Another SR22

There was a case last year IIRC where a Cirrus popped the chute
because it was all iced up. The guy even filed a PIREP on the way
down...

On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:11:40 GMT, "BDS" wrote:

There was a blurb in the latest IFR magazine saying that the passengers of a
Cirrus were saved when they pulled the chute after the pilot had a stroke.

There might be more to it than slick marketing after all. I bet those
passengers think so anyway.

BDS


"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Gwengler,

You may have a point here which supports my initial theory that just
having an additional safety feature does not necessarily make an
airplane safer.


I agree. And the Cirrus stuff is, of course, marketing. Clever
marketing.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Mxsmanic wrote:
What they overlook is that the systems don't change the minimum
stopping distances--they just help ensure that those minimums are
achievable. If the car can't stop
before hitting the tree, antiskid braking won't help.


You're half right here. It's true ABS won't shorten stopping distances,
unless you can singlehandedly alter physics. What it does do is allow
you to maintain steering control while in a panic stop by not locking
up the wheels

On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:56:50 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in :


Does the POH mention when it may be appropriate to deploy the 'chute?
I thought it was for use in spin recovery.


From the manual

[excerpt deleted]

Thank you.

What does the POH say about CAPS deployment for spin recovery?

"Kingfish" wrote in message
ups.com...
You're half right here. It's true ABS won't shorten stopping distances,
unless you can singlehandedly alter physics. What it does do is allow
you to maintain steering control while in a panic stop by not locking
up the wheels

Actually, depending on the conditions, having ABS allows the maximum
available braking performance to actually be achieved. Few drivers (or
pilots) are actually capable of using the brakes to maximum effectiveness
without ABS. They either don't brake hard enough, or they brake so hard
that the wheels lock up and lose control.

You're right that it's also useful (and IMHO most important, as far as ABS
features go) to be able to maintain steering control. But ABS also can
allow for nearly maximal performance during braking as well.

So while ABS doesn't change the *theoretical* minimum stopping distance, it
does change the practical minimum stopping distance for most drivers.

Pete

"Kingfish" wrote in message
oups.com...

Terry wrote:
What's with the SR22 crashes? Another one went down Arizona yesterday.

I doubt there's any more of them crashing than Pipers or Cessnas. They
do seem to make more of a stir when they do because of the national
attention focused on them. Now that Cirrus has overtaken Cessna in
production the fleet is getting larger fairly quickly.


The size of the Cirrus fleet isn't even a flea on an elephant compared to
the Cessna fleet.

In article ,
Peter Duniho wrote:

Actually, depending on the conditions, having ABS allows the maximum
available braking performance to actually be achieved. Few drivers (or
pilots) are actually capable of using the brakes to maximum effectiveness
without ABS. They either don't brake hard enough, or they brake so hard
that the wheels lock up and lose control.

I saw a show years ago when ABS was just becoming widely available
where they put Emerson Fittapaldi (then a current IndyCar driver)
with ABS, and did braking tests with and without the ABS. Even a
professional race car driver couldn't do better then the ABS,
although he came close to matching it.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

Dave,

The size of the Cirrus fleet isn't even a flea on an elephant compared to
the Cessna fleet.


You're comparing apples and oranges. Try again with new Cessnas (since 1996
or whenever they started building their antiques again) and Cirruses.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Bds,

There might be more to it than slick marketing after all.


Oh, I'm sure there is. It's just that the chute by itself doesn't make
the plane safer, as the quoted marketing blurb alluded. It takes a
pilot to do that. And pilots often don't do the right thing.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Brian,

(Add a Garmin 155 if want
to have all the same capabilty)


Sorry, but that's just BS.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jim,

It's the seatbelts. Aircraft manufacturers add those worthless devices to
cars and planes, yet people keep dying in car and plane crashes. Seatbelts
clearly add a false sense of security and are therefore responsible for the
accidents.

(The above is not meant to be taken seriously.)


I like your style. Oh, and smoking is not dangerous. Never was.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)