Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Another SR22 Down - 3 DEAD

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
sounds like that could've been any airplane with that guy at the helm.
 
All of them seemed to be pilot induced accidents, not a Cirrus problem
 
Let me ask a question.
You think this would have happened if this man were piloting say a C172, or maybe a cherokee 180?
I know if you do something real stupid it may not matter, but it sure seems this cirrus thing may have some problems. I've done a lot of stupid stuff in cessnas and pipers and they have always taken me home. I can't remember doing anything so stupid to need a built in parachute though.
It does give me an idea though. Maybe airtractor will start offering an ejection seat as a cheaper alternative to their bad wing design. But I guess that's a conversation for somewhere else.
 
I think it's pointless to argue the validity of the chute from a survival of the fittest standpoint. I'm not going to bet my life on the chute. That just makes me smart. Stupidity will kill, chute or no. Have I done stupid things? just look at my total time :P Seems to me in this case they chose the wrong area to be doing that type of flying.

To me, one incident of a saved life validated the chute... and there have been at least two incidents so far where it has proven itself. For the benefit of those who haven't heard about them, one was cruising along when an aileron came loose following maintenance. The other had moisture in the static system causing erratic altimeter and VSI readings while in IMC. One couldn't be helped, the other I guess could have but both would have ended up on the other side of the statistics without the chute... ask them if they think the chute was a good idea.

And I'm sure there will be other instances of the chute saving lives.
 
RightPedal - why do you suppose that flying a 172 or Cherokee would make the situation different?

The chute isn't designed to save the day in every situation, or even most situations. A standby vacuum pump doesn't help me if I fly the plane into the side of a mountain.
 
Read the headlining article in this month's issue of Flying. They discuss the feasibility of installing chutes into all small airplanes, as well as discussing its pros and cons. They do, however, outline a few of the instances when the chute was successfully and appropriately deployed and the pilots and passengers walked away without a scratch. I am not a pilot yet, but after reading that NTSB report, the only thing that would have saved those three people is some sense. Buzzing around another aircraft like that, no matter how big or small, is just stupid. I'm sorry, but that's Darwin at work right there. I am terribly sorry for their families, but people like that should 1) not be in charge of an aircraft and 2) should DEFINITELY not be in charge of someone else's life! Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong...
 
I would consider myself an accident junkie. I try to read and learn about accidents as much as I can. I wasn't allways this way but after losing a close friend I just want to learn.

There was an article in flying magazine about a cirruss owner who had all the credentials, was the cirruss regional president, IFR rated yada yada yada.

Anyways the guy takes off and has a static failure. So what does he do. He pulls the chute rather than fly the fing plane. NTSB investigates and low and behold. No checklist was done because if he had done it he would have selected the alternate static source.

I wonder if he thought about that on the way down.

All the parachute does is give you an excuse not to be a pilot and do what you've been taught and trained to do. FLY THE AIRPLANE.
 
no matter what he should have done, if he had the same brain fart in not selecting alternate static source in another airplane, he'd have eaten it. i'll bet he's glad he had the chute even if he did screw up.
 
Diesel said:
I would consider myself an accident junkie. I try to read and learn about accidents as much as I can. I wasn't allways this way but after losing a close friend I just want to learn.

There was an article in flying magazine about a cirruss owner who had all the credentials, was the cirruss regional president, IFR rated yada yada yada.

Anyways the guy takes off and has a static failure. So what does he do. He pulls the chute rather than fly the fing plane. NTSB investigates and low and behold. No checklist was done because if he had done it he would have selected the alternate static source.

I wonder if he thought about that on the way down.

All the parachute does is give you an excuse not to be a pilot and do what you've been taught and trained to do. FLY THE AIRPLANE.
Click to expand...
So easy to say that after the fact, that was the accident that "could have been prevented" that I mentioned. Pulling the alt static source may or may not have fixed the problem, which was water in the static lines. The pilot felt he was out of control and played it safe. You can't blame the chute for not running the checklist, but you can credit it with a save.
 
Maybe they should have just named it the "Titanic"?

What's in a name anyway?
SR-22 Insurance Information

An SR-22 insurance policy is a certificate of insurance that shows the department proof of insurance for the future, as required by law. SR-22 insurance is not necessarily "high risk" insurance. It is motor vehicle liability insurance which requires the insurance company to certify coverage to the Division of Motor Vehicles, and the insurance company must notify DMV any time the policy is canceled, terminated or lapses. You do not need to own a car to buy this kind of insurance. If you do not own a car, ask your insurance company about a non-owner SR-22 policy.

An SR-22 insurance policy is normally required for reinstatement after a driver's privileges to drive have been suspended or revoked. If you are required to show proof of SR-22 insurance filing before having your driver's license reinstated, you must go to your insurance agent and obtain a copy of the SR-22 insurance binder or application for the binder. You must carry this kind of insurance policy for three years from the ending day of any revocation except revocations for DWI and Refusal convictions. For DWI and Refusal convictions SR-22 is required for five (5) years from the ending date on a first offense, 10 years from the ending date on a second offense, 20 years from the ending date on a third offense, and for life on a fourth offense per AS 28.20.230.

The ending day of your revocation is the day before you can get your license back even if you do not try to get it back on the first day you can. In other words, the day you reinstate does not matter when counting the SR-22 requirement period. To figure out how long you need SR-22, all you need to know is the day your revocation ended.
Click to expand...
 
The BRS(Ballistic Recovery System) is available for many aircraft. The C152 has a certified aftermarket system. This aside. These accidents on the NTSB website that were fatal (and even the non-fatal ones) were pilot error that the parachute couldn't have/wouldn't have made a difference.

It is a good system in the event of an engine failure or structural problem, but i fear there may be bit too much reliance and blind faith on this system to save the pilots arse.

The school i work for is looking at getting a bunch of them, awesome airplane, looks fun to fly, but maybe the parachute is a false sense of security to some. me.02
 
Here's at least one pilot who actually flew the plane. Good thinking! How low can you pop the chute on this thing? Is there a limit?

NTSB Identification: ATL05IA025
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Incident occurred Tuesday, November 16, 2004 in Peachtree City, GA
Aircraft: Cirrus Design Corp. SR22, registration: N723CD
Injuries: 3 Uninjured.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.
On November 16, 2004, about 1035 eastern standard time, a Cirrus Design Corp. SR22, N723CD, operated by AirShares Elite, returned for landing following an engine fire shortly after takeoff from Peachtree City - Falcon Field, Peachtree City, Georgia. The business flight was operated under the provisions of Title 14 CFR Part 91 with no flight plan filed. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed. The private-rated pilot and two passengers reported no injuries, and the airplane sustained minor damage. The flight departed Peachtree City, Georgia, about 1030 eastern standard time on November 16, 2004.

According to the pilot, the flight departed runway 31, and the airplane climbed normally. The pilot stated he turned the airplane onto the downwind for a downwind departure, then he heard a "pop" noise followed by "a noticeable change in the exhaust note." The pilot elected to return to runway 31 for landing, and he stated he detected what he thought was the odor of composite burning. The pilot stated he executed a normal landing on runway 31, but when the nosewheel touched down, the nose continued to sink until the propeller struck the ground. The pilot steered the airplane toward the taxiway and shut down the engine. The pilot then saw smoke rising from the engine cowling, and he and the passengers began to exit the airplane. Upon exiting the airplane, the pilot saw flames coming from inside the engine cowling, and he used the airplane's portable fire extinguisher to fight the fire.

Initial examination of the airplane revealed the engine and cowling sustained fire damage, the nosewheel strut was fire-damaged and collapsed, and each propeller blade was damaged at the tip.
 
Goose Egg said:
How about we stop posting about every accident, ok? It's gettin' old. And stressful.

-Goose
Click to expand...
Was it too stressful to NOT click on the link so clearly marked as a crash discussion/speculation thread?

Besides, what's an accident? Is that when a pilot "accidentally" flies into the path of a meteor? Or is it when a pilot "accidentally" pulls the wings off a plane during spatial disorientation? Or when a company "accidentally" designs a flaw into an aircraft? Or is it when a mechanic "accidentally" forgets to replace some "extra" nuts and bolts?
 
FN FAL said:
Was it too stressful to NOT click on the link so clearly marked as a crash discussion/speculation thread?
Click to expand...
Hence my conspicuous lack of participation in the other similar threads. I'm all for learning from other's mistakes, but I think keeping a body count, which seems to be the tendency in this forum lately, is grim and unnecessary.

The author of the thread didn't have learning in mind when he posted it. It was an anti-Cirrus rant. I'm perfectly willing to contribute to a more rational accident analysis discussion.

-Goose
 
What's wrong with a body count? I'm up to 56 dead and counting including several high-time pilots and too many innocent passengers.

How about the parachute as 'purchased invulnerability'?

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein
 
jetbluedog said:
Look up "cirrus" under NTSB search and all the fatalities........dang!
Click to expand...
Look up "Cessna" on the NTSB site and you'll see enough fatalities to populate a small town... Including 8 fatalities in the first WEEK of December.

I don't understand why the SR-22 itself is to be blamed for this most recent accident... Sounds like a pilot with some amount of experience in an airplane s/he flew for $$ did something quite stupid. The chute had nothing to do with it.

BTW, I did look up "Cirrus" on the NTSB and see 23 fatalities in Cirrus Design Corp. airplanes (including this most recent one). The other "Cirrus" fatalities are for the VK-series kitplanes that Cirrus offered prior to the factory-built SR-20 and -22. 56 dead? Perhaps. But not with the chute-planes.

After reading the synopses, it appears the chute wouldn't have helped in any of these situations except one:

1 fatality: During the initial test phase, the now-famous aileron problem. Aircraft not equipped with a chute.

3 fatalities: Non-instr. rated pilot, in IMC, hit a mountain.

2 fatalities: Flat spin, chute NOT deployed, though it most certainly should have been.

1 fatality: A/C hit a mountain, rising terrain in VMC.

1 fatality: Non-instr. rated pilot, in IMC, hit a mountain.

2 fatalities: Non-instr. rated pilot, disoriented, strikes ground.

1 fatality: A/C struck power lines.

4 fataltities: A/C struck a mountain.

4 fatalities: Pilot appeared to be "showing off", pitched up rapidly after rotation, stalled, and spun into the ground. Chute not deployed.

1 fatality: A/C landed in a river 1000' short of a runway for as-yet undetermined reasons, but not chute deployment.

And this last one, with three more fatalities.

Sounds to me like a whole bunch of stupidity, nothing at all wrong with the Cirrus.
 
Sr-22

My coworker has an SR-22 which I've now flown right seat a few times. Fantastic plane. It's currently at the top of the list of things to buy when my bank account grows up.:)

Because it's relatively fast, we flew it to a meeting down in the bay area (from the Seattle area), thus taking us less overall time than our coworkers who flew commercial. We'd been cruising at 10-11K the entire way and trading off resting our eyes. At one point, over the Siskiyous, I asked him a question about something...and got no response. His eyes proceeded to roll back in his head, and he started having seizures. My thought process basically went:

- Well, that's spiffy. Never seen a seizure before.
- Uh, uh-oh. I've never landed this plane before.
- Man, I hope he doesn't throw up. That would be really gross.

I thought through my options, and not once did "pull the chute" seriously enter my mind.

Rather, I diverted to Redding, thinking that, with a long enough runway, I could land any small plane. Not gracefully perhaps, but I figured I'd probably walk away.

As we finally were able to descend out of the mountains (below about 8K) he came to, apparently his brain started getting enough O2 again. We then continued to the Bay area, (after I made darned certain I knew every speed and flap setting necessary to get that sucker on the ground!).

For the way home, we came up the coast at about 6K feet. He's now looking at O2 systems.

But my point (and I do have one) is that the parachute, just like every other instrument and piece of the SR-22, is a tool. There are things it is good for and things it is not good for. And like any tool, it isn't the "invlunerability potion".

But it does improve your odds of surviving certain scenarios, including certain airframe problems. Just because some dimwit (or smart person making the wrong decision) might fire the chute in the wrong situation and decrease his odds of survival doesn't mean that the rest of us shouldn't have that added safety feature. If you follow that line of reasoning, then we should never use the autopilot (what if I program it incorrectly?), we should limit the elevator such that it's really hard to stall (I hate that in the ercoupe!), etc. etc. etc.
 
Last edited:
"For the way home, we came up the coast at about 6K feet. He's now looking at O2 systems"

... you flew home with this guy in an unfamiliar aircraft, with him PIC..?

..also, rather than looking for O2 systems, your friend should be more worried about losing his medical.
 
Last edited:
Hopefully I can add to this thread. I had the factory training in the SR-22 and about 40 hours in it, maybe half IMC. The training is pretty good and they talk about past chute deployments. On one of them, the pilot claimed the plane was uncontrollable in mountain wave turbulence. Seemed like he went into panic mode. Saved his tail but beat up the airplane pretty good.

The chute is not meant to be pulled below 900 feet AGL. Deployment takes a bit of time. Impact is set to replicate being dropped straight down from about 13 feet. Yah, you'll feel it. It's meant for the occupants to live but not for the airplane to go undamaged.

I.P. mentioned the spin incident. It is clearly mentioned it the training that the airplane tends to flatten out in a spin. The recommendation is that if you're not out within two turns, to pull the chute.

It's really a great airplane. As posters have mentioned, just because it has a chute, fancy avionics and a glass pit doesn't mean you fly it any differently in an emergency. The chute simply gives you one last option. Engine failure in hard IMC with low ceilings is the only time I could think of pulling it. Offhand at least. To sum it up, I'd buy one in a New York second if I had the cash. It's made for 200-500 mile jaunts. 180 KTAS.

The insturctor I had did mention they have a few very low time pilots who have lots of cash who buy one but need extra training. Seemed he was infering the plane was a bit beyond their capabilities. If you have any questions about it, please feel free to pm me.

Mr. I.
 
Mr. Irrelevant said:
On one of them, the pilot claimed the plane was uncontrollable in mountain wave turbulence. Seemed like he went into panic mode. Saved his tail but beat up the airplane pretty good.


Mr. I.
Click to expand...
Beat up the plane pretty good? Deploying the chute means the airframe is unusable again...even if it lands on all three wheels.
 
FN FAL said:
Beat up the plane pretty good? Deploying the chute means the airframe is unusable again...even if it lands on all three wheels.
Click to expand...
Negative, at least one airframe was repaired and put back into service.
 
Are we missing the point? When I read the accident report it appeared to me that the pilot flew his aircraft into terrain?

The guy violated the rules of mountain flying. I don't think it has anything to do with the aircraft.

My $0.02.
 
Flew a SR22 GTS last week and it was pretty nice. It had terriain warning "whoop whoop" etc....and also had a terrain mapping system that color coded the terrain according to its altitude in relation to you. I guess this guy didn't have it or use it.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom