I think this is a time to show your cards and point to specific NTSB reports instead of sending folks on a fishing expedition.
Flutter destroyed a few early tails.
I think this is a time to show your cards and point to specific NTSB reports instead of sending folks on a fishing expedition.
That’s his M.O.Gryder was not kind to the pilot on his most recent video. Guys family suffers a huge loss and then someone says a few not-so-nice things about the pilot. Not the time or forum for that.
how did you get an airworthiness return to service with intentional non-compliance of an A.D. ?cuz I don't endorse moral hazards and the offender wouldn't pay me to have it done.
You can comply with the AD just due to low hours/lack of 100 hour inspections not requiring any further action...I'm assuming that's what he meant by "not comply", as in not falling for the fear/hype and ALWAYS getting the inspection as some have....how did you get an airworthiness return to service with intentional non-compliance of an A.D. ?
Good find, but that report points to imbalances in the rigging causing flutter. Granted there was a ruddervator involved.
Flutter destroyed a few early tails.
Quite the assumption. I just take people at their word, at least I try to…You can comply with the AD just due to low hours/lack of 100 hour inspections not requiring any further action...I'm assuming that's what he meant by "not comply", as in not falling for the fear/hype and ALWAYS getting the inspection as some have.
It’s not the only one. Also not the one I was looking for, the 2002 AD changed the ruddervator balance requirements to a much narrower range than previously prescribed. At least in part because a guy had a flutter event with the ruddervator inside of, but at the very aft end of the factory balance requirement. Actual cause was determined by NTSB as “pilot error” since the guy was flying through light turbulence above the POH turbulence penetration speed (but inside the green arc). The NTSB trail on these events leads me to believe the V tail is undoubtedly more sensitive to balance and condition of control surfaces than the straight.Good find, but that report points to imbalances in the rigging causing flutter. Granted there was a ruddervator involved.
A V-tail debate ? That's new!
Already plenty of two spinner lawyer killers on the market.Well, frankly, I think Beech missed the mark with the V-tail Bonanza. Now, had they set out to design a forked-tail lawyer killer, they might have avoided a lot of bad press.
Gryder shouldn’t be allowed around anything sharper than a Twinkie without adult supervision.That’s his M.O.
The guy is a moron and has mental problems. Do yourself and everyone else a favor: stop watching his content.
how did you get an airworthiness return to service with intentional non-compliance of an A.D. ?
Fixed that for ya.Gryder shouldn’t be allowed.
So! What is the relevance to this discussion? Any airplane can break someplace. Are you suggesting that the C-210 has a similar rate of breakup to the V-tails prior to the AD? If so, lets see you data.Neither did Scotty's 210.
At least he wasn’t playing a guitar this time and talking about his life story like he’s a saintGryder shouldn’t be allowed around anything sharper than a Twinkie without adult supervision.
Not at all. It was a sarcastic response to a previous comment that Crossfield's crash was some how relevant to the V-tail issue.So! What is the relevance to this discussion? Any airplane can break someplace. Are you suggesting that the C-210 has a similar rate of breakup to the V-tails prior to the AD? If so, lets see you data.
Because everyone is "assuming" the tail had something to do with the inflight break up.....Not at all. It was a sarcastic response to a previous comment that Crossfield's crash was some how relevant to the V-tail issue.
But I didn't comment on Crossfield's accident in the post you responded to. So you sarcasm is misdirected.Not at all. It was a sarcastic response to a previous comment that Crossfield's crash was some how relevant to the V-tail issue.
It wasn't directed at you, sheesh. It was an addition to your statement about straight-tail Bos.But I didn't comment on Crossfield's accident in the post you responded to. So you sarcasm is misdirected.
Yup…brought additional lack of information to the conversation.Good timing on an AvWeb article on the incident
Blog: V-Tail Myths And The Truth, As We Know It, So Far - AVweb
Does this crash support some long-standing Bonanza assumptions?www.avweb.com
Beechcraft was TOTALLY complacent about the breakup problem......so was the American Bonanza Society. Then, the president of the Bonanza Societies "V" tail disintegrated..........and finally, Beech made a strengthening kit. The straight-tail Debonaire is a MUICH better design
The nearest I know of is a close friend of ABS president Donald L. Monday crashed in 1984 in a V-Tail breakup. It caused him to change his (and the ABS's) mind on the V-tail strategy splitting with what Beech was selling. There were a few V-tail crashes in 1984, but I'm unsure of which this was.Do you have specifics on the "the president of the Bonanza Societies "V" tail disintegrated". I
Thanks for finding that report! It’s a very good read.
I was a member of ABS at the time, and there was general concern for the V tail, of which I owned one and still do. The claim was that he was involved in an accident, which was false and I just wanted to point that out. Monday remained on the board until 1987 and his airplane is still in the FAA registry although he is diseased.The nearest I know of is a close friend of ABS president Donald L. Monday crashed in 1984 in a V-Tail breakup. It caused him to change his (and the ABS's) mind on the V-tail strategy splitting with what Beech was selling. There were a few V-tail crashes in 1984, but I'm unsure of which this was.