Well said onetrack. Fully agree.

Figures have been thrown around for years that the average death can cost industry / community in excess of $1m by the time superannuation, insurances, court costs etc are paid out.

There were 4 adult male POB's in this crash. The aircraft was likely valued at circa AUD$700k.

Now if only I could fit one into my 172 for my rare flights over tiger country.

Avgas I believe you can have an aftermarket BRS fitted to a 172 and other aircraft. CAPS has been deployed not fully but successfully at altitudes lower than that stated by XXX as well.

CAPS
 

Given the twig that is a nose wheel and the speed across fence I think having the chute up your sleeve is a valuable thing

When the engine quits over terrain like that, it's not time to be all macho and prove that you're a better pilot because you can glide an aircraft.

Pull the chute, who cares. The end result is more likely to be better than a forced landing in that sort of area.

morno

As long as the chute works!

Once you pull that handle, there is no going back! Not a decision I would like to face!

Chutes on light aircraft singles are like air bags in vehicles. Ideally don't leave home without them. Anything to prevent an off-field arrival in tiger country is a great bonus. They, like air bags and seat belts can't be the answer to every situation but today demonstrates a great result to those on-board!

It is also interesting that FAR's require chutes for people flying aircraft that are certified for aerobatics no matter what...

pulling the chute is a serious decision, you WILL get injured. and you WILL destroy the aircraft. if out west, and all goes quiet, nice big flat paddocks, nice straight farm roads, is the chute the best option? over tiger country?

from what i have heard, 1 passenger has a broken neck, and another a broken back.. and seeing the chute pulled on another cirrus years ago near Hoxton park, you will most likely, or certainly get seriously injured pulling the chute.. that aircraft was within 1 mile of Hoxton park aerodrome, and pulled the chute, both pilots were very seriously injured.

I just dont trust any aircraft that states in the SOPs for emergency procedures, to pull the chute as the only option..

Not true, certainly not USA FARs.

Does anyone know the RoD with the chute fully deployed? I'm guessing the impact is still going to hurt.

Was in Wanaka two weeks ago :-0

900 - 1680fpm descent rate.

Equivalent to jumping from 7 feet.

News here reported one passenger had back pain, but nothing about broken backs or necks. Hopefully the news was correct.

I get the impression the tail snapped off when it hit the powerline as tail separation is not normally part of CAPS deployment...


So Jabba do you reckon this one had a TCM turbo versus the TAT one?

Yeah they can glide so long as you have somewhere to go to tiger country there if you did not notice
Cheers

Wait. Cirrus have a full motion sim? Crikey.

so whats the expected G force on your body from a drop from 13 ft?

Careful with your interpretations ...

First description,

A 7 ft jump, say off a low roof of a house onto your feet / butt / head.

Second description,

A 13 ft "drop" in the aircraft.

Not the same thing as the 13 ft drop includes crumpling undercarriage and honeycomb seats.

Ultralights - Many people have survived falls where the forces on the body exceeded 150G and even 200G. It all depends on what you land on, how you land, and if anything is there to break your fall. See the "case studies" in the link below.

Mechanical analysis of survival in falls from heights of fifty to one hundred and fifty feet -- De Haven 6 (1): 62 -- Injury Prevention

Remember the rear gunner who fell out of an aircraft without a parachute at 18,000' during WW2 and landed in pine trees and snowdrift, and survived with only a broken ankle??

Nicholas Alkemade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In other cases, people have suffered brain damage and died merely from falling over and hitting their head on solid pavement - or died from balcony falls as small as 10'.

I was forced to jump out of a tree from 13' up as a 10 yr old, and I'm still here to tell you about it. In fact, I never even suffered any jarring - and not even a scratch.

These blokes in the Cirrus had powerlines and trees to break their fall, and they were sitting in comfortable seats. Any physical damage they may have incurred would more than likely have been through getting thrown about inside the cabin as they touched down in a pretty uneven manner.

The media stated only one pax was transported to hospital "for observation" - thus indicating some possible concussion.

Hang on a minute, 200G is 200G no matter what you land on.

Landing on something soft is better than landing on something hard at the same velocity because the soft landing spreads deceleration over a longer time, thereby reducing the peak force experienced.

Butfli - Sorry, I could have worded that paragraph better. I wasn't suggesting that you could land on a pile of feathers and sustain 200G forces on your body, and then land on rocks with a 200G force and suffer vastly different results.
What I did mean, was that what you land on, will alter the amount of G's your body sustains, according to the decelerative ability of the material you land on.

For those who reckon they could have flown to a satisfactory landing where this bloke ended up - here's the address where they landed.

https://www.google.com.au/maps/place...93898427f24a08

These blokes are pretty lucky, they only just missed a monstrous HT powerline. I'll hazard a guess that HT powerline is 66kV or 132kV.
I don't know how much control the pilot still had when descending under the 'chute, I'll wager it wasn't anywhere near as much as he would have liked!