Pulling the 'chute on approach

Sounds like a mechanic shop somewhere may be in a bit of trouble.
 
Wild plane glad no one was hurt! If he thought he could get out of it he wouldn't have pulled or maybe still would have why risk his and his families lives.
 
MachFly said:
Well then good this he was flying a Cirrus with a chute. I can't think of too many other aircraft that would have created higher chance of survival after such failure. Uncontrolled crashes tend to be fatal.
Click to expand...

Exactly! The chute saved 4 lives yet many will continue to throw stones at Cirrus and its silly chute. :mad2:
 
MachFly said:
On a slightly different topic. Look at the two cops in the picture I posted above, they look very interested yet completely lost. What are they trying to do?
Click to expand...

Probably checking the expiration dates on his data cards. :dunno:
 
peppy said:
As his control of the airplane worsened, the pilot pulled the ballistic recovery system handle. The parachute deployed and the airplane descended onto a frozen lake.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the perfect time to pull the chute.
 
This is a classic example of when CAPS shines. Sure, there are many instances where it doesn't make sense; but in this one, it saved lives!
 
dell30rb said:
Loud bang at pattern altitude and the plane starts rolling over hard on its own... good time to pull the chute.

I'd think the plane would have enough aileron and rudder to keep from rolling over, and that you could fiddle with the flaps and probably set the good flap to where the other one is, and make the best of your situation. But the pilot made a good call.
Click to expand...

Not in this case. I don't think this was asymmetric deployment but rather one flap hanging all the way down well past deployment limits. The rod that sets the amount of deployment became disconnected so that the flap was just hanging down. I am basing this on how the flap looks in the picture of the plane sitting on the ice. The right flap is well past extension limits and basically hanging straight down.

Interestingly, the very first Cirrus chute pull was when an aileron came loose after maintenance. The mechanic forgot to tighten a nut and to safety wire it. The pilot said that he was able to use both hands and control the plane but he didn't feel comfortable landing and was afraid of losing control when he slowed down and the working surfaces became less effective.

Because descent under canopy leaves the plane mostly intact, we get to find out what happened. I wonder if this issue had resulted in a violent impact and killed everyone if we would have known what happened.
 
I don't think saying that the "flap deployed" is accurate. Based on that picture it looks like the hinges that are supposed to hold the flap detached and the flap is hanging on those "rails" (or what ever the proper name is) that are supposed to control the flap as it deployed. You can clearly see that the flap is inverted, so it's not even providing any lift. The pilot deploying the second flap to it's maximum position would not have helped, maybe it would have equalized the drag but the difference in lift would have still been huge.


flapl.jpg
 
Last edited:
I very much doubt the flap was in that position in flight.

Those are simple hinges and the flap just pivots. The airflow would likely keep the flap from extending too far. I would not get to where we see it in the picture, as it would have to swing through 90* to the air to do so.
The issues with trying to match it,
1 up, 50% and 100% are the only flap options
2 every change in airflow would change where the flap hung
 
Skylane81E said:
I very much doubt the flap was in that position in flight.

Those are simple hinges and the flap just pivots. The airflow would likely keep the flap from extending too far. I would not get to where we see it in the picture, as it would have to swing through 90* to the air to do so.
Click to expand...

It depends on where the flap went after the main hinges detached. If the flap went aft then your completely correct. But since the front hinges on the flap detached I wonder if it possible for the front part of the flap to drop a bit. In which case the airflow would turn the flap completely around.
 
MachFly said:
It depends on where the flap went after the main hinges detached. If the flap went aft then your completely correct. But since the front hinges on the flap detached I wonder if it possible for the front part of the flap to drop a bit. In which case the airflow would turn the flap completely around.
Click to expand...

Hinges did not detach, they are still connected in the picture, the rod end that controls deployment is what came loose.
 
In he situation pictured i'd think the flap with the broken actuator would be forced back into the fully retracted position (probably a little past that) and the other flap would remain extended.

At pattern speeds or below i'd guess the AOA would be such that the flap would be jammed back against its stops

Setting the flaps switch back to 0degrees would hopefully retract the other flap to a position near the broken flap and the plane would fly much better then :)
 
The report says the pilot tried to obtain better control by changing the flap position and pulled the chute when his ability to control the plane worsened. It sounds to me like he tried what you suggest but with poor results.


dell30rb said:
In he situation pictured i'd think the flap with the broken actuator would be forced back into the fully retracted position (probably a little past that) and the other flap would remain extended.

At pattern speeds or below i'd guess the AOA would be such that the flap would be jammed back against its stops

Setting the flaps switch back to 0degrees would hopefully retract the other flap to a position near the broken flap and the plane would fly much better then :)
Click to expand...
 
Glad the lake didn’t give way, they’re pretty soft this time of year. I’d rather land on a lake under power than under the chute when the snow is that thin (I’ve been around northern lakes my whole life and keep tabs on ice thickness and snow depth, and did my PPL training on a snow-covered grass field), but in this case that probably wasn’t a great option. Nice save.
 
So if the ice was going to fail, would you rather it fail while rolling across it a 50mph and catch your gear, or would you rather your gear punch through vertically then the entire lower surface area of the plane come to rest on the ice?
 
peppy said:
The report says the pilot tried to obtain better control by changing the flap position and pulled the chute when his ability to control the plane worsened. It sounds to me like he tried what you suggest but with poor results.
Click to expand...

Like I said, given the option of a chute and the altitude he had, i'd pull the chute. Though If I could control it at all I would aim away from any frozen lakes :yikes:
 
Skylane81E said:
So if the ice was going to fail, would you rather it fail while rolling across it a 50mph and catch your gear, or would you rather your gear punch through vertically then the entire lower surface area of the plane come to rest on the ice?
Click to expand...

Generally the former if I can choose. Ice doesn’t give way immediately on impact, it bends down and disintegrates, often after the vehicle traveling over it has passed. Also the plane won’t be putting its full weight on the ice until it slows down. Hopefully you do this near shore and not three miles out.

If you drop in under the parachute you’ll very quickly put the full weight of the plane on three very small points on the ice (or over a hole in the ice; you can’t steer). Now if the gear goes through and spreads the weight of the plane over the fuselage/wings and stops, you’re OK. but if the holes you just made break up the ice enough you could be in a very dangerous situation.

If I had to choose, I’d fly it in. But then again, it’s Minnesota. There’s nothing but endless fields to put it in most places.
 
koehn said:
Hopefully you do this near shore and not three miles out.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't the ice be thinner near the trees? So you're better off landing three miles out.
 
MachFly said:
Shouldn't the ice be thinner near the trees? So you're better off landing three miles out.
Click to expand...

No, it shouldn't. If anything the trees on the South end of the lake will shade the ice near the shoreline, leaving it thicker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top