Cirrus Crash near Dubbo
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jaba mate, relieved to hear that.
And yes the recovery system is no pussy cat, its a hard ball risk assesment isn't it.
And I'm only being slightly mischeivous here, but which of the below is which and/or which is the more better or least worst. Please assign relevant probabilities here.
And yes the recovery system is no pussy cat, its a hard ball risk assesment isn't it.
And I'm only being slightly mischeivous here, but which of the below is which and/or which is the more better or least worst. Please assign relevant probabilities here.
Code:
One is uncontrolled, one is controlled
Curious! Checked out a SR22 AFM Section 3 Emergency Procedures.
EDIT- removed lame comment.
[Spins
The SR22 is not approved for spins, and has not been tested or certified for spin recovery characteristics. The only approved and demonstrated method of spin recovery is activation of the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (See CAPS Deployment, this section). Because of this, if the aircraft “departs controlled flight,” the CAPS must be deployed.
The SR22 is not approved for spins, and has not been tested or certified for spin recovery characteristics. The only approved and demonstrated method of spin recovery is activation of the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (See CAPS Deployment, this section). Because of this, if the aircraft “departs controlled flight,” the CAPS must be deployed.
Last edited by OZBUSDRIVER; 22nd Nov 2012 at 07:11.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OZBUSDRIVER
Mate: Yup BRS was probably a cheaper fix to a spin problem than cost and time for the testing and design effort to actually provide the certification spin requirement.
It is even possible that it was not possible
to get the target (impressive) performance with the aerodynamic fix required for a non BRS spin recovery.
Its always "on one hand we could ............. and then on the other hand" when certifying an aircraft.
Mate: Yup BRS was probably a cheaper fix to a spin problem than cost and time for the testing and design effort to actually provide the certification spin requirement.
It is even possible that it was not possible
to get the target (impressive) performance with the aerodynamic fix required for a non BRS spin recovery.Its always "on one hand we could ............. and then on the other hand" when certifying an aircraft.
Last edited by gaunty; 22nd Nov 2012 at 06:57.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OZ and others,
Questions for you.
Arbitrary numbers but reasonable for the purposes of the exercise.
Cirrus BRS model BRS equipped 200KTAS cruise, Stall 61KTS say $400,000
Cirrus SPIN model spin certified 160KTAS cruise, Stall 48KTS say $500,000
Which one do you buy ?
At what price would the SPIN model have to be to get your money.
Questions for you.
Arbitrary numbers but reasonable for the purposes of the exercise.
Cirrus BRS model BRS equipped 200KTAS cruise, Stall 61KTS say $400,000
Cirrus SPIN model spin certified 160KTAS cruise, Stall 48KTS say $500,000
Which one do you buy ?
At what price would the SPIN model have to be to get your money.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cirrus BRS model BRS equipped 200KTAS cruise, Stall 61KTS say $400,000
Triple, just lots of friggin' pop ups including one of those spanker casino sites
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Gaunty...I will bite, Chute = uncontrolled descent. Fly the friggin glider = controlled.
Of course that assumes you don't Fork it up! Refer Ranga's suggestion.
Looking at the paddocks...fly it in and land.
Of course that assumes you don't Fork it up! Refer Ranga's suggestion.
Looking at the paddocks...fly it in and land.
Never having flown one of 'those' beasties, one can only assume.....
Stall speed with flaps approx = 60 KIAS....
Approach speed in glide = 60 x 1.3 = 78 KIAS....
Therefore, possibility of 'hooning' over paddocks of dubious surfaces / rabbit holes, ditches, etc etc @ some 70MPH (Think car/Ute) with possibility of overturning / more damage = more injury due much smaller wheels, and one 1 wheel at the front end....
vs the perceived 'safer' let down via the 'chute.....
Unless you've read about and ascertained the 'chute results to be 'not always good', then maybe its not a 'bad' prospect...??
Yep. I've heard about the deceleration of the chute vs the ground....but then, I've not had the training nor the 'advice' re the 'chute ...
Just food for thought...
Stall speed with flaps approx = 60 KIAS....
Approach speed in glide = 60 x 1.3 = 78 KIAS....
Therefore, possibility of 'hooning' over paddocks of dubious surfaces / rabbit holes, ditches, etc etc @ some 70MPH (Think car/Ute) with possibility of overturning / more damage = more injury due much smaller wheels, and one 1 wheel at the front end....
vs the perceived 'safer' let down via the 'chute.....
Unless you've read about and ascertained the 'chute results to be 'not always good', then maybe its not a 'bad' prospect...??
Yep. I've heard about the deceleration of the chute vs the ground....but then, I've not had the training nor the 'advice' re the 'chute ...
Just food for thought...
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dont forget, under that chute, your coming down at 1600 ft/min. or more, i would go the conventional landing option with a touchdown at 100 or less ft/min anyday over the cute option while in a 100% controllable aircraft/glider. over mountainous tiger country, different story, but out there, in my mind the chute would not have even been considered.
every summer, hundreds of glider pilots survive outlandings in just such paddocks...
after just doing an aero rating and AAC course at Red baron, forced landings are nothing to fear... every spin resulted in the engine stopping.. so forced landing practice, through to touchdown, is done regularly just in case the engine doesnt start again.
with proper training, a forced landing is no more a drama than steep turns, or stalling and recovering with less then 10ft height loss... inverted even..
on the plus side, the pilot lived, just decided to use another method of getting the aircraft down...
but the thought that the cirrus is certified with a spin recovery procedure that dictates the use of the chute is simply scary.
every summer, hundreds of glider pilots survive outlandings in just such paddocks...
after just doing an aero rating and AAC course at Red baron, forced landings are nothing to fear... every spin resulted in the engine stopping.. so forced landing practice, through to touchdown, is done regularly just in case the engine doesnt start again.
with proper training, a forced landing is no more a drama than steep turns, or stalling and recovering with less then 10ft height loss... inverted even..
on the plus side, the pilot lived, just decided to use another method of getting the aircraft down...
but the thought that the cirrus is certified with a spin recovery procedure that dictates the use of the chute is simply scary.
Last edited by Ultralights; 22nd Nov 2012 at 10:48.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I honestly don't know what I would do.
My instinct says pull the handle, my ego says go on you can glide it in.
Maybe instinct would win.
My instinct says pull the handle, my ego says go on you can glide it in.
Maybe instinct would win.
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: YSBK
Age: 35
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I honestly don't know what I would do.
My instinct says pull the handle, my ego says go on you can glide it in.
Maybe instinct would win.
My instinct says pull the handle, my ego says go on you can glide it in.
Maybe instinct would win.
Agree'd
Till now(thankfully) i have never had a forced landing in a paddock although im still doing my CPL and have had quiet a bit of training in recent times with forced landings and PREC SEARCH to 100ft AGL and am quiet confident with it. I still dont think my instinct of deploying would bow down to the ego if i was to be in the same situation and obviously in the Cirrus.
Last edited by CPT733; 22nd Nov 2012 at 12:53.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Under the Equator
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cirrus Spin Testing and BRS;
It was once put to me that the SR20/SR22 did in fact complete the entire spin testing envelope in order to meet the European Certification Standards. EASA and other Authorities were never going to allow a 'rubber stamp' waiver when it came to spin testing and recovery.
It was also put to me that the POH statement of activating the Ballistic Parachute in a spin etc. is there mainly to ass-cover for liability protection.
(BTW: The product liability insurance paid these days by Cessna, Cirrus Et-Al on every serial number, makes up a HUGE part of the cost of an aircraft).
Also, Insurance Companies apparently kinda like the idea that the Occupants almost always WALK away from a BRS deployment and there is almost always very little collateral damage on the ground (no swath of burning aircraft through suburbia or through 200 meters of crops and fencing). Injuries/Fatalities and property damage are often more expensive than the $500,000 aircraft or the $50,000 - $100,000 chute repack and repair.
However, nothing beats Pilot flight currency, regular recurrent training, proper flight reviews and knowing the ins and outs of the aircraft you fly.
Safe Flying out there.
It was once put to me that the SR20/SR22 did in fact complete the entire spin testing envelope in order to meet the European Certification Standards. EASA and other Authorities were never going to allow a 'rubber stamp' waiver when it came to spin testing and recovery.
It was also put to me that the POH statement of activating the Ballistic Parachute in a spin etc. is there mainly to ass-cover for liability protection.
(BTW: The product liability insurance paid these days by Cessna, Cirrus Et-Al on every serial number, makes up a HUGE part of the cost of an aircraft).
Also, Insurance Companies apparently kinda like the idea that the Occupants almost always WALK away from a BRS deployment and there is almost always very little collateral damage on the ground (no swath of burning aircraft through suburbia or through 200 meters of crops and fencing). Injuries/Fatalities and property damage are often more expensive than the $500,000 aircraft or the $50,000 - $100,000 chute repack and repair.
However, nothing beats Pilot flight currency, regular recurrent training, proper flight reviews and knowing the ins and outs of the aircraft you fly.
Safe Flying out there.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Cirrus doesn't land particulaly faster than any other aircraft of the same weight and will see you pull up easy enough in 400 metres or so. I know a 22 that operates out of a 300 metre strip. No less than 75 on late final or thereabouts should see you arriving savely so realistic touchdown speed is certainly a lot less than that.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This I can agree with, until you are confronted with the problem all is speculation.
I honestly don't know what I would do.
My instinct says pull the handle, my ego says go on you can glide it in.
Maybe instinct would win.
I honestly don't know what I would do.
My instinct says pull the handle, my ego says go on you can glide it in.
Maybe instinct would win.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
That is probably what the experts would say.
I am not an expert by any means, but I would be of the opinion given the severe flat paddock, that he should not have stuffed it up.
FFS.... that paddock looks as good as the runway I operate from. Just ask Forkie!
I am not an expert by any means, but I would be of the opinion given the severe flat paddock, that he should not have stuffed it up.
FFS.... that paddock looks as good as the runway I operate from. Just ask Forkie!