Pilot pulls 'cute in MD

drgwentzel

drgwentzel

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Sep 7, 2008
Messages
287
Location
NJ
Display Name
Display name:
Kobra
Flyers,

Did you read AOPA's ePilot's story "Pilot Pulls Chute" today? http://www.aopa.org:80/aircraft/articles/2009/090326md.html?WT.mc_id=090327epilot&WT.mc_sect=tts

This is the second story of a pilot pulling the ballistic parachute that I
think was a hasty discussion. The first was the gentleman that pulled the 'chute over the Hudson and now the recently reported incident over MD by Verle Wiita.

I know...I also hate Monday morning quarterbacking just as much as the next guy and I know it wasn't my toosh in the hot-seat in IMC with a major distraction and adrenaline pumping. As some of you read my story in this group on my icing encounter I am the last person to second guess anyones descisions.

But what I don't understand is that he was below the clouds with an active autopilot in control of his airplane's attitude. He also stated he was afraid of a stall, but why was he so slow? Does the POH in a Cirrus SR22 require 100 KIAS if a door pops open? If not, why couldn't he just fly faster? He also stated that he didn't know where the airport was, that he was low, afraid of obstacles and was near the Washington FRZ. But doesn't the Cirrus SR22 have an impressive G1000 glass cockpit with moving map, terrain,
obstacles and TRF's clearly displayed on the large MFD? I don't understand
his lack of situational awareness in regard to his location. He also stated
that although he engaged the "Leveler" feature he didn't feel he had time for it work? Exactly how long does the "Leveler Button" take to function? I could understand this whole confused situation if he was in a Cessna 152
with steam gauges and only a single VOR for navigation.

I agree that you should Aviate, Navigate and Communicate in that order. But more practically I think we should Inhalate, Exhalate, Aviate, Navigate and Communicate.

Gene - PS...I KNOW I'M THE LAST PERSON TO JUDGE...I JUST WANT THE GROUP'S OPINION AND TO UNDERSTAND THIS.
 
I guess what's not clear to me is how he entered something close to an unusual attitude. I wouldn't think a popped cabin door would cause that. I know it doesn't in a C-172 or C-182, maybe a Cirrus is different?

I'd like to think if I found myself flying slow to the point of being concerned about a stall, I'd lower the nose then add power before worrying about engaging the AP.


Trapper John
 
Trapper John said:
I guess what's not clear to me is how he entered something close to an unusual attitude. I wouldn't think a popped cabin door would cause that. I know it doesn't in a C-172 or C-182, maybe a Cirrus is different?...
Click to expand...

From my experience in a Piper I can tell you that there is a panic while you wonder why you're getting left rudder when you aren't giving it left rudder. A control failure is scary. I can imagine you can get cross controlled into the slip from hell if the door is bigger and you counter with aileron.
 
Note that like the story of a baseball player we all know, this guy choose to destroy his plane rather than risk an airspace intrusion. Airspace is not granite.
 
Sounds like he lost it in the clouds, managed to get into the clear, didn't know quite what to do and just reacted.

But I wasn't there, so...
 
I've had a door pop open before. Its loud and, in the winter, cold. But if one is going to fly fast, high performance airplanes in the clouds there is a need for proficiency in executing emergency procedures.
 
Well, I'm not gong to be so charitable. I'm 54 years old and have a LOT of flying under my belt. Asia, North Pacific, CONUS, etc. etc.

If he has to pull the chute for that conditon, his Pilot certificate needs to be "limited to operation of BRS equipped aircraft".

Once he lost it, Okay, pull it. I mean his ship has not one but TWO easy buttons, the big blue one and the RED T-handled one.

I've had more than doors come open in IMC and you figure it out. You stay cool. Or you pull the handle and.....sigh.
 
drgwentzel said:
I know...I also hate Monday morning quarterbacking just as much as the next guy
Click to expand...
Sounds like the guy himself is doing some Monday morning quarterbacking.
article said:
“I didn’t have any second thoughts when I did it. But since then, I’ve had all kinds of second thoughts.
Click to expand...
At least he able to have second thoughts. Who knows what would have happened if he had been in an airplane without a chute. Maybe he would have been able to recover from his initial panic like he should have, but maybe not. More than one person has crashed their plane and died because of an open door.
 
I understand the logic behind the leveler and the chute, but this is yet another case where it seems those safety devices discouraged thinking things through.
And I'd love to know how many of those who've activated their BRS chose their plane over some other because of that feature... then let their emergency skills atrophy.
 
He's actually lucky the chute had time to fully deploy if he was as low as the article makes it sound... Does the Cirrus POH have a minimum altitude for chute deployment?
 
Many years ago the US Navy had Douglas A-3 Skywarriors and the Air Force had RB-66 "Destroyers" which were essentially the same airplanes except for a few differences required by each branch of the service.

The A-3's didn't have ejection seats, the RB-66's did. After a few years of operation a study was done and found out that the loss rate for the RB-66 against the A-3 was like 4 to 1. The study also concluded that the reason for the higher loss of the RB-66's was in fact the use of the ejection seat. When the stuff hit the fan, the Air Force guys pulled the handle and punched out, whereas the Navy guys rode it out and brought it back home.

I've often wondered if the addition of a Ballistic Chute would give way to pilots just pulling the handle in any uncomfortable situation.
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
Well, I'm not gong to be so charitable. I'm 54 years old and have a LOT of flying under my belt. Asia, North Pacific, CONUS, etc. etc.

If he has to pull the chute for that conditon, his Pilot certificate needs to be "limited to operation of BRS equipped aircraft".

Once he lost it, Okay, pull it. I mean his ship has not one but TWO easy buttons, the big blue one and the RED T-handled one.

I've had more than doors come open in IMC and you figure it out. You stay cool. Or you pull the handle and.....sigh.
Click to expand...

64 years old with IR, 36x hours and it was his SECOND Cirrus.

I have more than 500 and no IR. :dunno:
 
kc310r said:
I've had a door pop open before. Its loud and, in the winter, cold. But if one is going to fly fast, high performance airplanes in the clouds there is a need for proficiency in executing emergency procedures.
Click to expand...

Training for the popped open door scenario is common regardless of aircraft speed, if the aircraft itself is appropriate for it. It's so easy for a CFI to set it up during a lesson or two, and such a common occurance, why not?
 
Earlier today on another thread I lamented that too many Cirrus pilots have died because they didn't pull. So now this thread is "damning with faint praise" and questioning the pilot's decision to pull since he did it (in their minds as reflected by the snide comments) in circumstances they could have stepped up and handled.

So where is the acceptable middle ground? Should the chute manual be revised to "here's the range where you can pull it without being thought of as a chickensiht or getting killed?"
 
I'm with Wayne. If in doubt, pull the handle. You'll have all the time in the world to second guess yourself.

Whether or not it should have been in doubt is up for debate, but as the PIC he made made a decision that ensured his life. I can't look down on that too much.
 
bbchien said:
Well, I'm not gong to be so charitable. I'm 54 years old and have a LOT of flying under my belt. Asia, North Pacific, CONUS, etc. etc.

If he has to pull the chute for that conditon, his Pilot certificate needs to be "limited to operation of BRS equipped aircraft".
Click to expand...
Thanks Bruce, that's exactly what I was going to say.

Based on what we know, this guy wasn't proficient enough to be flying an airplane. There wasn't a significant weather issue, nothing wrong with the airplane, no medical problem - there shouldn't be a need to destroy the plane and convert a perfectly routine situation into an emergency that could potentially be deadly. Scary...and his reasons? "I was close to the FRZ"? I've seen the FRZ on the G1000 (I imagine it's similar on the Avidyne), and it's a big circle that you can't possibly miss. Wow.

And unlike others, I do think this guy can be faulted for his actions. He already put his life in great jeopardy by flying at all. Pulling the chute doesn't ensure a survivable landing. Given that he was unable to be PIC of an aircraft, it was probably his only way out, but it gives the rest of us a bad name. Quite frankly, if I, as a non-pilot, heard about stuff like this, it would make me reconsider getting into a private airplane.

-Felix
 
Last edited:
To me, it sounds that we had a situation where there was too much airplane for too little pilot skills. Fortunately, there was BRS so he did not become a fatality in what would be a recoverable situation for a better trained pilot. I wonder if the CFI mills have some culpability in all of this. When so many CFIs barely have experience they are in a position of teaching people who are likely to get into situation that are beyond what they have learned. The grizzled, seasoned old CFI is a rarer and rarer commodity. We have all seen the CFI-I who has less than 5 hours actual teaching instruments and know of what I speak.

Some of the CFIs on this board have recently talked about how they go above and beyond the call of duty to get students into experiecne situations. Those types of CFIs are the exception not the rule. I know from my own training that the newer CFIs would consider that type of training outside of their own comfort area and would not fly in MVFR and NEVER actual in a single engine aircraft. That boggled my mind when a I heard a CFI tell me that once.

Pilots also to take some of the blame too. We as a society have taken an attitude of hurrying up and not putting in the time to master something. The minimums are the requirements and that is good enough, is a feeling that many people have. Much to their chagrin when something unusual happens. Their only recourse maybe to 'pull the chute'.
 
Last edited:
Rotor&Wing said:
I've often wondered if the addition of a Ballistic Chute would give way to pilots just pulling the handle in any uncomfortable situation.
Click to expand...
And in today's environment the uncomfortable situation may be financial. Pulling the 'chute is a good way to get a check from the insurance company.

Note please that I know nothing of the existing situation, and I am not implying that this pilot did anything unethical. I'm just saying there may be an incentive for some to reach for the big red handle early in this economy.

-Skip
 
Skip Miller said:
And in today's environment the uncomfortable situation may be financial. Pulling the 'chute is a good way to get a check from the insurance company.

Note please that I know nothing of the existing situation, and I am not implying that this pilot did anything unethical. I'm just saying there may be an incentive for some to reach for the big red handle early in this economy.

-Skip
Click to expand...
A literal golden parachute!
 
smigaldi said:
To me, it sounds that we had a situation where there was too much airplane for too little pilot skills. Fortunately, there was BRS so he did not become a fatality in what would be a recoverable situation for a better trained pilot. I wonder if the CFI mills have some culpability in all of this. When so many CFIs barely have experience they are in a position of teaching people who are likely to get into situation that are beyond what they have learned. The grizzled, seasoned old CFI is a rarer and rarer commodity. We have all seen the CFI-I who has less than 5 hours actual teaching instruments and know of what I speak.
Click to expand...

Yea, but I bet this Cirrus pilot had a real cool 25 page checklist and knew all his "call outs" by heart.........:rolleyes:
 
The guy's alive.

The airplane's destroyed.

He'll buy another airplane.

Should he re-think his personal minimums?

Duh.

I'd like to know if he was a product of the Cirrus zero to IFR hero program.
 
Life saving features are great.

Having life-saving features and deciding that means that you can go off and do stupid things because the life-saving features will save you is not.

Learn to fly the plane. I've had doors pop open on me, no big deal. It's a slight distraction, but shouldn't be a major one. If it is, you're not following the rule of aviate first. I've had them pop open on the Archer, Aztec, and Mooney. In the Archer and Mooney it was due to me not closing them properly (the Mooney's door has a really hard latch, and on the Archer I just screwed up) and on the Aztec it was due to the CFI not closing the door properly (oops). In all three cases, it was not a big deal.

Sounds to me like the guy was not in a situation to be flying. I'm glad he walked away and nobody was hurt, that is what's most important, but this sounds closer to someone with more plane than abilities.
 
Hi all,
Well first off, as is probably obvious, I am new to the group, so I don't want to start out by stepping on any toe's in this discussion.
I am not about to second guess anyone's decision. I wasn't there, and he survived to fly another day. That said I agree with many of the comments about comfort factor and that given the scenario in the story his reaction does seem a little quick. I agree this article makes it sound like he made way too much of the door, I have never had an airplane fall out of the sky or become uncontrollable as the result of a door coming open (though I would admit to never having flown a Cirrus either).
My real question is how much do the insurance rates of the Cirrus fleet go up after a few ~3-400k airplanes are destroyed in this manner?
From the threads I have read so far this looks like an interesting place to learn a lot from everyone and be entertained in the process.
~Jon
 
dmccormack said:
The guy's alive.

The airplane's destroyed.

He'll buy another airplane.
Click to expand...

Agreed, all of these are the most important items.

Should he re-think his personal minimums?

Duh.

I'd like to know if he was a product of the Cirrus zero to IFR hero program.
Click to expand...

At 320 hours total time and an instrument rating he should be better than that, even if he was a product of the Cirrus program. I'm still only at 290 and my commercial/instrument. Sure, I've had disorientation just like the rest of us, and dealt with it. Keep on repeating to yourself: "Trust thine instruments... Cross check... Trust thine instruments..." :)
 
WingNut42 said:
Hi all,
Well first off, as is probably obvious, I am new to the group, so I don't want to start out by stepping on any toe's in this discussion.
Click to expand...

Hi Jon, welcome to PoA!

I am not about to second guess anyone's decision. I wasn't there, and he survived to fly another day. That said I agree with many of the comments about comfort factor and that given the scenario in the story his reaction does seem a little quick. I agree this article makes it sound like he made way too much of the door, I have never had an airplane fall out of the sky or become uncontrollable as the result of a door coming open (though I would admit to never having flown a Cirrus either).
Click to expand...

Seems like a good assessment.

My real question is how much do the insurance rates of the Cirrus fleet go up after a few ~3-400k airplanes are destroyed in this manner?
Click to expand...

Good question.

From the threads I have read so far this looks like an interesting place to learn a lot from everyone and be entertained in the process.
~Jon
Click to expand...

Another good assessment. :)
 
WingNut42 said:
From the threads I have read so far this looks like an interesting place to learn a lot from everyone and be entertained in the process.
~Jon
Click to expand...
Welcome Jon!

Cool to have another Midwestern flyer on the boards. Several PoAers in your neck of the woods. I am just over the boarder in FIB land. So hopefully you'll also get to hang out with us during our numerous flyins and get togethers.
 
I'm not going to second-guess the guy, either. I wouldn't be surprised if the insurance company made him get some additional training before insuring him again, though...

A door opening is not a benign event in every aircraft. The Zodiac will fly if the canopy pops open, but it takes full power to maintain a barely flying airspeed. It cannot be closed in flight, as one CFI and the guy he was checking out discovered. The Zodiac checklist contains two separate "CANOPY - CLOSED" items, one on the pretaxi list and one on the runup list, and I visually confirm the canopy latches are fully engaged at both checks.
 
I guess it depends on what aircraft. I've had doors pop open on takeoff in both Cessnas and Pipers. No big deal. On Cessnas it was easy to just close the door. In the Cherokee, just stay in the pattern, land and close the door. In my Tiger, its never happened as the sliding canopy is conducive to being secured, but can also be opened in flight.

I'm not going to second guess they guy either, but in my experience a door ajar is a NON-emergency.
 
Like most accidents, I suppose any one of these wasn't the issue, it was the whole lot put together that became overwhelming.
 
While anyone who can carry on a conversation and drive can be taught to fly an airplane, not everyone who flies can or should be flying instruments.

Its takes self-discipline and a commitment to proficiency that goes beyond minimal requirements.
 
Ron Levy said:
As I read his own telling, he never entered the clouds.
Click to expand...

“I had just taken off (from GAI) and I was entering the clouds when the (passenger) door popped open. It was a major distraction…I was hand-flying and hadn’t engaged the autopilot. I decided that I should return and land and shut the door, and I turned back to the airport.
“I hadn’t yet contacted Potomac Approach.
“The airplane then went through some unusual attitudes, climbing and descending. I got control of the airplane and, below the clouds, turned (back) toward the airport.
Click to expand...

I took that to mean that he lost it in the couds. But I could be wrong.
 
I bet Cirrus hull insurance is going to get really expensive. Too easy to pull the 'chute and save your butt while wrecking the airplane.

I can't understand why the airplane was allowed certification while having handling problems that demands the presence of a chute. Form over function, again?

Dan
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
I took that to mean that he lost it in the couds. But I could be wrong.
Click to expand...


"Just entering" would seem to indicate that he did indeed encounter IMC however briefly. Without further info it appears to me that the issue wasn't so much spatial disorientation but rather aircraft control as the statement describes some serious control issues below the clouds on the way back to the airport. That's also consistent with the decision to pull the chute after exiting the clouds. What I don't understand is why he had so much trouble flying the airplane in at least marginal VMC, but if his statements are literally true, pulling the chute was probably the "right" choice and certainly the safest. Just imagine that you're close to the ground with a cloud deck just above and struggling with an airplane that's barely if at all controllable. That's the scenario the pilot described. Assuming it's truthful I think I'd have made the same choice given the BRS option.
 
Dan Thomas said:
I bet Cirrus hull insurance is going to get really expensive. Too easy to pull the 'chute and save your butt while wrecking the airplane.
Click to expand...

Depends on whether the insurance company thinks it's cheaper to pay for replacement airplanes or replacement people. You can build a LOT of Cirruses for the cost of one personal injury lawsuit, especially when you consider that the scrap value of the airframe is still going to be pretty high when the plane descends by 'chute.

What would be the legal expenses *alone* in a Cory-Lidle-like wrongful death suit?

Dan Thomas said:
I can't understand why the airplane was allowed certification while having handling problems that demands the presence of a chute. Form over function, again?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the situation is the other way around: The BRS wasn't added in response to a problem, Cirrus installed it as a way to meet FAR 23.221 (the Spin requirement) at lower cost. 23.221 requires:

- That the aircraft be able to recover from a spin in no more than one additional turn
- There are no unusual control forces that would affect recovery
- That recovery does not exceed either VNE or the airframe load limit
- That there be no way for the pilot to enter an *unrecoverable* spin

Cirrus convinced the FAA that a Cirrus with a BRS meets the requirements. Installing a chute bypassed a LOT of otherwise-required flight testing, and quite possibly avoided disruptions in the flight test program like Cessna is seeing with the Skycatcher..

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
Depends on whether the insurance company thinks it's cheaper to pay for replacement airplanes or replacement people. You can build a LOT of Cirruses for the cost of one personal injury lawsuit, especially when you consider that the scrap value of the airframe is still going to be pretty high when the plane descends by 'chute.

What would be the legal expenses *alone* in a Cory-Lidle-like wrongful death suit?



My understanding is that the situation is the other way around: The BRS wasn't added in response to a problem, Cirrus installed it as a way to meet FAR 23.221 (the Spin requirement) at lower cost. 23.221 requires:

- That the aircraft be able to recover from a spin in no more than one additional turn
- There are no unusual control forces that would affect recovery
- That recovery does not exceed either VNE or the airframe load limit
- That there be no way for the pilot to enter an *unrecoverable* spin

Cirrus convinced the FAA that a Cirrus with a BRS meets the requirements. Installing a chute bypassed a LOT of otherwise-required flight testing, and quite possibly avoided disruptions in the flight test program like Cessna is seeing with the Skycatcher..

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain the decision to include the BRS chute was made long before the issue of spin recovery and AFaIK the requirements you gave are for aircraft that are certified for spinning. The requirements for a normal category airplane that's not certified for intentional spins only require that recovery is possible from an incipient spin.

The Klapmier brothers have stated before that when they decided to abandon the VK30(?) experimental design and come up with a certified product that they had already concluded that BRS was something they wanted to have. It might be true that once that decision was made they went from there to the idea that the chute could be used to offset spin testing and compliance.
 
wanttaja said:
My understanding is that the situation is the other way around: The BRS wasn't added in response to a problem, Cirrus installed it as a way to meet FAR 23.221 (the Spin requirement) at lower cost. 23.221 requires:

- That the aircraft be able to recover from a spin in no more than one additional turn
- There are no unusual control forces that would affect recovery
- That recovery does not exceed either VNE or the airframe load limit
- That there be no way for the pilot to enter an *unrecoverable* spin

Cirrus convinced the FAA that a Cirrus with a BRS meets the requirements. Installing a chute bypassed a LOT of otherwise-required flight testing, and quite possibly avoided disruptions in the flight test program like Cessna is seeing with the Skycatcher..

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

Does the BRS deploy correctly when the airplane is in a fully developed spin?
 
Alan Klapmeier has publicly stated many times that the reason for the BRS chute on the Cirrus was rooted in a mid-air collision that he survived in the 80's. The pilot in the other airplane died.
 
tonycondon said:
Alan Klapmeier has publicly stated many times that the reason for the BRS chute on the Cirrus was rooted in a mid-air collision that he survived in the 80's. The pilot in the other airplane died.
Click to expand...


Now that's an indisputable reason to pull the 'chute!
Reminds me of this accident, where some guy ran into a tow rope. Forty lashes with a wet noodle for being so careless, but I don't blame him for deploying!! :yikes:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K0v9fGVs8M

But again, as with every other scenario, really, there is an error or errors in the chain of events leading to the situation. A pilot might be excused from blame in the event of a mechanical problem, but stuff like inadvertent flight into IMC or running out of go-juice, or even a mid-air... no.

But I guess it's not much different than an acro pilot wearing a personal 'chute... even pro airshow pilots in top-notch planes get themselves into situations where they have to exit in fight. They're not really thinking "This will save me where my own wits may fail me", even though that's exactly what it's for.

Still, personally, I'd be a whole lot more scared of riding a plane down under a canopy than flying to a airport with an open door!! Forward motion is decreased greatly, but 1000 fpm descent (or more) is nothing to sneeze at, especially when you have absolutely no lateral control, and might even be swinging when you hit.

The outcome will still be uncertain until after impact, just like hand-flown forced landings. Or landing at an airport with some weird problem, like a open door, or the top of one wing missing. :D

BRS has saved lives that may have otherwise been lost (it's a great idea essentially and very reliable), but people have died after deploying, when flying the plane might have still been an option.

Seems an odd decision to me, opting for the 'chute because of poor vis (?) and an open door. It'd take a midair or major structural problem to get me to pull the handle.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top