GeeBee

Really? When you lose an engine in a multi engine airplane you are trained to pull up? When you loose an engine on a single you were trained to pull up? Really?

Put 100 pilots in a single engine airplane and fail the engine below 500'. What will 95 of them do? Pull up on the pitch control. Put 100 VFR only pilots in an airplane, and suddenly plunge it into IMC what will 90 of those pilots do? Pull up on the pitch control Put 100 multi engine pilots in a light twin and fail an engine below 500' what will 90 of them do? Pull up on the pitch control.

We don't want to prevent the airplane from stalling? The other night I watched a demonstration, where the presenter kept throwing a glass of water on a subject on stage. The subject had a towel and an umbrella. The first time he used the towel. The second time he put up the umbrella. You obviously prefer the towel? Why? Your characterization of AF447 is totally inaccurate and since you are referencing book, let me be specific. My good friend and colleague, Captain Bill Palmer wrote the definitive work, "Understanding Air France 447". In fact I played guinea pig for him in the sim for his research. More automation does not mean less training. That is flawed thinking. It means training in how to manage the automation modality including complete failure.

What you are saying is you need transparency in control. I agree and you can not get that with mechanical controls with mechanical mixers, nudgers and shakers. We do not want the pilot to stall the airplane, so do we nudge or warn of a stall or do you prevent a stall in the first place? Now Blue on Top accuses me of being an Airbus fan. Let me tell you, I did not get there easily. After 33 years in Boeings, I fought the Airbus for 3 years. Then I had my "Road To Damascus" conversion which happened interestingly in Rome. Approaching in rain we had a sudden windshear warning. One aural, cancel, WINDSHEAR on the PFD. Only thing to do was pull back. Power already went to TOGA, no worrying about nibbling the stick shaker, the airplane will fly on the edge of critical AOA no matter how far aft the stick. All there was to do is call the IVSi and the tower. The mistake Boeing is making is trying to put lipstick on over designed mechanical control systems. Just like putting a config warning on a Mooney is one warning too many. By the way in an Airbus you will crab in a cross wind. You cannot slip the airplane until below 75 feet

No AF447 the aft elevator caused the stab trim to roll full nose up. Even if the pilots had pushed the stick forward to the stops, after FL270 the airplane could not recover because there was not enough down elevator in the whole wide world to save the airplane. A B757 out of Santo Domingo also crashed when it lost pitot static info, only they pitched forward, but the result was the same. The lesson is not to pull back OR pitch forward, but verify synchronous attitude, then fly attitude and power appropriate to condition of flight.

You might want to look at having the main bosses doweled and pegged. Keeps the case halves from shifting.

Nope it could not be easily solved by turning off the stab trim switches. and yes you get a lot of warning, most counter productive. When the MCAS starts to trim down the pilot instinctively pulls back on the yoke. That action in a Boeing airplane will engage the stab trim brake. At that point you have a stab trim down with an up elevator, which will activate a stab trim warning. The only way at that point to unlock the stab trim brake is regardless if the power trim switches are on or off is to push forward on the yoke. Except if you do, you got a EPGWS also screaming, "Don't Sink" , a Master Warning, and a Master Caution. Unfortunately, Boeing removed the stab trim brake "pull to release" after the 727. I had a "bound up Boeing" once over Ireland, when the autopilot failed to keep the stab in trim, it just kept adding up elevator. By the time "Stab out of trim" warning came on, the stab could no longer be trimmed, because the back pressure on the yoke engaged the brake. Fortunately, FL370 gives you some room. I had to sit every one down, suspend service, get a block altitude. I was then able to push the yoke forward then trim to elevator, then retrim back to normal flight. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/ntsb-faults-boeing-tests-of-max-system-for-not-assessing-pilot-response-to-multiple-alerts/ I would point out to you Boeing's hodge podge warning systems system on the 737 flies in the face of even 1980 Boeing EICAS technology with rudimentry prioritization, on the 757/767 series. It certainly is no where near the Airbus ECAM tech which correctly inhibits warning in critical flight regimes. The ECAM system proved its logic a design on QF42, the A380 that had uncontained failure of #2. The ECAM correctly prioritized the warnings, allowed the pilots to correctly ignore inconsequential failures and directed the crew to manage multiple failures in proper sequence. One of the great parts of the ECAM system is it ignores TO warning logic after 100 knots because it knows the pilot reaction to such a warning, even if say a single slat retraction occurred would be counter productive. That goes to the heart of A configuration warning on a light airplane. There is nothing that will kill a even modestly proficient pilots. Look you can immunize people with live virus', but you really don't do that unless the disease is lethal. So we immunize smallpox, but not the common cold.

If you look at the current Boeing MCAS debacle, you see Boeing arriving at the position of "warning overload" in critical flight situations. There is no need to create a configuration warning in an airplane that can be safely flown in bad configurations. You only add to confusion.

Takeoff with full flaps and landing trim. Hmmmmm, I think that is called an aborted landing. i.e you touchdown as wildlife wanders onto the runway. You should be able to perform that easily. No warning device required. Here is the thing guys. Every takeoff I make, even in a wide body jet the last words out of my mouth is "flaps set, trim set, spoilers down, airplane should fly.". I also never set the parking brake on the runway. These systems fail both ways. I have saved myself two high speed aborts by my final verification, knowing indeed the airplane was properly configured. Equally so, Delta 1141 DFW. System failed to warn and pilots crashed the airplane.My point is too many pilots rely upon these systems rather than secure knowledge.

What you are talking about is a Part 25 warning system. Speed brakes. Part 25 aircraft a killer if deployed. A Mooney will fly and land easily if deployed. Flaps. Part 25 aircraft essential to getting airborne. A Mooney will fly. Trim Part 25 aircraft pilot lacks strength to overcome a mistrim. In an Airbus it actually is very hard because the trim number is in the FMC, but if you did it, the airplane would be uncontollable. Mooney can be managed Not pleasant but manageable. Parking Brake. Part 25 jet can over come the parking brake with take off thrust before the pilot notices the degraded situation. Not so much in a Mooney. A set parking brake will be noted very early In short there is insufficient kill potential in these items in a Mooney to warrant such systems.

2 weeks ago, purchased through Lasar.

Yep the stick has it all. SI, SB, parts, AFM and service manual.

When the Piper Arrow first appeared with its automatic gear drop and myriad of warnings, FLYING magazine gushed that "only a very special idiot could land an Arrow gear up. Three weeks later that special idiot was found. Gear like LOC requires rigorous attention.

Just bought manuals for my 2005 from the factory. Came on a stick.

Yes I am confident, because I don't let an airplane spin. Recognizing incipient spin is the key, but beyond that is preventing loss of control in the first place. One of the changes that created AQP is to stop practicing maneuver in regimes that will kill us to preventing flight into such regimes in the first place. For instance on a single runway operation if you overshoot the center line do you skid the airplane onto final, keeping extra speed to prevent LOC or do you remain in co-ordinated flight accept the overshoot and fly back onto centerline? If they are to parallel runways do you start the turn early, if late skid with speed, or bank over hard but co-ordinated. If you bank over what is the minimum speed you maneuver at in the pattern?

Comparing apples and oranges. Let 's even it up. 10 year old SR22 vs 10 year old Ovation. Annual maint costs. Similar engines, one is aluminum, one composite. Both have TKS, one has retractable gear, one has CAPs. When you look at flat rates the Cirrus is a little higher even with the fixed gear. Then take it from there.

Actually there are even 737s that operate out of dirt strips. Boeing has a special rough field kit with engine sweeper nozzles. Lots of video on youtube.

So you start off with a 1000 dollar a year reserve for the CAPS. Tell me how you overcome that cost differential vs other makes?

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2003/february/pilot/spinning-in Your cite says they spun the airplane, but as I said, did not use that testing to meet certification requirements, rather relying on CAPS. That means it does not meet the spin recovery requirements.

Also want to point out about pulling CAPS in a spin. The Cirrus was not spin tested. Cirrus convinced the FAA of an alternate method of compliance. That means CAPS .Any time you enter a spin in a Cirrus, you are a test pilot. Just eyeballing the airframe it looks to me like a spin is not a maneuver easily recovered from. Large span, short coupling, smallish verticals. The AA-1 had a big red placard that said NO SPINS. Ask me how I know they meant it!

Not entirely. It is a business decision. One is liability based, the other is profit motive. As this shop owner pointed out many parts manuals point to a bolt or nut and call out a NAS, AN or MS spec. Cirrus will call out a part number. What you get may be a standard AN bolt or nut, but it has passed through Cirrus' hands. Now in defense of Cirrus there is a lot of counterfeit hardware out there, so this defends the integrity of their product. It also adds to their profitability.

I will tell you this about Cirrus. Expensive does not describe the maintenance. I was at a shop the other day where two high time SR20 were in for annuals. The shop manager told me on annual was going to run 30K, without a CAPs replacement. He said just about every part is proprietary. Example he pointed to was one needed a new seat belt on the pilot's seat. Just the latch side, not the whole assembly. Cannot go to Amsafe, have to go through Cirrus. 2700 dollars. New battery box, 5500. He said a lot of used Cirrus buyers get maintenance sticker shock because the airplane price is competitive with Mooneys and Bonanza but then the first annual drives it all home.

These things are like airlines. Boeing does not sell their planes significantly cheaper to one line or another. Nor does BP give a huge break on. Jet A. It is a commodity traded on an exchange. Equally so, Lycoming, Continental, Spruce, Aviall and Superior do not hand out deals to a small shop. The only place you can cut costs is in overhead, i.e. real estate, insurance, taxes or labor. If you think they can save that much money on overhead, you may have something. If you think they are. paying themselves what everybody else is paying themselves for the same work scope, be skeptical.

They say take the hearing protection off once and they will always want it in the future.

I was not a Scotch man until I was in Edinburgh and visited the Scotch museum. After taking the "Barrel Ride" which is a history of Scotch ( its history is mostly about taxes), I entered the tasting room. Now there you have to be careful. I had a ticket for a taste of 6 different ones. The keeper there took pity upon me and helped me on a most excellent tasting tour. that was way more than 6. I found I liked mostly Highlands and. Islay Scotch, vanilla and pepper finishes. The Lowlands is just too peaty for me. Once you identify your Scotch type you can zero in on brands. That all said, I am particular to Macallan. You really don't have to spend a lot of money to have a good experience in that line, although I have spent some big dollars. Everyday, after a hunt or around the campfire you can't beat their 12 year double cask. I have seen bottles of Macallan ranging from 35 dollars to six figures. Now a lot of people may agree or disagree but Scotch is like women. Some prefer blondes, other brunettes. Some like a little booty, others want waifs. Viva la difference., If you are lucky enough as I was to have a fine introduction, it will bring life long enjoyment.