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

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message Are you assuming traffic on the
interstate?

Every situation is different. On a sunny day with light traffic, it probably
wouldn't make much difference. However, on the day in question, it would
have been hard to find the interstate as forward visibilty was restricted.
Additionally, the ceiling was low. The pilot wouldn't have had much time to
manuever to avoid the traffic and the traffic wouldn't have had much time to
react once the pilot sighted the interstate. Wet pavement would increase
stopping distances.

More options equals better risk management. In this specific incident, the
occupants would likely have been severly injured or killed if the plane had
forward motion when it encountered the pine trees.

D.

"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
...

More options equals better risk management. In this specific incident, the
occupants would likely have been severly injured or killed if the plane
had
forward motion when it encountered the pine trees.

There may well be advantages from a BRS, including a softer landing on pine
trees

I do not, however, believe that the occupants would likely have been
severely injured or killed if the plane had forward motion when it
encountered pine trees. It is quite common for airplanes to land on trees
and then the occupants walk away unharmed; the pilot needs to keep flying
the airplane all the way until touchdown and he also needs to land into the
wind.


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

www.flyimc.com

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 15:34:25 GMT, "Richard Kaplan"
wrote:

I do not, however, believe that the occupants would likely have been
severely injured or killed if the plane had forward motion when it
encountered pine trees. It is quite common for airplanes to land on trees
and then the occupants walk away unharmed; the pilot needs to keep flying
the airplane all the way until touchdown and he also needs to land into the
wind.

It is also quite common for a landing in trees to be fatal. I
believe that the experts would disagree with you about landing in
trees.

Here in Western Oregon we have more fir trees than pine trees but I
would always choose to use the BRS rather than execute a forced
landing in the trees.

I was skeptical about airbags in autos, but I've been convinced of
their effectiveness. I was also skeptical of the BRS but I'm becoming
convinced of their effectiveness.

Did you also acuse pilots of flying carelessly once they had seat
belts?

- John Ousterhout -

"John Ousterhout"
wrote in message ...


I was skeptical about airbags in autos, but I've been convinced of
their effectiveness. I was also skeptical of the BRS but I'm becoming
convinced of their effectiveness.

Did you also acuse pilots of flying carelessly once they had seat
belts?

Actually, (IIRC), there was a surge in people thinking themselves invincible
when seatbelts started becoming commonplace in cars (1960's).

Same thing with St. Christopher medals, I'd imagine. :~)

Richard

Come to Houston. We run stop and stop on our InterStates and Freeways
in town. Verticl impact would be greater than horizontal from traffic
probably?

Big John

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 04:58:10 GMT, "Richard Kaplan"
wrote:



"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