COPA Members' reaction to recent SR2X accidents

Guest Discussion
1

[]Explore pilot qualifications, currency, proficiency for the flight conditions (night VFR and deteriorating IMC respectively)
[]Consider night VFR preparation, currency, proficiency and personal minimums, given that some other countries require an extra rating
[]Debate whether it is the plane or the pilot
[]Examine pilot decision-making and exercising good judgement, and share mistakes and lessons learned from similar situations
[]Share personal minimums for flight decision-making, encourage others to set realistic ones for themselves
[]Brainstorm ways to reach beyond “the choir” to encourage more pilots to fly safely; “If these discussions save one life a year, then this is the best $50 we have ever spent.”
[]Conduct a personal “safety standown” to reflect on our own personal decisions
[]Encourage AOPA to create a set of safety videos of realistic IFR flights showing the weather outside and focus on pilot decision-making at every stage of the flight
[]Propose simulator training for the Cirrus cockpit, focusing on emergency and unusual situations
[]Form a co-op training group for additional Cirrus instruction in the San Francisco Bay Area
Kill “Get-There-Itis” with the COPA Transportation and Accommodation Network, an on-line roster of COPA members committed to providing assistance when a pilot considers a No-Go decision; initially suggested by Mike Radomsky and Alan Klapmeier and implemented by COPA webmaster, Steve Lin, over 100 COPA members signed up in the first 24 hours [/list]These tragic events affect the COPA community in many ways. My intent in sharing this with you on the Public Discussion forum is to acknowledge the contribution that many have made to my appreciation for what it takes to be a safer and better pilot. Please fly safe!

Cheers
Rick
Noticing that the COPA Public Discussion forum had limited discussion on just two threads about the recent fatal SR2X accidents, click here last Saturday, Jan 18, and the SR20 crash in San Jose last Thursday, Jan 23, I want to share a glimpse into the extensive community reaction by COPA members on the Members Discussion forum that public visitors would not have seen.

There was so much information of value to me personally that I resorted to extensive note-taking. Eventually, I realized that it was huge: 13 threads, 269 posts, and over 16,000 views in the week since last Saturday morning.

Obviously, initial posts shared sketchy news reports and offered condolences to the families, friends and co-workers of those who perished. Some of us knew these people and posted personal statements about them, bringing others to appreciate the human side of these tragedies.

Lots of postings shared information gleaned from preliminary accident reports, weather condition reports, flight information, even radar track replays from the San Jose accident. But most of the discussion was reflection, analysis and speculation about the circumstances and potential causes, including sharing of personal stories of similar mistakes or experiences that provided important lessons. The tone was respectful of what we don’t know and appreciative that “There but for the grace of God go I.”

Some topics discussed:

2

I figured there was probably a lot of discussion among the members. I wonder, though, if some input from outside the Church might be helpful too. And, from the sound of it, there’s a lot for all pilots to learn from these discussions, not just Cirrus drivers.

3

In reply to:

I wonder, though, if some input from outside the Chruch might be helpful too.

Joe,
Absolutely - members and non-members alike who actually READ these discussions, welcome any and all input, ideas, opinions, etc.
The very fact that you’re reading this, and participating in the discussion, means that you’re already in the category of people who actually think about it and consider it - and so, I’d guess, are less likely to fall prey to a poor-judgement-incident than the folks who “don’t fly enough to read this stuff”, or any of the myriad other excuses that people have. [That’s not to say that any of us is immune; clearly we’re not.]

Anyway, we’d all like to hear any input that anyone has.

Mike.

4

My point was that more people would be able to participate and benefit if the discussions were in the Public Discussion forum.

5

In reply to:

My point was that more people would be able to participate and benefit if the discussions were in the Public Discussion forum.

Joe,

That may be true; however, it was the poor signal-to-noise ratio on the the public forum that led to the establishment of a Members forum in the first place. It has worked, to the overall satisfaction of most of the members.

The price of entry is reasonable, and all are welcome.

Mike.

6

In reply to:

  ... it was the poor signal-to-noise ratio on the the public forum that led to the establishment of a Members forum in the first place. It has worked, to the overall satisfaction of most of the members.

I wonder if it would be possible to copy the member’s posts to the public discussion forum. That way, itinerant pilots not specifically interested in Cirrus would be able to benefit from the discussion, especially the safety ideas, and contribute material back to the public forum. The “signal to noise ratio” on the members forum would be unaffected, and those willing to sift through the “noise” of the public forum might encounter some valuable insights.

In the interest of safety we pilots need to make some changes to the way we think and the way we do things. Maybe the forum could help by changing a little too.

7

That may be true; however, it was the poor signal-to-noise ratio on the the public forum that led to the establishment of a Members forum in the first place.

Are you sure they weren’t considering dissenting opinions about the Cirrus as noise? I’ve been following the public newsgroups for a long time and have found them to be very on topic and interesting. However, I’ve also found that many of the Cirrus owners don’t take kindly to people suggesting anything negative about the airplane. Do you remember how I was lambasted when I suggested after the first several crashes that perhaps there was something amiss and that the Cirrus and its 'chute was attracting pilots of a certain tendancy? Nonetheless, there was an interesting discussion on the topic even though many members just wanted to pick me apart for suggesting something negative about the Cirrus without providing a rigorous analysis of variance calculation.

Bottom line is that people were talking about stuff on the public forum that it seems the members forum hasn’t had the guts to deal with until now, so the argument about signal to noise can be made both ways. Personally, I’d rather have a discussion with the widest possible array of views, and you can only get that with a public forum.

-Jonathan

8

I second Steve’s idea. I really enjoy the public forum and learn a lot from it. I’m a sometime down the road COPA member. I’m already a Cessna Pilot’s Association member and belong to all the other “alphabet groups” and am trying to keep some fiscal discipline to my flying expenses.

9

In reply to:

I wonder if it would be possible to copy the member’s posts to the public discussion forum.

This proposal seems entirely reasonable. But let me explain why in my view it’s not, and why people who think the discussion would be valuable should – gasp! – pay the money to sign up (and support the real costs and work of the discussion forum itself).
I have no official involvement with COPA whatsoever – apart from being a dues-paying member and viewing this $50 as about the best-invested money I’ve spent on airplanes. I also benefitted tremendously from the Cirrus PIlot Proficiency Program, for which I paid nearly $1000. But let me explain why I think the people who actually do a lot of work, for no pay, keeping COPA operating can reasonably feel the system is working OK as is.
There are two ways to copy Members’ Forum postings to the general board. One is on a selective or manual basis – and in periods like this, when there are dozens of posts per hour, that would be a real operational headache. Essentially you’d be asking someone who has paid to be a member, and who already is doing a lot of volunteer work, to do extra work for people who are not willing to bear any of the membership cost.
The other approach would be automatic. Another way of thinking of this is converting the members forum to a pay-to-post, free-to-read forum. That would solve one problem: the anonymous or misleadingly-named postings that degraded the public forum in the first place. But it would change what has become a very beneficial climate of discussion. As Mike Radomsky, who seems to give 18 hours a day, gratis, to COPA activities points out, the current operation really has seemed to create an effective discussion community, where everyone involved has a stake in the value of the info exchanged. I share his ain’t-broke/don’t-fix-it view.
The latest Aero-News Net has an item about the recent Cirrus crashes and resulting forum discussion. It concludes (emphasis added): "In the meantime, though, if you are a Cirrus owner, operate a high performance aircraft, or are interested in such, a membership in the Cirrus Owner’s and Pilot’s Association seems like a no-brainer. " I agree with them.

10

Pay the money for the membership. No questions. Here’s why.

I learn a lot on the member’s forum. I find much of the information can apply to any high performance airplane, sometimes any airplane. If you fly a Cirrus, you’ll save money in the tips you learn. You might save a lot more.

The cost is a bargain. Some very dedicated people volunteer long hours to deliver a great product. At least support the cost a little. Compare this to the cost of actually flying and staying current. That said everybody has to decide where they’ll spend their continuing education time. The posts can be the cheapest ground school you’ll have.

Hobart Jones

11

Hobart,

I heartily agree with both you and Jim Fallows. The discussions on the Members Forum are very open and frank, which would not necessarily be the case if our discussions were opened up to the public. (Some people can ignore the glare of the outside world as they speak their mind — http://www.mtv.com/onair/osbournes/the Osbournes come to mind — but most of us are a bit more circumspect.)

Membership in COPA is open to all, the dues support COPA’s many programs, and the price is right. My good friend Mark Lowenstine once observed that all aircraft parts are priced in multiples of $300. By comparison, an annual fee of $50 — less than a dollar a week — makes COPA membership one of the best bargains in aviation.

Cheers,
Roger

12

Of course, I agree with Jim and Hobart.
I’d like to add my two cents to Roger’s observation (Some people can ignore the glare of the outside world as they speak their mind Â… but most of us are a bit more circumspect. ).
Not only is that the case, but our members have the right to expect privacy when they post on the Members forum. When we post there, we have an understanding of who our audience is - I know I do - and so I post somewhat differently there than I would on the Public forum.

Here’s a somewhat extreme, but easily understood, example:

From time to time, trolls appear on this forum. Any reaction to their garbage is exactly what they want, and serves only to keep them hanging around even longer. The trolls can’t see what’s on the Members forum, so we’ve posted “Ignore the Troll” types of messages there when trolls have been around. For the most part, that seemed effective - Members, at least, stopped reacting to the trolls. (Since we are experiencing a troll-free period on this forum right now, I’ll take this opportunity to implore everyone to simply ignore these idiots whenever they turn up).

It’s precisely because of the expectation of privacy that members frown upon the practice of ‘lifting’ a post (or worse, a whole thread) and re-posting in ANY other place without the permission of the authors. I’m sure that most appreciate and respect that.

Thanks,

Mike.

13

Roger:

an annual fee of $50 — less than a dollar a week <<<

I couldn’t agree more!

Congratulation Roger. This is the best “pay off” of my marketing life I ever heard!

COPA fee is the less expensive thing I touched in my short General Aviation experience.
In an opposite way, it is the most useful thing for a lot of G.A. related matter (and maybe not only related…).

Here I found a lot of good man (yes, too little female presence; hope new COPA’ President will take care of it…), ready to share all their experience with the intent to help, / avoid bad experiences to others without any return. Exactly opposite of what happen here in Italy (I could say Europe…) where “most G.A. people” to guard like a secret for themself every own G.A. experience…

Cheers

14

I understand that most of the comments are from members, who would not gain much benefit from having private postings made more public. But I am a non-owner who is curious about the Cirrus and might consider buying one someday. I read James Fallows’ book and it’s a fascinating story, but not justification to spend $50 a year to read about a plane that I’ve never even seen.

This forum is a great resource to learn about the planes and about the realities of flying them that go beyond the marketing hype. I’m very grateful for the hard work of the people who make the forum work.

Given the recent spate of accidents I am obviously not alone in wondering what Cirrus pilots make of the situation and what their experiences suggest about possible causes, whether pilot attitudes and practices, or operational issues with the controls and instruments. Given that increased safety was an explicit design goal for Cirrus, the recent accidents are particularly troubling. I wish that there were a way to get the insiders’ perspective on these problems. That is one of the potential benefits of a forum like this, to bring in outsiders by providing frank information that is not otherwise available.

Indirectly, you owners and members would benefit from this, by maintaining interest in the plane, attracting potential future owners, and helping to assure the long term success of the company. It’s a somewhat tenuous connection, granted, but the benefits are there if you want to consider them. Look at things from the perspective of someone who is not yet serious enough about the Cirrus to pay $50 a year just to read about it.

15

Mike: Re: “From time to time, trolls appear on this forum. Any reaction to their garbage is exactly what they want, and serves only to keep them hanging around even longer. The trolls can’t see what’s on the Members forum, so we’ve posted “Ignore the Troll” types of messages there when trolls have been around. For the most part, that seemed effective - Members, at least, stopped reacting to the trolls. (Since we are experiencing a troll-free period on this forum right now, I’ll take this opportunity to implore everyone to simply ignore these idiots whenever they turn up).”

Jeff, are you still out there?

16

Hal,

If you haven’t seen a Cirrus in the, er, flesh, why not post a message asking if any owners live near you and if they’d be willing to show off their airplane? Most of us are delighted to display our fine white steeds and to spread the word about the best single-engine general aviation airplane available.

Cheers,
Roger

17

In reply to:

But I am a non-owner who is curious about the Cirrus and might consider buying one someday… Look at things from the perspective of someone who is not yet serious enough about the Cirrus to pay $50 a year just to read about it.

When you are seriously looking at buying an aircraft, let me speak from my experience and tell you that your $50 will probably cost you about $300K+ if you decide to purchase a Cirrus SR22 partly based on the vast store of information available on the Member’s forum!

18

ALL of the Flying safety magazines (IFR, Ifr Refresher, Aviation Safety, etc) all have yearly subcription prices of $50 or more.
Your $50 spent on a COPA membership will give you every bit as much or more than any of those publications. If you are serious about SAFETY, even if not as serious about Cirrus, a COPA membership would STILL be valuable to you.
You are already getting a lot for free on the public forum anyway. If you have liked what you have seen so far, the price to see more is less than an hour of flying time.

19

In reply to:

I wish that there were a way to get the insiders’ perspective on these problems. That is one of the potential benefits of a forum like this, to bring in outsiders by providing frank information that is not otherwise available.

Hall, there are two ways. The first is to pay the $50. It seems that many people agree that this will be a very good investment, even Jim Campbell of ANN has published that thought. (See todays ANN article.) The second is to do what you are already doing, watching the free Public Forum. While the info is probably not as in depth or as voluminous, it is faily representative of what you will see on the Members Forum.

In reply to:

Indirectly, you owners and members would benefit from this, by maintaining interest in the plane, attracting potential future owners, and helping to assure the long term success of the company. It’s a somewhat tenuous connection, granted, but the benefits are there if you want to consider them. Look at things from the perspective of someone who is not yet serious enough about the Cirrus to pay $50 a year just to read about it.

I think most of us believe that this “Public Forum” already does so. However, while most of us are very happy with our planes or thrilled to be receiving one very soon, we really aren’t trying to replace Cirrus Design’s Marketing Department. If you were to join, I would think that you would soon notice that even though we are unashamedly biased, we do speak openly and often about what problems we have with the aircraft.

Not to be repetitive, but once you are ‘more serious’ try the $50 investment.

Marty Kent SR22 S/N 0017 N191KM 350 hrs TTSN

20

We each are responsible for allocating our “limited” capital on a daily or yearly basis. I would suggest to you that all of the “member discussion” is not Cirrus specific information - but in many cases flying information - and that includes IFR procedures - weather discussion and education - general openess amongst subscribers ( members). I would also suggest that in the first month - you will learn more than a few new tidbits which will either increase your ability to be a safer pilot, and increase your enjoyment of flying. Instead of thinking of " membership " think of COPA as a " flying Magazine " with new flying information every day ---- so when you finish all of your flying magazines which each seem to cover the same stuff as their competitor each month…log on to COPA ( which you would be wise to subscribe to ) and keep learning…or re-read your old plane and pilot mag which no doubt will cover once again for the millionth time … the different headsets on the market. Deep down, I sort of wonder if encouraging someone to spend $50…the cost of a cheap dinner …is a battle lost before it has begun. If you fly - you should be focused on safety for the benefit of your family, passengers or the poor souls on the ground below you. Subscription to COPA or membership to COPA is all about SAFETY - and information dissemination…Stepping off soapbox now.