Cirrus/BRS system saves 4 people

Is that parachute system why the CAA wont certificate them? There are plenty of Cirrus’s in Europe but all seem to stay on the N register. Comments?

I read somewhere that it’s its Avidyne Entegra (spelling?) “glass cockpit” which is preventing European certification as its makers have not yet brought it through that process.

Is that parachute system why the CAA wont certificate them? There are plenty of Cirrus’s in Europe but all seem to stay on the N register. Comments?

The second ‘incident’ followed multiple instrument failure above cloud. See today’s (Monday) ANN story.
mmitch.

I can’t see this as a gimmick. There will be hardware failures, and pilots will fly themselves into situations they can’t cope with, whether there is a BRS or not. But it does offer a way out, why add to the statistics? If I was flying my wife and kids and found myself in conditions I couldn’t cope with, over mountainous terrain, I would certainly pop the chute. I wouldn’t further demonstrate my lack of airmanship by rolling it into a ball when a better option was available.
I don’t think we are talking large numbers here, but there have been six lives saved already. It does seem that there was considerable risk in all three incidents, but they all survived.
It will be interesting to see if anyone else installs these systems.

Originally posted by macky42
If both these pilots had more confidence in the BRS than their ability to carry out a successful forced landing, perhaps it’s best they used it. It’s better than two holes in the ground and 5 dead people.

Undeniable. But that really isn’t the question.

Moggy

If both these pilots had more confidence in the BRS than their ability to carry out a successful forced landing, perhaps it’s best they used it. It’s better than two holes in the ground and 5 dead people.

I don’t like to sound like the senior officers in the RFC who wouldn’t allow aircrew to wear parachutes in case they jumped rather than fight but …

OK these are press releases, looking like they’ve been posted verbatim from the manufacturer, and designed to sell expensive aircraft, but how many of these aircraft could have been force-landed perfectly successfully by conventional means?

Additional info, gathered from local media reports, suggests that the pilot experienced a loss of control as a result of the aforementioned severe turbulence and deployed the chute over the mountainous terrain.

Given that we all know what a reliable source of information the local media can be in aviation matters

Loss of control in turbulence? What on earth weather was this guy flying in? Or is this not a very airworthy airframe?

This raises the second question. Is this ‘safety’ gimmick causing pilots to increase their risk acceptance on the basis of “Well I can allways pull the handle?”

Moggy

Now it’s happened again! See ANNs Sunday news page.
mmitch.