Cirrus CAPS deployment option during emergency
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a4fly
I don’t know a great deal about how the Cirrus "performs" when carrying ice - my suspicion would be that relatively low amounts of ice accumulation are going to cause a dramatic loss of performance because of the design of the wings. I would however want to do some reading on what Cirrus operators who have encountered these conditions have to say.
Obviously the first option would always be to extricate oneself from icing conditions without pulling the chute which in most cases should prove possible.
However if I could not get out of cloud and out of freezing conditions and there were any indications of ice accumulation causing the onset of flight control issues personally I would pull the chute.
Icing in an aircraft with no means of removing or preventing it (I appreciate some Cirrius have a wet wing and prop system) is in my book an emergency situation and one where you need to do something about it fast.
I don’t know a great deal about how the Cirrus "performs" when carrying ice - my suspicion would be that relatively low amounts of ice accumulation are going to cause a dramatic loss of performance because of the design of the wings. I would however want to do some reading on what Cirrus operators who have encountered these conditions have to say.
Obviously the first option would always be to extricate oneself from icing conditions without pulling the chute which in most cases should prove possible.
However if I could not get out of cloud and out of freezing conditions and there were any indications of ice accumulation causing the onset of flight control issues personally I would pull the chute.
Icing in an aircraft with no means of removing or preventing it (I appreciate some Cirrius have a wet wing and prop system) is in my book an emergency situation and one where you need to do something about it fast.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: west berkshire
Age: 59
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuji, thanks for that. I've only once had experienced of flying a non-deiced single in what turned out to be light / moderate ice and was grateful to be flying a slab winged Piper. I'm sure that I would have felt much more uncomfortable in a modern aeroplane with a higher wing loading. However, only complete loss of control would make me want to deploy the 'chute because of the permanency of this course of action. Do you think that having the apparent " safety net " of a 'chute might encourage pilots to press on in the scenario of flying in forecast icing ?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO only a fool would get a Cirrus into a situation where he lost control due to ice and had to pull the chute.
For starters, contrary to what most VFR pilots think the strategy for IFR flight is not to sit in IMC long term. It is a rapid climb to VMC on top, and stay in nice sunshine enroute. If the tops forecast looks like FL250 with the 0C level at FL080 and terrain at FL130
then one should scrap the flight.
For starters, contrary to what most VFR pilots think the strategy for IFR flight is not to sit in IMC long term. It is a rapid climb to VMC on top, and stay in nice sunshine enroute. If the tops forecast looks like FL250 with the 0C level at FL080 and terrain at FL130
then one should scrap the flight.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I0540 is correct but it is not always possible.
Unless you have an IR climbing into the airways into VMC on top is not possible and even if you do you may elect not to go on an airways flight plan.
On a recent trip, quite contrary to the forecast, I encountered moderate icing at FL85 an IMC down to 1,500 feet. Another 500 feet and it was VMC on top but having not filed airways a significant chunk of the flight was IMC to maintain below the TMA.
It didnt matter because the aircraft had full anti icing and in any event the freezing level was high.
However the forecasts are not always accurate so a combination of high terrain and low bases and a TMA to restrict the climb into VMC it is possible to get "caught out" even if it should never happen.
The anser is never to fly in such marginal conditions but the Cirrius is an IFR competant platform which may persuade the pilot to use the aircraft for hard IFR.
In short the answer to your question I think is therefore yes.
There was an interesting article in Flying recently about an ATPL who encountered unforecast icing in an Arrow ending up flying the ILS with an iced out screen.
He admitted he was very lucky and I guess he would have thought about pulling the chute if he had had one!
Sh*t happens I suppose.
Unless you have an IR climbing into the airways into VMC on top is not possible and even if you do you may elect not to go on an airways flight plan.
On a recent trip, quite contrary to the forecast, I encountered moderate icing at FL85 an IMC down to 1,500 feet. Another 500 feet and it was VMC on top but having not filed airways a significant chunk of the flight was IMC to maintain below the TMA.
It didnt matter because the aircraft had full anti icing and in any event the freezing level was high.
However the forecasts are not always accurate so a combination of high terrain and low bases and a TMA to restrict the climb into VMC it is possible to get "caught out" even if it should never happen.
The anser is never to fly in such marginal conditions but the Cirrius is an IFR competant platform which may persuade the pilot to use the aircraft for hard IFR.
In short the answer to your question I think is therefore yes.
There was an interesting article in Flying recently about an ATPL who encountered unforecast icing in an Arrow ending up flying the ILS with an iced out screen.
He admitted he was very lucky and I guess he would have thought about pulling the chute if he had had one!
Sh*t happens I suppose.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The vast majority of Cirruses are in the USA, where a large % of pilots have an IR and are thus limited only by weather and aircraft performance. In any case they can fly VFR to 17,999ft and that will get you above the clouds most of the time, enroute. They also have good weather forecasting systems over there.
Here in Europe, the utility of a Cirrus is minimal unless one has an IR, because CAS is so low down, all over the place.
I wonder what that "ATPL" was doing. Actually an ATPL (basically, somebody who sat a load of exams 20 years ago and now flies a big jet) knows hardly more about this than any experienced PPL. There is no such thing as "unforecast icing" Icing is never forecast with the slightest reliability. Anytime in IMC below 0C one can pick up ice; sometimes one doesn't, sometimes one does.
Pilots differ on their attitudes to risk. Many are in the "I always go" camp. I think that there is a definite technical limit to mission capability, and it's according to the operating ceiling, oxygen carriage, and the anti-ice equipment one has. In the TB20 (TKS prop) I would not embark on say a 5hr flight in freezing IMC no matter what - even if I had a chute - and a Cirrus is just the same.
The key to flying long distances - VFR or IFR - is to fly VMC, and VMC on top if necessary.
I am sure e.g. an Aztec with the rubber boots can sit in icing conditions for hours and just carry on, and many piston twins do this under "VFR" to avoid Eurocontrol route charges, but it isn't really a solution for having a nice flight with passengers.
Here in Europe, the utility of a Cirrus is minimal unless one has an IR, because CAS is so low down, all over the place.
I wonder what that "ATPL" was doing. Actually an ATPL (basically, somebody who sat a load of exams 20 years ago and now flies a big jet) knows hardly more about this than any experienced PPL. There is no such thing as "unforecast icing"
Icing is never forecast with the slightest reliability. Anytime in IMC below 0C one can pick up ice; sometimes one doesn't, sometimes one does.Pilots differ on their attitudes to risk. Many are in the "I always go" camp. I think that there is a definite technical limit to mission capability, and it's according to the operating ceiling, oxygen carriage, and the anti-ice equipment one has. In the TB20 (TKS prop) I would not embark on say a 5hr flight in freezing IMC no matter what - even if I had a chute - and a Cirrus is just the same.
The key to flying long distances - VFR or IFR - is to fly VMC, and VMC on top if necessary.
I am sure e.g. an Aztec with the rubber boots can sit in icing conditions for hours and just carry on, and many piston twins do this under "VFR" to avoid Eurocontrol route charges, but it isn't really a solution for having a nice flight with passengers.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was reading "Flyig VFR in Marginal Weather" last night as it contains some interesting anecdotal accounts.
In the US and here another trap is the pilot getting himself set up VFR on top on a long cross country. He expects to descend clear of cloud at his destination but pushes on over a solid undercast. A cold soaked airframe, a descent in IMC and AT asking the pilot to hold in a step down and the classic conditions for a severe icing encouner come together. To some extent the higher the pilot is "suckered" into climbing the worse a problem he can create for himself.
In the air the aircraft starts to behave "strangely". To maintain height the amount of pitch has to be increased and the aircraft requires a lot more power. Back on the ground there is not a trace of the amount of ice the airframe accumulated, and the pilot might never know how close he was to the stall.
I'd think about pulling the chute if the control problems became severe.
Yes, all totally avoidable, but again it is this type of scenario that can and has happened.
Yes, I dont think you want to maintain in icing conditions for any length of time what ever aircraft you are flying, but clearly something like an Aztec is likely to cope a great deal better than many underpowered twins or singles with half baked ice "protection".
In the US and here another trap is the pilot getting himself set up VFR on top on a long cross country. He expects to descend clear of cloud at his destination but pushes on over a solid undercast. A cold soaked airframe, a descent in IMC and AT asking the pilot to hold in a step down and the classic conditions for a severe icing encouner come together. To some extent the higher the pilot is "suckered" into climbing the worse a problem he can create for himself.
In the air the aircraft starts to behave "strangely". To maintain height the amount of pitch has to be increased and the aircraft requires a lot more power. Back on the ground there is not a trace of the amount of ice the airframe accumulated, and the pilot might never know how close he was to the stall.
I'd think about pulling the chute if the control problems became severe.
Yes, all totally avoidable, but again it is this type of scenario that can and has happened.
Yes, I dont think you want to maintain in icing conditions for any length of time what ever aircraft you are flying, but clearly something like an Aztec is likely to cope a great deal better than many underpowered twins or singles with half baked ice "protection".
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brussels - Twin Comanche PA39 - KA C90B
Age: 51
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
an Aztec is likely to cope a great deal better than many underpowered twins or singles with half baked ice "protection".
The one that Diamond got on their DA-42 is certified in Europe, it seems to be that the certification in Europe for known icing is a joke, since there was no possibility to certify the DA-42 in the USA, it would not standed a chance like the Mooney succesfully did....
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read the Book !!
It would seem to me that having trauled the four pages above the advice in the flight manual is the best Fuji and some others have given this a great deal of thought and refined what the flight manual stated adding greatly to the debate however I think that chute deployment is most likely to have to be a split second call and reading the above debate will rase the chances of a pilot making the correct decision with not very much time to do so.
Chute deployment will write off the aircraft as stated in the flight manual and a forced landing if done well will result in no damage, I have to take issue with IO540 on the subject if ditching always writing off an aircraft, It is very likely that his TB20 would sink apon ditching but if it did not the salt water would result in a write off unless the aircraft was recoverd and treated with water dispersant very quickly. A compostie airframe is not subject to corrosion and so the airframe structure should not be subject to secondary damage by salt water immersion.
In my opinion the if you ditch a Cirrus the chances are it will float and the chances of the aircraft being repaired are 60/40 in favour.
Chute deployment will write off the aircraft as stated in the flight manual and a forced landing if done well will result in no damage, I have to take issue with IO540 on the subject if ditching always writing off an aircraft, It is very likely that his TB20 would sink apon ditching but if it did not the salt water would result in a write off unless the aircraft was recoverd and treated with water dispersant very quickly. A compostie airframe is not subject to corrosion and so the airframe structure should not be subject to secondary damage by salt water immersion.
In my opinion the if you ditch a Cirrus the chances are it will float and the chances of the aircraft being repaired are 60/40 in favour.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A compostie airframe is not subject to corrosion and so the airframe structure should not be subject to secondary damage by salt water immersion.
And even if the aircraft will float, there's no aerodynamic balance keeping the plane level. It's just gravity. So it will float nose-down, submerging the most expensive bits of the aircraft in water anyway.
Cars that have been immersed in water (driven off the dike, say) are written off, and for good reason. So should aircraft.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: west berkshire
Age: 59
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540.
not only fools do foolish things ! remember the discussion we were having
recently about a twin that came a cropper in the Alps. You are right about
ice, it's a pain in the ar*e because you never really know when it's going
to appear, other than in certain circumstances like C.B.s and we try to
avoid them. Flying any aeroplane that doesn't have anti-ice in icing
conditions needs careful consideration.
Let us hope that there will not be a group of pilots out there that feel
that having a 'chute allows them to push their luck even further than they
already do.
not only fools do foolish things ! remember the discussion we were having
recently about a twin that came a cropper in the Alps. You are right about
ice, it's a pain in the ar*e because you never really know when it's going
to appear, other than in certain circumstances like C.B.s and we try to
avoid them. Flying any aeroplane that doesn't have anti-ice in icing
conditions needs careful consideration.
Let us hope that there will not be a group of pilots out there that feel
that having a 'chute allows them to push their luck even further than they
already do.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Backpacker
You realy are showing how little you know about this subject.
The engine will have to go for a shock load check and any problems with corrosion would be delt with during that check, the cost of the seat fabric and internal furnishings are very low as a % of the airframe.
The likelyhood is that the aircraft will float on it's wings as the fuel tanks are the largest sealed structure, as you may know the lift (c of p) acts from about 30% of the MAC so the aircraft will float at about the same place as the weight acts from, in composite aircraft this usualy keeps most of the electrics and radios out of the water.
Internal corrosion is an issue in tubular structures and the chances are that these will be scrappedas would the control cables.
Water should not penetrate the foam sandwich as it has to be watertight to avoid water turning to ice at high altitudes and damaging the structure and even if some water dose get into the foam it is not hard to repair.
The high value of the Cirus airframe is the critical to the chances of a write off, so I stand by the statment that the chances of repair are 60/40 in favour, and I speak as some one who has had some technical involvement in at least three aircraft that have returned to flying followind ditching.
The engine will have to go for a shock load check and any problems with corrosion would be delt with during that check, the cost of the seat fabric and internal furnishings are very low as a % of the airframe.
The likelyhood is that the aircraft will float on it's wings as the fuel tanks are the largest sealed structure, as you may know the lift (c of p) acts from about 30% of the MAC so the aircraft will float at about the same place as the weight acts from, in composite aircraft this usualy keeps most of the electrics and radios out of the water.
Internal corrosion is an issue in tubular structures and the chances are that these will be scrappedas would the control cables.
Water should not penetrate the foam sandwich as it has to be watertight to avoid water turning to ice at high altitudes and damaging the structure and even if some water dose get into the foam it is not hard to repair.
The high value of the Cirus airframe is the critical to the chances of a write off, so I stand by the statment that the chances of repair are 60/40 in favour, and I speak as some one who has had some technical involvement in at least three aircraft that have returned to flying followind ditching.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the aircraft comes to rest the right way up, the cockpit will slowly fill with water through the air vents and the passageways for the control surface cables and rods. I doubt that there would be sufficient buoyancy in the wings to keep it afloat after that. The SR22 that ditched under its parachute sank, as did a DA40 that ditched in Helsinki harbour.
Here are some pictures of the recovered SR22, taken for the insurance sale.
Here are some pictures of the recovered SR22, taken for the insurance sale.
Last edited by soay; 30th Oct 2007 at 10:56. Reason: Added link to pictures of the SR22 after recovery
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nearly every unpressurised plane will sink - unless it is made of wood and ditched because it had empty tanks
I don't buy the recovery after ditching. In a typical modern IFR plane, the value breakdown is roughly
1/3 engine, prop and related parts
1/3 airframe
1/3 avionics
The engine will be trashed, unless recovered fast and immediately dismantled.
Same for the prop.
The avionics will be totally trashed; sometimes the instruments get sold to companies making flight simulators and such.
Anyway, unless the incident is something mysterious with significant fatalities, nobody will bother recovering the plane from the seabed.
I have personally seen the remains of a TBM700 which ditched in shallow water and the whole thing was written off.
I don't buy the recovery after ditching. In a typical modern IFR plane, the value breakdown is roughly
1/3 engine, prop and related parts
1/3 airframe
1/3 avionics
The engine will be trashed, unless recovered fast and immediately dismantled.
Same for the prop.
The avionics will be totally trashed; sometimes the instruments get sold to companies making flight simulators and such.
Anyway, unless the incident is something mysterious with significant fatalities, nobody will bother recovering the plane from the seabed.
I have personally seen the remains of a TBM700 which ditched in shallow water and the whole thing was written off.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A and C, your original post suggested (at least to me) that a Cirrus ditching under its parachute in salt water would float, could be pulled from the water, rinsed off and fly again. I think you and I have clearly demonstrated now that that's not the case. Even if the fuselage itself can be reused, lots of components will need to be tested, cleaned, overhauled, replaced or whatever. Not trivial.
As for floating on its fuel tanks after ditching, I do not have the numbers here for a Cirrus but a standard Diamond (no long range tanks) can hold 28 USG of fuel. When empty, that's 106 liters of air providing 106 kg of buoyancy (a little more than that in salt water). The empty weight of our (IFR, so comparatively heavy) DA-40 is 815.3 kilos. So in order for it to float, it needs to pull some serious amount of buoyancy from somewhere. I doubt whether the foam sandwich will provide enough, and I cannot readily think of anything else that's significantly lighter than water in the aircraft that can provide buoyancy. So my gut feel is that as soon as the cockpit fills with water, the aircraft will sink.
Soay, nice pics of that SR22. It clearly shows that a ditched aircraft will sit in the water with a nose-down attitude due to the weight of the engine. In this case, initially some 20 degrees or so, going to about 90 degrees as the cockpit fills up.
As for floating on its fuel tanks after ditching, I do not have the numbers here for a Cirrus but a standard Diamond (no long range tanks) can hold 28 USG of fuel. When empty, that's 106 liters of air providing 106 kg of buoyancy (a little more than that in salt water). The empty weight of our (IFR, so comparatively heavy) DA-40 is 815.3 kilos. So in order for it to float, it needs to pull some serious amount of buoyancy from somewhere. I doubt whether the foam sandwich will provide enough, and I cannot readily think of anything else that's significantly lighter than water in the aircraft that can provide buoyancy. So my gut feel is that as soon as the cockpit fills with water, the aircraft will sink.
Soay, nice pics of that SR22. It clearly shows that a ditched aircraft will sit in the water with a nose-down attitude due to the weight of the engine. In this case, initially some 20 degrees or so, going to about 90 degrees as the cockpit fills up.
Last edited by BackPacker; 30th Oct 2007 at 11:18.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Backpacker/IO540
Compostie aircraft seem to float rather well if you look at the history of G-WAVE you will find a composite aircraft that has ditched, been taken in tow by a lifeboat and in now flying.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only reference I could find on G-WAVE was a PPRuNe archive, and they said that the wife, who remained on board, only got wet feet when she transferred from the aircraft into the lifeboat. So in this particular case I guess the cockpit stayed dry, or filled up with water extremely slowly. Obviously that provides a lot of buoyancy. Plus, it means that all the avionics and most of the electrics probably stayed dry as well.
But now that I think of it... All the composite aircraft that I remember from pictures or flying (Europa, DA-40 and Cirrus) have gull-wing doors or doors that open up upwards and sideways. In other words, the doors only extend from about halfway the fuselage upwards. If the bottom end is sufficiently sealed, you've got a pretty effective boat hull. So it might be because of this design (which may have its roots in the strength characteristics of composites) that composite aircraft do indeed float better than the average spamcan (with full fuselage height doors).
Mmmm. "Close all air vents" might actually be a very sensible emergency ditching checklist instruction.
But now that I think of it... All the composite aircraft that I remember from pictures or flying (Europa, DA-40 and Cirrus) have gull-wing doors or doors that open up upwards and sideways. In other words, the doors only extend from about halfway the fuselage upwards. If the bottom end is sufficiently sealed, you've got a pretty effective boat hull. So it might be because of this design (which may have its roots in the strength characteristics of composites) that composite aircraft do indeed float better than the average spamcan (with full fuselage height doors).
Mmmm. "Close all air vents" might actually be a very sensible emergency ditching checklist instruction.
Last edited by BackPacker; 30th Oct 2007 at 16:48.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by A and C
Compostie aircraft seem to float rather well if you look at the history of G-WAVE you will find a composite aircraft that has ditched, been taken in tow by a lifeboat and in now flying.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The one that Diamond got on their DA-42 is certified in Europe, it seems to be that the certification in Europe for known icing is a joke, since there was no possibility to certify the DA-42 in the USA, it would not standed a chance like the Mooney succesfully did....
The 42 appears to have a reasonable anti/de ice system encompassing as you would expect wings, screen, props, and tail. Moreover there are no sharp surfaces elsewhere which would "attract" ice. I have used the system in icing conditions and it did a fine job, albeit the icing was not severe and I climbed above the tops.
I wonder why the system on the Mooney is considered superior as it is based on the same TKS technology as far as I was aware.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
60/40 chance !
I did give the Cirus a 60/40 chance of being rebuilt after a ditching based on other aircraft that I have known to be recovered.
However the build quality is not as good as most of the Europan compostie aircraft so this might sway the balance, the other thing that will cause problems is the lack of composite repair experience within the Cirus company.
Cirus use the Boeing repair manual as a starting point, this might well be satisfactory for composite panels on large aircraft but is not good enough for light aircraft structual repair, Cirus are learning fast about the practical aspects of aircraft repair as people damage there products but the level of knowlage is far below that of the european glider repair business that has been doing the job for years.
The result is that Cirus might well not approve a repair that would be approved by a european company due to the reasons stated above or go for a "belt & braces" repair that would make the job an economic non-starter.
However the build quality is not as good as most of the Europan compostie aircraft so this might sway the balance, the other thing that will cause problems is the lack of composite repair experience within the Cirus company.
Cirus use the Boeing repair manual as a starting point, this might well be satisfactory for composite panels on large aircraft but is not good enough for light aircraft structual repair, Cirus are learning fast about the practical aspects of aircraft repair as people damage there products but the level of knowlage is far below that of the european glider repair business that has been doing the job for years.
The result is that Cirus might well not approve a repair that would be approved by a european company due to the reasons stated above or go for a "belt & braces" repair that would make the job an economic non-starter.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Norwich
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAPS deployment in Cirrus
I would deploy CAPS over land if in IMC conditions that exteded below about 1500ft AGL or at night(unless I were visual with a runway or able to get to one within comfortable gliding range). Regarding attempting a landing overland in good VFR I would attempt this if the terrain were good enough ie large enough fields and there was at least some headwind component otherwise I would deploy CAPS, I would try to position myself well 1st ie not over built up area or rocks.
If you are flying a Cirrus regularly, have you joined COPA (Cirrus owners and pilots association)? they run CPPP's (Cirrus pilots proficiency programme) once or twice a year in Europe and they cover matters like this. The last one I went too in Baden Baden last summer included a debrief on most CAPS pulls that have occurred since inception.
Hope you never need to make that decision, happy flying.
Dave Boucher
If you are flying a Cirrus regularly, have you joined COPA (Cirrus owners and pilots association)? they run CPPP's (Cirrus pilots proficiency programme) once or twice a year in Europe and they cover matters like this. The last one I went too in Baden Baden last summer included a debrief on most CAPS pulls that have occurred since inception.
Hope you never need to make that decision, happy flying.
Dave Boucher