Cirrus SR22 Chute Pull - (Post landing Video) Birmingham Alabama 6th Oct 2012

[Pace]

A C

That is encouraging to hear as if deployment does become recommended for use on situations where the aircraft is still flyable ie engine failure, fuel starvation etc rather than a conventional forced landing then the increased incidents of chute deployments will not have such an impact on future insurance! Costs which total write offs would!

Pace

[007helicopter]

That is very different to what Pilots like 007 are contemplating which is to use the chute in ALL cases of engine failure as a SOP.
That idea is being heralded by instructors and various Cirrus clubs with no backup from the manufacturer.

It may or may not be the right thing to do using the chute in all engine failure situations but on whos advice?

Ok, yes I do have pretty much as Pace describes a SOP that means in the event of all off airport landings onto an unknown surface I have chosen to use the Chute, because in my personal opinion I have a better chance of living to tell the tale.

When 4 + years ago I did my transition from then a Turbo Arrow to the Cirrus I was very much a fly it to the ground sort of guy and assumed the chute was the last resort in the event of mid air, engine failure in solid IMC or at night etc and this pretty much stayed with me for several years, so I fully understand the arguments against the chute and the preference for a fly it to the scene of the accident type approach.

The last couple of years and after 400+ Cirrus hours I have now changed my mind completely, and I fully admit being influenced by attending 3 x CPPP's (Cirrus specific training weekends organised by COPA) also by learning a lot from other Cirrus and COPA members and flying with some of the top (IMHO) Cirrus Instructors, and have now formed my own choice that suits me as an amateur pilot of average ability.

I am also very happy to publicly debate this as I believe the chute is largely misunderstood as a gimmick or an aid for incompetent bafoons who can not be bothered to get proper training and charge of into IMC knowing if it goes wrong, never mind , just pull the Chute. A good debate may even motivate some existing Cirrus (or other BRS equipped aircraft) to reconsider their own SOP.

At the start of this thead Mad Jock says that the airframe is a write off, I totaly disagree, there is nothing on that video that would indicate that the aircraft could not be repaired.

Agreed, I know at least 6 of the total 37 Cirrus Caps pulls that are flying again today with very happy new owners, there may be more.

I am told the costs for the repairs have varied from $80K - $160K USD which insurers are very happy about compared to massive litigation costs which has happened in quite a few Cirrus fatal's.

Pace i dont think any serious person is suggesting use the chute in every circumstance. If there is a socking great field in front of you mown to better than wimbelon standards you would hardly reach for the handle

Fuji I recall but may be wrong from a previous thread you made the very valid point that at a 1000ft in unknown territory who can really be certain on the condition of a landing site, whats looks great at 1000ft may be horrible at 100ft and then it is to late, hazards such as ditches, unseen wires, crops, ploughed fields, rocks, gradient, wet boggy ground (especially this year) coming up short, over shooting etc may all be factors that end up killing an average type of guy.

When I drive around the UK there is not that many spots I would like to land my Cirrus at 60+ knots on its tiny wheels and relative high inertia.

Maybe in complete random situations it would work for me in good weather maybe 8 or 9 out of 10 times, I just prefer my odds with the chute and have a pre determined plan before I even take off.

[goldeneaglepilot]

Having had some experience of the cost and complexity of composite repairs I am amazed that the repair cost is so low. The AC in the video has significant wing root damage from the wheel spat, the U/C is delaminated and that illustrates the stresses involved. The engine will require a shock load strip down and new prop, and thats only what is visible in the video.

With the chute deployed what is the vertical descent rate?

I have heard some stories of back injuries due to the deceleration

[Fuji Abound]

007helicopter - so you might like to give us an indication of when you would not pull the cute?

Here are some possible examples:

1. Downwind in the circuit. Obviously a chute pull will result in an off airport landing (assuming the wind is not at right angles to the down wind leg in the direction of the field). Lets assume the circuit is not sufficiently wide that you wouldn't expect to make the runway.

2. In the climb out from L2K - you will probably be at 1,000 feet or so over the beach or just beyond. The tide is out and the beach presents left and right.

3. South of the downs 4,000 feet - plenty of very large grass fields to choose from - no good reason to think any of the fields present hazards.

4. Over the Alps - some valley landing sites available, or "fly" the aircraft to a chute pull with the expectation of landing in a valley, or just pull the chute and end up where it takes you.

5. Over a built up area interspersed with some larger areas of parkland at 2,500 feet.

6. Over the Scottish highlands with very mixed terrain and no obviously clean landing sites.

7. In the winter over lots of muddy and evidently ploughed fields or fields with winter standing crops.

[goldeneaglepilot]

FA - Good points, even with small wheels and 60kts, Points 1 to 5 shout out for an attempt at an off airfield landing

[007helicopter]

Having had some experience of the cost and complexity of composite repairs I am amazed that the repair cost is so low. The AC in the video has significant wing root damage from the wheel spat, the U/C is delaminated and that illustrates the stresses involved. The engine will require a shock load strip down and new prop, and thats only what is visible in the video.

Just what I was told by someone who I believe knows the facts, bear in mind appx 30 may not have been economically repairable.

With the chute delpoyed what is the verical descent rate?

17knots is the speed, not sure exactly in ft/min but can check

I have heard some stories of back injuries due to the deceleration

from the 37 I only recall one serious back injury (but may be wrong) he I believe cracked a vertebrae on a water landing, i think the Hudson North of NYC, however he was still able to swim to the shore unaided and 6 months later was fully recovered and able to snow board.

The last one on water was Dick Mcglaughin in the Bahams after engine failure, no back problems and a great blog here if you have time Early Reflections on CAPS Pull #32 by Dick McGlaughlin in the Bahamas - Pull early, pull often! - Cirrus Owners and Pilots Association

[goldeneaglepilot]

28.69ft per second, that is a pretty heavy deceleration,

[Fuji Abound]

007

Fuji I recall but may be wrong from a previous thread you made the very valid point that at a 1000ft in unknown territory who can really be certain on the condition of a landing site, whats looks great at 1000ft may be horrible at 100ft and then it is to late, hazards such as ditches, unseen wires, crops, ploughed fields, rocks, gradient, wet boggy ground (especially this year) coming up short, over shooting etc may all be factors that end up killing an average type of guy.

I did say that. I also refer you to my post a couple up with regards your SOP.

[007helicopter]

007helicopter - so you might like to give us an indication of when you would not pull the cute?

Here are some possible examples:

1. Downwind in the circuit. Obviously a chute pull will result in an off airport landing (assuming the wind is not at right angles to the down wind leg in the direction of the field). Lets assume the circuit is not sufficiently wide that you wouldn't expect to make the runway.

Reasonable medium or big Airport read Lydd / or Manston, yes I would in most circumstances expect and be able to land on the runway.

My home airport Rochester which I know very well and the approaches are awful in the event of coming up short I would in fact pull the chute and hope to come here to pick up the criticism (and hopefully eat dinner at home that night)

2. In the climb out from L2K - you will probably be at 1,000 feet or so over the beach or just beyond. The tide is out and the beach presents left and right.

Good one and I have considered this one specifically several times this year, the beech if empty would be very tempting but I have in fact decided I would likely still pull the chute but this is one of the tougher decision's, again maximum criticism expected from pprune.

South of the downs 4,000 feet - plenty of very large grass fields to choose from - no good reason to think any of the fields present hazards.

I would pull the Chute

Over the Alps - some valley landing sites available, or "fly" the aircraft to a chute pull with the expectation of landing in a valley, or just pull the chute and end up where it takes you.

I would aim to manoeuvre to what I considered the best area with prevailing winds and pull the chute.

5. Over a built up area interspersed with some larger areas of parkland at 2,500 feet.

In fact assuming for some reason I could not glide clear, which happens I would pull the chute because a) more likely I would survive and b) less impact and damage to whatever I hit on the ground at 17kt vertical than 60+ knot horizontal. Or if possible try and arrive with the chute over the parkland which I accept pretty tricky. I know at least 2 CAPS pull over built up areas and I accept this is a highly hypothetical scenario but this is the best answer I can give from the arm chair.

6. Over the Scottish highlands with very mixed terrain and no obviously clean landing sites.

Pull the chute, why wouldn't you?

7. In the winter over lots of muddy and evidently ploughed fields or fields with winter standing crops.

Pull the chute

[007helicopter]

28.69ft per second, that is a pretty heavy deceleration,

May well be but so far has worked with 100% success rate when used within limitations - that is good enough for me.

However I do accept 37 is a small number and one fatality will skew the results.

[goldeneaglepilot]

Refresh my memory 007 - exactly why was the chute fitted to enable certification?

To help - a clue: SPINNING

Not as a get out of trouble at all stages of flight card...

[007helicopter]

Refresh my memory 007 - exactly why was the chute fitted to enable certification?

To help - a clue: SPINNING

Not as a get out of trouble at all stages of flight card...

True, one factor was it did reduce certification costs because it meant full spin testing was not required, fair point.

That does not mean the Cirrus does not spin and recover from spinning pretty much like most other GA aircraft, but I accept it did reduce the costs and the time involved in getting certified.

[goldeneaglepilot]

That does not mean the Cirrus does not spin and recover from spinning pretty much like most other GA aircraft

That's an interesting observation. Please tell us more about your experiences spinning aircraft and how you have arrived at that conclusion?

Have you ever spun the SR22 or variants?

If the aircraft exhibited normal spin charecteristics why not get it fully certified without the extra cost and payload of a ballistic chute?

Its interesting to see what others have wrote about the SR22 and spins:

Once in a spin the SR20 and SR22 are virtually impossible to recover, according to the test pilots. Remember that spin testing in certification is done with a special tail parachute for breaking the spin that can then be cut away inflight. NASA puts this best:

"Because unrecoverable spins may be encountered during initial aircraft stall/spin flight tests, spin test aircraft are commonly equipped with emergency spin-recovery parachute systems, which can be deployed to terminate the spinning motion and reduce the aircraft angle of attack to below stall conditions. The parachute is then jettisoned by the pilot and conventional flight resumed."
— http://oea.larc.nasa.gov/PAIS/Concep...echnology.html (contains some photos of spin-recovery parachutes)

Based on my own experiences and what others have written I doubt you have ever entered a spin in the SR22...

Indeed the NTSB attributes several fatalities to stall/spin scenarios.

To quote a website in 2009:

As with most facts, they can be skewed in many different ways to represent many different views. This much is known. According to the National Transportation Safety Board database, there have been 46 fatal Cirrus accidents

Read more: Cirrus Fatalities Have Critics Questioning Safety

Just to remove any doubt, I am not knocking the Cirrus, its a fantastic aircraft but it does require care in its handling, it has nasty parts of its flight envelope that you do not want to enter and the chute does not exempt the pilot from stupidity....

[Fuji Abound]

I have never spun a Cirrus.


However I am not sure your appraisal is entirely complete.

i. Test Matrix. A limited investigation of the SR20 spin behavior has been completed and results are contained in Cirrus Design reports 12419, title, and 15568, title. The incipient spin and recovery characteristics were examined during more than 60 total spin entries covering the following configurations.

So while limited, the Cirrus has been spun, and in every one of these cases the test pilot recovered within one turn. The conclusion was that while recovery cannot be assured in all circumstances the spin characteristics are not exceptional BUT equally the recovery technique is not typical of types used for spin training.



Personally given the spin training undertaken by most pilots I doubt many would do that good a job of recovering any aircraft from a fully developed spin. When I started flying aerobatics I will happily admit that I had very little idea what the h*** was going on and found the whole experience quite disconcerting.


Without training (and I don't mean having a couple of spins demonstrated to you in the distance past of your PPL training) I think spins should be avoided at all cost. With proper training I suspect most pilots would do no worse and no better a job of recovering a Cirrus. (but I have no assured basis for making that assertion other than reading Cirrus's report referred to above).

Would I intentionally spin a Cirrus - hell no, its not certified for spinning, would I attempt to recover from a spin, yes if I had sufficient height I would, but I have to admit I cant recall whether chute deployment is thought to be in any way possibly compromised from a fully developed flat spin. I must check.

[007helicopter]

Once in a spin the SR20 and SR22 are virtually impossible to recover, according to the test pilots. :

You have quoted some one here as if it is fact, Just wondered who because it is totally inaccurate?

No I have never spun a Cirrus or any other aircraft, the Cirrus was extensively spin tested to meet european standards and is it it one of the misquoted old wife's tales that it will not recover from a spin.

[Big Pistons Forever]

My 2 cents

-I have little respect for those who imply that "real" pilots don't pull the chute and instead should do some hero piloting shy*te to safely land the plane. I find it troubling that these people seem to think that death for not only the pilot, but also his/her unfortunate passengers, is an acceptable result for a pilot making a some bad decisions and/or demonstrating a skill deficit. There absolutely have been some instances where the chute saved the pilot from themselves, but the bottom line is in virtually every case the pilot and the passengers walked away. GA has enough fatal accidents already and the Cirrus parachute system has demonstrably and conclusively saved lives.

-The problem with the Cirrus is that after people spend a half a million plus dollars on their airplane they want to use it to get from A to B all the time, not just the good weather days. While Cirrus and COPA have worked hard to improve the training of Cirrus pilots the fact remains the PPL course and the FAA PPL IR doesn't do a very good job of preparing one for real world A to B flying in a technologically complex aircraft. Effectively using the fitted advanced Avionics in this aircraft also requires strong system knowledge and a very disciplined SOP driven methodology. Flight training in general is still stuck in the 1950's and needs to get with the program.

[goldeneaglepilot]

007 - Sadly I think there are hints within your posts of a lack of understanding of the issues with respect to the Cirrus. Without doubt its a great aeroplane, its fast, flies great and certainly does the job incredibly well. However it does require a different approach to its operation than say a typical Arrow or Rockwell Commander. This is due to its slippery nature, the control feedback and its integrated systems.

You seem to be under the impression that its spin charecteristics are typical of GA aircraft and are fully certified within EASA. They are not, a quick study of the type approval draws attention to some special conditions with regards spinning.

http://www.easa.europa.eu/certificat...3-30012012.pdf

You asked about my quote, put the text of my quote into Goggle and you will find the full article.

What BPA said is a very good summary of the BRS system and its advantadges, however one does have to ask if it lulls some pilots into taking to the air in conditions that they would not have considered in an aircraft not equipped with the BRS.

With respect to the spin, its a recognised problem that if you slow down, turn sharply and push the Cirrus it will bite you, people have died because of exactly that. It's an aircraft that inspires confidence due to having the BRS fitted, however does it inspire too much confidence that it will get you out of every adverse situation?

It was interesting reading the comments of 007 regarding the listed failiure situations and in which ones he would have pulled the handle.

[007helicopter]

007 - Sadly I think there are hints within your posts of a lack of understanding of the issues with respect to the Cirrus. Without doubt its a great aeroplane, its fast, flies great and certainly does the job incredibly well. However it does require a different approach to its operation than say a typical Arrow or Rockwell Commander. This is due to its slippery nature, the control feedback and its integrated systems.

GEP, what I took exception to was your inaccurate copy and paste of a statement that suggested the Cirrus was virtually impossible to recover from a spin, this I think was misleading and inaccurate and may have shown a certain lack of understanding on your own side.

I am not knowledgeable or experienced on spinning and should I or anyone else find themselves in a spin in a Cirrus then their piloting skills have already failed them and they are likely to be incompetent to recover, in this case I would recommend the chute as the best option.

Regarding my lack of understanding of issues with the Cirrus you are entitled to be sad about that, I am just a average PPL and Cirrus owner who takes a reasonable interest and care in trying to understand why people kill themselves in this and other aircraft and find strategies that work for me that reduce this risk.

With respect to the spin, its a recognised problem that if you slow down, turn sharply and push the Cirrus it will bite you, people have died because of exactly that. It's an aircraft that inspires confidence due to having the BRS fitted, however does it inspire too much confidence that it will get you out of every adverse situation?

Yes I could not agree more, as it will in many other aircraft types, the higher the performance generally the less forgiving to incorrect Pilot inputs. This in my observations is a factor in some Cirrus fatal's, typically in base to final turn at around 1000ft agl, the pilot has the wrong speeds, wrong inputs, stalls, spins and dies, the chute in this approach phase of flight is worthless.

[Rory Dixon]

GEP, you stated the following:

Once in a spin the SR20 and SR22 are virtually impossible to recover, according to the test pilots.

Yet, in the EASA certification a SR20 was spun 60 times, each time was recovered, not using a specific spin recovery device, but just control inputs.
Can you elucidate on this discrepancy?

[Rory Dixon]

GEP, another one:

With respect to the spin, its a recognised problem that if you slow down, turn sharply and push the Cirrus it will bite you, people have died because of exactly that.

Sure, but this is also true for many other planes. Why do you limit that to the Cirrus? What is it what you really want to say?