ytodd
Pre-takeoff checklist
http://www.pjstar.com/article/20150830/NEWS/150839985#loadComment
One survivor, looks like a Cirrus maybe. RIP
One survivor, looks like a Cirrus maybe. RIP
Plane down in central IL
- Thread starter ytodd
- Start date
sourdough44
En-Route
KEWANEE, IL -- Authorities say two Texas residents have died in a plane crash in northern Illinois that left a third person injured.
The Peoria Journal-Star reports authorities responded to the crash in a soybean field in Kewanee around 9:30 a.m. Sunday.
Henry County Coroner David Johnson pronounced 67-year-old Steven Murray and his son, 38-year-old Mark Murray, dead at the scene. Both were from Houston.
A third victim, 40-year-old Samantha Murray, was airlifted to a Peoria hospital.
Johnson tells the newspaper all three had been in the area for a family gathering and were returning home.
Illinois State Police say a farmer heard the crash, found the downed plane and called authorities.
The aircraft crashed about two miles west of Kewanee Municipal Airport, where it had taken off.
The Federal Aviation Administration and National Transportation Safety Board are investigating.
Runway 27, 4500', looks nice.
I wonder what the weather was like? Here is Moline about the same time.
30 09:52 E 3 2.50 Fog/Mist OVC003 64 63 96% NA NA 30.09 1018.7
30 08:52 E 5 0.25 Fog VV002 63 62
The Peoria Journal-Star reports authorities responded to the crash in a soybean field in Kewanee around 9:30 a.m. Sunday.
Henry County Coroner David Johnson pronounced 67-year-old Steven Murray and his son, 38-year-old Mark Murray, dead at the scene. Both were from Houston.
A third victim, 40-year-old Samantha Murray, was airlifted to a Peoria hospital.
Johnson tells the newspaper all three had been in the area for a family gathering and were returning home.
Illinois State Police say a farmer heard the crash, found the downed plane and called authorities.
The aircraft crashed about two miles west of Kewanee Municipal Airport, where it had taken off.
The Federal Aviation Administration and National Transportation Safety Board are investigating.
Runway 27, 4500', looks nice.
I wonder what the weather was like? Here is Moline about the same time.
30 09:52 E 3 2.50 Fog/Mist OVC003 64 63 96% NA NA 30.09 1018.7
30 08:52 E 5 0.25 Fog VV002 63 62
Last edited:
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
2 miles west of the departure airport - I suspect you are right. Looks like a nice field to make a survivable forced landing.....wonder if they would still be alive if they hadn't pulled the chute?
I'm not bad mouthing chutes, but the chute does take time to deploy and work for you. It is not a Martin Baker hot seat. If you are too low, you might be better off NOT pulling the chute.
JCranford
En-Route
I agree. Once you pull that chute, you have relinquished control of the airplane.
AlanM
Pre-takeoff checklist
Chute pull parameters I used:
1. 0 to 500 agl = no pull
2. 500 to 1000 agl = maybe
3. 1000 and above = definitely
Chute deploys fast. Was in the chute simulator at Cirrus in Duluth and the chute does work and does save lives if a "macho" attitude does not exist.
1. 0 to 500 agl = no pull
2. 500 to 1000 agl = maybe
3. 1000 and above = definitely
Chute deploys fast. Was in the chute simulator at Cirrus in Duluth and the chute does work and does save lives if a "macho" attitude does not exist.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,724
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
You can say that again. That was a nice field to dead stick on. A real tragic irony. I'm gonna go on a limb and speculate the front seaters would have had a better chance at surviving in this scenario if they had just accepted a straight ahead vector and Cessna Land-O-Matic (trim for app speed and let Jesus take the wheel) the dead stick attempt.
No it doesn't. If you look at the Hawaii CAPS deployment fully supervised by USCG (the wet dream real-world scenario for free Cirrus marketing) you can assess really easy that it takes an entire 21 seconds for the risers to re-pitch the aircraft to it's "PLF" prescribed pitch attitude. 21 seconds is not a fast sequence. Between second 1 and second 20 the chute puts you in a steeply nose down attitude, a non-survivable one for front seaters as it has been demonstrated several times already. That's why you can't pull this thing low. Like fearless said, this ain't a MB zero-zero for the occupants. It's not a matter of being macho, it's a matter of fully understanding the equipment you got to work with. Those who hastily pull low in a panic, do not. This forced landing couldn't have happened over better terrain and weather conditions. Condolences to the survivors and family.
Last edited:
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
For those who haven't seen it, here is the USCG video mentioned.
http://youtu.be/gBCUQlF3MMU
The chute itself does 'deploy' quickly, but as Hindsight pointed out, it takes a noticeably long period of time to get the aircraft into the proper attitude. He wasn't exaggerating about the 21 seconds.
If you pull the chute too low, I think you can imagine what the impact would be like with the chute open but the nose pointing almost straight down.
bnt83
Final Approach
Kinda surprised there isn't software linked to annunciator that shows when chute is not recommended based on altitudes/attitudes etc. (Queue product liability lawyers)
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
IF this accident was a case of too low to pull the chute, I wouldn't be surprised if after the lawyers are done, there is a mandatory placard with minimum chute altitudes placed on the panel.
Turningfinal
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
- Messages
- 436
- Display Name
Display name:
Turningfinal
I believe the older Cirri (?) take significantly shorter amount of time. I think they extended the amount of time for the line cutters to work by 10 seconds with the newer generation models (G5).
bnt83
Final Approach
A placard isn't idiot-proof enough (reference the landing gear selector lockouts, out of trim warning systems etc etc)
JasonM
Pattern Altitude
Talk on the cirrus forum is that the weather was low IFR. If that is the case, It is likely they couldn't even see the nice field below them.
Last edited:
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
True.
SixPapaCharlie
May the force be with you
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,024
- Display Name
Display name:
Sixer
I was told on our 2001 that there is a 8 second delay.
mr_happyland
Pre-takeoff checklist
Man...if I ever have an engine out I'd like it to be over terrain like that. It certainly seems like a dead-stick would have been a great option there. I imagine split-second decision making in the cockpit had to be made and that many Cirrus owners have the chute option automatically drilled into their head.
RIP.
RIP.
bnt83
Final Approach
Whatever it is it would be pretty SiFi so have the chute button with internally lighted red for "Not Advised" and green for "Hell Yeah" linked to an interface box that uses air data computer airspeed and AGL to determine if it is recommended to deploy at any given moment.
bnt83
Final Approach
I flew over your land in a beautiful T210 and was glad to return to my "fly over country".
Archammer
Cleared for Takeoff
I think one thing that gets lost in these conversations about "shoulda-woulda" scenarios is real world response. Seriously, watch some of the similar real time videos online and try and put yourself in their boots in real time. See how quickly your choices narrow and the timer runs out. Just try it.
If you are in a real world scenario like that and - you're not a person that freezes up under severe duress - you are capable of acting. I wonder how would you really respond? I wonder if we'd be here talking about what you "shoulda" done.
1) How hard would it be NOT to pull a parachute that could save lives instead of the unknown ahead of you based on only your flying skill in that situation.
2) Add the fact that you have family on board, makes the choice even more difficult.
I say this to remind us that these things don't happen for us to judge, they happen so we can learn and evolve. Not so we can have more lawyers get paid and give the FAA more and more overreach.
The CAPS is a phenomenal technology that saves lives and gets better every time. Mr. Murray had a 50/50 decision and he made it. It saved one life, which is better than none. We don't know if the other choice would have saved anyone at all, or ended up in a fireball after a beautiful forced landing. Ya, everyone loves to forget the fire after some "off airport" ops. There ain't no ARF to come save your ass while you're knocked out in the dashboard dreaming about your beautiful field landing while you cook.
If you are in a real world scenario like that and - you're not a person that freezes up under severe duress - you are capable of acting. I wonder how would you really respond? I wonder if we'd be here talking about what you "shoulda" done.
1) How hard would it be NOT to pull a parachute that could save lives instead of the unknown ahead of you based on only your flying skill in that situation.
2) Add the fact that you have family on board, makes the choice even more difficult.
I say this to remind us that these things don't happen for us to judge, they happen so we can learn and evolve. Not so we can have more lawyers get paid and give the FAA more and more overreach.
The CAPS is a phenomenal technology that saves lives and gets better every time. Mr. Murray had a 50/50 decision and he made it. It saved one life, which is better than none. We don't know if the other choice would have saved anyone at all, or ended up in a fireball after a beautiful forced landing. Ya, everyone loves to forget the fire after some "off airport" ops. There ain't no ARF to come save your ass while you're knocked out in the dashboard dreaming about your beautiful field landing while you cook.
bnt83
Final Approach
At best, humans make the correct split second decisions what? 70% of the time?
Hopefully something good comes from tragedy.
Hopefully something good comes from tragedy.
Skip Miller
Final Approach
I thought landing in a soy bean field with fixed gear was a guaranteed very quick stop and noseover upset. Yes/No? If yes, the field wasn't a good option, either. Zoom climb, pull the red handle.
mr_happyland
Pre-takeoff checklist
Uhhhh...I'm happy for you?
retailguy
Line Up and Wait
You don't know how much I appreciate your words of wisdom here, and I sincerely hope everyone follows them.
This was my plane. Steve was my partner.
I didn't know him very well, it was a new venture for me and I'm not sure how long he owned this plane either.
Here's what I do know. Steve did not "freeze" up. I have heard a few things that I won't share right now that suggest he had limited control of the plane and therefore limited options. Based on what I think I know, I believe he chose the "best" one, which wasn't very good.
Does anyone know where I can check what the weather was yesterday at the time he departed?
172andyou
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2015
- Messages
- 1,442
- Display Name
Display name:
172 Guy
Definitely a possibility, but probably still better than going in nose first as a result of pulling the chute too low.
Tough situation and the brain doesn't tend to handle that kind of stress well.
AdamZ
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
- Messages
- 14,866
- Location
- Montgomery County PA
- Display Name
Display name:
Adam Zucker
Wow talk about hitting close to home. Sorry for the loss of your partner. Really no words.
sourdough44
En-Route
Very sorry to hear.
http://www.intellicast.com/Local/Observation.aspx?location=USIL0614
Those observations were 28 miles East of Kewanee, but Moline in the other direction was about the same.
Last edited:
retailguy
Line Up and Wait
Thanks for this. Speechless.
ahkahn
Line Up and Wait
Or facing the fact that your $500,000 airplane will become instantly totalled and you may be able to save it otherwise.
EDIT: Sorry for your loss. Just noticed this one hit close to home.
Not Monday-morning-quarterbacking by any means, but pulling that chute, especially when trained to always put 'er down in a field, is probably not that easy of a decision to make when faced with a critical situation and denial or machoism may tend to set in. That's my point.
Last edited:
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
It's only a plane, they can all be replaced. People can't.
ahkahn
Line Up and Wait
I agree... my point is that when faced with an emergency situation, saving the plane, passengers, and avoiding collateral damage is what is running through your mind. If you think you can pull off the landing, why pull that chute? I would see it as a complete last resort which may or may not be too late when you arrive at that decision.
AlanM
Pre-takeoff checklist
It is NOT a last resort. Do you know how many planes flip over and kill their occupants when trying to perform a soybean field landing? I don't, and I suspect neither do you, but I would guess the physics, if thought out properly, would suggest that it would be a lot.
Cirrus TEACHES pilots to pull the chute!! Geez, they get to sell more airplanes that way people are probably saying, or get their repairs shops to "fix" what's left of the plane. I looked at my notes from my Cirrus CAPS training, and my original posting did NOT include a mentioning of the CALLOUT of "CAPS ready" at FIVE HUNDRED FEET AGL. That means that CAPS works at 500 agl.
You go into the simulator and see what happens like I did. You try and put a plane down in a field and see what happens. I am an AVID believer in CAPS (even though I can't afford to fly an SR22 anymore, oh well). On my ATP check ride, I told the DPE that my emergency landing procedure (from altitude) was to deploy the chute, and he accepted that technique.
It's a shame that people who have never flown an SR22 don't know what they are talking about these days.
Mark57
Filing Flight Plan
The Cirrus Airframe Parachute System was re-designed for the G5 aircraft, which has a 200# higher maximum gross takeoff weight and does take a little longer to deploy than the legacy G1-G3 models. The 500, 1,000, and 2000 call-outs you described are the altitudes suggested for the legacy models. Altitudes above 500' are "consider CAPS" altitudes meaning you should brief CAPS-pull scenarios ahead of time. Do that with a qualified Cirrus Standardized Instructor Pilot who understands the systems on your aircraft and is thoroughly familiar with its operating parameters. Recurrent training every 6 months is recommended.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
Reading through the NTSB reports indicates you'd be wrong. Going back to 1984 there have been 91 deaths where the term "soybean" showed up in the NTSB report. However, of the 10 or so reports I looked at out of 49, only one of them had anything to do with flipping over after touchdown - and that was after the field had already been harvested. The others I looked at: Midair collision that killed 11 between two planes that came to rest in a soybean field, hitting power lines while cropdusting and coming to rest in a soybean field, impact crater that happened to be in a soybean field, etc. So you may want to rethink your position.
Feel free to go through the 49 cases if you want:
http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/Results.aspx?queryId=40613e2d-bcb3-4024-a7a7-ae6187f09eff
Edit: I've now gone through 20 reports, and none of them have shown landing gear being "grabbed" by the soybeans as being the issue. Flights into IMC, power lines, flying into thunderstorms all show up however.
Shoddy teaching.
Last edited:
ahkahn
Line Up and Wait
It is NOT a last resort.
Cirrus TEACHES pilots to pull the chute!! Geez, they get to sell more airplanes that way people are probably saying, or get their repairs shops to "fix" what's left of the plane.
It's a shame that people who have never flown an SR22 don't know what they are talking about these days.
My suggestion is that it would be a last resort for a lot of pilots knowing full well that the plane would have 100% chance of being totalled versus <100% chance of saving it.
I'm well aware that Cirrus teaches pilots to pull the chute. Yes, they get to sell more airplanes, and yes, perhaps their liability attorneys and insurance company seems to like that idea, as well.
No, I've never flown an SR-22 before. I suppose I don't know what I'm talking about... so I'll go ahead and sit down now. Carry on.
Mark57
Filing Flight Plan
I'm not sure how long it's been since the above poster had any Cirrus-specific training. "Cirrus teaches pilots to pull the chute," trivializes what's actually taught during transition and recurrent training nowadays, and makes it sound as though a chute pull is the only option that's ever considered. That's incorrect.
Cirrus doesn't tell you what to do. You're the PIC - you decide. But, one should do so after getting a thorough checkout in the aircraft, study of its accident history, and thinking through scenarios in which a CAPS pull is the safest option. The Cirrus Owners and Pilot's Association has done a lot of work in this regard.
Regarding the instant fatal, the preliminary isn't out yet, so it's hard to tell what may have have caused this crash or his altitude at the time of deployment. With a low and slow deployment, there's a risk of striking extremely nose-low before the reefing line cutters fire.
Condolences to the gentleman who was partners with the deceased pilot, and to families of those who perished in the instant accident.
asgcpa
En-Route
Agree. There are minimum height requirements for pulling chute. I do check caps and flaps at 500 ft agl. Anything below you should land straight ahead. Cirrus has specific trainng for this. However, we are not in a position to know what happened so we can't jump to conclusions.
Last edited:
asgcpa
En-Route
I am so sorry for your loss of a friend and flight partner.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Agreed and I want to make it clear that I'm not judging the pilot's actions here as I wasn't there to know what he experienced. I simply bring it up because I think that for those that fly these airplanes or consider one, it is an important discussion that one needs to have before taking flight.
I hear conflicting stories from those who have been through Cirrus training. Some like you seem to indicate that they provide critical thought on when to pull and when to not. Others seem to advocate pull for anything at the first sign of something wrong.
AlanM
Pre-takeoff checklist
This is from the February 2013 "Flight Operations Manual -- Instructor Edition" applicable to SR20 and SR22 (+T) aircraft on page 4-5 re: "CAPS Deployment" [only selected portions reproduced]:
"The CAPS is a unique safety feature installed in all Cirrus aircraft. CAPS provides a level of protection to the pilot and passengers that is not common to most GA aircraft today. However, for CAPS to work, it must be manually activated by the pilot or a passenger at a safe altitude.
No minimum altitude for deployment has been set. This is because the actual altitude loss during a particular deployment depends upon the airplane's airspeed, altitude and attitude at deployment as well as other environmental factors. In most cases, however, the chances of a successful deployment increases with altitude. As a data point, altitude loss from level flight deployment has been demonstrated at less than 400 feet (561 feet G5) and altitude loss from spin deployment has been demonstrated at less than 920 feet (1081 feet, G5). If circumstances permit, it is advisable to active CAPS at or above 2,000 feet AGL.
........Whenever the safe outcome of a flight is in question and there is a high risk of severe injury or death, CAPS should be used.
Pilots may encounter situations that require an immediate activation of CAPS such as: an engine failure after takeoff, mid-air collision, spin or a loss of control in flight [that includes spatial disorientation, caused for example, by flight from VMC into IMC].
........Pilots who regularly conduct CAPS training and think about using CAPS will often have a higher probability of deploying CAPS when necessary."
Thus, JUDGMENT CALL.
retailguy
Line Up and Wait
I want to thank everyone for the kind words. It's been a tough couple of days. The worst part has been wondering what possessed him to depart in the weather he did. There is no reason for it and really no excuse for it. It makes no sense to any of us. Of all the people who wouldn't have been in a hurry, it would've been him. Yet, it seems he was.
I have to say that I've laughed about the inevitable "parachute debate". Mostly because I said the same thing before I flew one of these planes. I'm the worlds biggest cynic. And I say that even after reading some of the comments here. I used to think I coined the phrase - "they put the parachute in to sell extra planes". I thought I was right. I wasn't. I was wrong.
I've taken the Cirrus training. I also own a Baron. A C-55. And I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE it. But I like the Cirrus too. In a different way. I will buy another Cirrus. A used one. I don't buy new anything.
Those of you who don't 'get' a Cirrus, I get you. I was you. Today? I'm not you any more. I enjoy them. It's not the "be all" "end all" perfect airplane. But, in certain circumstances it gives an opportunity that my 182, and my 172 didn't have. But like anything else, you have to master the tools, not let the tools dictate what you do.
In this case, I'm waiting for what the NTSB decides. They get the big bucks to do the dirty work. I think I have pieced together most of this, but I'm just a little 'ole pilot from Houston and my thoughts don't really mean jack...
I believe the parachute saves lives. In this case, it was his only option and it took his, but that wasn't the parachutes fault. Most likely it was his because he eliminated all of his other options through some pretty poor ADM. Saying that hurts, but I think it's true. Don't blame the plane, let's wait for the NTSB. Oh, one final thought - landing in the field wasn't an option. Look at the weather.... He had no idea there was a field there....
I have to say that I've laughed about the inevitable "parachute debate". Mostly because I said the same thing before I flew one of these planes. I'm the worlds biggest cynic. And I say that even after reading some of the comments here. I used to think I coined the phrase - "they put the parachute in to sell extra planes". I thought I was right. I wasn't. I was wrong.
I've taken the Cirrus training. I also own a Baron. A C-55. And I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE it. But I like the Cirrus too. In a different way. I will buy another Cirrus. A used one. I don't buy new anything.
Those of you who don't 'get' a Cirrus, I get you. I was you. Today? I'm not you any more. I enjoy them. It's not the "be all" "end all" perfect airplane. But, in certain circumstances it gives an opportunity that my 182, and my 172 didn't have. But like anything else, you have to master the tools, not let the tools dictate what you do.
In this case, I'm waiting for what the NTSB decides. They get the big bucks to do the dirty work. I think I have pieced together most of this, but I'm just a little 'ole pilot from Houston and my thoughts don't really mean jack...
I believe the parachute saves lives. In this case, it was his only option and it took his, but that wasn't the parachutes fault. Most likely it was his because he eliminated all of his other options through some pretty poor ADM. Saying that hurts, but I think it's true. Don't blame the plane, let's wait for the NTSB. Oh, one final thought - landing in the field wasn't an option. Look at the weather.... He had no idea there was a field there....