Anatomy of a Cirrus Stall Accident
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ธ.ค. 2009
- So-called over-the-top or cross-control stall accidents have been common among general aviation pilots for years. But no one has ever really documented what happens in one--until now. Thanks the widespread use of glass cockpits, this fatal stall accident has been extraordinarily well documented by accident investigators and includes a video re-creation.
- ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
I just start watching AvWeb and Paul hasn't aged in 11 years....
The Groucho Marx of aviation.
You can see he pulls up last minute. Causes the stall.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools." Douglas Adams
Lord Sandwich best comment!!!!
Aye.
which is why the Cirrus is actually a dangerous plane in the wrong hands
Needless to say, any airplane is dangerous in the wrong hands. I think 911 taught that lesson to everyone.
@@GeneralKenobiSIYE I
Did a flight review with an experienced pilot a few years ago in an RV 10. We were on right downwind to land simulated engine out. We were high and as he started his base turn he banks hard right and starts pulling. I asked him what he was doing and his answer was to “load up the plane to lose altitude.” I immediately leveled the bank and relaxed the pitch and told him he was going to kill us if he did that.
I have no idea where people learn this stuff.
I’d imagine if the FAA were a person, it would look like this guy.
@Phil Swift flex seal?
Who the hell allows an aircraft to enter a 60 degree bank at 300 ft AGL? Regardless of the design of your damn wing.
I've done it....in an Extra 300L. LOL NEVER in a normal category aircraft, though.
I did it,
...in a flying sim on a PC display at a local electronics store.
Yup, I crashed too.
Idiots
The same thing happened to Learjet 35 near Terenboro NYC, but they just stalled the plane without applying the rudder.
You’d be surprised, people tend to panic when they over shoot base to final , and assume they HAVE to land the plane
This is the deadly classic:
1. Low
2. Steep turn
3. Pull because airplane starts to lose altitude rapidly i steep turn
4. Step in opposite rudder because turn gets too steep
5. Make a snap roll opposite to the direction of the turn and ...
6... die
It has happened hundreds of times. And no matter how often we flight instructors warn students about steep turns near the ground ... there is always another one.
I believe Paul was among the first aviation writers to dismiss the initially high number of fatal accidents in the Cirrus as being the fault of the airplane. John King, a few years back, may not have used the term, affluenza, as a cause of aviation accidents but he accurately, though diplomatically, spelled it out. As aviation left the realm of middle-class avocations many of those with the means to pursue it were, due to the very root of their financial success, temperamental ill-suited to pursue it. Aviation is not about what you want. If you approach it in the no-excuses manic success at all costs manner that gave you to the ability to purchase a new aircraft, it will kill you.
Somewhat agree, true, the type that can afford a new plane is, more often than not, make less than ideal pilots.
I think the high rate of Cirrus fatalities was because of it's appeal. It's selling points made it a good alternative to larger twin engine aircraft; the caps and saftey first mantra appeals to low hour pilots; couple that with poor training and pilots jumping from high wing 182's into an SR22, and you have all the makings of a crash waiting to happen.
Cirrus addressed the issue with It's training programs and the results are pretty staggering, from one if the highest accident rates to the lowest.
I still remember the bonanza doctor killer!
@@kellyreim6627 I prefer to say that lots of doctors were killing Bonanzas.
I'm a student pilot. Thank you so much for doing videos like these. I learn something every time I watch one your presentations.
This was posted in 2009 and he references a 2010 magazine article. I think the matrix is broken again
It was a January issue of 2010, so it just came out.
What in the love of god was he trying to do? You think the instructor would have jumped in at some point. =/
did he think he was Arthur Holland?
This is the best briefing I've seen to show a student pilot. It also touches on why an aircraft can try to roll out of a descending turn and roll in to a climbing turn. Excellent.
The words of my first instructor from 1979 have never left me, *"Just fly the airplane."*
he did...he flew it into the ground
@@touristguy87 Well, you might argue that it was flying, right up until the point that one wing was flying very little and the other wing was simply along for the ride.
@@ccasche5088 hell they both could have been flying, just not generating enough lift to keep the plane from crashing into the ground
Just for some background information on the instructor, he was a very experienced and proficient pilot. He was a one of the best IA/AP mechanics and understood airplanes better than most, but did not even want to do the flight review because he hated the Cirrus. He also was a aerobatic and antique pilot who had just earned his sailplane rating. Before you judge these guys ability just relize that we all make mistakes no matter our experience. He was one of my good friends and missed greatly!
@W C i hope this guy never read your comment.
I felt the chill run up my back when you described the action of the pilots in the pattern... Scary!
If I may, I am a 22 year old commercial pilot. It is, in fact, less dangerous to fly than to drive. You don't think that 20 year olds should be allowed to fly? I've been flying solo since I was 18. Many airline pilots are 23 years old. Most Air Force pilots are 26 or under. Young people can be responsible as well as old. A person that is 18 can go buy a car or motorcycle, so why can't they buy an airplane? Please use common sense before making a senseless post that makes you look stupid.
GA has the same fatality rate as automobiles. Deaths per 100 000 hours, i mean.
Paul Bertorelli 2020; folksy, truthful, relate-able - and one hell of a 'stache.
Paul great analysis and a very educational message for all to remember. What I find truly tragic with this accident was that they had an out being a Cirrus yet the BRS was not used. I hope if I am in that situation or another airframe failure I will remember that handle
Thanks Paul! Great breakdown!
I like these videos that get right into the lessons ,and what can be done if you find yourself in a little trouble.
Even when I flew model RC air planes, I was always very careful about the final turn and approach. I took long approaches that avoids anything even close to sharp turns.
Really useful analysis and an excellent video.
More stall-spin accidents occur when the engine quits after take off than what is commonly believed to be the from the "base to final" approach turn. See AOPA magazine statistics for authority. It's quite rare for the airplane to stall in the traffic pattern when things are going well. But imagine you have just departed and are climbing through five hundred feet when the engine abruptly quits. Studies show most people need at least five seconds to figure out they need to immediately react. Buy that time, the energy has been greatly depleted and the airspeed is slow. The airplane is about to stall and the nose is still in a climb attitude. Unless the pilot is cocked and ready to instantly pitch over, an incipient stall-spin will likely occur.
We need to teach pilots prior to departure to be ready at an instant to get the nose over into below level attitude and fly the plane as slowly as possible into the inevitable crash. As Bob Hoover has always pounded into our thick skulls: "fly the damn thing into the crash as long a possible". This way the energy will be dissipated slowly so that there will be at least a chance of survival. The force of the crash is quadrupled with respect to speed as the craft dissipates its energy along the ground. The longer it takes to land in the crash the better chance you have to survive. Simple as that.
Guys, the base to final stall spin event is extremely rare. Yes, we should pay attention to high "G" loading and steep turns while low to the ground. But the biggest killer of people in GA accidents is when the engine quits after take off. We need to be hair-triggered and ready to push the nose over. Better to crash into something where it takes time to dissipate the energy than to go straight down. In that event, there is no chance at all.
When you say push the nose over, do you mean down? I'm not a pilot, I just know from watching commercial airline accident videos that when a plane enters a stall, the comment sections scream with "PUSH THE NOSE DOWN!" Is that what you mean?
@@zyrrhos Very simply, your controls don't work unless you're moving fast enough. When you're climbing, you're pointed up, but that's ok because the engine is keeping your speed up. If you're pointed up and the engine quits, you start slowing down. At that point, you have the choice of either pointing down to get enough speed for your controls to work (which is counter intuitive because you instinctively want to try to keep as much altitude as possible), or you can keep trading speed for a little bit more altitude until you're essentially a funny shaped rock in the sky.
@@derp195 Oh, I get all that. Like I said, I've watched enough of these videos to know. The Air France flight from Rio to Paris was a good example of that. I was just wondering about the OP's use of terminology. Thank you though.
@@SGTSnakeUSMC This is true when things are going well. But statistics show that the most frequent "stallspin" accidents occur with things don't go so well. For instance, immediately after takeoff when the engine quits is when most stall spins accidents happen. Studies cited by John King of King Aviation Schools show that in single engine airplanes during an engine failure during the take-off phase when the aircraft is still on a straight out course, it can take as long as 5 seconds before the pilot even realizes he must lower the nose to maintain airspeed. The failure to maintain flying speed usually ends up in the stall/spin situation. With twin engine airplanes, the situation can be even worse if the pilot is not trained to act immediately.
Some pilots were taught years ago that the skidding turn from base to final approach was the worst culprit. Although not a good thing to do, the engine failure after departure has taken more lives than mid-air collisions. But most accidents do occur in the traffic pattern according to studies cited by John King.
The skidding turn whether on base to final or while attempting to turn back to runway after engine fail causes most of the spin accidents. Practicing the "impossible turn" scenario and going around when not lined up on final will avoid this. AOPA study does show the majority of stall/spin accidents happen below 1000AGL due to insufficient time/altitude to recover.
As a cfi I can say this was so totally unnecessary. Why would the instructor giving the review even allow this? So sad and unnecessary 😞
For those who are not native English speakers and are studying for the Icao Proficiency test, I have transcribed the video because YT subtitles are really poor.
Here you are:
If you’ve ever looked closely at a Cirrus aircraft, you’ve probably wondered about the split leading edge.
Hello, everyone! I’m Paul Bertorelli reporting for Aviation Safety and AvWeb.
The split leading edge is part of what Cirrus calls its passive safety concept. As you know, every aircraft has a stall angle of attack. For most wings that’s about 17 degrees. But since the early days of the Wright Brothers we, as pilots, have been struggling with the ability to control roll through a stall, and that’s what the split leading edge does.
Cirrus’s idea was to build in a slightly lower angle of incidence on the outer panel than on the inner panel. The effect o this is that the inner panel stalls first, the outer panel continues to fly and you maintain roll control with the ailerons.
Now, if you’ve ever flown a Cirrus and you’ve done stall demos, you know that this works exactly as advertised. However, as the accident we’re going to dissect in this video shows, it’s not full proof. If you use abusive control inputs, even the split leading edge won’t protect you.
Here’s the set up.
This accident occurred in February of 2008 at Lindsay, Oklahoma. Which is just south of Oklahoma City.
The flight took place close enough to Will Rogers Airport to be tracked by terminal approach radar. According to the NTSB’s accident report, the pilot of the Cirrus SR-22 took off with an instructor to complete a flight review. The airplane evidently flew northwest of the airport and performed some maneuvers before turning back towards the airport. It’s at this point that things began to unravel.
Although the pilot’s intentions are unknown, he appears to have flown a path that would’ve put the plane on a right downwind for runway 01 as shown in this graphic. The wind that day was out at the east at 5 knots, so either runway 01 or 19 would’ve been suitable.
Whether he intended to use runway 01 or not, the pilot then made a sharp right turn with a steep bank that essentially put the airplane on a left base for runway 19, but on a heading angled slightly away from the perpendicular base leg. A few seconds later, he made a sharp turn back to the left, possibly in attempt to line up with runway 19, or perhaps to enter a left downwind for runway 01. The accident report isn’t clear. Either way, it didn’t work out. The airplane crashed a quarter mile north of the airport killing both aboard.
Had there been no witnesses, this accident might have been just another of dozens like it where an airplane digs a smoking crater for no apparent reason. But there was a witness, and a very good one. Like all recent models Cirrus aircraft, the SR-22 had a glass panel suite, the Avidyne Integra. Despite the post crash fire, the NTSB retrieved enough data from the Integra to reconstruct this flight in this video.
Here’s what the investigators found.
At this point in the flight, the Cirrus is descending for that abortive right downwind. Significantly its altitude is 1520 feet, which is only 555 feet above ground level, and well below pattern altitude.
At this point, it’s entering the right turn and reaches a bank angle of 47 degrees. The angle of attack increases from 6.5 degrees to 10 degrees in 9 seconds. That’s a moderate pitch rate increase, but hardly aerobatic maneuvering. The wings weren’t yet heavily loaded because the airplane was still descending slightly. A second later as the airplane was flying through the runway centerline, it rolled sharply left through wings level to a left bank angle that reached 60 degrees. The angle of attack increased from 10 degrees to 17 degrees.
At this point, the airplane is at 223 feet AGL. Despite the SR-22 stall resistant wing, the flight data indicates that the entire left wing was above the stall angle of attack. This may have increased drag on the wing and induced more left yaw in moment, essentially, an incipient spin. The left aileron would’ve almost certainly been out of the game at this point. Surprisingly, 2 seconds later, the airplane rolled violently right, pitched down and crashed.
When they reviewed the data carefully, the investigators found out why. A fraction of a second before the final right roll started, the data showed that clear right yaw moment, and that’s evidence of right or top rudder application.
If the pilot sensed an incipient spin to the left, he might’ve countered it with full right rudder. But unless the wing is unloaded to break the stall, that’s not a counter spin input. It’s a snap roll entry. And that’s apparently what happened in this accident.
Here’s some final observation.
You might say that this video shows that the more things change, the more they stay the same. The accident we’ve seen in this video is very typical with a type of stall spin or stall accident that airplanes have been doing in traffic patterns for years. For some reason we can’t seem to learn that steep banks and high load factors in the traffic pattern invite disaster. They should be avoided at all cost. It’s that simple.
To find out more about this accident, see the January 2010 issue of Aviation Safety at www.aviationsafetymagazine.com. Elsewhere on AvWeb you can hear a podcast with John King and Rich Stowell, two veteran instructors, discussing stall/spin accidents.
I’m Paul Bertorelli reporting for Aviation Safety and AvWeb. Thanks for watching. ***
If you're interested in a free Icao Test Preparation Class, contact me at max_bukiewicz at hotmail or teachermax at skype.
Cheers!
Great video. CFI must have been sleeping. This was a go around. That said pilot traning doesn't include hands on spin training. For that reason pilots should play with flightsims where you can develop muscle memory and technique and gain a very deep understanding of stalls, spins and in this case snap rolls. So any aspect or scenario can played out until you know how you will deal with it as here, just abort and go around.
This feature was on the spitfire in the '40s, the wing was slightly twisted down at the outer edges, the inner wing stalled first, buffeted the pilot warning him of max AoA
yeah, kinda like a mechanical stall horn. pretty cool.
They still do the twisting thing even on modern fighters. The F/A-18 has a really pronounced twist, which is a small part of what allows that airplane to do some really exotic high-AoA maneuvers, despite the wafer-thin airfoil.
Thank you for a very informative video
Geez! This guy was doing a flight review ?!? I'm surprised the instructor didn't just tell him to go around or grab the yoke !
The same effect is achieved in the wing of a Cessna 172, whose angle of incidence is larger near the wing root, and rotates to a smaller angle of incidence towards the wing tip, but without the ugly abrupt transition seen in the Cirrus. The Cessna wing tapers and twists elegantly and continuously, to make sure the wing root stalls first, then the stall progresses outward toward the tip. The Cessna wing aerofoil cross section also transitions continuously from a flat bottom from the wing root, to a more symmetrical, curved bottom airfoil towards the tip. A beautifully elegant design. The abrupt transition of the Cirrus, including an ugly stall strip right at the step of the wing, is ugly and abrupt. The Cessna also has a beautiful flap design, with rails that make the flap first just extend, then start tilting and extending, opening a slot of a Fowler flap as it gets to full flaps. I have always admired the beauty of the Cessna wing and flaps. I'm amazed that the Cirrus reverted to an ugly two-stage wing with abrupt transitions and stall strips.
does anyone know if SR22 has an AOA as standard equipment?
I've seen modern crop dusters that seem, to my casual eye, to be breaking all the rules for stall spins that I have been seeing. Are these planes designed differently? They seem to rise up after doing a pass and do a 180 and zoom down and do another pass in the opposite direction!
So is this a situation where there was a CFI on board with a student pilot? My CFI would never have allowed me to enter the airport environment in such a shoddy manner, below pattern attitude etc.
Depends on the intentions. I was taught low altitude pattern work for going in and out of confined airstrips and in bad weather. However,airspeed, attitude, and bank angle are critical.
Tony Ascaso mentioned at the very beginning of the video it was a pilot with a CFI for his BFR. So he at least held a PPL.
I'm not yet even a flying student .. but if low and off the approach pattern ... is the correct thing to just abort the approach and try again from a greater distance? I don't understand the steep turn to the left in the first place .. desperation to make a landing does not make any sense to me.
I've had 5 hours of lessons and honestly nothing about this approach seems at all sensible to me.
That people do stupid stuff is a given, but here you had not only a lone pilot, but an instructor beside them as well?
That seems stupid.
First question is why are you approaching from such low altitude, and second question why are you pulling such sharp maneuvers? You're clearly not in the correct position to try a straight-in landing, so fly a proper pattern instead?
Turn around and redo your approach?
Pretty much anything at all would've been better than making a bunch of really sharp turns at low altitude...
@@jabberwocky1969 Just wondering if the words on the RT before this happened were "Watch this"? I had an instructor do that to me, showing off to the other pilots standing outside the training office.
@acemannw
at ~250 feet AGL?
Very informative. Thank you
Hello Y'all. The airplane did not kill the pilots. The pilots killed the airplane and themselves, or maybe one of them did. An airplane recovers from a stall just as fast as it enters a stall. The stick is the AOA lever, reduce AOA and you are not stalled. Having read accident report since the 1950s it is pretty clear that the main problem can be traced back to what the pilot has not been taught. Many students go through their training being taught that when you pull the stick back the nose comes up. And for hundreds of times, perhaps thousands of times, sure enough the nose comes up when you pull the stick back. Then one day, while stressed like these pilots were, the pilot pulls back on the stick and lo and behold the dang nose went down instead of up. This causes instant disbelief and panic. So, the poor guy pulls harder on the stick which of course keeps the airplane in a stall/spin mode until the farm stops the rotation. Read as many stall/spin accidents as you can find. I think you will find that more pilots kill themselves like that then any other "probable cause". How about the Airbus that went down on flight from Brazil to Europe couple years ago? I was teaching a friend how to do a snap roll. I did one and let him try his hand at it. (Aeronca Chief) When he got the stick back all the way and with full rudder and aileron the plane really rolled. He instantly went into panic mode and held the yoke back even harder. I had to hit his arm with a hard blow to get him off the yoke. A couple hours later we were sitting in a tavern having a beer. He said to me, "If you had not been in that airplane they would have found me in the wreckage with that yoke buried in my belly. Clearly when the Sirrus did that violent roll from left to right you can bet that the stick was all the way back and most likely stayed there until the farm neutralized the control system.
Great analysis.
We always say the elevator controls aoa.
Beautifully said
Thank you Paul
This leading edge change of angle design principle was used on the design of the Mitchell designed Spitfire fighter aircraft after the experience of loss by a stall of Schneider cup entrant some years earlier. The wing root of the Mitchell designed Spitfire was at a different angle to the remainder of the wing which reduced the tendency to suddenly wing stall over its whole length. Observation of this may be made by looking down the leading edge of the wing which illustrates the not so otherwise apparent different angle.
ive pulled that off on flight sim and the g-s are always 1.3- 1.9 and i always miss the centerline and endup at full throttle and going for the correct approach never works unless u want to land 3/4 down the field
Out of curiosity, does anybody know what was used to reconstruct the data? The video clip bears a resemblance to the X-Plane simulator program.
I just started my flight training and was told by an older, experienced pilot to read Stick and Rudder by Wolfgang Langewiesche. I'm hoping that the the principles taught in that book, along with a lot of practice, will keep me from ever getting into an unfortunate situation like the one shown in this video.
Always keep your turns shallow in the pattern and you will be fine. Also don't touch the flap handle unless you are straight and level.
I studied stick and rudder in 1970 it has worked for me 10000 crop dusting hours later and not a scratch.
I think instructions are often over stated, and studied. Whereas just plain old flying experience is better. It's like the stupid buttons are installed instead of confidence, and understanding thru experience.
If you've noticed the Cirrus crash rate from the time this video was posted until recently, another lesson to learn is that all the touted (and expensive) advancements in wing design, etc., may offer little to no advantage in actual, day-to-day operational safety and performance over much older designs. Pilots in trouble still tend to act like pilots in trouble, and the intended compensation in the design just doesn't reach that far.
What was the approach speed? Was that mentioned? Didn’t get that.
Let's not forget, we as pilots all know that the wind and other weather may have played a part. It is easy for us to criticize the deceased, but let's not think it cannot happen to the rest of us. Let's just all be careful and enjoy many more Christmases to come with our families.
@anythingthatflys Can you provide evidence of your statement: "putting the caps system on it was the only way they got the plane certified"? Cirrus state that the plane was deigned with CAPS from the outset.
My instructor tells me never to exceed 30˚ when making turns in the pattern. In my opinion, its better turn final early than late because of the tendency to increase bank angle. If you do overshot your base and you've extended you downwind enough, it's better to keep the turn shallow and realign yourself with the runway.
Yeah, he also taught me to avoid level turns when turning base and final so I don't end up high and/or slow on final. I remember trying to keep my base to final turn level and I got it all the way down to 60 before my instructor warned me about the speed.
that's exactly what I teach my students ;)
***** Best way to remember this in my opinion is foot on the ball! if the ball is to the right, apply right rudder, if it's to the left, left rudder
My instructor (and training manuals) advise against turning more than 30 degrees under any conditions.
They also warn about turning more than 15 degrees if you are descending at the same time.
Still, I appear to live in an exceptionally conservative country when it comes to flight safety rules for even the smallest of aircraft.
Sometimes to the level of causing extreme frustration in the aviation community.
Kuralthys: I guess your instructor never train for aerobatics. This also means he never train for unusual attitude recovery. If you never train for it, you never know how to fly the airplane past 15 degrees. How the heck can you turn with only 15 degrees of bank and make flying fun. 15deg bank means your turns look like 747 turns, really wide.
wonder about drag from the lower angle of attack?
Does this sound about right?
...
Only 223 AGL, little room for a stall recovery, much les a spin. This would make him averse to using too much foward should a stall start.
...
That last left bank was very aggressive therefore with high back pressure (AOA) to keep from descending too much.
Left wing stalls first; possibly when starting the roll-out, since the left aileron comes down.
He may have tried (more) right bank, but quickly saw no effect.
So... he kicks right rudder.
The right yaw would now slow and stall the right wing, initiating the right snap roll. He may also still be holding right roll aileron, thus aiding the right roll rotation...
He probably does not want to reduce back pressure for a lower AOA due to the low altitude.
--
Regards.
Sorry for your loss. A good reminder to that mistakes do happen and we are susceptible. After such a tragedy don't blame, learn!
I recreated the exactly same behaviour using Cirrus Vision SF50 in X-Plane.
Is that wing design similar to what the IL-62 used? Or I'm just wrong
@iratherfly Classic accident? Piper has no issue with uncovered fuel inlets in any angle of bank up to 60 degrees and they haved used a left/ right fuel selector for decades.
Experienced SR22/ATP pilot here. Sad and preventable accident. People tend to get into a Cirrus and think they're in an F16, think "glass cockpit, sidestick, etc:...which, in my experience, can lead to overestimation of the aircraft. The Cirrus is a wonderful aircraft, but it demands just as much respect as any other flying machine. Let's all keep learning what NOT to do as well as what TO do. RIP, aviators.
It's a lot like almost missing an exit on the highway: having to do a quick, risky maneuver of the car to get across lanes instead to the exit rather than just going to the next exit and saving your life. His mistake was trying to make exit 19 when he could've just gone around one more time.
I wonder if the flight data from the cockpit instruments reported a tachometer reading. Maybe an idle one? For some reason, I'm hearing the CFI overseeing this flight review telling the reviewing pilot a few moments before entering the pattern, "you just lost your engine." Then realizing he wouldn't make Runway 1 at 550 ft., he opted for runway 19 instead. That's a guess based on past experience with an instructor with a penchant for pattern engine-out scenarios. Maybe a left 360 turn away from runway 19 to bleed off a few hundred feet and a roll out on a short base/final would have been a better option.
Very sad. A good reminder for all of us.
When I was taught some fifty years ago...my instructor said you cant stall in a slip....has worked for me for years...the problem now is they do not teach fly the airplane...nor do they teach unusual attitudes..ie spins, slips, basic airmanship...now its you have a computer...your good to go
All their expensive touchscreens didn't help these pilots.
You can stall in a slip. Pull back hard and it will snap inverted. That’s why you maintain the same pitch angle in a slip from when you started. Never pull back to increase pitch in a slip .... whether forward or side slip.
incorrect, as a student pilot we are taught power on and off stalls, forward slips, minimum maneuvering speed. I fly a steam gauge 172
um, my guess is that a plane will happily stall in a slip if you stall both wings
A Sr20 did crash on the street that I live on a few years back
Why didn’t they just plan their approach, circle and land like everyone else? Did they get bored or something?
@dboy4ever well, that could work. howeverproper counter spin procedures tell us to control roll with rudder. PARE :power idle aileron neutral, opposite rudder, elevator to brake the stall. If he was indeed in a fully stalled condition with the left wing being more stalled then the right, (a left rolling incipient spin) then countering with aileron would only make the spin tighter and harder to get out of. Opposite rudder was proper for a spini think he wasnt stalled completely thus a snap roll
Thanks for revealing why cirrus22 's are such widowmakers.......
@acemannw 550 feet above the ground and no warning. you'd have to have spiderman like reflexes to pull the chute handle before you hit the ground.
(depending on speed and direction of travel, (horizontal/vertical) the parachute takes at least a thousand feet to work anyway.)
The real question: What was the aircraft doing in the pattern at 500'+ BELOW pattern altitude making totally non standard maneuvers??? There was a CFI on board and he/she allowed this? Or, worse yet, was the CFI at the controls? This is but one of many GA accidents that are a direct result of poor judgement. In flight school, I was told repeatedly that the most deadly threat I faced was something the instructor(s) could NOT teach me (or anyone else), and that was failure to exercise sound judgement at all times while piloting an aircraft.
I was on the Cirrus list of pilots take up a 22 and for me I just wanted to feel the difference with new mfg. technology and airframe. I went through all the performance maneuvers and wanted to do a stall spin. He mentioned at the time that the aircraft was not meant to do a stall spin. For some reason I thought all FAA certified AC needed to go through that test. The parachute has some limitations as well. You have to be at a certain low speed before deploying it, limiting its use.
@shaneboulds It seems to me that the deceased pilot applied the correct spin recovery procedure (opposite rudder) in what seemed to be a partial stall. But due to the peculiar design of the Cirrus aircraft, this actually made things worse because the ailerons were still effective. I heard once a Cirrus gets into a real spin it's nearly impossible to recover and that's why they come with parachutes. Correct me if I'm wrong
11 years after your posting! The Cirrus spins quite normally, and recovers normally, but it is slick and takes some vertical distance to do it. The Leading Edge Cuff on the Cirrus was not done to NASA specs of their spin-resistance test program, and the wing aspect ratio surpassed the NASA test airplanes significantly. Cirrus proved normal spin performance to gain European approval. It is true that >>effective
@GuyJCooper Simulated engine out should be done with a hard deck at ...say 6,000 ft AGL? Not atop a runway.
And then, there is that classic fuel management accident: Fuel selector valve set to pull gas from only one wing. Banking during the turn to final causes remaining fuel in this wing's tank to move away from pump line by gravity and centrifugal forces = Fuel starvation and engine dies off --> slows low speed aircraft even further --> inner wing stalls --> spin --> terrain.
Would that be avoidable if it was Diamond da42?
I am wondering how they know the aircrafts AoA from the data recorder. A Cirrus has no AoA sensor.
although the actions of the pilot caused this issue and really nothing would have changed the results......the wing design of the Cirrus helps the stall issues....But another help in the stall problems on many planes are Vortex Generators....they have been studied awhile. there are many videos out there showing the stall speed can be lowered way down with VG's added to the wings.....helps a ton .
What does he mean "high load factors" at 5:17?
True, the 30 degrees of bank assumes you're flying the airplane correctly in the first place. You can be straight and level and yank it into a stall, or if you're stretching the glide in an engine out situation; the 30 degrees of bank is a general rule to keep people from yanking and banking themselves at what would usually be a safe airspeed into a stall/spin below 1000' AGL.
A sterile cockpit environment on landing is a must. I cant help but consider that maybe the pilot and instructor where preoccupied. Thank you AVweb for another informative video. This keeps those of us that view these to be safer in the air.
My 2p is that the pilot was trying to make an S turn to line up for landing on 19.
You got the rudder direction and stalled wing wrong in your explanation, but everything else is spot on.
From what I understand don't aircraft already have 'wash-out' - a twist of angle of incidence between the root and tip of the wing ? I know that some training gliders have an aileron differential - upgoing aileron giving more deflection than down going drag inducing one - less adverse yaw and more down force to drag inducing lifting force, on opposite wing, to help reduce a yaw to spin. Then again a down going wing also creates a higher angle of attack, to angle of oncoming airflow, when angle of attack is near a stall - hence requirement of a wing tip of lower angle of incidence.
it prolly has more to do w/ selling. it is more often merely 'marketing': new 'ingredients' - flavors, features, and formulas. exactly as what can be found in the shampoo aisle. people go for it. now there are 23 ways to wash your hair and crash your airplane as well.
The Cirrus is a fast and thus, demanding airplane to fly, it's certainly no Cessna 150. I've read most of the Cirrus accident reports and the majority are by low time pilots with limited high performance experience. They should be proficient in something like a Bonanza, Piper Arrow or Cessna 210 before being turned loose in a Cirrus.
When a glider does a beat up and then does a 180 turn at 150feet or so the angle of attack is very high also. The speed is a lot faster but can someone explain the difference?
Kworbulan Well , I can think of a couple of reasons. You have to be a more competent stick and RUDDER pilot , because you don’t have an engine to cover up your mistakes-when coming in for a landing there’s no go-around. However A/S is lower so there’s more time to think, and instead of a ‘ball’ to step on to keep coordinated which necessitates looking down at the lower part of the instrument panel , there is a yaw string right in the middle of the windscreen which does the same job and negates the need to divert your attention from the aircraft’s attitude relative to the ground at a critical juncture in the flight ; coordinated flight , or lack of it, particularly at low level, seems to be an all too frequent initiatory cause for many powered flight accidents.
Slats will delay stall on the protected portion of the wing, but if you abuse it it will do the same thing. This was a very abused case.
Not a pilot but it looks to me like the most dangerous thing you can do in aviation is a low altitude, low speed, sharp turn.
I don't get it, why not just take the time to fly level and around to line up properly with the runway for the landing?
So was this pilot error?
With CFI in right seat, this approach to land not only borders the threshold of intentional criminality but also fully enters the realm of lethal lunacy
Can anyone elaborate on the "snap-roll" comment?
High load factors and steep bank angles are a not to be done in traffic. It would have been better to level the wings, climb to a safe altitude and attempt a safe landing. I ride a bicycle and I know from personal experience not to attempt steep bank angles with high load factors... especially in traffic!
You sound like an excellent bicycle pilot!
Yes, I have been riding for 51+ years. I ride to work and I have a fun time doing it!
Still biking 3 years later?
Mike Mac yes I am. (been riding for 54 years)
+Douglas Fawkes - only 40 years (biking, that is) Better mileage than the car!
My flight manuals and instructors always taught,,,,never exceed 15 degrees bank at traffic pattern altitude and of course never go below approach speed until final approach then use best rate of glide with some throttle unless high winds....
It seems that the pilot should've used counter-aileron, instead of opposite rudder?
Trying to correct a bad approach to landing with aggressive control inputs while you're low and slow.
What was the instructor doing? Was he intending to pass this flight review after a debrief? The return to the pattern was dangerously low and then these steep turns to rescue an approach? This is the problem with instructing. You get to far out of the loop simply because you're just monitoring.
What you said about the altimeter was confusing
He talks about the pressure altitude. The altimeter in the plane measures air pressure to determine height above sea level. This would be displayed directly in front of the pilot. The airport is not at sea level. To clarify how close to the ground the plane was, he gives the AGL (above ground level) altitude.
Wow that was strange that they did a right spin/snap on a left base to final turn. I would expect to see a skidding turn with not left bank but gobs of left rudder instead of a slipping turn with lots of left bank and too much right rudder. They explained what happened very well by showing the airplane snap roll to the right from a left turn. Too me it looks like coordination was just the initial problem but the major mess up was not unloading the stick when rolling upright.
So he didn't use full right rudder AND neutralize the controls. But I don't like those steep angles and that low at all anyway. What were they thinking? Just set up to land again. That approach is dangerous during both turns.
left "yawn" (3:56) ? I thought the term was yaw?
In a panic, people revert to training where they learned emergency techniques. The Cirrus has a side stick and trying the same movements that most use on a Cessna will not work the same way. That is my guess anyway.
@dboy4ever Well considering he was below 500 feet he wouldn't have the time to apply full spin recovery procedures, OR the time to enter a full spin in the first place. Simply the plane stalled, spin recovery was applied and since it was so early in the incipient spin stage, it caused a snap roll, (A basic aerobatic maneuver) and that ultimately led to disaster in this case. RIP to the pilot.
I think this is what happened in Houston also ! A buch of turns and go around an low altitude.. i think that stick i hard to get used to
In the Houston accident the pilot pulled power and retracted the flaps while still below the flaps up stall speed.
The pilot of this Cirrus was a VERY good friend of mine, and was also my veterinarian. He was a good pilot, and a good man. He stepped up into this aircraft from a Piper Arrow he had owned for several years. He had a vet clinic in Lindsay, and also one in Sulphur, and would fly himself and his two vet techs over to work every morning. This accident was the result of some bad decisions, and a lack of experience in the Cirrus, plain and simple.
Oooh well. Plane and simple.
He’s life is simplistic now at the bottom of the crater.
Sorry about your loss. No one should be joking about someone who gets killed in an accident like this. Sounds like a really nice guy,
Good pilot, right until he was not.
Someone on TH-cam once said, airplane was designed by God to reduce the number of doctors and lawyers.
Wow, just overfly and enter the left downwind for the opposite runway and live. Wonder if the CFI took over or was asleep.
SGTSnakeUSMC Seems most likely, as a previous commenter said , that the CFI gave him a forced landing , since it was one of the few places you can do it at that height above ground without having to worry about wires , scaring people or cattle, or getting reported for low flying. Trouble was , instead of just maneuvering to land on 19 with any checks superfluous by then , he started some rigmarole that confused the CFI and diverted his attention. Both thinking along different lines until it was too late for either of them.
John, you are wrong. An airplane can only descend if the wings are making less lift than needed to support the aircraft (lightly loaded). Alternatively, it can only climb if the wings are making more lift (highly loaded). The more rapid the descent, the more lightly loaded the wing is.
This almost sounds like the result of a seizure or stroke
So he failed the checkride?
Pretty much proves low altitude means no recovery chance. A personal rule should be --No large bank in traffic patterns. The aircraft will be too low and slow to take the chance, especially on a downwind leg or any maneuver involving a crosswind component.
wow...I'm beginning to think that all pre-pilots should first build and fly model airplanes (Like I did). It teaches you what flies and what struggles to fly. I'm still a student pilot, several solo's. My instructor is old school....tries to distract me....talks about off- subject issues at critical times.....Flying models taught me that even though your friends are trying to get you to do stupid things like buzz that guy in the parking lot or chase that bird....you MUST keep the plane flying....not falling...or you'll be repairing your model....And if you are flying a model and the engine is barely running at all.....that's about how most full size, single engine airplanes fly....so you have to be smooth and pretty much level and very careful in the pattern.....heavy input is not an option....an embarrassing go-around beats a forced landing any day. Hope you live to tell about it.