I believe this is correct. Besides the g-levels experienced upon 'landing' the chute straps that connect the risers to the airframe are embedded within the structure. When the chute deploys these straps rip open portions of the fuselage skin. Thus at a minimum the fuselage would have to be extensively repaired.
I just found in wiki that 14 of the 91 deployments have been checked by Cirrus and put back into service... including the very first deployment (it landed in thick mesquite that cushioned the impact).
At risk of boring everyone, I was awakened by this thread to think back about my PPL check ride and it brought up some memories. I had an "engine failure "on take off and I had to announce my intentions. After reaching the test area I had to perform spins to the right with a precision point of recovery after 2 turns, 2 1/2 turns, and maybe 3. Then spins to the left with the same recovery on a point. Then it was 720's to the right with no loss of altitude and coming out on the starting point. Same to the left. Stalls in a power off turn, stalls in a climbing turn, 3 full power stalls with stick in the gut and a straight ahead recovery. Rolling on a point, a falling leaf, eights on pylon ("power failure" in the middle of it), pylon eights (one pylon with turns at either end and crossing the pylon with each change of direction), both set up with a 90 deg crosswind. He threw in a chandelle and we finished with 4 power off accuracy landings.
https://www.cirruspilots.org/copa/safety_programs/w/safety_pages/723.cirrus-caps-history.aspx#CAPS_Planes_that_Were_Repaired_and_Flew_Again
None of the jets will be salvageable... the 'chute is in the nose. The plane hits the ground vertically, tail down.
It deploys from the nose, but that does not necessarily mean it 'hangs' from the nose. Any pics? Check out the 1:43 mark. Not sure if this represents the final configuration, but there appear to be risers attached near the aft end of the cabin.
Thanks, Jim. I haven't thought that the jabbering about days past has any importance now but I enjoy kicking it around. If it entertains everybody I'm all for it. Being retired allows me to sit in my chair and make up some more stuff. Problem is, I don't have a cat to stroke while I'm snoozing. Honestly, I find myself going through my flying days and doing things in my mind that I enjoyed so much. When I mentioned my PPL flight test I re-lived going from a righthand 720 , coming out on point and immediately rolling into the left 720 and maintaining altitude. I sure as hell couldn't do that today without wallowing all over the sky. Maybe when I get my final wings, I will do better....if I'm not assigned to cleaning the grease pits....and that's a real possibility.
Not sure there was ever an NTSB report. I landed it at an uncontrolled airport. I did fill out a NASA report to cover my butt but no one ever contacted me from the NTSB even though ATC clearly knew I was having an emergency. I was in class A airspace when I declared.
I semi-remember some quote by one of the Cirrus founders back when I was actively flying. Something like this when he was asked if they want every Bonanza owner to become a Cirrus owner and he responded no, we want every BMW owner to become a Cirrus owner. (Maybe someone can correct?)
Wow. Bummer. Most of us fly thousands of hours without experiencing engine failures. You fly a relatively new airplane and the motor craps the bed and nobody cares. The government dropping the ball I get. But Cirrus too. Reports on these types of events are a cornerstone of aviation safety. That’s really sad. Glad it worked out well for you. Great work!
I think that may have been one if our real Ferriestas on here? Jeff Ippoliti who was a founder of Celebration in FL.
I am in no way a pilot or a plane owner, however I ran across this thread on Reddit r/avation which might have played into this incident and the reason to pull the cord, a financial one based on insurance payouts: "Another crappy incentive: in a Cirrus with an engine out, if you land the plane safely you pay for the overhaul, but if you pull the chute and live it’s free. Edit: source - happened to my friend. His cylinder blew threw the engine and cowling, spewed oil everywhere and he decided he had enough time, airspeed and altitude to safely attempt a landing. He had the best landing of his life, but had to shell out like $35k for the engine overhaul. He later learned from the insurance company that they wouldn’t pay because he didn’t pull the chute because that’s technically what you’re supposed to do according to the POH." https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/9hynn1/pilot_of_piper_pa30_performs_perfect_belly_landing/
Rob, while i agree that ideally (!) you don't pull above a densely populated area, you also know you can't control when a catastrophic event like an engine fire occurs.... It is pretty clear that in this case, he will (or has) lost his engine, and as such he will need to make an emergency landing. The mandated SOP is to pull the chute. This has nothing to do with 'new Cirrus type pilots', but with 'following what the FOM / AFM mandates'. As a result, over 80 successful CAPS deployments have occured where people have walked away.... It's commendable... quite the opposite of your comment.
Anybody have a current SR22 or SR22 POH handy? Here's an excerpt from an older one. It seems to leave some room for pilot judgement...as it should IMHO. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Should one consider the % of incidents at altitude vs near-ground level to see how that factors into Cirrus pilots' (or I suppose any other brand pilots) decision-making? I assume at altitude you have more time to exercise judgement skills as opposed to 'just trying to save your ass' at 150 feet? Not a licensed pilot so just asking......correct me if there is protocol I don't know of.....
Depends on the circumstances. For an extreme example, if at night, in weather, and over mountains then just pulling the chute might not be a bad idea.