45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to date.

[FastEddieB]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Over what sort of terrain/landscape?

I routinely fly from Copperhill, TN to Knoxville. Did so yesterday as a matter of fact so Karen could be with a sick friend.

Even angling over towards Tellico Plains (in the distance below), there's a stretch where landing options are few and far between or well nigh nonexistent:

The arrow marks the one spot I might be able to make if my engine fails. With a 39k stall speed, I may be OK even going into trees, but my Sky Arrow's pusher configuration leaves me with not much structure in front of me. BTW, that type of terrain is very common in the Southern Appalachians.

I owned a Cirrus from 2003 to 2007. I did not buy it because of the chute. But like many safety features, once its there you kind of get used to the comfort it brings. My Sky Arrow has no chute - I would add one if I could get some extra gross weight allowance, but I don't see that happening and not sure if its even feasible with the airframe as it is.

BTW, I agree that 8 engine outs is an interesting hair raise number. I've had one in almost 40 years of flying, and that was right after takeoff with runway remaining. To have 8 really should have an explanation.

As an aside, the Cirrus engine out in the Bahamas was a doctor who does God's work taking care of patients in Haiti, using his Cirrus to ferry medical supplies as well as himself. So the chute's value in this case went far beyond just saving his and his daughter's lives.

 

[fiveoboy01]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

I'm more interested in the WHY did he pull the handle rather than the act itself.

 

[MachFly]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

So let me see if I got this correct. Engine quits and instead of doing your job and flying the airplane you stall it and pull the chute.....Ok.

The max certified chute deployment speed is 133kts, the chute has been successfully deployed at over 180kts. You REALLY don't need to stall it.

 

[SoloEqs]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

The bottom line is that it's nice to have the option. You can decide not to use the chute if you have it, but you can't decide to deploy it if it's not there.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

I routinely fly from Copperhill, TN to Knoxville. Did so yesterday as a matter of fact so Karen could be with a sick friend.

Even angling over towards Tellico Plains (in the distance below), there's a stretch where landing options are few and far between or well nigh nonexistent:

I have a lot of photos of similar terrain with almost no landable terrain that I have to fly over for at least an hour or more if I want to get anywhere east, south, or west.

 

[peppy]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

To clarify about Ilan, he had a cracked vertebrae. Ilan tried to steer the plane by leaving the engine running. BRS has said they suspect that caused air to spill out of the chute resulting in an increased descent rate. Whether or not that was the case, the injury wasn't permanent.

We have data regarding a pilot of a Cirrus losing an engine and electing to land. There are successful cases. However there are also fatal ones.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Cue ensuing argument about how a chute leads pilots to make more risky decisions, but there is substantial evidence that suggests many otherwise fatal accidents not caused by pilot error have resulted in no fatalities because of these systems.

I can guarantee you would wish you had a chute during a control surface jam and the airplane is in an unrecoverable spin.

There's a reason these arguments are usually Cirrus-centric rather than about BRS in general... Cirrus' marketing methods and targets lead to "pilots" who think they can go anywhere any time under any conditions, and that just ain't true...

There are SO many Cirrus accidents that leave me shaking my head. Not so for BRS-equipped LSA's.

Nobody's going to argue about chute pulls for pilot incapacitation, control failure, mid-air collision or other structural damage. That's why it's there. The arguments come from the large number of accidents where the pilot shouldn't have gotten into the situation they were in in the first place.

You can see how the plane will impact much more slowly under the parachute than if it were gliding for an off-field landing. A vertical impact at 15kts, settling onto the landing gear, has a much better outcome than horizontally at 70kts.

Maybe. If I'm in a Cirrus and I can make a runway or clear area, that's what I'm doing. You don't "settle" onto the landing gear, you crush the landing gear. The impact is supposedly what you'd feel if you sat on a chair 20 feet off the ground and just got dropped.

Or...consider hitting the water at 70 knots (as I hope not to do on my trips to Catalina Island).

I'd probably try to ditch the traditional way, even in a Cirrus. Ditchings are very survivable, usually without injuries. CAPS "ditchings" are 1-1 so far.

Let's put the "sink rate" issue to rest.

No one who has experienced a Cirrus or other 'chute landing has been injured.

Bullsh!t. The one in the Potomac has come up already, and the Cessna test pilot who took a Skycatcher down under the BRS was injured fairly seriously as well (he's all better now, but had some things broken and dislocated).

Chutes are a good idea. However, there's still a lot of work to be done in terms of how pilots act around them.

 

[steingar]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Tony,

Maybe you should ask your question to the 100 or so people who are living today due to chutes. No matter what the skill level, there are some situations where pilot skills will not save you.

You're assuming that all 100 would have perished without the chute, an assertion I find unfounded and unlikely.

For example, ask the dad who lost an engine over the ocean in the Bahamas who had his 12 year old daughter with him.

The dad should have been able to ditch his aircraft in the warm a waters of the Bahamas and use his flotation to wait for the assistance he summed with his distress call. Lots and lots of pilots made safe water ditchings before the parachute.

I'm guessing he would tell you that the risk of descending slowly to a water landing with a 'chute was just a wee bit safer than impacting the water at 70 knots or faster.

Which airplane stalls north of 70 knots dirty?

Also, as we see on this website (and the Cirrus website), even the best pilots make mistakes or otherwise end up in situations where an emergency off-airport landing is risky at best.

There are places where landing off airport is dicey, to say the least. Then again, folks have walked away from crashes in the middle of urban areas and forests. Yeah, people have died doing that as well.

I'm flying today without a 'chute and I consider myself an excellent pilot. I see a 'chute in my very near future...for me and for my family.

Not for this pilot. Might feel different if I were flying around rocks or something, but I'm not. If the mill goes TU over the little hostile terrain I fly, well maybe Odin has decided he don't need me no more. Engine out emergencies absent fuel mismanagement are still a rarity in GA, pilot screw ups are far more common. I'd rather not screw up than buy a damn parachute.

 

[VWGhiaBob]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

We're all pilots and we shouldn't be surprised we disagree. Let's throw in a few more facts:

* Cirrus is now a top seller of single engine aircraft; ask purchasers and you'll find that for many, the extra security of their parachutes closed the deal.

* Cirrus safety record started out poor, but now leads the industry; is it the parachute, or is it the mandatory training they now provide? Not sure, but it's working!

* On the negative side, "Cirri'" are very expensive to insure (per Avemco due to cost of repairing composite and not safety issues) and few would argue that they are as easy to fly as, say, a 172.

We all have to make our decisions, right? I'm leaning towards a 182 with a parachute. But an SR22 is right up there too.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

* Cirrus is now a top seller of single engine aircraft; ask purchasers and you'll find that for many, the extra security of their parachutes closed the deal.

More so by closing the deal for the wives, not the pilots.

* Cirrus safety record started out poor, but now leads the industry; is it the parachute, or is it the mandatory training they now provide? Not sure, but it's working!

It's the training. The chute has always been there.

We all have to make our decisions, right? I'm leaning towards a 182 with a parachute. But an SR22 is right up there too.

Are you going to specifically look for a 182 with BRS already installed, or just buy whatever 182 you want and then add the BRS to it? How much does an aftermarket BRS for a 182 cost?

 

[VWGhiaBob]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

I'll probably buy any 182 and retrofit it. Cost is around $15K.

Regarding training...part of the training encouraged use of the parachute; since then, statistically documented more frequent 'chute usage may be what's reducing fatalities. Most Cirrus pilots have gotten over the "I can land this puppy better than the 'chute" mentality in situations where a dangerous off-airport accident is likely.

Regarding wives, this pilot doesn't need a spouse to convince me. I love my family, my life, and flying. I don't want to die trying to land a plane in an LA neighborhood because of a mechanical issue. I also want to reduce the likelihood I'll kill someone else. The Cirrus record proves that the parachute results in non-injury accidents nearly all the time.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Regarding wives, this pilot doesn't need a spouse to convince me. I love my family, my life, and flying. I don't want to die trying to land a plane in an LA neighborhood because of a mechanical issue. I also want to reduce the likelihood I'll kill someone else. The Cirrus record proves that the parachute results in non-injury accidents nearly all the time.

I'm not saying the wives convince the husbands to get a chute - I'm saying the wives say "you can have an airplane, but only if it has a chute." An airplane with a chute is always better than no airplane at all.

I also see that they haven't yet recorded any 182 saves. I'm a little bit leery because I saw the video of what happened in the first Skycatcher test crash: Plane was in an unrecoverable spin, pilot pulled BRS handle, chute deployed and was almost instantly severed from the airplane, pilot bailed out. It was mounted in a similar fashion to how the 182 system is and that was the cause of it being severed. They changed it somewhat and had a successful deployment later in the test program. I'd sure like to know they actually tested it on a real, live, spinning 182.

It also looks like it takes up a significant and awkward portion of the baggage compartment... And I can't find any documentation anywhere to support your assertion that you can get a gross weight increase on some 182's. Got a reference?

 

[dnhill]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

I'm not saying the wives convince the husbands to get a chute - I'm saying the wives say "you can have an airplane, but only if it has a chute." An airplane with a chute is always better than no airplane at all.

My wife was against buying a plane until she found out it had a parachute. Her fear was that I would somehow be incapacitated and she would not have a way to land safely. She also had no interest in learning how to fly. I found a plane with a parachute and we purchased it in 2010.

 

[VWGhiaBob]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

ASCII - BRS just announced their first 182 save. There are installations in many 172's and 182's, but so far just one (successful) 182 deployment has taken place.

 

[mikea]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

It was a sales demo flight?
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Cirrus-Salesman-Pulls-Chute-During-Demo-Flight221997-1.html
Did the guy buy a Cirrus?

 

[Dave Theisen]

It was a sales demo flight?

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Cirrus-Salesman-Pulls-Chute-During-Demo-Flight221997-1.html

Did the guy buy a Cirrus?

The prospect was heard saying "What's this lever do?"

 

[frcabot]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

So let me see if I got this correct. Engine quits and instead of doing your job and flying the airplane you stall it and pull the chute.....Ok.

I might only fly little small single seat airplanes but in my 8 engine outs I have not totaled one airplane and have walked away from everyone.

Does this make me a better pilot then anyone else? I don't believe so. So I do not understand the common place with pulling a chute even if I had one. If I lost an engine I am flying her to the ground. The chute is in case I loose a control surface or some lack of control. Not for an engine out. The airplane still flies with out an engine, you just have one shot at it, you better make it good.

Tony

Over mountainous terrain, water, a dense city, or at night/IFR conditions? Ok, have fun with that.

 

[frcabot]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

I find all these arguments by people saying that they would opt not to use the chute except in the event of control failure somewhat ridiculous. In fact that is exactly what has led to the relatively high fatality rate in Cirrus planes.

As Cirrus points out, there has not been a SINGLE fatality (not one) where the parachute has been activated at speeds like than Vpd (maximum parachute deployment velocity) at altitudes above 400ft in straight and level flight or 920 feet in a spin. CAPS has also successfully saved lives even in cases where activated above Vpd (in a few notable cases at 187 KIAS and 170+ KIAS). With respect to the water landing that resulted in 1 fatality (and 3 serious injuries), the chute was activated at 528 feet AGL well into a spin (3 and 1/2 turns in) just 4 seconds prior to impact, well below design parameters). Even then, it's a miracle that 3 pax survived and they probably would not have in the absence of the parachute pull. The other water landings with CAPS resulted in saves (Caps event nos. 6, 17, 32 (activated at 300 feet AGL, below recommendation), 33). So the water record is actually 4 (and 3/4ths?) to 1 (or maybe 1/4) for CAPS, and even in that one 3 pax were saved and the chute was activated well outside the envelope.

Every single fatality in a Cirrus has occurred where the pilot failed to activate CAPS entirely, or failed to activate CAPS until recovery was impossible and well outside the envelope (in one case, at 270 KIAS, which is well above Vne and Vpd, and in five other cases at less than 400 ft AGL).

Cirrus basically says that if the engine fails at any time, the plane is simply NOT designed to withstand a forced landing (off-airport landing) or to recover from a spin without CAPS. As a result CAPS should be deployed as soon as possible after engine failure and in no event at less than 500 feet (working through engine failure checklists etc. altitude permitting). Likewise the chute should be deployed ASAP in the event of a spin.

The only time Cirrus says activation is not recommended is less than 500 ft AGL (e.g. engine failure immediately after takeoff or during final approach) where there is available runway to land on. To put this in perspective, CAPS is a mandatory component; the plane is not airworthy if not installed with CAPS.

Sources: http://cirrusaircraft.com/static/img/CAPS_Guide.pdf
https://www.cirruspilots.org/copa/safety_programs/w/safety_pages/723.cirrus-caps-history.aspx

I'll take my chance with the manufacturer recommendation and the 100% save rate (within envelope) rather than my subjective "skill."

 

[frcabot]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

There's a reason these arguments are usually Cirrus-centric rather than about BRS in general... Cirrus' marketing methods and targets lead to "pilots" who think they can go anywhere any time under any conditions, and that just ain't true...

There are SO many Cirrus accidents that leave me shaking my head. Not so for BRS-equipped LSA's.

Nobody's going to argue about chute pulls for pilot incapacitation, control failure, mid-air collision or other structural damage. That's why it's there. The arguments come from the large number of accidents where the pilot shouldn't have gotten into the situation they were in in the first place.



Maybe. If I'm in a Cirrus and I can make a runway or clear area, that's what I'm doing. You don't "settle" onto the landing gear, you crush the landing gear. The impact is supposedly what you'd feel if you sat on a chair 20 feet off the ground and just got dropped.

WRONG but good luck to you. Please don't mislead other pilots into not using this life-saving feature. The impact is from about 13 foot drop, NOT including the designed absorption from the airframe, seats and landing gear.

I'd probably try to ditch the traditional way, even in a Cirrus. Ditchings are very survivable, usually without injuries. CAPS "ditchings" are 1-1 so far.

WRONG. Again it's about 4 and 3/4ths to 1/4th, with the mitigating circumstances included above, so again, good luck to you. Remind me not to go flying with you.

 

[frcabot]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

I'll keep flying the airplane, thank you. I haven't gone too many places where I couldn't put it down safely without.

Good luck to you. You'll probably end up in Cirrus's and COPA's safety materials about pilots who would have survived had they used CAPS but chose not to because they subjectively thought that their perceived skills made them safer than the demonstrated 100% survival rate of CAPS.

 

[frcabot]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

If I lost an engine I am flying her to the ground. The chute is in case I loose a control surface or some lack of control. Not for an engine out. The airplane still flies with out an engine, you just have one shot at it, you better make it good.

Tony

Good luck to you sir. How exactly does one experience 8 engine outs? Are you checking the fuel before every flight or staying up to date with maintenance?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

I find all these arguments by people saying that they would opt not to use the chute except in the event of control failure somewhat ridiculous.

Why, is that how you do a normal landing?

In fact that is exactly what has led to the relatively high fatality rate in Cirrus planes.

I agree that there are numerous situations where the chute should have been pulled and wasn't. Many. Maybe even the majority of Cirrus fatals.

However, there are a subjectively higher incidence of "what on earth were they thinking?" situations with Cirri as well. This doesn't have anything to do with the chute, it's more of who Cirrus markets to. I don't begrudge them trying to bring new pilots into the fold, but they sell it as an always-go machine. There is NO airplane that fits that description. Thus, they get people who get into bad situations, and unfortunately those people don't seem to be mentally prepared to pull the red handle when the poop hits the prop.

With respect to the water landing that resulted in 1 fatality (and 3 serious injuries), the chute was activated at 528 feet AGL well into a spin (3 and 1/2 turns in) just 4 seconds prior to impact, well below design parameters). Even then, it's a miracle that 3 pax survived and they probably would not have in the absence of the parachute pull. The other water landings with CAPS resulted in saves (Caps event nos. 6, 17, 32 (activated at 300 feet AGL, below recommendation), 33). So the water record is actually 4 (and 3/4ths?) to 1 (or maybe 1/4) for CAPS, and even in that one 3 pax were saved and the chute was activated well outside the envelope.

I wasn't saying 1 to 1 fatal vs. survived. I was saying 1-1 injured vs. uninjured. I had forgotten about Eagle Creek, but wasn't the one guy on that one dead already? IE, he had a heart attack or something and was PIC and the red handle saved the pax? That was my recollection.

Every single fatality in a Cirrus has occurred where the pilot failed to activate CAPS entirely, or failed to activate CAPS until recovery was impossible and well outside the envelope (in one case, at 270 KIAS, which is well above Vne and Vpd, and in five other cases at less than 400 ft AGL).

Very true. The problem is that they got into that situation and DIDN'T pull the chute. But IMO the chute should not be the be-all end-all solution to every problem. Even Alan Klapmeier would have told you that when he was still around. (I never knew Brent, Dale, etc. as well as Alan.)

Cirrus basically says that if the engine fails at any time, the plane is simply NOT designed to withstand a forced landing (off-airport landing) or to recover from a spin without CAPS.

Not true. They had to pass spin certification to get certified in Europe. And I can't imagine that it'd be unable to land in a field. Finally, the plane isn't designed to "withstand" a chute pull either.

WRONG but good luck to you. Please don't mislead other pilots into not using this life-saving feature.

Where did I say "don't pull the chute?" It's definitely a life-saving feature. But I'm sure as hell not gonna pull it if there's a better option available, such as gliding to a landing at an airport or wide-open field.

The impact is from about 13 foot drop, NOT including the designed absorption from the airframe, seats and landing gear.

The 20-foot drop came from someone who's ridden one in under the BRS. I decided to calculate it myself, turns out it's 14. Still not something I'm going to do unless the alternatives are worse.

WRONG. Again it's about 4 and 3/4ths to 1/4th, with the mitigating circumstances included above, so again, good luck to you.

Again, I was comparing injuries vs. uninjured. I don't even count the Eagle Creek one as a fatal.

Remind me not to go flying with you.

You'd do well to not be a jerk just because you're on the Internet... People would be more inclined to listen to you, and lots of us know each other in person. I hope to meet you in person at a PoA fly-in someday and discover you're more pleasant in that venue.

Of course, you wouldn't fly with me anyway 'cuz I don't have a BRS.

Good luck to you sir. How exactly does one experience 8 engine outs? Are you checking the fuel before every flight or staying up to date with maintenance?

I'm guessing he's flying behind a Rotax 582 or some other similarly unreliable power plant. Still...

 

[bsnpilot69]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Cirrus basically says that if the engine fails at any time, the plane is simply NOT designed to withstand a forced landing (off-airport landing) or to recover from a spin without CAPS . As a result CAPS should be deployed as soon as possible after engine failure and in no event at less than 500 feet (working through engine failure checklists etc. altitude permitting). Likewise the chute should be deployed ASAP in the event of a spin.

Good Afternoon,

EASA European Aviation Safety Agency (Their version of the FAA) required Cirrus to spin the SR20/22 in excess of 60 times and see if the aircraft recovered normally. It did. I will paste a part of the report below.

The Cirrus test pilot performing the spin program noted that while all spins entered were recoverable, they required a method of spin recovery that, while not unique in light general aviation airplanes, is different from that of a light trainer airplane in which a pilot is likely to receive spin training.

Significant variability in spin recovery training techniques also exists – ranging from merely releasing the elevator control in some light trainers, to movement of the control to neutral, to brisk forward movement to neutral, to brisk foreward movement past neutral, etc..

In the case of the SR20, the proper spin recovery procedure is to briskly move the elevator control to the full down position. This is an unnatural control movement, when the nose of the aircraft may already appear to the pilot to be pointing down sharply. This is also a movement not typically advocated by spin training instructors due to associated discomfort.

CRI B-2 Page 5 of 21

The reliability level of a general aviation pilot to properly react in a loss of control condition in any type of airplane is historically low (see the FAA statistics). Cirrus has determined that the probability of the typical general aviation pilot properly applying the SR20 recovery controls to assess if the aircraft has permanently departed controlled flight is likewise low. While a small percentage of Cirrus pilots may be able to successfully recover from an inadvertent spin, Cirrus contends that the far larger portion of pilots would not do so in a surprise departure spin situation.

Cirrus has accordingly concluded, as a result of the further extensive flight test conducted pursuant to the JAA Study Group direction in April 2000, that in an inadvertent spin entry, time and altitude is too critical to allow for any pilot reaction except the simple and quick process of reaching for the CAPS handle and activating the system.

Cirrus believes it is better to accept some airframe losses through CAPS activation when the airplane could have been flown away following a successful recovery, in order to save the lives of the far larger number of pilots who would not be able to successfully execute a spin recovery.

c. Proposed Procedure. 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. Cirrus is removing existing references to spin recovery in its current AFM. The clear AFM procedure will be to activate CAPS system in the event that control is lost.

 

[steingar]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Good luck to you. You'll probably end up in Cirrus's and COPA's safety materials about pilots who would have survived had they used CAPS but chose not to because they subjectively thought that their perceived skills made them safer than the demonstrated 100% survival rate of CAPS.

Would I be safer with a chute? Sure, in that 1 in 100 instance where I might be over truly hostile terrain (a rare thing in the East). But a chute costs in excess of ten thousand dollars if I could get one for my aircraft, which I can't. Moreover, the fool thing has to be repacked or reloaded or resomethinged on a regular basis, and that costs money too.

Now, can I think of another way I can spend in excess of ten thousand dollars that would make me a safer pilot? Hell yes! Jebus, just that much flying is going to increase my currency and make me that much better. That's enough to train for an instrument rating, or a tailwheel and seaplane endorsement with some aerobatic training thrown in the mix, and those will make me a much safer pilot than any chute ever will be.

See, what you guys fail to realize time and time again is the best piece of safety equipment in any aircraft is the monkey behind the wheel.

 

[frcabot]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

I don't own a cirrus or have a BRS. I own a mooney which obvi doesn't have a chute.
What I meant to say is that I wouldn't fly with a cirrus pilot who was in the mindset that he would not pull the chute and would rather attempt a forced landing or ditching without one. If I were flying with a cirrus pilot who refused to pull the chute when it was clearly warranted, I'd probably pull the chute for him.

I trust cirrus and the 100% survivor with timely chute pull statistic a lot more than some pilot who thinks he is going to beat the 100% survivor rate by not pulling the chute. Stupid stupid stupid.

I recall a recent cirrus fatal where the pilot landed off airport with a couple passengers, the plane flipped (maybe the nose wheel caught on something?) and a pilot and pax died. All would have lived if he had simply pulled the chute.

 

[Henning]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

I am a big fan of the full airframe parachute systems. I do not fly a Cirrus, rather a light sport plane with a chute.

Cue ensuing argument about how a chute leads pilots to make more risky decisions, but there is substantial evidence that suggests many otherwise fatal accidents not caused by pilot error have resulted in no fatalities because of these systems.

I can guarantee you would wish you had a chute during a control surface jam and the airplane is in an unrecoverable spin.

CAPS doesn't lead pilots into more risky decisions, CAPS reduces the risks of decisions which increase the usefulness of the plane like flying over hostile terrain, in IMC single engine and at night. If you decide not to use your plane in those conditions, then the cost of not having the chute can be both ephemeral and economic, so one has to consider how much gained utility the use of the asset is worth when rating the value of increasing your survivable margin of risk tolerance with a BRS system.

That video was an excellent demo of exactly how low energy that descent is, and how much noise it makes when ending in a gum tree lol.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Now, can I think of another way I can spend in excess of ten thousand dollars that would make me a safer pilot? Hell yes! Jebus, just that much flying is going to increase my currency and make me that much better. That's enough to train for an instrument rating, or a tailwheel and seaplane endorsement with some aerobatic training thrown in the mix, and those will make me a much safer pilot than any chute ever will be.

There is a Catch-22 in your analysis. The pilot who is piling on those hours starts at a high risk. You are basically dismissing or ignoring the fatalities of those who don't survive the build-up of currency. It requires a bit of evil cynicism to dismiss use of a safety tool during that period just because the safety tool may be needed less during later periods.

 

[SixPapaCharlie]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

in my 8 engine outs I have not totaled one airplane and have walked away from everyone.

Could be time for an overhaul.

 

[Neil Rubin]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

It also looks like it takes up a significant and awkward portion of the baggage compartment... And I can't find any documentation anywhere to support your assertion that you can get a gross weight increase on some 182's. Got a reference?

The STC is available here. It applies to 182P and 182Q models, gives you 150 or 160 pounds extra takeoff weight / useful load, and requires no modifications to the aircraft except for paperwork. There are limitations to the CG range when operating at the higher weights, and you can't land at the higher weight. (There is an official inspection procedure if you need to land overweight for emergency reasons.) Not a bad deal for $750.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

The STC is available here. It applies to 182P and 182Q models, gives you 150 or 160 pounds extra takeoff weight / useful load, and requires no modifications to the aircraft except for paperwork. There are limitations to the CG range when operating at the higher weights, and you can't land at the higher weight. (There is an official inspection procedure if you need to land overweight for emergency reasons.) Not a bad deal for $750.

Oh, I know you can get a gross weight increase on some 182's by itself - I just don't see where you can get a gross weight increase by having a BRS as the other poster was saying.

 

[VWGhiaBob]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

iascii - The BRS for models 182P and 182Q comes with the STC described above.

Also...to all...yes...the parachute takes up around 1/3+ of the baggage area...one of the trade offs. Again, a decision for each of us based on our needs...

Regarding some of the "banter" above, I see some of what the FAA calls the "Macho" safety issue at play. It's one of the natural human tendencies we all need to work against. One has to weigh the pros and cons for parachutes for their individual situation. But to say "I'll prefer to land it myself no matter what" is ignoring the facts.

Pilots who prefer parachutes when their missions call for them are wise, not wimps.

And if someone thinks I'm a wimp, it's a free country. Have at it!

I choose safety.

 

[Kevin87]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Does anyone know why this pilot pulled the chute?

As for the whole chute debate, I would totally get a plane with one if I had the money.

To the people talking about the Cirrus accidents causing death. I think most of these accidents are pilot error when close to the ground, so a chute isn't really going to help there.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

iascii - The BRS for models 182P and 182Q comes with the STC described above.

Aha. So BRS isn't really adding anything. Smart move on their part to get the extra where they can, though.

Pilots who prefer parachutes when their missions call for them are wise, not wimps.

I don't think anyone's mission here is really any different: We fly GA airplanes. A Mooney can get in a mid-air as easily as a Cirrus or 182. And I think if it didn't cost us any payload, we'd all like to have a chute. I sure would... But I don't have the payload (or the $$$) to spare.

I think where the disagreement lies is in the usage. Let's split this away from the Cirrus discussion for a moment, and compare a 182 without a BRS to a 182 with a BRS. What do you do when you have an engine failure in each? What do you do when you get into a spin? What do you do when you fly into IMC? We know that the 182 can easily recover from spins. We know the 182 is designed to be able to land on rough surfaces. We know that people have been able to do a 180 out of clouds.

So, if you have a BRS, do you even attempt any of this? Or do you just automatically go for the chute? I would suggest that, given sufficient altitude, gliding options should be assessed, spin recovery inputs should be attempted, and a 180 should be tried. If landing options are bad or control is lost, THEN pull the chute.

 

[VWGhiaBob]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

About the mission differences, relates to my earlier post...

If my missions take me mostly over flat rural terrain and long stretches of 2 lane highways without telephone lines, I'd view a parachute as less essential. In LA, we are always over either heavily populated areas or steep mountains with canyons...both places where landing even at stall speeds is risky at best and many times fatal.

These two mission types would, at least for me, heavily influence my decision about a parachute.

 

[dukeblue219]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

See, what you guys fail to realize time and time again is the best piece of safety equipment in any aircraft is the monkey behind the wheel.

I actually don't see anyone arguing against that. There are certainly ways to improve safety that could have a larger statistical effect than adding a chute to an existing plane. Frequent training for emergencies would be one way -- you're correct.

I believe what many, including myself, are seeing is an attitude that "I don't need a chute because I can land the plane in an emergency." That, or "I won't fly a plane that needs a chute to be safe."

It's one tool in the toolbox. If the plane I want to buy happens to come equipped with a BRS out of the box, wow, that's great in case something goes horribly wrong. I'd definitely use it if I didn't think I had a >90% chance of landing safely. My plane doesn't have one, and I would not spend >$10k to install one even if it was an option, but it doesn't mean that I don't see the utility in it. It's all cost-benefit tradeoffs and those are different for every individual case. What's silly, though, is for anyone to act as though a BRS chute is somehow a negative, as if it makes the pilot less manly or some ridiculous notion, and that's how I have viewed many anti-chute comments over the years.

 

[VWGhiaBob]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Well said, Ted. Macho has no place here, especially for those with families. No one is saying a parachute is a substitute for being a good pilot. It's a tool to use when all else fails, which it does from time to time, even with Macho pilots.

 

[fiveoboy01]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Agreed. It's a tool. The way some people talk, it's a crutch for pilots with no skill and I don't agree.

Will there be the occasional fool who does something stupid and justifies it because he has another bail-out option? Sure but I don't think that's most Cirrus pilots or most pilots at all.

Complain about Cirrus' marketing but in the end the pilot is ultimately responsible.

 

[steingar]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

There is a Catch-22 in your analysis. The pilot who is piling on those hours starts at a high risk. You are basically dismissing or ignoring the fatalities of those who don't survive the build-up of currency. It requires a bit of evil cynicism to dismiss use of a safety tool during that period just because the safety tool may be needed less during later periods.

Get a grip. Most of those "saves" with perhaps only a couple exceptions were pilots who got themselves into trouble through their own faulty decision making. Rid yourself of faulty decision making (i.e. by training) and it is far less likely to happen. So am I going to blow that kind of cash on something for an instance rarer than getting hit by lightening or winning the lottery? Review just how many crashes are blamed on critical malfunctions and then subtract the number of pilots without the stones or training to put it down safely when they could have. Most of this nation is open space without cities, rocks, or water. The vast majority.

Moreover, pull the chute over lake Michigan you still get to drown. Pull it over a remote mountain and you still get to try and hike your way out or hope for rescue. Every form of refuge has its price.

 

[SixPapaCharlie]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Suppose you have a bird strike and are left with only one eye.
Part of the beak is lodged in your neck hitting a nerve, causing your head to twitch and legs to flail wildly.

You are completely coherent but in a lot of pain, and don't have full motor control from the waist down.

Also by a weird twist of events, the bird survived. The bird is flapping all over the place and bleeding from where his (I think it is a boy bird) beak was.

It's starting to rain.

Now you have a wet bird that has gotten himself wedged in between the dash and the knobs and inadvertently pulls the mixture. The engine quits.

There you are at 12000 feet, wet, partially blind, windshield smashed, no engine (couldn't get it restarted) it's raining, you got the Jimmy legs, and you feel like you may pass out from blood loss.

And you are a hemophiliac.

Do you pull the chute?

I mean a bird strike can happen to anyone.

 

[NoHeat]

Re: 45th Cirrus CAPS (Parachute) activation in Aus and the best footage caught to dat

Moreover, pull the chute over lake Michigan you still get to drown.

Agreed. For flying over Lake Michigan, a single engine with a chute is no better than the same plane without the chute. And a lot less attractive than a twin.

A small quibble, though. Hypothermia is a bigger worry than drowning, because life jackets are pretty reliable.

Pull it over a remote mountain and you still get to try and hike your way out or hope for rescue. Every form of refuge has its price.

I don't agree. What is your alternative in the mountains, when the fan stops?