Another MU2 down...

[RJones]

I think this thread has gotten a bit out of control.

 

[DenverDude2002]

Yah, more and more after seeing what type of people are around here makes me glad Im choosing a different career. At least theres a few good pilots out there who still give the industry a good reputation. Skyking, WNRHD17, Tadpoles, dont take anything personally on here, because quite frankly i could care less if i get shot down, Im only here 5 mins a day anyways.

 

[WNRHD17]

How about a free flight in a MU2?

Completely uncalled for under the circumstances. You are not a nice person.

 

[WNRHD17]

Very low blow. I'm not even going to retaliate b/c that was so over the line.

 

[ackattacker]

Maybe this is more direct: It is OK if we die in an airplane, this is our choice. We accept the risk.

Even if the accident rate of an airplane is known to be 100%, (every flight ends in a fatal crash and we WILL DIE) it is OUR CHOICE, we do not need the government protecting us with more regulations!

This statement is ludicrous on its face.

It is not OK for me to die in an airplane.

I accept the risks, but I know that the risks are small, and I learn to manage them. If the risk was great I would not go. If I had been deceived about the risk then I would be justifiably upset. If the risks had been hidden from me, covered up, or caused by gross negligence then I think a lawsuit would be justifiable.

I ride a motorcycle, which has a higher risk than driving a car. But I manage the risk by wearing a helmet and driving defensively. It is not OK for me to die in a motorcycle accident either. And its not OK for my motorcycle to come apart at 75mph. If it did, I hope my family sues the manufacturer.

If someone was to take off in an airplane knowing that it had a 100% accident rate, he would be criminally negligent for putting other people's lives and property in jeopardy. Personal freedoms don't apply when they infringe on the rights of others.

 

[enigma]

OK I think we are getting closer to you understanding me. No I don't speak for everyone; when I say 'we' I mean those who agree with my philosophies of less government involvement and more freedoms. Yes this means more risk and I am willing to accept this as I think a lot of pilots are.

Our main differences are this:
You want to impose your wishes (more regulations, the withdrawl of an airplane from service, aviation restrictions, loss of freedoms) on all who might fly.
My wishes impose NOTHING on you or anyone else.

I swear, that over the years - if this kind of pressure by well-meaning people continues, by the year 2025 we will have only the one 'government-approved' airplane left to fly in this country, and you will have to fly it in very tightly controlled circumstances. Aviation will be not a bit of fun (we have shades of this already!) and will have no attraction for people like Paul, myself, and many people here.

The goal of zero accidents and no fatalities in aviation is honorable but comes (to me) at the intolerable cost of our freedoms. It all originates in the public's unreasonable fear of aviation accidents. Why does no one take such actions regarding the insane THIRTY THOUSAND PLUS DEATHS due to road wrecks each year? Its an over-reaction; Im afraid.

gravityhater, I agree with you, but...I see nothing wrong with attempting to effect some regulatory change in Mitsu training/qualification. I've never even sat in an MU2, and I'm not qualified to say how it flys; but if you take MU2 pilots at their word, you soon realize that the airplane does require type specific reactions to abnormalities. Considering that, it seems reasonable for the FAA to require something along the lines of a type rating before one can fly an MU2. If the FAA can require a type rating for a straight wing Citation, I see no reason that they can't require such a rating for an airplane who's admirers even admit that it flys like a jet.

At the risk of insulting the survivors, I predict that the eventual cause will be determined to be pilot error. The Feds will come up with something like "the pilot neglected to maintain control after an engine failure", blame the dead guy and move on. If these Ladies (and Dad) want to try and force the Feds to require more intensive training, I say that they should go for it. If the airplane in question was killing pax at the rate it kills crew, the Feds would have acted long ago.

regards,
enigma

 

[bizijet]

Alas...
The light of reason and understanding! Thank you.

'Sled

Your welcome sled. I know a few people who operate the Mu2 and having just one flight of 1.3 hours in the plane doesn't make me an expert. However, As I rotated at 100 knots the Cheif Pilot told me to accelerate as quickly as possible to above 150 and resume a normal climb. Hand flying this plane to 17,000 feet was a hoot. The kick from the acceleration was a blast. I for one don't believe that removing the plane from the skies is an option. It really is a great plane, but as I was told you need to be on top of the plane if and when the engine fails.

 

[bizijet]

Requiring a type rating is an OK suggestion, but a SFAR requiring more training than is called for a type rating is a better solution. Maybe something like 25 hours in a sim with scenario based training and 100 hours of dual with an experienced MU2 pilot would help as well. I feel the operators of the MU2 would balk at this because of the increased training cost. However, the SFAR would make it a requirement or risk having the plane removed from the 135 certificate. Of course this is all in a perfect world. We will have to see what action if any the FAA takes.

 

[skygirl1968]

here we go again...

ok...i have just spent the last hour and a half reading thru this thread that i started. i started this thread to send my coldolences to Sam's family and friends, it has gotten way out of hand. as has been mentioned here COUNTLESS times, everyone has an opinion, just that an OPINION! of course this is an aviation forum and this is where we discuss aviation issues....but just like with a tv program or radio station, if you don't like it...DON'T COME HERE! if you want to express your opinion then do so. we all have opinions, we're all free to express them, even here. lets stop all the personal bashing, especially towards the family.

since i am paul's widow, i will take the position of being the person that says i knew him best, and try to speak on his behalf. we spent the last 8yrs devoted to each other, and i watched him become the aviator that he was. he LOVED everything about flying and aviation. he lived it, breathed, ate, drank, slept it. i even encouraged it...its wonderful to see someone that you love live thier dreams. i will say that paul did not die doing what he loved. he LIVED doing what he loved, he died trying to save his life and get home to his family.

paul was a professsional from beginning to end. he would never fly if he wasn't on top of his game. how do i know? i was there on the occasions that he called in sick, fatigued, etc and refused to fly becuase he didn't think it was safe. did he know the risks? absolutely...he flew anyway because not flying would have been like amputating his leg...he would have felt that life was pointless.

avbug, you keep saying that its always the PIC's resp. for everything and that we should stop blaming the plane...well since paul is not here we can't ask him if he takes resposibility for the crash. since he flew almost an entire pattern and crashed on his turn to final, i can only assume that he was confident in his ability to land that plane. I have to believe that, and i will go on believing that until the day i die (hopefully NOT in a plane). since NONE of us were up there with him, we will NEVER know what really happened on that last turn. we have nothing but specualtion. i don't think that any pilot's family memebr would jump right up and say "it was all his fault, he would take total resposnibility for killing himself. no, really, he would" is that what your family would say??

i would like to give some of you a glimpse into what kind of man/pilot/aviator paul was...i recently found a letter that he wrote to me on our 2nd anniversary. the anniversary was in april and i had just earned my private certificate in january of that year. i'm not going to type the entire text but there are some parts of it that shine light on just how he felt about being a pilot...

"you are part of an elite group and you should be proud of your performance and the skills that you have learned. although the only thing that you receive for your accomplishment is a piece of paper, you are entitled to much, much more."

"it is my wish that you continue with your learning and become a master of aviation like many of us have and some, including myself, are still trying to do. you are not just a person with a pilot's certificate, you are an aviator."

"always be proud, always learn, always be safe, always take a little extra time to embrace what you are and what you are doing."


if paul were here, i know that he would have been enough of a man and a pilot to take responsibility if the accident is determined to have been his fault. since he is not, NONE of us are in the position to speak for him...only on his behalf. would he tell me to run out and get a lawyer, prob not...he detested law suits. but if there is something REALLY wrong, he would expect me to find some answers. i can't just sit here and digest that paul successfully flew a crippled plane for a crosswind, downwind, and base leg, and then suddenly became a sh*tty pilot. something went wrong and i, to the best extent possible, am going to try and find out what. if it is determined that its 100% pilot error then i have no choice but to accpet it. will i love paul any less or think any less of him? HELL NO!

we (the family) DO feel like there is something inherently wrong with the MU2, is that a problem? (btw - for the record, the MU2 NEVER went thru FAA certification for the US, its certification just transferred from Japan. i'd be real interested to see if it could pass thru an FAA certification...)

this is our avenue for expressing our thoughts, feelings, and opinions. after all, this is a forum where we are all free to talk about anything aviation related. correct me if i'm wrong, but this is the GENERAL section -
"General
General aviation related discussion that doesn't fall into a sub-category below"

is my interpretation of the above description incorrect? aren't we all (including the families/friends/co-workers/etc) free to express our opinions here? good, i'm glad that we got that settled. perhaps my non-pilot sisters have become a bit emotional, but they do mean well and are venting the only way they know how at this point.

as far as telling us to "get a life"...you sir, have the wordiest, most frequent posts on here...perhaps you should practice what you preach.


p.s. skygirl1968 = paul's wife (in paul's honor i'm still flying, still learning, and still being safe)

Can we please end this thread now?

 

[WNRHD17]

Purple and green look lovely together! we're just one big happy crayola family