Hurrah! well done that man. Shame about the bump on the noggin', but he'll get over that. :ok:

gerry111

Nicely and professionally sumarised. :ok:

Must have been a bit uncomfortable ringing his mate to tell he had trashed his Cirrus/Ferrari/Maserati/Roller, even though I'm certain his mate would have been relieved he was unhurt.

Well done that man.

Love him to bits but I know the feelings when my very shaken son rang to tell me he had crashed my brand new S80AWD when I let him take it for a spin. Not his fault and saved from the risk of serious injury by the 2000 odd airbags and other Volvo stuff the use of which meant a write off. Initial cost high but the result priceless and not a whimper from the insurance company.

His mother never said another word about what I paid for it. :E

Would that have made a difference??:E

Nup, but it made me feel a bit better about it. :\

gerry111
 

Gerry,
hindsight is always a beautiful thing. Personally, would I have had a crack for that paddock? Hell yes. The ballistic chute like any safety device, has some limitations. Those limitations need to be at the forefront of your mind as one assesses how your forced landing is progressing. Chute= last resort, assess your progress and make the decision before you enter the area outside its envelope.

I have no qualms with the pilots decision to deploy, but from the information we have to work with here, it does appear the decision to deploy was made early.
Wasn't there, don't know for sure, but that is how it presents.

End of the day, 2 guys still walking :ok:

over 2200 times............provided you equate having no engine is the same as having a failed one.
Actually thinking about the field quality, my initial power training at YCEM saw me landing on an operational field that was as best as the worst paddock i ever landed on.

Exactly why I asked the question. Rich, Fine Green may have it. Probably a q better answered by a cirrus jockey who has done the course for a definative answer.

Cheers
Jas

This is the fact that I applaud him for ..... once you have made the decision to (insert action here) stick with it etc etc, he made the decision early (IMO a good thing) sorted out where and when he wanted to deploy and stuck with it .... rest is now history, bump on the noggin and a good landing (anyone you can walk away from)
cheers
A172

Avgas, therein lies the problem. Once you make the decision to [deploy the chute], you are stuck with it! There is no going back.

I'm a little concerned that people are being conned into believing that the BRS is their get-out-of-jail-free card!

It's a bit like a EFATO in a twin vs a single. A twin does not guarantee a successful outcome!

Presumably the others were unsuccessful then?

Anyone prefer to have been in a Bonanza in that situation?

How about the Hamilton Island one then - I seem to recall the pilot got a bit banged up but survived getting dunked.

I may be wrong here, but, at 1500' (high key) how many of you have good enough eyesight to tell the size of the imperfections on the ground?? The paddock may be huge and relatively flat but how high are the plough furrows, for instance (or rabbit holes or a lot of other possibilities). I would suggest that if any one of you can determine that from the high key, then you are of legendary status. Mear mortals may, however have chosen to take the known end result as the preferred option.

Are Cirrus serious? 1600ft per minute under canopy :hmm: make the friggin' canopy bigger, and make it square so you can steer it..........tools.:ugh:

Well, its a better option than Boeing has got.:E:E

I believe the Hamilton island one was at low level (below recommended deployment altitude) and it flipped over when it hit the water and Steve escaped out the back window by using the patented Cirrus (tm) safety hammer. Will have to drag up the prune thread on it, but none-the-less it was certainly deployed.

One other went off due to engine failure near Sydney that was unsuccessful and was also at a very low altitude.

Pilot escapes sinking plane | Mackay Daily Mercury

ASN Aircraft accident 24-DEC-2009 Cirrus SR22 GTS G3 Turbo VH-SLS

Maybe that wasn't "successful" in the eyes of the ATSB.

You learn something every day, I didn't recall reading that back when he dropped in the ocean.

Jack,
you cannot be serious about making it steerable. surely!

The training for meat bombs progressing to steerable chutes is bad enough, but you want to make a pilot be able to steer a chute from the cockpit in a high emotion environment.
hmmm

Better we leave it to the elements and perve on the cute nurses during our post BRS recovery stint in the hospital.

Fuc'n a bro, that way you could do a forced landing :ok: bit expensive to practice them though :cool:

I reckon I'd prefer an A36, maybe with the gear up, in that terrain.

Those in the know would prefer to be in a Bonanza, preferably a V-tail, in any situation! :E:E:E

Dr :8

Not even tiger country
 

Come on, it was just a paddock - would land any GA aircraft I have had on it with no issues.


Maybe we need to re-visit EFATO and engine failure procedures.

One could ask why there is no ATSB report.

There have been mis-fuelled accidents before, however ay Hammo, I seriously doubt that, and supposedly the nozzles for JetA on't fit into the typical GA filler.

If it was mis-fuelled, by the owner who has a lot of GA experience, would you not think that was strange.....almost by design? :hmm: Dots not lining up?

http://www.beechtalk.com/forums/imag...ies/rofl02.gifhttp://www.beechtalk.com/forums/imag...ies/rofl02.gifhttp://www.beechtalk.com/forums/imag...ies/rofl02.gif




And Forkie......how is that working out for you? Not much risk of landing in paddocks these days?

I reckon if we dangled a nice SR22 with the TAT integrated O2 and TN system........you would be on it like a fat kid on a cup cake! :}