First Eclipse accident

[BillErvin]

They had another one here in this area when the thrust levers inadvertendly moved forward while one was attempting to land.

Actually, I think the pilot jammed them forward in a go around, and the thrust levers or actuators jammed full forward. What fun that must have been!!

 

[jynxyjoe]

Actually, I think the pilot jammed them forward in a go around, and the thrust levers or actuators jammed full forward.

Thats what happens when you attach cheap rheostats to the power levers. If you are asking yourself "wait isn't that just a light dimmer?" you are correct. A little more Macguyver innovation and some duct tape, and you too can build your own jet, the FAA won't mind (*hush* don't tell the public).

 

[Minuteman]

Actually, yeah, the more I think about it that is kind of ghetto. It's not like a synchro or rotary encoder weighs more ... just maybe costs more to implement. But hey, it's only the throttles! :crazy:

 

[jynxyjoe]

Wanna get a real warm and fuzzy feeling in your stomach? Someone oughta start delving into why Eclipse had to change FSDO's so many times during the cert process.

 

[EMcx3]

First off, Jtrains double post was excellent - great advice.

Secondly a question: The Cirrus with the BRS chute still manages to be involved in many accidents. Cirrus promotes the chute heavily, Columbia/Cessna promotes an intense learning program including unusual attitude training. Does anyone have data regarding Cessna/Columbia 400 accidents vs. SR22? I mostly hear about SR22 wrecks. Ercoupe was supposedly the safest airplane ever built, but people have still managed to kill themselves with them. My question: Do you think Ercoupes, and now Cirrus' attract a clientele that is not as comfortable flying, or perhaps has degraded skills because of their safety features? Someone that wouldn't step up to a plane of that performance due to lack of confidence or skill telling themselves "hey, it has a BRS chute, if things go haywire I can always pull that"? Perhaps people scared themselves in Aeronca Champs and said "screw it, I can fly an Ercoupe - impossible to spin and no tricky rudders". Do you think these "safe" airplanes attract a least common denominator of pilot?

Cirrus SR22's are involved in so many accidents because there are so many being sold and flown. At first the accident rate was relatively high, that is why Cirrus created it's training programs and transition courses. In the last few years the Cirrus SR22 accident rate is amongst the lowest of all GA aircraft neck and neck with the Cirrus 182.

 

[msmspilot]

First off, Jtrains double post was excellent - great advice.

Secondly a question: The Cirrus with the BRS chute still manages to be involved in many accidents. Cirrus promotes the chute heavily, Columbia/Cessna promotes an intense learning program including unusual attitude training. Does anyone have data regarding Cessna/Columbia 400 accidents vs. SR22? I mostly hear about SR22 wrecks. Ercoupe was supposedly the safest airplane ever built, but people have still managed to kill themselves with them. My question: Do you think Ercoupes, and now Cirrus' attract a clientele that is not as comfortable flying, or perhaps has degraded skills because of their safety features? Someone that wouldn't step up to a plane of that performance due to lack of confidence or skill telling themselves "hey, it has a BRS chute, if things go haywire I can always pull that"? Perhaps people scared themselves in Aeronca Champs and said "screw it, I can fly an Ercoupe - impossible to spin and no tricky rudders". Do you think these "safe" airplanes attract a least common denominator of pilot?

Since the Cirrus accidents have been pilots with varying degrees of skill (a lot of those accidents have been high time pilots), I have to say no to your question in general. Specifically, I have seen some people who fly them who don't have the skill they should and don't worry about it because of the parachute.

Then again, I read an article where the pilot interviewed loved her Columbia 400 because she could just set the autopilot and read to her kids during the trip.

I also know a Bonanza owner who said he doesn't worry about how hard he lands because he knows the landing gear can take it. He's flown a total of about 1 hour total divided between two flights in the past year.

I've read the hype, and I think the Cirrus design is not the problem. Their marketing might contribute some, but since high time pilots are doing the same stupid stuff the low time guys are, I don't think the "Low time pilots are falling out of the sky in the Cirrus" is the whole story. Beech had the same problems with the Bonanza's when they first came out.

 

[WacoFan]

Since the Cirrus accidents have been pilots with varying degrees of skill (a lot of those accidents have been high time pilots), I have to say no to your question in general. Specifically, I have seen some people who fly them who don't have the skill they should and don't worry about it because of the parachute.

Then again, I read an article where the pilot interviewed loved her Columbia 400 because she could just set the autopilot and read to her kids during the trip.

I also know a Bonanza owner who said he doesn't worry about how hard he lands because he knows the landing gear can take it. He's flown a total of about 1 hour total divided between two flights in the past year.

I've read the hype, and I think the Cirrus design is not the problem. Their marketing might contribute some, but since high time pilots are doing the same stupid stuff the low time guys are, I don't think the "Low time pilots are falling out of the sky in the Cirrus" is the whole story. Beech had the same problems with the Bonanza's when they first came out.

Thank you for this post, and thanks for the one above it by EMcx3.

I will accept both posts, but pose another question. Do people see a general degradation of flying abilities with the advent of the glass cockpits in many of the GA planes today? Does anyone believe that all the gizzmo wizzardry detracts from learning airplane control or stick and rudder skills?

 

[jynxyjoe]

Thank you for this post, and thanks for the one above it by EMcx3.

I will accept both posts, but pose another question. Do people see a general degradation of flying abilities with the advent of the glass cockpits in many of the GA planes today? Does anyone believe that all the gizzmo wizzardry detracts from learning airplane control or stick and rudder skills?

I haven't seen it myself because I didn't teach much in GPS airplanes. I do believe in detracts from learning basic airplane control.

Though if a student works hard and really uses the GPS as a tool, not a crutch, I do believe it will make better pilots out of them. Though I don't believe the average 40-60 private pilot has time to do all that on top of the ridiculousness of the PTS. I think the GPS courses that are out there are a nice idea and I hope the execution is as thoughtful. I'm one of those daydreamers that believe the new GPS systems with psuedo-TAWS will end CFIT.

Maybe I should just say it depends on the person.

 

[mikecweb]

Thank you for this post, and thanks for the one above it by EMcx3.

I will accept both posts, but pose another question. Do people see a general degradation of flying abilities with the advent of the glass cockpits in many of the GA planes today? Does anyone believe that all the gizzmo wizzardry detracts from learning airplane control or stick and rudder skills?

Think what happens is there is a loss of respect for the airplane. Somehow people think if there are glass panels everywhere the airplane must be safer. When it hits the fan those glass panels aren't going to help you that much. I think new technology has been great in improving SA but I think it leads people to believe airplanes are safe. An airplane will kill you in mere seconds if you let it. In the event of emergency or anything outside of a textbook flight, nothing is a substitute for good stick and rudder skills combined with sound and efficient decision making.

 

[msmspilot]

Thank you for this post, and thanks for the one above it by EMcx3.

I will accept both posts, but pose another question. Do people see a general degradation of flying abilities with the advent of the glass cockpits in many of the GA planes today? Does anyone believe that all the gizzmo wizzardry detracts from learning airplane control or stick and rudder skills?

I haven't instructed in TAA's very much. The only one I have instructed in was bought by a former student who I trained for instrument. The main thing I saw with his instrument flying after he'd been flying the glass for a while was a total inability to figure out where a holding point was and set up a proper hold.

I can't blame that on the glass too much, however, because I've seen the same thing with people who didn't have the glass.

The airplanes I do most of my instructing in have a GPS, but I hardly mention it before solo, and we don't usually even use it on the first cross country.

This is the long way of saying, I don't know, but I know that I've seen a lot of pilots that "flight planning" is just the "direct to" button on the GPS. And you wouldn't believe the pilots who don't even check for TFRs before we fly. The Prez is around here occasionally.

 

[jcremy]

After instructing in the SR20 with none the less chinese students, I think people get to reliant on these glass cockpits and when their PFD fails, they have no idea what to do.

 

[Murdoughnut]

Thank you for this post, and thanks for the one above it by EMcx3.

I will accept both posts, but pose another question. Do people see a general degradation of flying abilities with the advent of the glass cockpits in many of the GA planes today? Does anyone believe that all the gizzmo wizzardry detracts from learning airplane control or stick and rudder skills?

I think it just lowers the bar overall. It makes flying easier, which means a certain portion of student pilots who would have otherwise washed out, are now licensed pilots. I would also guess that it provides an inflated sense security - one that I never had tooling around in a beat up 150, constantly on the look out for a place to put her down when she finally died.

 

[caliginousface]

Maybe if Obama wasn't the dem candidate this wouldn't have happened, hopefully you all will think about that when you go to the polls.

 

[Baronpilot244]

If I may be so bold!
These pilot types we're talking about have the ability to buy these airplanes, but if they can't fly then they're going to get themselves in big trouble very quickly.
They make a big deal out of fixed gear - kinda hard to land gear up, but just as easy to lose control in IMC when the wizardry quits and these planes go much faster too, so one second you're fat, dumb and happy, the next you're right in that cell that was 10 miles ahead trying to hand fly in an airplane you always flew on autopilot and looking at those funny round gauges on the panel.

I wonder if the examiners are really putting these guys through their paces too?

The Eclipse is a jet and has to be flown as such. By the numbers! Its slippery, fast and obviously doesn't like to slow down even when it meets the tarmac. Plenty of potential there for accidents involving rich owner pilots with low times.

The fact that an experienced ATP went off the end speaks volumes about the potential for this airplane to be disastrous in the hands of the less experienced. Mind you - I don't think I would have admitted to knowing I was high and fast on the approach! Kinda like shooting yourself in the foot!

We were seriously in the market for an E500, but the more I researched and got to know the airplane, the more I could see this being a bad idea. Thankfully I managed to kill that plan and we're probably going to stay with what we have. We might move to a King Air 90 but who knows.

 

[flyboywbl]

I saw one take off today from KBZN, such a cool sounding little jet. Kind of scary to think about that a low time pilot who can aforrd it can be behind the wheel (or stick) of somthing so fast. I'm curious to see what happens when the D-Jet and the Cirrus jet come out what the NTSB reports are like.

-Matt

 

[Murdoughnut]

I saw one take off today from KBZN, such a cool sounding little jet. Kind of scary to think about that a low time pilot who can aforrd it can be behind the wheel (or stick) of somthing so fast. I'm curious to see what happens when the D-Jet and the Cirrus jet come out what the NTSB reports are like.

-Matt

I saw one leaving KPIE (St. Pete) the other day as well. What'll really suck is when they go crashing into buildings and we all end up reaping the consequences of greater public distrust in GA.

I believe it was AOPA Pilot that had a great write up on that Yankees catcher who crashed his Citation (?) back in the 70s - they were making a comparison to the VLJ phenomena - low time pilot in control of a jet.

 

[flyboywbl]

I saw one leaving KPIE (St. Pete) the other day as well. What'll really suck is when they go crashing into buildings and we all end up reaping the consequences of greater public distrust in GA.

I believe it was AOPA Pilot that had a great write up on that Yankees catcher who crashed his Citation (?) back in the 70s - they were making a comparison to the VLJ phenomena - low time pilot in control of a jet.

911 was low time pilots in control of jets. Are VLJ's going to be a suicide bomber's dream? I'm not one of those crazy 911 conspiracists, just food for thought. My buddy and i were talking about this. trying to open up discussion. Personally i don't think they they will be. After 911 GA tightened up. I remember people being scared that people would be dropping anthrax out of GA planes.

 

[WacoFan]

911 was low time pilots in control of jets. Are VLJ's going to be a suicide bomber's dream? I'm not one of those crazy 911 conspiracists, just food for thought. My buddy and i were talking about this. trying to open up discussion. Personally i don't think they they will be. After 911 GA tightened up. I remember people being scared that people would be dropping anthrax out of GA planes.

What could a VLJ really do as a terror weapon? It is basically the same as a fast Baron hitting a building. The WTC was b to withstand a direct hit from a 707. Unfortunately, they got hit with much heavier and faster planes. I wouldn't be too concerned with a VLJ hitting a building in terms of structural damage - the Empire State Building took a direct hit from a B-25 which is much heavier than an Eclipse.

 

[ackeight]

What could a VLJ really do as a terror weapon? It is basically the same as a fast Baron hitting a building. The WTC was b to withstand a direct hit from a 707. Unfortunately, they got hit with much heavier and faster planes. I wouldn't be too concerned with a VLJ hitting a building in terms of structural damage - the Empire State Building took a direct hit from a B-25 which is much heavier than an Eclipse.

Fortunatly for the empire state B. there wasn't much fuel (10K+ 767 vs. 100gallons left in the B-25). The VLJ's do have the speed to penetrate buildings, but not the mass to get into the core. Along with that the light fuel loads there won't be building collapses because of them. However, loss of life will still occur and that should be the focus.

 

[flyboywbl]

My buddy and I were talking about the lax restrictions of GA in terms of security. I know they only carry a fraction of the fuel an airliner carries but, who is to say you don't put a payload (an explosive on) on board. That could do some damage. Pluss you have a fast plane that is, relativly in expensive, that a private pilot can operate. Again not trying to say it's gonna happen or that there is a likleyhood of it happening. My friend and i were just talking about it and wondering what others thought about it.

-Matt