 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 6:36 am Post subject: HID landing light review..and info concerning Aviation Consu |
 |
|
In a message dated 1/23/07 7:47:25 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, Tim(at)MyRV10.com writes:
After receiving Aviation Consumer for nearly a decade, I've recently dropped my subscription for a number of reasons. But during that time I've read some interesting articles including this review of the HID device. If you've not been exposed to AC's product you might want to borrow copies from someone and review all that they have. The folks at AC do a nice job in testing and reviewing all types of aviation products.
I've stopped my subscription for several reasons:
The way this product is sent to the subscriber often leads to damage product. My monthly product has gone missing at least twice per year and at the rate they charge, it's an expensive missing part. If you discover it's missing they will send you a replacement product if you request it pretty quickly (I wonder if my mail lady is a back sliding pilot want-a-bee!) if you don't request quickly then you just go to the electronic mag and review.
I began my subscriptions and renewals via mail, their renewals at SnF and KOSH were greatly lower than the mail route. This sort of cheese's me off and Paul B, the editor, wrote an article some time ago about how dangerous home-built's were vs production aircraft that also cheesed my off.
Understanding his point of view, after all he's a Mooney driver, I wrote a counter article comparing the two top products in each area using NTSB data. Thus I selected, Van's vs. Cirrus accidents/incidents showing that Van's have an accident rate equal to Piper...slightly above Cessna (the safest GA plane out there) vs. accidents of all types. And that Cirrus has higher accident rate vs. Van's and Piper and many more times the rate vs. Cessna. Cirrus's accident rates are just slight above Bonanza.
The numbers gathered were basic raw accident rates from the NTSB. For Cirrus's sake, the review was written when Cirrus was somewhat new and they were experiencing high fatal accident rates and incidents for aircraft departing the runways on take off, or brakes burning up etc...lot's of pilot errors. I did not weight the accident rates as the Cirrus numbers would have been so awful it would have been ridicules. At the time Cirrus did not have that many aircraft flying as they do today. Their fleet was doubling about each 6 months, and many of their accidents were fatal's.
I'd spent considerable time slicing the NTSB data and writing the article, AC did not publish my reply but I got a note from Paul B saying my "comments" were interesting but they would not publish my information. So I thought how one sided they were in their arguments. One interesting item to note is that Cirrus's first fatal accident occurred in an experimental SR 20 so even this accident counts again experimental's since the SR 20 was not certified at the time...nor was the BRS system in place.
At the time, the RV 10 was not a product. Many of the Van's accidents occurred because people ran out of gas and had forced landings.
My believe was and still is that not many Van's aircraft are flown hard IFR compared to hours flown by Cirrus pilots. Cirrus are used in commercial flights or time share services with a "leased" Commercial/ATP pilot at the controls.
That the average Van's pilot had more aviation hours flown in total than the Cirrus crowd and that they had more experience in IFR and VFR that the average Cirrus pilot; and having built their plane, they were more familiar with the plane than the Cirrus pilots. And I believe that the Van's pilots are a more conservative group of pilots towards their plane and skills than are the Cirrus folks---key word here is that this is my "belief" not based on any facts only conversations with folks that I know that own, fly and or built.
All of the Van's folks in our chapter I know, really know how every little thing works on their plane, mechanical, avionics etc. The Cirrus folks I know have a good knowledge but not overly knowledgeable.
Well since that time, I still believe the above about both products. I'm happy that Cirrus now has transitional training, and a CFI school in conjunction with North Dakota. Cessna continues to have the lowest accident rate vs. all other GA or Experimental aircraft. And the RV 10 is growing in safe numbers. I hope to join the ranks of the RV 10 builders when we complete our move back to IL later this spring. I was all set to buy a kit after Thanksgiving when a business thing happened and refocusing our family back to IL from PA...I decided not to buy as it would mean one more thing to move!
Who know, maybe I'll miss my AC's and re-subscribe at SnF or KOSH but at a lower rate than the snail mail subscription rate.
AC rant off...I still like the product and would recommend it to you all, highly.
Patrick
PA 28-235/J 5A (rebuilding)
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:07 am Post subject: HID landing light review..and info concerning Aviation Consu |
|
|
Yeah Patrick, you can't trust them crazy Mooney drivers. They are
Mooneys after all. 8^)
It is the same rag that noted that Mooneys suffer a higher than
average *percentage* of all Mooney accidents due to engine failure.
They refused to acknowledge the key point was that it was a percent
relative to other causes of Mooney accidents, and Mooneys don't seem
to have some other causes that other brands do. They wanted to imply
it meant that Mooneys had more engine failures than other brands,
which AFAIK simply is not true. This was after their own 201 suffered
a flameout on takeoff, cause never determined that resulted in a total
because it landed in a salt water marsh and wasn't retrieved for a few
days. All kind of funny, since after some time, they wound up buying a
231 to replace it.
On 1/24/07, GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com <GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
I began my subscriptions and renewals via mail, their renewals at SnF and
KOSH were greatly lower than the mail route. This sort of cheese's me off
and Paul B, the editor, wrote an article some time ago about how dangerous
home-built's were vs production aircraft that also cheesed my off.
Understanding his point of view, after all he's a Mooney driver, I wrote a
counter article comparing the two top products in each area using NTSB data.
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:30 am Post subject: HID landing light review..and info concerning Aviation Consu |
|
|
In a message dated 1/24/07 1:09:00 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, apilot2(at)gmail.com writes:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Yeah Patrick, you can't trust them crazy Mooney drivers. They are
Mooneys after all. 8^)
|
Kelly, I looked at the Mooney numbers and they are very acceptable especially if you look at their fatal rate compared to accidents...one of the best out there...strong wing and solid steel cage makes a difference apparently! Now if I could just lose enough weight to be comfortable sitting on the floor!!!
Patrick
Do not archive
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 11:06 am Post subject: HID landing light review..and info concerning Aviation Consu |
|
|
I know. They just wanted to say that because something like 20+
percent of Mooney accidents were engine failures, that they had a
problem with the engines or installation, when the real cause was lack
of some other categories of accidents, raising the engine failure
percentage. Seems they need to consult with a statitician before they
make stupid statements like that.
But your RV-10 certainly won't have any of those worries, eh?
On 1/24/07, GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com <GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
In a message dated 1/24/07 1:09:00 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
apilot2(at)gmail.com writes:
Yeah Patrick, you can't trust them crazy Mooney drivers. They are
Mooneys after all. 8^)
Kelly, I looked at the Mooney numbers and they are very acceptable
especially if you look at their fatal rate compared to accidents...one of
the best out there...strong wing and solid steel cage makes a difference
apparently! Now if I could just lose enough weight to be comfortable
sitting on the floor!!!
Patrick
Do not archive
|
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
