24 Apr 2024, 07:03 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 17 Oct 2017, 21:23 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/19/10 Posts: 291 Post Likes: +128
Aircraft: TBM
|
|
I really don't have a dog in this fight - I want the jet to be a tremendous success... but... that video doesn't seem to show much beyond the beginning of a chute deployment. Does anyone know if the end result was a success? The parachute finish opening? Was the "landing" survivable? Etc.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 17 Oct 2017, 21:26 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/31/10 Posts: 13101 Post Likes: +6970
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I really don't have a dog in this fight - I want the jet to be a tremendous success... but... that video doesn't seem to show much beyond the beginning of a chute deployment. Does anyone know if the end result was a success? The parachute finish opening? Was the "landing" survivable? Etc. The vid shows the chute fully open.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 17 Oct 2017, 21:33 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/19/10 Posts: 291 Post Likes: +128
Aircraft: TBM
|
|
I don't know much about parachutes other than they are supposed to keep you from hitting the ground too hard. Was my video cut she Orr or is it fully opened when it is narrower at the bottom of the chute than the middle area? Username Protected wrote: I really don't have a dog in this fight - I want the jet to be a tremendous success... but... that video doesn't seem to show much beyond the beginning of a chute deployment. Does anyone know if the end result was a success? The parachute finish opening? Was the "landing" survivable? Etc. The vid shows the chute fully open.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 17 Oct 2017, 21:38 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/31/10 Posts: 13101 Post Likes: +6970
|
|
You’ve got to watch a little further. 45 seconds in...
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 17 Oct 2017, 21:44 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/19/10 Posts: 291 Post Likes: +128
Aircraft: TBM
|
|
Thanks Jesse - for some reason my video stopped before that, when the chute was not yet fully deployed. Tried several times, but it kept stopping at the same place. Username Protected wrote: You’ve got to watch a little further. 45 seconds in...
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 17 Oct 2017, 21:45 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/22/12 Posts: 2601 Post Likes: +2362 Company: Retired Location: Lynnwood, WA (KPAE)
Aircraft: 1993 Bonanza A36TN
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I would think that maybe the chute was designed to be "ejected" from the plane and then the plane could make a normal landing. Pretty sure that's what they did with the parachute tests on the piston. No point in trashing a plane for each test.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 17 Oct 2017, 21:50 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/21/08 Posts: 5469 Post Likes: +6186 Location: Decatur, TX (XA99)
Aircraft: 1979 Bonanza A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I would think that maybe the chute was designed to be "ejected" from the plane and then the plane could make a normal landing. Pretty sure that's what they did with the parachute tests on the piston. No point in trashing a plane for each test. That plane looked way too low to have time for a restart on the engine, unless it was at flight idle, and I dont know if it would stay lit?
_________________ I'm just here for the free snacks
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 17 Oct 2017, 22:19 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/22/12 Posts: 2601 Post Likes: +2362 Company: Retired Location: Lynnwood, WA (KPAE)
Aircraft: 1993 Bonanza A36TN
|
|
Username Protected wrote: That plane looked way too low to have time for a restart on the engine, unless it was at flight idle, and I dont know if it would stay lit? Clearly it either stayed lit or restarted, since the plane (N251CV, serial #003) is still on the FAA registry and FlightAware shows it still flying, long after that test video was made.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 17 Oct 2017, 22:30 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/21/08 Posts: 5469 Post Likes: +6186 Location: Decatur, TX (XA99)
Aircraft: 1979 Bonanza A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Clearly it either stayed lit or restarted, since the plane (N251CV, serial #003) is still on the FAA registry and FlightAware shows it still flying, long after that test video was made. Then that is one very brave pilot!! I think I would have wanted a bit more time to recover. What if all but one shroud line severed? There a lot of things that could have gone wrong that low!
_________________ I'm just here for the free snacks
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 17 Oct 2017, 22:52 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 11898 Post Likes: +2854 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: That plane looked way too low to have time for a restart on the engine, unless it was at flight idle, and I dont know if it would stay lit? Clearly it either stayed lit or restarted, since the plane (N251CV, serial #003) is still on the FAA registry and FlightAware shows it still flying, long after that test video was made.
Cirrus has put a lot of the SR20/SR22 back in the air after a chute pull. So it may also be possible with the SF50...
Tim
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 18 Oct 2017, 05:54 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26431 Post Likes: +13066 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Didn't he also say the chute would come out of the nose and the plane would land tail first? #itwillneverwork Yes he did!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 27 Oct 2017, 01:09 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23622 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I'm really disappointed in Ciholas. I would have expected a post about the video either being fake or a radio control model. I want to see all of it. If it was a full up test, why did Cirrus beg off doing it for certification? Quote: Didn't he also say the chute would come out of the nose Yes, on Dec 23, 2015: "Chute is mounted in the nose." The SF50 chute is in the nose. That's the only place it could be. Do you think I said something different? Quote: and the plane would land tail first? No, I don't believe I ever said that. Link to post or it didn't happen. JC's assertions count zero in this regard. 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 2007-2024
|
|
|
|