Very very interesting PIREP

[flyf15]

Well guys, looks like another Cirrus used its parachute. This just happened an hour and a half ago.

MGM UUA /OV SCD 270004/TM 2200/FL090/TP SR22/IC SVR ICG 077-0900/RM ACFT WAS DESCENDING BY PARACHUTE DUE TO SEVRE ICG BUILDUP

I'll have to remember that for the next time I want to take a Cirrus into severe icing.

 

[wmuflyguy]

Seems the parachute, is haveing an adverse effect on peoples decision making skills.

"Oh it's ok to fly through the icing conditions, If it gets too much we can always pull the parachute"

Not all though, I know a CFI i worked with who put one into a field when an improperly fixed fuel selector starved the engine of fuel. Just cause the chute is there doesn't make it the best option.

 

[Steveair]

The question I'd like to have answered is if the parachute ice'd up on the descent!

 

[Flysher]

I heard a story recently about a cirrus that had an engine failure in the traffic pattern and the pilot pulled the chute, everyone on board died supposedly. This is just a guess but I wonder if the chute hasn't HURT more people than its helped.....

 

[avbug]

A cirrus crashed in Lancaster, CA, in the last day or so; parachute deployed in the pattern, with all dead, I believe. That was something like the 14th fatal crash out of 31 in the last few years.

I've decended out of cloud under canopy in the winter with ice on the canopy, and a coating of ice on my chest, arms, lets, and face.

 

[Steveair]

I recall a recent article I read in AOPA and Flying. It said that the chutes had only been used a few times and that they had been use successfully and safely.

In the same token, there have been several crashes of Cirrus Aircraft; mainly due to pilot error. You're putting pilots who are extremely unexperienced and putting them into a very fast and capable airplane. Cirrus, like the Baron and the A36, are doctor killers. Inexperience and lack of proficiency is killing these people; not mechanical failure of the aircraft.

I would like to know more about this recent Cirrus crash (chute deploys in the pattern). There's a chance the pilot pulled the chute at too low an altitude??

 

[p5harri]

http://www.dailyhome.com/news/2006/dh-talladegacounty-0114-richardmcvay-6a13v1838.htm

They made it down safely evidently.....

 

[StrykerFL]

The CAPS is only designed to work if you have altitude below you. It has been tested successfully many times by the factory test pilots. The Cirrus is a great airplane. I love to fly it and think it is a very safe airplane. The problem is the inexperience of the pilots and their reliance on the systems to save them when they get in trouble. There are a little over a dozen people, plus the four today, out there walking around today because the parachute saved their lives. I'm glad to hear there was a good outcome in today's deployment.

I've posted some info on the CAPS below for those that aren't very familiar with how it is designed to work. It is straight out of the SR22 training guide:

The Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS) is designed to lower the aircraft and its passengers to the ground in the event of a Life Threatening Emergency. The system is intended to save the lives of the occupants but will most likely destroy the aircraft and may, in adverse circumstances, cause serious injury or death to the occupants

The following information is meant to guide your decision about CAPS activation. It is intended to be informative, not directive. It is the responsibility of you, the pilot in command, to determine when and how CAPS will be used.


Deployment Attitude

• CAPS has been tested in all flap configurations at speeds ranging from Vso to Vo. Deployment from a 1 turn spin was also tested.
• The rocket would successfully recover the aircraft into its level descent attitude under parachute as long as the parachute was introduced into free air.

However, it can be assumed that to minimize the chances of parachute entanglement and reduce aircraft oscillations under the parachute, the CAPS should be activated from a wings-level, upright attitude if at all possible. This deceleration increases with airspeed but in all cases within the parachute envelope should be less than 3 g’s.During this deceleration a slight nose-up may be experienced, particularly at high speed; however, the rear riser is intentionally snubbed short to preclude excessive nose-up pitch. Following any nose-up pitching, the nose will gradually drop until the aircraft is hanging nose-low beneath the canopy.

Eight seconds after deployment, the rear riser snub line will be cut and the aircraft tail will drop down into its final approximately level attitude. Once stabilized in this attitude, the aircraft may yaw slowly back and
forth or oscillate slightly as it hangs from the parachute.


Deployment Speed

• The maximum speed at which deployment has been demonstrated is 133 KIAS. Deployment at higher speeds could subject the parachute and aircraft to excessive loads that could result in structural failure.

• Once a decision has been made to deploy CAPS, make all reasonable efforts to slow to the minimum possible airspeed. However, if time and altitude are critical, and/or ground impact is imminent, the CAPS should be activated regardless of airspeed.

Deployment Altitude

• No minimum altitude for deployment has been set. This is because the actual altitude loss during a particular deployment depends upon the airplane’s airspeed, altitude and attitude at deployment as well as other environmental factors. In all cases however, the chances of a successful deployment increase with altitude.

Loss of Altitude

• Demonstrated altitude loss from entry into a one-turn spin until under a stabilized parachute is 920 ft.
• Altitude loss from level flight deployments has been demonstrated at less than 400 ft.

With these numbers in mind it might be useful to keep 2,000 feet AGL in mind as a cut-off decision altitude. Above 2,000 feet, there would normally be time to systematically assess and address the aircraft emergency.
Below 2,000 feet, the decision to activate the CAPS has to come almost immediately in order to maximize the possibility of successful deployment. At any altitude, once the CAPS is determined to be the only alternative available for saving the aircraft occupants, deploy the system without delay.


Hazards of Deployment

• Ignition of pyrotechnic device - ROCKET
• Lateral speed over the ground dependent on wind speed. If the wind is 30 kts then you will be moving 30 kts when you touch down.
• Aircraft may be dragged on the ground by wind gusts
• No directional control - You will probably NOT touch down with the nose pointing in direction of travel
• No choice of landing site
• No release after deployment – There is no way to cut away the chute after it is deployed
• Vertical speed equivalent to a static drop from 13 ft. or about a 1600FPM descent
• Nose gear may collapse
• No guarantee of a safe outcome

 

[avbug]

The CAPS is only designed to work if you have altitude below you.

This may come as a shock, but very few parachute systems are designed to work based on altitude above you .

The problem is the inexperience of the pilots and their reliance on the systems to save them when they get in trouble.

Of the fourteen or so fatal accidents so far, about half have been pilots with a thousand hours or more...one involving a pilot with 41,000 hours.

 

[BlueLight]

A cirrus crashed in Lancaster, CA, in the last day or so; parachute deployed in the pattern, with all dead, I believe. That was something like the 14th fatal crash out of 31 in the last few years.

I've decended out of cloud under canopy in the winter with ice on the canopy, and a coating of ice on my chest, arms, lets, and face.

Below is a clip I saw and pasted from another site about the latest Cirrus accident-- great points consistent w/ Avbugs recent essays on a recent thread about non-certified aircraft launching into icing.

Good info also on icing and reference to a current article apparently from the author of the comments that follow -- all worth studying -esp if you are on the ground in warm air w/ a clean airframe and a frosty mug in your hand.
=====.
Yet another Cirrus accident! This afternoon while departing Birmingham, AL. "Experienced" pilot of an SR22 (no TKS) flew through an icing layer 3000-4000 ft thick after the passage of a cold front. Was on top at 8000 feet and the aircraft departed controlled flight. CAPS was activated, all three souls on board survived.

I cannot understand why pilots, experienced or not, attempt to challenge Mother Nature with little or no regard for the potential outcome.

The chances of icing was near certain. I'll say that another way. THERE WAS NO DOUBT THAT ICING WOULD OCCUR.

1. An AIRMET for icing existed which included Birmingham.
2. Strong cold front passed by earlier in the afternoon.
3. Strong cold-air advection behind the front lowering freezing levels throughout the day.
4. Saturated conditions (0°C dew point depression) from 3,500 ft through 6,700 ft with temperatures of 0°C at 3,500 ft to -5°C at the cloud tops around 7,000 ft. Very high risk of supercooled water droplets in the presence of cold-air advection = A high risk of severe icing.

If anyone doesn't get IFR Magazine, please read my latest article, The Appleman Line, which illustrates the atmospheric conditions that can produce icing.

 

[USMCmech]

Personally I don't view the CAPS chute as a major asset.

Almost any likely situation I could imagine pulling the chute, a good pilot either shouldn't be in in the first place (heavy ice) or should be able to safely recover & land (engine failure, or a spin) or probably wouldn't help anyway (spin at very low altitude). A deployed parachute is no gaurenty that you won't get hurt (1600FPM impact, OUCH), and the plane will likely be seriously damaged or totaled.

It deffinately can't be included in your go/no go decision makeing. If you ever say to yourself "if anything goes wrong I can always pull thechute" you need to stay on the ground.

 

[Flyin Tony]

The Cirrus that crashed at WFJ, the chute went off when it hit the ground. From what I was told, I know the guy that was working in the tower at the time it crashed

 

[TrafficInSight]

Personally I don't view the CAPS chute as a major asset.

Almost any likely situation I could imagine pulling the chute, a good pilot either shouldn't be in in the first place (heavy ice) or should be able to safely recover & land (engine failure, or a spin) or probably wouldn't help anyway (spin at very low altitude). A deployed parachute is no gaurenty that you won't get hurt (1600FPM impact, OUCH), and the plane will likely be seriously damaged or totaled.

It deffinately can't be included in your go/no go decision makeing. If you ever say to yourself "if anything goes wrong I can always pull thechute" you need to stay on the ground.

I doubt the chute would entice me to fly through an icing layer but I'd have to disagree with you. When the fit hits the shan I'll take anything I can get.

 

[91100 100 set]

Of the fourteen or so fatal accidents so far, about half have been pilots with a thousand hours or more...one involving a pilot with 41,000 hours.

Nothing against "older" pilots (more power to 'em), but whoever it was with the 41,000 hours probably already had one foot in the grave...

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

Not all though, I know a CFI i worked with who put one into a field when an improperly fixed fuel selector starved the engine of fuel. Just cause the chute is there doesn't make it the best option.

WMU,

I had the same thing happen to me when receiving my SR22 training(over a year ago). Except that I didn't run the tank dry. Noticed that no fuel was being used off the newly selected tank. Apparently a pin in the selector had broken and didn't allow for the changing of the tanks. This was a brand new airplane by the way. Probably had 75 hours or so on it. Cirrus claimed it was the first time something like that had happened. Maybe it's happened twice....

Mr. I.

 

[Cat Driver]

" Nothing against "older" pilots (more power to 'em), but whoever it was with the 41,000 hours probably already had one foot in the grave... "

Can you tell me when you would consider someone to be "older" enough to have one foot in the grave?

I need to know so I can know when to quit.

 

[avbug]

Nothing against "older" pilots (more power to 'em), but whoever it was with the 41,000 hours probably already had one foot in the grave...

Meaning?

 

[Cat Driver]

Avbug, I was only asking, tounge in cheek, when do we get so old we are getting one foot in the grave...

...I'd hate to keep flying with that handicap.

 

[avbug]

Catdriver,

That wasn't directed at you...it was directed at the poster who made the statement. I can't decide if he's suggesting that old pilots deserve to die, that the pilot was suicidal, that the pilot's loss is okay because he was older, or because he might eventually die...it just seemed like a really, really stupid thing to say.

Another poster had suggested that the Cirrus accidents have taken place because the pilots are all inexperienced, and it's not true...some fatalitis have been due to inexperience, but not others. Many due to poor judgement, but that's not necessarily related to hours, or experience, as we all know.

I'd kind of like to know about these signs of one foot being in the grave, myself. Sort of like one foot in the black, one in the green, or for those of us who grew up on a farm...one foot in a pail of milk. I supose the grave is more dangerous, because it's deeper. So long as we're not flying a cirrus, apparently it isn't an issue...

 

[Cat Driver]

Yeh, Avbug sometimes I am appalled at the level of intelect that comes across on these forums.

If you find out if we are to old someone should advise the JAR authorities to suspend my airdisplay authorization because it would not be in the best intrest of the air show industry for me to step over the edge in front of thousands of spectators..

Anyhow makes for interesting reading.

 

[pilotpat]

avbug = choker

 

[avbug]

Fly into the light little pilot pat. Fly into the light.

 

[wmuflyguy]

Did you ever Teach at WMU? You could be the person i was talking about

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

Negative. Clearly happened to two people.

Mr. I.

 

[kneeshoe]

I'm not sure if anyone already answered this, but what is the approximate descent rate with the parachute deployed? I've heard it's still pretty fast.

 

[paulsalem]

A Cirrus SR22 with three people on board landed gently in a grove of trees adjacent to a road near Childersburg, Ala., about 4 p.m. Friday after the pilot deployed the ballistic parachute. All three walked away from the airplane unhurt. The pilot, Kerwin Day, is a certified flight instructor and ATP-rated pilot with over 12,000 hours. He reported that he had control difficulties while attempting to maneuver through an area of in-cloud icing conditions, according to a news release from BRS, the maker of the chute system. The airplane was not equipped with an icing protection system. Day said that while trying to climb to a higher altitude to escape the icing, the airplane began to shake and entered into a stall; it then turned sharply and Day experienced a total loss of control. Larry Williams, CEO of BRS, said, "A scenario of this type is exactly why we at BRS go to work every day. What could have been a tragic disaster had a successful outcome, there were no fatalities in this accident, thankfully there were not even any injuries." FAA spokeswoman Kathleen Bergen told The Associated Press the plane is owned by Trench Shoring Services, a manufacturing sales company out of Colorado. All three people on board are company employees.​

 

[wmuflyguy]

I'm not sure if anyone already answered this, but what is the approximate descent rate with the parachute deployed? I've heard it's still pretty fast.

I think it was posted someplace around here. If I recal it was arund 1500fpm

 

[Alin10123]

WMU,

I had the same thing happen to me when receiving my SR22 training(over a year ago). Except that I didn't run the tank dry. Noticed that no fuel was being used off the newly selected tank. Apparently a pin in the selector had broken and didn't allow for the changing of the tanks. This was a brand new airplane by the way. Probably had 75 hours or so on it. Cirrus claimed it was the first time something like that had happened. Maybe it's happened twice....

Mr. I.

Dang... i keep reading about stuff like this from the owners reviews. One review i read was that a pilot was using the autopilot on his maiden voyage and the autopilot would climb and level off fine, but then during the descent, it didn't want to level out and he had to disengage and reengage the autopilot in order to level out. Then on the way back home he reported that when he engaged the autopilot on the climb, the autopilot would nose up all of the sudden. He said he flew the entire 4 hours home manually. When he got back to the cirrus factory eventually, they said that the autopilot module was fried.

There were quite a few of these i read about. I read about another one when the mechanical vacum pump had failed within 75 hours of the plane being brand new and the elctrical backup pump kicked in.

Then on here i read about the pin breaking on the fuel selector?

Of course... i dont have that much experience since i'm just barely under 90 hours, but is it just cirrus? Or is this just part of owning an aircraft and it happens to all of the brand new aircraft?

 

[CRJDispatchKid]

Correct me if I'm wrong as it's been some time since I've been up close on a Cirrus.

Wouldn't the aircraft be a loss if the parachute is deployed? I believe the rocket is fired aft of the cabin, but there is no "firing hole", it goes straight through the top of the fuselage. With the aircraft being made of composite I think that would about do your airplane in, regardless of how "softly" you landed.

Just wondering...

 

[JustFly]

Cirrus under canopy

There is no "hole" but there is a kick-out plate that is blown off. The deployment will not total the aircraft but the impact with the ground probably will. THis is not always the case, the first deployment came down in a small grove of trees that absobed enough energy that the aircraft was repairable. BTW, that was a case were I think any pilot would have wanted the 'chute, aileron partially seperated due to maintenance (that would not be caught on a pre-flight) making the airplane uncontrollable to land.