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

131–140 of 155 posts

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#131

Post by FL410 »

dhsysusbsjsi wrote: post #93

The problem with Cirrus is the parachute. Insurance companies don’t like it because instead of half or more of aircraft landing safely on a road or in a field, they are now all write offs. This then adds insurance premiums. We are also now in the position of having to do extra annual training (irrespective of experience) to get insurance because so many amateur pilots are flying Cirrus (I think it’s the new V tail do…

Which do you think an insurance company prefers: a full hull loss, or a full hull loss and multiple wrongful death lawsuits?

Insurance companies DO love it. Some even waive the deductible if you pull.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#132

Post by landemva »

hef19898 wrote: post #118
captainoats wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certification is the process of getting an aircraft design/model approved by the FAA for sale/use. There are 3 phases for GA commercially available aircraft, type certification (design approved), production certification (manufacturing approved), and airworthiness certification (plane tested, and ready for sale to the public) Usually when someone says a plane has received its certification they mean it’s ‘airworthine…

Each commercially ised or sold aircraft has to come from a certified Desogn Organisation, has to be built by a certified Production Organisation (in most cases the same company , aerospace legallish Airbus and Boeing have a DO and a PO which arw separate entities as far as authorities are converned), needs an Type Certificate (achieved after successful flight testing and to be redone if there are configuration and de…

Boeing skipped the step "to be redone if there are configuration and design changes" for the 737MAX, and smoothed over the differences with software. FAA was supportive of that rule-bending, and other countries followed along.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#133

Post by phire »

Syonyk wrote: post #90
rkagerer wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are the radio calls one-way, or can it understand directions from the air traffic control tower (e.g. Don't use Runway 6, Runway 8 is clear)? How's that work, voice recognition or teletype or something?

Any reasonably sophisticated jet (of which this is clearly one) will have access to more or less realtime weather data, as well as NOTAMs (notices to airmen) regarding closed runways and such. I'm not familiar with the system's details, but I would assume that it would pick the nearest towered airport with emergency services that met the requirements of the landing performance. Landing autonomously on a strip in the…

> you may have some serious questions about what the problem was, but this is the sort of stuff resolved after the fact, on the ground.

There will be questions, but there is a very strong doctrine of "A pilot in an emergency can do whatever the fuck they think is best", to the point where they are explicitly trained to ignore ATC orders in an emergency, if they don't agree.

A pilot would have to do something extremely malicious before the FAA would even start to question the choice of emergency landing airport. They don't want pilots second guessing their decisions out of fair of reprisals.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#135

Post by rlpb »

dhsysusbsjsi wrote: post #93

The problem with Cirrus is the parachute. Insurance companies don’t like it because instead of half or more of aircraft landing safely on a road or in a field, they are now all write offs. This then adds insurance premiums. We are also now in the position of having to do extra annual training (irrespective of experience) to get insurance because so many amateur pilots are flying Cirrus (I think it’s the new V tail do…

> ...and single power lever which decreases rpm with power resulting in an aircraft unable to (easily) slow down (without idle) which is normally done with prop braking

The article is about the Cirrus Vision Jet, not the Cirrus SR22 propeller-driven aircraft.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#136

Post by storyinmemo »

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!

In docile trainer aircraft the spin can be recovered from, but that's usually only allowed to be tested in the utility category which has more restrictive weight & balance limits. In famously efficient airframes, it can take several thousand feet. In this article, the famously hard to insure pilot killer the Lancair IV took 4,000 feet: https://www.kitplanes.com/taming-the-lancair-iv/

Part of the Part 23 (certified aircraft rules) process is demonstrating spin recovery. The Lancair is experimental so it's not Part 23. Cirrus said, "We put in a parachute instead of demonstrating spin recovery." To which the FAA said, "OK, that works for us."

Since the Cirrus prohibits spins (most certified aircraft do) and Cirrus never demonstrated it officially, I only have the word of random comments on the internet to go with. The assumed state is, "The SR22 has poor recovery characteristics from spins and the manufacturer states in the POH that CAPS is the only recovery method." Maybe it's not all that bad, but at pattern altitude (this has sadly been demonstrated) I'm sure it's fatal.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#137

Post by pholbrook »

kayodelycaon wrote: post #111
threatripper wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

It needs to be manually activated.

"The G3000 also monitors pilot activity/inactivity and cabin pressure and can automatically engage Autoland or Emergency Descent Mode if no activity is detected." - Arstechnica article. https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/11/this-system-from-garmin...

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#138

Post by shostack »

ehnto wrote: post #42
hackitup7 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very impressive to see how many people were able to walk away from these incidents, I wonder what the counts of injury or worse would look like without this system? Also it seems like these small planes have a lot of incidents, I'm guessing due to relatively inexperienced pilots?

General Aviation/Private Aviation is as dangerous as riding a motorcycle, per hour of participation. At least the last time I checked the statistics. It might have improved with navigation technology and flight planning software becoming more affordable.

Which is saying something given the level of training, testing, safety culture, licensing, and ATC coverage.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#139

Post by Scoundreller »

Syonyk wrote: post #91
CryptoBanker wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true, I think. Even a partial deployment will help provide drag and reduce aircraft velocity

But they also come at the expense of control. Once you pop the chute, you're a passenger, you no longer have the ability to control or point the airplane in any preferred direction. If you've lost that ability already, the chute is fine, but if you still have the ability to influence your path, being able to pick what you hit and how fast you hit it can be worth a lot.

Drag cars have parachutes. I’m unsure why a parachute would keep you going straight only. All your other controls are still there, you just have more drag.

Re: Cirrus Vision Jet Pilot Pulls Chute in Florida

#140

Post by bombcar »

kayodelycaon wrote: post #115
bombcar wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure the mechanics of a microburst that would prohibit the plane getting through but not push the plane and parachute into the lake.

I’ve seen way too many episodes of Air Crash Investigations. A microburst could easily take out a full-sized airline at low altitude. That’s why airports and planes have equipment to detect air shear so they don’t fly into it. Small planes are far more affected by weather and don’t typical have radar or safety systems like flight envelope protection.

yeah but why would popping a parachute in a microburst protect you? The air would still be going down with you in it.
Post reply on HN