SR22 crash in Ohio 11-6-2014

Swampfox201

Swampfox201

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
589
Display Name
Display name:
Todd W.
The final report came out this last week. The cause of the accident was never really in doubt. Having lost a friend the question in my mind is did they pull the chute or not? The report is inconclusive and evidence points both ways.

Fly safe everyone and don't let yourself get in a situation like this crew did.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/R...ID=20141107X75136&AKey=1&RType=Final&IType=FA





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Wonder what cirrus would be potentially in store for if caps was used at altitude but failed. I bet that would be a massive blow to the company on many levels.

Rocket fuel expended but everything in place gives me chills. Assuming I read that correctly.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Wonder what cirrus would be potentially in store for if caps was used at altitude but failed. I bet that would be a massive blow to the company on many levels.

Rocket fuel expended but everything in place gives me chills. Assuming I read that correctly.
Click to expand...

They go into depth on the scratch marks on the CAPS handle which doesn't mean anything to me because I'm not familiar with the airplane and how the handle works. With that said the evidence in the report to me says they pulled with the exception they couldn't find any rocket residue on the tail which I guess happens on a normal CAPS pull?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Handle is like lawn mower handle. Attached to a cable. 45 lbs of pull required to launch caps. Any scratch marks I would imagine attitude be from impact.

Rocket blasts a hole in the top of the empenage, drags the chute out. I would imagine that rocket would leave a lot of evidence on the back of the plane add it exits.
 
It was a 2001 Cirrus SR22. FIKI didn't come out until 2009. The older chute rocket may have discharged on impact and would explain why the chute was not unpacked.

Two critical thing to ponder. How could so much aviation experience as was present in the plane knowingly fly into such conditions and do it without de-icing protection and then once in trouble not employ the one safety feature that could have saved them?
 
Last edited:
By 2014 the CAPS training ("pull early, pull often") was well on the way to being institutionalized; there were only 3 fatal Cirrus accidents that year - well down from the 2011 peak of 16.

But it's not difficult to construct a scenario where the chute handle was not pulled, especially since that psychological reluctance is exactly what Cirrus was actively trying to train out at the time. Let's remember we have a couple of pilots here that launched IFR at night into forecast icing in a non-FIKI airplane.

And then confirmed that forecast when they flew into it. Probability is whatever ice they picked up before they got above the cloud tops was still on the airframe when they started their descent. I have no idea how well a non-TKS Cirrus handles ice, but I think these folks were already half-way to trouble before they put the nose down.

Like any other piece of equipment on an airplane, using the chute means you have to have imagined needing to use it, and integrated that into your training, emergency procedures and briefings.

Flying in IMC at night, trying to control an ice loaded airframe between stall and exceeding Vne, might not be the best time to expect to recall the one piece of equipment that can save you, if you've never thought about the need for it since the day you bought the plane. If it was, Cirrus wouldn't need to train.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Wonder what cirrus would be potentially in store for if caps was used at altitude but failed. I bet that would be a massive blow to the company on many levels.
Click to expand...
I doubt it will seriously hurt them since it would be an individual case, not a class action or case with multiple similar alleged chute failures.

Assuming there is a lawsuit, I'd expect Cirrus to settle and insurance will cover the payout. I don't think you'll hear much more about it.
 
The materials report in the docket has a little more in-depth description of the damage to the CAPS handle, cable, and holder. While they don't state it outright, it reads to me like the impact damage to the handle correlates with the impact damage on the holder, implying that the handle was still stowed on impact.

Nauga,
and a moment of silence
 
citizen5000 said:
This was a rocket failure after a repack. They don't say who did the 10 year on it.
Click to expand...

Is that what the final NTSB report concluded?

Looks like the rocket fired in the picture in the attached article, which also states (accurate?) the chute was repacked under the supervision of a Cirrus Service Center.

"...At this point, the FAA has been on site for an initial look-see, and the NTSB is expected to investigate, as well. This is the first attempted deployment of a repacked CAPS assembly, and of course, the first failure of its kind. This repack was conducted fully under the control of the Cirrus Service Center program and the supervising parties at a time when Cirrus and BRS (the company primarily responsible for pioneering this technology -- despite Cirrus's attempts to suggest otherwise) were involved in legal problems arising from a number of IP and financial issues. These days, BRS has a much larger role in the repack process and in the prep of the systems that are upgraded at the time of repack.​

Buzz among the Cirrus community has been extensive and a number of folks seeking more information from ANN, have indicated that their faith in the CAPS system has been shaken somewhat... and certainly in the repack process undertaken by Cirrus. One Cirrus owner noted that, "I'm sure as hell not going to tell my wife about this..."​

The repack process, fairly expensive, requires the airplane to be down for a considerable period of time (especially for first generation Cirrus airframes), and is reportedly much more expensive than what was hoped for, by BRS, before Cirrus and BRS had their falling out (and, in fact, Valentine noted that when he started researching the repack process, he would have preferred that BRS undertake it... but, "Cirrus wouldn't allow it.") Regardless, Valentine loves his airplane and looks forward to fixing the damage done and getting a proper repack conducted at a later date."​
 
The repack was done "under control of the Cirrus Service Center program" sounds like someone trying to build a legal case not where the repack was done. The poster even complains "despite Cirrus's attempts to suggest otherwise" is also someone trying to tag Cirrus with responsibility despite Cirrus not doing the repack themselves.

Cirrus does not tell customers where they are to get their repacks done. BRS started to offer repacks back in 2010. Some Cirrus Factory Authorized centers offer the service. Woodland Aviation at Yolo Muni for example now offers it. Cutter Aviation in Texas also does. http://cutteraviation.com/aircraft-...irrus-aircraft-parachute-repack-and-services/

The primary reason for the repack is to replace the rocket. The rocket has a limited life.
 
nauga said:
The materials report in the docket has a little more in-depth description of the damage to the CAPS handle, cable, and holder. While they don't state it outright, it reads to me like the impact damage to the handle correlates with the impact damage on the holder, implying that the handle was still stowed on impact.

Nauga,
and a moment of silence
Click to expand...

Thanks. Like I said I'm not familiar with how the handle works or what it looks like.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
GRG55 said:
Is that what the final NTSB report concluded?

Looks like the rocket fired in the picture in the attached article, which also states (accurate?) the chute was repacked under the supervision of a Cirrus Service Center.

"...At this point, the FAA has been on site for an initial look-see, and the NTSB is expected to investigate, as well. This is the first attempted deployment of a repacked CAPS assembly, and of course, the first failure of its kind. This repack was conducted fully under the control of the Cirrus Service Center program and the supervising parties at a time when Cirrus and BRS (the company primarily responsible for pioneering this technology -- despite Cirrus's attempts to suggest otherwise) were involved in legal problems arising from a number of IP and financial issues. These days, BRS has a much larger role in the repack process and in the prep of the systems that are upgraded at the time of repack.​

Buzz among the Cirrus community has been extensive and a number of folks seeking more information from ANN, have indicated that their faith in the CAPS system has been shaken somewhat... and certainly in the repack process undertaken by Cirrus. One Cirrus owner noted that, "I'm sure as hell not going to tell my wife about this..."​

The repack process, fairly expensive, requires the airplane to be down for a considerable period of time (especially for first generation Cirrus airframes), and is reportedly much more expensive than what was hoped for, by BRS, before Cirrus and BRS had their falling out (and, in fact, Valentine noted that when he started researching the repack process, he would have preferred that BRS undertake it... but, "Cirrus wouldn't allow it.") Regardless, Valentine loves his airplane and looks forward to fixing the damage done and getting a proper repack conducted at a later date."​
Click to expand...

Have to also take any blather from "ANN", since we all know who that is... with more than a box full of salt, especially about Cirrus products.
 
citizen5000 said:
This was a rocket failure after a repack. They don't say who did the 10 year on it.
Click to expand...
https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/R...ID=20130520X84445&AKey=1&RType=Final&IType=IA

"The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident to be:
The failure of the airplane’s parachute to deploy when activated during a loss of control in
cruise flight due to the dynamic maneuvering of the airplane at the time of the activation,
which exceeded the parachute system’s certification requirements." [emphasis added]

I wouldn't trust Jim Campbell's reporting on this any more than I'd trust him to repack my 'chute with his feet.

Nauga,
and his radial bias
 
citizen5000 said:
The repack was done "under control of the Cirrus Service Center program" sounds like someone trying to build a legal case not where the repack was done. The poster even complains "despite Cirrus's attempts to suggest otherwise" is also someone trying to tag Cirrus with responsibility despite Cirrus not doing the repack themselves.

Cirrus does not tell customers where they are to get their repacks done. BRS started to offer repacks back in 2010. Some Cirrus Factory Authorized centers offer the service. Woodland Aviation at Yolo Muni for example now offers it. Cutter Aviation in Texas also does. http://cutteraviation.com/aircraft-...irrus-aircraft-parachute-repack-and-services/

The primary reason for the repack is to replace the rocket. The rocket has a limited life.
Click to expand...

If you are going to shill for Cirrus, at least be forthright about your statements. Cirrus may not tell an owner which specific shop to have the repack done, but they certainly have control over who can do it.

From an article in Aviation Consumer:


"...Many owners naturally assume the CAPS replacement can be performed by any Cirrus service center, but this isn't the case. That's because of the specialized work and certificated training that tags along with the parachute repack. Due to the propellant-powered rocket that's part of the parachute deployment, the work is partially governed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. As if FAA oversight isn't enough government to answer to, the ATF performs regular inspections of the shops, who are required to have special facilities equipped with cabinets to securely store the rockets, among other requirements. Techs who handle the rocket are background checked. Further, each technician that performs a CAPS replacement is exclusively trained and licenced by Cirrus. Unlike most airframe work, the parachute repack process can't be taught from one technican to the other on the shop level. Each needs to receive specialized training at Cirrus.​
 
GRG55 said:
If you are going to shill for Cirrus, at least be forthright about your statements.
Click to expand...

No one is shilling for Cirrus. But the disinformation on the company and products seems to never end. Cirrus is not to blame for these pilots flying into known ice and killing themselves. And Cirrus is unquestioned in their efforts to give customers the training and the equipment to be as safe as possible.
 
This thread got confusing in a hurry, suddenly switching from the Ohio fatal crash in icing to the Texas nonfatal incident involving a chute.

The NTSB report for the Ohio crash left it undetermined whether the chute handle had been pulled. The NTSB tried hard to figure that out and couldn't. At least that's how I read it.

And for the NTSB's purpose of finding the cause of the crash it doesn't matter -- the Ohio crash pilot planned poorly and chose to fly night IFR into icing conditions, in a plane that had no special ice equipment, and that was the clear cause.
 
citizen5000 said:
No one is shilling for Cirrus. But the disinformation on the company and products seems to never end. Cirrus is not to blame for these pilots flying into known ice and killing themselves. And Cirrus is unquestioned in their efforts to give customers the training and the equipment to be as safe as possible.
Click to expand...

Methinks the lady doth protest too much...
 
citizen5000 said:
No one is shilling for Cirrus. But the disinformation on the company and products seems to never end. Cirrus is not to blame for these pilots flying into known ice and killing themselves. And Cirrus is unquestioned in their efforts to give customers the training and the equipment to be as safe as possible.
Click to expand...

First of all before I state anything I want you all to know my father and best friend died in this plane crash. My father was the most careful pilot you can imagine. Before and at the time of the crash my fathers flight instructor and friend was flying the plane. He was a pilot in the air force for 15 years flying fighter jets and then continued with trained air force training fighter pilotspil for 10 years after that, he then retired and started teaching private aviation. My siblings and I flew with my father numerous times each and every time no matter how redundant it was he made sure and told everyone in the plane before it took off about the parachute system he would always say if something bad happens you don’t care about the plane you pull the parachute showed us how to do it and would say you never care what happens to the plane just know the insurance company owns this plane and pull the parachute. The one thing I have learned through this experience is how one sided these NTSB investigations are. The people who made up the NTSB reports were 2 people from the NTSB 2 from cirrus 2 from continental engines and 2 from the ballistic recovery system. We had no idea what was going on for over a year and then find out finally that what the report said mad no sense so we sent the plane to be looked out by actual professionals. There is 100% no doubt they tried to deploy the parachute, it was pulled and was pulled multiple times in several directions like someone was trying everything they could to get it to deploy. These investigations and hat is released in these reports is something I would have never believed if I wasn’t involved with this. It’s truly like a fox in a hen house you literally have th companies who manufactured this airplane deciding what went wrong and who was at fault. There are so many key facts that show this crash was not pilot error but these things are simply not mentioned in the report, for instance after we had our professionals like at the CAPS system and they explained they were 100% positive the shoot was deployed the NTSB decided to do a second investigation into it and then changed the wording in the preliminary report they stated something like it didn’t appear the caps system was deployed and the propellant was expunged after impact, then after our investigators looked at it even though the NTSB knows for a fact it was pulled they changed the report to say it appears caps may have been engaged but are not sure and they never comment what is more likely etc... I now understand why almost every small plane crash investigated by the NTSB is determined to be pilot error. As for the people wondering about the repacking of the parachute that was done by a cirrus certiorari center in Florida I don’t think it would be right for me to say the name of the company. A few people on this thread said it didn’t make s new to them how pilots with this much experience could have flown into an ice storm it just doesn’t make sense. I totally agree with you if the only info your privy to is the NTSB reports it makes no since. I listened to the flight recordings several times and they did get some icing what the report doesn’t say is that the icing was 2 hours before the plane crash it was before they refueled, before the crash they are flying talking to air traffic controller everything totally normal no mention of any problems no mention of icing etc... all the sudden at the exact same time all the communications went out and the transponder went out and about a minute later all you hear is an air traffic controller trying to talk to them saying they lost them on flight following there is no response and the plane hit the ground just a little bit after that can’t remember exactly how long after the air traffic lost the,. The other thing that is never talked about in the reports is that there was at least 2 eyewitnesses that said they saw the plane on fire before it hit the ground. You can actually watch one of the local news channels report this online. The plane somehow got so out of control it hit the ground at a 70 degree angle and the cab of the plane was buried 6-7 feet in the ground. I know this really isn’t relevant to any of you but my father was 59 years old he was basically our only parent of us 4 kids when my parents were divorced my dad received custody of my younger 2 siblings and my mother moved away and for the last 15 years of his life he was the only parent we had. I truly can’t explain what kind of a person my father was he is truly the only person I know that I never saw him do anything that he felt in his heart was wrong not to say he never realized later he shouldn’t have done something but he always did what he felt was right. When my father was growing up his parents divorced my grandfather was an alcoholic and my grandmother just disappeared most of the time: my father truly lived in poverty growing up started working at age 7 and raised his younger 4 siblings basically by himself, dealing with all that he was a nationally ranked swimmer and saludatorian of his Highschool class, he finished college in 3 years while working full time and then immediately started medical school and later became an orthopedic surgeon never not even in medical school did he ever not work. So,e how while raising the younger 2 of my siblings he worked the same 40-60 hours a week and never failed to miss a single event of any of us kids. He as truly all we had all of us depended on him for almost everything I truly didn’t think ai would be able to go on living when he died. The only reason he started flying was because his kids were living in different states my youngest brother in Duke physical therapy school my youngest sister in New York which is where they were flying they were going there to help my little sister prepare for her wedding, my other sister in Texas and me Oklahoma I was 32 when my dad pat my oldest sister 30 my youngest sister 24 and my brother 22. I know we will never be the same and I’m hoping that just one person finds out about this story and decides not to get into a cirrus aircraft and I could know this tragedy saved someone. The lady that commented about a lawsuit and sounds like she is on hear to defend cirrus no matter what you are correct in your assumption there is a lawsuit, I honestly hope it doesn’t settle because ai want everyone to know the caps system is not reliable and that th design of the cirrus aircraft should be declared unsafe and production ceased. I apologize for such a long comment but when I saw this thread I was really shocked to see that the crash being talked about was that of my fathers. Please everyone be safe and do not get in a cirrus if they would have been in my fathers Cessna I know they would be alive today
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top