Comments on: Poking the Bear

By: Plane Training

Plane Training — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:55:52 +0000

Is there a way to become a content writer for the site?

By: Molotov

Molotov — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 12:57:58 +0000

Ну а что еще писать шоб не потерли?

By: Foundation companies

Foundation companies — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 07:33:24 +0000

Thanks !! very helpful post!

By: Chris St.Germain

Chris St.Germain — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 06:13:07 +0000

The whole point of factory flight testing is to see what works and what doesn’t. Some comments above indicate the writers think that a prototype and a production airframe are the same.

Why do you think Cessna or any other company tests a new aircraft? I seriously doubt if Cessna, of all companies, would release a trainer for sale that could get into a non-recoverable spin. It’s not good for the pilots, and not for their business, either. Now that they have discovered a problem, give them a chance to solve it.

I have no interest in flying the SkyCatcher, as it’s Chinese-built, which rubs me the wrong way. But, some of the comments above aren’t being fair. That crashed aircraft wasn’t ready for selling, but it wasn’t offered for sale, either.

By: George Horn

George Horn — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:24:35 +0000

For reasons of legality I doubt Cessna will publish the kinds of details we ALL want regarding this accident. The test pilot is probably prohibited by company from discussing it with anyone outside of company, and I wouldn’t be surprised if FAA/NTSB doesn’t go along with mfr’s regarding such “proprietary information.” What kind of accident investigation will they conduct? Not much. They’ll leave it to Cessna, where any information disseminated will remain suspect.
George (formerly mfr prod test pilot)

By: Chuck Not Yeager

Chuck Not Yeager — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:05:12 +0000

I think Cessna is in an “unrecoverable flat spin.” It started with the SkyCatcher being built in China and now with the accident.

NO airplane, especially one used for training should EVER enter an unrecoverable spin! There should be NO WAY to put a training plane into such a configuration. By the way, spin training is mandatory in Canada for the Private Pilot liscence.

Chuck

By: Capt. Denis Murphy

Capt. Denis Murphy — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:57:45 +0000

I agree with Dave Keach comments. Up to this day, Cessna has done a terrible job with the SkyCatcher. First it was the Made in China issues, secondly the very unfair way the 2007 buyers at Oshkosh were handle by Cessnas Marketing Department. Let me explain, at the 2007 Oshkosh Cessna buyers were let to believe they were going to get their new SkyCatchers according to their buying position in the buying line, but now two years later those same customers are at the end of the line. The Cessna dealers are going to get the first production SkyCatchers. In my book thats not very fair. In my opinion Cessna is not being very honest about their new SkyCatcher. A training aircraft which enters a spin and is not able to recover is not an airplane that I want to buy for my flight school!!!!!! Please Cessna publish the truth!!!

By: Dave Keach

Dave Keach — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:21:40 +0000

Does Cessna plan to certify their LSA for spins and, if not, why not? Full disclosure of design limitations for any aircraft is important, and Cessna should not presume that pilots, either professional or recreational, have no interest in every aerodynamic trait an aircraft may exhibit, accidentally or intentionally. Cessna’s engineering and marketing staffs should publish the truth about this catastrophic spin incident ASAP. Spin recovery is as important as gravity.

By: Tom Simmons

Tom Simmons — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 21:29:21 +0000

Testing the Aircraft for crossed controls stall is exactly what a GA aircraft test pilot should do. It is in a crossed-control condition on turning final (after overshooting final center line course) that has gotten so many pilots into the classic stall-spin situation over the entire history of flight. Spins and full stalls are no longer a part of the FAA basic private pilot GA training syllabus. (I doubt that many instructors are required to recover after a full three turn spin.) This is an even more serious oversight for LSA pilots and the planes they are going to fly. The idea of the LSA is that it will be easy to fly and require less skill than regular private pilots) In the case of the Sky Catcher ( and other new LSA aircraft) , perhaps anti-spin stall strakes can be installed under the rear fuselage to prevent an unintentional spin, but don’t say that GA / LSA aircraft should not be tested for such corners of their envelopes.

By: Bruce Landsberg

Bruce Landsberg — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:55:33 +0000

Fair points – I suspect that Cessna, NTSB, FAA and BRS would really like answers . There likely won’t be anything definitive for several months.

As for topics, If you’ve got some areas of interest email them to asf@aopa.org. Thanks for the comments.