Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
By Nick
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1644934
@Iceman Ah yes, I forgot about that one Ice, I think he got caught out in turbulence off the mountain..... I don't recall pages of rhetoric though :twisted:

My reasons for not opting for the BRS @Miscellaneous Misc.

1. Were that I reasoned that in a normal engine failure I would be better off being able to retain control and glide to a forced landing, so probably I would not use it. Yes over hostile terrain this may not be quite so straight foreword.

2. In a midair it would be very useful, if you were conscious and able to deploy it. But the most likely place for a midair would be in the circuit and therefore the height involved may not be enough for a successful deployment. (The Cirrus deployments seem to contradict this though)

3. It takes up some of the baggage space, as I like to tour with my aeroplane I didn't want to lose any space.

With all the above points carefully considered I decided against it.

Nick
User avatar
By MichaelP
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1644954
I flew in a Cessna 172S fitted with a ballistic chute.
45lbs in the baggage bay meaning the aeroplane while being a better spin trainer is no longer allowed to do spins
The owner wears a helmet as well; from his microlight days. You can’t be too careful.

I have written on here before about flying the BRS equipped ATEC Zephyr from Mogolon in Arizona.
The terrain was rocky, and the wind was strong. Deploying the chute here would mean getting hurt.

The chute is a safety aid, but must be used intelligently.

It should never be allowed to affect Pilot Decision Making by allowing greater risks to be taken.

Chute or not I would never take off from Kelowna to fly to Cranbrook at night with a reported 8,000 foot cloud base enroute. Many of the rocks have much higher elevations.
I would never take off from Kamloops at night into known icing to fly IFR over the mountains back to Boundary Bay even though you have the weeping wings, and chute.

I suspect that the PDM was influenced by the safety features of the Cirrus.

Comes down to discipline I suppose.
By Nick
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1644961
Paul_Sengupta wrote:Out of interest, how much did the option cost?


Hi Paul, At the time 2014 I think it was somewhere in the region of £3000 plus VAT if I remember correctly.

Nick
User avatar
By Jonzarno
#1644979
The terrain was rocky, and the wind was strong. Deploying the chute here would mean getting hurt.


There was actually a CAPS save in similar conditions in which all on board survived uninjured.

From the COPA CAPS history:

CAPS event #23, May 2010, Sirdal, Norway (CAPS Save #19)
4 uninjured; Factors: icing induced high-speed descent followed by parachute activation, Activation: high altitude, 6,000 feet; Weather: VMC; Landing: uneven rocky terrain

The chute is a safety aid, but must be used intelligently.

It should never be allowed to affect Pilot Decision Making by allowing greater risks to be taken.


That is quite right. BRS should never be used as an excuse for taking on a flight that is by its very nature inherently silly. The examples quoted are good ones and, although I’d use a FIKI Cirrus briefly in known icing, I would definitely not stay there nor use the FIKI capability to justify a flight over hostile terrain in forecast icing without a clear escape route if I needed it.

What CAPS does allow me to do is to undertake flights that others do routinely in non-BRS aircraft but which I wouldn’t. For example, I remember doing my night rating in a Robin and wondering just where and how I would do a forced landing if I lost the engine. The oft-quoted advice of: “aim at the darkest bit” doesn’t really appeal!

My choice is that, whilst I’m happy to fly my SR22 at night, I wouldn’t happily fly a non BRS equipped aircraft in those conditions. I don’t think that is unreasonable as my decision to pull if I lost the engine or had some other major airworthiness problem would be the same day or night.
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1644989
I recall seeing on youtube an aeroplane (might have been a Cirrus) descending slowly under a parachute after a midair: The engine was on fire and pouring smoke and the parachute cords had entangled the tail and the a/c was dangling steeply nose-down.

IIRC the pilot/pax were severely burned/ aspyxiated and may even have succumbed.

Peter
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1645004
Yep That’s the one Didn’t know pilot was killed by the impact . Prolly just as well better than being slowly barbecued/smoked alive .Interestingly the coroner reported cause of death was due to ‘multiple injuries due to mid air collision andsubsequent ground impact,’ so I guess the autopsy must have found smoke inhalation damage to lungs.
Have searched for but can’t find the video which was pretty grim .

Peter
Edit: found it:

The Admin Team: The video is indeed pretty grim. So I have deleted the link to it.

I’m not sure that I agree with this deletion However on the train set principle there’s nowt I can do about it.However those who wish to see the video can Google Cirrus descending under parachute after mid air collision
Last edited by PeteSpencer on Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
By stevelup
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1645007
I read a narrative at the time that suggested the poor chap would almost certainly have at least been unconscious immediately. I guess no-one knows for sure.

But I think it's clear that this would not have been a chute save even if it wasn't for the fire.

The fire just made it all the more horrible.
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1645016
Nick wrote:1. ...Yes over hostile terrain this may not be quite so straight foreword.

2. ...(The Cirrus deployments seem to contradict this though)

3. It takes up some of the baggage space, as I like to tour with my aeroplane I didn't want to lose any space.

Interesting Nick, thanks.

Given one and two are subjective and you acknowledge a possible value in having a chute in these scenarios, would you change your decision if you were building again?

You don't mention loss of payload, is it taken as a given that is integral to the loss of baggage space consideration?

Did the cost have any bearing on your decision?
By Nick
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1645068
No I would do the same again. Loss of both space and payload would affect my decision, but if building a microlight the extra weight allowance for the chute can be an advantage. If you are building a new aeroplane, then the cost of a BRS is not a great deal when looking at all the other insignificant bits and pieces and, how they add up. Better to spend it on a Power Flarm Core and have change! :evil: :wink:
Eventually you end up with a aeroplane tailored to just how you want it, so it is worth spending the time and effort thinking about what you would like. The odd pint of beer helps the thought process. :wink:

Nick

Edited to add. I enjoy the building, and the planning is part of that process, but the feeling of pride and enjoyment when it takes to the air I find hard to put into words.
Every time I fly I remind myself just how fortunate I am to be able to do it. I also like to share it with others who are less fortunate. :thumright: :thumleft:
Flyin'Dutch' liked this
User avatar
By Full Metal Jackass
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1645706
Flintstone wrote:As for Cirrus deaths -v- other light aircraft let’s have that conversation when there have been as many forced landings to be able to make a meaningful assessment.

The fact remains that the moment the pilot pulls the handle on a system of this nature he/she is no longer in control and the salvage is going to come down where the wind takes it. Does it have to get any closer than this to prove that point?


We get it, Flintstone. To you, anyone who pulls the chute is a loser, not a true pilot, incompetent and willing to risk the lives of others. Well, just this morning I received a tweet about a C182 accident where the engine failed and both occupants were killed during a failed attempt at an emergency landing. You know, I'd rather be ridiculed by you and alive than attempt to land after an engine failure and thereby kill both myself and my passengers.

Oh, yes when a Cirrus descends under a chute, injuring innocent bystanders in the process, then you can tell me 'told you so'.

Snip. Unnecessary - Ian

:D :D :D
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11