Pace, let me quote a couple of your statements:
Originally Posted by Pace
Reading some of the defensive responses makes me feel that some think I am attacking the Cirrus and its BRS system.
Read on . . .
Originally Posted by Pace
When the manufacturer will not condone the use of the chute simply stating consider its use and a second body are advising the use of the BRS for any engine failure almost even down to a sneeze then its natural that when to pull will be discussed as there is NO official guidance.
The chute pull records would indicate that many could have been avoided by basic training and pilot skills.
Seems your choice of words mis-states, and for effect attacks, both Cirrus and COPA positions on the use of the parachute.
"Simple stating consider its use"?
The POH, as well as several other Cirrus training documents, emphasize the use of the Cirrus parachute for loss of control situations and avoiding landings where safety is not assured. For spins, it says this: "Because the SR22 has not been certified for spin recovery, the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS) must be deployed if the airplane departs controlled flight. Refer to Section 3 – Emergency Procedures, Inadvertent Spiral/Spin Entry." For inadvertent spiral dive, it says "In all cases, if the aircraft enters an unusual attitude from which recovery is not assured, immediately deploy CAPS. Refer to Section 10, Safety Information, for CAPS deployment information." For forced landings, it says "If flight conditions or terrain does not permit a safe landing, CAPS deployment may be required. Refer to Section 10, Safety Information, for CAPS deployment scenarios and landing considerations."
Seems more thoughtful than simple, and more emphatic than consider.
"Advising the use of the BRS for any engine failure almost even down to a sneeze"?
Rhetorical flourish? Setting up a stalking horse? Or your interpretation for an attack that diminishes substantial effort?
Check the investigation reports for "sneeze" and you won't find it. Check COPA safety presentations for "sneeze" and you won't find it.
What you will find is the estimation that 120 people have died in scenarios similar to survivable parachute pulls. VFR-in-IMC. Mechanical failures. Avionics failures. Avoiding off-airport landings. How can we get into the minds of Cirrus pilots that they need to think differently in emergencies, since they have an option of abandoning recovery and pulling the parachute handle?
For the record, in the past 6 months, Cirrus pilots have had 1 fatal accident and 7 survivable parachute deployments:
Brazil -- pilot presumed dead in the interior since no aircraft has been found (1 fatality)
Brazil -- pilot avoided off-airport landing after loss of engine power (3 survivors)
West Virginia, US -- pilot avoided off-airport landing after engine failed to respond to go-around power (1 survivor)
France -- pilot avoided off-airport landing at night after loss of engine power (2 survivors)
Idaho, US -- pilot avoided off-airport landing during emergency descent following catastrophic engine failure (2 survivors)
Colorado, US -- pilot avoided off-airport landing in mountains during icing encounter (1 survivor)
Mexico -- pilot avoided off-airport landing in desert after loss of engine power (1 survivor)
Australia -- pilot avoided off-airport landing after loss of control (3 survivors)
No sneezes. 15 survivors.
Some situations could have been avoided by training and better judgment. COPA sees over 400 of COPA pilots (about 13% of our membership) attending recurrent training, over 500 attending decision-making seminars, and about 1,500 credits issued for the FAA Wings program. The Cirrus training network has expanded and the messages delivered more consistently. All this in a general aviation context that does not require more than a flight review every 24 months.
However, one consideration of thoughtful people is that the penalty for poor aeronautical decisions should not be death.
And before you get to amped up about avoiding off-airport landings, please be advised that Adrian researched this. He looked at the last 100 fatal accidents in each of Bonanza and Mooney aircraft, both comparable high-performance single-engine piston aircraft to the Cirrus fleet. He found about 20% of the fatal accidents in each type happened during off-airport landings. Good things to avoid, eh?
So, yes, Pace. I think your choice of rhetoric does attack those who have contributed to this significant reduction in Cirrus fatalities -- 1 in the past 6 months. Less than 1.00 fatal accidents in 100,000 flying hours in the past 12 months.
Cheers
Rick
-----
COPA Aviation Safety Chair