Interesting Cirrus Chute (CAPS) Stats.

SixPapaCharlie

SixPapaCharlie

May the force be with you
Joined
Aug 8, 2013
Messages
16,415
Display Name
Display name:
Sixer
Reading COPA this morning and I ventured into the CAPS stats.

I wouldn't have guessed that 14 of the chutes had been repacked and are flying again. I thought it was more like 1 or 2 at best.

https://www.cirruspilots.org/copa/safety_programs/w/safety_pages/723.cirrus-caps-history.aspx

Takeaways:
1. Hesitation seems to play a factor in some going for a last minute deployment too late.

2. Interesting that that two that failed to deploy resulted in survivable landings. That would suck. Being at your limit, and going for the tap out card and nada.

3. Texas is not a safe place to fly
 
Yah know... If I knew the GPS coordinates of the one that went into the drink outside HI, I'd be out there with a winch and a loooooooong rope.
 
yup....and here's one that landed...dragging the un-opened dangling participle.:yikes:

attachment.php
 
Last edited:
SixPapaCharlie said:
Reading COPA this morning and I ventured into the CAPS stats.

I wouldn't have guessed that 14 of the chutes had been repacked and are flying again. I thought it was more like 1 or 2 at best.

https://www.cirruspilots.org/copa/safety_programs/w/safety_pages/723.cirrus-caps-history.aspx

Takeaways:
1. Hesitation seems to play a factor in some going for a last minute deployment too late.

2. Interesting that that two that failed to deploy resulted in survivable landings. That would suck. Being at your limit, and going for the tap out card and nada.

3. Texas is not a safe place to fly
Click to expand...

I knew the guy in event #5.
 
Why is TX not a safe placed to fly? You cant get any flatter with more opportunities for landing spots.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
3. Texas is not a safe place to fly
Click to expand...

Why not? I see one anomaly (event 44) listed near Addison. Of the 66 events, 5 are in Texas. Considering Texas occupies 10% of CONUS and only 7.5% of the CAPS events, I'd say we're doing pretty well! Not to mention the vast amount of money here to afford Cirruses is above average.
 
Was Kidding. Should have put a grin after #3
I just noticed Carrollton, Addison, and Lewisville. All cities in which I have lived.
 
Unit74 said:
Yah know... If I knew the GPS coordinates of the one that went into the drink outside HI, I'd be out there with a winch and a loooooooong rope.
Click to expand...

Do you think it would have enough value to be worth it? I'm guessing that there would be very little worth having after six months on the bottom.
 
Stevel said:
Do you think it would have enough value to be worth it? I'm guessing that there would be very little worth having after six months on the bottom.
Click to expand...
It's corroded to hell. There won't be anything worth salvage. It's not like it's a Corsair or something else of rarity.

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk
 
mkosmo said:
It's corroded to hell. There won't be anything worth salvage. It's not like it's a Corsair or something else of rarity.

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yep! Salt water in the engine is going to be difficult to restore!
 
tecprotb said:
Why is TX not a safe placed to fly? You cant get any flatter with more opportunities for landing spots.
Click to expand...

That depends where in TX you're flying. On my pipeline routes, 20% of the time was unsurvivable if I had an engine failure due to hostile terrain and big rocks.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
so....the chute only workie in certain attitudes? :yikes::goofy::nono:
Click to expand...

From the SR22 POH:

• Note •
The CAPS is designed to work in a variety of aircraft attitudes, including spins. However, deployment in an attitude other than level flight may yield deployment characteristics other than those described above.
 
Henning said:
That depends where in TX you're flying. On my pipeline routes, 20% of the time was unsurvivable if I had an engine failure due to hostile terrain and big rocks.
Click to expand...

Over hill country, sure there are places that'd be unsurvivable... but if you look out, there's usually a draw you can glide in to with some flat enough area to survive.
 
mkosmo said:
Over hill country, sure there are places that'd be unsurvivable... but if you look out, there's usually a draw you can glide in to with some flat enough area to survive.
Click to expand...

:rofl: Pipeline my glide range was about 800'. Typically I'd fly around 100' AGL.
 
mkosmo said:
Hah, fair enough. Is the pipeline clearing not wide enough to put down alongside?
Click to expand...

Sure, but typically the right of way is neither clear, nor smooth, nor flat if the surrounding territory isn't.
 
mkosmo said:
Over hill country, sure there are places that'd be unsurvivable... but if you look out, there's usually a draw you can glide in to with some flat enough area to survive.
Click to expand...

Yep, back and forth over the Edwards Plateau and Hill Country on my way to OK and LA from el-chito Mexican border town....

It's remote that's for sure. During the day you can put in a valley, at night yeah I admit I'm rolling the bones. The instances of night flying over that terrain with my family are exceedingly rare, solo I did it all the time. Doesn't stop me from flying single engine though.

I've seen too many fatalities from single engine in CAVU conditions and with flat terrain ahead to know the only logical conclusion is to hang up single engine flying outright. Since I don't consider that opportunity cost reasonable, I accept the preponderance of the pitfalls behind flying single engine. My only exceptions being rocky mountain crossings and deep blue overwater with family on board.

I'm not a chute hater though. I don't like the Cirrus control [lack of] feedback and the load it imposes on wrist muscles is unnatural and uncomfortable to me, plus I don't do TCM engines. But if I could afford something speedy with a BRS, I'd absolutely incur that cost in lieu of a second engine. Of course, I could also afford a TwinCo , Travelair et al, predictably lose my shirt in maintenance and doubling fuel cost, and still be ahead the capital cost of a Cirri. So I'm not dead set against 1.5 engine airplanes either.
 
FastEddieB said:
From the SR22 POH:

• Note •
The CAPS is designed to work in a variety of aircraft attitudes, including spins. However, deployment in an attitude other than level flight may yield deployment characteristics other than those described above.
Click to expand...

So, the CAPS may not work when its most needed?
 
Zeldman said:
So, the CAPS may not work when its most needed?
Click to expand...

I think that's a biased way to phrase it.

It should not be surprising that the CAPS system has limitations.

It cannot be counted on when the airspeed is too high, nor when the altitude is too low. While it was tested in various flight regimes, there are bound to be some situations that compromise its ability to function.

None of this should reflect poorly on the fact that in the vast majority of cases it has functioned as designed, and often worked outside of the envelope for which it was designed.

But it's not magic. And current training is emphasizing to "Consider CAPS" early on in the decision process, and not to think of it as a "last resort", possibly delaying it until it's too late.

Unless, of course, I'm missing your point. What was it again? :dunno:
 
How late is too late? It seems as long as you have airspeed you would be okay, but I'm not familiar with the system.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
so....the chute only workie in certain attitudes? :yikes::goofy::nono:
Click to expand...

Here's what it says in the report for that incident, when the rocket fired but the chute did not deploy.

Modeling of the airplane's flight path through the radar data revealed that the flight was very dynamic with extreme pitch and bank angles (knife edge flight, bank angles greater than 90°, etc.). It appeared that the pilot's radio call about having deployed the parachute comes near the apex of a very steep climb, at which almost all the airplane's energy is sacrificed to make the climb (this was one of the places in the manual (simulation) flights where the airplane ran out of energy and could not match the target climb). Because of all the twists and turns that precede this point, it seems possible that the parachute rocket may not be pulling the parachute from the airplane at the intended angle after it is deployed. If the airplane has a large pitch or bank angle or angular rates (or combination of these), as the parachute rocket leaves the airplane, the airplane will rotate and cause the rocket tether to pull at an angle other than that intended.
 
Sounds like you should hit the blue button before the red handle?

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk
 
FastEddieB said:
I think that's a biased way to phrase it.

Sort of but not really.

It should not be surprising that the CAPS system has limitations.

It cannot be counted on when the airspeed is too high, nor when the altitude is too low. While it was tested in various flight regimes, there are bound to be some situations that compromise its ability to function.

None of this should reflect poorly on the fact that in the vast majority of cases it has functioned as designed, and often worked outside of the envelope for which it was designed.

But it's not magic. And current training is emphasizing to "Consider CAPS" early on in the decision process, and not to think of it as a "last resort", possibly delaying it until it's too late.

Unless, of course, I'm missing your point. What was it again? :dunno:
Click to expand...

The point, and I should have been more clear, is that if the CAPS is needed, it might not work as described in the POH. As long as the plane is straight and level the CAPS should work as designed. But if something happens, like VFC into IFR, possibly at night and over water, and the pilot is not capable of flying the plane back to VFR conditions, then over corrects and drops off into a stall spin situation the system might not work.

I haven't had time to read your link above, I will do that later this evening. I am guessing that as in my described situation as soon as the IFR conditions are recognized, the pilot should activate the system before a pilot induced unusual attitude occurs. It appears to me that the CAPS is not to be depended on as a last resort action and the pilot should consider activating the CAPS before anything goes wrong.
 
Zeldman said:
But if something happens, like VFC into IFR, possibly at night and over water, and the pilot is not capable of flying the plane back to VFR conditions, then over corrects and drops off into a stall spin situation the system might not work.
Click to expand...

Well, stall/spin is one of the eventualities that the system was tested for.

There will be failure modes. Imagine pulling CAPS after pulling the nose near vertical and running out of airspeed. The airplane would be about to slide backwards. Pull the chute then and the plane could descend into the risers and become a tangled mess.

Just one example. Like seatbelt or airbags, CAPS should work most of the time in most situations, but no mechanical system is foolproof.

It appears to me that the CAPS is not to be depended on as a last resort action and the pilot should consider activating the CAPS before anything goes wrong.
Click to expand...

Not sure about before, but when things start to go awry, it should be at least considered as an option. It often isn't, for reasons stated in that linked document.

I have a personal example I've posted before - I'll try to find it.

Here it is: http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1361029&postcount=37
 
Zeldman said:
The point, and I should have been more clear, is that if the CAPS is needed, it might not work as described in the POH. As long as the plane is straight and level the CAPS should work as designed. But if something happens, like VFC into IFR, possibly at night and over water, and the pilot is not capable of flying the plane back to VFR conditions, then over corrects and drops off into a stall spin situation the system might not work.

I haven't had time to read your link above, I will do that later this evening. I am guessing that as in my described situation as soon as the IFR conditions are recognized, the pilot should activate the system before a pilot induced unusual attitude occurs. It appears to me that the CAPS is not to be dependent on as a last resort action and the pilot should consider activating the CAPS before anything goes wrong.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you can manage to kick it into a spin, that may be the most effective thing as spin recovery is one of the things it's certified at. If you're losing it, yank, stomp, and pull.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top