lml@lancaironline.net Mailing List Archive

John:

I like your wife. I call BS also!

The truth is that the chute works rather well. The 1500 fpm thing is not accurate. It is designed to lower the aircraft onto flat terrain at a slow enough speed that the gear absorbs the vast amount of the impact energy. I can't recall the actual descent rate but I think 500fpm (about 8 feet per second) is about right. That's a very reasonable rate. As a comparison, the Shuttle must be landed at less than 9 fps vertical rate.) The chute works pretty doggone well as has been attested several times now. The big problem is descending into water where the gear doesn't absorb the impact.

It is not unusual for NO-time pilots to buy a Cirrus. I think there are more logical approaches, but it's not all that unusual, either. It's not unlike the guy who builds a Lancair before he learns to fly. It happens. We have to admit that the game has changed. It's no longer the ONLY way to learn to come up through the ranks. I know several pilots who learned in a Bonanza. Heck, Arthur Godfrey got his initial Private Certificate in a single-pilot DC-3.

Walter

On Aug 14, 2007, at 4:52 AM, John Hafen wrote:

I was cleaning out one of my hangars the other day as two guys wandered up and enthusiastically inquired about renting a hangar. Seems it was a father-in-law/son-in-law duo that had just come into money from selling a company. Now, naturally, it was time to rush out and buy a “Technically Advanced Airplane.”

They had the Cirrus sale all lined up but the Cirrus sales guy told them they really should have a hangar for their new bird. So they went looking (“Here, hangar hangar hangar……” Damn, suckers don’t just grow on trees!)

Both of the gents, but especially the younger one, positively effused about the capabilities of the new Cirrus and how absolutely safe it was, especially with the BRS.

I asked them about their flight experience. Seems neither of them even had a license. They had ZERO time. They didn’t even know about taking a flight physical.

They had found someone to insure them as they learned to fly, in their new Cirrus. $15k each per year was the price tag. They were OK with that. I suppose that if money is no object, then money is no object.

We chatted for a while, and then the older guy asked me, “Are we doing the right thing starting out with a Cirrus?”

A sales guy by nature, I have the habit of telling people what they want to hear. In this case, I just couldn’t. I looked the guy in the eye and said, “nope.”

“What do you think we should do?” the older guy asked.

I told him that he first might want to see if he could pass an FAA physical. Then I pointed to a Cessna 152 sitting out on the ramp. I said “See that old Cessna 152? I think you should get about 100 hours on that bird. Then, when you are WAY comfortable with that, move up to the 172 right next to it. If you don’t want to fly old planes, fly the Diamond, that pretty white bird over there. Get a few hundred hours in the 172 and or the Diamond, THEN think about buying a new Cirrus.” I believe he was actually listening. He and his son in law wandered off and I never saw them again.

I was chatting with a sales rep for Cirrus at an air show. My wife was with me so she was asking him about the BRS. I don’t know if this is Cirrus doctrine or real or fantasy or whatever – it’s a data point of one, but he told us that the BRS only slows the plane down to about a 1500 foot per minute decent rate, and that it is not really designed to be used over flat terrain. Where it really comes in handy, he said, is in the mountains, where the terrain is sloping down. His rationale was that if you are descending at 1500 fpm and land on a 45 degree slope, your slow down will be enough to survive.

My wife, no dummy (she married me, after all) understands aviation. She is working on her private pilot rating and has soloed. She doesn’t have much of a buffer between her brain and her mouth (she is a math major and pretty technical). When she heard about the 1500 fpm descent rate and the assumed position over a 45 degree slope yada yada yada, she immediately turned to me and blurted, in front of the Cirrus sales guy, “Sounds like Bullshit to me!”

Thank you, Dear.

So Lancair has a new propjet that cruises at almost 400 kts. Cool. The BRS can’t take any more than about 165 kias. Therefore, IMHO, the chances of a pilot becoming incapacitated, and having his wife or girl friend or child or whoever is in the right seat, immediately taking control of the aircraft and slowing it to 165 and then deploying the BRS that would allow the plane to descend at 1500 fpm onto a 45 degree slope so that all could survive…..seems a stretch, on a good day.

I agree that the BRS sells planes. It is marketing, rather than reality. Image over substance. AND we all know that what keeps airplanes aloft has nothing to do with the aerodynamics of flight – lift, drag, etc. Neither does it have anything to do with money. Money does not keep planes aloft. Kitchen Clearance (KC) is what keeps planes aloft – the wife’s permission/consent makes things positively fly!

Therefore, if the wife says “yes,” then the plane flies. If she doesn’t say yes, it doesn’t.

So, based on the FACT that a BRS is totally marketing and that it really doesn’t serve any purpose what-so-ever in actuality, I recommend that Lancair market their new propjet with the BRS. I also recommend they they not actually install the chute, since it only adds weight and doesn’t actually save anyone. But they need to install a big ass handle, with a label that says “Pull This Handle for Ultimate Safety (PTHUS).” It won’t actually DO anything (very much like a real BRS) but it makes people feel much better and truly does sell airplanes.

Just my two cents.

John Hafen

PS – There was no farmer’s daughter. That was just “marketing.” Kind of like a BRS.