I think I know why so many Cirrus' crash

In a previous article, "Michael Ware" said:
I got landing clearance once, 'Cessna 1234Z clear to land, short approach,
Hawker traffic five mile final'.
'Unable, continuing downwind'

I got something like that on my first solo - the tower said "make a short
approach, or continue downwind". I chose the downwind.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
My brother went to Florida, and all he bought me was this stupid election.
- George W. Bush

Ron Lee wrote:

Andrew, I have had concerns about Cirrus pilots after reading of some
of the parachute deployments. This just adds fuel even if not
statistically significant.

The only deployment about which I've read any real details was the one near
Westchester (which makes it relatively local to me). From what I
understood and recall, he responded largely to a brief blackout he
experienced (from a previously undiagnosed nerve or brain condition, I
believe).

I read and heard a lot of criticism of his choice to deploy. I'm not sure
why. First of all, why are we so quick to criticize the choices of other
pilots? They are, after all, PIC just as we are.

Sure, there are questionable pilots out there. The pattern-hogging 182
driver to whom I referred earlier is definitely one; I've several examples
in his case and have tried to talk to him about it.

The Cirrus driver that barged into your pattern might have been one too.

Still, I like to think that these are the exception rather than the rule.

Back to the deployment in Westchester: in that specific case, was he wrong?
Sure, he very likely could have continued the flight to a successful
conclusion. But there was a chance of a repeated blackout, and the pilot
had no data from which to extrapolate the likelyhood of this.

If that did occur, it could easily put not just the pilot and aircraft at
risk, but also those under his flight path. Weschester is pretty crowded.
And wouldn't *that* just do wonders for GA?

So the pilot made a very conservative choice. He paid his aircraft, and
risked his own life, to do so. I might have made a different choice, but I
don't feel it appropriate to criticize the pilot's.

Admittedly, I've a bias. I lust after Cirruses a bit. For a while, I
thought one might be in my future (though now I lean more towards another
pair of seats).

- Andrew

"Ron Lee" wrote

This was
particularly relevant when I turned base and was looking for someone
on final who should not have been there

Everyone knows this already but here is a reminder anyway - always keep in
mind that there is no requirement to have a radio to operate into and out of
non-towered airports. This guy told you where he was and it was still hard
to find him - what about the guy who has no radio or is on the wrong freq?

The fact is that traffic can come from anywhere at any time.

BDS

"John Doe" wrote:

Ron Lee


The interesting thing about this thread is that it is not so much
highlighting the case of unsafe Cirrus drivers as it is showing us how
someone can be distracted enough to get themself into a bad situation.

You do realize that you are actually the aircraft in the highest risk of
crashing in this situation, not the Cirrus driver you ripped on.

Actually I was safe other than the concern about an aircraft entering
the pattern "unsafely." I could have landed albeit long but under
the circumstances a go around made more sense.

I might make one go around a year due to a poor approach and my ego is
not such that I will attempt to salvage every approach regardless of
the conditions.

Ron Lee

"Tony" wrote:

You don't have to make excuses when you use superior judgement to avoid
circumstances where you might have had to use superior skills!

Thanks for explaining.

I am not sure what that means but I have never claimed to be the best
pilot around. I make up for lesser skills than others with superior
judgement!

Ron Lee

Scott D wrote:

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 01:16:05 GMT, (Ron Lee)
wrote:

Coming back from KCOS to 00V today several aircraft were in the
pattern for runway 33 and some people wanted runway 15 since the winds
were at the changeover point. With one or two at the runup area for
runway 15 I just went east until the fiasco was sorted out (I made
several position reports since people were all over).

Hey Ron, I flew out of 00V today as well. We took off around 1030ish
and came back around 1230ish. There was a SR-22 in the pattern from
the time we were preflighting till we took off. If it was the same
one, and I am assuming it was, it appeared to me that he was a fairly
new pilot as well. I was watching his pattern work and his landings
and needless to say, they were not spectacular at all. I watch about
4-5 of his landings and they were always to fast which caused him to
touch down almost midfield every time, and he would bounce it several
times after that. The guy I was with, made the comment to the fact of
"what is wrong with that guy". So you were not the only one to see
this type of flying from him.


Scott D.

That may have been him Scott. I landed about 1010 AM and the fact
that he could do normal patterns rules out needing to make the first
one by entering base with another aircraft (me) on downwind.

Ron Lee

"John Doe" wrote:

Before you rip on too many Cirrus owners, did he have to go around for poor
airspeed control?

Maybe not, but his poor/unsafe pattern entry did distract me from
proper airspeed management. Thus he was the one creating unsafe
conditions. Although I could have landed long, I decided it made
more sense to go around. No shame in that. Especially with an poor
pilot in a Cirrus behind me.

Is John Doe your name or are you afraid to use your real name like I
do?

Ron Lee

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:53:07 GMT, "BDS"
wrote in ::

The fact is that traffic can come from anywhere at any time.

That fact seems to have been lost on the majority of participants in
this message thread.

Larry Dighera wrote:

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:53:07 GMT, "BDS"
wrote in ::

The fact is that traffic can come from anywhere at any time.

That fact seems to have been lost on the majority of participants in
this message thread.

And in my world if the pattern is one thing and any pilot chooses to
do whatever they wish then people can die. Had no one been in the
pattern I could not have cared less how the Cirrus driver entered any
part of the pattern.

Ron Lee

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:06:31 GMT, (Ron Lee)
wrote in ::

Larry Dighera wrote:

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:53:07 GMT, "BDS"
wrote in ::

The fact is that traffic can come from anywhere at any time.

That fact seems to have been lost on the majority of participants in
this message thread.

And in my world if the pattern is one thing a ...


Here's what the FAA has to say:

http://www.avweb.com/news/features/184492-1.html
Advisory Circular AC 90-66A
Recommended Standard Traffic Patterns and Practices for Aeronautical
Operations at Airports Without Operating Control Towers

7. GENERAL OPERATING PRACTICES.

a. Use of standard traffic patterns for all aircraft and CTAF
procedures by radio equipped aircraft are recommended at all airports
without operating control towers. However, it is recognized that other
traffic patterns may already be in common use at some airports or that
special circumstances or conditions exist that may prevent use of the
standard traffic pattern.

b. The use of any traffic pattern procedure does not alter the
responsibility of each pilot to see and avoid other aircraft. Pilots
are encouraged to participate in "Operation Lights On," which is a
voluntary pilot safety program described in the AIM designed to
enhance the "see and avoid" requirement.

c. As part of the preflight familiarization with all available
information concerning a flight, each pilot should review all
appropriate publications (AFD, AIM, Notices to Airmen (NOTAM), etc.),
for pertinent information on current traffic patterns at the departure
and arrival airports.


http://www.avweb.com/other/ac90-42f.html
Advisory Circular AC 90-42F
Traffic Advisory Practices at Airports Without Operating Control
Towers


http://www.avweb.com/other/ac90-48c.html
Advisory Circular AC 90-48C
Pilots' Role in Collision Avoidance