Welcome Aboard !

THE GTS HOMEPAGE
Serving Swifters Since 
May 1996

HELP SUPPORT THE
GTS HOMEPAGE!
Your support of this website is sincerely appreciated.
More Info...

THANK YOU!
Recognizing Swifters who have chosen to lend their support to the continued efforts of the GTS Homepage.

Defending the Swift

Swifters reply to the following by Richard Collins in the February 1999 issue of FLYING magazine:

"Globe (or Temco) Swifts are not still in wide use... Not only was the Swift a miserable airplane -- I used to own one so I know -- it spend a lot of its time in a heap."

====================

FLYING certainly won't publish them all so here is our collection of email to FLYING and Collins
regarding our beloved Swift

To: hfmflying@aol.com
From: Denis Arbeau (arbeau@napanet.net)
Subject: Richard Collins' ON TOP
So there I sit in the airport restaurant at Petaluma Airport, browsing through the February 1999 issue of FLYING. The Swift I flew in, the exact same Swift in which I got my first airplane ride 30 years ago, sits outside on the ramp waiting for the short hop home to Schellville. But... do I dare fly it home now after what I just read in Richard Collins' "ON TOP" column?

I have spent my entire flying career as a professional CFI, (14,000+ hours and 9,000+ hours dual given), in deep admiration of Richard. I read his books and magazine articles religiously and constantly preach his aviation gospel to my students. So how, after almost 2,000 hours in Swifts, do I now rebel against my aviation mentor's advice? I can't. I know, I'll call my wife to fly over and pick me up. Wait... that won't work, she owns a Swift of her own.

I order another ice tea and ponder my dilemma. I finish the last of my veggie burger and decide, with a heavy heart, to go against my idol's opinion for the first time in 30 years. With all the confidence my feeble aviation experience allows me to muster, I bravely walk out to my beloved Swift. I climb aboard what I've just read Richard call, "...a miserable airplane - I used to own one so I know -" and fly it back to Schellville.

So I must write this now to confess my sins against Richard's golden words of aviation advice. I remain Richard Collins' biggest supporter and humble admirer. But dear Richard, if you should find the time to read this, I've finally realized that you are indeed human after all. I will praise your contributions to the world of aviation in my teaching whenever and wherever I fly. Many times that will be in my Swift. One of the best airplanes I've ever flown - I own one so I know...

Denis Arbeau,  Napa, CA

From: Bill Weaver (Swift238@aol.com)
To: arbeau@napanet.net
Subject: Re: #2 January GTS Internet Update
Denis, good job on the Collins thing. What would cause him to write that? Must have been a GC-1A on a hot day with tall trees. Thanks for sending it. -- Bill Weaver Swift 78238

From: Jim Montague (Monty747@aol.com)
To: FLYING MAGAZINE (HFMFLYING@aol.com)
Cc: arbeau@napanet.net
Subject: Collins - please read
Editor,
I now am coming up on 2000 delightful hours in my Swift. I have never had any real problems, either flying or maintenance wise. I can only surmise that someone who has had problems is an idiot, pilotwise or mechanicwise. -- Jim Montague
PS My Swift, the BEST airplane I ever had, I own one, so I ought to know.

From: Gene Gillott <egillott@nortek.com>
To: FLYING MAGAZINE (hfmflying@aol.com)
CC: arbeau@napanet.net
Subject: Swift
Sirs
I happened to see an excerpt from Richard Collins' article on Swifts in the Swift newsletter. Having owned and flown one since 1964 (yes, the same one - never in a heap) I must confess that I am a bit puzzled at these comments. I am not a commercial pilot so I cannot brag about the tens of thousands of hours that I have flown - you just can't get those kinds of hours on your own budget. On the other hand, every hour I have logged (except the 37.5 that it took to get my license) has been Swift time and has also been quality time. (Of my meager store, about 1500 hours has been formation flying: either during demonstrations or practicing.). There have been no long hours sitting and monitoring the autopilot, it has all been hands on. So, for what it is worth, I can only respond with the following: 1) I love that airplane! 2) I know many others who feel the same. 3) Pay it a reasonable amount of respect and it will never let you down. 4) If it is in a "heap" see no. 3 above. If you have got this far, I thank you for your time reading this response.
Regards, Gene Gillott  Swift C-FKXY

From: JSw7211963@aol.com
To: FLYING MAGAZINE (HFMFLYING@aol.com)
Subject: Richard Collins (On Top Column)
Possibly you could talk to Richard Bach about his experience in the Swift he owned, and then determine whether it was the plane or the pilot that caused you your grief and the bad taste in your mouth for the Swift. Not fair Richard. My dad sold them new and I am sixty years old and have owned two. You will be more than welcome to fly mine any time you wish, and maybe then you would reconsider your statements.
Jerry Swartz Sioux City, Iowa.

From: Dave White <David_G_White@compuserve.com>
Subject: re: Richard Collins
Had to laugh at Richard Collins' blathering in the new issue of Flying. That nitwit is the exact reason I never read Flying or any other magazine he is associated with. Thank God AOPA dumped him and saved Pilot from his depredations! Assuming that your admiration for him is genuine, I will apologize for my lack of respect, but I have never seen anything from him that showed the slightest glimmer of intelligence or aviation savvy, and his Swift-Slamming column just confirms my conviction.
"When once you have tasted flight you will always walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward; for there you have been and there you will always be."
-- Dave White

From: Billy Turner <bnturner@kih.net>
Subject: Re: #2 January GTS Internet Update
I just read your reply to Mr. Collins' on top column.I cannot beleive that during his ownership of a swift he never did learn that a swift is a pilot's aircraft and not a Cessna 120 or a 140. Also it's true that they make alot of people miserable. They are miserable because they don't own one, or know how to fly one safely. Since he think's my pride and joy is a miserable aircraft, Well i cannot help but think Flying Is a miserable magazine. Therefore i am cancelling the two year subscription that i just renewed. Thank's for your fine new's letter i really enjoy it especially when you save me the trouble of reading garbage such as Richard Collin's wrote about the Swift. All you swifter's be carefull flying those dangerous aircraft, and don't forget to write Richard, And let him know the way you feel about your DANGEROUS SWIFT"S. BY HITTING HIM IN HIS WALLET. WHERE IT HURT'S
-- Billy Turner Swift N78193

From: Alan Abell <ara@postal.interaccess.com>
Jim & Denis,
Thanks again for promoting the world of the Swift. Denis, don't take what Richard Collins writes too much to heart. There is a lot that he doesn't know and more that he chooses to ignore. His I-fly-my-210-on-yet-another-IFR-flight-plan repetitive rookie ramblings wore thin with me years ago. I'm glad that, in defense, you chose to post Richard Bach's definitive Swift article on the web page. When I taught, I used to tell my students that the airplane is just dumb a piece of aluminum that requires that you supply the brain. To Mr. Collins I would add what Mr. Bach already knows; it also requires that you supply the soul.
-- Later, Alan

From: Steve Wilson (SteveWlson@aol.com)
To: arbeau@napanet.net, Monty747@aol.com
Subject: Re: Richard Collins

I wanna get the article and read it for myself, just to get the flavor. My first reaction was to lambaste Mr. Collins; however, having thrashed him thoroughly in my mind, I decided that his impressions (at least from what you are saying) are 35 years old. There is a saying, "You don't get a second chance to make a first impression." Well...maybe yes, maybe no!

I know that a number of writers have found the Swift not to their personal liking (in fact, I did not originally think Bach's comments were complimentary on my first reading many years ago). One time, many many moons ago, I was "enlightened" by Max Karant (of AOPA fame) about how he was nearly killed in a new 1946 Swift due to its poor flight characteristics. Seems his "superior" skills as a pilot were called upon to keep the green side up, without which he certainly would have met his immediate demise.

One thing I know from my profession, (editor's note: Steve is NTSB), is that most airplane drivers have a desire to have ANYTHING except the pilot (crew) found to be the cause of the "accident." In GA at least, the statistics show clearly 80% of accidents are pilot problems. I guess I am of the old school, I believe that "accidents" are people problems. Someone designed it, someone built it, someone CQd it, someone marketed it, someone maintained it, someone inspected it, someone serviced it, someone instructed in it, someone checked out the crew in it, someone preflighted it, someone flew it, and so on. There are really very few "Act of God" accidents. That is what you need to keep it from being a human factor accident. Maybe hitting a fully submerged object with a seaplane or a deer running into an airplane would qualify, but very few are really "Acts of God."

I think I will make an open offer to Mr. Collins to take a ride in a current Swift and see if he accepts. Mr Karant would not! Collins really is an intelligent man and may just not have considered how things have changed in the intervening years since his last experience. Anyway, I think I will pick up the magazine today, weather permitting, and then draft an e-mail maybetonight along the lines proposed here. Your thoughts?
...Steve W

GTS INTERNET UPDATE EDITOR'S THOUGHTS...
We've seen quite an array of opinions re: the Collins thing. Steve Wilson's scenario is really the way I'd like to see it play out. As I stated originally, Collins has held my respect for years even if he does indeed sometimes tend to ramble with "His I-fly-my-210-on-yet-another-IFR-flight-plan" stories as Alan Abell so correctly put it. I have no plans to remove the Collins books that are top row center on the book shelf in my office at the Flight Crew Training Center where I teach. I'd really love to see Collins invited down to Tennessee and have some of our Swift "A-TEAM" get Collins reacquainted with the Swift. It is easy to get passionate about something so dear to most of us as our Swifts are and to read comments like Collins' are like someone casting aspersions at a member of the family. I don't doubt Collins' research on the Swift. Any of us could look it up. He's not making up stories just to sell magazines. I just know, deep in my heart and soul, that as I've said so many times when people have hit me with horror stories about the Swift... "The Swift is a super airplane that is sometime flown by pilots that aren't so super." (And I think we SHOULD name the doggie award at fly-ins after Collins...what's life with a sense of humor.) -- Denis Arbeau (arbeau@napanet.net)
AND REMEMBER, FLYING MAGAZINE EMAIL ADDRESS... HFMFLYING@aol.com

From: Mark Holliday (MarkH85@aol.com)
To: HFMFLYING@aol.com
Subject: Richard Collins, On Top, Feb 99
Dear Richard Collins,
The Swift a miserable airplane? NOT. I know- I own one, as a matter of fact I own several, from 85hp to 210 hp. The Swift is an airplane that takes some piloting skills. I've heard the Swift called a miserable airplane only by people who have never flown one, or by someone lacking the skill to fly one safely. If you read the January 1948 AIR FACTS pilot report, and I quote: "All in all, the Swift 125 represents a big step forward in the two-place category, and its sales figures
are beginning to show it. If you are used to a simpler airplane it will, of course, confuse you a little at first both because of the number of items in the cockpit to look after and because of its light, responsive controls. But after an hour or so you begin to forget that part and think in terms of 20 miles per gallon at 140 m.p.h. at seven of eight thousand; and those good stall characteristics; and, with the Aeromatic, top-grade small field abilities. And in your third hour you will begin to realize that this is by long odds the easiest to fly fast two-place airplane which has ever been built. " This was written by a real pilot, Leighton Collins.  
Sincerely, Mark Holliday

From: DG White <David_G_White@compuserve.com>
Subject: re: Mark Holliday's Letter to Flying Magazine
PRICELESS!
Unbelievable that Mark found Daddy's words to toss at sonny boy--I loved it, about died laughing. Thanks for brightening up a gloomy day!

From: Chris Mihok <accinc@stc.net>
Subject: Re: Mark Holliday's Letter to Flying Magazine
Bravo!!! Mark Holliday...
I've been alternating between fits of rage and pity towards Richard Collins and his pathetic column. Every time I'd try to put into words a response to his diatribe, I came across as too angry and too hurt. I think "hurt" is the right word here. The Swift is the first airplane I've ever owned and I've only been so privileged for a little over a year. Every time I go to the airport, open the hangar doors and see it sitting there I am overcome by a sense of awe....I can't believe it's mine!! It's such a wonderful blend of form and function that it moves me just to look at it....let a lone FLY IT. Demanding, perhaps...... challenging, OK......so what, I didn't learn to fly because I was looking for a time consuming, expensive, and boring hobby. I fly because I like to be tested and at the same time rewarded in ways that those tied to the earth can only dream about. Ok, Ok, I'm getting excited again....but as you know, that's what owning and flying a Swift does to the lucky few who are temporary trustees of such an exquisite aircraft. While I've never been a fan of Richard Collins and his "higher than thou" attitude, I usually don't let his comments bother me. But his latest "On Top" went too far (and hit too close to home). Either Richard's father was wrong in his praise for the flying qualities of the Swift or perhaps, Richard is not quite the stick and rudder man he thinks he is. Maybe he should continue flying straight and level in the tricycle gear, autopilot controlled 210 he loves so much.....as for me, I'll take my hand flown, "Challenging" Swift anyday, after all, I gave up tricycles a long time ago...
.... Chris Mihok

From: "Lee Barnum" <barnum@compucenter.net>
To: <hfmflying@aol.com>
Subject: Richard Collins @Globe Swift
There are people that have the audacity to criticize a beautiful airplane that they obviously do not have the skills to fly.
-- Lee Barnum

From: Bob Runge <ejectr@javanet.com>
To: hfmflying@aol.com
Subject: Richard Collins "On Top"
Dear Mr. Collins:
Somewhere in all of our pilot careers, we are called upon to make judgement calls. Sometimes we make good judgement calls, sometimes not. You obviously must have had a bad day when you put pen to paper writing your February "On Top" article demoting the Swift to something resembling a wringer washing machine, because the article surely wasn't up to your usual high standard, nor the best decision.  It only served to incense a very close brotherhood, made up of members that I believe would die for each other before they saw another Swift abused, either physically or literally. They happen to enjoy and receive the same rewards from aviating as the big corporate guys, who are also our brothers in the air.  Let's all enjoy this miracle called flight regardless of what we choose to do it in. To each his own, Mr. Collins. Life is too short for type certificate bashing. Best regards....
...Bob Runge, Colrain,Ma Swift N80528

From: Geoff Newcombe (GLNEWC@aol.com)
To: HFMFLYING@aol.com
Subject: Richard Collins and the Swift
King Richard,
Re: your comment that the Swift is a "miserable airplane"..... you know because you used to own one. I respectfully submit that you are all wet. The Swift is a wonderful airplane..... I have owned two, and still own one. If your Swift was miserable it was undoubtedly your fault and that of whomever did your maintenance. It is a responsive, fun, sporty little airplane that requires proper pilot technique and someone who cares about, and is familiar with, its proper maintenance.  If it makes any difference, I am a 10,000 hour ag-pilot (cropduster) and have owned a BC-65 T-Craft , a Cessna 140, a Cessna 195, a 182 (straight tail), a PA22/20 Pacer, and 2 Swifts (one in the late 70's and one I own now), and have several hundred hours in a Beechcraft C90B. I enjoyed them all, but am particularly fond of the Swift and the 195. Not a miserable airplane in the bunch.
--- Geoff Newcombe, Vero Beach, FL

From: Monty747@aol.com
To: HFMFLYING@aol.com
Subject: Swift
Editor,
Let me see if I got this straight....The Swift had a high accident rate in 1964. So it was a "miserable" airplane. The Twin Commanche had a HIGHER rate. So it, hmmm...well, what is Collins saying anyway?
I'll get back to you.
James J Montague

From: Monty747@aol.com
To: HFMFLYING@aol.com
Subject: Collins, Feb, On Top
Looking at Richard Collins' February column again, I can point out a few things. In attempting to make a point about AD-IPE, "Aircraft Design-Induced Pilot Error" he mentions the Globe or Temco Swift. His first point is a statistic, statistics don't lie, they say. Except don't mention that to the man who drowned in the stream that only averaged six inches deep. There are, after all, lies, damned lies, and statistics.  So I can't argue with the statistics. I think I can explain them, however. In 1964 the Swift was one of the cheapest airplanes on the market. I know, I bought mine in 1965--so I know. I paid $1,000.00 for mine and flew it home.  In 1964 the Swifts were mostly 18 years old, the age when certain mechanical items were starting to need attention and some money was needed to take care of these items. The typical owner didn't or couldn't afford to spend much money on an airplane that was only worth a couple thousand bucks. Also, the typical owner never received a proper check out in the airplane. Many Swifts "bit the dust" on their first flight with a new owner. Many, many Swifts have landed gear up over the years. Most of the time, the pilot "forgot" the gear. Whose fault is that? Is the Swift idiot proof? Absolutely not, but there are many pilots who have flown them hundreds and even thousands of hours without problems.  
-- James J Montague

Subj: attn: Richard Collins
From: Sam Swift (Flyboycpa@aol.com)
To: HFMFLYING@aol.com
Mr. Collins,
Having given many hours of instruction in various tailwheel aircraft, particularly the Globe/Temco Swift, I am saddened by your comments in the On Top column contained within the February 99 issue of Flying. For many years, I have anxiously read your columns and respected your broad based insight; however, after the comments made in the article mentioned above, I have been compelled to write (email).  It must be said that the Swift is a pilot's airplane. It is not the easiest to master and it is not the easiest to maintain; therefore, it deserves respect when being flown and maintained. It doesn't excuse the poor pilot technique often forgiven by ponderous tricycle gear aircraft. It doesn't warn us with bells and whistles when we stray off a hundred feet from altitude. It doesn't try to keep our wings level, and it doesn't fly itself from takeoff to final approach. The Swift simply asks for a pilot who can fly an airplane, not just a person who sits back to program in his or her flight.  I have found that those who are indeed scared of the perky little Swift enough to make foul comments do indeed need to reflect on their own abilities as a pilot and leave the Swift-driving to those who are capable. You've hurt the feelings/pride of many Swifters who proudly defend the honor of their favorite "little fighter". Remember, in the media business, don't bite the hand that feeds you.  
Respectfully, R. Sam Swift, CFI, CFII, MEI
(Proud member Int'l Swift Ass'n and yes, that is my real last name!)

From: Allen E. Andersen <72032.237@compuserve.com>
Subject: Collins Article
After reading all of the comments on Collins article, I went and re-read the "on Top" article which was in the February issue of Flying. Although I don't agree with Collins's cheap shot about being a "miserable" airplane, I can see where he may come up with his conclusions concerning the accident rate statistics of the Swift and Twin Commanche in the article. Back in '64, the Swift was a terrible accident rate airplane! But then it was also an inexpensive airplane and the education about the airplane we have now, largely due to the fantastic works of the Swift association, was not available.  You also might notice, that as the evolution of high- performance, single engine, civil airplanes go, the Swift was at the beginning of the line and gave a lot of education as to how general aviation, occasional flying pilots will screw up in different situations. To say that the Swift was a poor design is nonsense. To say that later designed, high performance airplanes didn't learn to make things a little more "pilot proof" as a result of the accident record of the Swift would also be nonsense.  The Swift was designed for the returning fighter pilot from WWII, and frankly the crisp handling characteristics in my opinion, make the airplane the closest civilian airplane to a military fighter ever produced. It is and will always be the most fun flying civil airplane I have ever flown.  I've flown military fighter-type airplanes which were more fun, but never a civil type.

You would not, and shouldn't, put a Cessna 150 pilot into a P-51 and give him an hour checkout and turn him loose. The results would not be pretty. We often do this very thing with a new Swift owner. In fact, due to the inexpensive price of the Swift, this may be his first complex airplane ever. To say that one of the first high performance civil airplanes developed didn't have any flaws would probably be foolish too. Anyone thinking that the Swift has too much rudder raise your hand! Anyone thinking that the Swift has great "High angle of attack" characteristics if you pull it off the ground too soon, or try to go around at a slow airspeed behind the power curve raise your hand! My point is, if you take the time to learn the flaws of the airplane, you'll stay away from those areas of the performance envelope, and have a great time with the machine!

I kind of view Richard Collins' comments about the Swift (except the Miserable part) as similar to your best buddy telling you that your wife needs breast augmentation. It may very well be true.......... but you didn't need to hear it from him!!!!!
-- AL

From: Steve Wilson (SteveWlson@aol.com)
Subject: Re: Collins Article
One of the Allen E. Andersen wrote...
<< I kind of view Richard Collins's comments about the Swift (except the
>Miserable part) as similar to your best buddy telling you that your wife
>needs breast augmentation. It may very well be true.......... but you
>didn't need to hear it from him!!!!! >>
Not exactly!!! It's more like Larry Flint posting in Hustler that your wife needs breast augmentation!!!
-- Cheers...Steve

From: Ed Krause (n97697@cecomet.net)
Subject: N3207B

I thought I would give you a quick update on '07B's restoration, and take your minds off an article some idiot wrote. I gave up Flying magazine years ago. When all or most of the articles involve big buck flying and very few on the "grassroots" of flying, you can tell where the magazine is headed. Maybe Richard Collins should dig out some back issues of Flying and read ALL of Gordon Baxters "Bax Seat" articles. Even better, Collins should contact Budd Davisson and go for a ride in his Pitts. Would this be considered a "dog" airplane simply because it takes more piloting skill to fly one? I don't think so! How many T-6's, Mustangs, P-40's, etc. bit the dust when they were being sold for pennies after WWII? Was it the airplanes fault, or was it because many pilots bought them and took off without being properly checked out in them, or over rode their skill level? Any person in the capacity of editor of a magazine who writes an article on any airplane like the Swift (especially if he's going to slam it) should first, and above all, update his facts.
-- Ed Krause

To: FLYING Magazine (hfmflying@aol.com)
From: "R.V. Lebkowsky" <rvl@efn.org>
Subject: The Swift....
Cc: arbeau@napanet.net
To: Richard L. Collins -- Flying Magazine
Dear Richard:
I'm sorry to say it looks like you've really stepped in it this time! I don't fly anymore, but I could not stand by and witness this slander of the Swift (Flying - Feb 99). Pilots (not airplane drivers) who love the challenge of a REAL airplane, appreciate the Swift. If you had a low opinion of the Swift, you should have kept it to yourself, or risk finding yourself branded as a "driver of airplanes with the tailwheel on the wrong end". I am a retired pilot. I have flown many varieties of aircraft, including the T-37, T-38, C-141, C-5, and untold numbers and types of light aircraft, including the Swift. I am type rated in the Lear Jet, and have many hours in that aircraft as a contract target for the Air Force (not straight and level, autopilot driving). I owned a Swift for two years in the early seventies, and have been wishing to own and fly one again for all the years since. If someone said tomorrow that I could again fly my choice, but only one, of the aircraft listed above for an unlimited number of hours, I would, without hesitation, choose the Swift. That should give you an idea of the character of that airplane! Shame on you! Your Father had it right! After reading your condescending statement about this wonderful machine, I considered letting my subscription to Flying expire, but some real pilots (Gordon Baxter, Len Morgan, Richard Bach, and all the Swifters out there) "talked" me out of it.
R.V. Lebkowsky -- Major, Oregon Air National Guard, Retired

From: "T. Kell or A.L. Price" <luscombe@iquest.net>
Subject: Swifts
Dennis,
Obviously the rules of 3 B.C.are still in effect, only 3 people in the whole village can write, so it's not hard to be " King Richard Collins". He ought to be ashamed of himself. As for that organization the Flyer, they have a history of bashing organizations that are trying to help/ or maintain Antiques, they did a large article just before Sun-n-Fun last year slamming the Luscombe foundation, an organization that wanted to shadow the swift foundation museum, do for the Luscombe what Charlie did for the Swift.
Blue Skies, Chip Kell -- Swift NC5092U -- Luscombe NC1776K

From: "Linda & Dennis Mee" <jmmee@nh.ultranet.com>
To: "Richard Collins" <hfmflying@aol.com>
Cc: "Denis M Arbeau" <arbeau@napanet.net>
Subject: Swifts
Richard:
I'm sure by now your e-mail must reflect the fact that many of us disagree with your opinion of the Swift. Since you saw it fit to publish yours for so many people to read I felt compelled to share mine with you. I first flew and worked on Swifts in the mid 1970's as a low time private pilot and A&P mechanic, I found it to be a fascinating and very eloquent airplane, a classic well ahead of it's time. I'm sorry to say that for over 20 years my life had been "Swiftless" until last year when my son and I purchased one. We are both professional pilots and have a considerable amount of experience in many different types of aircraft. We share a common feeling about the Swift, that it is a fascinating airplane to fly and enjoyable to work on, we think it's a wonderful sport airplane, after all now that we own one we should know! I would like to commend you on being a safe pilot, one who knows his limitations and also thank you for selling your Swift before you put it into a "heap", isn't it amazing how many of these 50 year old airplanes survived that pluperfectly accident rate of 1964 and are still flying. I would invite you to make a trip to Athens, Tennessee this spring for the annual Swift convention, witness the awesome beauty of these heaps and meet the terrific "Swifters" that fly them, perhaps we can change your mind about this great airplane.
-- Dennis Mee Swift N3812K

From: Victoria Deaton
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.restoration
Subject: Re: Globe Temco Swift vs Richard Collins
Denis,
You should've heeded the advice of Collins. The Swift is a terrible, terrible plane. You should deliver BOTH of yours to 2N9, where I will take them off your hands and make sure that you are never, ever inflicted with the terror of flying them again. They're bad planes. I should know. I've lusted after them for 10 years.
Regards, Victoria
(who has a framed picture of a Swift in her living room...)

From: Billy Turner <bnturner@kih.net>
To: hfmflying@aol.com, arbeau@napanet.net
Subject: Richard Collins On Top Column....
Dear Richard:
Today as I was cruising along in my miserable Swift my mind wandered back to the injustice that you did to the Swift Aircraft. I can't help but wonder if some of the other Aircraft Mfg's just might be a little worried that the Swift is going to be manufactured again. If not, well they should be,For the Swift will surely cut into the sales of their Aircraft, Since the Swift was way ahead of them in every way in 1946 And they haven't changed anything since, just imagine what it will do to them when it hit's the market. Did one of the big three finance a trip for you in your miserable 210, For writing such garbage? Or is it that you haven't been in a real Aircraft lately, And don't know any better?. I also wonder how you survived all the times that you put your Swift in a heap.  I'm under the impression that you put it in a heap more than once. Right? You are very lucky, or  The Swift is a very strong aircraft, that protected you from yourself very well. When the new Swift hit's the market, and one of them cruises by your Miserable 210, don't forget to wave Richard. Got to go now Richard, time to read Plane & Pilot (As I cancelled my subscription to your Miserable Magazine FLYING ). Then I'm going flying in The Best Aircraft in the whole world,  My SWEET, ADORABLE, LITTLE SWIFT. THAT SOME PEOPLE (LikeYourself) NEVER DID LEARN TO PILOT.
-- Billy, N78193

To: <HFMFLYING@aol.com>
Subject: swift
FLYING MAGAZINE, I feel compelled to write and counter some of the damage done by RICHARD COLLINS to the reputation of the Globe/Temco Swift. Although a person shouldn't believe every thing he reads, comments made by an aviation writer in your pages often carry the weight of "expert". I take great exception to Mr Collins' description of the Swift as "miserable". About eight years ago I switched careers to join aviation full time as a time building flight instructor. The FBO I worked for had several Swift owners for patrons. When they found out that I had only flown Cessna 152/172RG, they were genuinely excited to take me up and introduce me to "swift" flight. I was impressed with the airplane from the moment they gave me the controls, light and easy, think it and you go there. As time progressed I accepted every opportunity to go "Swifting". I had nearly 700 hours total flight and had yet to take off and land a taildragger. My first taildragger takeoff and landing? Swift of course! Since that time I have been very honored to have given a multitude of flight reviews, several new swift pilot checkouts and one pilot his commercial in his Swift. The most telling statement came from a retired 747 pilot I gave a check out to. He had heard for years about the "twitchy little airplane", from men like Mr Collins no doubt. His comment after twenty minutes of flying and two landings was, "This little airplane doesn't deserve the bad reputation it's been given!" Now many years and 5000 hours of flight later with 30 different types including the King Air I fly today, I can say I'm no expert because the aircraft I would choose to fly above all others is the "miserable" Swift.
Sincerely Joel Sampson, ATP, Flagstaff Az.

GTS INTERNET UPDATE EDITOR'S NOTE: I am wondering, how FLYING Magazine and Richard Collins will address the obviously overwhelming response of Swifters to Collins' statement in the February issue. Magazines like FLYING don't take our kind of "advice" very open-mindedly. It is possible they may publish a sampling of the letters. They'll probably even come up with a letter or two from pilots who agree with Collins. (Was Collins the first person YOU heard of who called the Swift "miserable"?) Elsewhere in the magazine Collins may mention it in his "ON TOP" column. Will he say he is willing to be reintroduced to the Swift and let Swifters share what they know to be true? Or will Collins find a polite way using "writer speak" to tell us we are all full of crap. Maybe we can get Richard Bach to come out of "retirement". Sigh... If Collins wants to live with his narrow minded opinion of such a wonderful airplane so be it. It's his loss, not ours. (In his "perfect" world every airplane would have the performance of a Lear Jet and the flying characteristics of an Ercoupe.) And if the readers of FLYING want to believe Collins and look upon us Swifters as daredevil aviators or superior pilots for risking life and limb flying such a "miserable" airplane? Well... I guess we can all live with that too.