Not understanding AoA indicators...

Reply Subscribe

Page 13 of 26

« First

Last »

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

06-30-2015, 02:10 PM

#121

BoilerUP

The NeverEnding Story

Joined APC: Sep 2005

Posts: 7,501

Quote:

This is why Cirruses are so dangerous

Cirruses are NOT dangerous.

I flew a SR22 in my previous job and have probably 700 hours in the thing - getting a "feel" for them is not an issue whatsoever.

For some odd reason people are terrified of doing slow flight and stalls in them, but I've done 45 degree banked steep turns in slow flight with substantial aerodynamic buffet and had no problem feeling out where "the edge" of stall was by the seat of my pants. Additionally, just like any airplane if you keep the "ball centered" it breaks in a stall benignly with little to no wing drop tendency.

The single biggest driver of Cirrus accidents is the aeronautical decisionmaking of the people driving the damn things...

06-30-2015, 04:39 PM

#122

cardiomd

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2009

Position: Seat: Vegan friendly faux leather

Posts: 974

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoilerUP

I agree with your last statement. I have little doubt that YOU, BoilerUP, can flly the Cirrus with an excellent margin of safety. Nevertheless, read the NTSB reports and you get a theme.

Read this:

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.av...20100510X11536

or this:

www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20090218X62344

or this:

www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20080206X00142

or this:

www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20020502X00613

and there is a common theme, spun in by students and instructors alike. Prompt anti-spin inputs in a C172 or C182 will abort any spin, but Cirruses can and do snap roll into the ground. They should be flown in a significantly different manner accordingly. They can probably be used for primary training in a part 141 type program, but if you have students putting in opposite aileron, like this, well, I'd want to be in a 152.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKIk-dqml6U

If you are interested, read a great article by Landsberg (ASF) back when the Cirrus was being approved, as the handling characteristics were being explored and some of this was predicted, as the Cirrus is far from "spin resistant."

Spinning In - AOPA

Quote:

According to Stough and DiCarlo, "Both the Cirrus and Lancair were certified using spin-resistance certification standards; however, neither was certified as fully spin resistant." Cirrus, which had already made the decision to include a standard parachute system to solve other safety problems, proposed this as an equivalent level of safety. If the pilot somehow managed to get beyond the enhanced stall characteristics and into a spin, there was a way to escape.

06-30-2015, 05:11 PM

#123

JohnBurke

Disinterested Third Party

Joined APC: Jun 2012

Posts: 5,995

From the Cirrus Pilot Entertainment Handbook:

Abnormal Procedures:
Spin...........................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Stall...........................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS parachute
Severe Turbulence........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Cruise Flight................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Engine Failure..............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Smoke in Cockpit.........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Smoke in Distance.......Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Moderate Turbulence....Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Bee in Cockpit.............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Hangnail.....................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Mild Turbulence............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Shellfish Allergy...........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Month of May...............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Visible Moisture............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
No Turbulence..............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Night Operations..........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Crosswinds..................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Irate Passenger............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Low Fuel Warning.........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Flight Over Water.........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Flight over Mountains...Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Airspeed >80 KIAS......Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Instrument Conditions..Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Psoriasis.....................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Flight Over Grass.........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Halitosis.....................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
When in Doubt............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Cockpit Fire................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
CAPS Parachute Fire....Kiss Ass Goodbye

06-30-2015, 07:02 PM

#124

NotPart91

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2014

Posts: 269

LOL I fixed it for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnBurke

From the Cirrus Pilot Entertainment Handbook:

Abnormal Procedures:
Spin...........................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Stall...........................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS parachute
Severe Turbulence........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Cruise Flight................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Engine Failure..............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Smoke in Cockpit.........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Smoke in Distance.......Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Moderate Turbulence....Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Bee in Cockpit.............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Hangnail.....................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Mild Turbulence............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Shellfish Allergy...........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Month of May...............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Visible Moisture............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
No Turbulence..............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Night Operations..........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Crosswinds..................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Irate Passenger............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Dysmenorrhea..............See Previous Instruction
Low Fuel Warning.........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Flight Over Water.........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Flight over Mountains...Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Airspeed >80 KIAS......Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Instrument Conditions..Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Psoriasis.....................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Priapism.....................Pull HANDLE, deploy CAPS Parachute
Flight Over Grass.........Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Halitosis.....................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
When in Doubt............Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
Cockpit Fire................Pull Handle, Deploy CAPS Parachute
CAPS Parachute Fire....Kiss Ass Goodbye

07-01-2015, 10:28 AM

#125

cardiomd

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2009

Position: Seat: Vegan friendly faux leather

Posts: 974

Here's a few more Cirrus variations if you're not convinced, from a quick NTSB search I did last night looking at a 2 year inquiry period.

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.av...20080324X00369

Quote:

Data extracted from the onboard global positioning system revealed that the airplane's last altitude was 838 feet; vertical speed was down -444 feet per minute, indicated airspeed was 60.3 knots, with a pitch attitude of up 4.98 degrees and a left roll of -31.73 degrees. These parameters indicate the airplane had or was about to enter the early phase of an aerodynamic stall.

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.av...20090218X62344

Quote:

The commercial pilot flight instructor and a commercial pilot receiving instruction departed from Orlando Sanford International Airport on an instructional flight. Approximately 30-40 minutes later witnesses reported seeing the nose of the airplane pitch down vertically and the airplane start to spin. The witnesses added that, just before the airplane disappeared below a tree line, a parachute deployed but did not inflate.

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.av...20100804X02630

Quote:

A postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Witness reports and findings from the wreckage examination are consistent with a loss of control and subsequent aerodynamic stall and spin.

Despite this I like the plane. I very nearly bought one, and they are much more affordable than even a new Cessna 182 (SR20 is half the price). However, I like the joy of flight too much to fly the spring-loaded plane that needs to be operated in such a fashion - again, I would not "have fun" or explore the envelope in this plane. It is a high performance transport craft and should be respected as such.

In fact, I might even want an AOA gauge if I flew a plane with the SR22's airfoil, (much as I would want one if I flew an F-16 or an A320.)

But, I don't, so I don't.

07-01-2015, 10:43 AM

#126

BoilerUP

The NeverEnding Story

Joined APC: Sep 2005

Posts: 7,501

Use your feet to maintain coordinated flight and you don't have to worry about spins.

Posting a number of training-related and base-to-final stall/spin accidents, which are still far too common and not exclusive to one type of aircraft, doesn't remotely prove that it is an "unsafe" design.

It certainly is a high performance SE piston and as such isn't as forgiving as other less capable airframes...but "dangerous"? Absolutely not.

07-01-2015, 11:29 AM

#127

2StgTurbine

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Feb 2010

Posts: 2,276

As BoilerUP said, the SR-22 is not unsafe. The reason people view it as dangerous is because there are a lot of them and therefore there are a lot of accidents. If Cessna sold a similar amount of Cessna 400s, I bet people would think that was a dangerous plane too.

07-01-2015, 11:45 AM

#128

cardiomd

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2009

Position: Seat: Vegan friendly faux leather

Posts: 974

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoilerUP

It certainly is a high performance SE piston and as such isn't as forgiving as other less capable airframes...but "dangerous"? Absolutely not.

Well I agree with the spirit of what you say. I'd argue that it is dangerous and aviation is dangerous. I would also say the SR's are more dangerous, all said, than a lower wingload design. But yes, absolute risk is low, so you could look on it as not dangerous, I wouldn't argue semantics with you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2StgTurbine

The reason people view it as dangerous is because there are a lot of them and therefore there are a lot of accidents. If Cessna sold a similar amount of Cessna 400s, I bet people would think that was a dangerous plane too.

That is a nice thought, but accident statistics do not support your claim.

You might be able to argue the "type" of person that flies each plane is different (e.g. a lot of doctors / dentists / lawyers buy Cirruses but only flight professionals or true enthusiasts would shell out the higher $$$ for a columbia/cessna 400, and they are more interested in flying and thus safer.) Also perhaps 400's are not used for training while a lot of Cirrus are.

07-01-2015, 04:32 PM

#129

F15Cricket

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2014

Position: Right Seat 737, Front seat T-6

Posts: 536

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardiomd

I've never flown a Cirrus, but this video shows it can be (and is) used as a good training aircraft for new pilots with absolutely no flying time... And at an airfield that is at 6572' field elevation!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tWAYBjqwU80

Maybe it is because they have an AOA gauge that they can do this so successfully?