Cirrus down with parachute East Texas

Stephen Shore

Stephen Shore

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Sep 30, 2017
Messages
425
Location
Longview, TX
Display Name
Display name:
sshore
Happened yesterday. IFR conditions - ceilings at Gladewater 07F were at 800-1500' most of the day.

It sounds like he floated down OK but then the wind caught the chute and drug the airplane for quite a distance until it impacted a fairly large tree in a stand of timber.

https://www.news-journal.com/news/c...cle_f03654ee-003c-5e21-9242-dd692dd91bfc.html

An obvious starting point in the debate if he would have been better off gliding down to an off field landing or pulling the chute. The IFR conditions make it a tough choice in my opinion, but I am sure that for alot on this forum there will not be a hard choice - but an obvious one, whatever that might be.
 
No debate. If you’re following the training, you pull the chute. IFR or VFR doesn’t matter. When you apply discretion to what you were taught, you increase the house’s odds.
 
My first instinct was to think "My God there's nothing but houses, businesses, and a school there."

But we're not talking about the ETX VOR :D
 
And with 800'-1500' ceilings, you would be very limited as to your landing spot.

I guess if the minimum pull altitude is 1,000' AGL, then you might be able to get low enough for a look.
 
Stephen Shore said:
...An obvious starting point in the debate if he would have been better off gliding down to an off field landing or pulling the chute...
Click to expand...

Seriously, is this even a debate any more?
Any objective review of the Cirrus fatal accident statistics over time makes the answer abundantly clear.

Let's move on and discuss more important stuff, like why Textron has all but abandoned supporting piston aircraft, or why Piper still makes planes that the wings fall off, or why Mooneys are better than Bonanzas (but high wings beat them both). :D
 
donjohnston said:
And with 800'-1500' ceilings, you would be very limited as to your landing spot.

I guess if the minimum pull altitude is 1,000' AGL, then you might be able to get low enough for a look.
Click to expand...

There really is no minimum pull, if you are spinning in, pull. But generally minimum recommended is 400 to 600 depending on model. In a pull situation you should make the decision by 1,000 minimum if you have the choice.
 
FastEddieB said:
I believe this pull was at about 500’ and the plane had stabilized under the chute just seconds before impact.
Click to expand...

Dang, that's a low pull. Better lucky than good I guess. Until those line cutters level the airplane, I'd rather dead stick it than touch down and eat the engine and my kneecaps. CAPS wasn't meant to touch down engine first. Though that discussion is embedded in the altitude limitations they publish, I don't think Cirrus stresses that part about the riser sequence enough, and it's a game changer imo in terms of the decision matrix to pull below 1k AGL. Under stress, people are terrible at gauging AGL altitude, especially without a radar altimeter.

But again, better lucky than good, and better chute than no chute when that toYs-r-uS cylinders powerplant gives you the finger. Glad to hear these folks walked away from it.
 
What is the failure rate of the Continental engines in Cirrus? It may be a faulty perception on my part, but it just seems like an inordinate number of engine failures with the SR22s, or maybe they are just more publicized?
 
Probably the right call; you can dead stick a 172 on a boat ramp and walk away. But popping out that low in an airplane without that sort of very short field capability. . .
 
Stephen Shore said:
What is the failure rate of the Continental engines in Cirrus? It may be a faulty perception on my part, but it just seems like an inordinate number of engine failures with the SR22s, or maybe they are just more publicized?
Click to expand...
Because they fly more. A lot more.

Tim

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk
 
Stephen Shore said:
What is the failure rate of the Continental engines in Cirrus? It may be a faulty perception on my part, but it just seems like an inordinate number of engine failures with the SR22s, or maybe they are just more publicized?
Click to expand...

I don’t know anything about this accident but a majority of the engine failures that occur within a few miles of the arrival airport are fuel related.
 
Stephen Shore said:
What is the failure rate of the Continental engines in Cirrus? It may be a faulty perception on my part, but it just seems like an inordinate number of engine failures with the SR22s, or maybe they are just more publicized?
Click to expand...
I’m actually very interested to know the numbers on this as well. As important, what exactly is failing and is there a pattern to a certain part failing or is it caused by “operator error” ?
 
My friend has a Cirrus and says the new safety training in the event of engine failure or something similar it to use the chute unless you have a runway available, no trying to land in a field or on a road. I think Cirrus is mostly right about this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top