@RetreadPhotowhy? I can slip it while level and lose 30 kts in about 5 seconds. Most pilots don’t learn to actually fly the plane, and let the plane fly them.
This really emphasizes to me how important it is to fly the numbers and fly the pattern with 90° controlled turns. It looks like he rounded the downwind to base turn and forced himself into a >90° turn while also still needing to dump speed. The whole point of the pattern is to give you time and space in wings level descent between the turns to configure the plane for a stabilized approach. I’m a student pilot, and this is what I am learning from these tragedies. So sorry for the loss to the families and communities of these folks. 😢
It sucks that often pilots learn from the tragic mistakes of other pilots, but the fact that you DO learn is why I watch these videos. I'm not even a pilot but every time I start watching one of these videos and see the pilot has some kind of other stuff going on I think.. "uh oh... Aviate, Navigate, Communicate."
I was going to leave a comment but then saw that you said it perfectly. I fly a high wing so I loose sight of the runway when turning downwind to base. I always want to go wings level momentarily to regain sight of the runway before I start my base to final turn. It disciplines me to keep my pattern square, consistent and repeatable. All of this helps to be ahead of the airplane and get stable quickly once I'm on final. My heart goes out to those lost in this tragedy.
@@DanKuhnActually, many pilots don’t learn from the mistakes of others and that is the real problem. I have been flying since 1977 and if you look at the accident types and rates, the learning is glacially slow at best. Pilots have made the same mistakes over and over again year after year for the nearly 50 years I have been involved in aviation. That is the real tragedy. Technology has certainly helped lower the accident rate, particularly the readily available weather information now, but the types and rates of accidents related to basic piloting skills and judgement, have made very little improvement in the last several decades.
There are a lot of things that went into this tragedy but the pattern likely wasn't the biggest contributing factor. As a former Navy pilot I wasn't taught the square pattern that civilians fly until much later in my career. A square pattern can give you more time to maintain the profile but a rounded pattern works too if you stay ahead of the aircraft. That's the key. The bigger issue will likely be that he didn't start his descent when he started the base turn which give him a glideslope that was 2X normal. I recommend that you brief and fly a 6-7 degree glideslope one time with a CFI. Don't land. Initiate a go around with enough altitude to be safe but you'll see how uncomfortable it is and you'll recognize when to go around.
Agree with flynavy, sometimes obstacles or particular variables of a runway make flying a textbook pattern more dangerous. A great CFI once taught me after landing straight ahead on final at a very tight strip with trees. He said "next time, if you move to the right you have way more clearance of obstacles here. Sometimes pilots don't use common sense out of fear of not following rules!". Great advice. Don't know what happened here, very sad.
I appreciate the expedited AOPA 'generic' crash summary. However I still believe it is conditionally valuable to speculate more given the available data and my experience. For reference, I have owned an SR22 since 2016 and a PC12 and C210T before that, and I am a CFI. Been through all sorts of training and 1000's of hours. Some of the basic and initial missing elements for me are how long had the pilot flown and/or owned this 2023 SR22? My initial reaction given the flight profile of his pattern is... inexperience in situational flying (e.g. AQP) i.e. short field, heavy, slight cross wind. The SR22 is a great and safe airplane but can be a handful (at gross weight, speed (accelerates and slows down very fast) and doesn't glide very well) to a less experienced pilot as aircraft performance anticipation is important. For those who might think a stall was a culprit, not sure, but let's just say SR22 stalls are fairly benign when done at the right altitude and coordination. I will also point out there is an audio call-out 'air speed' if dropping below proscribed appropriate approach air speeds. One leading indicator for me is... the pilot did not do the proper preflight work regarding the airport (flying left pattern vs RHP). furthermore flying at 154kts downwind is an indication the pilot wasn't following the Cirrus pattern training 100kts downwind, 90kts base, >80kts on final (higher for gusts). The latest SR22's are highly automated and pilots can become too reliant on its automation (as I have done in the past) and be weak or complacent on fundamental flying skills. I am terribly sad for the pilot and passengers, a terrible tragedy. I just sickens me when a likely perfect airplane and unknowing passengers parish like this. This tragedy impacts all of us emotionally and financially! So sad.
I'll take a guess; poor stick and rudder skills demonstrated here; an attempt was made by the pilot for a second go-around. Comments in the video mentioned the pilot may have been nervous about the approach and landing. Firewalling the throttle quickly and not applying enough right rudder angled and rolled the plane left, with a possible left-wing stall and roll into the trees. Is torque roll at low speeds in Cirrus demonstrated to new pilots as part of the checkout? Did the NTSB find the position of the throttle at full increase? If so, loss of control may have started when the pilot applied power.
The irony is that low-time pilots often buy the Cirrus thinking it's safer than a 172 or something similar in the hopes that a fancy airplane ("It's got a parachute!")can compensate for poor flying skills. If only these novices would fly around by themselves for a few hundred hours before taking friends and family up with them.....
Go around too, ive found in the 22 when you jam the throttle forward quickly the left turning tendencies are super strong…if at slow airspeed aka not alot of rudder authority in the 22 when slow…could be why he went left into the trees… There is another accident where the pilot tried to go around pushing the throttle forward quickly at low airspeed and dipped the wing into the infield causing it to cartwheel… Sad regardless…especially the child
I landed on 21 at FFA earlier this year and the mechanical turbulence/shear with the wind out of the southeast was strong. The quoted comment from the banner towing pilot on POA is right on. I can see it being one more factor especially for this pilot. Everything about this flight path indicates this pilot was behind the aircraft and reactionary, coarse and late in his decisions and actions: He showed up without reading the AFD leading to flying the wrong pattern. Then was late to slow down on downwind..Late to begin descent...Late to turn final...Late to elect to go around from an unstable approach. Zooming in on the landing phase: Fast descent rate and a history of reactionary control inputs going into a field with gusts and mechanical turbulence is ripe for over-correction, ballooning and Ham-fisted firewalling of the throttle and late response to left turning tendencies possibly exacerbated by a gust from the left. The piece of the airplane up high up the tree points to a botched ago around. NTSB will probably say something insightful like "pilot failed to maintain control of the aircraft in the landing and subsequent attempted go around". The real tragedy happened long before this guy got to the field.
It looks to me like the water caused him some anxiety. The ADS-B data seems to show that he turned base early, then angled away from the runway to increase his distance from it, and then made a fairly tight turn to final. His base leg was too close to the runway for him to lose enough altitude. The 2nd attempt was better because he was lower on downwind, but I think he rushed both approaches. Perhaps the water caused him to tighten his base legs. Had he made right traffic, the water wouldn’t have been as much of an issue, but then the runway would have been on the passenger side.
1:37 that base leg to final turn. If this is how that pilot flies that high-risk corner, a fatal accident was bound to happen. Im talking, without Devine intervention by a invisible man in the clouds, this was a near absolute certainty. Making the base to final turn greater than 90 degrees, and tighter than all the other turns, TWICE back to back... This person had a serious lack of fundamental principles.
Yeah. Both patterns too tight would suggest he may not have allowed for drift from the prevailing SSE winds. Then had to turn essentially downwind straight to finals. Would still have been recoverable though…. It does seem like go arounds are problematic for low hour SR pilots. Lots of feet off the pedals flying with YD etc - are people ready with rudder when they firewall the throttle on the GA? We lost a guy at my home airport last year in Sydney that had this issue.
Yeah. Both patterns too tight would suggest he may not have allowed for drift from the prevailing SSE winds. Then had to turn essentially down main straight to finals. Would still have been recoverable though…. It does seem like go arounds are problematic for low hour SR pilots. Lots of feet off the pedals flying with YD etc - are people ready with rudder when they firewall the throttle on the GA? We lost a guy at my home airport last year in Sydney that had this issue.
Another tragic reminder that we as pilots need to fly the aircraft. Every landing can kill you if you get complacent. As much as I love a tight pattern, it seems like there are times when a "bomber" pattern can be helpful for a busy or stressed pilot. Or just exit the airport area and get yourself collected. Most pilots will agree that having passengers increases stress, no matter how many times you've flown with them. Take a minute, breathe, follow your checklists, ask for a sterile cockpit, touch the ISO switch on the intercom, and fly the aircraft to a safe landing.
Literally any pilot would recognize a flight conducted below 10,000' and includes takeoff and landing and maneuvering at low altitude is inherently high risk.
If the aircraft was descending to the runway at about 1,000 fpm and near MGW, a pitch attitude to flare could be a potential factor for accelerated stall and loss of control
It’s worth mentioning that Tropical Storm Helene was over Georgia at the time of the crash and heading north. The term “gusty winds” is used several times in the vid, but I feel that doesn’t quite capture the unseen possibility of more local instability in the region of a powerful tropical storm - in the process of dispersion/disintegration! - especially on the N.C. dunes and in the vicinity of the mechanical turbulence caused by those trees. At the very least, I feel the pilot demonstrated poor ADM by choosing to fly that day.
My very strong advice to you is not to go looking for answers until at least the preliminary report has been issued. Information yes, answers no. Expect the final report with probable cause to be issued within a year. Until then only the NTSB will be aware of all available information - the rest of us can but speculate based on incomplete knowledge. Despite the title, this video provides no analysis, nor should it, and is really just a special interest news report with a shortlist list of hypotheticals. That same list has to be formally worked through in every single investigation, and it takes only one single finding from the airframe and engine inspection to dramatically alter the picture emerging within the investigation. The rest of us cannot know until they are ready to share.
Sorry about your friend. Aviation is a cruel passion. Losing friends and the expense is what made me stop. You will get a preliminary report in a week or two and a final within a year or two but sometimes we just never really know.
Having flown into there a few years ago. The one thing I remember about the approach to 21, was the location of the power lines. They get your attention.
A sad tragedy which, perhaps, could have been avoided. May we ALL learn from this incident. Thank you to AOPA and the ASI for continually serving the pilot community.
The altitude ADSB exchange shows is pressure altitude, it’s not altitude corrected for local altimeter setting. The local altimeter setting was 29.84, so the aircraft was actually 75 feet lower than what ADSB exchange was showing, but that is still too much altitude on base and final. Just an important distinction especially with much lower pressures.
My condolences to the families. That is a very challenging approach with the wind gusts and the surrounding trees. I have flown to KFFA several times, in a light sport, C172, and a C177. With the short runway, a pilot really needs to ensure that the aircraft is properly set up for landing, on speed and glideslope.
I don't think that a wind of 6-14 knots is "gusty conditions", nor do I think that the wind had anything to do with this. Maybe the pilot tried to do a SECOND go-around and lost control?
@@jimlthor Well, that's basic flying technique to not slam the throttle forward, especially if you are too slow ... but I think a go-around in the SR22 is pretty easy if you do it correctly. But I also think that a go-around going bad from slow speed is the best explanation.
I would add one more factor for you to consider: what if the pilot handling the controls quite suddenly applied an abrupt full throttle which may have added a roll torque to the left? It all happened so quickly he didn’t have time to find out about the engine’s torque roll and the last thing they saw were the trees.
No joke intended here - saying this is near the Wright monument made me think...The world's first fatality from an airplane occured in 1908. I would love to see a full analysis of it, both for history and for the fact that there are always unfortunate lessons to be learned from a crash.
Yep and you have to wonder if the pilot had any previous flight experience in the SR-22 at or near maximum T/O weight. Aircraft handle and perform differently when fully loaded vs. solo pilot onboard.
It has 5 seats, one was a child and it was, most likely, not over MTOM. Not a factor I think. Also the CG should have been within limits. In real life the CG of the SR22 will only go out of limits if the baggage compartment is overlaoded.
Using all available seats isn’t a problem. It wasn’t out of CG or over max gross limit. Losing control and stalling is the problem. It took off and flew the route without issue but pilot stalled it at some point during landing. A cabin full of loved ones screaming or at the least expressing distress adds pressure to land exponentially on pilot.
Suspect a bounced landing and decision to go-around w/ full throttle, flaps down. The SR-22 likely pitched up dramatically and torque-pulled to the left - the inevitable stall-spin accident scenario. Usually when I'm flying and I get a bounced landing, I'll attempt to salvage the landing by adding sufficient power to settle gently on the mains. Normally it's much safer to salvage the landing even if it means rolling out into the grass overrun.
First attempt 60 kts too fast and descending into the pattern. Both attempts show a misjudgment of downwind and base positioning. Flying isn’t for everyone but no flight instructor ever turned money down. This “pilot” should have chosen a less demanding hobby.
My best estimation at the moment is being distracted while initiating another go-around.... Either not enough power added or yanked back too quick and then stall....
I would not say ballooning is the same as proposing. Ballooning is when there is excessive airspeed and you enter ground effect which increases lift. Porposing, to me, is pilot induced oscillation. The worse would be when a pilot pushes the nose down to get the plane on the runway, then after hitting the runway pulls back, then lets the nose drop again. Usually the third one gets you a prop strike. At least in a Mooney. Come in at the right airspeed and keep the nose up and let the plane settle on the runway. If you are running out of runway go around! To me this pilot didn't have a stabilized approach. Turning final at pattern altitude means you will be way past having the airport at your 45 when starting base.
@@edcew8236 Pretty much what I said. To much airspeed when getting into ground effect. And Pilot Induced Oscillation. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot-induced_oscillation
An air strip in Alaska had trees on either side. If there was hardly any cross wind landing there was too dangerous. While on approach you would be crabbing into the wind, as soon as you came below the tree line, you had to immediately straighten out to no longer account for the cross wind. Power had to be reduced and it was hell as a passenger with a sudden acceleration and attitude adjustments. Are the conditions similar here? Based on the crash site and wind direction, it appears he crashed INTO the wind. Perhaps he was crabbing on approach and didn't straighten out to land? Further indicators would be the fast downwind? Aspiring pilot, asking for knowledge.
It's ground speed combined with the prevailing METAR for winds. That's why they said about 80 knots airspeed on final when the ADSB data showed 71 knots groundspeed.
My primary instructor drilled go-arounds into my head, to the point where they are just second nature to me. They're not hard if you're proficient and practice them. Power, positive rate of climb, walk the flaps up.
80kt is correct number in non-gusty conditions. They train SR22 pilots to fly downwind at 100kts, base at 90kt and final 80kts... there is also a computer/Garmin AOA indicator. Indeed the approach angle was way too high and not stabilized. I routinely fly out of 2500 strips and needless to say the pilots needs to be on altitude/glideslope and airspeed. what isn't clear is how many hours the pilot had in this plane... it doesn't seem like many and his home airport probably has >5000ft runways.
@@c365inc Thanks. I fly Cessna 60 to 70 final. So his speed was ok in the sleeker airframe. I'd simply dump the flaps and slip down in a 182 but assume the SR stall speed is higher and floats easily if you come in steep and fast. Agree about different home field length being a factor as well.
My SR22 is based out of 2400' strip. Obviously flying in and out is no issue at all. The 22 is slick but can be slowed very easily. I would argue it can be slowed a little too easily and if the pilot isn't paying attention, you can go from too fast to too slow. Because it has such docile flight characteristics you can be too slow without "feeling" like you are. In a 172 the entire plane is screaming at you that it's going to stall. In my sr22, when I first did my transition training and we practiced stalls, I wouldn't believe we were stalled if it weren't for my altitude dropping like a rock. It's a double edged sword: it's great because flights are really smooth but dangerous because if you're not paying attention to your instruments you won't "feel" like you're near stalling. It reminds me of driving an M3 where you can be doing 100mph but not feel like it until you look at your speedometer vs a camaro that lets you know when you're over 60. Praying for the family.
To minimise heavy crosswind, and moderate cross wind impacts as well as tyre slips for small aircrafts we can implement a runway magnetic field based central line orientation system,that will generate a magnetic field in the runway central line, for a plane fitted with the appropriate equipment that have its own identification with the smart runway, when a safe rate of landing is recorded in the runway sensors, the runway itself will orient the electromagnetic field, inside the plane to magnetically capture it in the central axis of the runway,while the magnetic field can also occasionally automatically switch itself off based on the aircraft local position sensed by the runway itself, to allow for the forward motion for the plane as well without hindering it. This system is only active for an aircraft that has done a safe touchdown with the runway,has the electromagnetic component and the data link to the runway system to communicate with it in crosswinds,fog, extreme fog or night,heavy rain,or heavy rain and crosswinds and night too.
gosh with the direction of landing and the location of impact pointed out, I wonder if this'll be the same situation as the Cirrus crash at Duxford, here in the UK.. the video can be found on UA-cam.
I'm a relatively new pilot that lives ~ 3 miles from the crash site. Glad to see that part of the discussion is now the pattern direction. Maybe that is a bit of a clue. I also looked at the data for the two previous flights. Maybe some more clues. Living where I do for 25 years, being an aviation enthusiast, and knowing local aviators, I often visually watch aircraft in the area and track them with adsb. There are flybys at the Wright Bros Monument very frequently - with no intention of landing. I see both military and civilian aircraft doing this. Combine this with all the other data, the passengers on board, the flight data, etc, and its very easy to imagine that there was no intention of actually landing on either pass. Highly possible it was a somewhat distracted flyby opportunity - with a number of factors that unfortunately ended with passing through that one hole in the swiss cheese of safety.
A tragic accident. Sorry for the loss of life. I fly an SR22. They are beautiful aircraft but need to be flown with due respect and training. In this accident there seems some obvious issues to me. 1. They were way too fast on downwind (normally 110 /120 max) 2. The base to final turn looks really steep from the trace which probably meant he wasn’t descending smoothly in a. stabilised manner 3. A Cirrus SR22 is a high performance airplane and needs care when applying power, especially at high angles of attack when significant P turning factors will come into play 4. The go around was most likely needed because his high angle of descent would have meant he’d be carrying way too much energy and speed initially causing float on round out. Complicated by gusts and rapid bleeding off speed because at max gross weight. 5. Applying max power to go around without compensating with sufficient right rudder will cause the aircraft to pitch up and roll left as explained above. 6 The tree line is left of the centreline and it appears the aircraft hit the trees fairly high up My impression here is, that the approach was unstable from the outset, not being flown smoothly and when the pilot applied full power to go around, did not compensate sufficiently.
That flight was super sloppy the entire time it was in the proximity of FFA, as you & others noted. Not to mention illegal, or can an SR22 legally seat 5? Be interesting to know the TT & experience of the student, as well as the experience of the commercial pilot, esp TiT
10/12/2024 - Whenever you state a date, include the year. Don’t just say September 28, because some people may be watching your video three years from now.
These folks did NOT even look at the charts for FFA. FFA is RP for 21 as stated in the video. I fly to FFA frequently and it is not a difficult airport to land at if you are flying like you are supposed to. The fact that these folks were doing left patterns to 21 tells me all I need to know about their skills. Still a tragedy, and folks need to make sure they are not kicking the tires and lighting the fires.
Late Generation Cirrus MTOW 3800? If you have early generation books, you may want to check perf figures too. Go around training should emphasize late phase go around with decayed speed as a result of deep float. Balk the landing if needs be.
Look at the speeds on short final. At Max Gross weight, he should have been at roughly 83-85 kts to accommodate for the gust factor. He was @ 70kts 😮. Stall speed is @ 64kts so maybe something to do with it. So sad….
Wrong traffic pattern (right downwind only to not fly directly over the monument) , pilot too fast/behind the plane, and the weather station isn't above the treeline so I am guessing that winds on approach were different than forecasted surface level, with 5 people on board, 3000 x 60 runway, trees on both sides... too many obstacles and risks to overcome! The runway looks like a sidewalk at pattern altitude so it is harder to judge how far away from it you are on downwind. I had this problem and overshot final, went around, and gave myself a ton of room after to get stabilized. Once on final there are powerlines along the highway, you need to get over those and then pull power to touch down on the thousand footers. It is a challenging airport to land at but very fulfilling. Sad to hear about the loss of life, RIP
Yep....a bounced landing and decision to go-around instead of salvaging the landing by adding sufficient power to settle gently on the mains. Much safer to salvage the landing even if it means rolling out into the grass overrun.
You cannot get behind this type of aircraft. You must be on the numbers, specially on final. Must have a stable approach,recommended airspeed configuration of flaps for landing for giving conditions. Factors that I think here are recency of pilot, expireince on aircraft, landing with strong gusty winds, familiar with airport and suroundings, planning ahead for this conditions. For the go around you must when and where to execute a go around. You must know go around procedure. Flap retraction, speed to retract flaps, when to iniate climd specific flap setting and airspeed for climb. Doing a go around in C-172 can be demanding. After reading about a go around on the Cirrus it can be a very daunting task especially under stress already.
“A Lesson Earned” It’s been one-hundred years and more Since Orv and Will took flight. It took them several tries of course But they finally got it right. The wind was blowing briskly when they launched their fragile bird. But the wind is what they came here for; At least that’s what I’ve heard. Since then they’ve built an airport to honor those first flights. The runway though is narrow; the approach is kinda tight. The trees that line the runway stand bravely straight and tall. The wind still blows quite briskly If it blows at all. Together they are guardians of flight’s most sacred land. With respect you must approach them if you are to try your hand. At flying into First Flight as so many pilots do. To say that “I have done it; I have flown where the Wrights first flew.” I was based at Dare County (MQI) for several years working as a commercial pilot and CFI. As a CFI I accompanied many rental pilots into First Flight who wanted to put their pilgrimage to FFA in their logbook and pay homage to the Wright’s legacy. I can attest to the fact that mechanical turbulence from the wind percolating through the local topography often catches pilots off guard. Sadly in this case it seems like it became one distraction increasing pilot workload. The fact that he didn’t take note of the RP21 suggests some lack of diligence and asks the question: what else about his flying skills may have been deficient? My heart goes out to the victims, their families, loved ones and friends.
Sad, the data presented by AOPA "full fuel 4 adults and a child?" That a/c is good for 500 pounds +/- in that load config. overweight and aft IMO unless the 4 adults are 90 pounds each... Again SAD! This guy was behind it the whole flight. Speed, altitude, pattern direction, trees and turbulence. SAD
The turn from base to final looks very sharp (high bank angle) and the approach started too high. That would have been a good time to call go-around. Now we have yet another fatal SR loss in the pattern. A C172 or a Cherokee would probably have landed safely.
Sounds like he was trying to go around the second time and the IO550 engine had too much power, airplane going too slow... Probably the student pilot was flying? I bought my Mooney Ovation before getting PPL at around 40 hours. I remember a close call at SNA in one go around, where it surprised me how much the airplane was going to the left when I applied full go around power.
That would be my guess aswell ... a second go-around that went wrong and lost control at low altitude. A wind of 6-14 knots does niot qualify as "gusty conditios", especially not for an SR22. In my experience a wind like that is absolutely harmless. I have landed my SR22 in winds of 28-35 knots (from a 30 degree angle) and it is really not hard if you have a little bit of technique.
Loss of control is the most common cause of fatal crashes? Really? Hey, that's not very helpful or insightful. Unless it's CFIT, you can pretty much conclude that control was lost before the crash.
Some comments and questions: * "Loss of control" is such an all-encompassing term as to have little value for analysis * Stable approach yes, but starting how far out? 1/2 mile? 1 mile? or measured in seconds? * The stable approach criteria could be violated by corrections for frisky gusts. Hmm. * You said bring the flaps up "slowly." If the Cirrus has electric flaps, how is this done? * Off the left side of the runway would be consistent with inadequate right runway on the go around, as you implied.
to me raise flaps slowly means let the airplane stabilize, track the centerline, lower nose, make sure the ball is centered, gain speed, then think about touching flaps.
It seems to be just another example of an incompetent pilot. It appears preflight planning was deficient and the pilot was behind the airplane as it approached the airport. Sadly, nothing new to learn here just another “wash, rinse, repeat” pilot error accident.
The high power lines mentioned in the AFD are no joke and the “feeling” of them may make one be high on approach. It is not an easy runway. Good on them for going around the first time. Cirrus can float for long time with too much speed.
A absolute devastating tragic airplane accident that was entirely preventable. Offer my sincere condolences to the victim's families and friends. As emphasized in this ASI accident analysis video, the Cirrus POH (or equivalent pub) highlights the requirement for pilots to be on a stabilized approach when landing at an airport. This is especially crucial for heavily loaded piston airplanes attempting to land on short - to moderately short runways; especially given the "wind shadow" effect, and turbulence encountered with tall pine trees next to the runway. But beyond this - is the mindset and absolute determination of the pilot to continue a 2nd landing attempt at a "marginal" airport - when conditions were not suitable for a safe landing. Nature was telling this pilot that "now is not a good time to land here." Sadly he disregarded nature's not-so-subtle cues.
Please stop filming yourself presenting slides. It adds nothing and it's a distraction when trying to read the slides. You are not forecasting the weather, and no pilot really prefers to get their forecast from the TV meteorologist anyway. And, your clicker is distracting. Please, just record a voiceover for your slides. You can even do it in your bathrobe and slippers.
This crash was one of the 3 SR-22 in the last week all in the landing phase. Two of them deployed the BRS, one unsuccessfully, one semi successful, yes the guy walked away, but destrroyed the airplane which we get to pay for, and this accident. A BRS is great when at night or over unfriendly terrain, but some Cirrus pilots forget to fly the airplane. The PVU crash happened after a go around. It was a stall spin and a BRS deployment probably at 300 feet in an unstable Cirrus. If the pilot continued to fly the airplane, they would both probably be alive. The BFL crash happened with an apparent engine issue 3-4 miles from a 10,000 foot runway at 125 kts and 5000' agl. Why didn't he land the airplane? perhaps bad emergency training. He could have attempted to land and pulled the BRS at 1,000' if needed. BRS does not take the place of how to fly an airplane in all regimes and situations of flight. This FFA crash looks like poor piloting skills. Good judgment also means a pilot has to know his limitations.
@@seeingeyegod Not at all. They recommend it as a last resort. Read the Cirrus emergency procedures in the poh it mentions pulling the chute in specific scenarios. With an engine out and available fields to land in it recommends putting it down at best glide speed in a field.
@@seeingeyegod That would be really stupid if they did. If you are at 4000' over an airport, smarter to land under control. We are taught to fly in emergencies. Once you pull the BRS, you have no control as to where you are going.
So THATS why I had a taxiway excursion last night and wound up in the ditch…. YOU plucked the last one before the runway and now using it on your desk!😂
"Entered the left downwind about at 154 knots, and was a little fast" understatement of the year.
That is _groundspeed,_ not airspeed, from ADS-B.
@@UncleKennysPlace i thought the ADS-B data shows a groundspeed of 178 kts and AOPA corrected it to 154 knots of IAS?
GUSTING 14. Not like it was blowing 60 knots.
@RetreadPhotowhy? I can slip it while level and lose 30 kts in about 5 seconds. Most pilots don’t learn to actually fly the plane, and let the plane fly them.
This really emphasizes to me how important it is to fly the numbers and fly the pattern with 90° controlled turns. It looks like he rounded the downwind to base turn and forced himself into a >90° turn while also still needing to dump speed. The whole point of the pattern is to give you time and space in wings level descent between the turns to configure the plane for a stabilized approach. I’m a student pilot, and this is what I am learning from these tragedies. So sorry for the loss to the families and communities of these folks. 😢
It sucks that often pilots learn from the tragic mistakes of other pilots, but the fact that you DO learn is why I watch these videos. I'm not even a pilot but every time I start watching one of these videos and see the pilot has some kind of other stuff going on I think.. "uh oh... Aviate, Navigate, Communicate."
I was going to leave a comment but then saw that you said it perfectly. I fly a high wing so I loose sight of the runway when turning downwind to base. I always want to go wings level momentarily to regain sight of the runway before I start my base to final turn. It disciplines me to keep my pattern square, consistent and repeatable. All of this helps to be ahead of the airplane and get stable quickly once I'm on final. My heart goes out to those lost in this tragedy.
@@DanKuhnActually, many pilots don’t learn from the mistakes of others and that is the real problem. I have been flying since 1977 and if you look at the accident types and rates, the learning is glacially slow at best. Pilots have made the same mistakes over and over again year after year for the nearly 50 years I have been involved in aviation. That is the real tragedy. Technology has certainly helped lower the accident rate, particularly the readily available weather information now, but the types and rates of accidents related to basic piloting skills and judgement, have made very little improvement in the last several decades.
There are a lot of things that went into this tragedy but the pattern likely wasn't the biggest contributing factor. As a former Navy pilot I wasn't taught the square pattern that civilians fly until much later in my career. A square pattern can give you more time to maintain the profile but a rounded pattern works too if you stay ahead of the aircraft. That's the key. The bigger issue will likely be that he didn't start his descent when he started the base turn which give him a glideslope that was 2X normal. I recommend that you brief and fly a 6-7 degree glideslope one time with a CFI. Don't land. Initiate a go around with enough altitude to be safe but you'll see how uncomfortable it is and you'll recognize when to go around.
Agree with flynavy, sometimes obstacles or particular variables of a runway make flying a textbook pattern more dangerous. A great CFI once taught me after landing straight ahead on final at a very tight strip with trees. He said "next time, if you move to the right you have way more clearance of obstacles here. Sometimes pilots don't use common sense out of fear of not following rules!". Great advice. Don't know what happened here, very sad.
I appreciate the expedited AOPA 'generic' crash summary. However I still believe it is conditionally valuable to speculate more given the available data and my experience. For reference, I have owned an SR22 since 2016 and a PC12 and C210T before that, and I am a CFI. Been through all sorts of training and 1000's of hours. Some of the basic and initial missing elements for me are how long had the pilot flown and/or owned this 2023 SR22? My initial reaction given the flight profile of his pattern is... inexperience in situational flying (e.g. AQP) i.e. short field, heavy, slight cross wind. The SR22 is a great and safe airplane but can be a handful (at gross weight, speed (accelerates and slows down very fast) and doesn't glide very well) to a less experienced pilot as aircraft performance anticipation is important. For those who might think a stall was a culprit, not sure, but let's just say SR22 stalls are fairly benign when done at the right altitude and coordination. I will also point out there is an audio call-out 'air speed' if dropping below proscribed appropriate approach air speeds. One leading indicator for me is... the pilot did not do the proper preflight work regarding the airport (flying left pattern vs RHP). furthermore flying at 154kts downwind is an indication the pilot wasn't following the Cirrus pattern training 100kts downwind, 90kts base, >80kts on final (higher for gusts). The latest SR22's are highly automated and pilots can become too reliant on its automation (as I have done in the past) and be weak or complacent on fundamental flying skills. I am terribly sad for the pilot and passengers, a terrible tragedy. I just sickens me when a likely perfect airplane and unknowing passengers parish like this. This tragedy impacts all of us emotionally and financially! So sad.
I'll take a guess; poor stick and rudder skills demonstrated here; an attempt was made by the pilot for a second go-around. Comments in the video mentioned the pilot may have been nervous about the approach and landing. Firewalling the throttle quickly and not applying enough right rudder angled and rolled the plane left, with a possible left-wing stall and roll into the trees. Is torque roll at low speeds in Cirrus demonstrated to new pilots as part of the checkout? Did the NTSB find the position of the throttle at full increase? If so, loss of control may have started when the pilot applied power.
The irony is that low-time pilots often buy the Cirrus thinking it's safer than a 172 or something similar in the hopes that a fancy airplane ("It's got a parachute!")can compensate for poor flying skills. If only these novices would fly around by themselves for a few hundred hours before taking friends and family up with them.....
IMHO it takes about 100 flight hours to really know a Cirrus.
Go around too, ive found in the 22 when you jam the throttle forward quickly the left turning tendencies are super strong…if at slow airspeed aka not alot of rudder authority in the 22 when slow…could be why he went left into the trees…
There is another accident where the pilot tried to go around pushing the throttle forward quickly at low airspeed and dipped the wing into the infield causing it to cartwheel…
Sad regardless…especially the child
@@bernieschiff5919100%
Slow airspeed+high torque+low rudder authority=hard left turn
I landed on 21 at FFA earlier this year and the mechanical turbulence/shear with the wind out of the southeast was strong. The quoted comment from the banner towing pilot on POA is right on. I can see it being one more factor especially for this pilot. Everything about this flight path indicates this pilot was behind the aircraft and reactionary, coarse and late in his decisions and actions: He showed up without reading the AFD leading to flying the wrong pattern. Then was late to slow down on downwind..Late to begin descent...Late to turn final...Late to elect to go around from an unstable approach. Zooming in on the landing phase: Fast descent rate and a history of reactionary control inputs going into a field with gusts and mechanical turbulence is ripe for over-correction, ballooning and Ham-fisted firewalling of the throttle and late response to left turning tendencies possibly exacerbated by a gust from the left. The piece of the airplane up high up the tree points to a botched ago around. NTSB will probably say something insightful like "pilot failed to maintain control of the aircraft in the landing and subsequent attempted go around". The real tragedy happened long before this guy got to the field.
Thanks Mike for the video. Sad stuff.
It looks to me like the water caused him some anxiety. The ADS-B data seems to show that he turned base early, then angled away from the runway to increase his distance from it, and then made a fairly tight turn to final. His base leg was too close to the runway for him to lose enough altitude. The 2nd attempt was better because he was lower on downwind, but I think he rushed both approaches. Perhaps the water caused him to tighten his base legs. Had he made right traffic, the water wouldn’t have been as much of an issue, but then the runway would have been on the passenger side.
1:37 that base leg to final turn. If this is how that pilot flies that high-risk corner, a fatal accident was bound to happen. Im talking, without Devine intervention by a invisible man in the clouds, this was a near absolute certainty.
Making the base to final turn greater than 90 degrees, and tighter than all the other turns, TWICE back to back... This person had a serious lack of fundamental principles.
Yeah. Both patterns too tight would suggest he may not have allowed for drift from the prevailing SSE winds. Then had to turn essentially downwind straight to finals. Would still have been recoverable though….
It does seem like go arounds are problematic for low hour SR pilots. Lots of feet off the pedals flying with YD etc - are people ready with rudder when they firewall the throttle on the GA? We lost a guy at my home airport last year in Sydney that had this issue.
Yeah. Both patterns too tight would suggest he may not have allowed for drift from the prevailing SSE winds. Then had to turn essentially down main straight to finals. Would still have been recoverable though….
It does seem like go arounds are problematic for low hour SR pilots. Lots of feet off the pedals flying with YD etc - are people ready with rudder when they firewall the throttle on the GA? We lost a guy at my home airport last year in Sydney that had this issue.
Another tragic reminder that we as pilots need to fly the aircraft. Every landing can kill you if you get complacent. As much as I love a tight pattern, it seems like there are times when a "bomber" pattern can be helpful for a busy or stressed pilot. Or just exit the airport area and get yourself collected. Most pilots will agree that having passengers increases stress, no matter how many times you've flown with them. Take a minute, breathe, follow your checklists, ask for a sterile cockpit, touch the ISO switch on the intercom, and fly the aircraft to a safe landing.
there are idiots build a fucking plane badly
have you heard of the ga pilots
Amen
Who would ever think that a simple 8 minute flight would end up with all five being killed…😢
That's why we always say "no flight is routine".
Literally any pilot would recognize a flight conducted below 10,000' and includes takeoff and landing and maneuvering at low altitude is inherently high risk.
If the aircraft was descending to the runway at about 1,000 fpm and near MGW, a pitch attitude to flare could be a potential factor for accelerated stall and loss of control
It’s worth mentioning that Tropical Storm Helene was over Georgia at the time of the crash and heading north. The term “gusty winds” is used several times in the vid, but I feel that doesn’t quite capture the unseen possibility of more local instability in the region of a powerful tropical storm - in the process of dispersion/disintegration! - especially on the N.C. dunes and in the vicinity of the mechanical turbulence caused by those trees. At the very least, I feel the pilot demonstrated poor ADM by choosing to fly that day.
Exactly. Was the ASOS up-to-the-minute?
I really want to know about this accident, the student pilot on board is my good friend recently promoted LTC Jason Campbell.
Sorry for your loss. I hope you can get the closure you seek.
My sincere condolences, Alexis. J
My very strong advice to you is not to go looking for answers until at least the preliminary report has been issued. Information yes, answers no. Expect the final report with probable cause to be issued within a year. Until then only the NTSB will be aware of all available information - the rest of us can but speculate based on incomplete knowledge. Despite the title, this video provides no analysis, nor should it, and is really just a special interest news report with a shortlist list of hypotheticals. That same list has to be formally worked through in every single investigation, and it takes only one single finding from the airframe and engine inspection to dramatically alter the picture emerging within the investigation. The rest of us cannot know until they are ready to share.
Sorry about your friend. Aviation is a cruel passion. Losing friends and the expense is what made me stop. You will get a preliminary report in a week or two and a final within a year or two but sometimes we just never really know.
Pilot error was the cause. But who or how will likely never be known.
Having flown into there a few years ago. The one thing I remember about the approach to 21, was the location of the power lines. They get your attention.
A very sad story, but a very good vid. Thanx.
Thank you for bringing these to us. Condolences to the families.
A sad tragedy which, perhaps, could have been avoided. May we ALL learn from this incident. Thank you to AOPA and the ASI for continually serving the pilot community.
The altitude ADSB exchange shows is pressure altitude, it’s not altitude corrected for local altimeter setting. The local altimeter setting was 29.84, so the aircraft was actually 75 feet lower than what ADSB exchange was showing, but that is still too much altitude on base and final. Just an important distinction especially with much lower pressures.
My condolences to the families. That is a very challenging approach with the wind gusts and the surrounding trees. I have flown to KFFA several times, in a light sport, C172, and a C177. With the short runway, a pilot really needs to ensure that the aircraft is properly set up for landing, on speed and glideslope.
I don't think that a wind of 6-14 knots is "gusty conditions", nor do I think that the wind had anything to do with this. Maybe the pilot tried to do a SECOND go-around and lost control?
Someone else mentioned that maybe they'd hit the throttle and wasn't ready for the torque.
@@jimlthor Well, that's basic flying technique to not slam the throttle forward, especially if you are too slow ... but I think a go-around in the SR22 is pretty easy if you do it correctly. But I also think that a go-around going bad from slow speed is the best explanation.
Sure, 6 kts is not a lot of wind, but gusting to 14 is more than double, so it could certainly be tricky.
@@Nsmithq99Have you flown an SR22 in winds like that? You almost cannot feel that. Not relevant, i am sure
Too high, too fast on downwind. Why did they ignore rgt traffic?
I would add one more factor for you to consider: what if the pilot handling the controls quite suddenly applied an abrupt full throttle which may have added a roll torque to the left? It all happened so quickly he didn’t have time to find out about the engine’s torque roll and the last thing they saw were the trees.
Thank you for the information.
Very sad loss but we gotta share this
No joke intended here - saying this is near the Wright monument made me think...The world's first fatality from an airplane occured in 1908. I would love to see a full analysis of it, both for history and for the fact that there are always unfortunate lessons to be learned from a crash.
Condolences to the family. It may be difficult for a pilot to remain focused with so many people and a child in such a small airplane.
A CR22 with 5 people. It's already a bad start 😲
Yep and you have to wonder if the pilot had any previous flight experience in the SR-22 at or near maximum T/O weight. Aircraft handle and perform differently when fully loaded vs. solo pilot onboard.
well, really 4 and a small child. tragic though.
It has 5 seats, one was a child and it was, most likely, not over MTOM. Not a factor I think. Also the CG should have been within limits. In real life the CG of the SR22 will only go out of limits if the baggage compartment is overlaoded.
20203’s are 5 seaters.
Using all available seats isn’t a problem. It wasn’t out of CG or over max gross limit.
Losing control and stalling is the problem. It took off and flew the route without issue but pilot stalled it at some point during landing. A cabin full of loved ones screaming or at the least expressing distress adds pressure to land exponentially on pilot.
Suspect a bounced landing and decision to go-around w/ full throttle, flaps down. The SR-22 likely pitched up dramatically and torque-pulled to the left - the inevitable stall-spin accident scenario. Usually when I'm flying and I get a bounced landing, I'll attempt to salvage the landing by adding sufficient power to settle gently on the mains. Normally it's much safer to salvage the landing even if it means rolling out into the grass overrun.
ah before I read this I'd though the same thing. Similar landing/crash profile in the Duxford UK accident, and that was caught on video.
First attempt 60 kts too fast and descending into the pattern. Both attempts show a misjudgment of downwind and base positioning. Flying isn’t for everyone but no flight instructor ever turned money down. This “pilot” should have chosen a less demanding hobby.
Excellent review. Thanks
My best estimation at the moment is being distracted while initiating another go-around.... Either not enough power added or yanked back too quick and then stall....
What does ballooning mean in that context? Never heard that term.
Porpoising
Aka porpoising.
I would not say ballooning is the same as proposing. Ballooning is when there is excessive airspeed and you enter ground effect which increases lift. Porposing, to me, is pilot induced oscillation. The worse would be when a pilot pushes the nose down to get the plane on the runway, then after hitting the runway pulls back, then lets the nose drop again. Usually the third one gets you a prop strike. At least in a Mooney.
Come in at the right airspeed and keep the nose up and let the plane settle on the runway. If you are running out of runway go around!
To me this pilot didn't have a stabilized approach. Turning final at pattern altitude means you will be way past having the airport at your 45 when starting base.
Porpoising implies multiple cycles. Ballooning usually means non-repetitive, caused by flaring too hard and gaining altitude in the flare
@@edcew8236 Pretty much what I said. To much airspeed when getting into ground effect. And Pilot Induced Oscillation.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot-induced_oscillation
An air strip in Alaska had trees on either side. If there was hardly any cross wind landing there was too dangerous. While on approach you would be crabbing into the wind, as soon as you came below the tree line, you had to immediately straighten out to no longer account for the cross wind. Power had to be reduced and it was hell as a passenger with a sudden acceleration and attitude adjustments.
Are the conditions similar here? Based on the crash site and wind direction, it appears he crashed INTO the wind. Perhaps he was crabbing on approach and didn't straighten out to land?
Further indicators would be the fast downwind?
Aspiring pilot, asking for knowledge.
I don’t think you can get airspeed from ADSB data? What is the source of airspeed ?
It's ground speed combined with the prevailing METAR for winds. That's why they said about 80 knots airspeed on final when the ADSB data showed 71 knots groundspeed.
You basically have to calculate it from groundspeed using winds aloft (as best able to determine) and density altitude.
You can't get airspeed but you do get groundspeed. They were referencing groundspeed.
@@avery8699 Apparently they can and do estimate the airspeed. See above comment.
This runway also has power line obstacles to clear. Mix with gusting winds heavy and slow with x-wind.
This is such a sad story.
Thank you.
My primary instructor drilled go-arounds into my head, to the point where they are just second nature to me. They're not hard if you're proficient and practice them. Power, positive rate of climb, walk the flaps up.
Right on. Also, Rudder (18kt 40deg left crosswind) and get on that nose down trim as well. This could have been a messed up go around for sure.
I don't know the approach speed for an SR22, but 1000'agl on final seems too high for a 3K long runway.
Final approach is about 80 knots.
80kt is correct number in non-gusty conditions. They train SR22 pilots to fly downwind at 100kts, base at 90kt and final 80kts... there is also a computer/Garmin AOA indicator. Indeed the approach angle was way too high and not stabilized. I routinely fly out of 2500 strips and needless to say the pilots needs to be on altitude/glideslope and airspeed. what isn't clear is how many hours the pilot had in this plane... it doesn't seem like many and his home airport probably has >5000ft runways.
@@c365inc Thanks. I fly Cessna 60 to 70 final. So his speed was ok in the sleeker airframe. I'd simply dump the flaps and slip down in a 182 but assume the SR stall speed is higher and floats easily if you come in steep and fast. Agree about different home field length being a factor as well.
My SR22 is based out of 2400' strip. Obviously flying in and out is no issue at all. The 22 is slick but can be slowed very easily. I would argue it can be slowed a little too easily and if the pilot isn't paying attention, you can go from too fast to too slow. Because it has such docile flight characteristics you can be too slow without "feeling" like you are. In a 172 the entire plane is screaming at you that it's going to stall. In my sr22, when I first did my transition training and we practiced stalls, I wouldn't believe we were stalled if it weren't for my altitude dropping like a rock. It's a double edged sword: it's great because flights are really smooth but dangerous because if you're not paying attention to your instruments you won't "feel" like you're near stalling. It reminds me of driving an M3 where you can be doing 100mph but not feel like it until you look at your speedometer vs a camaro that lets you know when you're over 60. Praying for the family.
Full flaps 80 knots + wind correction
To minimise heavy crosswind, and moderate cross wind impacts as well as tyre slips for small aircrafts we can implement a runway magnetic field based central line orientation system,that will generate a magnetic field in the runway central line, for a plane fitted with the appropriate equipment that have its own identification with the smart runway, when a safe rate of landing is recorded in the runway sensors, the runway itself will orient the electromagnetic field, inside the plane to magnetically capture it in the central axis of the runway,while the magnetic field can also occasionally automatically switch itself off based on the aircraft local position sensed by the runway itself, to allow for the forward motion for the plane as well without hindering it. This system is only active for an aircraft that has done a safe touchdown with the runway,has the electromagnetic component and the data link to the runway system to communicate with it in crosswinds,fog, extreme fog or night,heavy rain,or heavy rain and crosswinds and night too.
gosh with the direction of landing and the location of impact pointed out, I wonder if this'll be the same situation as the Cirrus crash at Duxford, here in the UK.. the video can be found on UA-cam.
I'm a relatively new pilot that lives ~ 3 miles from the crash site. Glad to see that part of the discussion is now the pattern direction. Maybe that is a bit of a clue. I also looked at the data for the two previous flights. Maybe some more clues. Living where I do for 25 years, being an aviation enthusiast, and knowing local aviators, I often visually watch aircraft in the area and track them with adsb.
There are flybys at the Wright Bros Monument very frequently - with no intention of landing. I see both military and civilian aircraft doing this. Combine this with all the other data, the passengers on board, the flight data, etc, and its very easy to imagine that there was no intention of actually landing on either pass. Highly possible it was a somewhat distracted flyby opportunity - with a number of factors that unfortunately ended with passing through that one hole in the swiss cheese of safety.
A tragic accident. Sorry for the loss of life.
I fly an SR22. They are beautiful aircraft but need to be flown with due respect and training. In this accident there seems some obvious issues to me.
1. They were way too fast on downwind (normally 110 /120 max)
2. The base to final turn looks really steep from the trace which probably meant he wasn’t descending smoothly in a. stabilised manner
3. A Cirrus SR22 is a high performance airplane and needs care when applying power, especially at high angles of attack when significant P turning factors will come into play
4. The go around was most likely needed because his high angle of descent would have meant he’d be carrying way too much energy and speed initially causing float on round out. Complicated by gusts and rapid bleeding off speed because at max gross weight.
5. Applying max power to go around without compensating with sufficient right rudder will cause the aircraft to pitch up and roll left as explained above.
6 The tree line is left of the centreline and it appears the aircraft hit the trees fairly high up
My impression here is, that the approach was unstable from the outset, not being flown smoothly and when the pilot applied full power to go around, did not compensate sufficiently.
My son and I flew there in a 172 not long ago from Raleigh. I hate to hear this.
Thank you, for keeping these going.🙏
That flight was super sloppy the entire time it was in the proximity of FFA, as you & others noted. Not to mention illegal, or can an SR22 legally seat 5?
Be interesting to know the TT & experience of the student, as well as the experience of the commercial pilot, esp TiT
Gen2 sr22 onwards have seating for 5
Thx!
10/12/2024 - Whenever you state a date, include the year. Don’t just say September 28, because some people may be watching your video three years from now.
These folks did NOT even look at the charts for FFA. FFA is RP for 21 as stated in the video. I fly to FFA frequently and it is not a difficult airport to land at if you are flying like you are supposed to. The fact that these folks were doing left patterns to 21 tells me all I need to know about their skills. Still a tragedy, and folks need to make sure they are not kicking the tires and lighting the fires.
please show us how to fly into Oshkosh.
Late Generation Cirrus MTOW 3800? If you have early generation books, you may want to check perf figures too.
Go around training should emphasize late phase go around with decayed speed as a result of deep float.
Balk the landing if needs be.
G1-G3: 3400 lbs. G5,6,7 is 3600 and 5 seats.
Look at the speeds on short final. At Max Gross weight, he should have been at roughly 83-85 kts to accommodate for the gust factor. He was @ 70kts 😮. Stall speed is @ 64kts so maybe something to do with it. So sad….
Wrong traffic pattern (right downwind only to not fly directly over the monument) , pilot too fast/behind the plane, and the weather station isn't above the treeline so I am guessing that winds on approach were different than forecasted surface level, with 5 people on board, 3000 x 60 runway, trees on both sides... too many obstacles and risks to overcome! The runway looks like a sidewalk at pattern altitude so it is harder to judge how far away from it you are on downwind. I had this problem and overshot final, went around, and gave myself a ton of room after to get stabilized. Once on final there are powerlines along the highway, you need to get over those and then pull power to touch down on the thousand footers. It is a challenging airport to land at but very fulfilling. Sad to hear about the loss of life, RIP
Possibly botched go around/bounce into stall-spin?
Yep....a bounced landing and decision to go-around instead of salvaging the landing by adding sufficient power to settle gently on the mains. Much safer to salvage the landing even if it means rolling out into the grass overrun.
5 souls lost and one a poor 6 year old baby 😢 what a waste. I just could never trust another pilot to fly me anywhere!!
Very sad last time I was there there were deer all over the place I had to Mosey them off the runway on a back taxi for my departure
You cannot get behind this type of aircraft. You must be on the numbers, specially on final. Must have a stable approach,recommended airspeed configuration of flaps for landing for giving conditions. Factors that I think here are recency of pilot, expireince on aircraft, landing with strong gusty winds, familiar with airport and suroundings, planning ahead for this conditions. For the go around you must when and where to execute a go around. You must know go around procedure. Flap retraction, speed to retract flaps, when to iniate climd specific flap setting and airspeed for climb. Doing a go around in C-172 can be demanding. After reading about a go around on the Cirrus it can be a very daunting task especially under stress already.
Friends don't let friends ride with a Cirrus driver.
“A Lesson Earned”
It’s been one-hundred years and more
Since Orv and Will took flight.
It took them several tries of course
But they finally got it right.
The wind was blowing briskly when they launched their fragile bird.
But the wind is what they came here for;
At least that’s what I’ve heard.
Since then they’ve built an airport to honor those first flights.
The runway though is narrow; the approach is kinda tight.
The trees that line the runway stand bravely straight and tall.
The wind still blows quite briskly
If it blows at all.
Together they are guardians of flight’s most sacred land.
With respect you must approach them if you are to try your hand.
At flying into First Flight as so many pilots do.
To say that “I have done it; I have flown where the Wrights first flew.”
I was based at Dare County (MQI) for several years working as a commercial pilot and CFI. As a CFI I accompanied many rental pilots into First Flight who wanted to put their pilgrimage to FFA in their logbook and pay homage to the Wright’s legacy.
I can attest to the fact that mechanical turbulence from the wind percolating through the local topography often catches pilots off guard.
Sadly in this case it seems like it became one distraction increasing pilot workload.
The fact that he didn’t take note of the RP21 suggests some lack of diligence and asks the question: what else about his flying skills may have been deficient?
My heart goes out to the victims, their families, loved ones and friends.
Sad, the data presented by AOPA "full fuel 4 adults and a child?" That a/c is good for 500 pounds +/- in that load config.
overweight and aft IMO unless the 4 adults are 90 pounds each... Again SAD! This guy was behind it the whole flight.
Speed, altitude, pattern direction, trees and turbulence. SAD
The turn from base to final looks very sharp (high bank angle) and the approach started too high. That would have been a good time to call go-around. Now we have yet another fatal SR loss in the pattern. A C172 or a Cherokee would probably have landed safely.
What in the world?!
Turning final at 1,000 ft? Too high.
The fact that they did not fly the pattern on the correct side shows lack of SA. The beginning of the swiss cheese model.
Sounds like he was trying to go around the second time and the IO550 engine had too much power, airplane going too slow... Probably the student pilot was flying? I bought my Mooney Ovation before getting PPL at around 40 hours. I remember a close call at SNA in one go around, where it surprised me how much the airplane was going to the left when I applied full go around power.
That would be my guess aswell ... a second go-around that went wrong and lost control at low altitude. A wind of 6-14 knots does niot qualify as "gusty conditios", especially not for an SR22. In my experience a wind like that is absolutely harmless. I have landed my SR22 in winds of 28-35 knots (from a 30 degree angle) and it is really not hard if you have a little bit of technique.
Loss of control is the most common cause of fatal crashes? Really? Hey, that's not very helpful or insightful. Unless it's CFIT, you can pretty much conclude that control was lost before the crash.
Some comments and questions:
* "Loss of control" is such an all-encompassing term as to have little value for analysis
* Stable approach yes, but starting how far out? 1/2 mile? 1 mile? or measured in seconds?
* The stable approach criteria could be violated by corrections for frisky gusts. Hmm.
* You said bring the flaps up "slowly." If the Cirrus has electric flaps, how is this done?
* Off the left side of the runway would be consistent with inadequate right runway on the go around, as you implied.
to me raise flaps slowly means let the airplane stabilize, track the centerline, lower nose, make sure the ball is centered, gain speed, then think about touching flaps.
@@asho1735 That's not at all what was stated.
It seems to be just another example of an incompetent pilot. It appears preflight planning was deficient and the pilot was behind the airplane as it approached the airport. Sadly, nothing new to learn here just another “wash, rinse, repeat” pilot error accident.
The high power lines mentioned in the AFD are no joke and the “feeling” of them may make one be high on approach. It is not an easy runway. Good on them for going around the first time. Cirrus can float for long time with too much speed.
Plane stalls nasty!!
Do th sr22 that crashed in Utah
This guy should get the most boring speaker of the year award! 😂😂
(cirrus)
A absolute devastating tragic airplane accident that was entirely preventable. Offer my sincere condolences to the victim's families and friends. As emphasized in this ASI accident analysis video, the Cirrus POH (or equivalent pub) highlights the requirement for pilots to be on a stabilized approach when landing at an airport. This is especially crucial for heavily loaded piston airplanes attempting to land on short - to moderately short runways; especially given the "wind shadow" effect, and turbulence encountered with tall pine trees next to the runway. But beyond this - is the mindset and absolute determination of the pilot to continue a 2nd landing attempt at a "marginal" airport - when conditions were not suitable for a safe landing. Nature was telling this pilot that "now is not a good time to land here." Sadly he disregarded nature's not-so-subtle cues.
Please stop filming yourself presenting slides. It adds nothing and it's a distraction when trying to read the slides. You are not forecasting the weather, and no pilot really prefers to get their forecast from the TV meteorologist anyway. And, your clicker is distracting. Please, just record a voiceover for your slides. You can even do it in your bathrobe and slippers.
Is suicide a possibility....
Always a remote one
Or just plain careless flying in a high perfermance machine
With 4 friends?
@@justinborysenko3885and a child?
This crash was one of the 3 SR-22 in the last week all in the landing phase. Two of them deployed the BRS, one unsuccessfully, one semi successful, yes the guy walked away, but destrroyed the airplane which we get to pay for, and this accident. A BRS is great when at night or over unfriendly terrain, but some Cirrus pilots forget to fly the airplane. The PVU crash happened after a go around. It was a stall spin and a BRS deployment probably at 300 feet in an unstable Cirrus. If the pilot continued to fly the airplane, they would both probably be alive. The BFL crash happened with an apparent engine issue 3-4 miles from a 10,000 foot runway at 125 kts and 5000' agl. Why didn't he land the airplane? perhaps bad emergency training. He could have attempted to land and pulled the BRS at 1,000' if needed. BRS does not take the place of how to fly an airplane in all regimes and situations of flight. This FFA crash looks like poor piloting skills. Good judgment also means a pilot has to know his limitations.
Doesn't Cirrus train that basically engine failure = pull parachute?
@@seeingeyegod Not at all. They recommend it as a last resort. Read the Cirrus emergency procedures in the poh it mentions pulling the chute in specific scenarios. With an engine out and available fields to land in it recommends putting it down at best glide speed in a field.
With a 2023 model year sr22 and 5 people on board, def suggests a more money than brains condition
@@seeingeyegod That would be really stupid if they did. If you are at 4000' over an airport, smarter to land under control. We are taught to fly in emergencies. Once you pull the BRS, you have no control as to where you are going.
Instant thumbs down for the 4 minute ads
The ads that play in front of our content have been and always will be skippable.
So THATS why I had a taxiway excursion last night and wound up in the ditch….
YOU plucked the last one before the runway and now using it on your desk!😂