Slingsby Firefly Accidents
Hello there,
I own and operate a T67M200 and I love it to bits. But being retired early, I have little income so have decided now to get a homebuilt with foldable wings to put in the garage rather than run a certified aircraft that needs a hangar. I put the aircraft up for sale and hit a problem..
The ability of google to bring together accident reports and scare people witless whilst they "skim" the headlines without reading them, is preventing anyone wanting to buy it - they google "Slingsby aircraft accidents" and then go no further, failing to differentiate that there are many models with very different capabilities.
The problem is that when it comes to accident reports, the devil is in the detail - you have to carefully read each accident report and then it becomes clear the multiple reasons there have been accidents. When you actually read the USAF accident reports for example, its is no wonder that the man in charge of the training school was "removed overnight" - but of course you cannot sue a officer in the air force, so of course you sue the manufacturer... they were flying a longer larger 260hp variant with and air conditioner under the cowl (dissipating heat) in the heat of texas (Hondo) taking off at high altitude and getting fuel vapour lock problems and then gaining altitude to practice spinning in an aircraft where the USAF wrote their own flight manual, NOT the one that was written by Slingsby with the special notes about spin recovery in it - NO it is NOT the same as a piper cub - hmmm.
The UK accidents each make sorry reading, with one being a case of pilot WITHOUT having completed his aerobatic training and NOT having been signed out for solo aerobatics, just deciding to do aerobatics to show off to friends - watch this ! . Even the accident where the most qualified pilot killed himself, he had practiced the aerobatic routine in a 260hp aircraft and when it would not start on the day of the airshow, hops in an aircraft with a 200hp engine and flies the routine in this aircraft instead for the FIRST TIME, then fails to recover from an inverted low-level manoeuvre during the display - what is it they say about never doing anything at low level you have not practiced at altitude (in the same aircraft type) ?
I think the failing of the Slingsby it is that it is a really easy aircraft to fly, much easier than the trainers I learnt on BUT it is a very capable aerobatic aircraft - not a snappy roller, but excellent all the same. This DOES NOT MEAN that flying aerobatics is easy and safe unless you are qualified and current. Now if you are interested in the Slingsby READ THE PART OF THE MANUAL ON SPIN RECOVERY - it is simple, safe and reliable BUT DIFFERENT to most aircraft. Most notably "if the stick is held forward whilst applying opposite rudder, the aircraft will remain in the spin" This is very important and warranted Slingsby issuing a special note to owners to pay attention to this. How many of the dead pilots read this and practiced it ?
SImilarly, I am now looking a buying a Europa aircraft and notice the many crosswind landing accidents - they are all in the Monowheel variant - now think about it - how tricky is it going to be to land a mono wheel aircraft in a crosswind that has sticking out OUTRIGGERS on each wing - very very tricky, whereas the tri-gear would be conventional. It does not put me off, I just know I need to have a tri-gear as my airfield is most often has a cross wind and I am not Houdini...
I really wish Slingsby had named the aircraft models differently, as they really are very different from each other - The T67M200 is SHORTER and LIGHTER and has a different C of G than the T67M260 and flies very differently meanwhile the 160hp model is much harder to fly aerobatics as it has WAY less power, but is still a nice aircraft.
Best wishes all
Regards
Trevor