answer with authority there. We had five composite issues. Two of the
instances involved a hard landing, the first of which I suspect went to
our insurance company the second to the student's rental insurance
company. Two of the instances were delamination issues, one big, one
small, and I doubt if either of those were or could have been sent to
insurance companies since there was to direct accident/incident to pint
at. The fifth involved a wing going into the side of a hangar and
putting a whole in the wing. I think the pilot who did that covered that.
Helen
dongeneda2000 wrote:
> I think everyone has to respect Helen and her point of view. On the other hand, a private owner who desires the better speed and efficiency of a slick glass plane, and their superior strength and resistance to corrosion, could make a decision for a plastic plane and it would be the right choice. One thing I have been wondering about Helen, did the insurance companies share your view of increased cost of repair? How much higher were the insurance premiums?
>
> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, "Lyle Cox" <LyleCox@...> wrote:
>
>> Yea, I saw that picture. It was a cool shot. I had heard that safety
>> reasons were the reason that they wanted to grind up even the privately
>> owned ones, but I'm in no position to prove or disprove that comment. It
>> might have been just a rumor. As to the original question as to why Helen
>> didn't chose composite, as a flight school owner, I would have to agree.
>> And she has provided evidence when she stated they have had two of them with
>> de-lamination problems. I'm not opposed to composite airplanes, but I would
>> rather have easily (and quickly) repaired metal aircraft in a flight school.
>> If I had to park on the ramp and not sit in a hangar, metal would be my only
>> choice, including over fabric for the same reasons. UV rays are devastating
>> to composites and fabric. Fabric has a test method to make sure it is still
>> serviceable. I am not aware of such a test for composites. However, I'm
>> not a mechanic and may just be ignorant of such a test. Are there 50 year
>> old composite airplanes still flying? Are there 50 year old fabric
>> airplanes that haven't been recovered still flying? I don't know the
>> answer to that question and it is a serious question. I do know there are
>> many 50 year old metal airplanes with their original skins still intact.
>> Likewise, there are some very young metal airplanes (around the coasts) that
>> look like swiss cheese.
>>
>> It's all about the situation. A metal airplane vs composite airplane in
>> Florida for 20 years? I'd probably go with the composite. Metal vs
>> composite in Leadville, CO with the high UV energy we get here in high
>> altitudes, I'd probably go with metal. No such thing as a one size fits all
>> when it comes to aircraft or materials.
>>
>> From: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com]
>> On Behalf Of dongeneda2000
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 9:16 AM
>> To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: Solid Trainer Aircraft?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Real simple, lack of buyers, partially due to high price (close to 5 million
>> dollars) and the economy at the time. Only a handful of the 53 made were
>> ever sold, Beech "hid" them where I was working at the time, did not want
>> people to see a ramp full of new unsold planes..
>> Being composite was not the reason, in fact it was a reason to own one. One
>> was recently used as chase plane for Rutan spaceship - also composite by the
>> way.
>>
>> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com> , "Lyle Cox" <LyleCox@> wrote:
>>
>>> What was the reason that Beech decommissioned them?
>>>
>>> From: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>>>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> [mailto:Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of dongeneda2000
>>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 8:41 AM
>>> To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>>>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>>
>>> Subject: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: Solid Trainer Aircraft?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I sure do, I used to park my Cherokee in a hangar under the wings of 12 of
>>>
>> them during their decomisioning.
>>
>>> The airframe was far stronger than any aluminum aircraft ever built, and
>>>
>> is actually stronger now then when built! Never had a delamination problem,
>> and your point was???
>>
>>> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>>>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com> , "Lyle Cox" <LyleCox@> wrote:
>>
>>>> Remember the Beech Starship?
>>>>
>>>> From: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>>>>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> [mailto:Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of pwrsport@
>>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 12:29 AM
>>>> To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>>>>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>>
>>>> Subject: RE: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: Solid Trainer
>>>>
>> Aircraft?
>>
>>>> Are any composite LSA’s coming apart do to fatigue? Ramos, CT and
>>>>
>> the Storm Rally that is flying over ten years now with zero problems. One of
>> the most popular GA composite plane flying, the Cirrus â€" fatigue
>> problems, I think not. The new airliners that you will be flying in will be
>> mostly â€Å"all compositeâ€Â�. Carbon fiber, stronger that steel with
>> much less weight. However, the all metal Zenair 601 is shedding wings to the
>> point the some countries will not allow it to fly in their airspace. The
>> NTSB is very unhappy with it here in the US. And then there is that nasty
>> (hidden stuff) in metal airplanes called â€" corrosion. Kind of bothers
>> me too.
>>
>>>> Ed Snyder
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Lyle Cox
>>>> Sent: Oct 13, 2009 8:53 PM
>>>> To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>>>>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>>
>>>> Subject: RE: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: Solid Trainer
>>>>
>> Aircraft?
>>
>>>> All good reasons, Helen, PLUS, you can’t tell they getting
>>>>
>> fatigued until they separate. That kinda bothers me.
>>
>>>> From: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>>>>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> [mailto:Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Helen Woods
>>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 5:29 PM
>>>> To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>>>>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>> <mailto:Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
>>
>>>> Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: Solid Trainer
>>>>
>> Aircraft?
>>
>>>> 1. When they crash, they shatter. (By comparison, we had a student
>>>> cartwheel a Tecnam down the runway and the only thing that broke off was
>>>>
>>>> the gear. Student walked away without a scratch.)
>>>> 2. Even a little bit of damage is expensive and time consuming to fix.
>>>> (A wing ding cost several thousand to fix.)
>>>> 3. There is no A&P in the entire state of Maryland willing and capable
>>>> of doing composite structural work on an LSA.
>>>>
>>>> We have three composite planes all of which have required composite
>>>> work, all which we've had to ship out of state, all of which were down
>>>> for approximately a year during repairs, all of which cost a small
>>>> fortune to repair. Composite LSAs are not suitable in my opinion for
>>>> primary training for these reasons. By contrast, on our metal Tecnams,
>>>> even the worst bang ups (excluding the aforementioned cartwheel which
>>>> was totaled by the insurance company) are fixed in a matter of days.
>>>>
>>>> That being said, we're putting a composite hulled SeaRey on the line. I
>>>> think composites are fine for rated and proficient pilots and especially
>>>>
>>>> seaplanes, just not primary training.
>>>>
>>>> Helen
>>>>
>>>> dongeneda2000 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> And you consider that to be a BAD thing because?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
No comments:
Post a Comment