Oshkosh observation

[LANCECASPER]

3 hours ago, MooneyMitch said:

When I interviewed Ken Harmon [son of Ralph Harmon] a few years ago, Ken informed this is exactly what Mooney was investigating...............hanging a 6 cylinder on the front of a mid-body [F/G model during that era].

 

You see, Ken was a very young man at that time and his dad [Ralph] put Ken in charge of the very enthusiastic and very energetic R&D department.  The R&D 6 cylinder Mooney was labeled the "H" model. Incidentally, this was during the Mustang era[and that's another story!].

 

They never got to fly the airplane as the company went into bankruptcy and all was lost!

 

In my opinion, this is one of, if not the greatest times in Mooney history!

They did hang a 6 cylinder on the Eagle, the IO-550. I was talking about putting the turbo continental from the Encore (TSIO360SB) on the Eagle.

[mike_elliott]

The cage is a structural hold over from fabric it provides no added safety benefit.  A crashed Mooney crumples like a beer can the same as any other plane.  

I better check to see if I'm alive then

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[exM20K]

1 hour ago, M20F said:

What is statistically supported though is that a properly used CAPS deployment equates to almost 100% survivability.

The Cirrus accident rate has gone from atrocious to better than average in recent years.  Why? Commitment to a training and safety culture by the owners' group.  That is not just encouraging people to pull the chute early and often - it also deals with LOC issues especially around the runway.  But the causal factor in the improvement in Cirrus safety has been training.

Consider the latest Nall report. As per usual, major cause of both fatal and non fatal mishaps is "PIlot-related."  That means lots of stuff, from preflight, to losing control on the takeoff, to running a tank dry, to flying into cumulo-granite, and many more.  The proportion is around 75% for both fatal and non-fatal incidents.  Clearly, if three quarters of incidents result from something a pilot did, then a focus on and commitment to training will yield profound, life-saving results.  The time series of Cirrus mishaps proves this.

I do not believe the statistics show Cirrus to be safer than Mooney because of the BRS.  It helps in some circumstances but not in all, and it is reasonable to believe that, just as multi-engine pilots typically accept more risk than single-engine pilots, the presence of a BRS may carry with it a moral hazard that worsens outcomes.

Again: I'm glad the Cirrus accident rate has come down significantly, and I believe that an objective observer would attribute that to a culture of safety, not a magic handle.

 

ps: speaking of training....anyone else here going to the MAPASF PPP in ACY?

-dan 

[Parker_Woodruff]

Late to this topic...

The worst part of Mooney’s situation is the swing and miss on the M10...during the one of the biggest pilot training booms in history.

The money was/is in the training market and they, sadly, missed.

There is still time if they’d pick up the pieces and put a substantial effort into the M10T. Maybe this time with some talent on this board like @KSMooniac heading up that project somewhere other than Chino.

You need something more robust than an LSA and cheaper to purchase and operate than a Piper Archer.

M10T fit the bill. Total shame it never made it to production.

And now the economics make sense for the powerhouse training schools with Piper’s cheaper Pilot 100. 

[gsxrpilot]

2 hours ago, M20F said:

The cage is a structural hold over from fabric it provides no added safety benefit.  A crashed Mooney crumples like a beer can the same as any other plane.  

What is statistically supported though is that a properly used CAPS deployment equates to almost 100% survivability.  

Can you show an example of a Mooney "crumpled like a beer can"? I've seen plenty of Mooney crashes, and the cage is always intact. People climb out of horribly mangled Mooneys because the cabin hasn't "crumpled". Personally, your full of shit with this statement.

On your second statement, you rightly state "properly used CAPS deployment". The key here is "properly used" and can apply to nearly every single accident. A "properly used" airplane is almost 100% survivable as well. We start with pilot who "improperly" fly/manage their airplane, but then we expect them to "properly" use the chute. Which if done, increases survivability significantly. But so does "properly" managing fuel, "properly" finding best glide, "properly" heading to the NRST or picking a suitable field. As soon as you add "properly", all kinds of accidents are survivable. I'll do the other stuff "properly" and then I don't need the chute.

[M20F]

38 minutes ago, exM20K said:

But the causal factor in the improvement in Cirrus safety has been training.

110% agree and that training has primarily been focused around using CAPS.  As the rate of pilots using it went up dramatically the incident of death went down dramatically.  The reason of how they got there (being stupid one of the potential reasons) isn’t relevant.  The reduction in a fatality in spite of being stupid (aside from being smart enough to pull the shoot) is. 

[M20F]

15 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

Can you show an example of a Mooney "crumpled like a beer can"? I've seen plenty of Mooney crashes, and the cage is always intact. People climb out of horribly mangled Mooneys because the cabin hasn't "crumpled". Personally, your full of shit with that statement.

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2018/08/n231ec-accident-occurred-august-11-2018.html?m=1

So now we can debate about how many examples (you asked for one) or how crumpled it is. The front half of the plane looks like the beer can I just crushed on my Neanderthal forehead. 

[M20F]

1 hour ago, aviatoreb said:

And your confident response is base on ...?

Based on a lot of people debunking it over the years (aside from the video of the rep saying NASCAR invented it, search the forums and then you can bring up the Bill Wheat quote as well).  You are a fervent BRS advocate and we want to get into a debate now about how some perceived metal piping is going to save you?  

I spent a few years racing cars for fun, do you know what an actual roll cage that might save your life weighs?  More than you would want in your plane and when you hit the wall at 50+ it doesn’t really matter.  You of all people should understand the physics of crash impacts and their effect on organs.  

[M20F]

58 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

I better check to see if I'm alive then

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

 

Good we need you to earn enough to save Mooney.  If you really want to you can. 

[MooneyMitch]

I love the Mooney airplane, and have since my early childhood days [a long, long time ago ], when my father would take to see all the little airplanes at some small private airfields.  I liked the other planes, but fell in love with that special look!

I wish there were more I could do in support of the current Mooney International team!

Go Mooney!

[LANCECASPER]

On 7/28/2019 at 5:36 PM, M20F said:

110% agree and that training has primarily been focused around using CAPS.  As the rate of pilots using it went up dramatically the incident of death went down dramatically.  The reason of how they got there (being stupid one of the potential reasons) isn’t relevant.  The reduction in a fatality in spite of being stupid (aside from being smart enough to pull the shoot) is. 

Absolutely false. I've never owned a Cirrus, but I've been a member of COPA for years and attended some of their events. Their more recent training has not been focused on CAPS. Their programs revealed that some people were making bad decisions reasoning that CAPS would save them.  They were not keeping up their basic flying skills. Their training has been based on basic flying skills and good decision making.

[Hank]

10 minutes ago, M20F said:

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2018/08/n231ec-accident-occurred-august-11-2018.html?m=1

So now we can debate about how many examples (you asked for one) or how crumpled it is. The front half of the plane looks like the beer can I just crushed on my Neanderthal forehead. 

Yep, the engine compartment is all smashed up. But you know as well as we that the safety cage starts at the firewall and goes back. That part isn't smooshed up. Part of the roof appears to have been cut away by first responders, whose training for car accidents is to immediately pop the hood and cut the battery cables, and if people inside are having problems they cut the front windshield pillars.

The "worthless" safety cage has saved many Mooney pilots, including Mike Elliott. It was a large factor in my purchase decision, after reading many NTSB reports for Mooney and other brands. Personally, I don't want a chute, but that little blue "wings level" button on the  new autopilots sure sounds interesting . . , ,

[M20F]

1 minute ago, LANCECASPER said:

Absolutely false. 

They won an award for pull early and often???

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2016/july/24/how-cirrus-reduced-accidents

[LANCECASPER]

1 minute ago, M20F said:

They won an award for pull early and often???

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2016/july/24/how-cirrus-reduced-accidents

Of course if they are going to pull the chute they have to do it before they build up too much speed, that's a given.

But the root cause went much further than this article goes into. Why were they getting themselves into situations like this at such a high rate? What was the root of the problem? Lack of basic flying skills and bad decision making.

[M20F]

6 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

Of course if they are going to pull the chute they have to do it before they build up too much speed, that's a given.

But the root cause went much further than this article goes into. Why were they getting themselves into situations like this at such a high rate? What was the root of the problem? Lack of basic flying skills and bad decision making.

As I said for sure in my earlier post but the chute fixes all of that.  You also made the comment they have never focused on CAPS which is clearly untrue given the article and the award where they clearly drive the pull early and often method. 

So now you want to change the topic? 

Edited July 28, 2019 by M20F
Spelling

[LANCECASPER]

Just now, M20F said:

As I said for sure in my earlier post but the chute fixes all of that.  You also made the comment they have never focused on CAPS which is clearly untrue given the article and the award where they clearer drive the pull early and often method. 

So now you want to change the topic? 

Go argue someplace else  - you are officially ignored

[M20F]

3 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

Go argue someplace else  - you are officially ignored

 

19 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

Absolutely false. I've never owned a Cirrus, but I've been a member of COPA for years and attended some of their events. Their training has not been focused on CAPS.

“There was a four-fold increase in the number of CAPS pulls in 2014,” said Travis Klumb, a Cirrus executive who helped develop Cirrus Approach. “It reflected a great deal of effort that had taken place during the preceding two years that got Cirrus pilots to train their brains on when to use CAPS. Pilots have to think about these situations in advance. When they do, they’re mentally prepared to pull the CAPS handle in an actual emergency.””

[gsxrpilot]

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2018/08/n231ec-accident-occurred-august-11-2018.html?m=1
So now we can debate about how many examples (you asked for one) or how crumpled it is. The front half of the plane looks like the beer can I just crushed on my Neanderthal forehead. 

From the panel to the back seat looks anything but crushed to me.

[exM20K]

22 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

Absolutely false. I've never owned a Cirrus, but I've been a member of COPA for years and attended some of their events. Their training has not been focused on CAPS. Their programs revealed that people were making bad decisions reasoning that CAPS would save them.  Most were not keeping up their basic flying skills. Their training has been based on basic flying skills and good decision making.

This is what I meant by moral hazard.  Bad attitudes and bad decision-making are trained out.  Pulling the BRS is easy.  Not getting into a situation requiring a BRS pull is about training.

-dan

[exM20K]

2 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

From the panel to the back seat looks anything but crushed to me.

and a lot of the damage is from FD cutting away the roof to extract the people.  

[Tom]

4 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

Go argue someplace else  - you are officially ignored

So you're taking the same approach as Mooney Intl when it comes to the chute issue...maintaining a different perspective on safety and ignoring the demand for a chute.

This plus the victim blaming above.  And people have the gall to blame Mooney Intl for being out of touch.  What a defunct groupthink circle jerk this conversation is.  Not helping Mooney moving forward while denigrating all those "improper" pilots who have accidents.  Nuts.  Just nuts.

 

 

 

 

[MooneyMitch]

LOP vs ROP?  Bladders vs reseal ?

We all love are Mooneys .

[David_H]

14 minutes ago, MooneyMitch said:

I wish there were more I could do in support of the current Mooney International team!

Mitch, there is more we can all do. The answer to Mooney Internationals current problems were spelled out clearly in the first post (then we strayed off topic with minor details.) We can all elect to earn more and buy a new Mooney. 

Okay @mike_elliott... I'll come clean: I don't agree with the opening post and I admit that I'm poking a little fun. Please try to look past the humor and know that I very much value your opinion, as I do others on here... even when I don't fully agree. 

That said, I highly value others views and my ignore list has zero people on it. 

 

[M20F]

28 minutes ago, exM20K said:

This is what I meant by moral hazard.  Bad attitudes and bad decision-making are trained out.  Pulling the BRS is easy.  Not getting into a situation requiring a BRS pull is about training.

-dan

I don’t disagree but the first part is hard, the second part is not.  If the pilot embraces he/she is in over their head and pulls the chute they live and the insurance company makes them whole. 

Pulling the BRS is easy, just like hitting the wing level on modern auto pilots.  That is why it is valuable because a 5hr instrument pilot who gets in over their head can live versus becoming a statistic.

[mike_elliott]

Mitch, there is more we can all do. The answer to Mooney Internationals current problems were spelled out clearly in the first post (then we strayed off topic with minor details.) We can all elect to earn more and buy a new Mooney. 
Okay [mention=11242]mike_elliott[/mention]... I'll come clean: I don't agree with the opening post and I admit that I'm poking a little fun. Please try to look past the humor and know that I very much value your opinion, as I do others on here... even when I don't fully agree. 
That said, I highly value others views and my ignore list has zero people on it. 
 

Okay, I'll un-ignore you then

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk