Interesting Cirrus article

I thought it was a decent article and really touched on the efforts of COPA and Cirrus to educate their pilots.
I've attended the COPA Critical Decision Making (CDM) and Cirrus Pilot Proficiency Program (CPPP) and both were wonderful events loaded with information. During the CPPP they have a Partner in Command class (PIC) that my wife attended and she loved it. It goes over everything from basic emergency radio communications and autopilot usage as well as deploying CAPS.

Cirrus pilots aren't any different than other pilots in that we make the same mistakes other pilots make flying VFR into IMC, getting too slow in the pattern, forgetting to fly the plane in an emergency, etc. The one difference is that in many of the Cirrus fatalities if the pilot would have pulled the chute right away they and their passengers would most likely still be alive. Even with controlled off airport landings and engine out airport landing attempts there are several fatalities that could have most likely been prevented simply finding an open field and pulling the chute at 1500' AGL.
 
An interesting observation...

COPA members are only a subset of Cirrus owner's and pilots.

When there is an accident reported, its unusual for the accident pilot to be a COPA member.

When they are a COPA member, its often a member with little or no activity on the forum.

By no means is COPA membership a guarantee against being in an accident - we've lost quite a few over the years - but it sure seems to improve one's odds.

Plus, its hard to establish a causal relationship. Rather than COPA membership giving protection, it may be simply that the kind of person to join COPA and actively participate is also the kind of person to emphasize safety and training more than most.

Good article overall.
 
I haven't piloted a Cirrus but is it true that the spring mounted controls do not give as much feedback as a standard system like in a 172?
 
midcap said:
I haven't piloted a Cirrus but is it true that the spring mounted controls do not give as much feedback as a standard system like in a 172?
Click to expand...

That's what some say.

I have maybe 700 hours or so in Cirrus', both as an owner and CSIP instructor and I never noticed it much.
 
midcap said:
I haven't piloted a Cirrus but is it true that the spring mounted controls do not give as much feedback as a standard system like in a 172?
Click to expand...

Doing plenty of controlled stalls in training I always felt the controls getting plenty mushy as we slowed down and I definitely got plenty of feedback. I am sure that you get "more" feedback in a C172, but I think it's a red herring that people like to point to as a cure all for stall spin accidents.
 
tuwood said:
Doing plenty of controlled stalls in training I always felt the controls getting plenty mushy as we slowed down and I definitely got plenty of feedback. I am sure that you get "more" feedback in a C172, but I think it's a red herring that people like to point to as a cure all for stall spin accidents.
Click to expand...

that makes sense.
 
midcap said:
oh ok, the tension has been made out to seem very firm.
Click to expand...

Ailerons are very light and one finger can easily push them back and forth. The elevator is a little more firm, but still pretty light overall.
 
I'm glad this discussion so far stuck to the topic and not the "real men (women) don't need a chute" or "Cirrus pilots can't handle emergencies".

Having attended 2 CPPP and taken the web portal courses, I am very impressed with COPA and the training support given along with courses developed by Cirrus.
 
FastEddieB said:
An interesting observation...

COPA members are only a subset of Cirrus owner's and pilots.

When there is an accident reported, its unusual for the accident pilot to be a COPA member.

When they are a COPA member, its often a member with little or no activity on the forum.

By no means is COPA membership a guarantee against being in an accident - we've lost quite a few over the years - but it sure seems to improve one's odds.
Click to expand...
They see the same effect in other type groups. LOBO (Lancair Owners and Buyers Organization) says, basically, the same thing.

In my opinion, it's more a reflection of an owner being more safety-conscious than fact-of-membership reducing the accident rate. An owner who is concerned about safety is less likely to have an accident to start with. They're already receptive to safety-related information, and COPA and LOBO do a good job of giving them stuff they can use.

Similar, someone willing to participate in a safety discussion has the opportunity to study typical scenarios and do some preliminary thinking on how they'd best react.

Absolutely nothing against the fine work COPA and LOBO do; it's just easier to preach to the choir if the choir is interested.

Ron Wanttaja
 
midcap said:
I haven't piloted a Cirrus but is it true that the spring mounted controls do not give as much feedback as a standard system like in a 172?
Click to expand...
The control are very responsive. It's an easy plane to fly.
 
asgcpa said:
I'm glad this discussion so far stuck to the topic and not the "real men (women) don't need a chute" or "Cirrus pilots can't handle emergencies".

Having attended 2 CPPP and taken the web portal courses, I am very impressed with COPA and the training support given along with courses developed by Cirrus.
Click to expand...
I'm always impressed with the resources Cirrus gives its pilots. I don't see any other manufacturer doing it.
 
jordane93 said:
I'm always impressed with the resources Cirrus gives its pilots. I don't see any other manufacturer doing it.
Click to expand...

In all fairness other manufacturers aren't producing any new certified GA planes in enough quantities to warrant it. I do applaud all they have done as it seems it really is making a difference. Pretty remarkable safety turn around after they initiated some of their new training ideas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top