Unfolding Story: Cirrus Parachute Again Saves the Day

Kritchlow said:
So... Should we ignore the "pull up terrain" ground prox warning because we have reviewed our sectional prior to flight?
Click to expand...

Answer: If I can clearly see the terrain and know why it's saying that, yes I ignore it. In fact, there's a switch to stop it in Cirrrus.

Answer 2: If I can't see clearly and am not sure and / or it's night, damn right I'd pull up! I'm human and could have mis-read the sectional!
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Answer: If I can clearly see the terrain and know why it's saying that, yes I ignore it. In fact, there's a switch to stop it in Cirrrus.

Answer 2: If I can't see clearly and am not sure and / or it's night, damn right I'd pull up! I'm human and could have mis-read the sectional!
Click to expand...

And that indeed is the correct answer.

Point being, some may say answer 2 even if they don't see it because they are pilots who did their homework. No technology needed.
 
Kritchlow said:
So... Should we ignore the "pull up terrain" ground prox warning because we have reviewed our sectional prior to flight?
Click to expand...

If you're getting an unexpected terrain warning and it's not a sensor error you screwed the pooch already. If you're any sort of decent pilot the flight should not have gotten to that point.
 
EdFred said:
If you're getting an unexpected terrain warning and it's not a sensor error you screwed the pooch already. If you're any sort of decent pilot the flight should not have gotten to that point.
Click to expand...

So..... Not clear. Are you saying it's too late and we should ignore it?

I would think it's a back up to the human mistake, weather it be ATC or pilot. Same goes for TCAS.
 
Kritchlow said:
So..... Not clear. Are you saying it's too late and we should ignore it?

I would think it's a back up to the human mistake, weather it be ATC or pilot. Same goes for TCAS.
Click to expand...

I'm saying you're a **** pilot if you're getting an unexpected legit terrain warning.
 
EdFred said:
I'm saying you're a **** pilot if you're getting a legit terrain warning.
Click to expand...

Glad to see you think you're perfect. It clearly shows your inexperience and lack of professionalism.
 
Kritchlow said:
Glad to see you think you're perfect. It clearly shows your inexperience and lack of professionalism.
Click to expand...

If I end up with one I will be the first to put myself in that group. I am my biggest critic. In fact if I end up in that situation I will quit flying as soon as that flight is complete, I have no business being in theair. But your post clearly shows you have no clue about who I am.
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
I'm saying you're a **** pilot if you're getting an unexpected legit terrain warning.
Click to expand...

EdFred said:
If I end up with one I will be the first to put myself in that group. I am my biggest critic. But your clearly shows you have no clue about who I am.
Click to expand...

But to *think* it shouldn't happen unless your a s... Pilot. Really? That shows some serious arrogance. You may be a professional pilot because you make money as a CFI in East Hicksville, but perhaps a bit of airline CRM or CFIT training is in order.
 
EdFred said:
If I end up with one I will be the first to put myself in that group. I am my biggest critic. In fact if I end up in that situation I will quit flying as soon as that flight is complete, I have no business being in theair. But your post clearly shows you have no clue about who I am.
Click to expand...

And that's the point.... You may not be able to report back here to "put yourself in that group".
 
Kritchlow said:
But to *think* it shouldn't happen unless your a s... Pilot. Really? That shows some serious arrogance. You may be a professional pilot because you make money as a CFI in East Hicksville, but perhaps a bit of airline CRM or CFIT training is in order.
Click to expand...

I KNOW it shouldn't happen unless you're a **** pilot. It's not arrogance, I will put myself in that category in a heartbeat if I do. Of course you're probably aslo a **** pilot if you think "oh well it happens".

Maybe if you did some actual planning and not just pushing buttons or getting your flight plan fed to you'd realize that. You know where my CFIT training comes from? Not spending all my time in the flight levels and spending almost of my flight time within 5 minutes of impact. And no, that's not in the pattern 85 percent of my flight hours are cross country - usually over more than one state on each trip.
 
Last edited:
bullwinkle said:
If you can foresee circumstances where you think it's the best option, why are you not a fan of having one?

Not digging at you, just curious.
Click to expand...

Weight, cost, space, the unlikelyhood of needing it. We look after a 172 that has one and boy, does it take up a pile of room.
 
EdFred said:
I KNOW it shouldn't happen unless you're a **** pilot. It's not arrogance, I will put myself in that category in a heartbeat if I do. Of course you're probably aslo a **** pilot if you think "oh well it happens".

Maybe if you did some actual planning and not just pushing buttons or getting your flight plan fed to you'd realize that. You know where my CFIT training comes from? Not spending all my time in the flight levels and spending almost of my flight time within 5 minutes of impact.
Click to expand...

lol!! You don't know me yet you're calling me a s... Pilot. Yowsaa!!!

So, airliners should not have redundancy, just like a C152. No need for dual systems or back up anywhere. Only a s... Pilot would need that. We should fly the airliner partial panel vs (God forbid) have a back up source.

In addition they should not have GPS, VORs, transponders, TCAS, EGPWS, or a host of other things.
After all, if the controllers are real men they can identify us without a code. Heck, the hell with radar, let's go back to position reporting.

This is getting silly.
 
Generic you, not a personal you.


But it's obvious you ignored a lot of what I said in thsithread - which is oddly coincidental
 
To be clear, back to the technology issue (parachute).

I truly believe everyone here believes piloting skills come first, but it's nice to have one more tool in the box should the need arise.
 
I have moving map GPS, autopilot, and a chute, I can half ass it because I can just hit the autopilot or pull the chute.
Click to expand...

Said no pilot ever.

look at it like automatic transmission, traction control, anti-lock brakes, and airbags in cars. Has it reduced the accident rate? No. Drivers have gotten worse, and worse.
Click to expand...

100% incorrect.

The chances of dying in a crash in a late-model vehicle have fallen by more than a third in three years, the latest IIHS calculations of driver death rates show. Among 2011 models, a record nine vehicles have driver death rates of zero. However, the gap between the safest and riskiest models remains wide, and three cars have death rates exceeding 100 per million registered vehicle years.

Improved vehicle designs and safety technology have a lot to do with the continuing decline in fatality risk. In a related study, Institute researchers estimated how much of the decline was due to changes in the vehicle fleet during 1985-2012. They found that vehicle changes — including improved structural designs, the addition of safety features and an evolving mix of vehicle types — were the main source of declining risk from 1993 through 2006.
Click to expand...

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/sr/statusreport/article/50/1/1

Modern cars are FAR safer these days than they used to be, especially compared to cars made before 1990, thanks largely to improved technology.

Just like airplanes.
 
I said accident rate not death rate, read what I said not what you think I said.

Safer cars have not improved driving skills. Try again on the 100 percent incorrect.
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
If you're getting an unexpected terrain warning and it's not a sensor error you screwed the pooch already. If you're any sort of decent pilot the flight should not have gotten to that point.
Click to expand...

And as we all know, none of us EVER makes a mistake, right?

True confession: I'm human. I make mistakes, even though I was at the top of my grad school class, solo'ed in 6.8 hours, and run a global technology organization.

True confession #2: I have made mistakes in the cockpit. I fly in complex LA airspace with traffic all around and controllers, some good, some awful, talking to me while I fly the plane.

True confession #3: I will make a mistake again soon.

I'm also a great pilot. Ed, if you read ASRS reports (great place to sign up for e-mail updates), you'll find even the best of us makes mistakes. Why even Martha and John King have made some jaw-dropping mistakes. :rolleyes2:

So yes. I'll take the technology assist, thank you very much.

Ed, perhaps you don't need any of it because you are perfect. Well...not that you would...but don't ever ask me to fly with you, because I don't buy it. You...we...all of us are human.
 
Where did I ever say I was perfect? Sorry if someone puts themself ina "oh **** I almost killed myself" situation due to lack of planning because they were a child of FF AP and GPS or getting spoon fed their flight plan from dispatch they are a **** pilot.
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
Where did I ever say I was perfect? Sorry if someone puts themself ina "oh **** I almost killed myself" situation due to lack of planning because they were a child of FF AP and GPS or getting spoon fed their flight plan from dispatch they are a **** pilot.
Click to expand...

You are parsing words if you think you never implied such.

And I can only chuckle about a spoon fed flight plan. You really should not speak of what you do not know.
 
Can't we all just get along? I think we know where Ed stands. Some will agree. Most (at least here) do not.

I am going to sign off until there's more info on the event that caused me to start this thread now. What we do know:

* It was dark - pilot couldn't see anything.
* He probably waited too long to pull; he was below 500 feet AGL
* This was caused by his focus on trying to troubleshoot
* He survived with a minor injury, even though he probably deployed outside the parachute's envelope

Let's see what else comes our way on this one.
 
Tech does erode skills, and some judgement. It just does, but hopefully gives back more than it takes. . .I was flying CAP a few years back, and my first reaction to the G-1000 182 was "You have to be kidding me! The plane is grounded if the autopilot is inop? It's a freakin' light plane, not the Space Shuttle!"

In my opinion only, that platform gave back less than it demanded, as its interface is clunky, labor intensive, and requires too much heads-down time.

I'm hearing the heated stuff in this thread, and the anti-tech side has validity, but the degree to which each of us decides to keep basic, non-tech, skills sharp is variable.

The safety at any cost crowd bothers me - I don't want uber safety, I want to fly; the 'chute and teach-first guys have valid points, but I sense some self-deception going on there, as well.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Can't we all just get along? I think we know where Ed stands. Some will agree. Most (at least here) do not.

I am going to sign off until there's more info on the event that caused me to start this thread now. What we do know:

* It was dark - pilot couldn't see anything.
* He probably waited too long to pull; he was below 500 feet AGL
* This was caused by his focus on trying to troubleshoot
* He survived with a minor injury, even though he probably deployed outside the parachute's envelope

Let's see what else comes our way on this one.
Click to expand...

See my update on post #110 if you missed it, although from your summary it seems you read it:

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1982976&postcount=110
 
EdFred said:
I said accident rate not death rate, read what I said not what you think I said.

Safer cars have not improved driving skills. Try again on the 100 percent incorrect.
Click to expand...

You need to stop making things up. By any measure it is much safer to drive today than it was even a few years ago.

Thirty seconds on Google provides this:
For drivers, passengers, cyclists, and pedestrians, 2009 was a very good year: Motor-vehicle-related fatalities fell to an all-time low in America, with only 1.13 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT). In total, deaths fell to 33,808, the lowest number since the Department of Transportation started recording the data in 1950. Crash rates fell to their lowest number (185 crashes per 100 million VMT), and injury rates also dropped, from a high of 169 per 100 million VMT in 1988 (the first year on record) to 74 per 100 million VMT in 2009, again the lowest on record.

Such data represent a decline that’s been ongoing for more than half a century, hastened by safety technology such as seatbelts and airbags, as well as federal standards that forced their adoption. At the same time, policymakers and *advocates have used education and enforcement to change social norms surrounding driver behavior
Click to expand...


http://www.caranddriver.com/features/safety-in-numbers-charting-traffic-safety-and-fatality-data
 
I cant believe how some people are fixated on the narrative that technology/safety improvements must be shunned due to the possibility it may allow some undisciplined pilots to lose proficiency.

I bet back in the early 1970s the same opinionated personality types shunned the use of those new fangled shoulder harnesses. Hell, if your forced landing got your torso impaled by a control column then I guess you weren't a real pilot.

I'll use whatever technology is available to facilitate a safe flight: GPS, autopilot, iPad with EFB, and if I could afford it, a parachute equipped plane. I still love to flight plan using the old school methods. Last weekend I flew to Las Vegas referencing paper charts and a paper navlog I computed with the old fashioned E6B and plastic plotter. Of course I cross checked with the onboard GPS and the iPad since it was available. Any mouthy blowhard who asserts I shouldn't supplement my primary skills with the latest technology has become obsolete and irrelevant in the industry.
 
Yep, I use all the technology available to me in my airplane including(gasp) an ipad and ADSB receiver. I even fly GPS approaches because I have an evil WAAS GPS. All that stuff gets used, quite often. I guess I'm not sure how good I am with pilotage and dead reckoning, I don't do it often... because I don't have to.

Signed, ****ty pilot.
 
That's a 5 year old article that still focuses on death rates and does not define what a crash is. I have seen more cars taking out street signs mailboxes guardrails and in the ditch and more stupid driver tricks than I ever have. None of those are reported, and none of those are even considered crashes. I never said cars weren't safer, but you keep trotting that out and ignoring what I actually said: drivers are getting worse.
 
It also appears that reading is not some of your guys' strong suit.
 
No need to close the thread, but when people don't read half of what I'm saying, there's no point in me continuing. Also at no point in the thread did I ever comment on how good I or any specific member here was on the **** to great spectrum but hey if it makes you feel better to categorize me have at it.
 
I think you did plenty of categorizing yourself. And if you're unable to see how your comments convey an elitist attitude, well that is your issue... And says more about you than the ****ty pilots you want to criticize.
 
Kritchlow said:
To be clear, back to the technology issue (parachute).

I truly believe everyone here believes piloting skills come first, but it's nice to have one more tool in the box should the need arise.
Click to expand...

I am generally skeptical of throwing additional technology at safety issues.

But the case here is one where technology may have come to this pilot's rescue.

From his account, once the engine started surging, he went into full troubleshooting mode. In spite of many years of internalizing and preaching "Consider CAPS", under the stress of an unexpected engine problem, task fixation set in. The CAPS might very well have stayed stowed until ground impact, as it did in my oft-mentioned simulator experience.

What likely saved him? An audible "Five hundred" emanating from one of his boxes. That shocked him out of what he was doing and got him to pull the CAPS, albeit very late and low. He hit nose down before full deployment, and that's probably what led to a broken wrist and ankle.

But a life saved. Like I quoted in my anecdote, Warren Zevon (R.I.P.) sang, "You're a whole 'nother person when you're scared". Something to consider as we each ponder exactly how we will perform when the chips are down. Or NOT perform, as the case may be.
 
I don't think Ed is advocating at all that we should get rid of technology and not use it. He's actually saying the opposite and is all for the technology. His point is that if technology becomes a crutch then we need to reevaluate ourselves as pilots. For example, scrubbing a flight because your GPS isn't working. I think that is a problem. Scrubbing a flight because Foreflight is down. I also think that is a problem. I fly and instruct on Cirrus aircraft everyday. The technology is amazing and everything can be found on the two screens. I fail the screens often, especially on cross countries with my students and learn how to fly without them. Again, Ed isn't saying we should get rid of technology, but if that certain piece of technology causes us to cancel a flight because we rely on it, then that is a problem. Honestly, when I plan VFR cross countries I'm hitting direct to on the GPS and autopilot is coming on. If the GPS and autopilot went to crap I'd still know how to get to my destination. If you can't, that is a problem. You also have to constantly monitor your position because one day your GPS WILL fail.
 
Last edited:
In the case of parachutes, Ed IS exactly saying they make for worse pilots, and in the case of Cirrus pilots if they follow the POH they are ****ty pilots.

If you can find one comment Ed has made that he thinks parachutes are a worthwhile technology, I'd love to see it quoted.
 
bullwinkle said:
In the case of parachutes, Ed IS exactly saying they make for worse pilots, and in the case of Cirrus pilots if they follow the POH they are ****ty pilots.

If you can find one comment Ed has made that he thinks parachutes are a worthwhile technology, I'd love to see it quoted.
Click to expand...



For the record, I was a ****ty pilot long before I started flying the Cirrus.
 
I just read this thread & have to ask the OP--"unfolding story, parachute saves the day!" Was that intentional? I hope so it is funny!
 
bullwinkle said:
If you can find one comment Ed has made that he thinks parachutes are a worthwhile technology, I'd love to see it quoted.
Click to expand...

Is there any technology Ed approves of? Beyond sectionals, dividers, and sextants? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top