Cirrus chute deployment -- an incredible story

Are we sure this is real? Perhaps it is simply a typing error but you
would think someone familiar with his SR22 would realize it had an
Avidyne system and not Garmin.

Mike

You would think someone familiar with the Avidyne system would realize that
it is NOT a GPS, but an MFD. And someone familiar with the Cirrus line
would know that they ship with two Garmin GNS430's plus the Avidyne MFD,
plus the Avidyne PFD if it's a newer Cirrus.
The post was riveting. It's rare to hear a full report in the pilot's
own words and not just in quotes or [worse] sound bites.

Conspiracy theories are all around us.
CJS


"Mike Long" wrote in message
oups.com...
Are we sure this is real? Perhaps it is simply a typing error but you
would think someone familiar with his SR22 would realize it had an
Avidyne system and not Garmin.

Mike

On 7/5/05 3:14 PM, in article
, "Michael182/G"
spewed:


Each pilot has to establish and evaluate their own risk assessment criteria,
but for me something that has a greater than 50% risk of death, even if
only 1% of the time, is an unacceptable risk. That's why I bought a
Cirrus in the first place.


While I'm glad this guy made it down relatively safely, I have to wonder
about this statement. It seems that I'm taking a greater risk than I thought
when I started this flying stuff. Is my death actually greater than 50%, 1%
of the time? I'm no math Wiz by any stretch of the imagination, but at ~300
hours, I seem to be living on borrowed time.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

I think you are right to question the statement. They're numbers taken out
of context. I think it would have been better for him to simply say that he
invested in a BRS to increase the odds of survival. If and when to deploy is
debatable. What is not debatable is that having the chute gives you more
options than not having it.

Anyone else think that two-weeks for that amount of work at the "regular
50-hour inspection" was a lot? I can understand the broken shear coupling.
Probably a manufacturing defect despite FAA certification. Who would have
thought! But a fuel sender and a new gauge? Is there a recall on them or
something? Otherwise, it sounds like the A/P was fishing for a solution or
money.

Kudos to the pilot. He survived without causing injury except to himself or
damage except to his own plane. I think he did the right thing only because
I have no way to second guess him.

What a marketing challenge for Cirrus. People debate the value and emotions
of having the parachutes. People debate the value of using the parachutes
whether the pilot chooses to launch them or not. People debate whether lives
were saved by the chute or if they would have survived anyway. What a mess.

Only those that overcome the emotions and decide to give themselves one last
out will ever benefit. Only those who have faced disaster and pulled the
cord rather than roll the dice can truly understand.

-------------------------------
Travis

"Wizard of Draws" wrote in
message news:BEF0A6D7.7EB5A%jeffbTAKEOUTALLCAPS@TOEMAILwiz ardofdraws.com...
On 7/5/05 3:14 PM, in article
, "Michael182/G"
spewed:


Each pilot has to establish and evaluate their own risk assessment
criteria,
but for me something that has a greater than 50% risk of death, even if
only 1% of the time, is an unacceptable risk. That's why I bought a
Cirrus in the first place.


While I'm glad this guy made it down relatively safely, I have to wonder
about this statement. It seems that I'm taking a greater risk than I
thought
when I started this flying stuff. Is my death actually greater than 50%,
1%
of the time? I'm no math Wiz by any stretch of the imagination, but at
~300
hours, I seem to be living on borrowed time.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

Travis,

People debate


Ah, no, it's just us Usenet guys ;-) That's not "people". "People" are
buying Cirrii like crazy. That's what people do.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thanks for taking the time to share your story. Lots of food for
thought. I can identify with the "so this is how it ends" moment. Had
one a few years back when I had a hold of 480 volts.
--
Gene Seibel
Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

Michael182/G wrote:

Don't fly a single engine plane that isn't equipped with a
parachute. Although the chances of actually encountering an emergency
situation that is worthy of "pulling the chute" are probably small
to infinitesimal over the course of any given pilot's career, the
penalty for not having a parachute is almost certain death. Each pilot
has to establish and evaluate their own risk assessment criteria, but
for me something that has a greater than 50% risk of death, even if
only 1% of the time, is an unacceptable risk. That's why I bought a
Cirrus in the first place.

Utter horse****, and destructive horse**** at that. Now I have
"semiknowledgable" people telling me that clearly you must get an airplane
with a parachute to be safe. Guess what. Airplanes still fly unless you
rip the wings off. Certainly LOC (Loss of Control) followed by CFIT
is real, but its..... Still...... Pilot..... Error.......

Just stop.

Scott Moore wrote:

Utter horse****, and destructive horse**** at that. Now I have
"semiknowledgable" people telling me that clearly you must get an airplane
with a parachute to be safe.

To be fair, you should indicate that you are responding to the Cirrus
accident pilot, not Michael 182. Michael was merely re-posting the story
for this newsgroup's benefit, but the method in which you quoted the
article makes it appear as if you are replying to Michael.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----