again, Jeff, you're talking about avionics and pilots, not the = airplane itself. Cirrus's have a ballistic parachutes yet pilots still fail to pull the = handle when they should. Too late, too fast, out of the envelope--fatal = and this is the airplanes fault? Tell this to Cirrus. Of course everything could be better with future techology -- but we = ain't got it today and even if we did you can't force everyone to run = out and buy it. There will still be someone 100 years from today flying = a J-3 Cub to Oshkosh and they will still be flying the Ford trimotor = there. I hope to be there. You hope to still be flying J3 technology even 100 years from now? Terrence ------=_NextPart_000_0056_01C6A92D.83F7B7B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Jeff,
    Let me = comment on=20 your opinions on my post.
 
pretty good, just as all drivers are pretty good.  We = need to cut=20 them a
little slack, like we do drivers, who are also us, and who = handle=20 amazing
complexity, without someone telling them 'Okay, you can = pull out=20 into traffic
now; and you gan climb that hill, and you can  = turn onto=20 I-70..."  And they do
it with an acceptable lev el of safety, = and=20 without medicals every two years.
Terrence,
 
You said:
Drivers are safe? Over 40,000 people are = killed on=20 our roads every year. Over a million are seriously injured. =
 
Floating statistics.  How m any driver-hours per = fatality? =20
Also, we who own our roads and cars find this level of safety = acceptable,=20 adn don;t want any government agency telling us when to go, when to = turn, how=20 to operate our cars, other than speed limits posted too low, for = the=20 insurance lobbies, and for providing enforcers justification for their = cars=20 and equipment... not that most of them don;t do a good job of helping = people=20 in need, and catching obviously unsafe drivers, drunks, etc. Why = are=20 posted speeds 10 to 20 mph different for identical roads in two = different=20 states?
 
 GA Pilots are safe? Part 91 flying is = 25 time=20 more hazardous that Part 121.
Another un-checked statistic.  Have you researched accidetn = data=20 (like I did) and found that the airlines report safety in terms of = passesnger=20 miles?  Is a 747 with 500 passengers 500 times safer than one = with jujst=20 crew?  And since that's abviously a lying statistic, one must ask = why the=20 FAA and airlines report such data... and why pilots like yourself do = not=20 question it, or see the fallicy of it.  In truth, in terms of = pilot-hours=20 flown, the GenAve aircraft are a little less (insignificant = percentasge) safe=20 than airlines, even considering thet the airline piklots have state of = the art=20 equipment, top training and proficiency, and are baby-sat from taxi = clearance=20 to shut-down.  Comapre that to the average low time pilot, flying = his=20 ramp-roped 25-year-old airknocker with steam gages and low compression = thrice=20 overhauled engines, etc.
 
Come to Oshkosh and sit down with me and = let's go=20 over the Lancair accident statistics. You show me where the airplane = let down=20 the pilot, versus where the pilot let down the airplane. Be at the = Lancair=20 Forum at 1730 Thursday.
I've already done over the Lancair accident statistics, so you'll = have to=20 do it yourself.  I don't know if I'll arrive in time for the = Forum,=20 but  I'd like to.
In the meantime, let me point out again several posts = problems =20
1. I've noted on a number of previous posts: the 2-seat Lancairs = haev=20 too-light a pitchcontrol, in lbs-per-G,a s documented by CAFE = tests. =20 This was also complained about by a top AF test pilot, in = detail. =20 Probably most Lancair piltos just disregard informatiojn they didn;t = want to=20 hear, because they didn't know what to do about it..  I've = suggested a=20 correction, and am doing it to my L235/320.
2. The horizontal tail is too small -- evidenced by very slow=20 stall-recovery.  Everyone knows this but you, and I read many LML = posts=20 confession fear of stalling, i guess.  Austrailia required the = tail be=20 enlarged. I've suggested a better cure, and will try it on my = own.
 
 
Airplanes have been improved immensely in = the last=20 ten years or so. I have EFIS screens with moving map, datalink = weather, a=20 bitching betty telling me when I get too close to stall. Sterling = Ainsworth=20 had that and a turbine powered airplane.. but he flew into convective = activity=20 because he did not pay for the Canadian WSI subscription, iced up his = pitot=20 tube (which most likely had pitot heat off) and put the = aircraft=20 into a full power dive until the tail departed.  How much safer = could his=20 airplane been designed? He purposely flew an airplane into conditions = he knew=20 before hand were hazardous-- did it anyway and somehow this kind of = accident=20 is the airplane's fault? I call it "free will."
Again, Jeff, you're talking about avionics and pilots, not the = airplane=20 itself.
 
Cirrus's have a ballistic parachutes yet = pilots still=20 fail to pull the handle when they should. Too late, too fast, out of = the=20 envelope--fatal and this is the airplanes fault?
Tell this to Cirrus.
 
Of course everything could be better with = future=20 techology -- but we ain't got it today and even if we did you can't = force=20 everyone to run out and buy it. There will still be someone 100 years = from=20 today flying a J-3 Cub to Oshkosh and they will still be flying the = Ford=20 trimotor there. I hope to be there.
You hope to still be = flying J3=20 technology even 100 years from now?
 
Terrence
------=_NextPart_000_0056_01C6A92D.83F7B7B0--