Its all in how you interpret the numbers . . . the numbers are not surprising. See attached article which was published today in Philadelphia . . . I'm am always looking to see where others may have went wrong and attempt to learn along the way . . .
A spokesman for the FAA could not confirm the statistics but said the Experimental Aircraft Association was considered highly reliable.
at least the FAA doesn't see us as being a rambunctious group of unstable quacks... well doesn't see us as being "unreliable"
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Phily Inquirer
The term experimental can cause misperceptions about the safety record of homebuilt planes, most of which are built from well-tested kits and flown by experienced pilots, Knapinski said.
All experimental planes must be inspected by the FAA, and all pilots must maintain the same federal pilot training as other general aviation pilots, he said.
at least the article didn't try to paint us as the bad guys!
__________________
Ian
RV-8 economically on hold... short term hold.
AME2, USN
I actually thought that was a pretty good article. Kudos to the author for taking time to investigate and present the facts.
mcb
__________________
Matt Burch
RV-7 (last 90%) http://www.rv7blog.com
VAF #836
Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and not those of my employer.
Bad press for us 'homebuilders'
Linear Mode
