Light aircraft crash IWM Duxford

[DogTailRed2]

LBC radio reporting light aircraft crash at IWM Duxford.

Live updates as plane crashes at Duxford Airfield and emergency services called to scene - Cambridgeshire Live (cambridge-news.co.uk) (https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/live-updates-plane-crashes-duxford-28890588?int_source=mantis_rec&int_medium=web&int_campaign=more_like_this)

[treadigraph]

A bad crash involving a visiting light aircraft.

Edit: actually does appear to be based at Duxford.

[Big Eric]

Reported as being SR-22T G-RGSK

[DaveReidUK]

Reported as being SR-22T G-RGSK

Based at Duxford.

[Pittsextra]

Just seen a video supposedly of the accident and it is incredible not just what happened but how it came to be in the position to do what it did! Was there a prior issue?

[treadigraph]

It was doing circuits, ADSB seems to show it was OK during the third approach.

Pics appear to show that the CAPS deployed, presume may have been triggered by impact?

[DogTailRed2]

Just seen the video. CAPS deployed after impact.

[treadigraph]

Just seen it also. Bloody hell.

[Pittsextra]

Yeah not good. I'm surprised by the logic of the CAPS as it seems kind of irrelevant once impact with ground? OR we think just the level of energy in the crash disrupted things?

[DogTailRed2]

Would appear CAPS deploys using a pyro rocket of some sort. So maybe the impact set of the ignition.
Cirrus Airframe Parachute System - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cirrus_Airframe_Parachute_System)

[wrench1]

FYI: The Cirrus CAPS is cable actuated. If the aircraft experiences a high impact load that distorts or breaks the airframe along that CAPS cable run from the T-handle in the ceiling to the actuator in the back, it can effectively "pull" the cable and initiate the CAPS rocket to fire. And just to add, the primary reason why the CAPS is mandatory in a Cirrus is its a spin certification requirement.

[CAEBr]

Following the accident, IWM have announced that it will be totally closed today and tomorrow, hoping to reopen on Good Friday.
I totally get that the airfield closure is as a result of the unfortunate accident and the AAIB presence and activity will drive its eventual reopening. However, since the airfield to all intents is totally separate from the IWM for everyone who arrives by road, why would it need to remain closed, particularly during the school holidays. Surely the obvious thing to do is to screen off the crash site from view and carry on as normal.
Comments or views ?

[Jonty]

I imagine they don't want hordes of children/parents gathered round the parameter fence all trying to get a look at the crashed plane. It's not the sort of image of aviation they want to promote. The AAIB will recover the wreckage soon enough.

[kghjfg]

It’s not school holidays in this part of the world yet.

It would be hard to screen it off on such a large site, and why bother wasting time and effort.

I hate to say it, but there will probably be small parts of plane where the crowd (and it would be a crowd) would stand, and they may need those small parts.

They don’t need to be covered in press photographers.

Why not let them tidy it up and investigate with some dignity. The press are already all over Facebook asking for exact details.

When people go to Duxford, they enjoy seeing some aircraft flying, there will be no flying till Friday.

My honest view, what a self entitled sort of post, someone has died, they can find out why with minimal inconvenience and intrusion this way.

[Mr Albert Ross]

...

My honest view, what a self entitled sort of post, someone has died, they can find out why with minimal inconvenience and intrusion this way.
Agreed.

[CAEBr]

Well you're entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. I maintain that just because you can shut the entire site - is it justified?
The people at the museum will have zero interference with the investigation. Intrusion is admittedly more difficult to control but the police now regularly use screens at motorway accidents without inconveniencing their investigations, and nobody is going to stand staring at screens for hours while walking between the hangars.
Several people on here have already commented on having seen a video of the crash. It's not been released by any of the regular news sites, why search it out. The people who posted it and those who searched for and viewed it are guilty of intrusion, albeit not in person, but its a bit rich to then suggest that a blanket closure needs to be in place just in case the public might behave in the same way.
Ultimately, how far do you have to ring fence a site. I presume the M11 isnt shut ?

[DogTailRed2]

I think it's appropriate to close Duxford out of respect just unfortunate that the accident happened on one of it's busiest weekends. Duxford is just a museum at the end of the day and the accident, recovery must take precedence.

A general question regarding Duxford as an airfield. Does Duxford operate like any local airfield i.e. you can base your aircraft out of there? I always thought the airfield was just to facilitate the museum and the operations based therein?

[Jhieminga]

No need to discuss this as we're not the ones making this decision. I can think of several reasons to keep the site closed for a bit, including the museum wanting to provide some relief to their staff and volunteers who may have been involved or saw the accident. But nobody has asked me for advice...

[DaveReidUK]

I think it's appropriate to close Duxford out of respect just unfortunate that the accident happened on one of it's busiest weekends. Duxford is just a museum at the end of the day and the accident, recovery must take precedence.

A general question regarding Duxford as an airfield. Does Duxford operate like any local airfield i.e. you can base your aircraft out of there? I always thought the airfield was just to facilitate the museum and the operations based therein?

See my earlier post about the accident aircraft being based at Duxford.

While many of the based aircraft are connected to the museum and restoration activities, residents also include a number of assorted Cessnas, Pipers, etc.

[treadigraph]

Has been confirmed that the pilot did not survive..

[DogTailRed2]

Pilot named.
First picture of pilot who died in crash at Duxford aviation museum (telegraph.co.uk) (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/27/plane-crash-imperial-war-museum-duxford/)

[kghjfg]

Well you're entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. I maintain that just because you can shut the entire site - is it justified?
The people at the museum will have zero interference with the investigation. Intrusion is admittedly more difficult to control but the police now regularly use screens at motorway accidents without inconveniencing their investigations, and nobody is going to stand staring at screens for hours while walking between the hangars.
Several people on here have already commented on having seen a video of the crash. It's not been released by any of the regular news sites, why search it out. The people who posted it and those who searched for and viewed it are guilty of intrusion, albeit not in person, but its a bit rich to then suggest that a blanket closure needs to be in place just in case the public might behave in the same way.
Ultimately, how far do you have to ring fence a site. I presume the M11 isnt shut ?

You’re right, the M11 isn’t shut, but there are photographers with cameras on top of long poles on the A505, “public land innit, we can do what we like”, and you think people would know how to behave !

Don’t worry. It’s open on Friday, only shut for 48 hours, so your very pressing need to visit can happen then.

The only problem is they’ll have taken the debris away, so I suppose there will be nothing for you to try and see.

Really? You can’t wait 48 hours to visit?
What are you a press photographer?

[DuncanDoenitz]

I don't think anyone on here is suggesting that they personally have a selfish reason to visit Duxford this week, least of all to rubberneck the scene of this tragedy. I certainly don't and, if I lived in East Anglia, I could/would probably reschedule my visit anyway.

However, I don't live in East Anglia; I live in Cumbria. If I'd planned to visit the IWM this week it would have comprised a 600 mile round trip, reservation of at least 2 nights hotel accommodation and scheduling of other domestic arrangements. With the greatest respect for the victim and their family I might have found that closure of the entire Duxford site was a little extreme. Would this not be a fairly localised accident site? Would a fatal RTC on Exhibition Road justify a 2-day closure of the Science Museum?

[kghjfg]

I’m pretty sure it would if it was in their foyer.
Yes.

This didn’t happen on the road outside.

[Planemike]

I’m pretty sure it would if it was in their foyer.
Yes.

This didn’t happen on the road outside.

You are right but it took place in a small part of a very large airfield. Really did not need to affect the Museum....

[ShyTorque]

The owner or custodian of private land (IWM in this case) can do as they please. If a temporary closure due to a tragic, fatal accident annoys someone planning on a hot date, hard luck. :rolleyes:

[Pittsextra]

Museum faff aside anyone closer to understanding what happened? It looks a bizarre accident for someone still alive at the controls!

[CAEBr]

Really? You can’t wait 48 hours to visit?
What are you a press photographer?

No, and I dont have a visit planned either, but as Planemike and Duncan have pointed out many people might have.
Just because you can shut something it doesn't mean you should. As I said before some people on here have already searched out video of the crash which is no less disrespectful than people watching screens on an airfield while walking between museum hangars. I doubt they all work remotely for the AAIB, so why do it and tell us.
My main comment remains that imposition of restrictions that are more severe than needed (and they obviously vary from case to case) can lead to complaints from members of the public and do not do the reputation of the organisation any good.
I would finish by saying that there has been no statement that the closure was requested by the AAIB or the Police so I stand by my view that the IWM have unnecessarily closed the site.

[SWBKCB]

Does this need to continue?

[kghjfg]

Does this need to continue?

Apologies for my part in it.

[Professor Plum]

After 30 posts including people whinging about the temporary closure of the IWM (first world problem)…

I’d like to offer my most sincerely condolences to a family who have received the terrible news of the untimely death of a loved family member

[Mike Flynn]

Does this need to continue?


Looks like a lack of right rudder to compensate for full power being applied on a go around.

This discussion is under accidents and close calls.If someone is offended then the best thing to do is avoid this part of Pprune.

There is an element of education from reading accident reports.That’s why they are published.

[treadigraph]

Mike, think SWBKCB is referring to the arguments about closure of the museum for two days.

Video of the accident is on ASN (https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/372326), which also mentions the aircraft bounced twice before the go around.

[Mike Flynn]

Mike, think SWBKCB is referring to the arguments about closure of the museum for two days.

Video of the accident is on ASN (https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/372326), which also mentions the aircraft bounced twice before the go around.


My apologies I missed that side discussion.Fatal accidents are a daily occurrence on the highways especially in this part of Asia where traffic laws are mostly ignored by drivers who have no concept of risk or self preservation. Some aviation sites are full of maudling comments from those who never knew the deceased which are pointless.

Light aviation is like riding motorcycles.Exciting but with risks.Looking at what can happen is worth a thousand briefings.

Similar accident here with a very experienced pilot who crashed his P51Mustang on his own UK airstrip https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib-investigation-to-north-american-p-51d-mustang-g-mstg

[megan]

Report on a similar Cirrus accident in Oz. Post by Centaurus (a highly experienced aviator - P-51, Lincoln bomber, 737 pilot and instructor, aviation author) in reference to the accident.This ATSB report on the Bankstown Cirrus 22 accident is worth reading. It includes extracts from NTSB reports on similar Cirrus 22 landing accidents in USA.
A low energy go-around (as from a bounced landing) can be quite critical if the speed is close to the stall when the go-around occurs. Old warbirds such as the Mustang and Sea Fury could be a handful on low energy go-aounds. Even a low powered aircraft such as Cessna 172 can yaw and pitch up quite markedly as full throttle is applied if a go around takes place from a bounced landing or after several bounces.

I would hazard a guess and say that most flying school instructors (especially new graduates) teach practice go arounds from short final at 200 feet where there is plenty of time to correct mishandling. On the other hand few would demonstrate a deliberate high bounced touch down where speed is close to the stall, energy is low and the aircraft pitches up and yaws and rolls at full power. of course this would be a dual exercise and not practiced by solo students

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/news-i...und-challenges (https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/news-items/2024/cirrus-bankstown-landing-accident-highlights-site-hazards-first-responders-go-around-challenges)

The accident being talked about, let's not be so shy in taking a lesson to heart.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1772709800788336934

[Mike Flynn]

The accident Megan refers to mirrors the one being discussed.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1945x1290/img_2970_d3cd0eaaa28576ea07d8f3a26148886da52ece66.jpeg
Despite so much criticism about Australian CASA as the holder of UK and Australian licences I find their regulations and training better than the UK.

[blind pew]

»I would hazard a guess and say that most flying school instructors (especially new graduates) teach practice go arounds from short final at 200 feet where there is plenty of time to correct mishandling. On the other hand few would demonstrate a deliberate high bounced touch down where speed is close to the stall, energy is low and the aircraft pitches up and yaws and rolls at full power. of course this would be a dual exercise and not practiced by solo students »
100%
My first solo was in a Aircoupe at Rochford aérodrome now London Stansted where I bounced along the runway due to never being shown what to do in a bounced landing especially relevant with an unusually light aircraft without the instructor. I was probably saved because of the low power and strength of the aircraft. My instructors were hour builders on PPLs and not much good.
I bounced my first jet with a training captain and pax on board..again hadn’t been taught what to do which ended with the oxygen masks out and a set of hydraulic control warning lights and the odd generator off line. Many years later I did a gliding instructors rating which included a low level winch failure called the « bunny hop » where the aircraft is flying in ground effect just above the stall speed still connected to the cable; the national coach advised that we didn’t need to demonstrate it to pupils because of the risk involved.
Maybe the answer is better briefings, flying exercises or a simulator.

[Jhieminga]

Some things don't need to be included in the training syllabus, simply because any student will invariably set up the needed conditions all by themselves. Bounced landings are one example.

Sad to hear that the pilot didn't make it.

[lederhosen]

I fly an SR22T off a short runway and am obviously motivated to learn as much as possible how to avoid getting into this kind of accident. I was immediately struck by the similarity with the Bankstown, Australia crash. Both pilots bounced and made the correct decision to go-around. The execution of this apparently straight forward maneuver is where things went terribly wrong on both occasions. Both were solo flights probably relatively light and as has been pointed out the 315 hp engine produces significant yaw at full power.

Most of us are used to doing touch and goes which are pretty easy in this aircraft. So as a relatively experienced Cirrus pilot I would not have expected this outcome. Maybe the nose angle reduced the visual cues. On a normal touch and go you have a reasonable view of the runway and the rudder is pretty effective. In a high bounce and with the added pitch up from a rapid application of power obviously things are different. Whilst the video is distressing it is quite illuminating and shows the aircraft had climbed rapidly before control was lost. The Cirrus has an audible stall warning, but it is pretty easy to trigger it by rotating a little enthusiastically and I have never known our aircraft to drop a wing. This is not something I would have expected and will definitely try to be cautious in this kind of situation.

[Pilot DAR]

but it is pretty easy to trigger it by rotating a little enthusiastically and I have never known our aircraft to drop a wing. This is not something I would have expected

What I saw in the video is totally predictable. For those who practice stalls at altitude, most seem to practice them as a power off entry. Also practice stalls at a full power entry, and hold the control inputs through to stall break. If held well, with appropriate use of rudder and yaw control, you'll get a decent pitch down and stall recovery. But if yaw is not carefully controlled, it's going to roll on torque. Even a C172 will do this if the pilot is careless, and it is a spin entry. The evidence is that it spun to the left from pitch up, slow flight.

Sure, if the landing has gone bad, go around. During any go around, your first job is to maintain flying speed, and accelerate to Vx, the Vy as soon as possible. There is zero need to be flying slowly at altitude, if flying with greater airspeed and less altitude can be done with consideration to obstacles. Keep it low, and accelerate. Even if there are obstacles, if there is any concern about clearing them, I aim for two thirds up the obstacle, accelerate as much as possible, then sacrifice some of the airspeed to pop up over the obstacle, knowing that I can lower the nose again once clear, and continue to accelerate to Vy.

As seen in this, and many other videos, climbing slower than Vy puts the pilot at increased risk of stall/spin, and not being able to achieve a safe glide in the case of engine failure.

[Pittsextra]

Likely head in as otherwise the developing situation doesn’t need a stall warner!

[lederhosen]

The SR22T is a very capable aircraft, and an extremely expensive one. It has sold well not least because of Cirrus marketing it to well off individuals as a very efficient transport solution. Some owners even learn to fly on these complex aircraft. The parachute, highly advanced avionics and pretty solid training options have made the aircraft an attractive and accessible option. The downside is that there are people with not a lot of real hands on flying experience operating them. I deliberately use the word operating rather than flying. As a retired airline captain I was impressed by how similar the experience was to flying a jet. You log a lot of time in a Cirrus with the autopilot on and at 400 euros plus an hour they are not really that attractive an option for doing circuits, however much money you have. But I intend to do a few more than I usually would now the flying season is upon us.

[punkalouver]

There have been several TBM700 accidents with lots of power(torque) applied at very low speeds leading to uncontrolled flight and crash. One doesn't typically think of an SR-22 as some sort of high performance WWII handling fighter aircraft and having flown one, I certainly don't. But, I suppose if one is on the edge of a stall and suddenly adds lots of power, they can end up in a situation like this. Perhaps, there was a lack of proper rudder input.

It can be the instinctive mind, in this case wanting as much power as possible due a high state of concern being so close to the ground and wanting to avoid nosegear damage. I have been in the situation(sliding on ice in a vehicle toward an object) where the instinctive brain takes over and one just continues applying as much faulty application as is physically possible. In my case it was demanding more and more braking when less braking which if modulated would likely have been preferential(and yes, I hit the object firmly). In the airplane case, it can be less power is better but the instinctive brain that has taken over is demanding full power and even more if it were possible.

While there may be more to this particular accident, I would take away from these high power engine accidents on certain aircraft is to avoid very large power applications in near stall situations like this, when in an aircraft having a significantly large amount of power. Consider a partial application of power at first with reasonably brisk application to regain control and then smoothly add more power as required. In order to make it a more likely action, a quick reminder prior to flight(or approach) could be useful, so that it has been reviewed recently.

Many pilots will have a background of rapid power applications on lower-powered aircraft where it was not an issue which can continue over to a new relatively high-powered aircraft.

[lederhosen]

Good post Punkalouver! Incidentally I knew someone who managed to do something pretty similar on an ultralight so selecting full power on any aircraft in this flight regime needs to be considered carefully.

[treadigraph]

I've seen a pic of a Grumman Bearcat in knife edge with gear and flaps down - it had been waved off from a carrier, presumably late 1940s; apparently too much power at low airspeed and I believe it described a complete roll before being flown away by the lucky pilot!

[ShyTorque]

I’ve mentioned this incident before..

An RAF navigator I used to fly with told me how, in his earlier days he was training as a pilot on Balliol aircraft (Merlin engined). During a night solo flight he decided to go around from a very low, slow approach. As he applied a lot of power, the aircraft allegedly (according to ATC) did at least two 360° rolls before climbing. The pilot was so frightened he withdrew from pilot training and became a navigator.

He also told me that at that time, on my first tour, his nav bag was older than me!

[Runaway Gun]

From John Deakin, discussing the dangers of full power low speed go-rounds in higher performance aircraft.

Avweb link (https://www.avweb.com/features/pelicans-perch-87-killer-go-arounds/)

[markkal]

There have been several TBM700 accidents with lots of power(torque) applied at very low speeds leading to uncontrolled flight and crash. One doesn't typically think of an SR-22 as some sort of high performance WWII handling fighter aircraft and having flown one, I certainly don't. But, I suppose if one is on the edge of a stall and suddenly adds lots of power, they can end up in a situation like this. Perhaps, there was a lack of proper rudder input.


It can be the instinctive mind, in this case wanting as much power as possible due a high state of concern being so close to the ground and wanting to avoid nosegear damage. I have been in the situation(sliding on ice in a vehicle toward an object) where the instinctive brain takes over and one just continues applying as much faulty application as is physically possible. In my case it was demanding more and more braking when less braking which if modulated would likely have been preferential(and yes, I hit the object firmly). In the airplane case, it can be less power is better but the instinctive brain that has taken over is demanding full power and even more if it were possible.


While there may be more to this particular accident, I would take away from these high power engine accidents on certain aircraft is to avoid very large power applications in near stall situations like this, when in an aircraft having a significantly large amount of power. Consider a partial application of power at first with reasonably brisk application to regain control and then smoothly add more power as required. In order to make it a more likely action, a quick reminder prior to flight(or approach) could be useful, so that it has been reviewed recently.


Many pilots will have a background of rapid power applications on lower-powered aircraft where it was not an issue which can continue over to a new relatively high-powered aircraft.

Excellent post Punkalover

I have been allowed to try the SR22 for a few flights, and am currently the owner of a 315 HP high performance aircraft and have been the owner of a Sukhoi 29 with 450 HP M14P Engine.

These aircraft don't have enough torque - compared to the immense power to weight ratio and propeller disks diameters of WW2 fighters- (Even the Sukhoi 29 with its 2,60 m diameter MTV-9 Muhlabuer prop) to interfere with a sudden full power application at low speed. They will torque roll in the air -which is an aerobatic maneuver- but at a very slow roll rate.

Your analogy with the car is spot on. Take an automobile and when you loose grip, especially with those old rear wheel drive without stability control, (Yes decades ago you needed to know how to handle them), the instinct to release accelerator pedal and brake ( Which is the right thing to do under normal conditions) made the situation worse, as by doing so the weight due to inertia shifted forward and the car started spinning. Likewise a mororcycle in a bend will not turn by shifting the drivers weight but only when destablising the gyroscopic effect of balance by countersteering in the direction opposite to the turn.


The laws of physics coming into play in these "Extreme" scenarios, are not an opinion, they are non negotiable; An aircraft at the backside of the envelope, automobile when starting to drift, motorcycle when cornering at high speed require techniques, skills, awareness and knowledge which are not part of the driving or pilot's licence. There is a need for further training.


An SR22 is definitely high performance when compared to the older spam cams; It is twitchy at low speed and needs precise inputs, you must be gentle, quick and must be right.

The SR22 will need the attention and the skills it takes to confidently fly an extra 300 in the backside of the corner envelope. I.E. one has to be gentle with very littke inputs on the stick, coordinated with right foot application to correct yaw due to slipstream and P factor, and pick up any tendency of a dropping wing correcting with opposite foor NEVER with opposite aileron. And NEVER pull on the yoke when down and low and slow.


Cirrus has a dedicated course, I would strongly recommend in addition to take a few flights, not doing any aerobatics but just indulge into the backside corner of the flight envelope with an Extra 300 with a suitable instructor. It will give a level and confidence and skills which will likely not only have you enjoy a fantastic machine but to be in control and safe in any scenario.

[NoelEvans]

There have been several TBM700 accidents with lots of power(torque) applied at very low speeds leading to uncontrolled flight and crash. One doesn't typically think of an SR-22 as some sort of high performance WWII handling fighter aircraft and having flown one, I certainly don't. But, I suppose if one is on the edge of a stall and suddenly adds lots of power, they can end up in a situation like this. Perhaps, there was a lack of proper rudder input.

It can be the instinctive mind, in this case wanting as much power as possible due a high state of concern being so close to the ground and wanting to avoid nosegear damage. I have been in the situation(sliding on ice in a vehicle toward an object) where the instinctive brain takes over and one just continues applying as much faulty application as is physically possible. In my case it was demanding more and more braking when less braking which if modulated would likely have been preferential(and yes, I hit the object firmly). In the airplane case, it can be less power is better but the instinctive brain that has taken over is demanding full power and even more if it were possible.

While there may be more to this particular accident, I would take away from these high power engine accidents on certain aircraft is to avoid very large power applications in near stall situations like this, when in an aircraft having a significantly large amount of power. Consider a partial application of power at first with reasonably brisk application to regain control and then smoothly add more power as required. In order to make it a more likely action, a quick reminder prior to flight(or approach) could be useful, so that it has been reviewed recently.

Many pilots will have a background of rapid power applications on lower-powered aircraft where it was not an issue which can continue over to a new relatively high-powered aircraft.

Excellent post Punkalover

I have been allowed to try the SR22 of a friend, and am currently the owner of a 315 HP high performance aircraft and have been the owner of a Sukhoi 29 with 450 HP M14P Engine.

These aircraft don't have enough torque - compared to the immense power to weight ratio and propeller disks diameters of WW2 fighters- (Even the Sukhoi 29 with its 2,60 m diameter MTV-9 Muhlabuer prop) to interfere with a sudden full power application at low speed. They will torque roll in the air -which is an aerobatic maneuver- but at a very slow roll rate.

Your analogy with the car is spot on. Take an automobile and when you loose grip, especially with those old rear wheel drive without stability control, (Yes decades ago you needed to know how to handle them), the instinct to brake made the situation worse, as by doing so the weight due to inertia shifted forward and the car started spinning. Likewise a mororcycle in a bend will not turn by shifting the drivers weight but only when destablising the gyroscopic effect of balance by countersteering in the direction opposite to the turn.


Physics is not an opinion; An aircraft at the backside of the envelope, automobile when starting to drift, motorcycle when cornering at high speed need techniques, skills, awareness and knowledge which are not part of the driving or pilot's licence. There is a needd for further training.


An SR22 is definitely high performance when compared to the older spam cams; It is twitchy at low speed and needs precise inputs, you must be gentle, quick and must be right.

The SR22 will need the attention and the skills it takes to confidently fly an extra 300 in the backside of the corner envelope. I.E. one has to be gentle with very littke inputs on the stick, coordinated with right foot application to correct yaw due to slipstream and P factor, and pick up any tendency of a dropping wing correcting with opposite foor NEVER with opposite aileron. And NEVER pull on the yoke when down and low.


Cirrus has a dedicated course, I would strongly recommend to take a few flights, not doing any aerobatics but just exple the backside corner of the flight envelope with an Extra 300 with a suitable instructor. It will give a level and confidence and skills which will likely not only have you enjoy a fantastic machine but to be in control and safe in any scenario.Good Posts, both.

Far too many pilots are not taught how and why to use the rudders properly (they are not 'foot rests'"").

Don't 'under-rate' "the older spam cams"!! The old ones that I learnt on made you very, very much aware of the use of rudder and the effects of power!

[markkal]

This did not prevent many pilots with bad habits to fly uncoordinated

[markkal]

The only way to quickly learn coordination is to learn to fly a tailwheel even a PA18.

[Hot 'n' High]

The only way to quickly learn coordination is to learn to fly a tailwheel even a PA18. :ok:

....... and even "secondary effects of controls" (including things like the throttle) is well worth referring back to when Instructing more advanced things such as go-arounds or even on annual check flights. As a general observation, often those early lessons, flown in the heady early days of training, seem to be forgotten yet can save lives - even on quite "docile" types. I've had students who have taken the correct initial appropriate actions ..... but then sort of seemed to psychologically assume they needn't worry any more as the original issue had been solved ......... forgetting that they had now initiated several other "unusual" things which they now need to sort out.

[India Four Two]

The only way to quickly learn coordination is to learn to fly a tailwheel even a PA18.

Or fly a glider.

When I take a power pilot for their first glider ride in my club's DG-1000 (20 m span), I get them to try a medium turn, using ailerons only. They are often very surprised by the 30º yaw in the opposite direction!

I've flown an SR-22 and I found it quite easy to fly - perhaps that's because of my glider background. I felt I would be comfortable flying it after another hour or two of slow-flying and circuits. The electronic systems were a whole different matter. I figured I would need multiple hours of study and airborne practice.

On my one SR-22 flight, I found myself often sneaking glances at the steam gauges below the display!

[JEM60]

'Watch him spin, watch him burn, he took off bank in a low speed turn' An Americanism. Demonstrated to me in a Sedburgh in my ATC days. Was asked to demonstrate a spin. Very lazy affair. Went up again, tried to pick up the downgoing wing just before the stall with full opposite aileron. What a huge surprise!!. Never ever forgot that!! Downgoing wing accelerated massively into a spin. ... Be good if all power pilots flew gliders first???........

[Hot 'n' High]

'Watch him spin, watch him burn, he took off bank in a low speed turn' .......... Be good if all power pilots flew gliders first???........

.................... or Spinning was still taught at PPL and refreshed regularly. I took an elderly owner (a lovely lady with many hours in her logbook) up for a check-flight in her own aircraft for her annual insurance company requirements. Towards the end (she flew very well) I cautiously asked if she would like to do a spin (not required as part of the check but the a/c was cleared for spinning). She was very hesitant but said "yes - just one" as she hadn't done one since she had qualified years ago.

After 10 spins in a row (a) I was feeling rather queasy and (b) the Approach Radar at an adjacent International airport must have been wondering "What the hell????????!!!" and (c) fuel was starting to get low (the excuse I finally used to "knock it off") so we called it a day! She, however, was ready for more!!!!

Most importantly, she was, by then, fully aware again of how easy it was get into a spin by various means....... and how long it took to get out of one if it got fully established and how to recover from an incipient spin and what additional problems that could bring if she was not ready for them (in a humble C172). All forgotten over the preceding hundreds of hours she'd flown! :ok:

[markkal]

Or fly a glider.

When I take a power pilot for their first glider ride in my club's DG-1000 (20 m span), I get them to try a medium turn, using ailerons only. They are often very surprised by the 30º yaw in the opposite direction!

I've flown an SR-22 and I found it quite easy to fly - perhaps that's because of my glider background. I felt I would be comfortable flying it after another hour or two of slow-flying and circuits. The electronic systems were a whole different matter. I figured I would need multiple hours of study and airborne practice.

On my one SR-22 flight, I found myself often sneaking glances at the steam gauges below the display!


Same exact reaction, was not comfortable with the Garmin glass cockpit at first, would have taken some delving into, and was confused by the airspeed and altimeter bands scrolling up and down.

Gave a glance to those emergency clock gages below and finally was able to fly straight and level again; It's so much easier to glance at a needle position than to pinpoint scrolling numbers. Glass cockpit aircraft are often coupled to autopilots, they are not meant to be flown for hours manually, which would be tiring.

Plus the side stick feels strange, though aircraft flies nicely and is very reactive with only 2 fingers gently holding it.
Needs gentle precise inputs, pure joy. Perhaps it's too sensitive and unforgiving for those not used to it. Just a matter of training, It's a high performance aircraft and needs to be treated as such

[beamer]

After a lifetime of Military and Commercial flying I have returned to GA and enjoy flying aircraft with as little technology as possible. That being said, I have flown a SR22 and it is a delight to fly but would I want one…no. It is a complicated aircraft for its size and requires first class training.

[scifi]

Once the pilot has allowed the nose to pitch up, to an extent that he has lost sight of his reference spot on the horizon. He has lost his pitch attitude reference, and his Heading and Yaw information. Both of these are required to avoid entering a Spin situation. So if you can't stop the nose moving up and obscuring your horizon. You need to rethink how quickly you bang the throttle open.

[Jonzarno]

After a lifetime of Military and Commercial flying I have returned to GA and enjoy flying aircraft with as little technology as possible. That being said, I have flown a SR22 and it is a delight to fly but would I want one…no. It is a complicated aircraft for its size and requires first class training.

That's true. Fortunately there is plenty of training available, some of it free. For example:

1. Everyone buying a Cirrus, whether new or used, can get free transition training funded by the Cirrus Embark programme

2. There is a widespread network of CSIP (Cirrus Standardised Instructor Programme) instructors

3. The Cirrus Owners and Pilots Association (COPA) holds weekend training events (CPPP or Cirrus Pilots Proficiency Programme) which cover all aspects of the aircraft, including flights with an instructor and sim training. They also offer a Partner in Command course which teaches non pilot passengers how to deal with.a pilot incapacitation emergency.

[megan]

Effects of power and low airspeed.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/640x339/zzz_7a381a0f4b6af85ba9707f62c76a84fa9a45a9f9.png

[Edward Teach]

There is a lot of talk about torque roll and right rudder but why is the most obvious and critical thing not being talked about....

The MOST IMPORTANT thing to do during a go round especially in a Cirrus is to HOLD THE NOSE DOWN, which didn't happen in this accident.

When full power is applied they kick like mules and require significant pressure on the side stick to keep the nose level....

Hold the nose down, fly it straight and level (even if you're only at 10 feet) and rotate once the speed has built up.

During a go around, missed approach or baulked landing, HOLD THAT NOSE DOWN FIRST AND FOREMOST.

[Compton3fox]

There is a lot of talk about torque roll and right rudder but why is the most obvious and critical thing not being talked about....

The MOST IMPORTANT thing to do during a go round especially in a Cirrus is to HOLD THE NOSE DOWN, which didn't happen in this accident.

When full power is applied they kick like mules and require significant pressure on the side stick to keep the nose level....

Hold the nose down, fly it straight and level (even if you're only at 10 feet) and rotate once the speed has built up.

During a go around, missed approach or baulked landing, HOLD THAT NOSE DOWN FIRST AND FOREMOST.

Edward, Agreed..

See here >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqKERFrvHGg&t=634s
.
Yes I realise Dan isn't everyone's cup of tea but this IMHO is a good lesson on go arounds... and how to prevent what happened in the incident we are all discussing

[VH-MLE]

Yes, Dan makes a valid point, but he loses a lot of his credibility for not having his shoulder seatbelt connected & also for two hands on the controls when climbing after his go around...

Just my 2 lire's worth...