NC Bill Posted May 27, 2013 Report Share Posted May 27, 2013 Here's a link to more info on the CIRRUS equivalent to our BRS - what CIRRUS calls CAPS. Same "little Red handle" in a different location and sized for their aircraft's weight. Might be worth a few minutes time while contemplating under what circumstances you might energizes your "safety device". Imagine! 69 LIVES SAVED TO DATE. http://www.cirrusaircraft.com/caps/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted May 27, 2013 Report Share Posted May 27, 2013 That means there were a lot of bad flight choices by Cirrus pilots to have to pull for that many lives and that doesn't include the ones that didn't make it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted May 27, 2013 Report Share Posted May 27, 2013 This was well worth reading. Cirrus deployment will be similar but not identical to other airplane types (for one reason, because of spin issues). It would be worth while for all of us to incorporate BSR training into periodic training, including flight reviews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrapman1959 Posted May 27, 2013 Report Share Posted May 27, 2013 Flying a high performance piston single at night or over large areas of low ceilings probably puts you at a 25% survival rate if you lose power and can't glide to an airport. We owned a 350 Columbia for 3 years and sold it for that reason. The Columbia was a much finer airplane in design, aerodynamics, and fit and finish. We now own a Cirrus purely because of the chute. If that 550 Continental decides to go quiet at the wrong time, by no bad choice we made, our odds of survival just increased dramatically. On the other hand we are flying our CTs in day VFR conditions and there are very few places we couldn't land safely In those conditions (Charlie Tango comes to mind, up in the mountains) and walk away unscathed. That said, if you have any doubt about a safe landing without power, do as the Cirrus crowd preaches "pull early and pull often". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted May 27, 2013 Report Share Posted May 27, 2013 That means there were a lot of bad flight choices by Cirrus pilots... Cirrus pilots certainly do NOT have a monopoly on "bad flight choices". Though, admittedly, they have their fair share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted May 27, 2013 Report Share Posted May 27, 2013 Two lessons from this, A chute can be a life saver in some situations - Counting on this too much can increase the number of these situations - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted May 27, 2013 Report Share Posted May 27, 2013 Hi Eddie, They (Cirrus) seem to have a fairly high incident rate compared to other aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted May 27, 2013 Report Share Posted May 27, 2013 Roger, I believe the total and fatal accident rates are currently on par with other similar planes. The rates have been much better recently. http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Cirrus_Safety_Record_Average_205914-1.html But that is damning by faint praise - with all the safety stuff they should be much better. The reason for this is hotly debated - but it's an interesting debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted May 27, 2013 Report Share Posted May 27, 2013 Hi Eddie, They (Cirrus) seem to have a fairly high incident rate compared to other aircraft. There seems to be a higher number during flight reviews. I have an opinion why this is, but I'll keep it to myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted May 28, 2013 Report Share Posted May 28, 2013 Unfortunately, the debate about the Cirrus accident rate is fueled by a bunch of old fogey types who've never come to grips with composite aircraft and modern conveniences. If I had a $1 for every time I've seen..."they don't learn to "really" fly... and count on the 'chute to save them"... Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chanik Posted June 4, 2013 Report Share Posted June 4, 2013 It is worth noting that the USAF has long had the same problem with ejections as Cirrus pilots do with CAPS. Attention lock-up and delayed handle pulls still kill many AF pilots that could and 'should' have safely ejected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted June 7, 2013 Report Share Posted June 7, 2013 Another save a couple days ago, this one in England... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-22798139 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 Another save a couple days ago, this one in England... http://www.bbc.co.uk...rshire-22798139 There's been a great deal of debate on various UK forums over this one - clearly if you look at the pictures, the engine was running when it finally hit the ground as all 3 blade tips are characteristically bent. As yet, no-one knows the full story, we all await the AAIB report with interest!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted June 8, 2013 Report Share Posted June 8, 2013 There's speculation that because the engine was running, the vertical descent speed may have been a bit higher, due to the chute not filling properly. We'll see... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.