Cirrus Crash near Dubbo
 

Lucky escape after their light plane crashed near Gilgandra | Aviation Inspector

Let the discussions begin on whether we would have pulled the chute handle versus landing in what looks like a perfectly good paddock near Dubbo!

From my experience, 95% of the terrain out there is suitable for an outlanding there.

VH-WYH

Pull the handle, that's what's its there for.

I Don't think it's so easy to predict the firmness of a field from the air, although the pictures do indicate the ground was quite good once it was back on earth.

We'll all end us paying for it eventually thru our insurance premiums. Pulling the chute on a Cirrus is not cheap.

The field looks great for a dead stick landing!

I reckon have seen that machine before out there. Local Dubbo one?

And it is the SR22 with the TNIO550, they are the pick of the Cirrus fleet. :{

Waste of an airframe. Nothing Half a Million won't replace, fortunately the folk on board survived.

And another one.....how many in how many weeks. :sad:

I see the Air Traffic Safety Bureau is investigating again.

How about a discussion about why he didn't land at Gilgandra after he'd declared to ATC he was losing oil pressure some time before arriving overhead there. Would the same decision be made if he wasn't carrying a BRS chute.

There does seem to be some eagerness to fire off the chute.

It should be used as a last resort, ie. if you don't use it, you will die!

If you do elect to use the chute and it malfunctions, there is no coming back.

:uhoh:

That's the bit that scares me. It would be my luck to pull the chute, have it wrap around the tail and end my passenger and my lives abruptly when it could have in all probability deadsticked in. It wouldn't be the first time that has happened either!

Clearly this guy didn't learn to fly in a 2 stroke drifter, and he's a local :confused:

Registration holder as of 27 August 2012
MAAS AVIATION PTY LTD
PO Box 332
DUBBO NSW 2830
AUSTRALIA
Registered operator as of 27 August 2012
MAAS AVIATION PTY LTD
PO Box 332
DUBBO NSW 2830
AUSTRALIA

From the news report:

?? You mean open the door and get out like normal?

Harry

Do you know who was flying it? Or did you just here it unfold on the radio?

I would be interested in talking to those involved as to what caused the loss of oil. And get a data download from the engine monitor.

PM me with anything helpful.

Parachute instructor at Williamtown said to our course, "anyone who would jump out of a serviceable aircraft is mad.

The aircraft only becomes unserviceable after it has crashed". Same WO picked me up after a night jump out of a $hithook into Port Stevens and said I had confirmed his theory.

Gilgandra.... well I would have taken the most obvious and least dangerous course of action. As such I will give the benefit of the doubt to the pilot.

Doesn't that usually happen to aircraft already tumbling out of control? Don't know of any "straight and slowly descending" deployments that ended up that way.

Tough call, but I still rate the walking away chances higher with the chute. (Though not as high as a precautionary landing at a nearby ALA after you notice problems)

News Flash: The Occupants are OK. They got to have breakfast with their Families this morning.

End of story...

Safe Flying out there.

Modesetter, Landing with the chute fully deployed is said to feel like falling off a 2 storey building. Its like the old mushroom parachutes, if you dont roll properly on landing you break legs. The undercarriage is designed to take some of the impact along with the honeycomb structure within the seats. I reckon the airbags would be as useful as big saggy ones on a bull, but there you go.


The only reason it has a chute is to increase sales. You can still glide the thing and land successfully, however like most aircraft if you do not maintain the correct attitude/speed, you will fall out of the sky like a stone.

As to whether they did the right thing by pulling the chute, look, at the end of the day they survived. Perhaps if they attempted a forced landing without the chute the result might be different. I may of done things differently but that doesn't mean they have done the wrong thing.

What will be more interesting is why the low oil pressure. Why did the ol 550 give up the ghost. We will have to wait and see for that.

If they had dead sticked the arcraft in and it ended up in the same state it is now, I reckon the insurance company might have asked "why didn't you pull the chute?:ooh:

Damned if you do and damned if you don't! ;)

RFG, good to hear.

What they had bought was a Ballistic Recovery System that just happened to have a very nice aircraft attached.

Why people sometimes sacrifice their lives to save bending a hunk of metal has always escaped me.

If you need to, sure, pull the handle, go have brekkie with the family, which BTW is priceless.
The insurance company now owns the Aircraft and after breakfast, you then go order anothery. :D:ok:

I can hear the distant thunder of hooves already:E

No Hooves gaunty,

But, the chute landing is not a soft fluffy drop into a bundle of pillows. It has risks too.

If you look at the choices of landing area in the photo, and assuming they were high enough to be in the cruise noticing an oil pressure problem, I would have thought that a landing in a dead flat field would have carried less risk.

Just a guess is all. One is uncontrolled, one is controlled.

I read a pilot report recently about the SR22 and its safety features, which are pretty impressive. The FCOM / POH cautions the crew regarding its use. It warns use may result in death or serious injury. Looking at the pics of the "landing site" it may have been a case of land the aircraft rather than deploy the chute. Maybe this case could be used in pilot conversion training once the investigation has been completed.

I wonder if one bought an aircraft that cost say......$100,000:00 less than a Cirrus (because it didn't have a ballistic parachute thingy) and then spent that $100,000:00 on pilot training if the out come would have been any different?

Ways to spend the $100,000:00 on pilot training:

Learn to fly a glider
An aerobatics endorsement
All sorts of Flight Safety courses
A couple of Lycoming engine courses
Old mate in Omaha's engine course

Not second guessing the dood, wasn't there but maybe money could be better allocated than a ballistic parachute thingy (there but for the grace of God go I!!)

Jaba mate, relieved to hear that.:rolleyes:

And yes the recovery system is no pussy cat, its a hard ball risk assesment isn't it.:8

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.:E

Triple, your link is a pain the arse by the way :ugh:

Curious! Checked out a SR22 AFM Section 3 Emergency Procedures.

EDIT- removed lame comment.

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 :sad: 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.:{

Agreed Gaunty, a lot of ink dispensed by various aviation scribes regarding this means of gaining certification.

Sorry Jack, it works for me. It's a nice picture.

I've heard figures of $100k for a repack being thrown around.

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.

This model and spend $90,000:00 on an Instructor Rating, Advanced Aerobatic Course and Old mate in Omaha's Engine Course. :ok:

Triple, just lots of friggin' pop ups including one of those spanker casino sites :ugh:

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.

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...:ouch:

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. :confused::ugh:

If anyone knows the pilot, can I get connected somehow.

Thanks!

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. :sad:

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.

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.

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.

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. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...y_dog_eyes.gif

If he'd have got it wrong on the forced lob then the "experts" here would say 'why didn't he use the chute?':mad:

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!

He's probably happily married Jaba! :E

Dr :8