BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 15 Apr 2014, 13:42

Username Protected wrote:

OK, here I go getting into the "Chute" argument.

The Cirrus Chute like the ejection seat is there for when you run out of options. Running out of options occurs at different points for different people. While an incompetent pilot (who knows he's incompetent) might pull as soon as the engine quits a competent pilot might never pull and make a successful landing or might pull when it becomes apparent that there is no good place to land. So the chute, if you have one installed, is a very good safety feature. Cirrus is looking for successful outcomes to emergency situations and they are attacking the problem through TRAINING to help keep the number of incompetent pilots flying their airplanes to a minimum. (Because, if you can successfully land and NOT pull the chute.............that's a good thing)

The thing that bothers me most when flying my Baron with my wife, kids or grandkids is that if something happens to me, who's going to land the airplane? Being almost 65 makes this a bigger concern with each passing day. Briefing a passenger on how to deploy a BRS chute would be a wonderful option in the event of my incapacitation.

Nailed it. Feel the same way. Purchased the Baron for the peace of mind at night and with a full airplane over water. Wife can land the baron in a pinch, but I guarantee she would prefer the chute.

Anyone not wanting an 'ejection seat' or a parachute is simply arrogant or ignorant.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 15 Apr 2014, 13:50

Here is another very informative and interesting thread and for the 90% of those who have shared their feelings and opinions openly and without negativity, I thank you. For the rest who insist on type bashing, I simply do not get it.

Our biggest challenge as pilots is that we are a very, very small percentage of the population. Today, roughly 0.2% of the US population are pilots. For those with instrument ratings, that figure is 0.1% of the population. There are SO FEW of us out there and the reason our airplanes, fuel, parts, maintenance and everything associated with aviation is SO expensive is that there are numbers are far too small. The only way that ever changes is if we're successful in increasing the size of our community.

However, instead of recognizing that and appreciating and welcoming every brother (and sister) among our small community, some choose to bash the other due to the logo on the side of their airplane? I simply do not get it. Who cares what another guy flies? You're going to levy judgment and snub your nose because someone flies a Cessna or a Cirrus or a Piper and not a Beech product?

Yes this forum is called Beechtalk and there are many Beech guys here but it's true value IMHO is not in the brand represented but the overall collective knowledge and willingness to share information in order to help a fellow pilot. It's the reason I'm here and as a result of being here, I've learned a mountain about Beech products and have become a huge A36 fan. Will I buy one? Perhaps but many factors are going in to that decision and I may buy something else.

Bottom line is that in order for aviation to survive and thrive and we need to increase our population and in addition to attracting as many non-pilots as possible, we also need to support each other.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 15 Apr 2014, 14:35

Excellent, Don.

Those who eat their own will one day run out of food..

Username Protected · **Posted:** 15 Apr 2014, 14:41

A thoughtful post Don. Well said.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 15 Apr 2014, 16:48

Username Protected wrote:

What are the take-aways from this thread?

Cirrus aircraft are safer?

Cirrus pilots value safety more than others?

Cirrus pilots value their families more than others?

Cirrus pilots are committed to safety more than others?

Training has no limits? Anyone who trains more than you do is more concerned about safety than you are?

Meeting the FAA regs and insurance company requirements means you are a bottom feeder?

I'm really worn out by the Cirrus evangelists. Really. Truly. You don't need to "save" me. Honestly. Please don't come by my front door trying to get me to convert. I like my "religion", it's a Beechcraft. I won't go to CirrusTalk (or wherever Cirrus pilots hang out when they're not here) and promote my "religion" and try to get you to convert.

No matter how often you pray someone will pray more. No matter how often you attend church someone will attend more. How holy is holy enough? How safe is safe enough?

Life has risks in almost any endeavor. Pilots of traditional airplanes have amassed a good safety record. If you don't agree that how do you explain flight in your pre-Cirrus days?

If each of us does our part and merely avoids the most common blunders GA can demonstrate an amazing safety record.

There are emergency modes in an aircraft that a parachute won't solve. It is being touted as some sort of panacea, but it's not. That does not mean it is not a worthwhile improvement.

The accident statistics demonstrate that twin turbine powered aircraft (often with a crew of 2) is where the number of incidents gets really low. Last time I checked we've got a long way to go to match that safety record, chute or no chute.

Time will tell how much the Cirrus Chute changes the game. If it's truly as good as you all suggest, insurance costs for Cirri should plummet due to reduced liability.

We shall see.

Or it could just save a few more lives... We shall see

Cirrus is looking safer than average GA