CAPS deployment caught on camera near FYV

K

krock918316

Pre-Flight
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
41
Location
Oklahoma
Display Name
Display name:
Kevin
From @fredjackturner on twitter:

XbRXcNL.png
 
Interesting to see a picture of it caught in action! Do you have any more details on the incident?
 
Guy that caught the image found the plane. Says both people on board had minor injuries, but appeared ok.
 
Unless the canopy had just deployed, that's an awful lot of oscillation! No reason that should have not been designed out of the canopy.
 
write-stuff said:
Unless the canopy had just deployed, that's an awful lot of oscillation! No reason that should have not been designed out of the canopy.
Click to expand...


I was thinking the same thing, I wonder what altitude it was pulled at
 
write-stuff said:
Unless the canopy had just deployed, that's an awful lot of oscillation! No reason that should have not been designed out of the canopy.
Click to expand...

Motor running perhaps? That might do it. Otherwise rounds gonna pound it is what they do. That handle turns a flying machine into a crappy fabric drag device.
 
Nice picture,be interesting to know ,what altitude chute was deployed,on initial opening there is oscillation to get the airplane stable.
 
They're saying he had oil pressure issues.
 
Wow, that pendulum-motion while under canopy looks like it could result in a pretty violent ground impact.
 
Regardless of the oscillation, the rate of descent looks pretty intense. That explains the injuries you hear about after BRS deployment. My fear would be having back problems all my life after a landing under chute. Beats the alternative, though, if the alternative involves a smoking hole.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Wow, that pendulum-motion while under canopy looks like it could result in a pretty violent ground impact.
Click to expand...

Well he had the asphalt to cushion the blow. :eek:

The seats absorb some of the g load in a pancake impact, but not enough to keep it from hurting real bad.

Glad to hear that both survived and sounds like they're relatively OK. Wonder what precipitated the deployment.
 
News here is reporting the aircraft reached 9,500 ft before beginning a descent. At one point the descent reached 3,300 fpm.
 
krock918316 said:
News here is reporting the aircraft reached 9,500 ft before beginning a descent. At one point the descent reached 3,300 fpm.
Click to expand...

Looks like emergency descent from the altitude and speed track.

Had he trimmed it for best glide, he could have easily reached the field. :dunno: (In my own opinion, which is not worth much here, I realize.)

Can anybody dig out some ATC tapes? (if LA has a scanner closeby)
 
Maciej said:
Pulled the chute to not grenade the motor?
Click to expand...

Good question! Could loss of oil pressure degraded the power output of the engine to a point they couldn't hold altitude? The cloud cover looks fairly low so maybe they pulled the chute not being able to see a suitable forced landing site.
 
TFulwider said:
Good question! Could loss of oil pressure degraded the power output of the engine to a point they couldn't hold altitude? The cloud cover looks fairly low so maybe they pulled the chute not being able to see a suitable forced landing site.
Click to expand...

Plausible. The decision height for the chute is, what, 1000 agl? They may have reached the chute DH in or above the clouds with no assurance that they could definitely make the field. In that situation you'd probably have to pull the handle, no? Cirrus-trained guys can enlighten me on the decision process.

Anyone got a tail number? N857SW
 
Last edited:
markstanco said:
Wow. Sounds like he panicked. SOUNDS like it. Guess we will know more in the coming days.
Click to expand...

Yeah he hit that for like one data point. Total time spent greater than 1800 fpm descent rate was 2.5 minutes, during which time he picked up speed. I don't know the reason for doing that, but he's not losing much energy by descending and speeding up. And his descent rate slows considerably at lower altitudes where he traded that extra speed for altitude.

Like you, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. :dunno:
 
petrolero said:
Plausible. The decision height for the chute is, what, 1000 agl? They may have reached the chute DH in or above the clouds with no assurance that they could definitely make the field. In that situation you'd probably have to pull the handle, no? Cirrus-trained guys can enlighten me on the decision process.

Anyone got a tail number? N857SW
Click to expand...

Not recommended below 500 agl
And yes that is a reasonable scenario in which to pull it (reasonable landing location not assured by DH)
 
I'm just jealous that he was climbing 800 to 1000 fpm at 140 KGS. :mad:
 
It's always fun to watch the Cirrus haters come out of their closet so soon after each one of these events.

Hmmm...

It seems that two people got out with pretty minor injuries. What's not to like??

Who gives a flying f*** about who, what, where, why, when and how?

I don't.

petrolero said:
The seats absorb some of the g load in a pancake impact, but not enough to keep it from hurting real bad.
Click to expand...

It's my understanding that the gear absorbs some also...and it's apparently better to come down on land than in water.
 
timwinters said:
It's always fun to watch the Cirrus haters come out of their closet so soon after each one of these events.

Hmmm...

It seems that two people got out with pretty minor injuries. What's not to like??

Who gives a flying f*** about who, what, where, why, when and how?

I don't.
Click to expand...

I didn't see any posts that looked like Cirrus-hating in this thread so far. Did I miss something?
 
petrolero said:
I didn't see any posts that looked like Cirrus-hating in this thread so far. Did I miss something?
Click to expand...

I dont either, and I dont think I was being referred to. I like the 22T. Theres a 2014 with G1000 glass at my airport that I drool over almost weekly.
 
petrolero said:
I didn't see any posts that looked like Cirrus-hating in this thread so far. Did I miss something?
Click to expand...


I think he was referring to posts questioning the oscillations earlier. To Cirrus lovers, if you're not one them, you are a hater.
 
teejayevans said:
I think he was referring to posts questioning the oscillations earlier. To Cirrus lovers, if you're not one them, you are a hater.
Click to expand...

To some Cirrus lovers that's probably true. CAPS has been attacked so much that some of those guys get prematurely defensive. But in this thread I see no bashing.

But the thread is young and it's POA... I'm sure some real haters will stop by. :D
 
LOL True, true, most of us are just waiting for the Cirrus bashing to begin. :)

I really wonder (I am not bashing any persons or any airplanes) why he didn't pitch for Vg and glide to the airport that was 3 miles away. Pitching down for emergency descent wastes a LOT of energy that could have been used to get to a suitable LZ. I think that's where the Cirrus bashing will come in ... through the critique of the pilot's actions. It is a capable airplane but sometimes the pilots are a little premature. :D

Let's wait and see what the NTSB reports.
Glad everyone is okay. We've had plenty of fatalities recently.
 
twitter video link doesn't work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top