Reminds me of the Carnahan crash, when the Senator's son lost control of a plane in IMC and crashed. The jury placed the blame and a large award on the company that manufacturered the vacuum pumps, even though the NTSB said the pumps were working properly all the way to the scene of the crash.
In the Lidle crash, this was simply bad airmanship. Too low, too fast, and inproper wind-drift correction for the turn they tried to make. If you crash into the side of a building when you're turning, you were too close and too low.
I have been routinely looking at the FAA's accident database for a few years and have noticied that the newer aircraft (I generally look at Cirrus) have higher accidents per number of aircraft flying than other types (PA-28's for example). Not only ate the rates higher, but the rate of fatal accidents is higher. I'm familiar with Aspen panels, G1000's as well as the analog gauges that I have had in my two aircraft, and really prefer the analogs because of the ability to rapidly interpret them at a glance. The PFD's can be challenging when the information presented is changing rapidly, and this slows the pilot's reaction time, especially in critical flight phases.
In addition, the degree of automation breeds pilot reliance and erodes basic airmanship skills. There was another study not long ago that demonstarted this phenomena in commercial operations. Pilot proficiency, a sound aircraft, and good aeronautical decision making will always win out over a mediocre pilot flying the newest plane with the latest gadgetry.
RSB, CFII
