Three Dead in Houston Cirrus Crash

killbilly said:
Interesting. Does it really handle that differently from traditional trainers?
Click to expand...
Not really. I got my PPL in an SR20, I have maybe 40 hours in them. As mentioned above, they are very slick, so descents have to be managed, and airspeed on approach is key for hitting your aiming point. If you want to go down and slow down, you have bring the nose up first to bleed off speed and manage it from there.

It's a tragic situation, but as with any accident in aviation, we can learn from it.
 
Murdoughnut said:
Just listened to the audio. Having not spent any time in higher performance singles, is there something about the aircraft that makes chopping altitude on final particularly difficult?

Have to say from listening to it that the controllers seemed very patient with her considering the workload and her obvious difficulties operating the aircraft.
Click to expand...
High performance aircraft (particularly turbocharged ones) require you to be ahead of them, specially on power reductions. They're usually heavy enough that the inertia they have takes longer to counter, resulting in the temptation to reduce power even more untill suddenly you're way behind the aircraft. Natural correction to this is to add power, but they take longer to accelerate, so being behind causes you to add too much power and the cycle repeats itself.

This is basically what happened to thr Asiana 777 in KSFO. They were highh, they chopped the power (and thought the autopilot would take care of it). To arrest a descent at the point thhey needed to, they should have applied power some time BEFORE they needed it. In other words, STAY FURTHER AHEAD OF THR AIRCRAFT.

A common procedure on High Performance A/C is Power setting profile, where you know what setting you need for take off, cruise, landing, and stick to it and let the plane catch you, not the other way around.

I'm no CFI but This is he technique I was taught and I find it to be the best option so far.

Take Care
 
MaRiO FDZ said:
A common procedure on High Performance A/C is Power setting profile, where you know what setting you need for take off, cruise, landing, and stick to it and let the plane catch you, not the other way around.

I'm no CFI but This is he technique I was taught and I find it to be the best option so far.
Click to expand...

To simplify that, fly every airplane the same way - with stabilized approaches. Stabilized approaches with minimal changes = good controlled landings. At least, that's what I teach, and it seems to work.

EDIT: Even close in approaches should be stabilized - you aren't generally starting the below 1,000...
 
JeppUpdater said:
Surveillance video of the accident. Airplane hit with little forward momentum and stopped almost immediately. Parachute was definitely stowed and blown out by the impact.

Before you click this is NOT a nice video shot from distance. This is up close right next to the accident and is graphic.

RIP to all onboard.


http://www.khou.com/news/local/raw-video/raw-surveillance-video-captures-plane-crash/239001161
Click to expand...
Graphic is an understatement. Wow. Sure, Cirrus are crash proof....
 
greg1016 said:
What you missed is that she was told to keep her speed up and make short approaches on every attempt, and at least one of the go arounds e as due to a jet crawling up her behind. If you take her to 17 and use LAHSO, the sequence with the jets landing 4 becomes moot. I edited my original post because I don't want to mmqb those controllers.
Click to expand...

Yes, all piston aircraft at HOU are told to keep their speed up. Many times their Vne is slower than a Jets Vref.

Regardless, 17/35 has 6000' of concrete. If you can't LAHSO, say unable and chew up all 6000' if you want.

If you can't keep up with the pace of the airport, choose a smaller one.

Simple really.
 
mshunter said:
Get upset. Everyone here is so quick to hang someone when an accident happens. I pray it's never me. You should do the same.
Click to expand...

I'm not upset.

I think your response about their bodies not even being cold was way more tasteless than any other post/speculation that I had read up until that point.
 
Interesting quote from the on site NTSB investigator:

"It appears the rocket motor deployed either immediately before or just after impact," Latson said. "The rocket motor did deploy (but) the parachute did not."

The pilot might have tried to use it, but way too late....

EDIT: The video does show the rocket fire during the crash sequence
 
Last edited:
JeppUpdater said:
Surveillance video of the accident. Airplane hit with little forward momentum and stopped almost immediately. Parachute was definitely stowed and blown out by the impact.

Before you click this is NOT a nice video shot from distance. This is up close right next to the accident and is graphic.

RIP to all onboard.


http://www.khou.com/news/local/raw-video/raw-surveillance-video-captures-plane-crash/239001161
Click to expand...
It seems to show a counter-clockwise rotation until impact. Her position was the upwind-to-left-crosswind corner, so it suggests a very low airspeed that went quickly from stall to left spin as she turned left and the Gs began to increase. I can't tell the elevator position, but you can clearly see the CAPS rocket firing upon impact. I find these discussions and this video to be very helpful in understanding what most of us only know through books, videos and instruction.
 
fast89pony said:
The fact that you can pretty much see the bodies of 3 people dying in real time.
Click to expand...

I guess I'll have to look closer. Didn't see any "bodies". Now if we are trying infer that because we know people died in that crash that it's graphic, I'll just agree to disagree.
 
Murdoughnut said:
Just listened to the audio. Having not spent any time in higher performance singles, is there something about the aircraft that makes chopping altitude on final particularly difficult?

Have to say from listening to it that the controllers seemed very patient with her considering the workload and her obvious difficulties operating the aircraft.
Click to expand...
Controller was a freaking saint IMO, and I don't like hearing criticism of ATC in this situation.

As a flight instructor, I'm just gonna say that it's our damn job not to turn out a student like this. We have the ultimate power of the signoff here, and we ultimately control what sort of pilot we create. It sucks, but it's also our job to deny further signoffs if a pilot fails to demonstrate competence OR if they appear to have an attitude or mindset that will result in them being an unsafe pilot and it's something we can't correct.

I have an incredibly dear friend of mine who wants me to teach him to fly, but I've observed him in other situations enough to know that while I can absolutely teach him to fly—and he'd probably be a pretty good stick—I cannot teach him the judgment or responsibility aspect because he has an anti-authority and invulnerability streak a mile wide, and doesn't do well with stress. I felt awful about it, but I gave him "the talk" and said exactly that.

As to another point being made, you can do almost anything to an unloaded wing.... flight instructors also need to be pilots enough to understand that a steep-banked, low-speed descending turn is ok and sometimes ideal... as long as that yoke doesn't come back before the speed is increased. Elevators stall airplanes, not ailerons or throttles.

-Fox
 
I've never flown a Cirrus but I've read that the spring loaded sidestick can inhibit the pilot's perception of how much force she is applying to the control surfaces. Can anyone who has flown a Cirrus speak to that? Is it a legitimate criticism? As a new pilot I had one instance that I'll never forget where I got slow in the pattern but there was so much feedback from the plane in terms of control pressure required and lack of responsiveness that it instantly brought my attention back where it belonged and I un-f'd myself.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
"Cut it in tight" is the last thing heard in now two accidents. Sure, it's not the controllers fault. But if we can show that this phrase has caused people (obviously not you) but many other people to overreact, and then stall and fatally crash, then the whole situation needs to be examined.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the "whole situation" of pilots not knowing how to cut the power downwind somewhere between midfield and the numbers and glide on in. I do believe power off landings and short field landings are both still part of the PPC PTS.
IMO, there was WAY too much jabbering going on here. If I was ATC, the second I had the impulse to switch runways on a GA pilot during a busy period, I'd take that impulse as my personal directive to either clear the area or waive off the GA plane on a delay vector until I could get around to giving them something more, er, standard. But that's just me based on my very extensive experience with many, many GA pilots. That said, ATC is not to blame here. Anyone flying an airplane should have the capacity to deal with this kind of situation (and that capacity might be simply the judgement to get the heck out of Dodge for a few minutes and come back a little later). The unfortunate reality is that many do not, and some -like this one- pay a heavy price for their lack of capacity.
RIP. Condolences to the families and friends involved.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fast89pony said:
The fact that you can pretty much see the bodies of 3 people dying in real time.
Click to expand...

Okay. It sucks, but it doesn't make me feel anything to know that there were 3 people in that plane. It is what it is. That being said, in drivers ed we watched a series called red asphalt and I was more intrigued than scared into good driving.

The most disappointing thing isn't the deaths, it's that a pilot way in over their head took two other people.
 
There is a LOT of blame to go around here, Whomever signed this pilot off, ATC, the pilot, etc. One thing is for sure, the lawyers are going to have a field day.

RIP, absolutely senseless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top