Cirrus SR22 Chute Pull - (Post landing Video) Birmingham Alabama 6th Oct 2012
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: uk
Age: 63
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cirrus SR22 Chute Pull - (Post landing Video) Birmingham Alabama 6th Oct 2012
Thankfully both passenger and pilot walked away, appears Pilot lost control in IMC on approach and elected to pull the chute, probably the most detailed video of a post chute pull.
Last edited by 007helicopter; 7th Oct 2012 at 09:58.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: uk
Age: 63
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airframe pretty well written off. Looks to have done the job as advertised.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SAYE
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BRS Parachutes
Wondering if the abnormally high number of Cirrus accidents (and/or airframe parachute deployments) is linked to the pilot’s resignation (attitude) when confronted to an abnormal situation. Because of the very availability of the parachute system (CAPS), the pilot seems to deploy it instead of dealing with the situation. Comments appreciated.
Wondering if the abnormally high number of Cirrus accidents (and/or airframe parachute deployments) is linked to the pilot’s resignation (attitude) when confronted to an abnormal situation. Because of the very availability of the parachute system (CAPS), the pilot seems to deploy it instead of dealing with the situation. Comments appreciated.
If you are genuinely interested in this question and not some troll just looking to stir the pot then I would suggest you use the search function as there have already been several long threads on this very subject
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cirrus interesting account
I think this is a very interesting first hand account of a recent chute deployment.
The purpose of the thread is not to rekindle the debate about chutes (albeit it probably will
) but to hear from a pilot who found himself in serious difficulties on an approach and who would almost certainly not be able to give this account were it not for the chute. In short its the sort of incident we never hear the pilot's side of.Its interesting to speculate what you might have done differently and at what point you would have decided to relinquish flying the aircraft and pull the chute.
As I said it might make the discussion more interesting if we try and avoid going over the usual chestnuts about whether the chute is a good thing and whether it encourages pilots to do something they wouldn't if it were not for the chute. Lets just take it as read the pilot got himself into the situation for whatever reason and the chute happened to enable him to survive a pretty harsh lesson.
Last edited by Fuji Abound; 10th Oct 2012 at 13:36.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only thing I can get from that is if you not a competent instrument pilot get a cirrus and you might live to tell the tale.
Personally I would have continued down the ILS or whatever approach I was cleared for and landed. 700ft cloud base and no RVR's thats doing a NDB approach for ****s and giggles territory.
Personally I would have continued down the ILS or whatever approach I was cleared for and landed. 700ft cloud base and no RVR's thats doing a NDB approach for ****s and giggles territory.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad Jock
Listening to that report I do not know what to say. Fuji and others have convinced me about the benefits of the chute and I am all for this as the way ahead in the future of other SEPs.
Listening to the report I must admit on thinking what on earth was this guy doing flying approaches as he was a totally incapable instrument pilot who wrecked an aircraft due to his inabilities.
No wonder his girlfriend got a commercial back as I doubt she will ever set foot in an aircraft with this pilot again!
A bit like a second engine on a twin the chute gives options and is an excellent addition to safety for the pilot who respects that and uses it as a back up to his skills.
This is worrying as it shows a poor and incapable instrument pilot who should not have been flying in conditions he was not up to!
How much the chute lead him to fly in conditions he was not up to ????
I have my suspicions ?
Regardless thankfully for the chute they survived but there are some hard lessons to be learnt and some big cautions in false security that the chute may bring! If having it there encourages pilots to fly in conditions they or the aircraft are not up to then its a worrying addition.
That pilot was not up to a fairly easy approach and cloudbase.
One good thing he was humble about it so lets hope he gets some proper training and competence before heading off into the clouds again.
Pace
Listening to that report I do not know what to say. Fuji and others have convinced me about the benefits of the chute and I am all for this as the way ahead in the future of other SEPs.
Listening to the report I must admit on thinking what on earth was this guy doing flying approaches as he was a totally incapable instrument pilot who wrecked an aircraft due to his inabilities.
No wonder his girlfriend got a commercial back as I doubt she will ever set foot in an aircraft with this pilot again!
A bit like a second engine on a twin the chute gives options and is an excellent addition to safety for the pilot who respects that and uses it as a back up to his skills.
This is worrying as it shows a poor and incapable instrument pilot who should not have been flying in conditions he was not up to!
How much the chute lead him to fly in conditions he was not up to ????
I have my suspicions ?
Regardless thankfully for the chute they survived but there are some hard lessons to be learnt and some big cautions in false security that the chute may bring! If having it there encourages pilots to fly in conditions they or the aircraft are not up to then its a worrying addition.
That pilot was not up to a fairly easy approach and cloudbase.
One good thing he was humble about it so lets hope he gets some proper training and competence before heading off into the clouds again.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 10th Oct 2012 at 14:43.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point of the post was more to drive at what a VFR only pilot might have done in these circumstances given the other equipment available to him and at what point he would have been "right" to bail out. Also I think the recording is an interesting insight into how quickly things can go wrong for any pilot straying into conditions beyond his ability. I get the impression its fair to say the pilot was inexperienced - he says he had been flying for 10 years and had had an engine quit on him and obviously pulled off a successful forced landing.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Neither could I Contact.
Pace I wasn't having a go at the chute or having the chute or even using it. More of WTF was he doing in that bit of sky in the first place with or without a chute.
Pace I wasn't having a go at the chute or having the chute or even using it. More of WTF was he doing in that bit of sky in the first place with or without a chute.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I very much doubt that a chute would lul a VFR only pilot to fly an approach in instrument conditions.
I could imagine that a highly automated aircraft with a full 3 axis autopilot and large glass screen avionics could "encourage" a VFR only pilot to let the aircraft (autopilot) fly the IFR stuff while they just watched ready to take over when they became VFR again, but the chute would seem a misnomer to me.
I could imagine that a highly automated aircraft with a full 3 axis autopilot and large glass screen avionics could "encourage" a VFR only pilot to let the aircraft (autopilot) fly the IFR stuff while they just watched ready to take over when they became VFR again, but the chute would seem a misnomer to me.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The interviewer made a comment at the end that two blocks away there was an area full of kids skate boarding obviously implying that it was lucky they came down where they did.
The implications are that pulling the chute over built up areas may one day bring about an aircraft landing under the chute on top of people or cars and the bad press that will bring the chute.
playing it back it is unclear whether the pilot was on an instrument approach or flying VMC on top expecting a 2000 foot cloud base when it turned out to be 700 feet.
Either way one has to question the pilot as he was obviously in cloud without the skills to be there.
That brings the concern that while the chute is a wonderful thing the down side is that it may give a false sense of security which encourages pilots to fly out of their abilities at night or in weather which itself creates accidents which would not occur through caution in conventional aircraft!
Fuji I am not attacking the chute as you have convinced me of its worth even for SOME engine failures but I still have concerns on the false sense of security angle which this may imply! As well as training and education which maybe required into the possible results of the chute in potentially dangerous locations not just to people on the ground but to pilots too.
Further thinking and training needs to be addressed to avoid that pitfall.
Pace
The implications are that pulling the chute over built up areas may one day bring about an aircraft landing under the chute on top of people or cars and the bad press that will bring the chute.
playing it back it is unclear whether the pilot was on an instrument approach or flying VMC on top expecting a 2000 foot cloud base when it turned out to be 700 feet.
Either way one has to question the pilot as he was obviously in cloud without the skills to be there.
That brings the concern that while the chute is a wonderful thing the down side is that it may give a false sense of security which encourages pilots to fly out of their abilities at night or in weather which itself creates accidents which would not occur through caution in conventional aircraft!
Fuji I am not attacking the chute as you have convinced me of its worth even for SOME engine failures but I still have concerns on the false sense of security angle which this may imply! As well as training and education which maybe required into the possible results of the chute in potentially dangerous locations not just to people on the ground but to pilots too.
Further thinking and training needs to be addressed to avoid that pitfall.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 10th Oct 2012 at 15:50.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if he had that and had it hooked in why did he loose controls with what appears to be a case of the leans.
I was making a more general point.
As a VFR only pilot I could not see myself being even remotely tempted to make an IFR approach because I could pull the chute if it went wrong. After all if it all goes wrong I'm going to be very close to the ground and I'm going to have an aircraft which is written off at best.
On the other hand if I figured the autopilot could fly me to 200ft on an ILS and the cloud base was 700ft, and the only thing I had to worry about was an autopilot failure in the few minutes it takes to make the approach, I could see how that might be tempting. I wouldn't do it, but I could see how someone would be tempted and I have a feeling that a fair amount of that might go on. No real evidence, just a feeling from some of the accident reports that I've read.
Last edited by dublinpilot; 10th Oct 2012 at 15:56.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DublinPilot
I can see where a not proficient instrument pilot knowing he has a chute might push on into conditions which are worse than his abilities thinking he has a way out if it all goes pear shaped.
In the same way as a cautious night SEP pilot I would be more inclined to fly at night simply through the fact that the chute was there! Without any shadow of a doubt I would fly more at night with the chute rather than in a conventional aircraft!
That is not against the Cirrus or the chute just stating a fact which we all need to be aware of.
Accidents will increase because of the chute while lives will be saved because of the chute!
Pace
I can see where a not proficient instrument pilot knowing he has a chute might push on into conditions which are worse than his abilities thinking he has a way out if it all goes pear shaped.
In the same way as a cautious night SEP pilot I would be more inclined to fly at night simply through the fact that the chute was there! Without any shadow of a doubt I would fly more at night with the chute rather than in a conventional aircraft!
That is not against the Cirrus or the chute just stating a fact which we all need to be aware of.
Accidents will increase because of the chute while lives will be saved because of the chute!
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 10th Oct 2012 at 16:03.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was there not another Cirrus, accident, then discussion on Pprune, about the guy on the night flight to Jersey, who untimately went in, It was interesting because if I recollect, the discussion centered on the Cirrus IR automation/GPS coupling, with of course the chute, if even all of that went pear shaped?? This gave rise to a general discussion on pilots taking on flights/situations. where they were not competent, but had acres of automation. perceived safety gadgets?
This then led to an unsafe, wrong mindset, particularly in Cirrus aircraft. specifically because of the chute?
This then led to an unsafe, wrong mindset, particularly in Cirrus aircraft. specifically because of the chute?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dubin to be fair this pushing it into IMC with an autopilot has been around for years and has a fairly unhealthy death toll to prove its been happening as well.
The chute I don't think will have changed this much apart from the people are around afterwards to tell the tale.
The chute I don't think will have changed this much apart from the people are around afterwards to tell the tale.
Last edited by mad_jock; 10th Oct 2012 at 16:43.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I can see how the chute might affect the decision making for night flight and vfr on top. Both of those are about taking a relatively low risk but serious consequences activity, and for the first time giving you a way out.
It would probably have a serious affect on my decision making in those circumstances too.
Can't see it encouraging me to hand fly an IFR approach though.
It would probably have a serious affect on my decision making in those circumstances too.
Can't see it encouraging me to hand fly an IFR approach though.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dublin Pilot
As stated by others we are not aware whether this pilot was IR rated or whether he was indeed a pilot fly VFR on top who expected to break cloud at 2000 feet and found infact that the cloud was at 700 feet.
In that situation he should have asked for help from ATC and been vectored to VMC conditions.
Instead he appeared to try to break cloud was unable to fly a runway heading on a go around and then lost control attempting a turn under ATC instructions!
Whatever he did not have the abilities to be where he was and by the looks of things did not get TAFS or ignored them.
Had he been flying a 172 would this have happened or worse??
The Cirrus does have a very sharp roll rate I timed it as the same as a Firefly aerobatic machine so it would be easy to overcontrol in roll in cloud especially for an inexperienced instrument pilot.
He would have fared better engaging the autopilot and getting ATC help.
Pace
As stated by others we are not aware whether this pilot was IR rated or whether he was indeed a pilot fly VFR on top who expected to break cloud at 2000 feet and found infact that the cloud was at 700 feet.
In that situation he should have asked for help from ATC and been vectored to VMC conditions.
Instead he appeared to try to break cloud was unable to fly a runway heading on a go around and then lost control attempting a turn under ATC instructions!
Whatever he did not have the abilities to be where he was and by the looks of things did not get TAFS or ignored them.
Had he been flying a 172 would this have happened or worse??
The Cirrus does have a very sharp roll rate I timed it as the same as a Firefly aerobatic machine so it would be easy to overcontrol in roll in cloud especially for an inexperienced instrument pilot.
He would have fared better engaging the autopilot and getting ATC help.
Pace