Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

flyingmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 155 posts

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#71

Post by threatripper »

_s wrote: post #3
crooked-v wrote: post #2

For those wondering at the context, this is a company that builds well-liked small aircraft with the unique feature of having a last-resort emergency parachute for the entire plane built into the fuselage.

Some more context - this the first deployment of the BRS system in their flagship; the Vision Jet. The Vision Jet is also the only turbine (jet) engine powered aircraft with such a system. It also boasts the Garmin Safe Return system; where the autopilot lands the aircraft in case of Pilot incapacitation - doing everything from radio calls, selecting the appropriate airport and runway, flying the approach and landing…

> where the autopilot lands the aircraft in case of Pilot incapacitation

OEFGR could have used that. Their autopilot just continued to fly straight until they ran out of fuel and spiraled down into the sea.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#72

Post by CryptoBanker »

TylerE wrote: post #59
nopzor wrote: post #8

awesome to see the first real world example of a caps parachute deployment on the vision jet working out well. the caps parachute results in “a good day for the passengers — walk away, bad day for the insurance company — plane will never fly again” the vision jet also has a “safe return” feature that will 100% autonomously land at the nearest suitable airport. both brs and safe return are designed to be initiated by…

Actually, the insurance company would rather you pull the chute too... an airframe is a lot cheaper than multiple wrongful death lawsuits.

Can you sue your own insurance company for wrongful death?

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#73

Post by krisoft »

imglorp wrote: post #64
hugh-avherald wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's no longer considered a last-resort measure. Cirrus training now says to consider it as a first resort.

As a glider pilot I find this mindset disappointing. Every aviator must have a constantly updating array of "what if" situations and planned responses: "Right now, where's my best landing spot and how would I get lined up for that?" etc. It leads to a chess-like thinking ahead mindset which brings all kinds of benefits. "Whelp I'll just pull the lever if something goes wrong" robs you of that. Automation and chutes a…

You can find it dissapointing, but they found that statistics supports this kind of emphasis in the parachute training.

Obviously it is not true that people use it as a first resort. Landing with wheels on the runway is the first resort. As supported by the fact that vastly more cirruses land that way.

Initially they trained it as a last resort. Something you only do when you get mated in that chess game you mention. What they found is that pilots were reluctant to pull the lever. They know it totals the aircraft and it is hard to see the point where all is lost with 100% certainty. Pilots crashed planes where the chute could have saved them.

So they changed the emphasis. They now tell the pilots in their training that if they are ever in any doubt they should pull the lever. The people on board will walk away and the plane is the problem of the insurer. After this change in the training they have seen that pilots were pulling a lever a lot more and a lot more lives were saved.

> Automation and chutes are fine but we keep seeing incidents where lack of judgement, planning or basic stick and rudder skills were contributory.

Absolutely. There are a some general aviation pilots who perhaps should not be flying. I don’t know how the people organising the parachute training at Cirrus could help with that though.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#74

Post by atdrummond »

stevehawk wrote: post #65
nopzor wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

also worth mentioning - the vision jet is afaik the only single jet passenger jet that is fully certified.

I think you meant to say "single pilot passenger jet" that is fully certified, and if so, that statement is not correct. The Phenom, Citation, and several others are.

Single engine is more likely what the poster meant than single pilot, no?

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#75

Post by pmyteh »

rkagerer wrote: post #55

Has a CAPS save ever injured a bystander or destroyed expensive property like a house? (Not saying an uncontrolled landing couldn't do the same, just curious about the history)

Looking at the photos, at least one of them crushed a pickup truck coming down in a parking lot. It'd certainly be a bad day for a bystander if they couldn't get out of the way. But, as you say, an uncontrolled landing is no better, and with probable higher impact speeds and greater risk of fire.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#76

Post by atdrummond »

ehnto wrote: post #41
kylecordes wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a pilot, not even a little bit; But I was under the impression that pilot training has a lot of attention on recovery from a stall or spin, and unless at low altitude, those are generally recoverable (in a small aircraft). Would love for someone with actual knowledge to weigh in, thanks!

It can take time and altitude to recover a spin, and low altitude maneuvers are often where unintentional spins occur. That said, I don't know what the minimum altitude for a parachute deployment is. That'd be important.

I believe 2000 feet unless Cirrus has changed their recommendations.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#77

Post by krisoft »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #69
p_l wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not unique to Cirrus, but Cirrus is probably most well known for having made bigger and heavier planes with BRS

What is BRS?

Ballistic Recovery System. It is a parachute afixed to the airframe which can be deployed by the pilot. It is named that because the parachute is pulled out of its housing by a small solid-fueled rocket.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_Recovery_Systems

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#78

Post by LorenPechtel »

api wrote: post #9

Is scaling such a thing to a passenger aircraft feasible?

The bigger the vehicle the more altitude that is needed to deploy chutes. The bigger the vehicle the proportionately heavier the chutes need to be because they need to spread out more and they need to be stronger.

Furthermore, most commercial aviation disasters occur at low altitude and the ones that happen at high altitude tend to be too catastrophic for chutes to be of value. (If something bad happens at high altitude that doesn't destroy the plane it tends to make it back.) Off the top of my head I can only think of three crashes where they could have used chutes--two where the hydraulics were damaged by high energy events (and would the chutes have worked properly??) and one fuel failure due to hijacking.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#79

Post by cmurf »

kylecordes wrote: post #37
Gracana wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engine failure, running out of fuel, stalls, spins, midair collisions, disorientation, etc. Cirrus has a history of CAPS deployments, linked in the article and copied here: https://www.cirruspilots.org/Safety/CAPS-Event-History

I am not a pilot, not even a little bit; But I was under the impression that pilot training has a lot of attention on recovery from a stall or spin, and unless at low altitude, those are generally recoverable (in a small aircraft). Would love for someone with actual knowledge to weigh in, thanks!

Stall avoidance and recovery is mandatory training for certification, arguably mandatory training for make/model checkout even if there's no type rating required.

Stall spin training is only required for flight instructor certification. While anyone can do this training, FARs require both instructor and student are wearing a parachute, unless it's for CFI training.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#80

Post by chinathrow »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #69
p_l wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not unique to Cirrus, but Cirrus is probably most well known for having made bigger and heavier planes with BRS

What is BRS?

The manufacturer of those rescue systems.

https://brsaerospace.com/

Post reply on HN