One guy's thoughts on Cirrus, parachutes ...(long)

Guest Discussion
1

For the last week, Kevin Moore and I have been talking about the subject of flying with non-flyers, particularly ones you are close to. As a single guy, who has pretty much only had to answer to himself, I had not given much actual thought to the idea that “a lot of people don’t like to fly – especially in smaller airplanes.” But now, as I look to a possibly non-single future, the real value of Cirrus, or maybe I should say the intangible value of Cirrus, begins to become clear to me. And despite recent postings about various production hiccups, my new perspective gives me even more confidence in this company and its future.

To put is simply: As a pilot, I think I’ve forgotten that most people really don’t like to fly GA. I know a lot who love it, but after a very unscientific survey of friends/family, I realize that for every one who likes it, there are three who aren’t that crazy about it. Sure, they’re good for a lunch flight, but as a regular means of transportation… forget it! Maybe all of you who post here know this, but I had forgotten it in all my enthusiasm for GPS, STEC AP’s…etc.

For aviation to take the next step, it needs to get over this hurdle. That is going to take a great deal of tangible improvement: reliability, IFR capability, service (ask Kevin Moore). But I think the most significant change will be in people’s minds. The 66% of this country that thinks of small planes as home of the thrill-seekers needs to be convinced otherwise. Until this happens, GA will expand very slowly, no matter how bad traffic gets on the ground or at LAX.

Enter the parachute. Now, for me, the parachute is a nice idea. For me, it’s like extra-airbags. I think it’s great, but will fly without them. But what I am finally beginning to realize is you CANNOT overestimate the value of that sucker for the majority of people who are not pilots. I know that until a few days ago, I severly underestimated it. I would be interested in hearing other people’s experience on this one, but in my case I am beginning to see that the chute may be the difference between flying with people I love and seeing them truly comfortable in the air.

Now maybe to you seasoned guys this is all wimp stuff. You’re aces, your loved ones either trust you or not. You bomb into 2000 foot sod strips with 25kt crosswinds… But that’s not the way it works for me, and my guess is that’s not the way it works for that 66% that GA needs to woo in order to go to that next level. I fly because I love it. I want to share it with the people in my life, and if the parachute opens up the skies for them, well, then I think I’m going to stop trying to explain to them how rarely we’d use it, etc. I think I might just say, “well then maybe I’ll get one.”

My guess is that years from now, no one is going to care too much about how fast the SR-20 went, or how much fuel it burned. People will say, “we’re flying to Santa Barbara? Does the plane have a chute?” and if you say yes, the people will probably relax and enjoy the ride.

2

Interesting post, Dean.

I have experienced much of what you say first hand. As you state, the reaction of many is non-scientific but the perception does effect their actions.

My wife, who loves our Archer so much that she discusses it like a pet (child??), said ‘yes’ the day I mentioned the Cirrus because of the chute. While she loves the Archer, she doesn’t really love to fly. I’m hoping that my new toy will change that!

At one point in history, seat belts were not installed in cars, then were an option. Now I’m not comfortable riding/driving a car without both seat belts and air bags! I might feel the same about my Cirrus after a few hundred hours.

Nice post.

Chris

For the last week, Kevin Moore and I have been talking about the subject of flying with non-flyers, particularly ones you are close to. As a single guy, who has pretty much only had to answer to himself, I had not given much actual thought to the idea that “a lot of people don’t like to fly – especially in smaller airplanes.” But now, as I look to a possibly non-single future, the real value of Cirrus, or maybe I should say the intangible value of Cirrus, begins to become clear to me. And despite recent postings about various production hiccups, my new perspective gives me even more confidence in this company and its future.

To put is simply: As a pilot, I think I’ve forgotten that most people really don’t like to fly GA. I know a lot who love it, but after a very unscientific survey of friends/family, I realize that for every one who likes it, there are three who aren’t that crazy about it. Sure, they’re good for a lunch flight, but as a regular means of transportation… forget it! Maybe all of you who post here know this, but I had forgotten it in all my enthusiasm for GPS, STEC AP’s…etc.

For aviation to take the next step, it needs to get over this hurdle. That is going to take a great deal of tangible improvement: reliability, IFR capability, service (ask Kevin Moore). But I think the most significant change will be in people’s minds. The 66% of this country that thinks of small planes as home of the thrill-seekers needs to be convinced otherwise. Until this happens, GA will expand very slowly, no matter how bad traffic gets on the ground or at LAX.

Enter the parachute. Now, for me, the parachute is a nice idea. For me, it’s like extra-airbags. I think it’s great, but will fly without them. But what I am finally beginning to realize is you CANNOT overestimate the value of that sucker for the majority of people who are not pilots. I know that until a few days ago, I severly underestimated it. I would be interested in hearing other people’s experience on this one, but in my case I am beginning to see that the chute may be the difference between flying with people I love and seeing them truly comfortable in the air.

Now maybe to you seasoned guys this is all wimp stuff. You’re aces, your loved ones either trust you or not. You bomb into 2000 foot sod strips with 25kt crosswinds… But that’s not the way it works for me, and my guess is that’s not the way it works for that 66% that GA needs to woo in order to go to that next level. I fly because I love it. I want to share it with the people in my life, and if the parachute opens up the skies for them, well, then I think I’m going to stop trying to explain to them how rarely we’d use it, etc. I think I might just say, “well then maybe I’ll get one.”

My guess is that years from now, no one is going to care too much about how fast the SR-20 went, or how much fuel it burned. People will say, “we’re flying to Santa Barbara? Does the plane have a chute?” and if you say yes, the people will probably relax and enjoy the ride.

3

I’ve posted this before, nut I’ll throw it out again. My wife is no shirking violet. She was coxswain in the Coast Guard and served in Tillamook Oregon. She’s been in 20-foot seas with a 40-foot boat, she’s had to board another boat with her pistol drawn. You get the idea.

She doesn’t like to fly. Really dislikes small planes. I’ve taken her flying once in 5 years. She had a good time and it was a great day. She still doesn’t like to fly. She never flew in the 172 I had on leaseback. I hardly fly because if I do itÂ’s a taking away activity. ItÂ’s not a getting together activity.

I told her about the Cirrus and its parachute. She really liked the idea, in fact she started calling it a “Family” airplane. When the finances are possible IÂ’m certain I will be able to get her to buy in on getting one.

That’s the whole difference in a nutshell, its a plane that the whole family will feel safer with.

4

Dean,

Good post, and with it a lot of truth. Two more dimensions of flying bear serious attention. For one, every time there is an aviation accident, it makes headlines. But for the thousands fold of automobile accidents in excess of aircraft, there are no headlines unless it’s a fatal and then usually relegated to the “local” pages unless there were multiple fatalities or it involved nuns and babies.

The facts show that when the bonehead aviation accidents are excluded (ie., ran outa fuel, VFR pilot enters IMC, icing, guys flirting with [or worse, attempting intercourse with] thunderstorms, etc., etc., it is safer to fly than to drive the trip.

Yet the public doesn’t know this, and they therefore have the perception that flying is unsafe. Thus, education and training are the name of the game to significantly reduce the bonehead accidents. We can each do something here in re peer pressure; speak up when you see a possible bonehead accident out there.

Secondly, cost is a major factor keeping people from flying. It’s an expensive hobby, any way you cut it. Until ALL costs (even including ground costs at one’s destination) can be reduced to the pocket books of the economic middle class, there will be no mass market allowing companies like Cirrus to operate in any form of mass production.

Cheers!

Pete

For the last week, Kevin Moore and I have been talking about the subject of flying with non-flyers, particularly ones you are close to. As a single guy, who has pretty much only had to answer to himself, I had not given much actual thought to the idea that “a lot of people don’t like to fly – especially in smaller airplanes.” But now, as I look to a possibly non-single future, the real value of Cirrus, or maybe I should say the intangible value of Cirrus, begins to become clear to me. And despite recent postings about various production hiccups, my new perspective gives me even more confidence in this company and its future.

To put is simply: As a pilot, I think I’ve forgotten that most people really don’t like to fly GA. I know a lot who love it, but after a very unscientific survey of friends/family, I realize that for every one who likes it, there are three who aren’t that crazy about it. Sure, they’re good for a lunch flight, but as a regular means of transportation… forget it! Maybe all of you who post here know this, but I had forgotten it in all my enthusiasm for GPS, STEC AP’s…etc.

For aviation to take the next step, it needs to get over this hurdle. That is going to take a great deal of tangible improvement: reliability, IFR capability, service (ask Kevin Moore). But I think the most significant change will be in people’s minds. The 66% of this country that thinks of small planes as home of the thrill-seekers needs to be convinced otherwise. Until this happens, GA will expand very slowly, no matter how bad traffic gets on the ground or at LAX.

Enter the parachute. Now, for me, the parachute is a nice idea. For me, it’s like extra-airbags. I think it’s great, but will fly without them. But what I am finally beginning to realize is you CANNOT overestimate the value of that sucker for the majority of people who are not pilots. I know that until a few days ago, I severly underestimated it. I would be interested in hearing other people’s experience on this one, but in my case I am beginning to see that the chute may be the difference between flying with people I love and seeing them truly comfortable in the air.

Now maybe to you seasoned guys this is all wimp stuff. You’re aces, your loved ones either trust you or not. You bomb into 2000 foot sod strips with 25kt crosswinds… But that’s not the way it works for me, and my guess is that’s not the way it works for that 66% that GA needs to woo in order to go to that next level. I fly because I love it. I want to share it with the people in my life, and if the parachute opens up the skies for them, well, then I think I’m going to stop trying to explain to them how rarely we’d use it, etc. I think I might just say, “well then maybe I’ll get one.”

My guess is that years from now, no one is going to care too much about how fast the SR-20 went, or how much fuel it burned. People will say, “we’re flying to Santa Barbara? Does the plane have a chute?” and if you say yes, the people will probably relax and enjoy the ride.

5

I made a similar statement a few months back in this Forum; this is the MAIN reason I bought THIS aircraft. During the ten years I flew with the Navy (A-4’s & A-6’s) I enjoyed the confidence provided by an ejection seat. I never needed it, but it was always there!

Guess what! I’m 51 and I haven’t flown in over ten years, but my wife, kids, and all my friends are anxious for this airplane to arrive (SR22 #68 this June) because they trust me and they trust the concept of this airplane, especially the parachute. It gives them that little bit extra. They may never need it, but it’s always there!

Now, I’m going to make a statement here that I’ve always wanted to express; this CAPS, just like a “Martin-Baker” isn’t the answer for everything! It has limitations, most of which have not yet been tested or documented. As a military pilot I knew the envelope of the seat. The envelope of the CAPS has NOT been fully documented, only that it has been successfully tested up to 135 KIAS. As a Cirrus pilot I will determine in advance under which conditions I will deploy and under which conditions I won’t deploy. These things MUST be well thought out before the moment of decision arrives!

Finally, for those of you questioning how I plan to get the dust off my wings, I’ve already started ground school with Sporty’s video tapes and my local flight school. I continue to study the SR20 POH (waiting for the SR22 to come out) and I’ve downloaded the GNS430 Pilot’s Guide and the Simulator. I’ll start flying locally in April to get my basic skills back and then, if they give me a fair price, I’ll meet Wings Aloft in Duluth for my pickup and head west to Seattle for two weeks of concentrated flying to get my IFR back. I’ll let everyone know how this works out.

Bob Mihocik

“Bagger”

Cleveland, Ohio

6

Dean,

Great post! I agree with your comments; and have one more reason to add to the list.

Over the years, I’ve met people who are uncomfortable with flying GA airplanes because of the single-pilot nature of the flight. They’ve gone up willingly when there are two pilots, because they reason that the second PILOT is a safety margin that they need in case of pilot incapacitation.

These same people are greatly comforted by the availability of a way out that THEY can use if the pilot develops food poisoning/has a heart attack/is struck by a stray bullet/etc. (There’s no use trying to apply LOGIC to their concerns; they have them, and that’s that). The point is, the parachute gives a perception of control in the hands of the passenger if push comes to shove, and people like that.

The downside of control in the hands of the passengers is that I worry that one day, some passenger will panic and grab that handle.

That’s why, at the end of my briefing on the use of the CAPS, I point out that pulling the handle will instantly transfer ownership of the airplane to the insurance company, and that they could be injured in the landing. I also say something like “… if I’m conscious, I alone will make the decision, and I alone will pull that handle if needed. If I see you reach for it, I’ll break your arm.”

:slight_smile:

Mike.

7

This is a great thread! I’d like to add that when my sister (who is very fearful of light planes) asked me why Gary and I had decided on a Cirrus (after all, she had “heard” of Pipers and Cessnas!), I got a great reception when I told her about the CAPS. She was also very impressed when I told her about the great strength of the composite fuselage. This is certainly another safety feature that passengers can relate to.

Speaking of "bonehead" mistakes, I must add that the third safety feature which we particularly liked (this is probably of little interest to pax) was the Cirrus' spin resistance (i.e. its retention of aileron authority in a stall). I guess the base-to-final stall would qualify as a "bonehead" error, but I would hate to pay for it with my life were I to get distracted in IMC etc.
8

For the last week, Kevin Moore and I have been talking about the subject of flying with non-flyers, particularly ones you are close to. As a single guy, who has pretty much only had to answer to himself, I had not given much actual thought to the idea that “a lot of people don’t like to fly – especially in smaller airplanes.” But now, as I look to a possibly non-single future, the real value of Cirrus, or maybe I should say the intangible value of Cirrus, begins to become clear to me. And despite recent postings about various production hiccups, my new perspective gives me even more confidence in this company and its future.

Since plunking down my SR20 deposit in October 1998 I have had numerous conversations with nonpilots: friends, acquaintances, family members. Their response when I informed them of the Cirrus’ airframe parachute has been consistent and emphatic, albeit verbalized in varying ways, from “Wow, that’s really interesting!” to “What a great idea!” to “It’s about @#$!%&* time!!”

We all have heard the debate about its actual utility: most midairs occur too close to the ground near an airport for the 'chute to help, a large number of midairs or structural failures will incapacitate the occupants too quickly for the 'chute to be deployed, fly VFR into IFR and lose control, WHO, ME?? etc. But the key fact is that, as “bagger” and others have pointed out, it represents both a last “out” for the pilot and a means for PAX to feel they have some measure of control. For a very large segment of those who currently fear small airplanes, this last aspect is profound. The introduction of CAPS could well be a “tipping point” which allows small airplane GA to be accepted not just by us diehard hobbyists but by a much broader public.

The GA community will in the long run be very grateful that CD has persevered with this perceptive, and accurate, vision. Its strongest impact–no pun intended–will be felt when, sometime in the next few years, an SRXX pilot has to deploy CAPS and it saves the pilot’s and occupants’ lives. The GA community will nod approvingly but the general public and media will be ecstatic and you can just bet that the number of new student pilot certificates issued will mushroom. And I for one will be happy to move my delivery slot back in line so that this pilot can get a brand new replacement SRXX right away!

9

My wife, who loves our Archer so much that she discusses it like a pet (child??), said ‘yes’ the day I mentioned the Cirrus because of the chute.<

I have taken my wife on a lot of trips in the Cirrus, and as often as possible we take one or both of our kids. (The limiting factor on “often” is that one of the kids is in college on the opposite end of the continent.)

I have no doubt that their attitude would be radically different were it not for the parachute. In fact, I’m sure I couldn’t have justified buying a plane, because they would be so reluctant to rely on it for travel.

It’s not that they actively mistrust my handling of the plane and therefore are looking for the equivalent of safety wheels. Three or four times over the last few years, they have (joylessly) gone along with me in trips in rented spamcans. Rather the point is that the parachute removes two otherwise-considerable mental obstacles for them, and therefore lets them enjoy rather than endure a journey:

  1. Since neither my wife nor either of my sons is a pilot, in a normal plane they would have absolutely no answer to the “what if something happens to Dad?” scenario. I know, I know: it’s a chance in a million. But fears and risk-assessments are notably different from pure statistical analysis. And there is no denying the worry factor for non-pilots about what would happen IF the only pilot in the plane were suddenly incapacitated. These things are possible. A goose could smash through the window and knock the pilot out. I have never in my life fainted or “passed out,” but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen. In those cases the parachute gives passengers an answer other than “and then we crash.”

2)It provides a significant extra feeling of comfort in an experience that is, for MOST people, still a fundamentally worrisome one. Even relative newcomers to the piloting business, like me, have spent many hundreds of hours getting used to the processes and experiences of flight. We know intellectually that the plane “wants to fly.” We know that in clear, calm weather the risks are practically nil. We know that turbulence is unpleasant but, within reasonable limits, not dangerous. We know that even if the engine fails, we’re not in terrible shape as long as we have the time, visibility, and terrain-choice to find a landing site. And so on.

Passengers, including family members, don’t have any of this experience – and admit it or not, are basically apprehensive every minute they’re in the craft. If the parachute gives them a reason to feel better about the process, it’s a big plus.

10

My wife, who loves our Archer so much that she discusses it like a pet (child??), said ‘yes’ the day I mentioned the Cirrus because of the chute.<

I have taken my wife on a lot of trips in the Cirrus, and as often as possible we take one or both of our kids. (The limiting factor on “often” is that one of the kids is in college on the opposite end of the continent.)

I have no doubt that their attitude would be radically different were it not for the parachute. In fact, I’m sure I couldn’t have justified buying a plane, because they would be so reluctant to rely on it for travel.

It’s not that they actively mistrust my handling of the plane and therefore are looking for the equivalent of safety wheels. Three or four times over the last few years, they have (joylessly) gone along with me in trips in rented spamcans. Rather the point is that the parachute removes two otherwise-considerable mental obstacles for them, and therefore lets them enjoy rather than endure a journey:

  1. Since neither my wife nor either of my sons is a pilot, in a normal plane they would have absolutely no answer to the “what if something happens to Dad?” scenario. I know, I know: it’s a chance in a million. But fears and risk-assessments are notably different from pure statistical analysis. And there is no denying the worry factor for non-pilots about what would happen IF the only pilot in the plane were suddenly incapacitated. These things are possible. A goose could smash through the window and knock the pilot out. I have never in my life fainted or “passed out,” but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen. In those cases the parachute gives passengers an answer other than “and then we crash.”

2)It provides a significant extra feeling of comfort in an experience that is, for MOST people, still a fundamentally worrisome one. Even relative newcomers to the piloting business, like me, have spent many hundreds of hours getting used to the processes and experiences of flight. We know intellectually that the plane “wants to fly.” We know that in clear, calm weather the risks are practically nil. We know that turbulence is unpleasant but, within reasonable limits, not dangerous. We know that even if the engine fails, we’re not in terrible shape as long as we have the time, visibility, and terrain-choice to find a landing site. And so on.

Passengers, including family members, don’t have any of this experience – and admit it or not, are basically apprehensive every minute they’re in the craft. If the parachute gives them a reason to feel better about the process, it’s a big plus.

One thing I have noticed.When I tell someone about the cirrus airplane im geting. They dont say much but when I tell about chute almost everyone .Has either read about or heard about the plane with a aparachute.It is always the case.From Don #215

11

My wife, who loves our Archer so much that she discusses it like a pet (child??), said ‘yes’ the day I mentioned the Cirrus because of the chute.<

I have taken my wife on a lot of trips in the Cirrus, and as often as possible we take one or both of our kids. (The limiting factor on “often” is that one of the kids is in college on the opposite end of the continent.)

I have no doubt that their attitude would be radically different were it not for the parachute. In fact, I’m sure I couldn’t have justified buying a plane, because they would be so reluctant to rely on it for travel.

It’s not that they actively mistrust my handling of the plane and therefore are looking for the equivalent of safety wheels. Three or four times over the last few years, they have (joylessly) gone along with me in trips in rented spamcans. Rather the point is that the parachute removes two otherwise-considerable mental obstacles for them, and therefore lets them enjoy rather than endure a journey:

  1. Since neither my wife nor either of my sons is a pilot, in a normal plane they would have absolutely no answer to the “what if something happens to Dad?” scenario. I know, I know: it’s a chance in a million. But fears and risk-assessments are notably different from pure statistical analysis. And there is no denying the worry factor for non-pilots about what would happen IF the only pilot in the plane were suddenly incapacitated. These things are possible. A goose could smash through the window and knock the pilot out. I have never in my life fainted or “passed out,” but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen. In those cases the parachute gives passengers an answer other than “and then we crash.”

2)It provides a significant extra feeling of comfort in an experience that is, for MOST people, still a fundamentally worrisome one. Even relative newcomers to the piloting business, like me, have spent many hundreds of hours getting used to the processes and experiences of flight. We know intellectually that the plane “wants to fly.” We know that in clear, calm weather the risks are practically nil. We know that turbulence is unpleasant but, within reasonable limits, not dangerous. We know that even if the engine fails, we’re not in terrible shape as long as we have the time, visibility, and terrain-choice to find a landing site. And so on.

Passengers, including family members, don’t have any of this experience – and admit it or not, are basically apprehensive every minute they’re in the craft. If the parachute gives them a reason to feel better about the process, it’s a big plus.

echo the above. i have never had any trepidation about flying myself personally. and i am, of course, as healthy as a horse, as the faa examiner so certifies every few years. a forty year old friend of mine just passed away from a heart attack. if it were me, i wouldn’t want my last thought to be "i just killed my wife and two kids’ because i like to fly. the parachute is for them… thanks cirrus.

12

Pete,

I agree that the air crashes get the media attention and that if one excludes “bonehead” accidents, the numbers look better. But I disagree completely with your conclusion. I suggest you experiment with various interpretations of the statistics on

 www.bts.gov

and

 www.ntsb.gov

and see if you can support your argument.

The solution to GA’s bad image problem is not educating the public. The solution is to improve the dismal record by educating the pilots, more reliable aircraft, etc. GA has a terrible accident rate, no matter how you cut it. The general public’s apprehension of light plane safety is a lot closer to the truth than that of many pilots. [It isn’t accurate to say “GA” as that includes corporate a/c, which has a vastly better record than Part 91/light plane.]

I know one dead pilot who used to scof at the “bonehead” mistakes others made – until he made one himself. Fact is, you or I, despite all our efforts, could goof too. Less likely than the average Joe, perhaps, but not impossible. And that’s one of the reasons I like the Cirrus A/C so much.

Rob

PS. Chris, great post! I agree. I was surprised how quickly my wife said “buy it” after seeing and learning about the SR20.

Dean,

Good post, and with it a lot of truth. Two more dimensions of flying bear serious attention. For one, every time there is an aviation accident, it makes headlines. But for the thousands fold of automobile accidents in excess of aircraft, there are no headlines unless it’s a fatal and then usually relegated to the “local” pages unless there were multiple fatalities or it involved nuns and babies.

The facts show that when the bonehead aviation accidents are excluded (ie., ran outa fuel, VFR pilot enters IMC, icing, guys flirting with [or worse, attempting intercourse with] thunderstorms, etc., etc., it is safer to fly than to drive the trip.

Yet the public doesn’t know this, and they therefore have the perception that flying is unsafe. Thus, education and training are the name of the game to significantly reduce the bonehead accidents. We can each do something here in re peer pressure; speak up when you see a possible bonehead accident out there.

Secondly, cost is a major factor keeping people from flying. It’s an expensive hobby, any way you cut it. Until ALL costs (even including ground costs at one’s destination) can be reduced to the pocket books of the economic middle class, there will be no mass market allowing companies like Cirrus to operate in any form of mass production.

Cheers!

Pete

For the last week, Kevin Moore and I have been talking about the subject of flying with non-flyers, particularly ones you are close to. As a single guy, who has pretty much only had to answer to himself, I had not given much actual thought to the idea that “a lot of people don’t like to fly – especially in smaller airplanes.” But now, as I look to a possibly non-single future, the real value of Cirrus, or maybe I should say the intangible value of Cirrus, begins to become clear to me. And despite recent postings about various production hiccups, my new perspective gives me even more confidence in this company and its future.

To put is simply: As a pilot, I think I’ve forgotten that most people really don’t like to fly GA. I know a lot who love it, but after a very unscientific survey of friends/family, I realize that for every one who likes it, there are three who aren’t that crazy about it. Sure, they’re good for a lunch flight, but as a regular means of transportation… forget it! Maybe all of you who post here know this, but I had forgotten it in all my enthusiasm for GPS, STEC AP’s…etc.

For aviation to take the next step, it needs to get over this hurdle. That is going to take a great deal of tangible improvement: reliability, IFR capability, service (ask Kevin Moore). But I think the most significant change will be in people’s minds. The 66% of this country that thinks of small planes as home of the thrill-seekers needs to be convinced otherwise. Until this happens, GA will expand very slowly, no matter how bad traffic gets on the ground or at LAX.

Enter the parachute. Now, for me, the parachute is a nice idea. For me, it’s like extra-airbags. I think it’s great, but will fly without them. But what I am finally beginning to realize is you CANNOT overestimate the value of that sucker for the majority of people who are not pilots. I know that until a few days ago, I severly underestimated it. I would be interested in hearing other people’s experience on this one, but in my case I am beginning to see that the chute may be the difference between flying with people I love and seeing them truly comfortable in the air.

Now maybe to you seasoned guys this is all wimp stuff. You’re aces, your loved ones either trust you or not. You bomb into 2000 foot sod strips with 25kt crosswinds… But that’s not the way it works for me, and my guess is that’s not the way it works for that 66% that GA needs to woo in order to go to that next level. I fly because I love it. I want to share it with the people in my life, and if the parachute opens up the skies for them, well, then I think I’m going to stop trying to explain to them how rarely we’d use it, etc. I think I might just say, “well then maybe I’ll get one.”

My guess is that years from now, no one is going to care too much about how fast the SR-20 went, or how much fuel it burned. People will say, “we’re flying to Santa Barbara? Does the plane have a chute?” and if you say yes, the people will probably relax and enjoy the ride.

13

I made a similar statement a few months back in this Forum; this is the MAIN reason I bought THIS aircraft. During the ten years I flew with the Navy (A-4’s & A-6’s) I enjoyed the confidence provided by an ejection seat. I never needed it, but it was always there!

Guess what! I’m 51 and I haven’t flown in over ten years, but my wife, kids, and all my friends are anxious for this airplane to arrive (SR22 #68 this June) because they trust me and they trust the concept of this airplane, especially the parachute. It gives them that little bit extra. They may never need it, but it’s always there!

Now, I’m going to make a statement here that I’ve always wanted to express; this CAPS, just like a “Martin-Baker” isn’t the answer for everything! It has limitations, most of which have not yet been tested or documented. As a military pilot I knew the envelope of the seat. The envelope of the CAPS has NOT been fully documented, only that it has been successfully tested up to 135 KIAS. As a Cirrus pilot I will determine in advance under which conditions I will deploy and under which conditions I won’t deploy. These things MUST be well thought out before the moment of decision arrives!

Finally, for those of you questioning how I plan to get the dust off my wings, I’ve already started ground school with Sporty’s video tapes and my local flight school. I continue to study the SR20 POH (waiting for the SR22 to come out) and I’ve downloaded the GNS430 Pilot’s Guide and the Simulator.

Bob:

I have much the same situation as you as regards currency. I’m taking Instrument Ground currently at a local f.b.o. using the Jeppesen materials and videos. I also have the 430 simulator and Pilot’s Guide to work from.

I have been looking at the Jeppesen FlitePro simulator packages. The hardware; yoke, radio panel and rudders are pricy, but this would give an opportunity to “fly” the approaches involved prior to theh actual flight. The simulator lets you look at your ground track and vertical profile to see how you did. I have tried to download the demonstrator which is a 27 mb. file, but I haven’t had any luck doing so yet. Anybody out there have any personal experience with FlitePro?

I’ll start flying locally in April to get my basic skills back and then, if they give me a fair price, I’ll meet Wings Aloft in Duluth for my pickup and head west to Seattle for two weeks of concentrated flying to get my IFR back. I’ll let everyone know how this works out.

I’m really interested in your experience in this. My promised (!) date is November for my SR22. Is Wings Aloft flying with you Duluth-Seattle? My present tenative plan is to go to Seattle for both basic flying skills and ICC for 5-6 days in Seattle on a SR20 in their fleet and then fly out from Duluth to Oregon with a CFII I’ve known for decades. I think the insurance will be easier if I have time in type before delivery. Let us know how this all works out.

Bob Mihocik

“Bagger”

Cleveland, Ohio

14

I made a similar statement a few months back in this Forum; this is the MAIN reason I bought THIS aircraft. During the ten years I flew with the Navy (A-4’s & A-6’s) I enjoyed the confidence provided by an ejection seat. I never needed it, but it was always there!

Guess what! I’m 51 and I haven’t flown in over ten years, but my wife, kids, and all my friends are anxious for this airplane to arrive (SR22 #68 this June) because they trust me and they trust the concept of this airplane, especially the parachute. It gives them that little bit extra. They may never need it, but it’s always there!

Now, I’m going to make a statement here that I’ve always wanted to express; this CAPS, just like a “Martin-Baker” isn’t the answer for everything! It has limitations, most of which have not yet been tested or documented. As a military pilot I knew the envelope of the seat. The envelope of the CAPS has NOT been fully documented, only that it has been successfully tested up to 135 KIAS. As a Cirrus pilot I will determine in advance under which conditions I will deploy and under which conditions I won’t deploy. These things MUST be well thought out before the moment of decision arrives!

Finally, for those of you questioning how I plan to get the dust off my wings, I’ve already started ground school with Sporty’s video tapes and my local flight school. I continue to study the SR20 POH (waiting for the SR22 to come out) and I’ve downloaded the GNS430 Pilot’s Guide and the Simulator.

Bob:

I have much the same situation as you as regards currency. I’m taking Instrument Ground currently at a local f.b.o. using the Jeppesen materials and videos. I also have the 430 simulator and Pilot’s Guide to work from.

I have been looking at the Jeppesen FlitePro simulator packages. The hardware; yoke, radio panel and rudders are pricy, but this would give an opportunity to “fly” the approaches involved prior to theh actual flight. The simulator lets you look at your ground track and vertical profile to see how you did. I have tried to download the demonstrator which is a 27 mb. file, but I haven’t had any luck doing so yet. Anybody out there have any personal experience with FlitePro?

I Purchased a yoke from them and it’s worth every bit of the $500 I paid for it!

I’ll start flying locally in April to get my basic skills back and then, if they give me a fair price, I’ll meet Wings Aloft in Duluth for my pickup and head west to Seattle for two weeks of concentrated flying to get my IFR back. I’ll let everyone know how this works out.

I’m really interested in your experience in this. My promised (!) date is November for my SR22. Is Wings Aloft flying with you Duluth-Seattle? My present tenative plan is to go to Seattle for both basic flying skills and ICC for 5-6 days in Seattle on a SR20 in their fleet and then fly out from Duluth to Oregon with a CFII I’ve known for decades. I think the insurance will be easier if I have time in type before delivery. Let us know how this all works out.

Bob Mihocik

“Bagger”

Cleveland, Ohio

15

I think most of us have agreed from the beginning that the parachute was more for the passengers than the pilot. (I wish I had said that originally, but I think the honor goes to Alan K.)

Love the thought on the pre-flight briefing.

FWIW: I intend to keep the “remove before flight” safety pin in the parachute T handle with the ribbon/streamer extending out beyond the black velcro cover. In this way, it is a little more difficult to pull the T handle in a panic, but it will actually take no more effort or additional actions than if it is removed. By pulling the ribbon, the safety pin and cover are both removed and the T Handle exposed. If in a panic, my passenger pulls off the black velcro cover, the safety pin will still be in place.

16

We all have heard the debate about its actual utility: most midairs occur too close to the ground near an airport for the 'chute to help, a large number of midairs or structural failures will incapacitate the occupants too quickly for the 'chute to be deployed, fly VFR into IFR and lose control, WHO, ME?? etc. But the key fact is that, as “bagger” and others have pointed out, it represents both a last “out” for the pilot and a means for PAX to feel they have some measure of control. For a very large segment of those who currently fear small airplanes, this last aspect is profound. The introduction of CAPS could well be a “tipping point” which allows small airplane GA to be accepted not just by us diehard hobbyists but by a much broader public.

A little story for y’all. Just last year, a friend of mine and I were going to fly in his brand new homebuilt Challenger 2 seater to Sun-n-Fun. I called him the Wednesday before I was to leave for Florida to make sure things were all ok. He said, “Tom, I just totalled the airplane” :-(.

A plane he’d spent 5 years building, was just absolutely beautiful, and most definately would have won an award at the show for its craftsmanship.

After inspecting the plane, the FAA inspector told him that he was so impressed with the quality of his work that, instead of the normal 25 or 50 hours (I forget) you have to fly the plane with 25 miles of the home airport before you are allowed to take it beyond that radius, he would only need 10 hours. On top of that, he suggested that my friend should really take it up to Vne just to see how it handled.

Well, my friend was a tad trepidatious of this suggestion. He had had the plane up to 110 knots, and felt very comfortable there, and really wasn’t planning on flying it faster than that, but despite the reticense he felt about the exercise, he figured he’d better listen to the voice of experience (this was his first homebuilt). So he brought it up to 5000 ft and put it into a shallow dive at full power. Well, just as he was going through 115 knots, all of a sudden the elevators started to flutter, slamming the control stick back and forth at about 3 or 4 Hz. He immediately shut down the engine, and tried to pull back as hard as he could, but it wouldn’t slow down, the flutter wouldn’t stop. All of a sudden, he heard a loud BANG behind him. Just as he turned around to see what it was, the plane flipped over upside down.

At that point, he said, that’s it, I’m outta here! and he pulled the plane’s chute he had installed in it. Never thought he would use it, but, he figured, what the heck, it’s not that expensive and is worth the peace of mind.

Well, the point is, that chute saved his butt. He and the plane floated right down between a couple of rows of orange grove trees and didn’t even get a scratch (except, of course, the huge bruise on his ego). The plane was totalled, but he was very alive and lived to fly again.