08 Nov 2025, 13:32 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail  Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 13:50 |
|
 |
|
|
Joined: 08/25/13
Posts: 615
Post Likes: +128
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Maybe the chute will only be required for the first 50 or so hours, while the piston pilot gets up to speed?  Over 50% of GA accidents are in the approach/landing phase. By the time the pilot accepted the fact that they were in trouble, it would be too late to use the chute. 20% of GA accidents are in the takeoff phase, the chute won't be helping here. The chute will really be marginalized with the SF50. Marginalized to where it should only be used when the pilot is incapacitated. If there are many chute pulls like the SR series, sales guys, underwriters and training facilities will be hung. I agree. The chute appeals to me for only one reason. Engine out at night or low IMC. It is useless during take off or landing. I will not fly a single at night or low IFR. I would with a chute. It's not a cure for all ills, but it has a place.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 14:14 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13085
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Eclipse: 0 fatals
Mustang: 0 fatals
Phenom 100: 1 fatal (chute useless).
That's about 1,000 delivered aircraft over several years, around a million flight hours, and not a single case the chute would have made a difference.
If a whole bunch of SF50s end up chuting to the ground, then we have to question why Cirrus builds an airplane that needs it so much while others don't.
The belief in the chute is another example of inappropriate piston experience transferred to jets.
Mike C. You said "crash". Which is it? Don't change the subject and back pedal.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 14:15 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13085
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It already exists. It's called auto-feather and rudder boost. Yet they're still crashing.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 14:29 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/25/13
Posts: 615
Post Likes: +128
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It already exists. It's called auto-feather and rudder boost. Yet they're still crashing.
Yeah, so? I mean look at the Airbus accident described above and the video. All the systems in the world will not overcome stupid. Cannot be done. Stupid always "wins".
Go fly a KA. You are going to be amazed how well and easy it climbs on one. I get it, you want more speed for your buck and are going the CJ3/Phenom route. I understand. But a KA is not the death trap you're painting it to be. No more than a PC12 if keys handed to "stupid". Ability to meet obstacle departures on one is priceless to me and my family. Looked at some lower end jets and the engine out balanced field requirements and climb gradients leave a lot to be desired hot and high.
I don't know you, but you seem like a bright fellow. I'm sure you can handle engine out in KA just fine. My pilot is not the brightest fellow and he does just fine.
Last edited on 09 Feb 2015, 14:34, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 14:32 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13085
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: But a KA is not the death trap you're painting it to be. No more than a PC12 if keys handed to "stupid". I agree. My post you referenced in this thread was more of a joke. The linked article had nothing to do with what we're talking talking about.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 14:35 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/25/13
Posts: 615
Post Likes: +128
|
|
Username Protected wrote: But a KA is not the death trap you're painting it to be. No more than a PC12 if keys handed to "stupid". I agree. My post you referenced in this thread was more of a joke. The linked article had nothing to do with what we're talking talking about.
I always forget what we talk about here anyway. The thread title always seems to be deceiving. Oh yeah, I see. Mike C claims SF50 will bankrupt the entire state of MN, Chris W will state it doesn't matter as the state is already bankrupt, Todd will sell you salvation with an extended warranty and you'll gladly take EBT for Snaple 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 14:42 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08
Posts: 26338
Post Likes: +13085
Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I always forget what we talk about here anyway. The thread title always seems to be deceiving. Oh yeah, I see. Mike C claims SF50 will bankrupt the entire state of MN, Chris W will state it doesn't matter as the state is already bankrupt, Todd will sell you salvation with an extended warranty and you'll gladly take EBT for Snaple That's right. You've got it.  The linked article was about F16's being flown against ISIS and how one of the new ones has a new TAWS system that will not allow the airplane to crash blah blah blah.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 10 Feb 2015, 00:17 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20734
Post Likes: +26203
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: By the time the pilot accepted the fact that they were in trouble, it would be too late to use the chute. If you are above 1000 AGL and below Vne airspeed, your aren't yet in real trouble. Yet if you activate the chute below those conditions, the chute advocates say that wasn't "in envelope" and excuse the chute from blame should it not help you. In other words, the chute only works when you aren't really in danger. Quote: The chute will really be marginalized with the SF50. Marginalized to where it should only be used when the pilot is incapacitated. In the 6 million hours of SR flying, there has not been a single case of a chute deployment being initiated by anyone other than the pilot. Pilot incapacitation is not a valid reason for a chute. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 10 Feb 2015, 00:43 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 07/30/12
Posts: 2388
Post Likes: +364
Company: Aerlogix, Jet Aeronautical
Location: Prescott, AZ
Aircraft: B-55, RV-6
|
|
Username Protected wrote: If you are above 1000 AGL and below Vne airspeed, your aren't yet in real trouble.
Pilot incapacitation is not a valid reason for a chute.
Mike C. Many ways to be in trouble above 1000' and below Vne, what context are working off of? Edit: Number one cause of accidents, Worldwide Commercial Jet Fleet, Loss of Control- In-flight. Obviously, these are "commercial", but I think there's plenty of danger above 1000' and below Vne for the GA guys as well, maybe more. I consider the chute a good life insurance policy, hopefully my wife would never have to use it, still good to have.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 10 Feb 2015, 00:55 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20734
Post Likes: +26203
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I consider the chute a good life insurance policy, hopefully my wife would never have to use it, still good to have. It is delusional to think your wife can know when to pull the chute when PILOTS more often than not don't know when. So far, in 6 million hours, no passenger has done it, and dozens of pilots failed to do it in time, too. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 10 Feb 2015, 01:03 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/30/12
Posts: 2388
Post Likes: +364
Company: Aerlogix, Jet Aeronautical
Location: Prescott, AZ
Aircraft: B-55, RV-6
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I consider the chute a good life insurance policy, hopefully my wife would never have to use it, still good to have. It is delusional to think your wife can know when to pull the chute when PILOTS more often than not don't know when. So far, in 6 million hours, no passenger has done it, and dozens of pilots failed to do it in time, too. Mike C.
Not true, I teach wives to fly King Air's, why can't I teach my own wife when to pull the chute? Not delusional at all.
The pilot is the one that is responsible for getting the plane into this position, bad decision making and confirmation bias probably won't let them get out alive.
When someone passes out, it's pretty easy to get the airplane slowed up enough to activate the chute.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Jet w/ V-tail Posted: 10 Feb 2015, 01:19 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20734
Post Likes: +26203
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: why can't I teach my own wife when to pull the chute? Give a detailed answer to this question: what are the exact criteria when she should pull the chute? That is far more difficult than you think, so difficult that pilots make the wrong decision most of the time. Quote: Not delusional at all. It has never happened after millions of hours. Quote: When someone passes out, it's pretty easy to get the airplane slowed up enough to activate the chute. How often do people pass out? This just isn't a significant risk. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|
