I read Brent Regan's colorful post and was tickled to find someone else who is
moved to apply complex language skills to make a point. I loved the one about
the chicken and the soufflé.

In all it reminds me of an OUTSTANDING "bumper sticker" I saw many years ago
affixed to a washroom mirror at the TCM factory in Mobile, AL while I was
attending their week long maintenance training course. It said "You are looking
at the person responsible for YOUR safety"  ...... believe it.

On a separate note, the question was asked "What can be done to improve the
safety of the IV?"  One thing, albeit a very expensive proposition, might be to
apply the same level of aerodynamic sophistication to the IV wing as was given
to the Legacy. Some years ago I flew both aircraft on the same day and found the
Legacy to be significantly better "behaved" in the slow speed regime. And on the
other end of the economic scale, I have to agree with Charlie Kohler, install
stall strips.

There are so many factors that cause our aircraft (and all others for that
matter) to fall out of the sky:  lack of pilot skill, poor construction, poor
maintenance, alternative design features, etc. etc. One thing is most basic
however, weight and balance. As I've explained to pilots on occasion ....

Do you know what additional rating you get when you fly an aircraft outside of
its design limitations ?
"TEST PILOT"

For those searching the NTSB data base, if I remember correctly, don't search
under "experimental" aircraft. The NTSB lists them as "amateur built", and it is
indeed the "amateur" portion which in itself is something to ponder. This is not
to suggest that all amateurs are less capable than professionals, however the
design and construction modalities inherent in certificated aircraft production
are all but non-existent in amateur build aircraft.

Ted Stanley - A&P/IA - ATP - Aviation Safety Counselor