Cirrus G7+ Safe Return Discussion

[Worldwide trade]

Commentary requested on the value of Cirrus's "Safe Return". As with CAPS, a life saved is priceless but the calculus on these options are complex. Seems the Safe Return option is about $300K+ up front, pushing a single engine piston into the $1.5M stratosphere. CAPS deployments (100+) have saved lives. Safe Return redundant?

Also, simple math might dictate a NetJets alternative, invest the $1.5M and ride in style in a jet on the invested ROI.

More to it I'm sure so let's hear the pro's and con's on this subject!

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

Depending on how much you fly and where, making 8% on your $1.5MM won’t get you much NetJet. Plus, flying a plane is part of the fun. And if you decide to sell, you get some of your $ back.

As for Safe Return, though not familiar, doesn’t that complicate the Cirrus “pull in emergency” decision making, especially for passengers in a pilot incapacitation? Still, good to have options than none.

My costless opinion.

 

[WDD]

Flying, and flying a Cirrus, isn't mandatory. If a person wants to voluntarily pay for that, then that's up to him/her. As long as these things aren't mandated, then fine. FWIW, I wouldn't pay for it.

MPOV, it's the person that should get to make that choice. Cost / benefit analysis on the entire fleet seems to be suggesting making a decision for everyone, vs each person making their own decision about the risk they want to take or pay to not have.

There are limits of course. A plane has to have a reasonable probability of a wing not falling off, rules on maintenance need to be in place, etc. A balance is good, and we all can debate where that balance is.

TANGENT:
This situation isn't similar to a car, where one could argue that mobility is a necessity in most parts of this country to have a job, get food, etc. A car/vehicle I could argue should have some safety mandated features, such as ABS and airbags. So yeah, I'm not an absolute legalist on that "it should only be up to the person" idea.

But some safety features are beyond the point of diminishing returns. Adding these features with minimal safety value (rear view cameras, lane assist steering) can drive up the cost a vehicle to the point where a person can only afford an older vehicle that is less safe vs a newer one that is safer even without the marginal safety features.

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

A friend of mine owns a Cirrus Vision Jet with the safe return feature. He told his wife if he was incapacitated to activate the safe return feature and let the computer do the rest, and then just push him aside and get out of the airplane. She pointed out that he may not be dead. He said, "Well, there's a handgun in the glove box."

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Commentary requested on the value of Cirrus's "Safe Return". As with CAPS, a life saved is priceless but the calculus on these options are complex. Seems the Safe Return option is about $300K+ up front, pushing a single engine piston into the $1.5M stratosphere. CAPS deployments (100+) have saved lives. Safe Return redundant?

I don't think Safe Return alone is responsible for all $300K... Unless you have evidence to the contrary.

The system is a combination of software for the G3000 ("Cirrus Perspective Touch" in this case) that also requires some hardware that wasn't there before - A radar altimeter (GRA55 is $7800 retail), autothrottle (figure at least $2K for an extra servo plus software), brake actuators, etc... It's not cheap, but it shouldn't be $300K either.

Safe Return is really there for pilot incapacitation. The chute is still there for the other reasons the chute has always been there for: Midair collision damaging the plane and making it unflyable, control failure, etc... And while the chute could be used for pilot incapacitation, the red button is a better solution - Lower risk of injuries and far less damage to the airplane.

 

[camorton]

You won't get far trying to calculate the cost/benefit of these systems if you only look at 'saved lives'. 99% of the value of these systems is psychological. As in: "Hey everybody, just in case, despite the one in a million odds, I or the airplane become disabled on this flight, all anyone has to do is pull this red handle or push this red button and we'll all be fine!" While I would not invest in the technology for my own airplane, if it gets folks reluctant to fly GA flying (or buying) small airplanes, then I'm all for it. If you think wearing a St. Christopher's medal or holding a magic feather will protect you, I've got no problem with that either.

C.