PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - The most unnecessary chute pull ever?
View Single Post
Old 24th May 2014, 14:53
  #391 (permalink)  
Pace
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The airplane was in instrument meteorological conditions, and the pilot intended to fly an instrument landing system approach. Review of non-volatile memory data revealed that the autopilot approach mode was armed as the airplane intercepted the localizer course and was descending toward 2,600 feet mean sea level (msl). At that time, the autopilot was selected to vertical speed (VS) mode with the altitude armed rather than selected to the altitude mode, which is one of the criteria for automatically arming the glideslope (GS) mode later in the approach. About 1 minute later, the autopilot automatically cancelled the VS mode and switched to altitude mode as the airplane reached 2,600 feet msl. However, at that time the airplane was above the glideslope by 53 percent needle deflection. The autopilot will not automatically arm the GS mode unless, in addition to the altitude mode being selected, the airplane is more than 10 percent needle deflection below the glideslope. As a result, the airplane remained above the glideslope until the autopilot was disconnected about 1 minute later. The pilot then attempted to hand-fly a missed approach; however, he was unable to maintain the heading or altitude assigned by air traffic control. He subsequently lost control of the airplane during a turn and elected to deploy the airplane's parachute system. The airplane came to rest in a vacant lot.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The pilot's failure to maintain airplane control during a missed approach in instrument meteorological conditions. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's overreliance on the autopilot system and his inability to hand-fly the airplane once the autopilot was disconnected
.
The above is just one example I can cut and paste here there are many more equally ridiculous CAP pulls! What the heck was this guy doing IMC with as the NTS Board stated reliance on systems and inability to hand fly without the autopilot? I can show you many more examples.

The recent channel crash with a recommendation by the CAA to look at highly automated aircraft with CAPS would indicate that there is a problem with these pilots flying out of their depth and being lured by the systems and CAPS into situations they cannot handle

Safety action
As a result of discussions arising from this accident and others, the CAA is
considering enhancing publicity to the GA community concerning the operation
of light aircraft equipped with advanced avionic and ballistic recovery systems.
to just defend and say everything in the garden is rosy is frankly sticking ones head in the sand even the CAA are identifying a problem which needs addressing!
I fully accept we are talking about a small minority and most Cirrus pilots are well trained and extremely competent pilots but as with anything positive there are negatives too.

Pace

Last edited by Pace; 24th May 2014 at 15:07.
Pace is offline