[tialaramex]

Pilots of planes with CAPS are (now) taught to pull the chute if anything goes wrong inside the profile (low enough speed, far enough above ground) where the chute is designed to work. The aeroplane is insured, you can buy a new one. Even if the pilot and all passengers are insured you can't buy new ones.

They changed this because it turns out that the same phenomenon that leads to private pilots taking undue risks in the rest of flight ("Get-there-itis") also makes them reluctant to pull the chute even when it's clearly their best option. Pilots who clearly couldn't reach a safe landing spot, yet had working CAPS would dig themselves (and their passengers) a grave rather than just pull the handle. So teaching them to start by assuming they'll pull the chute and only then considering whether there are other options reduces the fatality rate.

[elliekelly]

I’m not really sure how to ask what I want to ask, so apologies if this doesn’t make sense: Does the parachute only work if the plane is in a free fall? If the plane is gliding along and suddenly the engine goes out, for example, would pulling the chute work?

[throw0101a]

There is a maximum speed that the system can handle:

> Four CAPS deployments occurred successfully at higher speeds, 168, 171, 187 and 190 knots indicated airspeed, and one deployment failed at an airspeed estimated at over 300 knots airspeed.

* https://www.cirruspilots.org/Safety/What-Is-CAPS

Anything lower than that will forward-motion stop the aircraft. AFAICT, there is a need for 2000' (650m) of altitude above the ground for the system to deploy in time to be useful (slow descent).

[DarmokJalad1701]

> AFAICT, there is a need for 2000' (650m) of altitude above the ground for the system to deploy in time to be useful

Official Cirrus guidelines include verbalizing "CAPS is available" when crossing 600ft AGL during climb-out.

Source: I fly an SR22.

[captainredbeard]

Even then, they recommend pulling the chute anyway because it can reduce velocity if it’s still above nominal “touchdown” speed

[captainredbeard]

Well you wouldn’t pull the chute. The plane has lift when it has forward motion at a non stalling angle of attack. It would become a glider until reaching stall speed

[tialaramex]

No, you should probably pull the chute.

Yes you're gliding right now, but whilst that's better than just falling uncontrolled from the sky it's no guarantee you'll walk away.

Now if you're gliding... right towards a perfectly nice runway you were already lined up on then CAPS is likely the wrong call, not least because you may already be too low. But if you're just in the middle of nowhere then CAPS is much safer than hoping that's just a big empty grassy meadow you see ahead and doesn't have a thin, wheel-snagging ditch, or a barbed wire fence, or a dozen other obstacles that you wouldn't see until it's too late.

Even for a water landing, if you have never practised there are a lot of ways for putting a conventional plane down in the water to go badly, including flipping or breaking up the plane, whereas CAPS should just plonk you in the water, relatively gently, right side up, not great news, but very survivable.

[jrockway]

Here's an analysis of the CAPS system's safety record: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT58pzY41wA (contains some good footage of an SR22 parachuting into the ocean, and into the ground).

This is a good overview on the survivability of water landings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LwGYBBhTss. I haven't watched the video recently but I think even a 172 that cartwheels after landing has a pretty good survivability rate, something like 90%. Parachute is a nice to have, of course.

[tialaramex]

Paul Bertorelli is a lot of fun, I have seen those videos a while back. I enjoy his "cheap pilot bastard" attitude to things even if maybe I don't agree with it.