ytodd
Pre-takeoff checklist
http://www.pjstar.com/article/20150830/NEWS/150839985#loadComment
One survivor, looks like a Cirrus maybe. RIP
One survivor, looks like a Cirrus maybe. RIP
2 miles west of the departure airport - I suspect you are right. Looks like a nice field to make a survivable forced landing.....wonder if they would still be alive if they hadn't pulled the chute?May they rest in peace,looks like a cirrus,with chute deployment,may not have been high enough.
2 miles west of the departure airport - I suspect you are right. Looks like a nice field to make a survivable forced landing.....wonder if they would still be alive if they hadn't pulled the chute?
I'm not bad mouthing chutes, but the chute does take time to deploy and work for you. It is not a Martin Baker hot seat. If you are too low, you might be better off NOT pulling the chute.
2 miles west of the departure airport - I suspect you are right. Looks like a nice field to make a survivable forced landing.....wonder if they would still be alive if they hadn't pulled the chute?
I'm not bad mouthing chutes, but the chute does take time to deploy and work for you. It is not a Martin Baker hot seat. If you are too low, you might be better off NOT pulling the chute.
Chute pull parameters I used:
1. 0 to 500 agl = no pull
2. 500 to 1000 agl = maybe
3. 1000 and above = definitely
Chute deploys fast. Was in the chute simulator at Cirrus in Duluth and the chute does work and does save lives if a "macho" attitude does not exist.
For those who haven't seen it, here is the USCG video mentioned.No it doesn't. If you look at the Hawaii CAPS deployment fully supervised by USCG (the wet dream real-world scenario for free Cirrus marketing) you can assess really easy that it takes an entire 21 seconds for the risers to re-pitch the aircraft to it's "PLF" prescribed pitch attitude. 21 seconds is not a fast sequence. Between second 1 and second 20 the chute puts you in a steeply nose down attitude, a non-survivable one for front seaters as it has been demonstrated several times already. That's why you can't pull this thing low.
IF this accident was a case of too low to pull the chute, I wouldn't be surprised if after the lawyers are done, there is a mandatory placard with minimum chute altitudes placed on the panel.Kinda surprised there isn't software linked to annunciator that shows when chute is not recommended based on altitudes/attitudes etc.
No it doesn't. If you look at the Hawaii CAPS deployment fully supervised by USCG (the wet dream real-world scenario for free Cirrus marketing) you can assess really easy that it takes an entire 21 seconds for the risers to re-pitch the aircraft to it's "PLF" prescribed pitch attitude. 21 seconds is not a fast sequence. Between second 1 and second 20 the chute puts you in a steeply nose down attitude, a non-survivable one for front seaters as it has been demonstrated several times already. That's why you can't pull this thing low. Like fearless said, this ain't a MB zero-zero for the occupants. It's not a matter of being macho, it's a matter of fully understanding the equipment you got to work with. Those who hastily pull low in a panic, do not. This forced landing couldn't have happened over better terrain and weather conditions. Condolences to the survivors and family.
IF this accident was a case of too low to pull the chute, I wouldn't be surprised if after the lawyers are done, there is a mandatory placard with minimum chute altitudes placed on the panel.
True.A placard isn't idiot-proof enough (reference the landing gear selector lockouts, out of trim warning systems etc etc)
I believe the older Cirri (?) take significantly shorter amount of time. I think they extended the amount of time for the line cutters to work by 10 seconds with the newer generation models (G5).
I was told on our 2001 that there is a 8 second delay.
Man...if I ever have an engine out I'd like it to be over terrain like that. It certainly seems like a dead-stick would have been a great option there. I imagine split-second decision making in the cockpit had to be made and that many Cirrus owners have the chute option automatically drilled into their head.
RIP.
I flew over your land in a beautiful T210 and was glad to return to my "fly over country".
I think one thing that gets lost in these conversations about "shoulda-woulda" scenarios is real world response. Seriously, watch some of the similar real time videos online and try and put yourself in their boots in real time. See how quickly your choices narrow and the timer runs out. Just try it.
If you are in a real world scenario like that and - you're not a person that freezes up under severe duress - you are capable of acting. I wonder how would you really respond? I wonder if we'd be here talking about what you "shoulda" done.
1) How hard would it be NOT to pull a parachute that could save lives instead of the unknown ahead of you based on only your flying skill in that situation.
2) Add the fact that you have family on board, makes the choice even more difficult.
I say this to remind us that these things don't happen for us to judge, they happen so we can learn and evolve. Not so we can have more lawyers get paid and give the FAA more and more overreach.
The CAPS is a phenomenal technology that saves lives and gets better every time. Mr. Murray had a 50/50 decision and he made it. It saved one life, which is better than none. We don't know if the other choice would have saved anyone at all, or ended up in a fireball after a beautiful forced landing. Ya, everyone loves to forget the fire after some "off airport" ops. There ain't no ARF to come save your ass while you're knocked out in the dashboard dreaming about your beautiful field landing while you cook.
I thought landing in a soy bean field with fixed gear was a guaranteed very quick stop and noseover upset. Yes/No? If yes, the field wasn't a good option, either. Zoom climb, pull the red handle.
Chute pull parameters I used:
1. 0 to 500 agl = no pull
2. 500 to 1000 agl = maybe
3. 1000 and above = definitely
Chute deploys fast. Was in the chute simulator at Cirrus in Duluth and the chute does work and does save lives if a "macho" attitude does not exist.
You don't know how much I appreciate your words of wisdom here, and I sincerely hope everyone follows them.
This was my plane. Steve was my partner.
I didn't know him very well, it was a new venture for me and I'm not sure how long he owned this plane either.
Here's what I do know. Steve did not "freeze" up. I have heard a few things that I won't share right now that suggest he had limited control of the plane and therefore limited options. Based on what I think I know, I believe he chose the "best" one, which wasn't very good.
Does anyone know where I can check what the weather was yesterday at the time he departed?
You don't know how much I appreciate your words of wisdom here, and I sincerely hope everyone follows them.
This was my plane. Steve was my partner.
Does anyone know where I can check what the weather was yesterday at the time he departed?
Chute pull parameters I used:
1. 0 to 500 agl = no pull
2. 500 to 1000 agl = maybe
3. 1000 and above = definitely
Chute deploys fast. Was in the chute simulator at Cirrus in Duluth and the chute does work and does save lives if a "macho" attitude does not exist.
Or facing the fact that your $500,000 airplane will become instantly totalled and you may be able to save it otherwise.
It's only a plane, they can all be replaced. People can't.
I agree... my point is that when faced with an emergency situation, saving the plane, passengers, and avoiding collateral damage is what is running through your mind. If you think you can pull off the landing, why pull that chute? I would see it as a complete last resort which may or may not be too late when you arrive at that decision.
Do you know how many planes flip over and kill their occupants when trying to perform a soybean field landing? I don't, and I suspect neither do you, but I would guess the physics, if thought out properly, would suggest that it would be a lot.
Shoddy teaching.Cirrus TEACHES pilots to pull the chute!!
It is NOT a last resort.
Cirrus TEACHES pilots to pull the chute!! Geez, they get to sell more airplanes that way people are probably saying, or get their repairs shops to "fix" what's left of the plane.
It's a shame that people who have never flown an SR22 don't know what they are talking about these days.
Reading through the NTSB reports indicates you'd be wrong. Going back to 1984 there have been 91 deaths where the term "soybean" showed up in the NTSB report. However, of the 10 or so reports I looked at out of 49, only one of them had anything to do with flipping over after touchdown - and that was after the field had already been harvested. The others I looked at: Midair collision that killed 11 between two planes that came to rest in a soybean field, hitting power lines while cropdusting and coming to rest in a soybean field, impact crater that happened to be in a soybean field, etc. So you may want to rethink your position.
Feel free to go through the 49 cases if you want:
http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/Results.aspx?queryId=40613e2d-bcb3-4024-a7a7-ae6187f09eff
Edit: I've now gone through 20 reports, and none of them have shown landing gear being "grabbed" by the soybeans as being the issue. Flights into IMC, power lines, flying into thunderstorms all show up however.
Shoddy teaching.
2 miles west of the departure airport - I suspect you are right. Looks like a nice field to make a survivable forced landing.....wonder if they would still be alive if they hadn't pulled the chute?
I'm not bad mouthing chutes, but the chute does take time to deploy and work for you. It is not a Martin Baker hot seat. If you are too low, you might be better off NOT pulling the chute.
You don't know how much I appreciate your words of wisdom here, and I sincerely hope everyone follows them.
This was my plane. Steve was my partner.
I didn't know him very well, it was a new venture for me and I'm not sure how long he owned this plane either.
Here's what I do know. Steve did not "freeze" up. I have heard a few things that I won't share right now that suggest he had limited control of the plane and therefore limited options. Based on what I think I know, I believe he chose the "best" one, which wasn't very good.
Does anyone know where I can check what the weather was yesterday at the time he departed?
Agreed and I want to make it clear that I'm not judging the pilot's actions here as I wasn't there to know what he experienced. I simply bring it up because I think that for those that fly these airplanes or consider one, it is an important discussion that one needs to have before taking flight.However, we are not in a position to know what happened so we can't jump to conclusions.
I hear conflicting stories from those who have been through Cirrus training. Some like you seem to indicate that they provide critical thought on when to pull and when to not. Others seem to advocate pull for anything at the first sign of something wrong.