![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"a" wrote in message
... -----massive clip because my reader didn't properly update the quotes---------- There is some data that suggests there are more fatalities in a Cirrus than a 172 when normalized for exposure (flight hours and the like) although the more directly competing airplane in terms of performance might be a 182 or a complex single. I have not seen data about that. The CAPS manufacture cites the deployed device will provide a descent rate of about 1600 fpm. Some point out a suitably configured sel might go down at 800 fpm, but the different that might be more important is the SEL will be flying at 50 or 70 MPH and that represents some energy that has to be turned to heat. Speaking of heat, someone may be able to reduce it and add light if they have data on serious accidents among airplanes with similar mission profiles -- my guess is the Cirrus mission might be more nearly like an complex SEL than a 172. -----------begin new post----------- IIRC, this subject came up and one of the contributors, possibly Ron, provided some data which he had made a considerable effort to filter in a usefull and not predjudicial way--and the difference in accident rates were not sufficiently great, between the Cirrus and other high performance singles, to be at all compelling--especially considering the small number of accidents in any type of aircraft during a given period. OTOH, my personal opinion is that a lot of it really comes down to the idea of pilots reducing themselves to passengers, as though in the back of one of those giant airline mailing tubes, simply riding along to the crash site after irrevocably turning control over to a mechanical device--in this case, the ballistic parachute. That's probably an acceptable concept for bureaucrats and desktop simmers; but seems to richly deserve a little "push back" from current and former fliers--from solo students to ATPs. Personally, I thnk I'd rather be out under a "real" parachute and not forced to crash flat on my fanny in the damned airplane... Just my $0.02 Peter |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Young Eagles + AvWeb | Montblack | Piloting | 28 | April 15th 06 12:07 AM |
Young Eagles Day & Fly-in at 47N | john price | Piloting | 0 | July 1st 04 04:33 AM |
Young Eagles Day & Fly-in at 47N | john price | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | July 1st 04 04:33 AM |
Young Eagles pilots | David Gunter | Piloting | 13 | January 16th 04 02:20 AM |
Young Eagles push (USA) | John H. Campbell | Soaring | 0 | September 22nd 03 03:48 PM |