|Quoting Larshjort (Reply 57):|
Agreed but that has more to do with the extensive network of maintenance facilities due to the much larger number of Cessnas
I don't even think it's that. Here in the US, basically every A&P has worked on a Cessna and Piper at some point. Part of it is the time they've been around (both plane and A&P). Seeing as they make up a large portion of the light GA
fleet, mechanics have incentive to be able to work on them. You end up with something else (not just Cirrus) like say a Mooney, it might be difficult to find somebody who knows how to work on them. Sure, anyone can, but finding someone who is familiar with them isn't easy.
|Quoting VokinLoksar (Reply 58):|
If anything, the G1000 system in that plane is a far more likely reasons for people to take stupid risks, especially weather-related, than the parachute.
I don't think it's that. Might be part, but the biggest thing is the TKS
system, which is for inadvertent icing encounters, which some pilots may take liberty to just fly through the ice with. Granted, they do have the FIKI model now, but even with that, I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in any amount of icing. Another issue is people flying extremely high, and running out of O2. Simple to prevent, but it still manages to happen.
|Quoting cobra27 (Reply 59):|
Am tired of this another aviation conversation, parachutes are useless, end of topic
If you honestly believe that is what I and others are saying, you sir are a fool. I'm not saying its useless, but the system has very, very, very marginal usefulness. You don't want to see to listen to other opinions on the topic, and if we don't agree with you, we are automatically wrong. So, keep drinking your parachute panacea kool aid.
Flying has risk, especially in general aviation. If you can't accept risk, stay on the ground. Heck, for that matter, don't ever leave your house. Some of us are willing to take slightly more risk. Nothing wrong with that, but you can't seem to accept that.