Another Chute Pull Saves The Day

Man. Every plane should be legally required to have a chute.:stirpot:
 
Somedudeintn said:
Well... are you OK?:rofl:
Click to expand...

Well I know the guy. Not personally but I know him. Happy he's ok. Other than that I'm fine. I was up on an early coffee mission to Lakeland and a quick stop at 28J for a quick practice approach and then I had to go to work...
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Man. Every plane should be legally required to have a chute.:stirpot:
Click to expand...

I know there's a lot of Cirrus/parachute haters on this board but I guarantee you that everyone that walked away from this and other pulls are quite happy they did.

I didn't buy a Cirrus because of the chute. I loved the looks, the speed, and the way it flew. But the significant other definitely feels better with it packed in there..
 
Engine trouble after 3 hrs flight time? Wonder if fuel management had anything to do with it?
 
Back yard landing. Can the wings on a Cirrus be unbolted and removed? If not, it is going to be hard to remove the plane from the back yard.
 
Scott@KTYR said:
Back yard landing. Can the wings on a Cirrus be unbolted and removed? If not, it is going to be hard to remove the plane from the back yard.
Click to expand...

With the wings off, will it fit in a 3 car garage? "What SR Twen... Um, I mean... I didn't see any airplanes land in my backyard, officer."
 
Never flown a cirrus, I know they are nice airplanes, have always been interested in them to some extent. But anytime someone pulls the chute, the banter on here begins. However, it seems to me, there are a LOT of threads about this on here, meaning there are a LOT of guys pulling the parachute's and more importantly A LOT of engine failures. My question is, where are there so many damn cirrus engine failures????
 
TRocket said:
Never flown a cirrus, I know they are nice airplanes, have always been interested in them to some extent. But anytime someone pulls the chute, the banter on here begins. However, it seems to me, there are a LOT of threads about this on here, meaning there are a LOT of guys pulling the parachute's and more importantly A LOT of engine failures. My question is, where are there so many damn cirrus engine failures????
Click to expand...

I'm betting "chute pull" grabs more attention, thus folks tend to think they have more issues because it's chute = cirrus. I've noticed other threads will say "plane down" ... could be anything, but likely not a Cirrus.
 
MetalCloud said:
I'm betting "chute pull" grabs more attention, thus folks tend to think they have more issues because it's chute = cirrus. I've noticed other threads will say "plane down" ... could be anything, but likely not a Cirrus.
Click to expand...

I don't think majority of them are engine failures, most the ones I have read about have been fuel mismanagement.
 
Assuming the pilot left with full tanks and flew at a reasonable power setting, this flight should be well within range of the airplane with plenty of reserve fuel.
 
TRocket said:
Never flown a cirrus, I know they are nice airplanes, have always been interested in them to some extent. But anytime someone pulls the chute, the banter on here begins. However, it seems to me, there are a LOT of threads about this on here, meaning there are a LOT of guys pulling the parachute's and more importantly A LOT of engine failures. My question is, where are there so many damn cirrus engine failures????
Click to expand...

I wonder a bit about this also. Do these pilots push the plane, say like fuel range, knowing that they have the chute to save the day? Seems to be quite a few incidents like this. Fuel starvation the cause or the engine itself?
 
dell30rb said:
Assuming the pilot left with full tanks and flew at a reasonable power setting, this flight should be well within range of the airplane with plenty of reserve fuel.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure he is based at KTTA so maybe you can ask him for us!
 
asicer said:
With the wings off, will it fit in a 3 car garage? "What SR Twen... Um, I mean... I didn't see any airplanes land in my backyard, officer."
Click to expand...

Years ago I recall reading that the Cirrus airframe is not repairable once the chute is deployed - it's a one time event for any Cirrus. If this is correct (could you Cirrus owners/pilots here confirm this), and parachute deployments keep rising it'll be a good thing for lives saved, but i wonder if the insurance costs will start to ramp?
 
GRG55 said:
Years ago I recall reading that the Cirrus airframe is not repairable once the chute is deployed - it's a one time event for any Cirrus. If this is correct (could you Cirrus owners/pilots here confirm this), and parachute deployments keep rising it'll be a good thing for lives saved, but i wonder if the insurance costs will start to ramp?
Click to expand...

Not strictly true, there are several that have been repaired and put back in service.

That said, the damage to faired in risers, replacement of parachute, and impact damage usually make repairs uneconomical.
 
GRG55 said:
Years ago I recall reading that the Cirrus airframe is not repairable once the chute is deployed - it's a one time event for any Cirrus. If this is correct (could you Cirrus owners/pilots here confirm this), and parachute deployments keep rising it'll be a good thing for lives saved, but i wonder if the insurance costs will start to ramp?
Click to expand...
Not true at all. Mine was a CAPS pulled plane that was repaired.
 
Cirrus pilots, help me with this honest question. Vs0 is 60 knots, ish? If I need to put my bugsmasher down in a congested area with no options, I'm probably going to wish I had a chute. But otherwise, If you've got the choice of a road or a field to land rather than pull, you do that, right?
 
mscard88 said:
I wonder a bit about this also. Do these pilots push the plane, say like fuel range, knowing that they have the chute to save the day? Seems to be quite a few incidents like this. Fuel starvation the cause or the engine itself?
Click to expand...
Boy, I wouldn't think so... Still pretty risky even with the chute, and definitely expensive!!
 
Tflhndn said:
Engine trouble after 3 hrs flight time? Wonder if fuel management had anything to do with it?
Click to expand...

Southern headwinds yesterday. If he did not leave with full tanks or lean it in cruise, fuel would be tight.
 
Kritchlow said:
Boy, I wouldn't think so... Still pretty risky even with the chute, and definitely expensive!!
Click to expand...

I wouldn't either but I wonder if these pilots use that chute as a sort of crutch. Like, well if I run out of gas, or have an engine failure I'll just pull the handle. Not saying that's the case but there seems to be a lot of these things going down. Could be we just hear about them more too because they have a chute, I dunno.
 
whereisrandall said:
Cirrus pilots, help me with this honest question. Vs0 is 60 knots, ish? If I need to put my bugsmasher down in a congested area with no options, I'm probably going to wish I had a chute. But otherwise, If you've got the choice of a road or a field to land rather than pull, you do that, right?
Click to expand...

Do this exercise. Set a random timer and go flying. When it goes off, select the field you would land in. Now go back to the airport. Get in a car and go to the field. Remove the shocks, put on tiny tires. Now drive over the field at 70 mph.

Here is a mental exercise. If the chance of an off field landing with only minor injuries is say 80% and the chance if you pull is 99% which do you do?

Sorry, but I had a friend die trying to make it to an airport rather than pulling. He almost made it. Listening to his 9 year old daughter talk about missing her dad made me wish he had thought more about himself and his family and less about the plane.
 
whereisrandall said:
Cirrus pilots, help me with this honest question. Vs0 is 60 knots, ish? If I need to put my bugsmasher down in a congested area with no options, I'm probably going to wish I had a chute. But otherwise, If you've got the choice of a road or a field to land rather than pull, you do that, right?
Click to expand...

How many off-airport landings have resulted in fatalities?

How many Cirrus parachute deployments have resulted in fatalities?

The answer is plainly obvious if your aircraft is equipped with a parachute.
 
whereisrandall said:
Cirrus pilots, help me with this honest question. Vs0 is 60 knots, ish? If I need to put my bugsmasher down in a congested area with no options, I'm probably going to wish I had a chute. But otherwise, If you've got the choice of a road or a field to land rather than pull, you do that, right?
Click to expand...

Look at the past 12 months of Bonanza vs. Cirrus accidents. 20+ Bonanza fatals, many of which might have turned out very different with a parachute.

I don't care about the plane - Cirrus has made 7000 of them and they keep pumping them out. My parents only made one of me and call me self-centered but I'm saving my own skin if things go wrong.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
How many off-airport landings have resulted in fatalities?

How many Cirrus parachute deployments have resulted in fatalities?

The answer is plainly obvious if your aircraft is equipped with a parachute.
Click to expand...

Yup, statistically off-airport landings are much more dangerous (both to people on the ground and in the airplane) than a chute pull. I will land if I am *very* sure of the outcome, otherwise it's the silk elevator for me. My wife insists on me coming come after every flight. Even more so if she's in the plane. :)
 
I think he should have left (a satire) off the title. A few people would be bound to take it seriously:)
 
fiveoboy01 said:
I think he should have left (a satire) off the title. A few people would be bound to take it seriously:)
Click to expand...


And they should. It was a textbook landing.
They just need to watch it with the sound off.
 
mscard88 said:
I wonder a bit about this also. Do these pilots push the plane, say like fuel range, knowing that they have the chute to save the day? Seems to be quite a few incidents like this. Fuel starvation the cause or the engine itself?
Click to expand...

The recent ones are more related to the pilot forgetting to switch tanks and running one tank out versus running it completely dry.
I really wish the FAA would allow a "both" setting on the low wings. They require the tank switch for "safety", but multiple planes have crashed due to pilots forgetting to switch. :confused:
 
whereisrandall said:
Cirrus pilots, help me with this honest question. Vs0 is 60 knots, ish? If I need to put my bugsmasher down in a congested area with no options, I'm probably going to wish I had a chute. But otherwise, If you've got the choice of a road or a field to land rather than pull, you do that, right?
Click to expand...

I'd pull chute without hesitation. Even when a runway is within glide distance I still might come up short 1 or 2 out of 10 times (especially in a high stress environment). I'd much rather pull the chute and make it 10 out of 10 over a field.
 
tuwood said:
I'd pull chute without hesitation. Even when a runway is within glide distance I still might come up short 1 or 2 out of 10 times (especially in a high stress environment). I'd much rather pull the chute and make it 10 out of 10 over a field.
Click to expand...
Chutes sometimes fail to deploy, there was a case this happen and the guy ended up landing after a failed deployment, chutes are not 100% effective.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top