which was tested in an inverted spin
Bloody hell I'd like to see a Cessna get out of an inverted spin without making a crater! I wonder how it got into that spin mode in the first place?
The regs will require that the structural failure load is roughly 2.25 times limit, not 1.5. So for a 3.8g value of N1, structural failure should occur at around 8.6g.
Interesting - wasn't aware of that until now, but it makes a lot of sense.
When assembled, the facts mostly exhonorate the aircraft itself, so what pilots really need more of (in any spin prohibited aircraft) is discipline, plain and simple, is in the areas of energy management, flight planning and contigency management. As it stands I'd be happy to fly a Cirrus - much happier then flying a PA28.
The only thing about the SR22 that may be lacking is the POH - giving only some advice about inadvertant spins is bad, but giving no advice is fatal, although:
Cirrus has reached strong conclusion that any spin recovery guidance in the AFM distracts pilot from immediately activating CAPS system when the aircraft has departed controlled flight.
If the a/c can recover in an emergency, it's probably better to tell us that, as Diamond did with the DA40. Maybe a bit of type specific sim training? I know the sim might have problems with stall/spin aerodynamics (as X-Plane does), but it's far better than nothing.
Everytime an aircraft crashes we benefit from the knowledge gained, so that's why poring over GA/airline accident reports is so critical - it contributes hugely to our overall knowledge and decision making skills.
PS: Where can I test fly Angelina Jolie?? 