Airfacts Journal Story on PDK accident

cocolos

cocolos

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
468
Location
Davis, CA
Display Name
Display name:
cocolos
Did any of you get a chance to read over this? Just curious what your thoughts are? Any cirrus owners know about the last part:

If you worry about things like this, you might want to fly a Cirrus, with an airframe parachute. Trouble there is that I am not sure the Saratoga at PDK got high enough for a chute to have been effective. I’ll leave the absolute answer to that in the hands of the Cirrus community. Do speak up.
Click to expand...
 
Interesting story, though he really offers no solutions. I find articles like this annoying because you spend all the time to read them, get to the end and think "and then"

Dude-Wheres-My-Car-And-Then.jpg


As for the cirrus parachute, I cant remember the operating envelope, but I know that there have been a lot of cases of them being deployed well outside of the parameters and them working. In a congested area with no good landing options I'd pull the handle and cross my fingers. The chances are probably better than anything else I could do.
 
Yea apart from a BRS I figure you could land at airports with long runways as a safety measure. Possibly the other addition would be circling above an airport until you get enough altitude to have options--I'm not sure how you could do that on IFR flight plan, maybe open in the air.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
cocolos said:
Yea apart from a BRS I figure you could land at airports with long runways as a safety measure. Possibly the other addition would be circling above an airport until you get enough altitude to have options--I'm not sure how you could do that on IFR flight plan, maybe open in the air.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

All this talk about climbing over the airport on departure as a solution ignores the fact that the PA32 at PDK would never have been able to complete such a circle.
 
I don't find the "and then" aspect to be troubling; I think the purpose of the article, as much as anything, is to be an introspective thought-provoker, and that it is. Much of what he describes resonates with me, because all of the factors he describes about operating out of Peachtree-De Kalb applied to operations out of Addison, as well.

One thing that occurs to me in reading that: I will very rarely accept an intersection departure, if I have a good, long runway available without a ridiculous weight. I hangar on the west side of Addison, and I can certainly get out much more quickly if I accept a departure from taxiway Foxtrot, at which point I have a little over 3000 feet of runway remaining, plenty for the bonanza. Nonetheless, I almost always except the delay associated with waiting for a crossing clearance, and the taxing to the full-length beginning of runway 15.

Good food for thought!
 
We've had some successful chute pulls as low as 400ft (maybe even 300) but I'm not sure he even got that high. And in general, you're a bit of a test pilot in that range - it's going to depend on a lot of variables (are you climbing or descending, airspeed, etc...) If there is really no good option, it might be worth a shot. In general Cirrus pilots should have a pre-determined plan of action for engine failure on takeoff/climbout. Mine is:
< 500 AGL, land straight ahead in the best/clearest/softest stuff I can find
500-1500 AGL - pull CAPS immediately
>1500 AGL, troubleshoot, try to restart engine, evaluate landing spots, etc...
 
I think the lowest Cirrus chute pull that worked was 298 feet and that is lower than the minimum. That said, if I am 100 feet off the ground and out of options, might as well pull it.
 
Flocker said:
How about the impossible turn? Couldn't a Cirrus make it back from 1,500'?
Click to expand...

Probably depends on the pilot.
My insurance guy stressed that the chute should be used if there is any doubt.

He straight up said they would rather buy the plane than pay for the occupants inside.
 
Flocker said:
How about the impossible turn? Couldn't a Cirrus make it back from 1,500'?
Click to expand...

Not directly related to the question, but this reminded me that I simulated a few scenarios in x-plane departing KPDK rwy 3L climbing Vy in a C172 to see at which AGL I could make it back to rwy 16. Was surprised to see I could pull it off at 500' if I reacted immediately and nailed my bank and airspeed. Wasn't about what this pilot should have done but to be better prepared to react to the unthinkable scenario with lack of options that KPDK gives us. At least this tragic event has caused me to rethink my 0 - 1000' plan.
 
johnxreid said:
Not directly related to the question, but this reminded me that I simulated a few scenarios in x-plane departing KPDK rwy 3L climbing Vy in a C172 to see at which AGL I could make it back to rwy 16. Was surprised to see I could pull it off at 500' if I reacted immediately and nailed my bank and airspeed. Wasn't about what this pilot should have done but to be better prepared to react to the unthinkable scenario with lack of options that KPDK gives us. At least this tragic event has caused me to rethink my 0 - 1000' plan.
Click to expand...

I don't think he even go that high.

I guess this article is just a reminder that the places we land at have little to no outs. So even with BRS that might not be enough. Alternatives would be land at airports with better outcomes for engine outs on takeoff?
 
cocolos said:
I don't think he even go that high.



I guess this article is just a reminder that the places we land at have little to no outs. So even with BRS that might not be enough. Alternatives would be land at airports with better outcomes for engine outs on takeoff?
Click to expand...

That's about all you can do.

In hindsight, about the only thing I might take issue with about the pilot's departure is accepting the change to the short runway. If he had insisted on the original 3R, he might have noticed something and still had runway remaining to put it back down.

I am not trying to judge him as I have no clue if it would have made a difference, but it might have. What saved my butt when I had the sick engine in the Cardinal was a long runway.

As a twin driver, I would not have accepted 3L for departure.
 
johnxreid said:
Not directly related to the question, but this reminded me that I simulated a few scenarios in x-plane departing KPDK rwy 3L climbing Vy in a C172 to see at which AGL I could make it back to rwy 16. Was surprised to see I could pull it off at 500' if I reacted immediately and nailed my bank and airspeed. Wasn't about what this pilot should have done but to be better prepared to react to the unthinkable scenario with lack of options that KPDK gives us. At least this tragic event has caused me to rethink my 0 - 1000' plan.
Click to expand...

I have done this scenario too and one thing that I didn't consider is how an engine fails.

Engine stops, you will react pretty quickly. Boom "Oh s**t", Turn

Now if the engine is gradually slowing or losing power but still spinning and being all loud like engines do, I could totally see the trouble shooting get in the way of making a quick decision.

During training, it was always "Whoop, you lost an engine". Find your field and go.

I never had a more gradual scenario. Not sure how it could be taught but after this incident, I got to thinking even if there are gradual issues you need to be able to make that decision first. Then decide to start looking at the knobs.
 
Some airports, it's just going to be a really bad day if you have an engine out below the magic altitude where you know you can return.

Nowadays at least there's Google Earth so you can take a peek before flying somewhere you haven't been before. When I started flying you had no idea until you were in the pattern that the departure options were not pretty, other than noting that the airport was surrounded by yellow ink on a chart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top