Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

erronis

(18,961 posts)
5. Made me look it up - thanks.
Sun Apr 13, 2025, 03:29 PM
Sunday
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_MU-2

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2011/may/01/mitsubishi-mu-2-addictive-performance
Mitsubishi’s entrant to the American general aviation scene in the late 1960s—the MU–2 twin turboprop—was a cutting-edge airplane that, performance-wise, blew the doors off the competition. At the time, the Beech King Air 90 couldn’t come close to the speedy Japanese newcomer. And the MU–2 was every bit as good a short/rough-field airplane as the King Air.

Today, the MU–2 is still a performance leader bested in cruise speed by only contemporary—and much more expensive—King Airs (300 and 350), and the rare Piper Cheyenne 400LS. But the MU–2 has been plagued with a reputation of being an unforgiving, or outright dangerous, airplane. A few high-profile accidents, including one that killed a prominent politician, didn’t help the MU–2’s reputation. But MU–2 owners and operators are its most ardent supporters. They argue that the MU–2’s formerly eyebrow-raising accident record had nothing to do with the design, but with improperly trained pilots. After the NTSB recommended—and the FAA followed through with—a Special Certification Review of the design in 1983, the MU–2 came out with a clean bill of health supporting the owners’ theory.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Six presumed dead after p...»Reply #5