Cirrus BRS malfunction - Addison, TX May 16, 2013

[designrs]

Unfortunately pilot Valentine is getting slammed really hard on the AOPA forums. Apparently the IMC boys have a real problem with dodging weather cells via XM weather without a stormscope, as well as some the decisions made. Although I don't appreciate the name calling and personal attacks on the pilot it is interesting to read alternate opinions:

http://forums.aopa.org/showthread.php?t=87433&page=4

[dstclair]

I noticed the same error in judgement (if the post is accurate). The pilot seemed to believe that XM weather provides adequate updates to circumnavigate storms. Very bad idea, IFR or VFR, given the images can be 30 minutes old. These storms were nasty with staying on the ground the best option. Had a business associate coming in from OKC commercial that got diverted to St.Louis. When the big boys don't fly, I sure don't.

Doesn't diminish his skills in getting the plane down nor does it seem related to the chute failure, though.

[FastEddieB]

From Tim Valentine, the pilot:

"Would you please post on the CT flier and let them know that according
to flight aware we were 35 miles behind a fast moving cell and the cell that
moving away from us rapidly. We were talking with ATC . We did not fly into
a Thunderstorm."

Thought it was relevant to this thread as well.

[jnmeade]

The more you know about the components and constituency of a thunderstorm the better decisions one can make about them.

In some cases you can safely be within a couple of miles of a thunderstorm and in other cases 30 miles is plenty close.

Anyone I know of uses XM weather as a trend indicator as well as a situation display. That is an important use that is ignored in most discussions.

I have a great respect for thunderstorms but that does not transfer into unreasoning fear so long as I have some outs.

[drseti]

so long as I have some outs.

I'm in complete agreement, Jim. I just don't consider "pull the 'chute" to be one of those outs. The BRS is a last-resort out for problems you didn't anticipate, not an excuse to ignore problems you should be planning for.

[Merlinspop]

so long as I have some outs.

I'm in complete agreement, Jim. I just don't consider "pull the 'chute" to be one of those outs. The BRS is a last-resort out for problems you didn't anticipate, not an excuse to ignore problems you should be planning for.

I agree with you both. The failure to deploy is what would cause me to lose sleep if I was the owner of a Cirrus with a repacked BRS.

Bruce

[designrs]

FAA data suggests less than 3% of inadvertent spins are recovered (regardless of aircraft)... almost none at low altitude. Yet 80 to 90% of chute pulls are one happy maneuver away from death and dismemberment. *

So... unless you're an aerobatic pilot and not at low altitude (where most spins occur) the survivability based on spin recovery techniques seems pretty bleak.

Most thoughts about chutes are about pilot incapaitation, motor or control failure, or unsuitable emergency landing terrain. Yet most people don't think much about chutes for low altitude spins. Of course good airmanship to stay out of such a situation is the priority. However chute deployment would be just about the only thing to save lives in a low altitude spin... and it would have to be deployed instantaneously, just as seen in videos of military pilots ejecting at low altitude... and damm they do it fast!!

I was just watching a King Schools LSA checkride prep course in which the pin on the balisic parachute handle is removed before flight on a Flight Design CT. (Probably standard POH for that aircraft.) That struck me as a being a bit overly reliant on the safety equipment. Logically it is worth consideration based upon how fast a chute might need to be pulled... yet it seems unnatural in leaning towards the "pull the chute" mentality over "fly the airplane" first and foremost.

* Note: First paragraph paraphrased from the following post (just to give due credit):
http://forums.aopa.org/showpost.php?p=1 ... tcount=121

[3Dreaming]

FAA data suggests less than 3% of inadvertent spins are recovered (regardless of aircraft)... almost none at low altitude. Yet 80 to 90% of chute pulls are one happy maneuver away from death and dismemberment. *

So... unless you're an aerobatic pilot and not at low altitude (where most spins occur) the survivability based on spin recovery techniques seems pretty bleak.

Most thoughts about chutes are about pilot incapaitation, motor or control failure, or unsuitable emergency landing terrain. Yet most people don't think much about chutes for low altitude spins. Of course good airmanship to stay out of such a situation is the priority. However chute deployment would be just about the only thing to save lives in a low altitude spin... and it would have to be deployed instantaneously, just as seen in videos of military pilots ejecting at low altitude... and damm they do it fast!!

I was just watching a King Schools LSA checkride prep course in which the pin on the balisic parachute handle is removed before flight on a Flight Design CT. (Probably standard POH for that aircraft.) That struck me as a being a bit overly reliant on the safety equipment. Logically it is worth consideration based upon how fast a chute might need to be pulled... yet it seems unnatural in leaning towards the "pull the chute" mentality over "fly the airplane" first and foremost.

* Note: First paragraph paraphrased from the following post (just to give due credit):
http://forums.aopa.org/showpost.php?p=1 ... tcount=121

I had the chance to attend BRS training for the CT. Before I had the training I was reluctant to pull the pin before flight. In the training BRS said they investigate all aircraft accidents where a BRS is installed wether it was used or not. In their investigations they have found at least one incident where there was damage to the handle mounting from the pilot trying to pull the handle and the pin had not been removed. I now have the key for my airplane on the same ring as the parachute pin, so it has to be removed before flight. To me it doesn't go towards the pull the chute mentality it goes towards being ready if the need would be there.

[jnmeade]

FAA data suggests less than 3% of inadvertent spins are recovered (regardless of aircraft)... almost none at low altitude. Yet 80 to 90% of chute pulls are one happy maneuver away from death and dismemberment. *

* Note: First paragraph paraphrased from the following post (just to give due credit):
http://forums.aopa.org/showpost.php?p=1 ... tcount=121

That quote is from an AOPA member post who did not attribute it. There is no way to know what the quoted number is based on. There is no discussion of whether a C150 is easier to enter/exit a spin than a B747. There is virtually no credibility at all to the quote without more references.

[deltafox]

I pull the pin prior to each flight (...and I like the idea of having the pin on the airplane key ring). I fully agree that it helps mentally prepare me to USE the system. I also include the altitude where I can use the chute during my takeoff brief.

Another thought, try to remove the pin with your eyes closed...with either hand.

[jnmeade]

The pin on my plane is out before the plane moves. It is on a ring that fits nicely on the fuel selector so it is easy to see and when the flight is over and the fuel selector is turned off the pin is visible as a reminder to put the BRS back on safety.

[FastEddieB]

Another successful CAPS activation, this one in England:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gl ... e-22798139

[designrs]

Thanks Eddie. Very interesting photo in that article showing what happens after a chute deployment. It ain't pretty, but it sure looks a lot better than some of the recent fatal crash photos that I have seen. Knowing that someone walked away with only minor injuries is even better!

[designrs]

Scroll through all the photos in that article. Damm, that was close! Good thing it didn't take out one of the densely packed houses!

[RyanShort1]

FAA data suggests less than 3% of inadvertent spins are recovered (regardless of aircraft)... almost none at low altitude. Yet 80 to 90% of chute pulls are one happy maneuver away from death and dismemberment. *

So... unless you're an aerobatic pilot and not at low altitude (where most spins occur) the survivability based on spin recovery techniques seems pretty bleak.

Interesting statistic, but most certainly in need of qualification. Inadvertent non-training exercise spins might be more appropriate. I've had students kick rudders the wrong way during stall practice and some of those have developed quickly into incipient spins. They were certainly inadvertent on the student's part!

Also, that assumes that pilots don't get themselves into spins in other situations and just not report it, which I know is not the case. I've heard other pilots talk about stall / spin situations that they got themselves into whilst practicing one thing or another.

Ryan