Another Chute Save

[aviatoreb]

Statistically EVERYBODY DIES in a midair collision.....

 

Not exactly but close enough.  Amazingly there have been many mid airs without parachutes even where not everyone died.  But sure enough if I were in a mid air then most definitely I would want a parachute.  I was just saying that mid airs are so uncommon that the rest of the ways pilots get into trouble in airplanes swamps the signal of the mid air story.  Again, I am sure happy for the SR22 folks in KFDK yesterday that they had a parachute.

 

 

Erik I think that you'll find that these facts and statistics will be switching course.  And in fact they are.  The pilots mindset and training in the beginning of the CAPS evolution was very different than it is now.  Now pilots of the Cirrus airplane are programmed to pull that sucker "now".  Here is a great article explaining much better than I ever could.  However, for the statistical side of it we will have to wait but my money is on the Cirrus proving to have a much better safety record (as far as fatalities) in an emergency situation.

 

http://macsblog.com/2014/09/cirrus-fully-embraces-the-chute/

 

 

I bet you are right.  It has always been surprising to me (and everyone) that Cirrus is not doing better than it does.  But it hasn't.  Maybe it will.  I always believed the explanation that it was a combination of complacent training practice and cowboy launch into anything attitudes, and perhaps those plus always pull the chute mantra are moving the Cirrus stats to a much better place.

 

 

I'm not sure but I think you will find statistcally on an injury vs accident ratio a cessna 150 is the safest plane to fly. the lower the stall speed the softer the impact. I'm shure there will be a plethera of disagreement on the subject. it would be great to have a chute but I dont so what curl up in a little ball and stay on the couch. No Way!

 

 

I do believe the Diamond line is the safety king of the GA fleet.

 

All this aside, and my opinion, my wife today is making noise that we should have a parachute.  Hoorumph.  I like my Mooney.  But I like to fly with her too.

[PMcClure]

 

"All this aside, and my opinion, my wife today is making noise that we should have a parachute.  Hoorumph.  I like my Mooney.  But I like to fly with her too."

 

Sounds like a good excuse to expand the AMU budget  and explain to her that it costs money for a new airplane. That is how I ended up in a 2 battery Ovation after a generator failure at night! Keep the wife happy, rule #1 at my house. 

[Guest]

Regarding mid air collisions, my brother survived one many years ago.

When I fly now I keep my head moving and searching. The number of times I hear pilots confirming traffic with "I got him on the TCAS" is worrying. I still trust the "Eyeball MK 1" but it does not display well on glass panels.

Clarence

[Piloto]

Here

a good example were 6 pairs of eyeballs MK 1 fail to spot traffic on time, even when told where to look.  

 

Mid-air collisions are rare because every transport plane is TCAS equipped

 

José

[jetdriven]

Jose, the midair between the Russian airliner was due to a systemic flaw where Russian pilot always obey the controller while everyone else (and i do mean everyone but Russians) obey the TCAS. The hundreds of millions of hours of midiar-free 122 commercial jet operations are testament to that.

The fact your private GA airplane is statistically 50 time more fatal than a 121 commercial operations speaks volumes to the pilots training and proper procedure. It even extends to 135 operators who operate the same airplanes that private pilots do, Bonanzas, Barons, twin cessnas etc.

[Piloto]

Byron, there are instances were you have to ignore TCASII RAs like when doing parallel approaches or departures.

 

BTW I will never get Ebola in my plane. There is no mention of it on GA private planes.

 

José 

[Alan Fox]

Byron hit the nail on the head.....The 121 and 135 pilots are statistically 50 times safer than us part 91 guys.....we have been beating that horse (incorrectly) for many years......I wonder if the "safer than driving" rule holds water for the part 91 only crowd......Would be interesting to see those numbers.... 

[tony]

I think that was the incident that drove the change to TCAS version 7.1.  However, none of this has anything to do with putting a stupid parachute on an aircraft, increasing the empty weight, and wasting useful load.

[Guest]

Here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTXyxWl7p9k is a good example were 6 pairs of eyeballs MK 1 fail to spot traffic on time, even when told where to look.

Mid-air collisions are rare because every transport plane is TCAS equipped

José

I'm not talking about airliner TCAS, I'm talking GA. When I hear an airliner say "Got him on TCAS" they mostly follow up with "Got him visual". Seldom ever hear that from GA guys with their magic panel. If I put TCAS in my plane, I won't be painting over the windows.

Clarence

[DaV8or]

I'm not talking about airliner TCAS, I'm talking GA. When I hear an airliner say "Got him on TCAS" they mostly follow up with "Got him visual". Seldom ever hear that from GA guys with their magic panel. If I put TCAS in my plane, I won't be painting over the windows.

Clarence

 

They don't paint their windows over either. The idea that people with traffic awareness technology in their cockpits no longer look out the windows is idiot talk. TCAS, TAS, TIS, PTAS and ADS-B are all supplements to the radio and our primary collision avoidance tool, see and avoid. Anybody who has used these systems knows this. A typical encounter-

1. Traffic system gives a audio warning of traffic.
2. Pilot looks away from the window toward the display screen to get an idea of where to look and how immediate the threat is. Similar to getting traffic advisories from ATC, only better.
3. Pilot then goes back to the window to confirm the finding of the traffic system.

Everyone that has used these systems knows that they can and do give false alerts. You have to confirm the info by looking out the window. Please, do not fear technology, unlike the FAA, it really is here to help. I suspect that a great many pilots fear traffic systems because they can be very expensive and the fear is that the FAA will mandate them. So they run around telling as many fellow pilots that will listen that they are worthless and dangerous. Sadly, it couldn't be further from the truth.

[Marauder]

They don't paint their windows over either. The idea that people with traffic awareness technology in their cockpits no longer look out the windows is idiot talk. TCAS, TAS, TIS, PTAS and ADS-B are all supplements to the radio and our primary collision avoidance tool, see and avoid. Anybody who has used these systems knows this. A typical encounter-

• Traffic system gives a audio warning of traffic.
• Pilot looks away from the window toward the display screen to get an idea of where to look and how immediate the threat is. Similar to getting traffic advisories from ATC, only better.
• Pilot then goes back to the window to confirm the finding of the traffic system.

Everyone that has used these systems knows that they can and do give false alerts. You have to confirm the info by looking out the window. Please, do not fear technology, unlike the FAA, it really is here to help. I suspect that a great many pilots fear traffic systems because they can be very expensive and the fear is that the FAA will mandate them. So they run around telling as many fellow pilots that will listen that they are worthless and dangerous. Sadly, it couldn't be further from the truth.

I think since I got my ADS-B (FIS-B only at this point), I am more diligent looking out the window. Never knew that many planes were out there!