Why are these planes still flying?
An article in today's Sunday Times contains further information on the safety record and problems of Piper Malibu aircraft. According to figures collated by the US National Transportation Safety Board, there are been 237 accidents or incidents involving the P46 model since 1984 resulting in 168 fatalities.
The plane requires constant professional maintenance by experienced mechanics and necessitates the pilot "having experience in complex airplanes"; and one who should be "sensitive to proper operating technique". No doubt, an enquiry will determine whether these criteria have been met in this case and no-one should pre-judge the outcome.
However, to a layman like me it seems fair to ask why, with such an appalling safety record, this type of plane is still flying, particularly in challenging conditions. Just imagine the outcry if a similar number of accidents involving A320 Airbuses had occurred.
Re: Why are these planes still flying?
I have posted on another thread that I hope this tragedy will bring about a change in the law involving these type of unofficial commercial flights using aircraft which seem not to be fit for the purpose.
Re: Why are these planes still flying?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
KD50
An article in today's Sunday Times contains further information on the safety record and problems of Piper Malibu aircraft. According to figures collated by the US National Transportation Safety Board, there are been 237 accidents or incidents involving the P46 model since 1984 resulting in 168 fatalities.
The plane requires constant professional maintenance by experienced mechanics and necessitates the pilot "having experience in complex airplanes"; and one who should be "sensitive to proper operating technique". No doubt, an enquiry will determine whether these criteria have been met in this case and no-one should pre-judge the outcome.
However, to a layman like me it seems fair to ask why, with such an appalling safety record, this type of plane is still flying, particularly in challenging conditions. Just imagine the outcry if a similar number of accidents involving A320 Airbuses had occurred.
Does the article give any data about accident rates for comparable light aircraft that have been in operation for a similar period and flown a similar number of miles? By what standards do you judge this aircraft's record to be appalling?
Re: Why are these planes still flying?
No it doesn't . As I say, my comments were those of a layman and I do not claim any technical knowledge. The article does state, however, that the Piper Malibu has a poor reputation amongst professional pilots. I just know that a failure rate of 237 out of a total build of around 1400 would make me think seriously about getting in one. To be honest, having taken 25 years to overcome a fear of flying between taking my first flight in 1974 and my next in 2000, I still wouldn't go near any small aircraft!
Re: Why are these planes still flying?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
KD50
No it doesn't . As I say, my comments were those of a layman and I do not claim any technical knowledge. The article does state, however, that the Piper Malibu has a poor reputation amongst professional pilots. I just know that a failure rate of 237 out of a total build of around 1400 would make me think seriously about getting in one. To be honest, having taken 25 years to overcome a fear of flying between taking my first flight in 1974 and my next in 2000, I still wouldn't go near any small aircraft!
I have to agree, I wouldn't go near a small or single engine aircraft.
I heard something similar about this planes reputation with pilots too.
However, it might be impossible to obtain accurate figures, but what percentage is as a result of pilot error alone?
Of course, there could be crashes as a result of both plane malfunction and poorly experienced pilots.
In the Sala tragedy, if the various reports are to be believed, then the aircraft seems to have been malfunctioning, at least to some degree.
The pilot allegedly had poor experience of flying this aircraft.
Then there's the facts of, why fly a single engine aircraft over a 100 mile expanse of sea, in very poor and freezing weather conditions, at night.
That has to be down to pilot error.
Would Nantes and Cardiff airports, along with air traffic controls known of this single engine aircraft making this specific journey?
I would suspect the airports would, so why would they 'allow' it, or is it more prevalent than we are aware of?
As RichardM asks, it would be intersting to see comparable data for similar aircraft.
Re: Why are these planes still flying?
I went on one of these back in September( Everton away) we never made it back to surrey, plane had to land at Oxford, no Doing it again
Re: Why are these planes still flying?
Were all of these incidents due to the deficiencies of the plane? Or were some down to pilot error etc?
Re: Why are these planes still flying?
It's a mixture of both. On the Aviation Safety Network website (Google "Piper Malibu Safety Record) it gives full details of the causes of death accident. It goes into a lot of detail that you may want to go through yourself.
Cheers.
Re: Why are these planes still flying?
Is it just this one type of light aircraft that’s so unreliable? You’d never get me on any of them, where’s the redundancy in them?
Quote:
The plane requires constant professional maintenance by experienced mechanics and necessitates the pilot "having experience in complex airplanes"; and one who should be "sensitive to proper operating technique".
Surely this is applied to every single plane too?
Re: Why are these planes still flying?
I don't know. I just looked at Piper Malibu Records but I would suspect that newer types of aircraft would be better designed and built. This particular plane was 35 years old which seems a lot to me but I'm no expert. Presumably there is a service and maintenance log available. Like you, I don't trust small planes or helicopters but that is partly down to prejudice on my part.
Cheers
