Another Cirrus BRS deployment:

"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
...

There are less than perfect pilots. Some pilots need crutches. Without the
crutch, 4 people likely would have been seriously injured. The plane came
down amongst pine trees. Even if the crutch was for ineptitude, it was
still
a good thing.

What would happen if the BRS set the airplane down on an interstate highway?
On top of power lines? In a lake? Downtown in a highly populated urban
area?

Is it possible under these conditions that injuries could have occurred in a
BRS landing whereas conventionally handling the emergency could result in no
injuries?


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

What would happen if the BRS set the airplane down on an interstate highway?
On top of power lines? In a lake? Downtown in a highly populated urban
area?

Is it possible under these conditions that injuries could have occurred in a
BRS landing whereas conventionally handling the emergency could result in no
injuries?

Richard

It sounds like you are grasping at straw possibly to justify the non available
parachute in your P-210 ( a great a/c BTW)
I would rather take the chance of a less than perfect landing area on an
interstate or lake rather than slamming down on a field with unknown hazards.
Most off field landings are injury free, but too many result in serious injury.
Looking at the relative lack of airframe damage on the 3 successful Cirrus
incidents - (do you call them accidents or precautionary landings ? :.)
)contrasted to the broken heaps of metal normally seen in the newspapers ... I
would opt for the chute.
Think of descent at 15MPH sitting on seats designed to absorb 23G vs a fence
post, rockor tree at 70MPH.RE a lake landing under chute I think the odds are
pretty good that the airframe and occupant might be intact.
My personal fear is departing over a housing development and losing an engine
at low altitude and impacting something solid at 60-80 kt. I've told myself
that I WILL deploy the chute because even it only partially deploys, it will
act as a drogue and reduce the horizontal impact, hopefully, enough to survive.

I own a Cirrus - if you couldn't tell- with a chute, life raft & life vests.
Hopefully I'll never find out if anyone of them work

John

Landing on big high tension lines would probably cut the airplane up. As to the
Interstate and downtown, less damage would probably result than if the aircraft
hit the ground at some speed above stall.

Dave Reinhart


Richard Kaplan wrote:

"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
...

There are less than perfect pilots. Some pilots need crutches. Without the
crutch, 4 people likely would have been seriously injured. The plane came
down amongst pine trees. Even if the crutch was for ineptitude, it was
still
a good thing.

What would happen if the BRS set the airplane down on an interstate highway?
On top of power lines? In a lake? Downtown in a highly populated urban
area?

Is it possible under these conditions that injuries could have occurred in a
BRS landing whereas conventionally handling the emergency could result in no
injuries?

--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"David Reinhart" wrote in message
...

Landing on big high tension lines would probably cut the airplane up. As
to the
Interstate and downtown, less damage would probably result than if the
aircraft
hit the ground at some speed above stall.

Are you assuming traffic on the interstate?


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

What difference does it make if it's a "crutch for pilot error"? If the
error under discussion would have led to the deaths of the aircraft
occupants then pulling the chute was the right thing to do. Maybe the
pilot's training was inadequate to deal with the situation, maybe another
pilot in the same situation could have handled it. It doesn't matter.
The *pilot in command* decided his best option was to use the chute.

Somebody else said that most GA accidents are attributed to pilot error,
but that covers a lot of ground. Loss of control after vacuum failure in
actual IMC is, I believe, classed as pilot error because pilots are
supposed to be able to handle a partial panel situation. The vacuum
failure is usually listed as a contributing cause. The problem is, how
likely are you to recover after you've lost it while flying partial
panel? Having the chute would give you one final chance at saving the
people. To hell with the airplane.

Dave Reinhart


Ron Lee wrote:

Thomas, I love GPS. No way will VOR navigation be my primary method.
But let's get the facts about this parachute deployment and assess
whether it really saved four people from an otherwise certain
death...or was just a crutch for pilot error.

Ron Lee

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Jeeze, what is it with pilots and change? Anything new in GA is
bad-mouthed here - while at the same time everybody and his brother
complains about the old technology we have to use. You can't have it
both ways.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...

Jeeze, what is it with pilots and change? Anything new in GA is
bad-mouthed here - while at the same time everybody and his brother

No, "new" things are not bad-mouthed here; they are simply analyzed
critically, as they should be.

Technology is not "bad" just because it is "old".

Neither is technology "better" just because it is "new."

Analysis of the facts is helpful in all situations.


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com