When the Cirrus was first introduced, it included a Ballistic Recovery System, which shoots a parachute out the rear of the plane that can save a plane and its occupants when something goes wrong.
Seeing as how this technology has been honed over the past decades, why don't all new planes incorporate this feature? I would think that any drawbacks outweigh the benefit of not losing one's life when something happens unexpectedly.
Airframe parachutes are becoming an increasingly popular option on newly-certificated aircraft, thanks in part to the track record of successful deployments on Cirrus aircraft.
If I had to speculate on why they're not showing up in older certificated designs (like the Piper PA-28 or the Cessna 172 & 182) I'd go with the reason I mentioned in my comment: "New" Pipers and Cessnas are basically extended manufacturing runs of very old designs - going on 50+ years. Changing an existing aircraft design to include the required hardpoints, breakaway panels, etc. for a parachute system would be a substantial change to the type certificate, and under Part 23 certification rules doing so would cost the manufacturer an equally-substantial sum of money for the design, engineering, and testing required.
Light GA aircraft sales at the moment are, shall we say, lackluster -- the additional costs for the engineering, the type certificate update, and the parachute itself would certainly not help matters, as that cost would need to be passed along to the eventual purchaser of parachute-equipped aircraft (which would probably mean putting a 50+ year old classic Piper or Cessna design in the same price category as a clean-sheet Cirrus SR20/SR22).
In addition to the mainly-financial reasons above Quantas 94 Heavy has a point regarding weight. BRS (the premier airframe parachute company) makes a STC'd kit for some Cessna aircraft.
This kit costs about 80 pounds of useful load, and on many light GA aircraft the useful load is marginal enough that this added weight means you're effectively sacrificing a passenger to the installation. The Cessna retrofit kit also takes up a substantial amount of space in the baggage compartment as you can see from their installation white paper, which is certainly a negative factor as well. Were the chute to be incorporated into the design by Cessna it would likely be installed in a similar location (there just aren't many other places to put it) with a similar cost in weight and cargo space.
When the Cirrus was first introduced, it included a Ballistic Recovery System, which shoots a parachute out the rear of the plane that can save a plane and its occupants when something goes wrong. Seeing as how this technology has been honed over the past decades, why don't all new planes incorporate this feature? I would think that any drawbacks outweigh the benefit of not losing one's life when something happens unexpectedly.
Per FAR 91.307: Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved parachute, no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) may execute any intentional maneuver that exceeds... So if I'm flying aerobatics solo, I'm not required to have a parachute. But if I have a passenger, both are required to have one. What is the rationale for that? I suppose that in something like a Super Decathlon, where the pilot must exit the plane before the passenger, it would be senseless to have one for the passenger but not the pilot. But is there anything more to this?
On two of my trips (same airline, same kind of plane 777), I noticed that the airplane took very different routes (from New York to UAE). 1st Trip in 2012 (blue): Duration 11h 30m 2nd Trip in 2013 (green): Duration 13h 00m I know that the blue line is the shorter distance, and probably also because of jet streams, it took lesser time. But why a plane would take this green route, even not considering jet streams? Since I am not an important person, I could not ask the captain of the plane this question at the end of journey. P.S.: I observed the flight paths on the entertainment system
at an altitude where you don't need oxygen to bail out. With that in mind, couldn't you put the plane into a shallow dive to keep it from stalling, trim it to keep it going straight and then bail out? It seems like a somewhat practical solution, yet I have never heard of anyone doing it. Why do pilots often try to find a road to land on or a lake to ditch in when trouble strikes instead...There was another question that asked why commercial flights don't have parachutes. The almost ubiquitous response was that the parachutes would be useless because: Most accidents with commercial
(or cargo restraint webbing? I'm not sure I'm joking) could handle the remaining risk. No, I don't really think it would be commercially viable ... but I'm wondering whether folks who actually Know...The airlines are always trying to jam more passengers into each plane. I'm smaller than today's average, and I'm still often uncomfortable in a standard Economy seat. It occurred to me... an airline couldn't introduce a cabin in which some or all passengers travel in a reclining, rather than sitting, position? Seems to me that it would be more comfortable (except for claustrophobes
When I extend my flaps to 10 degrees, what exactly is the 10 degrees measuring? Is this referring to the angle of the flap blades themselves, the new angle of the wing chord, the change in the new critical angle of attack or something else?
Provided an aircraft with a fly-by-wire system, there are basically two possible choices when it comes deciding how to let the pilots interface with it: rate control / attitude hold: a deflection of the stick will command a certain rate, releasing it will make the system maintain the current attitude. See the Airbus Normal control law. direct control: a deflection of the yoke will directly translate to a deflection of the surfaces, mimicking the "old" mechanical control setup. It is my understanding that this is the design choice of Boeing in its new aircrafts. I do not wish to discuss
. This is just so we can find plane crashes in the sea when we don't know precisely where they went down (and to get basic data when the black boxes are too deep to get to immediately). Malaysian flight... be distributed around the plane (tail section, along fuselage, etc.). These FDR floaties would be about the size of a seat cushion, but they'd be wrapped in a water soluble cover. When a plane crashes into the water, if the plane breaks up, then several of the cushions would float to the surface. When the cover dissolves, several folded arms open up making it much bigger exposing a orange-nylon
Is it possible to rent a float plane with a private pilot's license? Flying floats is one of the main attractions for me to learn to fly. However, after some searching on the internet I can only find wheeled aircraft that are available for rent in my area. Am I missing something? Are there flying clubs or partnerships that have float planes available? I would love to fly floats but owning a seaplane is not in the cards for me at this point in my life.
If I understand correctly, when a plane transitions from takeoff roll to being airborne, it is not something that happens "by itself" when the airspeed is high enough, but is caused by deliberate... the tailplane down, which makes the entire aircraft pivot around the main gear and increases the wings' AoA enough to create lift that takes the plane off the ground. Or is it something that increases lift with unchanged attitude, such as a symmetric aileron movement, or an additional flaps extension? And then after the plane is airborne it is rotated to climbing attitude? The descriptions I can