Judging interest in developing a BRS system for the Mooney fleet

[aviatoreb]

8 minutes ago, Urs_Wildermuth said:

I see one problem however with the M20 and the BRS. The Cirrus and some of the others I understand count on the landing gear as a shock absorber for landing on land. I can imagine that the Cessna gear also is quite suitable for that. The short gear of the M20 is singularily unsuitable for that. So the question is, what else would be needed to make the M20 suitable for this kind of rescue device? It could be done with seat cushioning, with an airbag under the fusellage or possibly there are other solutions, but i would think that this is a show stopper for having the BRS in the M20.

I've been thinking about that.  Maybe on a "firm" vertical landing, the gear simply punches through and that absorbs a lot of shock saving the humans but yes damaging the airplane.  That plus airbag seats which you sit on airbags.  Also maybe the chute size is controlled to control descent rate.

As far as I see the poll - 50% of us here roughly are possible customers, and 50% are definitely not.

[Urs_Wildermuth]

Yes, and of those roughly 50% most of us have the same concern: if it was available, could we afford it.

As I can see there are two major cost elements of which the 10 yearly repackaging seems to be the worst all in all.

[Ron Blum]

I agree with the majority of items that have been posted, but what if ...

1. We spent the same money (both initial and repack) for more personal training and/or flying more?

2. Would anyone be interested if I would take the time to go through all the NTSB accident reports on production airplanes with chutes?

[chrisk]

If it was $10k installed, then sign me up.  At $25k, no thanks.  And for those who think I'm cheap, at what point do you say its not worth it? $50k, $100k, $500k, or its so important that price doesn't matter?  I'm with Don on this one.  It adds some safety factor, but how much?  My guess is it cost well over 50 million per life saved.  I'm afraid real statistics are not possible.

[Tom]

3 hours ago, Ron Blum said:

I agree with the majority of items that have been posted, but what if ...

1. We spent the same money (both initial and repack) for more personal training and/or flying more?

2. Would anyone be interested if I would take the time to go through all the NTSB accident reports on production airplanes with chutes?

1.  Flying more over hostile terrain increases risk.  For some, the money likely needed to install a BRS into a Mooney isn't so much a concern, nor is more training.

2.  Only if you're trying to make an argument to decrease the relative safety value of a BRS system?  Why would you want to do this?  In what other areas of design do we do this?  Sorry to be testy, but does it make sense to run reports on motorcyclists who wear helmets to show that there's an intrinsic problem with helmets?  Why not just agree that some people with helmets feel like superman and are more likely to be foolish and suffer, while others are self-described conscientious meek wimps who would be more likely to survive a mishap because of having the ability to use a helmet?  Should we outlaw helmets because of the former group?

I stand to be corrected, but Mooney has produced around 10,000 airframes.  A NTSB search of "Mooney" and "fatality" finds 682 results (approximately 6% of the airframes produced resulted in one fatality).  If training is effective at reducing fatalities, the combination of a chute AND a bunch of training on how 'not to take extra risks just 'cause you have a chute' would lower the fatality rate, all else equal, no?

[DonMuncy]

3 hours ago, Ron Blum said:

 Would anyone be interested if I would take the time to go through all the NTSB accident reports on production airplanes with chutes?

Finding out about the chute pulls would not be too bad. Finding out about the alternatives to the chute pulls is most likely impossible. Especially, as some of them might have resulted in no accident at all. For example; I lost my AI in IMC several years ago. Due to my poor piloting skills, I lost control for brief period of time. I don't know whether I would have considered a chute-pull if it had been available, but I recognize it as a possibility.  Since I didn't have the choice, I dealt with it, and regained control. Ie. not statistic.

[Aviator]

The initial posting on this topic stated that Mooney International had other priorites than the "chute" at this time, for either new aircraft or the existing fleet.  I believe that, in the not too distant future, any airplane manufacturer that wants to compete with Cirrus and sell a significant number of small aircraft will need to provide a whole plane parachute. 

If that happens to be Mooney a retrofit program will probably be developed for the existing fleet.

I also believe that, over time, the sentiments of existing fleet owners will become more pro-chute.

But, what do I know?

Jim

 

 

[Tom]

1 hour ago, DonMuncy said:

 I lost my AI in IMC several years ago. Due to my poor piloting skills, I lost control for brief period of time. I don't know whether I would have considered a chute-pull if it had been available, but I recognize it as a possibility.  Since I didn't have the choice, I dealt with it, and regained control. Ie. not statistic.

Better put, I think, you lost control for a brief period of time because of the dynamics involved in the situation and it was because of your good piloting skills that you regained control. 

[DXB]

I felt a little arrogant answering that I have  little or no interest in a technology that has clear life-saving potential, albeit in a few very narrow contexts and with a risk that increased pilot complacency will counteract any safety dividend. But high ongoing cost and loss of relatively modest useful load in my C model (about 900 lb) make it impractical in my case.  If I want the added safety, I better get back to work so I can afford a newer plane with the chute installed at the factory.

[Hank]

Don't give the chute all of the credit for Cirrus sales. There's always the car like interior, leather seats, XM radio and cupholders. Two doors probably helps, too. And they can brag about "modern design, materials and construction," as long as nobody mentions the Depression-era engine design.  

[philiplane]

So if a lot of potential chute buyers say that they're OK with $10K, but not OK with $25K, does that mean they only value their life at $15K, which is the differential?

Granted, the probability of needing a chute is low, but like a fire extinguisher, you hope to never need it but when you do you are glad you have it. 

I may be one of the few who would put a $25K chute on a $50K Mooney without worrying about resale or other nonsense. I also know several people who have been saved by chutes so maybe that influences the  opinion.

[aviatoreb]

I find the responses to this thread interesting in some ways.  Ok, some come out and say they want a chute at even the higher price point - include me for the reasons I already said. And some say they don't want at any price.  And some inbetween.  Fair enough.  And it is interesting to hear the opinions.

But the discussions is rolling by a few who do not want as if it is a thing we all need to agree with, as if we need to be convinced why it is a bad idea to have a chute.  As if they are campaigning against a chute and trying to convince us pro chute supporters that we are wrong.  It is the presidential campaign season after all.  But this is not such a thing - we can each have a different opinion and all that matters is if the company decides to make an STC.  I figure as a business, the STC would need to have an idea that a certain fraction of the airframe owners would buy to make back their investment and hopefully make a profit. Then whether right or wrong some of us might buy it.

P.S.  I doubt it - such an STC - will come to pass, for the business reasons that the innovators of large scaled STC's are much further and farther between than they were in the GA heyday, but I would be delighted be wrong and I would belly up with a check book.

[MyNameIsNobody]

1)I live in the Midwest.  Lots of bean and corn fields.  I mean LOTS.

2)I do not fly IFR.

3)I do NOT fly at night.

I like the idea of flying a glider vs. riding a chute.  I maintain my plane.  I watch the weather.

To say I have zero interest in a BCS would not be true.  To say I have zero interest in retrofitting a system into my current airframe would be accurate.  The price point will be interesting.

I will take a Sabre Cowl, Garmin 630 and ADSB as well as paint over a chute.  Everybody have fun with the useful load/cost (both buy-in and re-pack.  No thank you.

[Ron Blum]

I am curious.  Did all of the original Mooney's come with shoulder harnesses?

If not, did someone provide an STC to incorporate shoulder harnesses in ALL Mooney airplanes?  Shoulder harnesses save lives by reducing HIC (Head Impact Criteria).

Also, is there an STC to install air bag harnesses in ALL Mooney airplanes?  These also reduce the chance of head impact.

Putting a price on life is neither possible or practical.  Every life is priceless.  SAFETY, Speed and Style.

I am guessing that if someone (on MooneySpace) wants to pursue the business of installing a whole-airplane chute, that would be great!

[Hank]

At some point, probably late 90s or early 2000s, shoulder belts were added to new Mooneys. An STC was created to retrofit them to the Vintage fleet.

Airbag safety belts are now provided in new Mooneys. As STC was created to add them to late model Mooneys, but not to the Vintage fleet despite repeated, vocal pleas. So I can add a shoulder belt for improved safety, but not an airbag of any sort. Adding an airbag for my personal safety violates the FAAs safety regulations, and makes my Mooney officially and legally unairworthy. No A&P can install one, and no IA can sign off on an annual with one in my plane.

Don't you love bureaucracy run wild? I'd really like to have airbag shoulder belts, but alas, I can't. It's just not safe, you know--ask the FAA.

[DXB]

5 minutes ago, Hank said:

At some point, probably late 90s or early 2000s, shoulder belts were added to new Mooneys. An STC was created to retrofit them to the Vintage fleet.

Airbag safety belts are now provided in new Mooneys. As STC was created to add them to late model Mooneys, but not to the Vintage fleet despite repeated, vocal pleas. So I can add a shoulder belt for improved safety, but not an airbag of any sort. Adding an airbag for my personal safety violates the FAAs safety regulations, and makes my Mooney officially and legally unairworthy. No A&P can install one, and no IA can sign off on an annual with one in my plane.

Don't you love bureaucracy run wild? I'd really like to have airbag shoulder belts, but alas, I can't. It's just not safe, you know--ask the FAA.

In contrast to a chute, I'd likely be willing to spring for the airbag belts in my 50k plane.  Another Mooneyspace survey? Maybe someone is listening...

[Hank]

It's been tried before, but it won't hurt to try again. Seems like there used to be someone from AmSafe on the board.

[gsengle]

Life is priceless but money isn't infinite. We have to choose how to split up resources. To get philosophical, we all trade different amounts of our valuable time, i.e. life, for money. So if it takes me a long time to earn the money for BRS, way longer than the amount of life it preserves on average, it's not a good buy for me...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ron Blum]

Hank:  I like your posts and Don's, too.

I do not troll, and I try to be accessible for any and all questions ... although y'all put a lot of stuff up on this site :o)  I am the chief engineer on the new M10.  I will answer any questions that you want to ask at rblum@mooney.com or fly-in-home@att.net or (316) 295-7812 depending on your preference (and my availability).  We, Mooney, would love to save every life that we can (it's hard to save lives when you're not making a profit at it, though).  To say that we have not looked at a whole-aircraft parachute would be naïve (and erroneous).  Just as you individually do, we too must make a business case that makes cents.

The three pages of discussion above that I have read completely are no different than that which we hear at each and every event that we attend.  Some pro; some con; all valid.

Cirrus may have most of the sales ... at this time, but how many airplanes are we as an industry producing today?  We made an order of magnitude more airplanes 30-40 years ago ... and I think that there are more people on Earth today than there was back then.  Why are people not buying airplanes?  That's the question that we need to answer.

If there is an etiquette rule about me not being able to be a member on MooneySpace, please let me know, and I will dismiss myself.  Honestly, I know that I definitely WON'T see all your posts (which I apologize for upfront).  Each and everyone of you is a valued member of our family, and you opinion counts.  THANKS TO ALL!  -Ron

[tony]

Ron, welcome and thanks for posting.  You're always welcome here!

Have you had a first flight yet?  That's always an exciting and very memorable/ moving event. 

[Ron Blum]

Before the New Year.

[gsengle]

Time to add an M10 forum

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ron Blum]

Now that's something that couldn't be said in a few decades.

[steingar]

If I didn't want to subject myself to risk I wouldn't fly airplanes.  Heck, I wouldn't leave the house, but that isn't much of a life.  Airplane doesn't know its night.  Airplane doesn't know there are rocks below.

 

Those who would restrict their flying to daytime VFR over cornfields should keep in mind that plenty of guys have died on VFR days over cornfields.  I think most accidents happen due to miscontrol in the pattern.  No chute will save you from that.

 

 

[MyNameIsNobody]

17 minutes ago, steingar said:

If I didn't want to subject myself to risk I wouldn't fly airplanes.  Heck, I wouldn't leave the house, but that isn't much of a life.  Airplane doesn't know its night.  Airplane doesn't know there are rocks below.

 

Those who would restrict their flying to daytime VFR over cornfields should keep in mind that plenty of guys have died on VFR days over cornfields.  I think most accidents happen due to miscontrol in the pattern.  No chute will save you from that.

 

 

I don't "keep it in mind", (although I know the facts)...otherwise "I wouldn't fly airplanes or leave the house"