What was wrong with V-tail Bonanza pilots? (2012) | Hacker News Reader

What was wrong with V-tail Bonanza pilots? (2012)

airfactsjournal.com

36 pointsomnibrain15 comments

I fly a Cirrus and it is not inherently more difficult or dangerous to fly then any other aircraft. What Cirrus has done is make an aircraft which brings new pilots into flying with the concept of using an aircraft like you would a car. The debate comes when the addition of technology (e.g parachute) is added and its ability to increase safety by not allowing pilots to make mistakes or always saving them.

The accident statistics are also interesting as actually the average experience of pilots involved in accidents are very high and you are more likely to be involved in an accident when flying with an instructor. There is no doubt though that more training in an aircraft type and currency are the two biggest ways to decrease accident rates. [1]

It is also funny that Cirrus' latest aircraft is a V-tail jet aimed at owner pilots! [2]

1. https://www.cirruspilots.org/copa/safety_programs/w/safety_p...

2. http://cirrusaircraft.com/vision/

There is a common opinion in the aviation community that several of the "saves" from the recovery chute in a Cirrus shouldn't really count. In an aircraft that wasn't equipped with a parachute, (anecdotally) many of the "departures of controlled flight" could have been fixed without a chute before crashing. Undoubtedly some of them are actual saves, but opinion is that people pull the handle too early just because it is there and they get scared. Again, this is just an opinion and not shared by everyone.

There is also a common opinion among Cirrus owners that a number of fatal Cirrus accidents could have been avoided had the pilot deployed the chute, i.e. people don't pull the handle early enough.

That may be the case, but I don't think it is an argument against the chute. As pilots, we look at past accidents and it is easy to say 'I wouldn't have done that' but once placed in that situation, the reality is often different. The COPA motto for use of the chute is 'Pull early, Pull often' and I think this represents the fact that training can only go so far (this is seen to be the case both with professional and amateur pilots) and pilots should not 'deserve' to crash due to poor decision making.

I don't think anyone takes the decision of pulling the parachute lightly, but in many cases it is statistically the best path to take (there have been no fatalities through proper use of the parachute). If pilots had been using the parachute in cases where it is not necessary, insurance premiums etc. would reflect this but this has not been the case. I think the main debate is to the risk of injuring someone on the ground. Thankfully this has not happened yet, but it should be the duty of pilots to put the safety of others ahead of themselves.

Although it is no doubt true that some of the pulls could have ended safely with no injury without pulling, that doesn't mean they were incorrect pulls. I think parachutes are great safety devices. At the risk of definitively putting myself on the wrong side of other pilots' opinion, I think it's great when flying can and is safely opened to lower skilled individuals. The more pilots flying means more support for airports and aviation services.

In other words, maybe you could have recovered from their "departure from controlled flight", but maybe they can't; and since there is a safety mechanism to recover them, that becomes OK (instead of a fatality statistic).

I grew up in a Bonanza - H, M, and V35 models. I still think they are on of the sexiest designs.

My grandpa owned a V35 and while he didn't have a problem with controlling the airplane, he did land it with the gear retracted, which screwed up the bottom skins and the prop. I heard the "doctor killer" nickname several times, but never knew anyone who actually crashed it (there were several at the airport he flew out of).

They say there are two kinds of pilots who fly retracts: those who have landed with the gear up, and those who will.

I'm currently in the latter category and trying my damndest to stay there, but the odds don't seem good.

just remember to do gumps check everytime on short final

I'm a glider pilot, so I do FUSTAL around when I enter downwind: flaps, undercarriage, speed, trim, airbrakes, look.

Just checking won't save you 100% of the time, though. My partner once forgot to retract the gear earlier in a flight, then came in to land and did the U part by moving the lever to the other position. I think the stripe he painted down the runway cost about $50/foot. Fortunately the repair was great and it's good as new.

We call them "fork tail doctor killers" at the airport I hang out at.

Same here in Texas. I think the implication is that many of the pilots are/were "casuals" flying airplanes whose performance exceeded their skill.

That's the version of the story I heard as well...to put a little bit more context, because the plane was quite expensive, typically the people who could afford to get one would be in a high paying profession. Anecdotally, the chat around pilot circles was also that the mental attitude of highly successful professionals - such as Doctors - gave an air of confidence that wasn't earned when it came to airplanes. As in, too self assured, and when it was time to trust the instruments or go down, the latter happened a lot more than the former.

Side note: I haven't seen the number in a while, but supposedly the Dodge Viper was one of the most lethal cars when purchased new, in that it had so much performance that its inexperienced driver would get into trouble very quickly (as in, within weeks / a month of purchase). This was from quite a while ago, and I think several companies started including driving courses or 'limited performance' aspects to their flagship vehicles to prevent this kind of reputation (ex: 'Valet Key' or a specific dongle to unlock full potential).

I haven't seen the number in a while, but supposedly the Dodge Viper was one of the most lethal cars when purchased new, in that it had so much performance that its inexperienced driver would get into trouble very quickly...

That doesn't surprise me. A front-engine, rear-wheel drive car could (depending on how the handling is adjusted) have massive oversteer coming out of a corner if you lay on the accelerator. So there are plenty of opportunities to get into trouble. In the hands of a pro, this can really help getting through the corner quickly. But an amateur could easily spin out.

My father was a dentist and we owned a V35 from the 1950's while I was growing up.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com