Return-Path: Received: from [161.88.255.139] (account marv@lancaironline.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.2b4) with HTTP id 122017 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 03 Jun 2004 10:09:03 -0400 From: "Marvin Kaye" Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Unsafe at any speed. To: lml X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser Interface v.4.2b4 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 10:09:03 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Posted for "Chatfield S. Daniel" : The amount of rationalization that goes on on this list is unbelievable. Some think that a plane like the IV is a death trap and should be banned from flight. Some think that it is a perfect plane with no bad habits, and no matter that it was a Delta captain flying it into the ground, it was just another case of pilot error. I suspect that the truth is someware in the middle. The IV is a fast, high performace airplane, and as such is more dangerous and unforgiving than a C172. A few years ago, I was on the RV list while building my RV-8. The RV-8 prototype lost a WING...that's a +9G and -4.5G wing,...on a demo flight. Well the list just went crazy for several months. Just like this list, some said the plane should be withdrawn and tested and that it was design error. The rest said this plane was perfect and the only thing that could possible cause the accident was serious pilot error. There was so much talk that Van's tested another wing to destruction and sure enough, the wing was OK. I guess my point here is anytime there is a tragedy like this, it brings out the differences in our prospectives. Sometimes, the best trained pilots is the world will auger one in. There is an inherent danger in flying that you can't avoid, and if you can't accept that, you are not being honest with yourself. Chat Daniel RV-8 678RV Super ES 891AC (reserved)