Cirrus SR22 down in N.E. Ohio - 2 dead
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Over the hill and far away
Age: 76
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cirrus SR22 down in N.E. Ohio - 2 dead
From Fox 8 News, Cleveland:
Not many details at this time - the incident happened around 5pm EDT Tuesday. Weather was wet with cloudbase around 700ft. The aircraft was leaving KCGF - Cuyahoga County Airport, OH - for KBUF - Buffalo, NY.
This is the second light-aircraft to go down in the area this week. A single-engine home-build crashed on Saturday afternoon, killing the solo pilot.
MAYFIELD VILLAGE, Ohio - A single-engine plane crashed Tuesday afternoon in Mayfield Village east of Cuyahoga County Airport, the Federal Aviation Administration said.
The plane went down just after taking off, FAA spokeswoman Elizabeth Isham Cory said.
Cuyahoga County Coroner Dr. Frank P. Miller tells Fox 8 News two adults perished in the crash.
The plane went down in a wooded area behind the parking lot of St. Bartholomew Episcopol Church and near the North Chagrin Reservation of Cleveland Metroparks.
The plane went down just after taking off, FAA spokeswoman Elizabeth Isham Cory said.
Cuyahoga County Coroner Dr. Frank P. Miller tells Fox 8 News two adults perished in the crash.
The plane went down in a wooded area behind the parking lot of St. Bartholomew Episcopol Church and near the North Chagrin Reservation of Cleveland Metroparks.
This is the second light-aircraft to go down in the area this week. A single-engine home-build crashed on Saturday afternoon, killing the solo pilot.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cleveland, Oh
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From some of the news articles I have been reading, it would appear the pilot was not instrument rated, nor did he file an any flight plan, and as you mentioned the ceiling was about 700 feet. Actually, I flew in to CLE about an hour before the crash and the ceiling was more like 200 feet. I hope that I am wrong, because otherwise this was just plain stupidity resulting in the death (or murder) of a passenger who was probably completely oblivious to what he was getting himself in to.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: uk
Age: 63
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More bad news for the cirrus community, this is fatality number 51
Prelimanary report here, note the weather.
Prelimanary report here, note the weather.
************************************************************ ********************
** Report created 4/29/2009 Record 1 **
************************************************************ ********************
IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: 504MD Make/Model: SR22 Description: SR-22
Date: 04/28/2009 Time: 2016
Event Type: Accident Highest Injury: Fatal Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Unknown
LOCATION
City: MAYFIELD State: OH Country: US
DESCRIPTION
AIRCRAFT CRASHED UNDER UNKNOWN CIRCUMSTANCES, THE TWO PERSONS ON BOARD WERE
FATALLY INJURED, MAYFIELD, OH
INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 2
# Crew: 2 Fat: 2 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Pass: 0 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
WEATHER: SPECI 2014 010/08 4SM -RA BR OVC002 07/06 A3038
OTHER DATA
Activity: Unknown Phase: Unknown Operation: OTHER
** Report created 4/29/2009 Record 1 **
************************************************************ ********************
IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: 504MD Make/Model: SR22 Description: SR-22
Date: 04/28/2009 Time: 2016
Event Type: Accident Highest Injury: Fatal Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Unknown
LOCATION
City: MAYFIELD State: OH Country: US
DESCRIPTION
AIRCRAFT CRASHED UNDER UNKNOWN CIRCUMSTANCES, THE TWO PERSONS ON BOARD WERE
FATALLY INJURED, MAYFIELD, OH
INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 2
# Crew: 2 Fat: 2 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Pass: 0 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
WEATHER: SPECI 2014 010/08 4SM -RA BR OVC002 07/06 A3038
OTHER DATA
Activity: Unknown Phase: Unknown Operation: OTHER
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Over the hill and far away
Age: 76
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The weather certainly was not VMC yesterday afternoon - though could have been if they flew in to CGF yesterday morning, (IIRC, the clouds came over around 10am local). I had assumed (dangerous, I know), that they were flying IFR.
From the local newspaper website:
A Ohio State Police captain said on the news last night that they were "trying to locate the tail to get the number of the aircraft so that we can determine where it was coming from and going to". There wasn't much left of the aircraft from the few pictures that are on the Fox News site.
From the local newspaper website:
The two men who died in the plane crash Tuesday in Mayfield Village have been identified as attorneys from the Buffalo, N.Y. area.
Michael H. Doran was a partner at Doran and Murphy LLP and Matthew J. Schnirel was a young associate attorney, according to Colleen Murphy, Doran’s law partner.
Doran and Schnirel had been in Ohio to represent railroad workers during a case, said Michael Torcello, who also worked at Doran & Murphy.
Doran was the likely pilot of the Cirrus SR-22 that crashed near the Hickory Drive neighborhood in Mayfield Village. He was an experienced pilot who had been flying since 1996.
The National Transportation Safety Board and Ohio Highway Patrol have not confirmed that Doran and Schnirel are the decedents yet.
Michael H. Doran was a partner at Doran and Murphy LLP and Matthew J. Schnirel was a young associate attorney, according to Colleen Murphy, Doran’s law partner.
Doran and Schnirel had been in Ohio to represent railroad workers during a case, said Michael Torcello, who also worked at Doran & Murphy.
Doran was the likely pilot of the Cirrus SR-22 that crashed near the Hickory Drive neighborhood in Mayfield Village. He was an experienced pilot who had been flying since 1996.
The National Transportation Safety Board and Ohio Highway Patrol have not confirmed that Doran and Schnirel are the decedents yet.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: new york
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SR 22 Ohio Crash--How many more must crash?
Here is another crash of a Cirrus which in all liklihood will be attributed to pilot error along with all the others. How many more will there be before someone at the FAA focuses on the real problem? This is a bad plane and no matter how many flight control fixes they patch work onto it ..this will always be a bad plane with a poorly designed flight control system.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AviationLaw
Here is another crash of a Cirrus which in all liklihood will be attributed to pilot error along with all the others. How many more will there be before someone at the FAA focuses on the real problem? This is a bad plane and no matter how many flight control fixes they patch work onto it ..this will always be a bad plane with a poorly designed flight control system.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
except the plane would be less forgiving after such a stupidity than a PA28 or similar
Aside from the flying qualities, an aspect on which we are doubtless about to be enlightened, I would have thought the air bags in the belts, the energy absorbing design features of the cockpit, the carbon re-enforcing frame and egress from doors both sides all contribute to improve your chances of surviving a crash compared with a PA28.
Just a thought.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oops, don't get upset....
Clearly these features have a limited effect (which are no doubt much appreciated during a forced landing,) during an outright crash of (what I understand to be!) a plane in IMC just after take off flown by a non IFR qualified pilot.
So my OPINION is that if the plane has control issues which more old fashioned designs have not, it is even less wise to take off as a non IFR qualified pilot in IMC condition in this plane.
Perhaps such safety features give a false sense of safety (I refer to comments made recently during the Greece crash)
Clearly these features have a limited effect (which are no doubt much appreciated during a forced landing,) during an outright crash of (what I understand to be!) a plane in IMC just after take off flown by a non IFR qualified pilot.
So my OPINION is that if the plane has control issues which more old fashioned designs have not, it is even less wise to take off as a non IFR qualified pilot in IMC condition in this plane.
Perhaps such safety features give a false sense of safety (I refer to comments made recently during the Greece crash)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 32°55'22"S 151°46'56"E
Age: 39
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The more advanced aircraft you progress to, often the less forgiving it is. Hence why you need experience and training to progress, usually that would include knowing when to decide whether to go or not to go.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oops, don't get upset....
I was only spicing up my response... .. .. never the less
I am still intrigued to know more of these control issues that concern you.
I have flown a few types including having a few hours on the 22. I am yet to discover the issues you have in mind but always keen to learn.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The main concern I have with the Cirrus design is the lack of protection for the fuel tanks in the wings. I don't think their accident rate per hours flown is out of the norm, but the incidence of post impact fires is. (10 out of 26 of the Cirrus fatal crashes in the US, up to the end of 2007. This compares with 3 out of 162 for the C172.) However, I have no data on whether the crashes in the NTSB database that resulted in fires were otherwise survivable.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Fuji!
AviationLaw is the one to ask.
He was refering to "constant fixes of the flight controls". It suggests trouble, trouble which I am not personally aware of, being a true Piper man.
Glad you were not upset, we keep on rocking (wings included)
Bert
AviationLaw is the one to ask.
He was refering to "constant fixes of the flight controls". It suggests trouble, trouble which I am not personally aware of, being a true Piper man.
Glad you were not upset, we keep on rocking (wings included)
Bert
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cirrus had several goes at fixing a potentially dangerous problem with the bungee chord interconnecting the ailerons with the rudder, so that might be what AviationLaw was alluding to. (Why does that sound like the username of an ambulance chaser?) Anyway, N504MD was first registered in 2008, which makes it an SR22 G3. The rudder/aileron interconnect was eliminated in that model, so it's a red herring.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a negligible flight experience in a Cirrus but so far as I know there isn't anything actually wrong with the type.
The slightly "elevated" accident profile seems to be caused by Cirrus having marketed the type at non-anorak types, without a supporting training/regulatory framework to enforce any kind of
- type specific training;
- for pilots flying IFR (legally or otherwise), some decent training on weather appreciation appropriate to planes which are not exactly de-iced tanks with radar
The Cirrus marketing strategy was essential if anybody was going to make any progress in GA and shift anything remotely innovative into a market which is highly conservative and borders on totally stagnant.
The downside is that Cirrus attracted more than their fair share of pilots who incorrectly (some would say "arrogantly" but there is a high correlation between ebullience and the ability to shell out $500k, so the difference is only in the training or lack of training) think the plane is a car which can go anywhere.
I much prefer my TB20GT for various reasons but I am sure that if Socata had done "Cirrus marketing" they would have ended up with the same accident profile. Fewer fires perhaps but a CFIT kills nearly every time so the difference is only in how much material is left over to go into the body bag. In fact, Socata's marketing was crap, even in the USA, so they ended up being flown mostly by picky fussy and often slightly weird anorak types who probably know more about light aircraft ops than Cirrus owners.
The slightly "elevated" accident profile seems to be caused by Cirrus having marketed the type at non-anorak types, without a supporting training/regulatory framework to enforce any kind of
- type specific training;
- for pilots flying IFR (legally or otherwise), some decent training on weather appreciation appropriate to planes which are not exactly de-iced tanks with radar
The Cirrus marketing strategy was essential if anybody was going to make any progress in GA and shift anything remotely innovative into a market which is highly conservative and borders on totally stagnant.
The downside is that Cirrus attracted more than their fair share of pilots who incorrectly (some would say "arrogantly" but there is a high correlation between ebullience and the ability to shell out $500k, so the difference is only in the training or lack of training) think the plane is a car which can go anywhere.
I much prefer my TB20GT for various reasons but I am sure that if Socata had done "Cirrus marketing" they would have ended up with the same accident profile. Fewer fires perhaps but a CFIT kills nearly every time so the difference is only in how much material is left over to go into the body bag. In fact, Socata's marketing was crap, even in the USA, so they ended up being flown mostly by picky fussy and often slightly weird anorak types who probably know more about light aircraft ops than Cirrus owners.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Demographics of a *typical* Cirrus owner when cirrus first came on the scene was probably the Agelina Jolie and Brad Pitt types - lots of money, little experience - though giver her her due she did her IR/CPL in a PA28 (in the same aeroplane as me 
).....Aeroplanes in the States are a good tax dodge too, and I know of people who buy very expensive aeroplanes, rarely fly them, because the tax man ends up paying for them. Of course to do this you have to be loaded / have a business making so much money and paying so much tax......
).....Aeroplanes in the States are a good tax dodge too, and I know of people who buy very expensive aeroplanes, rarely fly them, because the tax man ends up paying for them. Of course to do this you have to be loaded / have a business making so much money and paying so much tax......
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does the US IRS really have a more lax attitude to benefit in kind?
My understanding is that a lot of people out there have bought planes for leaseback to a school, and it is the aggressive writedown of the purchase cost against their personal taxes which is why they do it.
This worked for many years, because new prices kept rising so fast (10-20% a year in 2000-2002) and this propped up the used values.
Now the bottom has fallen out of the market, especially on plastic planes, so I don't see the benefit of a leaseback anymore. The tax saving would be wiped out by the real depreciation.
One can do that in the UK too, and it would be a waste of money for the same reasons.
In the UK, the only time a leaseback would not draw HMRC attention is if you were not at all interested in flying. The moment you show the slightest interest in flying that plane, they will be attracted like flies to a lump of **** and then you have all the crap to do with benefit in kind. Maybe the USA has subtly different rules there?
My understanding is that a lot of people out there have bought planes for leaseback to a school, and it is the aggressive writedown of the purchase cost against their personal taxes which is why they do it.
This worked for many years, because new prices kept rising so fast (10-20% a year in 2000-2002) and this propped up the used values.
Now the bottom has fallen out of the market, especially on plastic planes, so I don't see the benefit of a leaseback anymore. The tax saving would be wiped out by the real depreciation.
One can do that in the UK too, and it would be a waste of money for the same reasons.
In the UK, the only time a leaseback would not draw HMRC attention is if you were not at all interested in flying. The moment you show the slightest interest in flying that plane, they will be attracted like flies to a lump of ****
and then you have all the crap to do with benefit in kind. Maybe the USA has subtly different rules there?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is another crash of a Cirrus which in all liklihood will be attributed to pilot error along with all the others. How many more will there be before someone at the FAA focuses on the real problem? This is a bad plane and no matter how many flight control fixes they patch work onto it ..this will always be a bad plane with a poorly designed flight control system.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OFBSLF
Not quite.... the tendency seems to concentrate on a non IR rated pilot taking off into a 200ft cloudbase..... At best design issues according to some could be a contributory factor
Not quite.... the tendency seems to concentrate on a non IR rated pilot taking off into a 200ft cloudbase..... At best design issues according to some could be a contributory factor
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US Tax law is more rational, stable and less vindictive, but also much more encompassing. The benefit you receive (i.e. market value of actual use less amount paid) is taxable, the fact you 'could have used the aircraft 24/7' doesn't matter vs. the UK where you have a BIK of say 35% of the purchase price (less any real rental) each year. (Simplified opinion, Lots more details ..... back to the thread.....)