Thanks. Attempting a spin recovery or a controlled descent over water would be my first choice too, but some people in the SR20 forum think otherwise. The chute is so new that we may have a lot to learn.
Also, I’ve never flown a seaplane, but I wonder if a seaplane pilot would prefer a chute descent to a dead stick ditching?
I have flown seaplanes, and I think the deadstick scenario there is very similar to a power-loss over land. That is: if you can control the descent, and see where you’re going, then gliding in for a dead-stick landing is obviously the preferable choice. In the pontooon-equipped 172s I’ve flown, you just trim it for 60 or 65kts and glide it in. And on the typical lake or bay it’s a lot easier to find a suitable landing field than over land. But if you can’t get out of a spin, or you don’t know where you are, or it’s night, or there’s a mountain right next to the water, then a chute would be a nice extra alternative to have.
I read an article in one of the flying magazines 3 to 4 months ago which delt with ditching at sea. As I recall the jist of the article was that it is not that easy. High wing airplanes invariably flip over as do a goodly portion of low wing airplanes. Hitting the side of a wave, even a small one at 50 to 60 kts is going to stop you “right now” unless you skip off most likely out of control. If you drag a wing tip you can end up in a “flat spin” on the water and/or cartwheel. Granted, you will still hit the water pretty hard even with a chute but the seats would be much better at softening the force in a vertical direction than the seat belt/shoulder harness would horizontally.
In my opinion the chute whould definitely be the way to go over water, Especially at night.
As was discussed earlier, don’t forget that things may have been different for Kennedy if he had a Cirrus instead of a Saratoga.
michael
My understanding is that the issue w/ ditching is that a chute descent would generally be preferable to ditching a fixed gear aircraft<
Yeah, sorry, I misunderstood the question to be about ditching a SEAplane in the sea. That’s a no-brainer (unless it’s dark, in a spin, etc). I don’t know anything about the physics/safety of fixing gear planes hitting the water.
My understanding is that the issue w/ ditching is that a chute descent would generally be preferable to ditching a fixed gear aircraft<
Yeah, sorry, I misunderstood the question to be about ditching a SEAplane in the sea. That’s a no-brainer (unless it’s dark, in a spin, etc). I don’t know anything about the physics/safety of fixing gear planes hitting the water.
My understanding is that the issue w/ ditching is that a chute descent would generally be preferable to ditching a fixed gear aircraft<
Yeah, sorry, I misunderstood the question to be about ditching a SEAplane in the sea. That’s a no-brainer (unless it’s dark, in a spin, etc). I don’t know anything about the physics/safety of fixing gear planes hitting the water.
I AM a SES rated, and in most conditions I’d rather use the chute if I know the water is too deep to permit recovery.
A fixed gear pland will probably flip, but not necessarily. Furthermore, nite, glassy water or big swells make the ditching much harder. I also do not practice ditching. Given those odds, I’d probably use the chute. At least your guaranteed an upright egress.
How if I’m over calm water with 6" waves, elatively shollow (I don’t know how ?I’d know unless I am very familiar with the area or have a natical chart), I may pick a full stall ditching.
Again, at least I have the choice. In my 172, I know what allo of my options are.
but probably one of the highest loads is the shock load from the tractor rocket carrying the deployment bag away at a high velocity.
What’s the basis for this “probably”?
Here is something I found very clarifying on this whole point: looking at videos of the actual chute deployment. The videos on the CirrusDesign.com site seem to be down right now, but here is a link to the BRS site:
It’s a video of an SR20 deploying a chute from the middle of a bona fide spin. At least to my eye there seems to be no shock load whatsoever from the rocket’s deployment – I’m judging shock by whether there’s any check in the plane’s movement. Look at it yourself and see what you think. This video also makes dramatic the “reefing” effect that can adjust for different speeds. I think these videos render moot a lot of “what if??” discussion. Here’s a link to a variety of BRS videos:
What about the weight increase of the 22? Max deployment speed should be considerably less to stay within the same structural limitations, No?
It’s my understanding that the parachute deployment tests were done at higher weights, so that the results could be used in the SR22 certification.
F=ma
but probably one of the highest loads is the shock load from the tractor rocket carrying the deployment bag away at a high velocity.
What’s the basis for this “probably”?
Here is something I found very clarifying on this whole point: looking at videos of the actual chute deployment. The videos on the CirrusDesign.com site seem to be down right now, but here is a link to the BRS site:
It’s a video of an SR20 deploying a chute from the middle of a bona fide spin. At least to my eye there seems to be no shock load whatsoever from the rocket’s deployment – I’m judging shock by whether there’s any check in the plane’s movement. Look at it yourself and see what you think. This video also makes dramatic the “reefing” effect that can adjust for different speeds. I think these videos render moot a lot of “what if??” discussion. Here’s a link to a variety of BRS videos:
F=ma
Seeing=believing. Look at the video
F=ma
Seeing=believing. Look at the video
I have a copy of a video on vhs tape put out by Cirrus and exstensive spin and recovery footage is on it…
I think the only limiting factor is height to “full deployment” I believe that is in the 900 ft range…
The chutes were tested to 3600 lbs what is said to be it’s “ultimate load” at speeds of 165 knots and with 4 55 gallon barrels of wet sand during certification…
There is some reason to believe that at least partial effectiveness could be attained even with the chute not completely deploying at very low heights…but I guess not all the info is in on that yet…
I have a copy of a video on vhs tape put out by Cirrus and exstensive spin and recovery footage is on it…
Any idea if this is still available? Did Cirrus sell it? Any Cirrus contacts who would know about it? Thanks
I have a copy of a video on vhs tape put out by Cirrus and exstensive spin and recovery footage is on it…
Any idea if this is still available? Did Cirrus sell it? Any Cirrus contacts who would know about it? Thanks
They gave it to investors …
you may be able to call them and ask about it…