Originally Posted by
Rory Dixon
It is a fact that the rate of fatal accidents in Cirrus isn't much different than in other high performance airplanes.
It is not a "fact" that the accident rate isn't "much different" than other high performance singles. The true measure of accident rates has to measure both risk and exposure.
For example if you looked at the the number of accidents versus the fleet size of Cessna 182's in Alaska you would find it is 5 times higher then the total accident rate per 100,000 hrs for similar aircraft in the Continental US. The obvious reason is the extremely demanding flying conditions in Alaska compared to the lower 48.
Similarly if you have a higher proportion of low time pilots combined with a higher proportion of hours flown in IFR weather , which is the case for the Cirrus, then you are comparing apples and oranges if you are measuring it against other aircraft. The only "fact" in the question of Cirrus accidents is that there has been 38 accidents involving a chute pull where everyone survived that would otherwise have resulted in certain death for most/all of the aircraft occupants.
There been numerous other accidents where the chute was not used and the outcome was tragic.
Obviously continued efforts should be made to reduce the number of accidents that resulted from poor piloting, but for me the bottom line is simple.
If the engine fails and a cause check will not get it going again, pull the chute.
If you have lost control of the aircraft, pull the chute.