Jason, I REALLY appreciate all your videos. In fact, I’ve adopted a very similar teaching style to you. I’m a factory direct instructor at Cirrus Aircraft. A power off glide is obviously within the capabilities of our airplane. But there are loads of factors that can get you in serious trouble when landing on any unimproved field. As mentioned in the video, ruts. Also, muddy fields, barbed wire fences, power lines, etc are sometimes very hard to spot from altitude. As you’ve stated, the chute is an awesome tool in the tool bag in the event you’re unsure of a safe outcome. However… you can bet that our students practice being able to hit a runway from a power-off glide. It’s a giant common misconception that we teach to “just pull the chute” when anything goes wrong. Exactly like you said. An awesome tool in the tool bag.
Excellent video! I'm a Cirrus pilot as well and I've always regarded the parachute as an option, but not the only option. Similar to the fact that I have GPS, but I still train and practice flying VOR and doing ILS/LOC approaches. I also train for parachute emergencies and non-parachute.
Great clip! This guy did an incredible job. At the end of the day you’re a pilot in an aircraft, fly it! Aviate Navigate Communicate. Proficiency/Mastery is the goal. Thank you Jason for all of your solid content as it truly helps!
Seconding Micah, I did get pretty good factory training at Cirrus when I took delivery of my new SR. We did a couple power-offs in Knoxville. Then a ton of them with my CSIP doing my commercial. And last year I had an engine issue at 7500 near an airport. Just spiraled down and glided it in uneventfully, with a cylinder blown up. CAPS is great tool and I’d never hesitate to use it. I’d not do an off field landing though, because there may be last-second surprises that kill you. I’m not worried at all about my ability to land safely. I’m worry about things out of my control, like wires, etc. To other Cirrus pilots. Don’t forget the Cirrus has a wet wing. If anything ruptures the wing on the rollout, you are on fire. No thanks.
That is so true, also with the fairings on the wheels this is not an off airfield airplane. 90kt best glide is over 100mph, so unless its an airport i believe the chute is your best choice. I would personally choose gliding to an airport first though.
Everyone should read Marlon's write-up on his emergency landing. His write-up is as amazing as his cool-under-pressure performance on that day. Hope to be as confident and proficient as him one day.
Something not being mentioned here is the Cirrus wing. For those of you who know this aircraft, you know that the wing is almost a critical wing - not much lift being produced without thrust or potential energy. Depending on your angle of attack (assume we're in climb out at Vy), you might really have to pitch the nose down to keep the aircraft at or above best glide. The problem for low-time, new, or less proficient pilots is that they still tend to keep the aircraft in that nose-up attitude a little too long when processing certain events. These few seconds can cost you dearly in a Cirrus. Depending on generation (and I'll go with G5/G6 numbers here), VY is 102 KIAS, VG is 92 KIAS and VS1 is 74 KIAS. The spread between the three of those is 28 knots. One wouldn't think that the airspeed can dissipate so quickly, but because of the human factor, it absolutely will if you're not expecting the scenario you've just encountered. Furthermore, this scenario can be compounded by the fact that stall speed increases with bank angle. Low altitude engine failure, adrenaline spike, loss of airspeed, sloppy maneuvering, and now you see why some Pilots inadvertently stall at this point and subsequently enter a spin. While I agree that every pilot should know and understand glide characteristics as well as low-energy maneuvering, it's unrealistic to assume that all pilots will maintain this level of proficiency and keep learning....So unfortunate. They rest on their laurels, and that's when the crap hits the fan. This is what really makes the CAPS a thing of value, which is bittersweet when you really think about it. Sometimes it's a great tool to have in a pinch for encounters such as mid-air collisions, engine failures over water/rough terrain, inadvertent or negligent flight into IMC or known ice, an incapacitated pilot with pax on board, and a few other scenarios. But sadly, it's a crutch for those folks who don't keep their axes sharp.
Having gone from a 1943 Taylorcraft to a Cessna 177RG to a Cirrus SR22 G5, I completely agree that the parachute may not apply in all situations. Glad I have it but it is important to train for all situations.
Thanks to both for this video and the comments. I had an EFATO event 10 years or so ago - and I'd like to offer some "don't do this" experience - and you can see the wisdom is the above video : I was flying a Cirrus SR 20 that I had purchased and repaired as a project. It became a mammoth task, getting it all through ( pat on the back at this point) and was flying with a cirrus rated instructor with 1k hours. ( non-CSIP) . There was a lot to deal with, and was having a lot f problems that were difficult to resolve, as the location was SE Asia . There were a few issues we just weren't overcoming, auto pilot & Transponder, and the prop wasn't adjusting properly... but they weren't no go issues.. and I was under pressure to get some hours on it before we ferried her home. SO I landed up doing a lot of circuits and with a long runway- but in the course of touch - and goes, I landed long, and took off again with not much Rway left... but in my last downwind I changed the fuel from Laft to "off" ... simply because was thinking about an emergency shut -down. And so , my hands did what my brain was in... ( did I really even HAVE a brian ?) and completed the touch and go .. but she starved at about 400ft AGL. I can tell you - there in't much time... and were at 100kts + when we got back on the Rway. we did our best but it wasn't going to save the ensuing mess. too low for chute - we considered it.. and so my friends - I was forehead smackingly stupid .. I wasn't concentrating on the task, and my instructor wan't watching my hands.. closely. We survived - the aircraft did not. I have to accept that in my haste and frustration and lack of focus on the job - it was my screw up. One may attribute my failure to "get there itis" - whatever but at the end of the day, I was NOT FIT TO FLY. So our friends on this video demonstrate discipline, forethought and preparedness. Those things don't kill you Fly safe. .
Now that I'm in Phase 1 with my RV-8 I'm going back to review your earlier videos for more tips and tricks. I'm trying to instill your checklist disciplines but to be honest, it's been hard. We'll have to discuss it during the next Patron meeting. Hope to see you at OSH; planning to camp in Homebuilt Camping for the first time!
I just recently got to fly in an sr20 for the first time with a cfi applicant and it surprised me when his pretakeoff brief consisted of "if we have an emergency after we depart the vicinity of the airport, pull the 'CAPS.'" Very interesting to me
Well, true in some senses but fact of the matter is that there still isn’t a single fatality from CAPS deployment in the authorized boundaries. And in 1500ft AGL you can decide: “Am I going to pull the chute, survive with a 99% chance with the insurance paying for the damage” or „Am I more confident in my piloting skills to put down a plane without a working engine“. I can imagine plenty scenarios for 1.
@@dominikm1457 great points. But you cannot forget to practice a full emergency landing scenario or maybe a caps failure. Not sure if those happen or not. Always pays tonstsy proficient.
Things haven't changed much since the '40's. My father went through Navy flight school during the war. He trained in a 2-seat Stearman. The instructor would randomly throttle to idle and say: "Your engine just quit. What are you going to do?" The student had better have a plan in mind and start executing it. That would sometimes require side-slipping to reduce altitude quickly.
Also, pulling the chute is guaranteed damage to the plane. It will land straight down and fairly hard. Things will get broken, bent and damaged. Landing in a field gives you a chance of limiting the damage.
Well done, and reassuring to see and hear a pilot with the confidence in his thought processes to make a successful emergency landing and not 'automatically' resorting to the reliance on pulling a chute.
@J M Think in terms of an owner claiming it was an engine defect and wants warrantee... and a manufacturer who claims it is not covered... while negotiations occur, you can't go around broadcasting your OPINION about what happened.
@@TheFinerPoints understood. Mostly I'd be wanting to know if the plane/engine had been somehow operated outside the recommended settings and looking for a "lesson learned" here, but if you can't discuss it, it seems there's no lesson as of yet, at least. Cheers and thanks for the content, as always.
@@LeantoPeak I will tell you that the airplane has always been operated as per the POH with lots of attention on CHT's and EGT's. Let's just say this happened after some engine work.
I'm going to be starting up my flight training again here real soon but as an aircraft mechanic I look at and think the parachute is a great tool.... if and this is a big if, there is no alternative landing site. Honestly I find it hard to believe that pulling a chute at 2000 feet going 150 knts is going to be good for the structure of the aircraft or the pilot. Yes I know smarter people than I have designed this but what happens 10 years from now and that plane has its first engine failure but a small leak has water logged and rotted that chute? Or after years of heat? I have questions, also like is there an expiration for the line and chute material ? Is there an inspection interval for the deployment mechanism how about a test procedure? I don't know much about the parachute system but after 100 years of flying a lot of procedures have been developed for this. Yes I feel it's a tool a great tool and should be on every aircraft. I just have questions and I think it should be a last resort not a go to...
Let me be absolutely clear about this: Without an airstrip you can reach, attempting a landing in a field is like playing in a Casino (which I don't do). In a plane that stalls at 59kt, like our Cirrus, it's pure luck if you reach a field that doesn't have bumps, etc. to high for the shopping cart wheels. You have 0 chance of making that sure from your glide in. I made the experiment myself, bicycling around in our region and looking consciously at fields if they would allow a landing that keep the plane on the gear. The answer, maybe 10%. Mostly for production of lawn. In Germany, fields are smaller anyway, we have a different history of agriculture and land distribution. If you attempt a landing with the engine off, which is absolutely part of PPL education and the test flight, you make a bet on that landing spot. It can go right, it would go wrong in most cases. So pulling the Chute is the safest option, if you are not for some reason familiar with the field. It should be done if there is any doubt of a save landing spot, which is always the case outside an airport. It is great that this bet ended well, but it was a bet. Those who attempt that and don't go lucky can't tell the story on TH-cam, it's done for them if at all. If you fly a high wing with bush wheels stalling at 40 mph you don't need a Chute. In a Cirrus, not to pull is taking an unnecessary risk you can't calculate and you shouldn't celebrate that you were lucky. And not suggest that way others should not pull but be proficient in off airport landings, because that's an illusion in some planes, the Cirrus one of them. Luck is the only strategy you have in some planes, not the Cirrus. You can replace luck (not proficiency) with CAPS.
Having watch several videos by Cirrus and others about the chute you can understand why the training for CAPS the way that it is. Firstly Cirrus understands their planes are being used mostly by low hour private pilots and one of the things they seem to be trying to do is make flying more accessible, easy, and safe for the average joe. Which explains a lot about the chute training as well. Cirrus says there were many accidents where the pilots probably would have lived had they just pulled the chute. In fact in Cirrus testing in simulators they found pilots wouldn't pull the chute even when given a 100% no win scenario where the ONLY way to survive was the chute. So the Cirrus training changed to be more aggressive about pulling the chute and making it a if/then fast decision. The issue is can the average pilot flying an SRxx plane really glide it to safe off air port landing? Even if they do and do everything right they could still hit a rock or deep hole or wire ect they can't see from the air and flip over. Or the ground could just be too soft and a wheel digs in and they go tumbling. There is a lot that can go wrong in forced off air port landing even in an open feild that become 100% non issues if you just pull the chute. The idea of the Cirrus training regrading the chute, right or wrong, is that with in it's designed usage envelope the chute is a near 100% chance of surviving and a forced landing has far less odds of success, maybe as bad as 50/50. So don't be a macho man thinking you're a top gun pilot and try to land it. Don't risk your life needlessly. Just pull the chute and live.
I viewed Marc's video along with his follow-up regarding removing the Cirrus from the farm field. Bravo to him and there's no doubt he will ace his commercial check ride! I definitely liked his instructor's 3-2-1 mnemonic!!
Odds of chute landing you in an unpleasant spot vs. odds of the field being softer or more uneven than it looks and flipping over on impact. Both scary thoughts
I just solo'ed in an SR20, and was very pleased that you took the time to post this video. We are indeed trained to 'just pull the chute', but as you point out, that's not necessarily the best options.
It seems like it's still seen as some badge of honor not to use the chute. I hope this doesn't teach the wrong lesson God forbid we ever end up in a similar situation.
I know Marc through my flying club. One instructor we train with is the same instructor for recurrent training. The instructor he and I fly with is a former airline pilot and DPE. The instructor regularly cuts power so we can practice power off airport landings. I joke that i always have engine problems when we fly. From personal knowledge of flying with Marc, he is an excellent pilot. The silver hair gentleman, the former DPE, is one of the instructors I fly with and was one of the instructors I worked with to obtain my commercial. By the way your videos helped me on some of my commercial maneuvers.
My only FAA certification is SUAS. Once life allows for private pilot training, I'll be chasing the dream. I've often wondered why it appeared that the parachute was so prominent in the owners' accounts of their training. I highly doubt that I'll ever fly that airplane, but learning from level-headed pilots is valuable (even for my SUAS professional flights). Thank you!
If the air coming into the engine is blocked for whatever reason (e.g. ice, bird, etc.),, alternate air provides an alternate source of air. And as the CFI said, we need fuel, air, and spark in the right proportions to make it work.
@@Factory400 Actually, you are referring to Alternate Static air, which is different. Alternate Air is found on non -carbureted engines (fuel injected), which allows the pilot to select an alternate source of air intake. It is only used if the main air intake becomes blocked. If you're flying a plane with a carburetor, and you performing the 3-2-1 check referenced by the CFI (Bob), then the last item "AIR" would be the CARB HEAT control. Does that answer your question?
I honestly don't understand why pilots believe they can't land a cirrus aircraft without power. All aircraft should be able to glide and land like normal
i fly a TL2000 sting LSA which has a chute, we're taught to pull it as a last resort (eg the wing fell off). We're taught the same thing you said... it's a wing, it'll fly you unless it's not there. in fact the last lesson was power off 180s and engine failures. in essence.... we're taught that the cute isnt there at all. there's going to be many planes you fly that don't have a chute and if you're in that mindset of "just pull the chute" you're going to be screwed if you havent been taught anything different.
The primary air intake could have been obstructed by ice or anything else which may have blocked the airflow causing engine failure. Alternate air as the name suggests is an alternate air source which bypasses the primary air intake.
Nice job presenting the main message and key take-away; which I believe was this; The Chute is a TOOL. Gliding to a forced landing is another TOOL. Good training and circumstances (daylight, suitable terrain) influenced this pilot's decision towards using the "Glide" tool, instead of the "Chute" tool. And he should be applauded for recognizing and using a TOOL that got the job done and concluded the emergency in a SAFE manner. Each pilot's proficiency, and, the circumstances when the emergency happens should be the factors that influence the pilot's decision about which TOOL to use in an emergency. POH's are not bibles... they are "Manufacturer's suggested/recommended operating procedures." But if your personal proficiency and the circumstances of your emergency are indicating to you that there is a better TOOL available to you, then go ahead and use the better tool.
Great job landing into the wind. It seems to me that too many pilots landing off-airport forget to do this, and landing into the wind GREATLY reduces the amount of kinetic energy that has to be dissipated.
My understanding is that you can't rely on teh chute below 2000ft. and why pull the chute when you can land safely? pulling the chute totals the cirrus. Seems there is a growing lack of airmanship among pilots these days. People needing autopilots and parachutes rather than knowing how to actually fly.
@@SoloRenegade this topic is covered in the TH-cam video that Marc/PIC posted. Also, pulling the chute is not automatically totaling the airplane. There are Cirrus airplanes flying that were repaired after a CAPS event. Each event is different.
@@rocky_williams ok, last I'd been informed was that the plane was a total right off if the chute was pulled. I guess it also depends upon how much damage is done on landing. harder set down collapse landing gear and damage airframe, vs softer let down and minimal damage. Makes sense, I'd just never heard of a case personally where it hadn't been totaled yet.
As they say, in an emergency people don’t rise to the occasion. They sink to their level of training. In this case the pilot was obviously well trained. And he survived.
Frankly this is not the interesting case. Flying over wide open fields. If there were no good landing spots there would be plenty of fear, plenty of indecision and plenty of second-guessing. Seems relatively simple. If you have much doubt (operative word being “much”) that you can put it in a field without injury, pull the chute. The “much” depends on a lot of factors probably most importantly your experience and competency. All you can do is try to increase both. Not much else to talk about. Individuals fly airplanes and individuals decide how much effort to put into things. Dosen’t seem like a need for patting on the back in situations like this.
@@MikeHalsall Sorry didn’t know it was a party. I thought it was a discussion about people making serious decisions that potentially involved life and death.
@@raymondlancaster3355 🤷 bruh, you started with "Frankly this is not an interesting case" and "not much else to talk about" and now you're at "this is a discussion about serious life and death matters"... so you're saying it is an interesting case worth discussing? And an interview worth Jason putting up for consideration? Because I thought it was too.
The POH calls for pulling the chute. So Im not sure why everyone is lauding this pilot's decision to do an off-field landing and thus breaking SOP. I think its dangerous to portray pulling the chute as something to be ashamed of. We use seat belts because they are a tool for safety. The chute is also a tool that comes in the Cirrus as a tool to be used.
That's the point I want to make is that an "automatic" chute pull is too rote. What if, after the chute pull, he landed on a farmhouse and hurt people on the ground? In this case, he elected to make a safe off airport landing and I think it's a good reminder that the Cirrus can do that. This case highlights some of that nuance
@@TheFinerPoints Oh I dont doubt that, Jason! I fly Cirrus and I practice engine outs and off field landings as part of my regular 6-month checkin with my CFII. As you mentioned in one of your podcasts, whenever we as POCs decide to do an off field landing on say a road, we are responsible for making sure we dont land on an SUV or something. Good discussion as always but Id like to see perhaps a followup discussion on why its OK to pull the chute and remove the stigma attached to "Cirrus Pilots" pulling the chute. Id rather be alive to fly another day and bend that metal than try to save the plane. Thats what insurance is for.
pulling the chute should not be the Default response. pulling the chute is more nuanced than that. some situations require it immediately, others do not. There is No reason you can't land a cirrus with an engine failure if you have places to land. If the engine failed in the pattern, would you still pull it? Are the rest of us without parachutes just supposed to stop flying and die?
@@SoloRenegade Agreed that its nuanced. Thats why its hard to have a good debate on chute vs no chute on the internet... There are so many factors on making that decision. Not binary at all.
Fully agreed. The chut should be a safety feature. If one can land safely in a field and has the altitude to do so, there is absolutely no reason why pulling the chute. The parachute imo, should be used if no place to land safely, structural damages to the plane making it unsafe to fly, incapacited pilot with passengers not being able to land...
![[UNCUT]“ฅนตื่นธรรม”ปะทะ“หมอปลา-ปู่มหามุนี-อั๋นโอกิ”สะเทือนกระทรวงเวทมนตร์ Iคนดังนั่งเคลียร์I10 ตค.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/peMD_SAkwNc/mqdefault.jpg)
Good stuff! Thanks Jason!
Jason, I REALLY appreciate all your videos. In fact, I’ve adopted a very similar teaching style to you. I’m a factory direct instructor at Cirrus Aircraft.
A power off glide is obviously within the capabilities of our airplane. But there are loads of factors that can get you in serious trouble when landing on any unimproved field. As mentioned in the video, ruts. Also, muddy fields, barbed wire fences, power lines, etc are sometimes very hard to spot from altitude. As you’ve stated, the chute is an awesome tool in the tool bag in the event you’re unsure of a safe outcome.
However… you can bet that our students practice being able to hit a runway from a power-off glide. It’s a giant common misconception that we teach to “just pull the chute” when anything goes wrong. Exactly like you said. An awesome tool in the tool bag.
I really don’t know where did he get that from. I admire Jason a ton, but that was a major strikeout.
Excellent video! I'm a Cirrus pilot as well and I've always regarded the parachute as an option, but not the only option. Similar to the fact that I have GPS, but I still train and practice flying VOR and doing ILS/LOC approaches. I also train for parachute emergencies and non-parachute.
Excellent point
Great clip! This guy did an incredible job. At the end of the day you’re a pilot in an aircraft, fly it! Aviate Navigate Communicate. Proficiency/Mastery is the goal. Thank you Jason for all of your solid content as it truly helps!
Practice practice practice what ifs... Great videos. Thank you
Seconding Micah, I did get pretty good factory training at Cirrus when I took delivery of my new SR. We did a couple power-offs in Knoxville. Then a ton of them with my CSIP doing my commercial. And last year I had an engine issue at 7500 near an airport. Just spiraled down and glided it in uneventfully, with a cylinder blown up. CAPS is great tool and I’d never hesitate to use it. I’d not do an off field landing though, because there may be last-second surprises that kill you. I’m not worried at all about my ability to land safely. I’m worry about things out of my control, like wires, etc.
To other Cirrus pilots. Don’t forget the Cirrus has a wet wing. If anything ruptures the wing on the rollout, you are on fire. No thanks.
That is so true, also with the fairings on the wheels this is not an off airfield airplane. 90kt best glide is over 100mph, so unless its an airport i believe the chute is your best choice. I would personally choose gliding to an airport first though.
Everyone should read Marlon's write-up on his emergency landing. His write-up is as amazing as his cool-under-pressure performance on that day. Hope to be as confident and proficient as him one day.
Great job, Marc!
Thank you, Jason.
Hi Jason,
Great video with very valuable information.
Thank you for sharing.
Take care,
Be safe.
Something not being mentioned here is the Cirrus wing. For those of you who know this aircraft, you know that the wing is almost a critical wing - not much lift being produced without thrust or potential energy. Depending on your angle of attack (assume we're in climb out at Vy), you might really have to pitch the nose down to keep the aircraft at or above best glide. The problem for low-time, new, or less proficient pilots is that they still tend to keep the aircraft in that nose-up attitude a little too long when processing certain events. These few seconds can cost you dearly in a Cirrus. Depending on generation (and I'll go with G5/G6 numbers here), VY is 102 KIAS, VG is 92 KIAS and VS1 is 74 KIAS. The spread between the three of those is 28 knots. One wouldn't think that the airspeed can dissipate so quickly, but because of the human factor, it absolutely will if you're not expecting the scenario you've just encountered. Furthermore, this scenario can be compounded by the fact that stall speed increases with bank angle. Low altitude engine failure, adrenaline spike, loss of airspeed, sloppy maneuvering, and now you see why some Pilots inadvertently stall at this point and subsequently enter a spin. While I agree that every pilot should know and understand glide characteristics as well as low-energy maneuvering, it's unrealistic to assume that all pilots will maintain this level of proficiency and keep learning....So unfortunate. They rest on their laurels, and that's when the crap hits the fan. This is what really makes the CAPS a thing of value, which is bittersweet when you really think about it. Sometimes it's a great tool to have in a pinch for encounters such as mid-air collisions, engine failures over water/rough terrain, inadvertent or negligent flight into IMC or known ice, an incapacitated pilot with pax on board, and a few other scenarios. But sadly, it's a crutch for those folks who don't keep their axes sharp.
Also why the cirrus is not a good trainer, way too expensive and way too fast for any students own good.
Having gone from a 1943 Taylorcraft to a Cessna 177RG to a Cirrus SR22 G5, I completely agree that the parachute may not apply in all situations. Glad I have it but it is important to train for all situations.
Thanks to both for this video and the comments. I had an EFATO event 10 years or so ago - and I'd like to offer some "don't do this" experience - and you can see the wisdom is the above video : I was flying a Cirrus SR 20 that I had purchased and repaired as a project. It became a mammoth task, getting it all through ( pat on the back at this point) and was flying with a cirrus rated instructor with 1k hours. ( non-CSIP) . There was a lot to deal with, and was having a lot f problems that were difficult to resolve, as the location was SE Asia . There were a few issues we just weren't overcoming, auto pilot & Transponder, and the prop wasn't adjusting properly... but they weren't no go issues.. and I was under pressure to get some hours on it before we ferried her home. SO I landed up doing a lot of circuits and with a long runway- but in the course of touch - and goes, I landed long, and took off again with not much Rway left... but in my last downwind I changed the fuel from Laft to "off" ... simply because was thinking about an emergency shut -down. And so , my hands did what my brain was in... ( did I really even HAVE a brian ?) and completed the touch and go .. but she starved at about 400ft AGL.
I can tell you - there in't much time... and were at 100kts + when we got back on the Rway. we did our best but it wasn't going to save the ensuing mess. too low for chute - we considered it.. and so my friends - I was forehead smackingly stupid .. I wasn't concentrating on the task, and my instructor wan't watching my hands.. closely.
We survived - the aircraft did not. I have to accept that in my haste and frustration and lack of focus on the job - it was my screw up. One may attribute my failure to "get there itis" - whatever but at the end of the day, I was NOT FIT TO FLY. So our friends on this video demonstrate discipline, forethought and preparedness. Those things don't kill you
Fly safe. .
Thanks for this
Now that I'm in Phase 1 with my RV-8 I'm going back to review your earlier videos for more tips and tricks. I'm trying to instill your checklist disciplines but to be honest, it's been hard. We'll have to discuss it during the next Patron meeting. Hope to see you at OSH; planning to camp in Homebuilt Camping for the first time!
Excellent video!!
I agree, if chute becomes a replacement instead of an addition to the toolbox, then they're a problem more than a solution.
I just recently got to fly in an sr20 for the first time with a cfi applicant and it surprised me when his pretakeoff brief consisted of "if we have an emergency after we depart the vicinity of the airport, pull the 'CAPS.'" Very interesting to me
Well, true in some senses but fact of the matter is that there still isn’t a single fatality from CAPS deployment in the authorized boundaries.
And in 1500ft AGL you can decide: “Am I going to pull the chute, survive with a 99% chance with the insurance paying for the damage” or „Am I more confident in my piloting skills to put down a plane without a working engine“.
I can imagine plenty scenarios for 1.
@@dominikm1457 great points. But you cannot forget to practice a full emergency landing scenario or maybe a caps failure. Not sure if those happen or not. Always pays tonstsy proficient.
@@TheBrennan90 Absolutely! I agree 100% to stay proficient. In my case mostly because I don’t have a chute 😂
Things haven't changed much since the '40's. My father went through Navy flight school during the war. He trained in a 2-seat Stearman. The instructor would randomly throttle to idle and say: "Your engine just quit. What are you going to do?" The student had better have a plan in mind and start executing it. That would sometimes require side-slipping to reduce altitude quickly.
Also, pulling the chute is guaranteed damage to the plane. It will land straight down and fairly hard. Things will get broken, bent and damaged. Landing in a field gives you a chance of limiting the damage.
@Matthew Morycinski True, but your plane won't be down nearly as long for an engine replacement as structural damage our replacing the entire plane.
Great story and topic!!
Currently working on forced approaches in my training. Hopefully this never happens to me, but I want to have THAT level of confidence Marc had.
In my opinion, if you study, train, and practice with a purpose, you will have that confidence.
good info!
Awesome. Thanks for sharing. Saludos !!!
Well done, and reassuring to see and hear a pilot with the confidence in his thought processes to make a successful emergency landing and not 'automatically' resorting to the reliance on pulling a chute.
Awesome! Well done, Marc. And thanks to you both.
Great job! Question though, do we know what happened to the engine? Very curious about that!
Not allowed to discuss that yet 😞
it "blew up" :D
@J M Think in terms of an owner claiming it was an engine defect and wants warrantee... and a manufacturer who claims it is not covered... while negotiations occur, you can't go around broadcasting your OPINION about what happened.
@@TheFinerPoints understood. Mostly I'd be wanting to know if the plane/engine had been somehow operated outside the recommended settings and looking for a "lesson learned" here, but if you can't discuss it, it seems there's no lesson as of yet, at least. Cheers and thanks for the content, as always.
@@LeantoPeak I will tell you that the airplane has always been operated as per the POH with lots of attention on CHT's and EGT's. Let's just say this happened after some engine work.
I'm going to be starting up my flight training again here real soon but as an aircraft mechanic I look at and think the parachute is a great tool.... if and this is a big if, there is no alternative landing site. Honestly I find it hard to believe that pulling a chute at 2000 feet going 150 knts is going to be good for the structure of the aircraft or the pilot. Yes I know smarter people than I have designed this but what happens 10 years from now and that plane has its first engine failure but a small leak has water logged and rotted that chute? Or after years of heat? I have questions, also like is there an expiration for the line and chute material ? Is there an inspection interval for the deployment mechanism how about a test procedure?
I don't know much about the parachute system but after 100 years of flying a lot of procedures have been developed for this. Yes I feel it's a tool a great tool and should be on every aircraft. I just have questions and I think it should be a last resort not a go to...
Let me be absolutely clear about this: Without an airstrip you can reach, attempting a landing in a field is like playing in a Casino (which I don't do). In a plane that stalls at 59kt, like our Cirrus, it's pure luck if you reach a field that doesn't have bumps, etc. to high for the shopping cart wheels. You have 0 chance of making that sure from your glide in.
I made the experiment myself, bicycling around in our region and looking consciously at fields if they would allow a landing that keep the plane on the gear. The answer, maybe 10%. Mostly for production of lawn. In Germany, fields are smaller anyway, we have a different history of agriculture and land distribution.
If you attempt a landing with the engine off, which is absolutely part of PPL education and the test flight, you make a bet on that landing spot. It can go right, it would go wrong in most cases. So pulling the Chute is the safest option, if you are not for some reason familiar with the field. It should be done if there is any doubt of a save landing spot, which is always the case outside an airport.
It is great that this bet ended well, but it was a bet. Those who attempt that and don't go lucky can't tell the story on TH-cam, it's done for them if at all.
If you fly a high wing with bush wheels stalling at 40 mph you don't need a Chute. In a Cirrus, not to pull is taking an unnecessary risk you can't calculate and you shouldn't celebrate that you were lucky. And not suggest that way others should not pull but be proficient in off airport landings, because that's an illusion in some planes, the Cirrus one of them. Luck is the only strategy you have in some planes, not the Cirrus. You can replace luck (not proficiency) with CAPS.
Comprehension and prioritizing task at hand, you'll find out when you get there. Remember "'the right stuff"?
Having watch several videos by Cirrus and others about the chute you can understand why the training for CAPS the way that it is. Firstly Cirrus understands their planes are being used mostly by low hour private pilots and one of the things they seem to be trying to do is make flying more accessible, easy, and safe for the average joe. Which explains a lot about the chute training as well. Cirrus says there were many accidents where the pilots probably would have lived had they just pulled the chute. In fact in Cirrus testing in simulators they found pilots wouldn't pull the chute even when given a 100% no win scenario where the ONLY way to survive was the chute. So the Cirrus training changed to be more aggressive about pulling the chute and making it a if/then fast decision. The issue is can the average pilot flying an SRxx plane really glide it to safe off air port landing? Even if they do and do everything right they could still hit a rock or deep hole or wire ect they can't see from the air and flip over. Or the ground could just be too soft and a wheel digs in and they go tumbling. There is a lot that can go wrong in forced off air port landing even in an open feild that become 100% non issues if you just pull the chute. The idea of the Cirrus training regrading the chute, right or wrong, is that with in it's designed usage envelope the chute is a near 100% chance of surviving and a forced landing has far less odds of success, maybe as bad as 50/50. So don't be a macho man thinking you're a top gun pilot and try to land it. Don't risk your life needlessly. Just pull the chute and live.
I viewed Marc's video along with his follow-up regarding removing the Cirrus from the farm field. Bravo to him and there's no doubt he will ace his commercial check ride! I definitely liked his instructor's 3-2-1 mnemonic!!
Odds of chute landing you in an unpleasant spot vs. odds of the field being softer or more uneven than it looks and flipping over on impact. Both scary thoughts
I pulled my chute. N121YT. Probably saved my life.
I just solo'ed in an SR20, and was very pleased that you took the time to post this video. We are indeed trained to 'just pull the chute', but as you point out, that's not necessarily the best options.
It seems like it's still seen as some badge of honor not to use the chute. I hope this doesn't teach the wrong lesson God forbid we ever end up in a similar situation.
Great video... Thank you
"...fly the airplane all the way to the ground". That other pilot couldn't have said it any better.
I know Marc through my flying club. One instructor we train with is the same instructor for recurrent training. The instructor he and I fly with is a former airline pilot and DPE. The instructor regularly cuts power so we can practice power off airport landings. I joke that i always have engine problems when we fly. From personal knowledge of flying with Marc, he is an excellent pilot. The silver hair gentleman, the former DPE, is one of the instructors I fly with and was one of the instructors I worked with to obtain my commercial.
By the way your videos helped me on some of my commercial maneuvers.
Brilliant. Like the phrase flight training not flight education. I’ll use that….
My only FAA certification is SUAS. Once life allows for private pilot training, I'll be chasing the dream. I've often wondered why it appeared that the parachute was so prominent in the owners' accounts of their training. I highly doubt that I'll ever fly that airplane, but learning from level-headed pilots is valuable (even for my SUAS professional flights). Thank you!
How many Cirus test pilots pulled the chute at 600 AGL on departure from an urban airport?
How does alt air impact engine function? Not sure I have heard that before.
If the air coming into the engine is blocked for whatever reason (e.g. ice, bird, etc.),, alternate air provides an alternate source of air. And as the CFI said, we need fuel, air, and spark in the right proportions to make it work.
@pfflying6275 Alt air is for the pitot static system, not the engine....right?
@@Factory400 Actually, you are referring to Alternate Static air, which is different. Alternate Air is found on non -carbureted engines (fuel injected), which allows the pilot to select an alternate source of air intake. It is only used if the main air intake becomes blocked. If you're flying a plane with a carburetor, and you performing the 3-2-1 check referenced by the CFI (Bob), then the last item "AIR" would be the CARB HEAT control. Does that answer your question?
@@pfflying6275 Ahhh...ok. thanks. 😁
I honestly don't understand why pilots believe they can't land a cirrus aircraft without power. All aircraft should be able to glide and land like normal
i fly a TL2000 sting LSA which has a chute, we're taught to pull it as a last resort (eg the wing fell off). We're taught the same thing you said... it's a wing, it'll fly you unless it's not there. in fact the last lesson was power off 180s and engine failures. in essence.... we're taught that the cute isnt there at all. there's going to be many planes you fly that don't have a chute and if you're in that mindset of "just pull the chute" you're going to be screwed if you havent been taught anything different.
Around 10:20 the instructor alternate air might be the reason why your engine quit. I don't understand how it could be. Can someone explain?
The primary air intake could have been obstructed by ice or anything else which may have blocked the airflow causing engine failure. Alternate air as the name suggests is an alternate air source which bypasses the primary air intake.
In the regular opening title sequence you put an expo pen into the face of the camera. why.
Wow! Marc you’re blowing up!
And good job Capt Bob on the training he provides!
May be I dont get it but has anyone a clue why the Engine quits?
Pretty unusual for the continental io550 to fail in midair..
Parachute seems great for those times where you have no suitable landings spots. But if you lose your engine and have fields, just glide it.
Gotta have a plan
Nice job presenting the main message and key take-away; which I believe was this; The Chute is a TOOL. Gliding to a forced landing is another TOOL.
Good training and circumstances (daylight, suitable terrain) influenced this pilot's decision towards using the "Glide" tool, instead of the "Chute" tool.
And he should be applauded for recognizing and using a TOOL that got the job done and concluded the emergency in a SAFE manner.
Each pilot's proficiency, and, the circumstances when the emergency happens should be the factors that influence the pilot's decision about which TOOL to use in an emergency. POH's are not bibles... they are "Manufacturer's suggested/recommended operating procedures." But if your personal proficiency and the circumstances of your emergency are indicating to you that there is a better TOOL available to you, then go ahead and use the better tool.
I mean shoot, if theres a way to land it. Freakin land it. If u pull the shoot its instantly totaled if i understand correctly.
Great job landing into the wind. It seems to me that too many pilots landing off-airport forget to do this, and landing into the wind GREATLY reduces the amount of kinetic energy that has to be dissipated.
I wonder why he didn’t pull the chute.
We have to wait for the investigation report I think. But I also want know why he did what he did.
My understanding is that you can't rely on teh chute below 2000ft. and why pull the chute when you can land safely? pulling the chute totals the cirrus. Seems there is a growing lack of airmanship among pilots these days. People needing autopilots and parachutes rather than knowing how to actually fly.
@@SoloRenegade this topic is covered in the TH-cam video that Marc/PIC posted.
Also, pulling the chute is not automatically totaling the airplane. There are Cirrus airplanes flying that were repaired after a CAPS event. Each event is different.
The PIC shared this answer. He was too low to pull the chute.
@@rocky_williams ok, last I'd been informed was that the plane was a total right off if the chute was pulled. I guess it also depends upon how much damage is done on landing. harder set down collapse landing gear and damage airframe, vs softer let down and minimal damage.
Makes sense, I'd just never heard of a case personally where it hadn't been totaled yet.
Cirrus wants you to pull the chute so they can sell you a new plane?
First real emergency landing in a Cirrus???
If I were to pick a bone with you, you train people on death trap Cessnas.
As they say, in an emergency people don’t rise to the occasion. They sink to their level of training. In this case the pilot was obviously well trained. And he survived.
All pilots should know how to fly their wing without power to the ground.
He’s lucky he was flying over endless wide open fields without lots of crops or structures.
landing wings level, under control, even into trees and built up areas, has a survival rate over 90%
I was lucky. If over a populated area, I believe I would've pulled the chute without question.
Frankly this is not the interesting case. Flying over wide open fields. If there were no good landing spots there would be plenty of fear, plenty of indecision and plenty of second-guessing. Seems relatively simple. If you have much doubt (operative word being “much”) that you can put it in a field without injury, pull the chute. The “much” depends on a lot of factors probably most importantly your experience and competency. All you can do is try to increase both. Not much else to talk about. Individuals fly airplanes and individuals decide how much effort to put into things. Dosen’t seem like a need for patting on the back in situations like this.
You sound like a blast at parties...
@@MikeHalsall Sorry didn’t know it was a party. I thought it was a discussion about people making serious decisions that potentially involved life and death.
@@raymondlancaster3355 🤷 bruh, you started with "Frankly this is not an interesting case" and "not much else to talk about" and now you're at "this is a discussion about serious life and death matters"... so you're saying it is an interesting case worth discussing? And an interview worth Jason putting up for consideration? Because I thought it was too.
I pulled my chute. Probably saved my life. N121YT.
How differently things could have turned out had the engine failure occurred at night. Only fly single engine at night in an emergency.
This is Marc (the pilot). I would've pulled the chute at night or if terrain were not so inviting. At least I hope I would've. 😉
So night flying is generally required in Private Pilot training. Would you consider that an acceptable "emergency"?
The POH calls for pulling the chute. So Im not sure why everyone is lauding this pilot's decision to do an off-field landing and thus breaking SOP. I think its dangerous to portray pulling the chute as something to be ashamed of. We use seat belts because they are a tool for safety. The chute is also a tool that comes in the Cirrus as a tool to be used.
That's the point I want to make is that an "automatic" chute pull is too rote. What if, after the chute pull, he landed on a farmhouse and hurt people on the ground? In this case, he elected to make a safe off airport landing and I think it's a good reminder that the Cirrus can do that. This case highlights some of that nuance
@@TheFinerPoints Oh I dont doubt that, Jason! I fly Cirrus and I practice engine outs and off field landings as part of my regular 6-month checkin with my CFII. As you mentioned in one of your podcasts, whenever we as POCs decide to do an off field landing on say a road, we are responsible for making sure we dont land on an SUV or something. Good discussion as always but Id like to see perhaps a followup discussion on why its OK to pull the chute and remove the stigma attached to "Cirrus Pilots" pulling the chute. Id rather be alive to fly another day and bend that metal than try to save the plane. Thats what insurance is for.
pulling the chute should not be the Default response. pulling the chute is more nuanced than that. some situations require it immediately, others do not. There is No reason you can't land a cirrus with an engine failure if you have places to land.
If the engine failed in the pattern, would you still pull it?
Are the rest of us without parachutes just supposed to stop flying and die?
@@SoloRenegade Agreed that its nuanced. Thats why its hard to have a good debate on chute vs no chute on the internet... There are so many factors on making that decision. Not binary at all.
Fully agreed. The chut should be a safety feature. If one can land safely in a field and has the altitude to do so, there is absolutely no reason why pulling the chute. The parachute imo, should be used if no place to land safely, structural damages to the plane making it unsafe to fly, incapacited pilot with passengers not being able to land...