Site icon Golf Hotel Whiskey

Do Cirrus pilots have a safety problem?

Richard Collins has written a thought provoking post for Air Facts noting that when the Cirrus first debuted, one of its executives pointed out that product liability would not be a problem because the aircraft would be so safe BUT since then, NTSB figures show 80 fatal Cirrus accidents in its database (nearly all of which have probably led to lawsuits….). In other words, 80 fatal Cirrus accidents despite the fact that:

However, Richard also pointed out that the FAA had drastically reduced instrument rating requirements to make the rating less expensive – and potentially more lethal with the result being that there are now instrument-rated pilots who are actually not prepared for instrument flying in technically advanced aircraft like the Cirrus. He then added that:

From the beginning the Cirrus has been sold as a transportation machine. That relates to weather flying like the airlines do. So a new pilot, and many Cirrus pilots are relatively new, gets an instrument rating and is suddenly trying to do what infinitely more experienced pilots are doing with airliners. And there are two of those experienced pilots in the front end of every airliner.

On the other hand, a certain Capt. Dave posted a comment well worth noting:

In my experience in both boating and flying, it always seems to be the rich playboy that buys more plane or boat than their experience deserves.

Ray Stallings then added to that point with his take about Cirrus pilots:

The thing that always impressed me the most about these people is their total lack of airmanship. The majority of them have much more money than sense (or pride in their flying abilities) and rely totally upon the avionics in the aircraft to get them from point A to B. They fly for the most part completely heads down, eyes glued to the PFD, even on CAVU days.

So what do you our readers think: Is there something seriously wrong with Cirrus pilots or is there another explanation?

Exit mobile version