Pulling the 'chute on approach

If you're headed into the airport and the engine dies while you're still outside gliding distance...
 
The pilot managed to maintain control of the plane and deploy an aircraft parachute.
There were two adults and two children in the plane, in all.
Click to expand...

From the article..... if it was me and my wife, with my daughters and I was busy enough trying to diagnose the problem and fly the plane,... I'd pull it too. Family first.
 
JeffDG said:
If you're headed into the airport and the engine dies while you're still outside gliding distance...
Click to expand...

...giving you a choice between a forced landing in a clear area or pulling the 'chute...
 
Also, anyone else notice the flap is broken? Perhaps that is the mechanical failure mentioned and control was difficult.
 
It depends on what you call an approach. If he was on an IFR plan, or even VFR with a tower, he may have been on a long straight in and could have been a few or miles out. If I remember correctly the parachute can not be deployed below 2000 feet so it sounds to me he may have been a few miles or more from the airport when he had problems. Would have I deployed a chute? Probably not, as my plane does not have one, but if it did I do not know.
 
douglas393 said:
It depends on what you call an approach. If he was on an IFR plan, or even VFR with a tower, he may have been on a long straight in and could have been a few or miles out. If I remember correctly the parachute can not be deployed below 2000 feet so it sounds to me he may have been a few miles or more from the airport when he had problems. Would have I deployed a chute? Probably not, as my plane does not have one, but if it did I do not know.
Click to expand...

Media approach likely has little resemblance to what we would call approach as well.
 
Skylane81E said:
Media approach likely has little resemblance to what we would call approach as well.
Click to expand...
Anything the media says about aviation seems to be quite different from the reality of aviation.
 
douglas393 said:
Anything the media says about aviation seems to be quite different from the reality of aviation.
Click to expand...

Which is the reason why I do not watch the news. Most news shows have very little to do with reality.
 
Skylane81E said:
I just measured on Foreflight, 1.8nm from the lake to the airport.
Click to expand...
Assuming he was at 2000 feet and less than 2 miles from the airport when he pulled the chute, it seems to me he should have made it. However, if he was that close to the airport, then why was he not at pattern height, and if was indeed at pattern height then the chute should have not helped. So what am I missing, because it seems quite obvious to me I am making some assumptions that are not true.
 
AdamZ said:
If you pull the chute is it really a crash?
Click to expand...
If it was an Apollo capsule I would say no. If it was a Cirrus and damage occurs to the plane as it will when the chute is pulled I would say yes, because if not would my insurance pay to repair/replace my plane?
 
douglas393 said:
It depends on what you call an approach. If he was on an IFR plan, or even VFR with a tower, he may have been on a long straight in and could have been a few or miles out. If I remember correctly the parachute can not be deployed below 2000 feet so it sounds to me he may have been a few miles or more from the airport when he had problems. Would have I deployed a chute? Probably not, as my plane does not have one, but if it did I do not know.
Click to expand...

How does the chute know the distance to the ground?
 
roncachamp said:
How does the chute know the distance to the ground?
Click to expand...
The altimeter? The GPS? Anyhow, I think you knew what I meant, if not I will restate it to be clearer. I thought that for a successful plane meeting land conclusion the chute had to be pulled above 2000 feet AGL.
 
douglas393 said:
It depends on what you call an approach. If he was on an IFR plan, or even VFR with a tower, he may have been on a long straight in and could have been a few or miles out. If I remember correctly the parachute can not be deployed below 2000 feet so it sounds to me he may have been a few miles or more from the airport when he had problems. Would have I deployed a chute? Probably not, as my plane does not have one, but if it did I do not know.
Click to expand...

douglas393 said:
Assuming he was at 2000 feet and less than 2 miles from the airport when he pulled the chute, it seems to me he should have made it. However, if he was that close to the airport, then why was he not at pattern height, and if was indeed at pattern height then the chute should have not helped. So what am I missing, because it seems quite obvious to me I am making some assumptions that are not true.
Click to expand...

douglas393 said:
The altimeter? The GPS? Anyhow, I think you knew what I meant, if not I will restate it to be clearer. I thought that for a successful plane meeting land conclusion the chute had to be pulled above 2000 feet AGL.
Click to expand...

This is wrong.
There is no published minimum deployment altitude, and successful deployments have been demonstrated at altitudes less than 400ft AGL (and this is stated in the POH).

Also CAPS is not connected to an altimeter or the GPS.
 
Last edited:
Skylane81E said:
Given that it is a cirrus with tiny wheels and clear area is snow covered,

Chute
Click to expand...

Agreed

Skylane81E said:
Also, anyone else notice the flap is broken? Perhaps that is the mechanical failure mentioned and control was difficult.
Click to expand...

Maybe it was damaged in the impact. Will have to wait for an NTSB report.

Here is a larger picture
894938_10151619874468825_1079988598_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
I am routinely flying approaches from which I cannot reach the field should the engine quit. Mainly this is happening because Cherokee and Arrow can only reach the runway from a somewhat tight pattern, or maybe a couple of miles when straight in. But in most cases I want to be at pattern altitude 3 miles out, better 5. This is because it's much, much easier to see airplanes on the horizon than looking down. Plus, speed control is easier when I do not have to dive to join the pattern.
 
Here is the other thing about the clear area, it is a frozen lake, I would rather hit it under canopy in just about any plane. Only the lightest planes would I want to land on it this time of year. I would bet that the nose gear is not broken off in that picture.
 
Whatever. The PIC made his decision, and it had a positive outcome. Second guess all you like.
 
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?
 
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...
Checking for the VIN for their report? Checking out the rich kid's toy and all the googahs in it? Wondering, as I often do, how something really flies, especially something made of plastic?
 
Skylane81E said:
Here is the other thing about the clear area, it is a frozen lake, I would rather hit it under canopy in just about any plane. Only the lightest planes would I want to land on it this time of year. I would bet that the nose gear is not broken off in that picture.
Click to expand...
That is an excellent point. I'm normally a pop the chute as a last resort guy, but in that case, I'd much rather land there under the chute.
 
silver-eagle said:
Checking for the VIN for their report? Checking out the rich kid's toy and all the googahs in it? Wondering, as I often do, how something really flies, especially something made of plastic?
Click to expand...

Well it doesn't fly any more LMAO
 
MachFly said:
This is wrong.
There is no published minimum deployment altitude, and successful deployments have been demonstrated at altitudes less than 400ft AGL (and this is stated in the POH).

Also CAPS is not connected to an altimeter or the GPS.
Click to expand...
I know that the CAPS is not connected and was being sarcastic, sorry it was missed. My point was I thought the Cirrus had a AGL below which they did not recommend using the chute, and thought that was 2000 ft. I remember reading a number of unsuccessful deployments(where the passengers of the plane were badly hurt or died after chute deployment) and the reason given was it was deployed when the plane was too low. That was the issue I was asking about. Sorry I caused so much angst with what was a obviously poorly worded question and irritated those more superior intellects. Maybe I will just bow out and find some other place to waste time.
 
douglas393 said:
I know that the CAPS is not connected and was being sarcastic, sorry it was missed. My point was I thought the Cirrus had a AGL below which they did not recommend using the chute, and thought that was 2000 ft. I remember reading a number of unsuccessful deployments(where the passengers of the plane were badly hurt or died after chute deployment) and the reason given was it was deployed when the plane was too low. That was the issue I was asking about. Sorry I caused so much angst with what was a obviously poorly worded question and irritated those more superior intellects. Maybe I will just bow out and find some other place to waste time.
Click to expand...

The only cases I know of where people were severely injured involved very low altitude deployments in the area of 200' or less.

In the event under discussion the pilot reported rudder problems. The current speculation on COPA is that a broken flap would appear as a rudder problem i.e. a yaw control issue. At 2000' you don't have a lot of margin to diagnose an issue like that.

The end result is that the pilot and his family are fine.
 
An initial report is out.

NTSB Identification: CEN13LA212
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Friday, March 29, 2013 in Alexandria, MN
Aircraft: CIRRUS SR22T, registration: N1967N
Injuries: 2 Minor,2 Uninjured.


This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators may not have traveled in support of this investigation and used data provided by various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.
On March 29, 2013, about 1045 central daylight time, a Cirrus SR22T-0031 airplane, N1967N, was substantially damaged after impact with terrain (frozen lake) near the Chandler Field Airport (AXN), Alexandria, Minnesota. The private pilot and one of the three passengers sustained minor injuries. The airplane was registered to MWBS Holdings LLC and operated under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 with no flight plan filed. Day visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight, which originated from the Marv Skie-Lincoln County Airport (Y14), Tea, South Dakota at 0904.

While on pattern downwind to AXN, the pilot reported a loud noise during flap extension, followed by a roll of the airplane to the right. The pilot countered this roll with aileron inputs and initiated a climb. He then attempted to reduce the airplane’s rolling tendency by adjusting flap position. 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.

During initial examination, the right flap rod end was found disconnected from the right flap actuation fitting. The right flap rod end mounting bolt and washer were found laying on the snow under the airplane. No safety wire was noted on the mounting bolt or on the right flap actuation fitting.
 
Oops, that is supposed to be saftied

In fact I was just under our 22 looking at this portion thinking about how it could shave come off.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
peppy said:
While on pattern downwind to AXN, the pilot reported a loud noise during flap extension, followed by a roll of the airplane to the right. The pilot countered this roll with aileron inputs and initiated a climb. He then attempted to reduce the airplane’s rolling tendency by adjusting flap position. 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.

During initial examination, the right flap rod end was found disconnected from the right flap actuation fitting. The right flap rod end mounting bolt and washer were found laying on the snow under the airplane. No safety wire was noted on the mounting bolt or on the right flap actuation fitting.
Click to expand...

Well then good thing 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.
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
I'd think the plane would have enough aileron 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...

I don't know how Cirrus' flaps works mechanically. Will one flap even move if the other one is stuck in a certain position?
 
silver-eagle said:
Checking for the VIN for their report? Checking out the rich kid's toy and all the googahs in it? Wondering, as I often do, how something really flies, especially something made of plastic?
Click to expand...

I can understand plastic things flying..

But how do things made of meat fly?

:D
 
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...

About the only one I know of is a PA31 with the flap travel restrictors in place. They were installed by AD due to asymmetric flap deployments in a position determined by test pilots to be the maximum one flap could be deployed and maintain sufficient control to land.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top