007H
I wonder if half the reason for all the attention this aircraft gets is because it is the first to have a chute as standard.
having that chute brings in a different mentality to flying and different option potentials.
Even the fact that with conventional aircraft engine failure you are going down! Whether you are successful will depend on your skills and the landing sites open to you.
The Cirrus pilot can forget all that and just pull the chute.
I think if the chute was used as one strapped to your back ie bail out when the aircraft becomes critical then there might not be this level of discussion but fitted to the aircraft challenges conventional methods and teaching so it is bound to generate discussion?
Pilots are pilots and I do not believe that Cirrus pilots are substandard although I do believe the chute will lure them into flying in conditions or situations they maybe wary of in conventional aircraft.
I also believe that reliance on systems rather than keeping current on flying the aircraft will make a pilot lazy and complacent.
I do think the chute is the way ahead and would love to see other manufacturers following suit and offering aircraft with built in and tested chute systems.
Cirrus gets attention because it is the first and there is still debate over when the chute should be used.
It is always a worry flying single pilot that should anything happen to that pilot or the aircraft that the precious cargo of a family on board stand no chance! But with the chute properly trained in its execution they do!
The 172 had the best safety record! I wonder what a chuted 172 would be like compared? Of course if one could be fitted as standard!
Pace