Pulling the Chute

Here's the place for you to post videos and photos of your favorite airplane or most interesting flight. Commercial posts should go instead into the Want Ads forum.

Moderator: drseti

User avatar
drseti
Posts: 5855
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: Lock Haven PA
Contact:

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby drseti » Sun Sep 06, 2015 7:10 pm

CTLSi wrote:According to BRS, there have been 324 lives saved to date with their product,


I continue to argue this claim with Boris Popov, founder of BRS and in fact a great engineer, whenever I see him. I maintain that all he can assert is that 324 people have successfully descended under his canopies. Lives saved? You can only claim that if you can demonstrate that (1) all those people would have been fatalities without the chute, and (2) the plane would have been in the same place, doing the same thing, even if it hadn't been BRS equipped.
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, KLHV
fly@AvSport.org
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US

Wm.Ince
Posts: 729
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:27 pm
Location: Clearwater, FL

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby Wm.Ince » Sun Sep 06, 2015 8:21 pm

drseti wrote:. . ."I continue to argue this claim with Boris Popov, founder of BRS and in fact a great engineer, whenever I see him. I maintain that all he can assert is that 324 people have successfully descended under his canopies. Lives saved? You can only claim that if you can demonstrate that (1) all those people would have been fatalities without the chute, and (2) the plane would have been in the same place, doing the same thing, even if it hadn't been BRS equipped." . . .
Based upon that Paul . . . I'd say you are a better engineer! :D
Bill Ince
CTSW
Retired Heavy Equipment Operator

User avatar
drseti
Posts: 5855
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: Lock Haven PA
Contact:

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby drseti » Sun Sep 06, 2015 8:48 pm

Thanks, Bill, but you should put us both on equal footing. (Not my call; EAA's. Boris and I each received the EAA Safety Achievement Award, one year apart.)
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, KLHV
fly@AvSport.org
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US

Wm.Ince
Posts: 729
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:27 pm
Location: Clearwater, FL

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby Wm.Ince » Sun Sep 06, 2015 9:07 pm

drseti wrote:Thanks, Bill, but you should put us both on equal footing. (Not my call; EAA's. Boris and I each received the EAA Safety Achievement Award, one year apart.)
Very well deserved. . . . :)
Bill Ince
CTSW
Retired Heavy Equipment Operator

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1962
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby MrMorden » Sun Sep 06, 2015 9:30 pm

This topic comes up about once a year, and invariably is a long thread as everybody has an opinion (some very strong!) about parachute recovery systems.

My personal view is the same one shared by some close friends who do not have chutes in their airplanes. It comes down to "in an emergency, EFF THE AIRPLANE." It's just a motor vehicle, easily replaced. Do *whatever* you have to do to walk away, regardless of considerations about the airplane. The airplane has one function once the stuff hits the fan: to kill itself if necessary to protect the pilot and passenger(s).

In an engine out, my first thought is not going to be to pull the chute, unless at very low altitude. I'll set up an emergency landing at the best spot I can see, as we were all taught. HOWEVER, if at any time during the approach to landing a good outcome is in doubt, I'm pulling the red handle. That includes something as simple as a rougher landing surface than it appeared from higher up.

The statistical fact is that off airport landings have higher rates of fatalities and serious injuries than BRS pulls do. Rationally, then it is easily argued that we should *always* pull the chute before landing off-airport. But we are pilots, and we have to at least fight the good fight in piloting before resorting to becoming parachutists. ;)
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA

User avatar
drseti
Posts: 5855
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: Lock Haven PA
Contact:

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby drseti » Sun Sep 06, 2015 9:40 pm

I agree completely, Andy, that airplanes are expendable. The minute you fire them up, they no longer belong to you; you're just borrowing them from the insurance company. So, why try anything heroic just to save them money? If you have a chute, and a safe emergency landing is in question, then by all means use it. If you don't have a chute, do what you were trained to do -- preserve life and limb, and the aircraft be damned.

A completely separate question is whether you should choose to equip an LSA with a chute. If it comes with one standard, and you want that particular model, it's not a choice. If it doesn't come with one, and you want that particular model, it's also not a choice. It's only a question if the chute is optional, and then you have to balance payload against perceived safety. There's where it becomes a conundrum. There is no one right (or wrong) answer.
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, KLHV
fly@AvSport.org
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US

Nomore767
Posts: 899
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby Nomore767 » Sun Sep 06, 2015 11:46 pm

drseti wrote:I agree completely, Andy, that airplanes are expendable. The minute you fire them up, they no longer belong to you; you're just borrowing them from the insurance company. So, why try anything heroic just to save them money? If you have a chute, and a safe emergency landing is in question, then by all means use it. If you don't have a chute, do what you were trained to do -- preserve life and limb, and the aircraft be damned.

A completely separate question is whether you should choose to equip an LSA with a chute. If it comes with one standard, and you want that particular model, it's not a choice. If it doesn't come with one, and you want that particular model, it's also not a choice. It's only a question if the chute is optional, and then you have to balance payload against perceived safety. There's where it becomes a conundrum. There is no one right (or wrong) answer.


Paul,

There is a lot of wisdom in what you say.

"Perceived safety". I think you would agree that it's impossible to say that one LSA is 'safer' than another because it has a chute installed versus another that doesn't. Anymore than you could say having ADSB installed is 'safer' because it offers traffic awareness over a model without ADSB. Newer versus older LSA, low wing versus high wing, metal versus composite, Rotax versus Continental, tricycle gear versus tailwheel….. the list is potentially endless. How long is a piece of string?

Perhaps the one thing that we could all agree on is:-

"The best safety feature in any airplane is a well trained pilot".

3Dreaming
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:13 pm
Location: noble, IL USA

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby 3Dreaming » Mon Sep 07, 2015 9:11 am

CTLSi wrote:
3Dreaming wrote:
CTLSi wrote: • Loss of control/icing (component failure, icing induced or pilot error, IMC flight prohibited in all SLSA)
.


You might want to check your facts. The earlier SLSA were not prohibited from IMC, unless it specifically prohibits it in the AOI (POH). For later aircraft it is required to prohibit IMC in the AOI. I think the cut off date was April 2010, but I could have the date wrong.


You are behind. ASTM Votes To Prohibit SLSA in IMC http://tinyurl.com/qbxl55d

No SLSA manufacturer will cross the ASTM. Including Vans http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/revisio ... ls/POH.pdf


Did you look at the time stamp on the article you posted? It was "This entry was posted on Thursday, September 9th, 2010 at 12:00 am", there were quite a few SLSA built between 2005 and 2010.

You are correct that now any new SLSA can not be flown in IMC, but that has not always been the case as I explained before. Any SLSA built before the prohibition of IMC by the ASTM can be flown in IMC if it is not prohibited in the AOI, and it is approved on the operating limitations that go with the airworthiness certificate.

User avatar
designrs
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 9:57 pm

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby designrs » Mon Sep 07, 2015 9:54 am

My SportCruiser is equipped with a chute. I've flown others without a chute and did not feel vulnerable. Overall, I'm glad that the chute is there... especially for the clearly "best to pull situations".

Key points compared to Cirrus pulls:
1) lower kinetic crash energy of LSA (greater chance of off-field or controlled crash survival)
2) Cirrus has "egg crate" seats to absorb energy reducing chances of spinal injury... most LSA's don't.
3) Cirrus has many chute pulls on record. Chute performance and rate of survivability are known. Most LSA's do not have actual chute pulls to study. There are many unknowns.

CTLSi
Posts: 783
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:38 pm

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby CTLSi » Mon Sep 07, 2015 12:17 pm

The Flight Design CTLS has spine protecting force absorbing seats and an 'egg' similar to modern car designs. The cabin remains stable while the energy is absorbed in peripheral areas.

No SLSA has lightning or ice protection. Flying in IMC is ill-advised even if the POH doesn't specifically prohibit it.

Nomore767
Posts: 899
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby Nomore767 » Mon Sep 07, 2015 12:24 pm

CTLSi wrote:The Flight Design CTLS has spine protecting force absorbing seats and an 'egg' similar to modern car designs. The cabin remains stable while the energy is absorbed in peripheral areas.

No SLSA has lightning or ice protection. Flying in IMC is ill-advised even if the POH doesn't specifically prohibit it.


Apart from stating the obvious and quoting the brochure…what has this to do with the topic?

User avatar
drseti
Posts: 5855
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: Lock Haven PA
Contact:

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby drseti » Mon Sep 07, 2015 12:28 pm

CTLSi wrote:No SLSA has lightning or ice protection. Flying in IMC is ill-advised even if the POH doesn't specifically prohibit it.


Remember that IMC comes in various flavors. I've flown many an IFR-approved certified aircraft that had neither icing nor lightning protection. They're perfectly safe in what I call benign IMC. You just don't fly them when and where icing or lightning are present!
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, KLHV
fly@AvSport.org
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US

SportPilot
Posts: 1060
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 3:39 pm

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby SportPilot » Mon Sep 07, 2015 12:37 pm

.......
Last edited by SportPilot on Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Nomore767
Posts: 899
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby Nomore767 » Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:06 pm

Sport flying is ALL about day VFR, in good to great weather. LSAs are designed and built to meet this area of flying.

If you're only a sport pilot but you want to fly IFR in IMC then you need to upgrade your license and ratings and move up to the appropriate level of airplane.

For myself sport flying is just fine. My days of flying night freight in icing and bad weather, or at the airline where we were struck by lighting several times, once blowing a hole in the nose cone, are behind me.

If you're a sport pilot and you stray into IMC, or are still airborne at night, or some other difficulty beyond the limitations of yourself and/or the airplane AND you have a chute…that is probably the time to pull and say a prayer. Or you could err on the side of prudence and stick to the limitations of sport flying and conservatively stay on the ground till things improve. Its what I try to do these days.

CTLSi
Posts: 783
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:38 pm

Re: Pulling the Chute

Postby CTLSi » Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:40 pm

Nomore767 wrote:Sport flying is ALL about day VFR, in good to great weather. LSAs are designed and built to meet this area of flying.

If you're only a sport pilot but you want to fly IFR in IMC then you need to upgrade your license and ratings and move up to the appropriate level of airplane.

For myself sport flying is just fine. My days of flying night freight in icing and bad weather, or at the airline where we were struck by lighting several times, once blowing a hole in the nose cone, are behind me.

If you're a sport pilot and you stray into IMC, or are still airborne at night, or some other difficulty beyond the limitations of yourself and/or the airplane AND you have a chute…that is probably the time to pull and say a prayer. Or you could err on the side of prudence and stick to the limitations of sport flying and conservatively stay on the ground till things improve. Its what I try to do these days.

Since a little confusion exists let's get more acquainted.

I am a private pilot and am about 30 days away from my instrument checkride (I was never a sport pilot). I have several hours in dual-IMC flight.

I have 200 plus hours in an FD CTLSi equipped with dual Dynon Skyviews, ADS-B, Mode S XPNDR (TIS-TCAS), and a BRS chute which I own. I also have time in a Zenith CH650 & 750 STOL, Lancair ES, Cessna 172 & 182, Cirrus SR22 equipped with deicing, lightning protection...

My next plane is the Lancair ES-P, pressurized with Garmin G3x touch, Garmin GTN750, an all-airframe BRS chute, deicing, and a top cruise of 225ktas @ FL250 (should be ready early next year).

But the subject is the safety offered by an all-airframe parachute...and apparently somewhat on the subject of SLSA and IMC. I think my commentary stands on it's own...
Last edited by CTLSi on Mon Sep 07, 2015 10:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Eye Candy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests