Fork-Tailed Doctor Killer?

Guest Discussion
1

The Beech Bonanza used to be called that, deserved or not, because there seemed to be so many doctors killed in them.

It was speculated that the reasons were that they could afford to buy a high performance airplane as their first one, and they were unrealistically confident of their skills. (After all, they were people who had achieved success after success their whole lives in areas where many others had failed, and perhaps thought they could quickly learn such a mundane task as flying an airplane. In the medical profession, the “See one, do one, teach one” approach to new procedures may have led them to think that flying skills were as easily mastered.)

All this led to some inexperienced and overconfident people getting into trouble in high performance airplanes.

What has this got to do with the SR20? IÂ’m worried that it might become the “Computer Tech Para-Glider.” Most of the posts IÂ’ve seen on this board that seem (to me) to indicate an attitude similar to the Bonanza-crashing physicians come from apparent computer types. (Posts regarding topics such as icing and the wisdom of carrying ELT’s are evidence of this.) Again a high-income group with the same ability to buy a high performance aircraft early on, and perhaps with the same sort of overconfidence born from succeeding in a field often viewed as mysterious to others.

Let me quickly add IÂ’m sure the vast majority of both physicians and techies are good, safe, and prudent pilots. ItÂ’s the few on the margin who get all the attention. Let me also say that foolhardiness in certainly not the exclusive preserve of any group! ANYONE with a more money than experience is vulnerable.

I know this is way off topic, but I think itÂ’s worth noting and perhaps food for thought.

“Flame shields up.”

Joe

2

But, of course, “fork-tailed doctor killer” applied only to Vtails . . . the shape that gave its nickname. :slight_smile:

The SR2X is certainly safer than a two-generation-old Bonanza Vtail, given its stall resistance, superb situational awareness tools, and chute. Nevertheless, your point is a good one. The Ercoupe was designed and hailed as the safest plane of its day. The record proved otherwise. Instead of stalls, Ercoupe pilots suffered back-of-the-power curve nose-high mushes on final. Kaboom all the same.

This is the first winter with over 100 Cirrus planes in use. The weak link of the Cirrus, seems to me, is the relatively long time it takes to slow the slippery thing down without gear or speed brakes. There are going to be some challenging IFR flights for pilots moving up from Archers and 172s. I pray it all works well, and I hope we get some “I Learned About Flying From That” reports on this site.

The Beech Bonanza used to be called that, deserved or not, because there seemed to be so many doctors killed in them.

It was speculated that the reasons were that they could afford to buy a high performance airplane as their first one, and they were unrealistically confident of their skills. (After all, they were people who had achieved success after success their whole lives in areas where many others had failed, and perhaps thought they could quickly learn such a mundane task as flying an airplane. In the medical profession, the “See one, do one, teach one” approach to new procedures may have led them to think that flying skills were as easily mastered.)

All this led to some inexperienced and overconfident people getting into trouble in high performance airplanes.

What has this got to do with the SR20? IÂ’m worried that it might become the “Computer Tech Para-Glider.” Most of the posts IÂ’ve seen on this board that seem (to me) to indicate an attitude similar to the Bonanza-crashing physicians come from apparent computer types. (Posts regarding topics such as icing and the wisdom of carrying ELT’s are evidence of this.) Again a high-income group with the same ability to buy a high performance aircraft early on, and perhaps with the same sort of overconfidence born from succeeding in a field often viewed as mysterious to others.

Let me quickly add IÂ’m sure the vast majority of both physicians and techies are good, safe, and prudent pilots. ItÂ’s the few on the margin who get all the attention. Let me also say that foolhardiness in certainly not the exclusive preserve of any group! ANYONE with a more money than experience is vulnerable.

I know this is way off topic, but I think itÂ’s worth noting and perhaps food for thought.

“Flame shields up.”

Joe

3

The Beech Bonanza used to be called that, deserved or not, because there seemed to be so many doctors killed in them.

It was speculated that the reasons were that they could afford to buy a high performance airplane as their first one, and they were unrealistically confident of their skills.

I’m not a doctor nor their public relations man but in their defense . . . they are likely to receive this reputation because successful people who are killed in airplanes make good news stories. The headline is better if a community leader, well-known doctor, lawyer or sports figure is involved. What then happens is that the public perception of these folks is that they are the ones always getting killed in airplanes (expensive ones, too), which is not necessarily
true. The computer programmer getting killed is not quite as interesting to the public. The next illogical step is to say they don’t know how to fly (which is said about 85% of the time in aircraft fatalities by the NTSB).

4

This is the first winter with over 100 Cirrus planes in use. The weak link of the Cirrus, seems to me, is the relatively long time it takes to slow the slippery thing down without gear or speed brakes. There are going to be some challenging IFR flights for pilots moving up from Archers and 172s. I pray it all works well, and I hope we get some “I Learned About Flying From That” reports on this site.

I’ve said this before, but I think it bears repeating. The slowing-down part in the SR20 (and presumably the 22, since the drag characteristics should be almost identical) is really overblown. Reduce the power, add nose-up trim, and it slows down quite quickly. Takes a little practice, but not much. (The first time you hit the pattern

at 150 knots you’ll take note.) I’ve gotten to the point where I can indicate 180 on the descent, level out a couple of miles out, and still enter the pattern at about 100 not that I’d make a habit of doing this with other traffic present, of course).

I think the one thing that pilots transitioning from Cessnas will have a little difficulty with is that the airfoil is a bit unforgiving about getting slow on landings. Unlike a 172, you can’t start rounding out when you’re 50 feet up, you need to keep the nose coming down until you’re pretty close to the runway, or you’ll develop a wicked sink rate that will take a surprising amount of power to recover from (the sensation of being in a dropping elevator is firmly burned into my consciousness from one of my early training flights.) Wings Aloft teaches you to fly approaches at 80KIAS, which is really too fast (you’ll float for quite a ways) but it gives you five knots to piss away rounding it out early like a 172. 75 knots is much more reasonable, but you need to resist the urge to start pulling until close to the runway. At 70 you get one chance at a Hail Mary flare.

I do have one bit of anecdotal evidence; I met a pilot who ended up with broken nose gear and a prop strike, apparently by getting too slow, dropping hard on the mains, and porpoising a couple of times as a result.

This is not to say that the plane is hard to land; it’s really a piece of cake if you fly the numbers and pay attention. Get slow and sloppy and you’re dropping like a stone, so pray that you’re only a foot off the ground when you do (been there, done that.)

5

This is the first winter with over 100 Cirrus planes in use. The weak link of the Cirrus, seems to me, is the relatively long time it takes to slow the slippery thing down without gear or speed brakes. There are going to be some challenging IFR flights for pilots moving up from Archers and 172s. I pray it all works well, and I hope we get some “I Learned About Flying From That” reports on this site.

I’ve said this before, but I think it bears repeating. The slowing-down part in the SR20 (and presumably the 22, since the drag characteristics should be almost identical) is really overblown. Reduce the power, add nose-up trim, and it slows down quite quickly. Takes a little practice, but not much. (The first time you hit the pattern

at 150 knots you’ll take note.) I’ve gotten to the point where I can indicate 180 on the descent, level out a couple of miles out, and still enter the pattern at about 100 not that I’d make a habit of doing this with other traffic present, of course).

I think the one thing that pilots transitioning from Cessnas will have a little difficulty with is that the airfoil is a bit unforgiving about getting slow on landings. Unlike a 172, you can’t start rounding out when you’re 50 feet up, you need to keep the nose coming down until you’re pretty close to the runway, or you’ll develop a wicked sink rate that will take a surprising amount of power to recover from (the sensation of being in a dropping elevator is firmly burned into my consciousness from one of my early training flights.) Wings Aloft teaches you to fly approaches at 80KIAS, which is really too fast (you’ll float for quite a ways) but it gives you five knots to piss away rounding it out early like a 172. 75 knots is much more reasonable, but you need to resist the urge to start pulling until close to the runway. At 70 you get one chance at a Hail Mary flare.

I do have one bit of anecdotal evidence; I met a pilot who ended up with broken nose gear and a prop strike, apparently by getting too slow, dropping hard on the mains, and porpoising a couple of times as a result.

This is not to say that the plane is hard to land; it’s really a piece of cake if you fly the numbers and pay attention. Get slow and sloppy and you’re dropping like a stone, so pray that you’re only a foot off the ground when you do (been there, done that.)

I absoultly agree, fly it on at about 80kts the flair almost taks care of itself