I also would use the chute when having severe technical difficulties flying at night, in solid IMC and in remote areas.
But for me, the most important advantage is when flying with family they have a safe way out, in case I would be incapacitated. Otherwise, realistically, they haven’t.
I am all with @Pilot_DAR here. My own flying experience, the statistics, the laws of physics and the accidents I have seen around me in all my flying years support his views.
As I think about it, I would imagine that pulling the ’chute in a Cirrus anywhere near “people” on the ground risks violation of a number of regulations:
In Canada:
(2) Except at an airport, heliport or military aerodrome, no person shall conduct a take-off, approach or landing in an aircraft over a built-up area or over an open-air assembly of persons, in a manner that is likely to create a hazard to persons or property.Quote
(3) Except at an airport, heliport or military aerodrome, no person shall conduct a take-off, approach or landing in an aircraft over a built-up area or over an open-air assembly of persons unless that aircraft will be operated at an altitude from which, in the event of an engine failure or any other emergency necessitating an immediate landing, the aircraft can land without creating a hazard to persons or property.Quote
no person shall operate an aircraft
• (a) over a built-up area or over an open-air assembly of persons unless the aircraft is operated at an altitude from which, in the event of an emergency necessitating an immediate landing, it would be possible to land the aircraft without creating a hazard to persons or property on the surface,……….
Quote
And,
No person shall create a hazard to persons or property on the surface by dropping an object from an aircraft in flight.Quote
All of these regulations are intended to protect innocent people on the ground. A person who is descending by parachute has reasonable control of their path to prevent a collision with a person on the ground. A Cirrus is the only civilian thing I can think of which is capable of being “deployed” for an uncontrolled landing, by a perhaps modestly trained civilian person.
I’ve done a lot of flight testing in airplanes with towed external loads. Over the years, we’ve lost three. We are very careful to assure that our routes never create a risk to people or property on the surface. I think that Cirrus pilot owe the same responsibility to innocent people on the ground. To me, that means, that if there is a risk of hitting someone on the ground, the pilot must maintain control of the airplane as much as possible so as to actively prevent a collision with a person.
Yes, I know that a pilot in Portugal a few years back, landed on a beach and killed people on the beach. The pilot had the choice of splashing the plane into the ocean, and not risking people on the beach, and is also responsible, in my opinion. To me, a Cirrus pilot who drifted onto a crowded beach under a ’chute, would be as guilty as a pilot who landed by choice onto that beach, were someone to be injured.
So, should I ever find myself flying a Cirrus, I would not pull the ‘chute, unless I’m nowhere near another person, and a horizontal landing would be impossible.
Let me offer you a choice: I have 2 sets of 100 cards to choose from. In the first deck of 100, 99 of them give you €1000. The other 1 requires you to commit suicide, that all passengers are injured or killed. In the second set of cards, all 100 cards offer you €1000. Which set are you going to draw from?
Set 1 is electing to fly a dead stick landing when you have the chute option available, set 2 is pulling the chute. Why would you choose to pull from Deck 1 when, as long as the chute was deployed within defined parameters, no-one has been killed or seriously injured? Whereas the forum are awash with plenty of pilots who die because they either didn’t have the option of pulling the chute or they had the option and their dead stick skills came up lacking. It’s the reason the mantra ‘pull early, pull often’ was borne. A well respected, competent, capable and current Cirrus pilot died because he tried to land his stricken craft.
Don’t kid yourself for one moment about “I’m current, my choice of landing field from xxxx feet AGL is always perfect” because I can tell you you’re wrong. That billiard table like field from 2000 feet up could be rutted with grooves and electrical wires for sheep pens or whatever; these you won’t see until you get close. Not only that, out of experience I’ve seen that maybe 99% of practice forced landings go well, but can you be sure that when it comes down to it, you won’t draw that card which means you chose the wrong field, approached with wrong speed / altitude and crashed, injuring or killing yourself / others in the plane?
Please don’t kid yourself on a forced landing you’re not going to hit anyone whereas because with a Cirrus under the chute, you have no control hence you will likely hit someone. Agreed, you have ZERO control under a chute but the noise of a rocket going off, the chute unfolding and the aircraft descending is something people NOTICE. And not ONCE has anyone outside of a Cirrus descending under CAPS been injured. Not once. But there are instances of innocent bystanders being injured, killed even, by a pilot making a dead stick landing. I recall the story of a C172 dead sticking onto a beach, hitting and killing a little girl and father.
And finally, let’s talk physics. Those 6 inch wheels you land on. The likelihood is that the field you will land on isn’t perfectly smooth, it could be rutted. Those wheels could dig in, flipping you. What’s the speed for a P28A on short final? 70 knots? What’s the speed of a Cirrus under the chute? Wind speed. 5 – 10 knots. Maybe more. Agreed, the vertical descent rate is higher but the Cirrus is designed to take those loads; more importantly, the issue is when those little wheels do dig in, when the aircraft flips, it has more energy to dissipate, significantly more, because of the higher speed?
I’m saying this because choosing the chute as your option shouldn’t be viewed as the bad choice, the choice of losers, but as the smart choice. The only time I wouldn’t pull the chute was if I was directly about an international airport. Anything else means I’m drawing a card from deck 1. And the question is: Do I feel lucky?
Maybe every Cirrus should have a big sounding horn that is directed downwards to warn anyone below that an aircraft is about to land on them. ;)
Fly310 wrote:
Maybe every Cirrus should have a big sounding horn that is directed downwards to warn anyone below that a aircraft is about to land on them. ;)
Maybe every aircraft should have them except Cirrus because:
“not ONCE has anyone outside of a Cirrus descending under CAPS been injured. Not once. But there are instances of innocent bystanders being injured, killed even, by a pilot making a dead stick landing. I recall the story of a C172 dead sticking onto a beach, hitting and killing a little girl and father.”
The noise of a CAPS rocket going off is something you WON’T miss, even if you’re deaf. It is LOUD. It’s why you have videos of Cirrus aircraft descending under CAPS. Because people hear them. An aircraft gliding to earth with no engine is just that – a glider. And if he’s flying correctly, he’s landing INTO the wind so any noise would be drawn away from the direction of landing…..
Steve6443 wrote:
And not ONCE has anyone outside of a Cirrus descending under CAPS been injured. Not once.
Well, at least once:
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/230098
Steve6443 wrote:
I’m saying this because choosing the chute as your option shouldn’t be viewed as the bad choice, the choice of losers, but as the smart choice.
And to each their opinion, though mine is very different…
Yes, there have been many situations where an airplane has crashed into innocent people on the ground. Some could have been prevented by better piloting, more could have been prevented by better pilot decisions earlier into the flight. One of those decisions, whether piloting a Cirrus, or an aircraft which must be flown to a landing will always be, am I approaching an area where there is increased risk of my landing on someone if it quits? If so, what’s my plan to assure the safety of the people on the ground. You can decide if you feel lucky, but you have no right to decide if they feel lucky not to be landed upon by an unexpected object descending with the wind.
I can’t argue against a parachute sometimes being the better choice for a safer descent, but I can always argue that a pilot who chose to fly has no right to increase risk to people on the ground because they chose to fly. Yes, a plane may be damaged in a forced landing, but it is designed to be force landed, and provide occupant safety when kept under control. Yes, a rough surface may rip off the landing gear, a pilot may choose to fly from one suitable landing site to the next, and I have, when I’ve flown an airplane with an engine I do not trust. After 25 years, my neighbour plowed up the field off the end of my runway. Her property, she can plow the field if she wishes. It just became a much less desirable EFATO field – my problem, and I can choose not to fly if I think the risk is too high. But I’m not going to now aim at her house, because her lawn is more smooth, I’ll still take the field, and make the best of it.
Steve6443 wrote:
The noise of a CAPS rocket going off is something you WON’T miss, even if you’re deaf. It is LOUD. It’s why you have videos of Cirrus aircraft descending under CAPS. Because people hear them. An aircraft gliding to earth with no engine is just that – a glider. And if he’s flying correctly, he’s landing INTO the wind so any noise would be drawn away from the direction of landing…..
???
A person hears the sound, and makes a video recording? ’Doesn’t mean that everyone else in the danger area heard and understood the sound. ’Doesn’t mean they are able to get out of the way of a gliding path they cannot figure out…
I see too many people wandering around with music in their ears to ever expect that someone will assure their own safety because they heard a bang…
Simply put, pilots have no right to drop things on, or near people.
I do not see how crashing 20 seconds after take off would be an example of deploying within defined parameters. You need 500 or 600 AGL depending on which Cirrus generation AC you fly for CAPS to “become active”.
Cirrus and COPA offer fantastic training programs and CAPS is a real option and a true life saver in many scenarios.
@pilot_DAR you’re of course entitled to your own opinion and everyone seems to have very strong views on Cirrus, but the data is hard to argue against (I don’t fly a Cirrus!)
