It sounds like he was a skilled aviator. What about his maintenace, however? As the article pointed out a great many apparent descrepancies or gaps, it appears that, at the very least, his record keeping was poor.
I am honestly an unbiased observer watching Dr. Morris'argue his position as I am not a high performance single or twin engine driver. However, I thought it was interesting, and of course sad, to read in my AIN newsletter today this story:
Quest Diagnostics TBM 700 Crashes, Killing Pilot
The pilot was killed when his TBM 700 turboprop single hit a 38-foot telephone pole, then burst into flames a half mile short of Runway 18 at Mobile Downtown Airport, Ala., at 8:10 p.m. last Thursday. VMC prevailed at the time. According to the Mobile tower controller, the pilot (who was the sole person on board) reported that he had a “runaway engine†and subsequently said he was shutting down the Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-64.
I think you will be unable to present a valid argument for the superiority of any piston engine against the reliability record of the PT6 family, but as we see they break, too. Assuming money is not a limiting factor, for safety I'd choose a turbo-prop over a piston, single or twin, anyday. But the next step down on the desirability pecking order would have to be a piston twin.
An Italian Stallion. Pretty neat aircraft. Seems that it has a lot of the advantages of the Beech Starship with not all the complexity. As the Flying article pointed out, it has speed, a large cabin and style.
I agree. My question is why they posted the price so low at the start of the project. Surely, people who were paying $1.5 for Meridians would gladly pay the same price for a twin engine jet. Yet, Vern Raburn continues to say that they will bring the aircraft to market under the original pricing structure even though they will be forced to use an obviously more expensive powerplant. As you recall, the Williams design was an evolution of the NASA funded GAP project. The goal of the program was to produce a turbine engine at a competitive cost to present large displacement aircraft piston engines: $50-$100K. Obviously, any available alternative powerplant will be considerably more expensive. Who do they think is going to buy that story? It seems to me they missed an excellent opportunity to increase the price as they "claim" the re-engined design will have great capability and, also, Cessna has now annouced the Mustang that is almost three times their price. The real tragedy of this, in addition, to scaring off potential investor in the next aviation startup, is the damage done to the present particiapants in the market: Beech, Cessna, Piper, Pilatus and Socata. How many buyers have been sitting on the fence waiting for the paper airplanes to fly while the current manufacturers suffer? All of GA suffers as a result. Vern, grasp reality and fold the Eciplse tent now before you waste anymore of other people's time and money. We all fail from time to time, and you can always say that you gave it your best shot.
Quest Diagnostics TBM 700 Crashes, Killing Pilot
The pilot was killed when his TBM 700 turboprop single hit a 38-foot telephone pole, then burst into flames a half mile short of Runway 18 at Mobile Downtown Airport, Ala., at 8:10 p.m. last Thursday. VMC prevailed at the time. According to the Mobile tower controller, the pilot (who was the sole person on board) reported that he had a “runaway engine†and subsequently said he was shutting down the Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-64.
I think you will be unable to present a valid argument for the superiority of any piston engine against the reliability record of the PT6 family, but as we see they break, too. Assuming money is not a limiting factor, for safety I'd choose a turbo-prop over a piston, single or twin, anyday. But the next step down on the desirability pecking order would have to be a piston twin.