Would you have bought a Cirrus if it did not come with a parachute?

I wonder how many made the decision based on the parachute.

I asked at another group and most owners seem to be very happy with their Cirrus , parachute or not, one guy said he wishes it did not have one.[:O]

When I purchased my Cirrus in 2001 I would have gotten it WITHOUT the parachute had that been an option.

Now that I’ve seen the effectiveness of CAPS, I would insist on having it, and if I were choosing between a CAPS equipped and any similar but non BRS aircraft, the parachute equipped plane would win, hands down.

I was in the market for a Piper Arrow and my ex-wife said to buy the one with the chute.

So I guess the answer is no…

Being 9” wider than my Cessna, and appearing to be much roomier with a side stick rather than a yoke it was an easy decision.

CAPS wasn’t a thought, the extra speed nice and the cup holders a plus.

I ordered my Cirrus before they were approved to sell them. I felt strongly then, like Jerry, if I could get it without the chute I would have. Too much weight consumed and maintenance implications.

I was proven wrong by its track record, the chute has been a real life saver.

So the answer when I bought it, no it did not influence me. Today it does. I do fly other planes without a chute, but I prefer to be in a plane that has one.

We sent our deposit in 1998.

There was nothing on the market like it other than kit planes.

The chute was a great selling point, but it would not have been a deal breaker at the time. The Cirrus was so advanced compared to anything on the market, there was no comparison.

My sentiments reflect Jerry’s starting in 1999 when I put a deposit on a plane. If opting out was an option I would have voted for the extra 80 pounds of useful load or whatever the exact weight was at the time. Now I feel a bit naked flying a plane without a chute.

I had a close friend that lost his life in a Cirrus and was determined never to buy one because of this. I was ready to close on a Corvallis 350 but educated myself on the chute attributes and went the Cirrus way…Short answer, nope.

Probably not;

I probably would have ended up with a P210N and redid the avionics on it. Even though the pressurization on them isnt that great, its good enough for me and the dogs.

Back in 2004, I would have skipped on the chute.

The reason I bought it for was the speed. It was fast.

Back in 2003 I was doing a cross country trip in C172 with my CFI. We were on flight following. We heard a Cirrus check in with ATC. He was behind us, going the same direction as we were. Within 15 minutes, he had passed us and was checking into the next sector.

We both had a WTH moment. How did he do that? Those Cirrus planes are fast, my CFI explained.

I. wanted. one.

I bought my SR22 in 2004 and the attributes that sold me then were speed and the great avionics. I would have bought it if it didn’t have the chute. I’m not sure I would have opted out of the chute if that had been an option. Since it wasn’t an option I never even thought about it.

CAPS never entered into the decision.

  1. Comfort

  2. Capacity (MTOW)

  3. Range

  4. Fuel burn

When I was taki g my private lessons my wife and I were laying in bed watching wings channel. They showed the cirrus chute deployment over the desert during testing. She said you can buy in if those. I did it the next day. I would probably have a meridian by now, but the wife wants the chute. She is worried that I will crap out and not the plane.

so NO, in the south we say if momma ain’t happy, nobody is happy!

Do not think I would be flying at all without having the chute.

I would be flying a TTX if not for the chute.

My answer is essentially the same. It didn’t factor into my 2001 decision to make a deposit (you had to wait almost 2 years at that point for delivery) and I certainly would have bought it without CAPS. The number of CAPS pulls at that point was zero. Now, having seen the effectiveness, I would highly favor its inclusion in an aircraft I would purchase but its absence wouldn’t be a show-stopper for me for certain aircraft such as a rag-wing taildragger (or, obviously, a twin jet!).

That is a great question. At the time I bought my first Cirrus in 2008 I was a brand new pilot. There was no doubt at that time that the parachute was primary in my decision to buy that Cirrus. In 2010 I moved up from the SR20 to the SR 22 and I never questioned the benefit of a parachute.

In 2012 I moved up to a Piper Meridian and was very much sold on the reliability of a turbine powered aircraft as well as the ability to fly in the flight levels in a pressurized aircraft.

So I guess the answer is yes at first but I would trade the parachute for a high altitude pressurized turbine powered aircraft all day long. Years ago I thought the future of GA was going to be turbine powered aircraft believing that the price of the engine would eventually come down. It is good bad it never did. Once you sit behind a turbine it is hard to imagine flying a gas powered airplane.

The Cirrus w/o a chute is close to the Corvallis or Cessna TTX. By all accounts (except sales) a remarkable plane.

Seat belts, air bags, CAPS all are indispensable to me!

Larry,

curious about the reason of the question.

For me the chute was a special plus. Flying non pilot business partner, and wife, it was reassuring for them. Now I don’t have the chute option so I fly more carefully! (Kidding)

15 years and maybe 85 save events from now let’s ask the same question about the Vision Jet. The save events will likely be much less but that number will be irrelevant.