AirTranTUS
Topic Author
Posts: 3313
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:12 am

Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sat Oct 28, 2006 3:42 pm

I'm surprised this has not been picked up yet. Wednesday (10/25) a Cirrus SR-22 piloted by SCCA Pro Racing SPEED Touring Car driver Lucho DeCastro and carrying his wife and two kids cruising at 13,000 ft from the San Francisco area to Phoenix declared an emergency due to severe wing icing about 60 miles East of LAS shortly after 12PM (Noon). Contact was lost and the wreckage was found by helicopters a few hours later. It is unclear if the parachute was deployed. All four on board perished and three were found outside the airplane.

http://www.kingmandailyminer.com/mai...nID=18&ArticleID=10603&TM=81080.03
http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=237223&FS=

RIP to all.  Sad
I love ASO!
 
ChiGB1973
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 6:39 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sat Oct 28, 2006 3:44 pm

I saw that on the FAA site and wondered about the parachute, guess I am still wondering?

http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/a...reliminary_data/media/B_1026_N.txt

M
 
flyinryan99
Posts: 1432
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2001 6:54 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sat Oct 28, 2006 10:29 pm

From what I have heard, the chute was not deployed. They were also VFR at 13,500. No IFR flight plan was on file.
 
fspilot747
Posts: 3455
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 1999 2:58 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 12:12 am

Guy was VFR in IMC, at 13K+ ft?
 
APFPilot1985
Posts: 1840
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 12:51 pm

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 12:42 am

Quoting Flyinryan99 (Reply 2):
No IFR flight plan was on file.

Thats not what the FAA report says.
Stand Up and Be Counted Visit Site Related to Voice your opinion
 
dc-9-10
Posts: 481
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 1999 11:45 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 12:52 am

While I feel for everyone involved I think this is going to be another case of a pilot trying to get more performance out of his airplane then is possible. The SR-22 is not approved for icing and the icing system is only for when arrive in inadvertent icing and when that happens you need to turn immediately. I have seen several pilots who think they are indestructible because of the parachute and weeping wing, and I think they are going to face a hard reality someday, lets just hope they are luckier.

Dc-9-10
 
4holer
Posts: 2733
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2002 1:47 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:01 am

All I have to contribute is an observation that on the PHX local TV news that had film of the crash site, the parachute was open. Now if the pilot did it or the crash itself freed it up enough for the wind to open it up is something I don't know.
Ghosts appear and fade away.....................
 
flyinryan99
Posts: 1432
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2001 6:54 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:32 am

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 4):
Thats not what the FAA report says.

That's strange, it was not showing up on any tracking websites. The only thing that I can think of happened is he could've picked up one in the air then. My bad. Conflicting reports he was in IMC or not...don't need to be in IMC in order to pick up icing.
 
flyingbronco05
Posts: 3484
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 11:43 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 5:25 am

Let me remind you all that NO Cirrus is approved for flight into known icing, EVEN the 22!

If no parachute was deployed, he was a moron.

During the pre-flight briefing, he should have told all passengers how and when to operate it.

And if you enter IMC, you are taught how to engage the autopilot and do a 180.

I'm putting money on the fact that he probably never attended Cirrus training at the factory which Cirrus highly recommends.

RIP.
Never Trust Your Fuel Gauge
 
aerodog
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:48 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 5:54 am

A SR22 crashed in North Carolina Friday killing two of the four on board.

Cirrus aircraft are compiling a rather lengthy list of fatals.

While most can probably be attributed to pilot error, the company is going to be facing a lot of lawsuits which take years to come to trial and the aircraft manufacturer enters the courtroom guilty and forced to prove innocence.

Condolences to the victims families.
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 6:14 am

Quoting Aerodog (Reply 19):
A SR22 crashed in North Carolina Friday killing two of the four on board.

Cirrus aircraft are compiling a rather lengthy list of fatals.

While most can probably be attributed to pilot error, the company is going to be facing a lot of lawsuits which take years to come to trial and the aircraft manufacturer enters the courtroom guilty and forced to prove innocence.

Condolences to the victims families.

I, too seem to be hearing about an awful lot of Cirrus crashes lately. I had the opportunity to fly one once and immediately fell in love with the thing. I think it's too much airplane for those that choose to fly it. It's a bit of a step up from a 172 or a warrior.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
flyingbronco05
Posts: 3484
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 11:43 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 6:35 am

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 20):
I think it's too much airplane for those that choose to fly it. It's a bit of a step up from a 172 or a warrior.

I'm sick and tired of people saying this. If you get proper training in it, it is not too much to handle. I am a CFI in the Cirrus SR20 and it is the wave of the future. People who train for fun should not be in a cirrus. If your goal is to be a commercial pilot, you might as well learn now how to handle a quick, glass cockpit airplane with skywatch and terrain advisories.
Never Trust Your Fuel Gauge
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 6:41 am




Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 21):
If your goal is to be a commercial pilot, you might as well learn now how to handle a quick, glass cockpit airplane with skywatch and terrain advisories.

 checkmark 

Indeed. Developing a scan is well and good, but folks with glass time will make a much smoother transition to modern airline avionics than those without that experience.

In the end, the Cirrus has it's pluses and minuses. Preparing future ATPs for their careers is certainly one of the pluses.



2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 9:19 am

Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 21):
think it's too much airplane for those that choose to fly it. It's a bit of a step up from a 172 or a warrior.


I'm sick and tired of people saying this. If you get proper training in it, it is not too much to handle. I am a CFI in the Cirrus SR20 and it is the wave of the future. People who train for fun should not be in a cirrus. If your goal is to be a commercial pilot, you might as well learn now how to handle a quick, glass cockpit airplane with skywatch and terrain advisories.

Relax! Im not saying that it's too difficult to fly...I said for those who chose to fly it. It seems alot of celebrity types buy it just for fun and are more than likely not properly trained in it and wind up killing themselves. I flew with a Cirrus instructor as well on a demo flight and it was just awesome. No other way to describe it.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
newagebird
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 10:08 am

I dont think 13000 ft is where you want to be without anti-ice systems. De-icing systems are totally different and if he didnt turn them on before hitting the freezing level (which is in the damn forecast!) then its not hard to see why his wings froze. As mentioned before the system isn't approved for flight in icing conditions, just a precautionary should you enter it. I've heard of cessnas going down after being near a freezing level of 7500ft.
Not only does it change lift characteristics but it messes up the stall characteristics making the A/C stall earlier. I really hate it when its pilot error.

rgds newagebird
 
fspilot747
Posts: 3455
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 1999 2:58 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 10:12 am

Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 21):

I'm sick and tired of people saying this. If you get proper training in it, it is not too much to handle. I am a CFI in the Cirrus SR20 and it is the wave of the future. People who train for fun should not be in a cirrus. If your goal is to be a commercial pilot, you might as well learn now how to handle a quick, glass cockpit airplane with skywatch and terrain advisories.

Nothing wrong with leisure pilots learning to use glass, but there is everything wrong with learning to use nothing BUT glass (for instance, the FBOs that teach private candidates in shiny new G1000 172s). Try taking an instrument pilot who trained on a G1000 or Avedyne all their flying life and having them fly an instrument approach in actual with no autopilot in a basic instrument panel. They won't make it.

Our main mechanic was laughing one day when we had a Mooney in the shop, a beautiful one at that. It had a G1000 that failed. He was laughing because of how many times he's had to work on failed glass displays in these GA airplanes.

Electrical systems fail. I've had it happen before, and I would rather have my pitot-static system feeding into analog gauges than everything in one system that can fail. That's the whole point of redundancy. You can't call it redundancy if everything feeds into the electrical system (it doesn't have a RAT either).

You can argue that sure, it does have a backup Altitude Indicator and compass, but chances are if you've been relying on a glass cockpit and autopilot, that's not going to help you get anywhere if you're in the soup with 200ft ceilings and who knows what tops.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned. I think the glass concept is great idea for the experienced pilot. It's got traffic avoidance, beautiful displays that make situational awareness a piece of cake, but it's when those systems fail that things can hit the roof fast.

Of course, you could always just pull the chute.
 
ferrypilot
Posts: 623
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 1:19 pm

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 10:15 am

Very interesting to read all the above. ...In 2005 I ferried 10 brand new Cirrus SR20/22's from the Duluth factory across the North Atlantic via Greenland, Iceland and Scotland to the Cirrus dealer in Holland, ...which amounts to approx. 300 hours flying time on the type, ...and also means I have a lot of thoughts about the Cirrus, but at the moment I am going to give further consideration to what I might say.
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 10:19 am

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 16):
The Cirrus feels very numb to me...almost as though they went too far in isolating the pilot from the outside environment. The controls, in my opinion, demonstrate a considerable lack of feel and feedback when compared to more 'traditional' aircraft.

I've never flown a Cirrus myself, but Aviation Consumer said the following about the SR20:

"The SR20 handles quite well; it’s among the nicest flying airplanes we have ever experienced, on par with the Cessna 208 Caravan or T303 Crusader, two Dave Ellis designs. There’s no dead spot in roll or pitch and stick forces are well harmonized with linear elevator force. Bonanza pilots will be right at home."

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 20):
I think it's too much airplane for those that choose to fly it.

Bingo. It's a high performance aircraft, even though it is fixed gear.
 
beechnut
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:27 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 10:44 am

Reality check time. I fly and own a 4-seat Beech Sundowner. I'm already paying $2k per year for insurance on a 10,000 hour, 27 y.o. airframe. If the Cirrus continues piling up the stats, it doesn't matter who's fault it is. The damned thing will end up uninsurable, or insurable, but at a price that will start to make the tired old Cessna and Piper designs seem awfully attractive again.

I realize that to someone who can afford to buy a brand-new Cirrus, the insurance is probably pocket change, but I know someone with a relatively late-model ('90s vintage) A36 Bo and even though he's wealthy, he's starting to find that the near $10k a year insurance bill bites.

The situation with the Cirrus, though a different cause, is starting to resemble the situation with the V-tail Bonanzas. Took some time for Beech to finally admit that the V-tail needed strengthening through an AD. Initially, Beech was saying that the plane was too slick and inexperienced pilots were getting caught in loss of control situations when they got in over their heads, with a rapid airspeed buildup beyond redline and then they overstressed the airframe trying to pull out.

Turns out the tail WAS too weak after all.

The Cirrus is starting to sound an awful lot like V-tail déjà-vu.

Beech
 
ferrypilot
Posts: 623
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 1:19 pm

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 10:44 am

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 28):
The SR20 handles quite well; it’s among the nicest flying airplanes we have ever experienced, on par with the Cessna 208 Caravan or T303 Crusader, two Dave Ellis designs. There’s no dead spot in roll or pitch and stick forces are well harmonized with linear elevator force. Bonanza pilots will be right at home."

...I have flown all 3 of those planes and in my opinion control feel in either the Cirrus SR20 or 22 does not bear any resemblance at all to control feel in the 208 Caravan or 303 Crusader.
 
JBirdAV8r
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 4:44 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 11:43 am

Quoting Dc-9-10 (Reply 5):
While I feel for everyone involved I think this is going to be another case of a pilot trying to get more performance out of his airplane then is possible. The SR-22 is not approved for icing and the icing system is only for when arrive in inadvertent icing and when that happens you need to turn immediately. I have seen several pilots who think they are indestructible because of the parachute and weeping wing, and I think they are going to face a hard reality someday, lets just hope they are luckier.

 checkmark  Right on, brother.

IMHO, the only people that should really be flying Cirruses are professional flight training schools (for people that want to fly for a living) and 135 organizations like SATSair. It's not the airplane for your typical weekend warrior, by any means. And more money does not necessarily equal more sense. This airplane is quickly replacing the Bonanza for the reputation of "doctor-killer."

Quoting Flyinryan99 (Reply 15):
That's strange, it was not showing up on any tracking websites. The only thing that I can think of happened is he could've picked up one in the air then. My bad. Conflicting reports he was in IMC or not...don't need to be in IMC in order to pick up icing.

Right. My experience with the tracking websites and my own flying is that air-filed flight plans don't show up.

If he was really at 13,500 feet in VMC then there must have been some kind of precipitation to cause him to ice up, as you know, obviously, but most of our resident student pilot/observers may not. Either way, precip that high, at this time of year, with OATs so marginal, should set off warning flags as being a BAD THING.

I am amazed how many people I come across in the Cirrus that have been so complacent with the new technology. I've had one guy actually laugh at me once for "failing" the ND and saying "that won't ever happen, it's a Cirrus!" And all this NEXRAD business, too...I've flown through prenty of precip that hasn't been displayed on the screen, due to the data being +5 minutes old and, quite simply, that ground-based WSR-88D radar wasn't really designed to provide precipitation data for airplanes at altitude.

If I designed training programs, I'd start people out in the old steam-gauged 172 and TRANSITION them to glass cockpit as an "extra" once their (mechanical) needle/ball flying got good.
I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
 
turnit56N
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:13 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 12:01 pm

It's a fantastic airplane, and gives you a completely different perspective on light GA flying. It is designed to make you feel comfortable, and to handle smoothly. It's so comfortable and handles so smooth that you forget how much airplane it really is....which I believe is the exact reason many people get into trouble with them.

I do not think it is an aircraft for inexperienced pilots or for initial training.

OT: By the way, not all commercial airliners have glass panels, which makes me wary of the "if you want to be a commercial pilot, learn on glass" theory. I know from personal experience that it takes very little time to transition from round dials to glass. It takes a bit longer to develop a T-scan to the point where it is second nature. Imagine a student that does their initial, instrument, commercial, instructing, ATP and regional flying in a glass cockpit. Then one happy day they get hired into CO and plop down in the right seat of a Continental 737-300.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Marcus Anderholm


Uh-oh.
Aviation is not so much a profession as it is a disease.
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 12:44 pm




Quoting Turnit56N (Reply 31):
I do not think it is an aircraft for inexperienced pilots or for initial training.

I don't think anyone here has claimed otherwise. I agree with JBird 100%...it's ideal to train on round gauges during one's primary, and then transition to glass for advanced training. This builds a solid foundation of experience and skill, while adding valuable exposure to advanced equipment.

Quoting Turnit56N (Reply 31):
OT: By the way, not all commercial airliners have glass panels, which makes me wary of the "if you want to be a commercial pilot, learn on glass" theory.

While it's certainly true that not all commercial airliners (nor corporate jets, and certainly not freighters) are glass, glass is only becoming more and more prevalent. Steam cockpits, on the other hand, are fast becoming the exception, rather than the norm.

Is it important to learn and become proficient on round gauges? Absolutely. Is it important to also learn and become proficient on glass? If one's goal is to fly corporate jets and/or transport-category aircraft, absolutely.

Quoting Turnit56N (Reply 31):
I know from personal experience that it takes very little time to transition from round dials to glass.

But in the modern airline training environment, where training time is money, syllabi is being concentrated into an ever shorter period of time. Sure, the transition to glass may be relatively painless for some people, but it's just one more thing to tack on to an already saturated syllabus.

The more training topics with which one can become familiarized before the entire training/IOE process, the better. Ideally, the entire process is simply review!  Smile

Quoting Turnit56N (Reply 31):
Imagine a student that does their initial, instrument, commercial, instructing, ATP and regional flying in a glass cockpit. Then one happy day they get hired into CO and plop down in the right seat of a Continental 737-300.

Again.....unless I missed a post above, I don't think anyone here is advocating flight training based solely on glass. I agree that such a program would be foolish, and I think there are clear advantages to including exposure to both environments.  yes 



2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 12:52 pm

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 30):
If he was really at 13,500 feet in VMC then there must have been some kind of precipitation to cause him to ice up, as you know, obviously, but most of our resident student pilot/observers may not. Either way, precip that high, at this time of year, with OATs so marginal, should set off warning flags as being a BAD THING.

I was working that Wednesday and had flights into LAS, PHX, and ABQ from LAX and SNA, and from what I recall there were scattered-to-broken coverage thunderstorms and rainshowers roughly along a IGM to INW line and maybe a little south of there. I can't recall what the exact freezing levels were, but I do recall that FLG was reporting -TSSN (Thunder and light snow) at one point.

Pretty sad that a crash has to take out an entire family...  Sad
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
DeltaGuy
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 5:25 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:25 pm

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 30):
IMHO, the only people that should really be flying Cirruses are professional flight training schools (for people that want to fly for a living) and 135 organizations like SATSair. It's not the airplane for your typical weekend warrior, by any means.

Yes and no- unfortunately money is allowing rich folks to buy the shiney new plane and kill themselves with their false sense of security, but those who are properly trained in the plane are no more dangerous in it as they'd be in a new 172SP. Most aircraft salesmen are more interested in getting the plane out the door and paid for than they are with ensuring proper training is given. Give it some time and I'm sure there'll be more incidents like this unfortunately- had to have something to replace the Beech.

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 30):
If I designed training programs, I'd start people out in the old steam-gauged 172 and TRANSITION them to glass cockpit as an "extra" once their (mechanical) needle/ball flying got good.

I'll throw you that bone- I've met, on more than one occasion, a Cirrus pilot who almost looked lost in a 172- but could navigate through the G1000 like it was a Maxim- that's the accident waiting to happen. Do it like the military does, (or rather, did) make you start out on the old steam equipment before getting in the fancier stuff.

Overall, it's an extremely capable aircraft and I'm happy I spent the money on a checkout in it, hopefully people can remember how far their limits go- kind of like drinking in that regard, know when to say when.

DeltaGuy
"The cockpit, what is it?" "It's the little room in the front of the plane where the pilot sits, but that's not importan
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:36 pm




Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 35):
Yes and no- unfortunately money is allowing rich folks to buy the shiney new plane and kill themselves with their false sense of security

I wonder how often this has been said over the years, regarding things like attitude indicators, nav instruments, tricycle gear, wx radar, etc....  Smile



2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
andrewuber
Posts: 2142
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:45 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:48 pm

Looks like the name "Doctor Killer" might need to be passed from Bonanza to Cirrus. They are slippery airplanes, and when low time pilots find themselves in a fast, high power aircraft, they tend to get foolish.

I'm not speculating on the Arizona or North Carolina crashes, because we do not know what happened yet.
I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
 
JBirdAV8r
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 4:44 am

RE: Cirrus SR-22 Crash In N. Arizona

Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:01 pm

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 24):
Yes and no- unfortunately money is allowing rich folks to buy the shiney new plane and kill themselves with their false sense of security, but those who are properly trained in the plane are no more dangerous in it as they'd be in a new 172SP

Ah, DG, we meet again!  Wink

Well, yeah, but I suppose that begs the question of what qualifies as "proper training." I agree that going through Cirrus stands is the best thing to do; I know I sure wouldn't want to fly that airplane had I not gone through all that material and had all that training first. Of course it's not OVERLY complicated, but it's a greasy little bugger with lots of eye-catching little gadgets and a lot of horsepower under the cowling.

I think the question is that of proficiency. As I mentioned in my post, quite a few of these airplanes are flown by "weekend warrior" types. Those people (and I'm telling you from personal experience) tend to be complete disasters in the airplane...ten minutes behind the plane, overconfident in the abilities of themselves and the craft, and I can make them sweat bullets on a simple GPS approach. It's not an airplane for your 250-hour private pilot pursuing their IA rating.

I also think that the airplane's reputation (and let's face it, Cirrus' marketing team is brilliant) is leading to the downfall of quite a few people. I don't know anyone who'd attempt a trip into known icing in a glass 172SP; I've met many who, even knowing that the Cirrus is not certified for flight into known icing, think that it is "no big deal" because of the TKS. "Hell," I hear all too often, "if we get into trouble, there's always the 'chute!"

It's hard to compare those two airplanes; as previous posters have mentioned, I'd compare it more to a Bonanza (or, for a stretch, a Mooney). It's an awful lot of airplane for someone who can't stay within my definition of "proficiency."

My advice to people around here that don't fly a whole lot who are looking for a faster, "go-places" airplane is to give the Cessna 182/206 and Piper 6X/Saratoga a look.
I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos