When to pull the 'chute

[FastEddieB]

Tim,

 

That sounds like a good idea, but...

 

...knowing how Murphy works, I'd want to make 100%, ABSOLUTELY sure there was no way that anyone or anything might accidentally get wrapped up in that loop or snag it accidentally.

 

Just sayin'.

[CT4ME]

'thought about that.... decided the ability to pull was more important the likelihood of an accident, especially considering the amount of force and distance of pull needed. The cord lays coiled under the handle, out of the way. Pin is always in unless flying.

tim

[FastEddieB]

I assumed you had thought of that.

 

I was envisioning just a loop of cord that a foot or elbow or tool or baggage or something could inadvertently snag on.

 

I was thinking maybe tape it so it would lay flat with maybe a tab to pull to free it.

 

Just lookin' out for ya!

[Ed Cesnalis]

One poster keeps saying there is no down side to deploying except the cost of a repack.

 

I always figured that a deployment meant the CT would be totaled because of the composite damage and damage from a nose low contact.

 

What would be the damage amount from an average deployment?

[Tom Baker]

From an insurance stand point the airplane will be totalled. I have heard that all three airplanes that had deployments in Europe were rebuilt. When I went to the composite class last fall they showed pictures of some pretty amazing damage of aircraft that were rebuilt.

[FastEddieB]

The assumption is that a Cirrus will be totaled - that once you pull the handle, the idea is the insurance company just bought your plane.

 

Still, a handful have come through the ground impact with little enough damage that it was economically feasible to repair them and they're flying today.

 

My guess is that it would be similar with the CT.

 

But...

 

...I think economics should not play any part in the decision to pull or not to pull. By the time the chute becomes the best option, survival may be in question. Adding economics into the decision may result in a fatal inaction. First, survive - then worry about the money stuff.

[Ed Cesnalis]

Bigs,

 

Where are the bridle cables attached to? How are they routed? Won't composite be ripped off?

 

What is your attitude on contact? What damage results from that?

 

Will it fracture your spine if done on water? Will the gear soften your contact enough?

 

In the 1st stage of deployment the composite is not damaged but as the canopy inflates and the cables tighten the composite will fly. Then you have more damage on contact.

 

I'm not saying don't deploy, I'm saying if the situation is within your capabilities and you can avoid totaling your airplane then you are going to land it. Deployment is not a forgone conclusion. At the minimum it cannot be based on the thinking that a repack is the main cost, not even close.

 

Perhaps if you were from back east I would cut you some slack on this but out in our neck of the woods there are landing opportunities all day long. I did a magazine shoot over Tahoe once in my CT and then we went and landed out on a dry lake bed. 3 CTs, some not even sold yet landing off field near your airport, its really doable especially once you are east of the Sierra.

[Znurtdog]

I just happen to have had a tour of a hanger that had 2 Cirrus' post-pull in there for reconstruction. Looked like a LOT of work. I'll see if I can post pics

[Ed Cesnalis]

Charlie Tango. The design of the BRS system is pretty straight forward. They went out of their way to put in a precut popout for the chute, and they designed it to deploy even at high speed. Like in a dive. if you manage to get your CT inverted you have bigger proglems than what the BRS is gonna do if you pull it in that situation. The CT will be breaking up if you put it in a violent spin and or invert in an acrobatic mode creating g forces in excess of 3g. which is over the spec. It seem you are trying to figure out ways to defeat it, sure it likely can be defeated , but 99% of the time if you simply fire it off its gonna get you down, unless you are 100 feet off the ground, i doubt it can help you at that point, and really not much can if you are gonna land hard on something unfriendly.

 

 

Your rocket should exit within that precut but with 2 of the attachment points on your firewall and your bridle cables run down along your wind screen. The cables come from the luggage area but attache to the firewall and have to rip apart the area alongside of your windscreen.

 

I get my CT inverted often and you are wrong, I have no problems as a result, it doesn't break up as you suggest. You are wrong that the BRS isn't going to help if inverted. Wrong again that the CT will break up simply because 3Gs is exceeded. You don't even specify if positive or negative and and there is a 2g difference between the 2.

 

You state that the BRS is going to work for you 99% of the time, where do you get that? You just make this stuff up.

[Roger Lee]

There is a lot of damage after a chute pull and landing. The gear gets taken out. The firewall will stand a very good chance of cracking due to the front end impact and collapse of the nose gear. To replace engine mount is $4500 and that's only for that part. The main landing gear will be totaled and it will damage the belly and gear attachment points. The top of the fuselage will be torn open. The "A " post will be damaged. Possibly wing spar damage depending on angle of ground contact and impact speed. Possible tail damage depending on ground contact angle. Land on any rocks or irregular surface will absolutely damage the belly. If the engine is running on contact add a prop strike inspection to the repair cost. It would be a very costly repair to say the least. If you have an older CT insured for only $80K you may get totaled, but if the damage is down around $50K probably not. No matter what the CT is going to sustain damage and it won't be light.

[sandpiper]

If I decide to pull the chute I won't be worrying about how much damage will happen to the aircraft.

 

But, IMHO there will be far more damage to repair than the hole where the chute comes out. Near as I can tell the harness is attached to the motor mounts (both sides) and to the landing gear. There will be composite ripped up in the cabin top and down the windshield pillars. I have no idea if that is an easy fix or not.

 

When you hit, assuming no trees, fence posts, buildings, and minimal wind, etc, the gear will be damaged, maybe firewall, prop and so on. As a minimum. I have no idea what the extent of that repair may be but we all know that, in airplanes, damage that looks minimal ends up costing a lot.

 

But, pulling the chute you will probably live with only minor injuries provided obstacles and wind don't further ruin your day. Deciding to dead stick can have far better results. But the results can also be far worse. You won't know until you are out of the aircraft and standing in a safe spot.

 

It's a tough decision. On the one hand you may be over an area you personally know will result in a no or minimal damage, no injury. In that case you land. On the other hand you may be over really crappy terrain, or experience a structural failure, etc. You know the answer to that - pull the chute. It's those in between scenarios where the decision gets harder. Personally, if there is any doubt about the outcome, I would be inclined to pull.

[sandpiper]

Sorry Roger, I was writing and didn't see your post. As far as damage goes, we seem to have similar thoughts.

[FastEddieB]

 

I get my CT inverted often...

 

Can you please expound on that?

[FastEddieB]

1) I assume the checklist has shutting down the engine on it, so a running engine should not be on the list of worries.

 

2) I think some of the minimally damages Cirruses came down into trees or bushes, lessening the damage to the gear.

[Roger Lee]

A running engine would be on the list for a low altitude pull like take off issues and low altitude flying. Many of the BRS chute pulls on record were so low that engine shut down wasn't possible.

Throw a 3K-4K lb. plane on a bunch or vertical logs (trees) at 26-30 MPH and there will be belly and wing damage. We only get to see these pictures from far away. It would be much more interesting to few everything up close for all the real damage.

[sandpiper]

I think the checklist does have an item to shut off the engine. I'm not sure, without checking, exactly what it says but my inclination would be to bring the throttle to idle, pop the chute, then decide about the turning the engine off.

 

Lets say, the airplane is intact. Before I kill the engine, I would want to be sure the chute deployed. If it does deploy my thinking is the engine might be used to have an effect on the touch down point. I don't know if that's true or not. Any thoughts? Anyone know for sure?

[Roger Lee]

If at altitude I would prefer to kill the engine to help kill any gyroscopic action or strange gyration from a control surface loss and a possible prop contact on a bridal. At low altitude just getting the cute pulled may be all the time you have.

[Ed Cesnalis]

Can you please expound on that?

 

I like to do wing overs, given all the canyons out here I call it canyon exit maneuver practice.

[Doug G.]

The proceedure is to shut off the engine, cut the fuel, tighten seat belts and harnesses, pull the handle. The Cirrus video addresses trying to control the chute with the engine does not work. When you think about it, it takes quite a bit of power to give any authority to the empennage and is most likely to induce uncontrolled oscillations (swininging) which could increase your speed on touchdown. You could even conceivably dump air from the chute. (Probably unlikely.)

[FastEddieB]

 

 

I like to do wing overs, given all the canyons out here I call it canyon exit maneuver practice.

 

Just curious...

 

...is there any bank limitation in the POH? Inverted sounds kind of like "inverted" - unless you meant something else.

[Ed Cesnalis]

Just curious...

 

...is there any bank limitation in the POH? Inverted sounds kind of like "inverted" - unless you meant something else.

 

60 degrees is the limitation. I use about 60 degrees pitch up, 45 degrees of bank and just before stall I chop the power and use full rudder ( co-ordinated ). The nose falls through and I am never flat on my back but it seems close.

 

I need to learn a military version without the bank.

[FastEddieB]

Got it.

 

That's not really inverted - which is a good thing.

 

I used to get a kick out of doing and teaching aerobatics in Citabrias - but it's been a long time.

 

Windgovers are a good coordination exercise, kinda like an exaggerated first half of the lady-8 required for Commercial applicants.

 

And hammerhead stalls were a logical progression - also fun unless the student waited a hair too long to kick the rudder. Sliding backwards is NOT a good feeling if you're not really used to it.

 

Important note: ALWAYS done in aerobatic aircraft.

[Ed Cesnalis]

Got it.

 

That's not really inverted - which is a good thing.

 

I used to get a kick out of doing and teaching aerobatics in Citabrias - but it's been a long time.

 

Windgovers are a good coordination exercise, kinda like an exaggerated first half of the lady-8 required for Commercial applicants.

 

And hammerhead stalls were a logical progression - also fun unless the student waited a hair too long to kick the rudder. Sliding backwards is NOT a good feeling if you're not really used to it.

 

Important note: ALWAYS done in aerobatic aircraft.

 

Below is a video that looks my maneuver. It is at this point that I think I am inverted,

 

 

granted the bank angle is steep but the ground is up and the sky is down.

 

I'm glad you taught aerobatics, tell me where I am wrong here.

1. I pitch up 60 degrees
   
2. I bank 45
   
3. I yaw almost 90 getting, closer to zero Gs.
   

Nothing above causes me to become inverted but as I run out of energy and allow the nose to fall through thats where I get the sight picture that looks inverted.

 

Perhaps you are right, the 60 degrees pitch down looks like 90 I guess the 30 degree difference fools me?

 

[FastEddieB]

More to follow, but...

 

1) Does your plane have a Limitation for pitch?

 

2) Are you wearing a parachute for the maneuver?

[Ed Cesnalis]

More to follow, but...

 

1) Does your plane have a Limitation for pitch?

 

2) Are you wearing a parachute for the maneuver?

 

 

I don't think it is limited in pitch, even if it is I have to pitch down If I''m out of airspeed limitation or not you have to fly in the relative wind.

 

I'm not wearing a chute by my CT is. I've done spins with a CFI and we didn't wear chutes.