Another MU2 down...

[WNRHD17]

Boy, you guys sure have been busy today...

The problem is that you are pursuing a resolution to your incredible loss.

That's a problem?

His interest in aviation was enthusiastic and his sense of humor was wonderfull.

Wonderful......only 1 "l", thank you.

We are all human and the final acceptance of that possibility is a step that you may need to make. This final acceptance is the true statement of love that is on the other side of the sudden loss trama that all of us unfortunately have felt through the years.
Maybe I am completely wrong but the odds are that you will ultimately have to accept that conclusion.

Yeah....pretty surre that won't make anyone feel any better...that's like saying "accept jesus as your savior and you will be granted entrance to heaven.....otherwise you're screwed!"I don't believe your ratings had a psychology degree listed...

J
Once again, i'll take a little poll (no one seemed to respond to it the last time, so i'll try again, a little more general this time): WHO HERE HAS LOST A FAMILY MEMBER TO A PLANE CRASH???? just simply answer, that's all i'd like. Once you can experience your flesh and blood dying in a plane, then you tell us to leave emotion out of all you're trying to say, mmk?

Don't everyone be brushing my sister off like that....she asked a question, the polite thing would be to answer.

We're keeping him alive by trying to keep others alive. I'm sure if you died tomorrow in a crash, your family would be doing the same thing--whether or not your mistake cost your own life.

I'm sure they would too...maybe you should ask them?

You people(you and family) need to get a life. You are not helping. You are only making it harder on yourself and everyone around you.

You think ignoring everything would be better? , didn't see a PHD next to your ratings either.

Can you state the problems with the MU2 you are trying to find a solution to?
Thanks

could you read this thread entirely? thanks.

If you don't agree with Sir Avgod then you are:
A) Too stupid for him to waste time on

I guess we're the smart ones then, b/c he keeps coming back...

Do something positive. The solution you are trying to find has nothing to do with the mu2. Its more about finding a solution for the pain you feel. And you are going about it all wrong.

Says you. Maybe if you were me you'd do something differently, but, lucky for me, you're not me.

Why do they crash? Because they hit the ground. If pilots don't let the airplane hit the ground, the problem is solved, don't you think?

we've got a rocket scientist here, folks!! If people didn't let drunk drivers hit them, problem solved, right? Just get an owl-head transplant and you'll never worry again!

Amen, I've given up trying to figure out who is who.

*pulls out box of 64 Crayola crayons and an 11x14 sheet of white construction paper*....ok, I'm going to draw me w/ my green crayon b/c green is my favorite color. My name is Miriam, I'm one of Paul's younger sisters, the older of the 2...I am posting under my username, WNRHD17. my birthday is next week and you better get me something good. The other sister, Veronica, is TAdpoles, I'll draw her in brown, no wait, burnt sienna, b/c she farts a lot and smells like poop. I'll draw my Dad, Skyking1976, in blue b/c he loooooooooves airplanes and flew them for tons and tons of years until someone gave him a big huge cake and said "way to go, you're done! Go play golf!" Would you like me to scan the picture in and post a link?

Dad, Sister and Sister.
Respectfully, let me recommend that you step away from boards such as these.

Respectfully, let me say no. We're not trying to change anything by posting on here. Merely conversing. You guys make us giggle beyond belief.

This is very good advise.

Advice, w/ a "c".

Planes dont fall out of the sky, pilots make them fall from the sky.

Idiots aren't born, they're made.

I get the impression that a significant number of posters feel like the families of crash victims have some sort of objectionable agenda. Their losses are real and they run deep. As has been said, the loss of a close family member is a far cry from the loss of a fellow aviator. Relatively few aviators of more than a couple of years experience have escaped knowing a fallen comrade. On the other hand, few aviators have faced the loss of their husband, wife, parent, etc. to a crash. I despise even mere suggestions that ignore where obvious fault may lie (e.g., the it is always the PIC and no one else).

seeeeee....we're not the only ones.

All right, I said I wouldn't post anymore on this thread, but, I couldn't help myself.
None of you know the details of any of the investigations--you have no clue, you just guess, and speculate.
I can't really say what I think, or feel, cause it'll just misteriously disappear!

You people need to get a life. You have no idea!

You said you wouldn't post and you did...jesus doesn't like liars...no one knows any details!! We're all guessing and speculating. It mYsteriously disappears? can't help you there....control your anger, you may have issues. I have a life, I like it most of the time. Especially right now

See? Now you've gone and made me be long-winded....

 

[WNRHD17]

What would deceased pilots, those who died in crashes have to say?

I think it would be rare to hear "Beloved family, find a lawyer and hunt down those responsible for making me fly that POS airplane which took my life."

It is my personal belief that most would be more likely to say,

"Family and friends, you know I loved flying. Let me tell you if I have not before: I knew the risks. Whether they were because of the machinery itself, or because the human interaction was risky; but I knew and accepted those risks beforehand. Please honor my memory by not pursuing any action that will further restrict or regulate aviation. Such action, to me, would be shameful.
Now, I realize that you have experienced a loss; my presence on this earth. And you feel cheated because you did not have any say in accepting those risks; and as such my death is an unacceptable shock to you. But please remember that it was my life, my choice, my risk to accept, no one else's.
Consider that any action you undertake that restricts aviation in any way will prevent future pilots from experiencing the joy that is flight, the same joy that you know aviation gave me. Please let others chose for themselves as I did for myself."

LMAO!!!! If only you'd known my brother....that would be the FARTHEST thing from what he would say.

 

[350DRIVER]

I couldnt believe it when i heard it. with no internet/TV until friday in the new place, I didnt even hear about it for a few days ago. I really hope this crash sends a message to the FAA to ground the MU2 and do something to prevent this from happening again. How many more pilots have to be killed in thie d**m plane before action is taken.

You truly have got to be smoking crack or something else a long those lines?. Ground the entire MU-2 fleet?. Hmmm.... Sure that is gonna fly (right). I guess we should also ground the Metro, C421, etc, aircraft that have also had quite a few fatal accidents... Oh yeah, that sure makes a lot of sense. (much sarcasm intended). The loss of human life is always difficult to accept and to cope with but your post was truly ridiculous to put it mildly. Have you flown the aircraft? Have you lost anyone in one?. I didn't think so, it is easy to be naive and to jump on a bandwagon but rest assured that the FAA surely ain't gonna do it whether you like it or not. It is a fact whether you decide to accept it or not.

 

[GravityHater]

You can line up all the airplanes, from experimentals - to private singles & twins - RJs to the 747 right up to the Space Shuttle and compare their accident rates all you want. (the space shuttle is 1 per 62.5 right now and the 747 is around 1 per million, the MU 2 obviously somewhere in-between)

Yes, work towards improving safety though training and design, but please do not try to 'ground all of a model' because they fall somewhere on the list that does not suit you. Do not deny anyone the right/privilege to fly regardless of its accident rate.


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!

 

[skyking1976]

GravityHater; I certainly hope you don't assume you speak for all of us. It is not OK for me to die in an airplane. It was never, isn't now and never will be OK. I fear you romanticize the occupation too much. And if it's less regulatin you want, I fear you are already too late. The FAR/AIM isn't getting any thinner. Hugs, Dad

 

[bizijet]

The answer to this question is simple. More training period. To highlight this I submit that Frank Robinson, the creator of the R22 and R44 line of helicopters experienced a high number of accidents ( some fatal ) with his helicopter. Frank knew that the problem was from lack of training for a specific type, not the helicopter. Frank worked with the FAA and proposed a self induced SFAR for his chopper.

As a result of this SFAR, Frank requires that you have a minimum of 100 hrs before you can be PIC of his helicopter. The MU2 needs a SFAR, which should help reducing the accidents in the Mu2. Training has always been the answer. I have flown the Mu2 once for 1.3 hours. I hand flew the plane up to 17,000 feet and I can tell you that this plane is awsome. What I didn't like is rotating at 100 knots and being vulnerable from 100 knots to 150 knots while climbing. This speed is where the Mu2 problems occur. Lose an engine between those speeds and you had better be on your game.

I flew the plane on two engines and have flown it with a Cheif Pilot for a Cargo outfit that uses Mu2's exclusively. I flew a passenger version of the MU2 with him and I learned a lot about the plane. He has had numerous engine failures in his thousands of hours in Mu2's and he must know what he is talking about and how to fly the plane because he is still here. These guys are the ones the FAA needs to talk to and come up with scenario based training with them.

 

[WNRHD17]

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

It is most certainly not OK if I die in an airplane either!!! Perhaps what you meant to say was "If I should die in an airplane, I accept that risk." It is not OK if anyone dies in an airplane. I'm sure there are tons of people who would comletely disagree w/ what you have just said. Maybe it's OK for you, but make sure you tell your family that it's OK for you to die in an airplane before they start "speculating."

 

[bizijet]

It is most certainly not OK if I die in an airplane either!!! Perhaps what you meant to say was "If I should die in an airplane, I accept that risk." It is not OK if anyone dies in an airplane. I'm sure there are tons of people who would comletely disagree w/ what you have just said. Maybe it's OK for you, but make sure you tell your family that it's OK for you to die in an airplane before they start "speculating."

I think what the poster is saying is what difference does it make if we die in a MU2 or an ultralight. The point is your dead. He is not saying that he would rather die in a plane crash then any other way. He is saying that the type of aircraft doesn't make a difference, you are still dead. Me personally, I wouldn't be caught dead in an ultralight. Unless I have a midair with one, then it's not my choice.

 

[WNRHD17]

No no, he was definitely saying it was OK to die in an airplane....because you've all made the conscious decision to make it your careers to fly them.
I know he didn't mean it opposed to any other means of death... correct me if I'm wrong, gravityhater.

 

[enigma]

Originally Posted by enigma
Dad, Sister and Sister.
Respectfully, let me recommend that you step away from boards such as these.

Respectfully, let me say no. We're not trying to change anything by posting on here. Merely conversing. You guys make us giggle beyond belief.

WNRHD17, I guess that I was mistaken. It now appears that you are just enjoying the attention; or maybe just stirring the pot. You still have my condolences.

You've obviously seen how some of these anonymous posters treat "conversing". Continue at your own risk.

enigma

 

[skyking1976]

Bizijet; Thanks for your refreshing, concise comment on the SFAR requirement and the FAA seeking out those with the broadest background in the airplane. If there is any thrust to this whole bruhaha it is exactly that. Let's get the Feds to really look at the training requirement in the MU2 and admit that what one learns flying a conventionally controlled ME aircraft does not transfer to the MU2. This seems to me that this would be the logical place to start to improve the safety record of the airplane. But, the Feds first have to conclude that there is a basic differece with the MU2 and take a positive approach to identifying training deficiencies of the operators. As we all know too well, the Feds do not like to rethink a lot of the things they have stood on historically. This is one of those things and the upshot of all of this (I hope) will be for them to look more closely at the things that can be corrected and implement procedures to do just that. Happy Day and Hugs, Dad

 

[skyking1976]

Xav8tor; Loved you post. Lets you and me get together and judge a micro-brew contest. Best Regards, Dad

 

[Tadpoles]

Originally Posted by avbug:
"I have absolutely no problem with dying in an airplane, so long as it's not my fault."


poor carpenter blames his tools???

 

[apttmab]

you missed his point!!!!thats OK you'll get it next time

 

[Flyin Tony]

training requirement in the MU2

I think thats the best idea, theres no way they are going to can all the MU2's. The only way you can make it a safer plane for some people is to mandate (sp) a training req. I would start by sending them to www.mu2b.com

 

[WNRHD17]

Once again, i'll take a little poll (no one seemed to respond to it the last time, so i'll try again, a little more general this time): WHO HERE HAS LOST A FAMILY MEMBER TO A PLANE CRASH???? just simply answer, that's all i'd like.

Still....no answers...

 

[Lead Sled]

The answer to this question is simple. More training period. To highlight this I submit that Frank Robinson, the creator of the R22 and R44 line of helicopters experienced a high number of accidents ( some fatal ) with his helicopter. Frank knew that the problem was from lack of training for a specific type, not the helicopter. Frank worked with the FAA and proposed a self induced SFAR for his chopper.

As a result of this SFAR, Frank requires that you have a minimum of 100 hrs before you can be PIC of his helicopter. The MU2 needs a SFAR, which should help reducing the accidents in the Mu2. Training has always been the answer. I have flown the Mu2 once for 1.3 hours. I hand flew the plane up to 17,000 feet and I can tell you that this plane is awsome. What I didn't like is rotating at 100 knots and being vulnerable from 100 knots to 150 knots while climbing. This speed is where the Mu2 problems occur. Lose an engine between those speeds and you had better be on your game.

I flew the plane on two engines and have flown it with a Cheif Pilot for a Cargo outfit that uses Mu2's exclusively. I flew a passenger version of the MU2 with him and I learned a lot about the plane. He has had numerous engine failures in his thousands of hours in Mu2's and he must know what he is talking about and how to fly the plane because he is still here. These guys are the ones the FAA needs to talk to and come up with scenario based training with them.

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

'Sled

 

[KigAir]

.I am posting under my username, WNRHD17. my birthday is next week and you better get me something good.

How about a free flight in a MU2?

 

[Flechas]

How about a free flight in a MU2?

Ouch!! That was uncalled for!

 

[GravityHater]

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

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.