One dead three injured

[Tommy]

 

13 minutes ago, PTK said:

Please do elaborate because that's not at all clear...

 

Pretty much like what Andy said. And there is certainly clear evidence to suggest that a partial engine failure in a single resulted in worse outcome than a total failure. When you don't have options, you don't second guess...

[PTK]

4 hours ago, Tommy said:

 

Pretty much like what Andy said. And there is certainly clear evidence to suggest that a partial engine failure in a single resulted in worse outcome than a total failure. When you don't have options, you don't second guess...

So you're saying there were no other options here but to pull the chute. I understand now. I respectfully disagree. 

[PMcClure]

2 hours ago, PTK said:

So you're saying there were no other options here but to pull the chute. I understand now. 

I think he is saying that without a chute the only option would have been a forced landing. 

[kortopates]

4 hours ago, Tommy said:

When you don't have options, you don't second guess...

I guess the problem I have with this line of reasoning is that you always have options. And this was no exception. The Cirrus POH (actually FOM) is one of the best most detailed ones out there and I believe it and their standardized training program have been very responsible in greatly improving the fleets early higher accident rates. They devote a separate document to just CAPS deployment. Although they don't specifically cite an absolute minimum altitude for deployment because they say it depends on several factors and they say they have only demonstrated it to within 400' AGL and then add as of 2013 a pilot successfully deployed it at 444' AGL and their were 5 fatals with CAPs deployments too close to the ground to deploy, Cirrus has also said it should work to 300' AGL if maintaining straight and level flight but if the aircraft is coming down they say it can take 400' to deploy it and 920' if in a spin. 

There other key point with their training and POH is the need to perform the industry standard safety brief before departure. This may not be universal but Cirrus didn't invent this, its being preached by the majority of training organizations and is prudent for all of pilots because just as Cirrus underlines, its too late to be on takeoff and start making unanticipated decisions about if you are high enough to deploy or even high enough to turn back and just which way you will turn or where you might land. But in performing a pre-takeoff brief, the pilot verbalizes several key decision points such as what minimum airspeed he/she will continue the takeoff run past the half way point of the runway, what minimum altitude he/she will deploy the chute if a problem and what minimum MSL altitude he/she will turn back to a runway and which runway taking into account the airport physical environment as well as weather conditions while their is time to give it some thought. 

I doubt the pilot would have briefed deploying the chute below the min demonstrated deployment altitude of 400' when he had wide open space ahead. But we know the NTSB is going to say the pilot deployed the chute below the minimum demonstrated altitude. How can we not conclude that better emergency training and following procedures to self brief would have helped this pilot survive the accident? To me this is a wake up call to any pilot not yet self briefing each departure to go over their emergency plan before taking the runway.  

Edited July 17, 2017 by kortopates

[PMcClure]

I prefer to have more options. But with more options, decisions become more complicated and require practice. 

[Tommy]

6 hours ago, PMcClure said:

I prefer to have more options. But with more options, decisions become more complicated and require practice. 

Yes, we all prefer options but when there are options AND time is critical, having options means a snap decision needs to be made - often based on incomplete information and incorrect recall of the POH... 

Indeed, I think Cirrus and its owner should definitely take this incidence as a wake up call - if NTSB showed that low altitude chute deployment was indeed the culprit - and hammer its owner pilots the importance of take off and landing safety brief to include CAPS altitude call out.

[Tommy]

9 hours ago, PTK said:

So you're saying there were no other options here but to pull the chute. I understand now. I respectfully disagree. 

"...Use of the chute, asymmetric operation, and partial engine failure can be more harmful than complete failure in a single without a chute..."

[Yetti]

So how many people have practiced the engine quitting on climb out in the Mooney?  Flight Review found me practicing pushing over from a climb (at a safe altitude of course)  You have to be aggressive.  You don't have much time to make the first move to give you the chance to make more options available.

Edited July 18, 2017 by Yetti

[PMcClure]

1 hour ago, Yetti said:

So how many people have practiced the engine quitting on climb out in the Mooney?  Flight Review found me practicing pushing over from a climb (at a safe altitude of course)  You have to be aggressive.  You don't have much time to make the first move to give you the chance to make more options available.

And how many have made that decision in advance? Engine out before XXX' and land straight ahead.... Some priorities and decisions need to be made in advance.

If...Then....

I would assume the same applies to the chute pull. 

[XXX]

45 minutes ago, Yetti said:

So how many people have practiced the engine quitting on climb out in the Mooney?  Flight Review found me practicing pushing over from a climb (at a safe altitude of course)  You have to be aggressive.  You don't have much time to make the first move to give you the chance to make more options available.

I have, 100' AGL and land on a long runway. Yes you have to be very aggressive. Couldn't do it the first time, instructor had to push the yoke forward. Second time I was able to do it. Windscreen full of runway and no sky.

[Yetti]

19 minutes ago, PMcClure said:

And how many have made that decision in advance? Engine out before XXX' and land straight ahead.... Some priorates and decisions need to be made in advance.

If...Then....

I would assume the same applies to the chute pull. 

using MS Flight Sim and Cessna 172 it was 750 AGL to complete a turn back to the field.  May or may not make the runway.  There was a screen full of ground as you made the turn.  Have not made the Power off 180 in the mooney.