It's occurred to me that in some circles, we Cirrus pilots are going through some of the same thing early 35 pilots were, and still are, to some degree.

The early 35s had a terrible record 4.9 per 100k hour fatality rate in 1952. Compare that to the 2.0 of the Cessna 195.

Yet today, it's almost as safe as the 33 and 36. But still, I had other Bo pilots on this site and in person, saying they wouldn't feel safe in one.

On the Cirrus side, the stats now say they are considerably safer than the average business and pleasure GA pilot. Yet, it only passed a spin test in Europe, and 60 spins is way below standard, here.

Why the bias, I wonder. I experienced it, too. Threat of the masses rejecting your choice as the best? In the used market, that's not logical for a lot of us. Cirrus doesn't compete with a '67 S35.

So it must be brand loyalty. Like, I'm an American, except it's, I'm a beechcraftian. Well, no, because it happens with even Piper pilots.

So it's the chute. If it didn't have one, it would just be another plane, and no one would feel threatened. Well, maybe. But some LSAs have them. And owners here agreed by a healthy majority that they would like one.

Really, I don't know. And again, I experienced the bias myself a couple years ago. For me, the bias left when pilots actually started using the chute, and the safety stats became impressive.

Just rambling while waiting for my CPA to show up.

my thoughts- skidded turn stall? did it in a T34C once, scared the crap out of me.

I don't think there is anything surprising here.
A pilot spun a plane that isn't certified for intentional spins. He was unable to recover. We don't really know if he applied the best recovery procedure, but considering that he managed to spin the plane in the first place, I willing to believe that his spin recovery attempt was not optimal. There are also many certified planes that will not recover from a fully developed spin.

He then followed the Cirrus spin recovery procedure: pull the chute. The chute worked and everyone walked away.

Nate, would it be illegal here for you or Paul or any other Cirrus faithful to show us the videos of those 60 spin tests done in Europe? Or if you believe that the factory or someone did these tests and didn't take any photos, maybe you can show us the written reports from these tests. By written reports I don't mean just something from the internet, but the factory accounts by the test pilots.

I tend to be a bit of a skeptic about a lot of things said when someone is selling something. I recall Nixon's "secret plan for peace" and when I read that there was an investment fund that never, even in down years, returned less than 20% I had a little doubt, even though Bernie, like Cirrus had lots of decipules.

So as for all these European spin tests we keep hearing about, a few doubts. Does it seem logical that the Cirrus factory would not or could not, or at least did not get the Cirrus certified in the U S by passing the same spin testing that Beech did with Bonanza, however the factory went to Europe and risked a plane and test pilot or planes and test pilots in doing 60 spin tests in Europe?
To what purpose? Even if the passed in Europe, which is doubtful ( maybe the air is thicker there or the regs less rigorous) they would not be certified that way here. And if they did pass in Europe, are intentional spins legal in one there? And what is the recovery method listed in the pilot operating handbook of an European Cirrus?

If I was selling Cirrus I would be glad first of all that the chute really seems to work as hoped or even better and next that good marketing has resulted in many buyers. I'd be glad it was a good cross country machine and not try to promote it on some basis of being and some aerodynamic wonder.

Bill,

What difference does it make if they are certified for spinning or not?

People in many kinds of planes enter spins, and many of them - perhaps most of them die. Except in the Cirrus when the chute is pulled.

When I had a Cirrus, I really didn't care that it was not certified to spin in the USA. I never spun it. Never spun my Bonanza either.

never spun the Bo....but I have spun other aircraft....and I haven't died yet.

...and no chutes were needed.

If one follows the manufacture's instructions for W&B and has the proper training....it really should be a non-event.

...SHOULD be....correct. And, I'd bet that you did your spins up at altitude and on purpose. I've done that in a 152 and in a Decathlon. I didn't die either.

Had the demo pilot even been taught how to recover from a spin? Most private and commercial pilots in the USA aren't - glider pilots and CFI's are - but even CFI's only get to experience 2 or 3 spins (glider pilots do tens of them - I would say I've done about 30 to 40).

Just about anyone can recover from a spin that they intentionally start. In the real world you are most likely to spin due to losing control in IMC or at night disorientated or hot and heavy in a climb in gusty conditions. Any of these would be very difficult for the average pilot to recover from not expecting the spin. If fact, since they allowed to get the plane into the spin to start with shows they are not capable of handling the plane and will most likely not be able to handle the recovery either. A chute is a no-brainer here.

The only other spin likely is maneuvering at landing with cross control input causing a low-level spin which probably will not matter with or without the chute.

Some airplanes (including all acro planes) will recover from a fully developed spin. I've spun and un-spun several.

Other planes will not recover from a spin and shoudln't be spun

my thoughts- skidded turn stall? did it in a T34C once, scared the crap out of me.

Skidded turn stalls are evil. And an eye opener.

In the text of the report it states that after the third rotation the PICsaid "i'm sorry". The plane was spinning to the right and as the PASSENGER used left rudder, the rotation slowed. The PIC then reinput right rudder and the rotation accelerated.

I don't think this is a matter of the Cirrus not being able to recover from a spin but rather inconsistent and improper spin recovery techniques

John
SR 20

If that is really true, maybe Cirrus can fix stupid.....

I don't know of any plane where spin direction rudder is used for spin recovery. (maybe there is some exotic reason I'm not aware of?).

Was it an inverted spin? - that can be confusing - though you still use rudder to reduce the rotation.

Utility class normally means you can spin?