Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Another "Expert" Opinion on an Experimental Crash

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    36
    I agree with you Mark. I would be happier if Aimer had said "flying any do-it-yourself airplane carries more risk than flying certified aircraft" but that might fall into the wordsmithing category. Commenting on the safety of the aircraft before knowing the cause of the crash might be a bit disingenuous but that's the nature of journalism today. Other than that, everything he said was accurate, just not what I like to hear. I just started my Phase I flight testing and I can assure you it produces a higher state of anxiety than when flying 50+ year old certified airplanes. Certified aircraft may not be defect free (two people have been partially sucked out of airliner windows in the last month or so) but they get a lot more testing and over-site than Experimental.
    Last edited by Tralika; 05-29-2018 at 10:07 AM.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    1,957
    Marc, I would reply to his question of "how many people know how to build an airplane in their garage" with a statistic - the number of active, registered E-AB aircraft.

    It was meant to be a slur on the homebuilding community, no more, no less, with more than a dash of elitism thrown in.

    We can infer from his comments when taken as a whole that he believes that only certified aircraft should be allowed, even though some "aren't unsafe." Very interesting choice of words.

    I wonder how he would like to be referred to as a professional pilot as being "other than unsafe."
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  3. #13
    Jeff Point's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    257
    Frank beat me to it but he pretty well nailed it. His response was a back-handed slap at E-AB aircraft and their builders reeking of the certificated-aircraft snobbery that we're all experienced. His responses make me question his expertise to opine on matters related to E-AB.

    Update- I reviewed his website bio and I see nothing in it that changes my mind, including- for the record- his claim to hold an A&P.
    Last edited by Jeff Point; 05-29-2018 at 06:25 PM.
    Jeff Point
    RV-6 and RLU-1 built & flying
    Tech Counselor, Flight Advisor & President, EAA Chapter 18
    Milwaukee, WI
    "It All Started Here!"

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Zeitlin View Post
    He said “Usually there’s not much control over these home-built type of airplanes,” which is true...
    and implies there's not enough control.

    He said "The FAA hopes you do a good job, but how many people know how to build an airplane in their garage?”. The first part is demonstrably true...
    and implies the FAA isn't doing enough to fix the problem.

    and the second part is a rhetorical question that...
    implies no one should do it who hasn't done it before.

    Imagine if he'd said, 'There's not much control over the production of babies. The government hopes you do a good job, but how many people know how to raise a child in their home?'

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Zeitlin View Post
    So I'm missing what folks are annoyed about with what Mr. Aimer said...
    "But he added that flying any do-it-yourself airplane carries risk"

    That statement is true for any airplane but by adding "DIY" he poisoned only the well from which DIY'ers drink. I find that "annoying" and would have asked for clarification.

    He could have quantified it with fact, for example: "DIY airplanes carry 'x' amount of risk over store bought planes" but he chose to keep it ambiguous. Off with his head!

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,155
    Sometimes just the wording lends too meaning more than what is said or the facts.
    How about, homebuilt airplane , experingetal don't go through the same Govt. FAA , approval process as normal certified planes, nor the extensive testing certified planes do. However many thousands of homebuilt airplanes have been built and are flying successfully, some with better performance and lower prices than factory built ones.
    There is a vast range of designs for homebuilts, some well proven by the thousands like RVs and some that are only almost prototypes. Some designs, like the Cub replicas have top safety features and some are on the edge of safety with often small wings ( high wing loading) highere stall speeds or sensitive controls ,and less than idea landing and runway characteristics, very high power and speeds and demanding of careful piloting. No homebuilt is the whole market any more than a sunfish boat is the same as a all out racing catamaran.
    In almost all planes the most important part of safety is the pilot, not just his skill, but his judgement.
    And yes, I have co built , the minor part, of a plane in the garage and it flew fine.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    1,957
    The fact that the plane was homebuilt may or may not have any relevance at all to the crash - but he instantly said it does.

    When someone cracks up a Cessna 172, nobody is out there saying "well, as a certified aircraft it's inherently safe, so beats me why it could crash."
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  8. #18
    gbrasch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood View Post
    Sometimes just the wording lends too meaning more than what is said or the facts.
    How about, homebuilt airplane , experingetal don't go through the same Govt. FAA , approval process as normal certified planes, nor the extensive testing certified planes do. However many thousands of homebuilt airplanes have been built and are flying successfully, some with better performance and lower prices than factory built ones.
    There is a vast range of designs for homebuilts, some well proven by the thousands like RVs and some that are only almost prototypes. Some designs, like the Cub replicas have top safety features and some are on the edge of safety with often small wings ( high wing loading) highere stall speeds or sensitive controls ,and less than idea landing and runway characteristics, very high power and speeds and demanding of careful piloting. No homebuilt is the whole market any more than a sunfish boat is the same as a all out racing catamaran.
    In almost all planes the most important part of safety is the pilot, not just his skill, but his judgement.
    And yes, I have co built , the minor part, of a plane in the garage and it flew fine.
    Bill, I suggest you send him your post. Glenn
    Glenn Brasch
    Tucson, Arizona
    2013 RV-9A / 1952 Piper Tri-Pacer
    Medevac helicopter pilot (Ret)
    EAA member since 1980
    Owner, "Airport Courtesy Cars" website.
    www.airportcourtesycars.com
    www.facebook.com/airportcourtesycars
    Volunteer Mentor www.SoAZTeenAviation.org

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •