Originally Posted by
BoilerUP
It certainly is a high performance SE piston and as such isn't as forgiving as other less capable airframes...but "dangerous"? Absolutely not.
Well I agree with the spirit of what you say. I'd argue that it is dangerous and aviation is dangerous. I would also say the SR's are more dangerous, all said, than a lower wingload design. But yes, absolute risk is low, so you could look on it as not dangerous, I wouldn't argue semantics with you.
Originally Posted by
2StgTurbine
The reason people view it as dangerous is because there are a lot of them and therefore there are a lot of accidents. If Cessna sold a similar amount of Cessna 400s, I bet people would think that was a dangerous plane too.
That is a nice thought, but accident statistics do not support your claim.
You might be able to argue the "type" of person that flies each plane is different (e.g. a lot of doctors / dentists / lawyers buy Cirruses but only flight professionals or true enthusiasts would shell out the higher $$$ for a columbia/cessna 400, and they are more interested in flying and thus safer.) Also perhaps 400's are not used for training while a lot of Cirrus are.