Why does it have to be so black and white? Those who want to pull, just pull. No one is stopping you. You are the pilot in command ! Do whatever you feel is necessary to save your a$$.
Buuut, pulling a chute in a perfectly well operational small little glider is not exactly the mark of an Aviator 
It’s a bit difficult to brag about your flying skills after such an event.
Seriously, deep down I think this is how we all feel about it, and nothing will change that. Loosing a wing, unrecoverable spin or any other event that with certainty will kill you, is another matter entirely 
The statements here about slow flight characteristics are simply not true.
Newer Cirrus aircraft have a cuffed wing.
From: http://whycirrus.com/engineering/stall-spin.aspx
Spin Prevention
Cirrus chose, in the very earliest stages of designing the SR20 to take on the challenge: to minimize the risks associated with inadvertently stalling an airplane. The approach chosen was to employ wing technology developed by NASA reducing the potential for spin entry after an inadvertent stall. The most visible aspect is the discontinuous leading edge dividing the wing into distinct parts.
…
How does this wing design work?
The outboard section of the Cirrus wing flies with a lower angle of attack than the inboard section. When the inboard section, which produces much of the lift, stalls the outboard section, where the ailerons are, is still flying. The result is that a stalled Cirrus airplane can be controlled intuitively using aileron.
lenthamen wrote:
The outboard section of the Cirrus wing flies with a lower angle of attack than the inboard section. When the inboard section, which produces much of the lift, stalls the outboard section, where the ailerons are, is still flying. The result is that a stalled Cirrus airplane can be controlled intuitively using aileron.
That’s called washout, and has been a design feature long before NASA ever existed. Take a closer look at any Cessna for instance.
LeSving wrote:
Buuut, pulling a chute in a perfectly well operational small little glider is not exactly the mark of an Aviator It’s a bit difficult to brag about your flying skills after such an event.Seriously, deep down I think this is how we all feel about it, and nothing will change that.
Making the right decision is the mark of an aviator in my eye. Its a bit difficult to brag if you die.
And I’m not sure if you seriously think you know how we all feel. But let me assure you that you are wrong. That is NOT how I feel, and I bet i’m not the only one.
But let me assure you that you are wrong.
Why get personal?
Making the right decision is the mark of an aviator in my eye.
Agree!
Cirrus offers a chute. They are by far the most successful ga manufacturer currently. The chute is their major USP. One can (not must) use it.
To conclude: it’s better to have the option of a chute and still pulling of a successful off field landing than not having the chute while descending towards unforgiving terrain with a failed engine.
Snoopy wrote:
Agree!Cirrus offers a chute. They are by far the most successful ga manufacturer currently. The chute is their major USP. One can (not must) use it.
To conclude: it’s better to have the option of a chute and still pulling of a successful off field landing than not having the chute while descending towards unforgiving terrain with a failed engine.
Agree too. It is the same about a thing like autopilot use. A constant argument that real pilots don’t pull a chute or use their autopilot. It is ridiculous and is clearly a form of harking back to the good old days when we all had radial engines and lots of people died. Cirrus’ success is not just luck or marketing. Pilots like the chute.
LeSving wrote:
That’s called washout, and has been a design feature long before NASA ever existed. Take a closer look at any Cessna for instance.
A guy I know was once young (about 20 at the time) and wanted the fastest sport plane he could design. So as his second homebuilt project he designed a plane (called the Whisper) minus any washout at all – because a wing running at multiple L/D ratios is a little less efficient. To hear him tell the story of the resulting stall characteristics is fun, and needless to say he rapidly built a replacement wing with some added washout. The Whisper is still flying, rebuilt at least one additional time and out there somewhere, so reverting to tried and true seemed to work.
Partial span slots on Stinsons etc also work well for the same purpose.
tomw wrote:
Making the right decision is the mark of an aviator in my eye. Its a bit difficult to brag if you die.
Hence:
LeSving wrote:
Those who want to pull, just pull. No one is stopping you. You are the pilot in command ! Do whatever you feel is necessary to save your a$$.
It may very well be the “right” decision, you will never know for sure because you cannot chose both at the same time and compare the results. But it is your decision as PIC.
Let’s look at it differently. The engine stops at 10k feet and you have at least one 3 km runway within gliding range. Would you still pull the chute? If the answer is yes, then the confidence in your own ability as a pilot is severely lacking to the point of ridiculous IMO. Every pilot flying a SEP should be able to pinpoint a dead stick landing without a sweat.
I fly with a lot with a BRS, but never has it occurred to me that a BRS is always the one and only option, the option that guarantees success. If I can, I would rather be in control all the way to the ground than chose to let go for no reason whatsoever.
To hear him tell the story of the resulting stall characteristics is fun
Off topic but… A friend of mine had a Yak-54, a plane the Russians designed purely and solely for competition acro to take on the Extra 300 etc. It had 100% symmetric aerofoils with no washout or dihedral or sweep. It stalled and recovered just fine. But trying to turn with rudder only was… interesting. You put in gentle right rudder and it would start to yaw right. But then instead of rolling gently into the turn, as my 182 does, it would suddenly and instantly flip itself upside down to the left. Makes sense when you analyse it, the rudder is providing a torque to the left, and with no dihedral there is nothing to counter it. But it is still quite a shock the first time. (No, I don’t normally turn that way, my friend told me to try it).
It also wants desperately to snap roll. Anything you try to do will likely end up as one. Straight and level flight, look at it the wrong way… snap!
I don’t know how much of this is JUST due to the wing design. It is certainly “entertaining” to fly.
