Lancaster California: Another Fatal Cirrus Crash

"Kenny" wrote in message
...
Years ago we called it a 200 kt aircraft with a 50kt brain.

Kenny



A fool and his money soon has more aircraft than he can handle.

----------------------------------------------------
DW

Please check my previous post (in the same topic) for more detail..
The egine quited when turned crosswind after several touch and goes in
a very hot day and he was low and was on training..... unlike my
friend's SR22, his engine quited caused by vapor lock but he was high
and was close to a airport. That poor guys had probably missed a
window of few seconds in a very unforgiving airplane. The instructor
had no time to save the plane after it is too late.

RIP

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 22:35:37 -0500, "Darkwing"
theducksmailATyahoo.com wrote in
::

A fool and his money soon has more aircraft than he can handle.

In the case of this Columbia crash, a recently certificated ATP was
PIC:
http://www.landings.com/_landings/pa...bia-crash.html

Perhaps there's something inherently dangerous about composite
aircraft?

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 22:35:37 -0500, "Darkwing"
theducksmailATyahoo.com wrote in
::

A fool and his money soon has more aircraft than he can handle.

In the case of this Columbia crash, a recently certificated ATP was
PIC:
http://www.landings.com/_landings/pa...bia-crash.html

Perhaps there's something inherently dangerous about composite
aircraft?


I don't know what the glide ratio is on a Cirrus or a Columbia but I can't
imagine it is really good.

--------------------------------
DW

When I was given a demo flight by Cirrus, I checked their glide ratio
is...VERY IMPRESSIVE (9:1)....however, here is the catch: the best
glide speed is at 110kt. On a climb out like this (Vx may be 85), you
have only few seconds to lower the nose and prepare for a crash landing
in front of you. Otherise, stall and spin.

I don't think so. Boeing will make 787 almost full composite. The
problem is their design. Both Cirrus and Columbia have very high
wing-load, therefore fast speed.
Which implies its stall speed is high and poor low-speed handling.
Wingload is the total wight devided by wing area. High wing load
means per square feet of wing has to bear higher weight of the craft.
In the low speed, you can imaging that the low air pressure max out its
capability to bear the weight.

"cpu" wrote in message
ps.com...
I don't think so. Boeing will make 787 almost full composite. The
problem is their design. Both Cirrus and Columbia have very high
wing-load, therefore fast speed.
Which implies its stall speed is high and poor low-speed handling.
Wingload is the total wight devided by wing area. High wing load
means per square feet of wing has to bear higher weight of the craft.
In the low speed, you can imaging that the low air pressure max out its
capability to bear the weight.


I agree. I don't think it's a design issue, I think it is just at slow and
low speed there isn't much margin AND the chute is useless at that phase.

----------------------------------------------------
DW

I don't think so. Boeing will make 787 almost full composite.

I was referring to the "Perhaps there's something inherently dangerous
about composite
aircraft...".

Also I should not say "The problem is their design. ". It is not
really a "problem" but a "characteristic". As a pilot, you have to
understand the behavior of a aircraft. But in this case, I would say
the window margin is really short.

More information:

Peter Lopez was kind enough to send me this link:
http://www.avpress.com/n/12/0112_s6.hts#thetop#thetop

Shortly before the accident, the pilot radioed the tower
requesting permission to simulate an emergency situation in which
the engine stops shortly after takeoff and the pilot must make an
emergency landing. In this simulation, the pilot cuts back on the
engine power, similar to a driver taking his foot of the gas
pedal, but the engine does not stop completely, Jones said.

The aircraft made a low approach to the airport but did not touch
down on the runway, then proceeded with the simulation, Jones
said.

The first attempt was apparently successful, and the pilot
requested permission for a second attempt.

It was in making the second attempt that the accident occurred, he
said.

The airplane crashed about two miles from the airfield, at 40th
Street West and Avenue F.

Completely based on assumptions here, I read this as practicing the
'turnaround' maneuver after an engine failure on takeoff.
You know, the manuever that kills lots of pilots every year, the
maneuver that you are taught never to attempt?

If that is true, I would like to know if the Cirrus training curriculum
or the Gene Hudson curriculum calls for this. I wonder how many times
this went well with other students before this had to go bad one day
and result in a crash.

Well, I guess it went well once in this case, the second time it did
not. (if indeed this was the reason, we all don't know)
I wonder who else is teaching students these circus stunts out there.