Another Cirrus 'chute deployment

C J Campbell wrote:

Early manuals gave a theoretical method of spin recovery, but it has been
removed. The POH specifically says that the Cirrus has not been tested for
spin recovery, that intentional spins and recoveries are prohibited, and
that the only method approved for accidental spin recovery is deployment of
the BRS. Sounds an awful lot like "won't recover from a spin and has never
demonstrated recovery from a spin" to me.

Nope, that's completely bogus. I have no idea why you insist on
disseminating bad information about the airplane.

The BRS is the only CERTIFIED method of recovery from an accidental
spin. Conventional spin recovery techniques are recommended prior to
BRS deployment. As such they are 'approved.'

The airplane has spun plenty of times during development.

-Ryan

C J Campbell wrote:

You continue to say this even though the manual does not. The manual
actually prohibits attempts at normal recovery and requires immediate
deployment of the BRS.

Actually, the manual does say that - quite clearly, in fact.

Where's your Cirrus instructor kit - with the SR-20 and 22 IMs?

They state this quite clearly. You should be up to snuff on this if you
give as much 'advice' on the Cirrus product line as you have been lately.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
"Ace Pilot" wrote in message
om...
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
"Ace Pilot" wrote in message
om...
There's a William K. Graham listed as a certified training instructor
on the Cirrus Design web site. He's from San Diego. Anyone want to bet
that is the same guy in the article? If so, Mr. Graham is a CFI and is
instrument rated, which makes the description of the incident all that
more puzzling.

Not really. He did exactly what I would expect a flight instructor to
do.
When he got into an emergency, he followed the manual, not the theories
of a
bunch of armchair pilots on Usenet who think they know better than the
aircraft designer on what to do when a Cirrus spins.

So you don't find an IFR-rated flight instructor going into a spin
during cruise flight puzzling?

No. Not in severe turbulence. Note that he was descending rapidly because of
the turbulence. If he was attempting to maintain a level attitude he would
have had a very high angle of attack, probably much higher than he realized.
The Cirrus is more stall and spin resistant than most airplanes, but it is
not invulnerable. What I find curious is that a flight instructor flew into
there in the first place, but I have to admit having flown into conditions
that I should not have, too. Hopefully we learn from our mistakes. It is
probably asking too much that we never make mistakes in the first place. It
is too bad he lost the airplane, but I think the performance of the Cirrus
in this incident was commendable. It saved his butt when he went poking his
nose where he shouldn't. I can think of a few other airplanes that might
have broken up in flight under similar circumstances.

Now I see why you aren't puzzled and I am. The article mentions
turbulence, but I have it on good authority that the incident occurred
in smooth air. We're operating from different data sources.

I'm starting to think that the incident may have a mechanical cause,
based on what I've been told, but we'll have to wait and see.

Recently, Ryan Ferguson posted:

C J Campbell wrote:

You continue to say this even though the manual does not. The manual
actually prohibits attempts at normal recovery and requires immediate
deployment of the BRS.

Actually, the manual does say that - quite clearly, in fact.

Where's your Cirrus instructor kit - with the SR-20 and 22 IMs?

They state this quite clearly. You should be up to snuff on this if
you give as much 'advice' on the Cirrus product line as you have been
lately.

What I find puzzling is the contradictory statements about what is in the
manual. In another thread, "Cirrus Spin Recovery", the spin recovery
portion of the SR22 manual is directly quoted. There is *no* mention of
normal recovery, and very discouraging language about even trying to
recover normally. C J's statement is thus supported, while others who say
that their manuals include a normal recover procedure are in conflict (I
know what *I'd* do if I wound up spinning a Cirrus, since both manuals
agree on the deployment of the CAPS at some point).

Neil

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 09:34:14 GMT, Ryan Ferguson
wrote:

Cirrus is understandably mute on this issue due to liability concerns.
Until conventional recovery is approved (if ever), they will NEVER say,
"Sure, the airplane will recover normally from spins!" I've never spun
a 20 or 22 and I have no intention of ever doing so, because spins are a
prohibited maneuver per the AFM. But wake up and engage the noggin,
folks, if you think this airplane is somehow magically incapable of
recovering from spins!

Any pilot who ignores the POH because some guy on the internet said so
richly deserves the Darwin award they are likely to receive.

john smith wrote

To reaffirm some of what CJ is saying, you cannot spin if you do not
first stall. Avoid the stall and you avoid the spin. My question would
be, "Why are you opeating so close to stall to begin with?"

Because they probably believed, as does most of this newsgroup,
(certainly not me) that flying at Va in turbulence is safer
than flying at Vno.

Bob Moore

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:59:04 GMT, "Neil Gould"
wrote:

What I find puzzling is the contradictory statements about what is in the
manual. In another thread, "Cirrus Spin Recovery", the spin recovery
portion of the SR22 manual is directly quoted. There is *no* mention of
normal recovery, and very discouraging language about even trying to
recover normally. C J's statement is thus supported, while others who say
that their manuals include a normal recover procedure are in conflict (I
know what *I'd* do if I wound up spinning a Cirrus, since both manuals
agree on the deployment of the CAPS at some point).

The original manuals did mention standard recovery for spirals and
incipient spins (spins which are about to start). Apparently too many
people did not understand the word incipient and read this to mean
normal spin recovery was possible. The manuals were updated and all
references to spin recovery other than CAPS were removed.

"Ryan Ferguson" wrote in message
.. .
C J Campbell wrote:
Cirrus models will recover from a spin. The only spin recovery
method in the manual is to deploy the parachute.

BOGUS INFORMATION ALERT!

Even Cirrus says they have never spun the airplane. If you have information
otherwise, please show it to us.

"Ryan Ferguson" wrote in message
...
C J Campbell wrote:

You continue to say this even though the manual does not. The manual
actually prohibits attempts at normal recovery and requires immediate
deployment of the BRS.

Actually, the manual does say that - quite clearly, in fact.

Where's your Cirrus instructor kit - with the SR-20 and 22 IMs?

They state this quite clearly. You should be up to snuff on this if you
give as much 'advice' on the Cirrus product line as you have been lately.

You obviously are not "up to snuff" yourself and using outdated information.

"Ryan Ferguson" wrote in message
...
Thomas Borchert wrote:

Stefan,


I didn't know this.



Because it is not true.

Thomas, you're absolutely correct. I hope folks wake up to the fact
that CJ really has no clue as to what he's talking about when it comes
to matters Cirri. I've personally talked with test pilots who flew the
Cirrus SR-20 and 22 during certification.

Really? What were their names? When did you talk to them? And why are you
disputing what the manual, which is available on Cirrus' own web site,
clearly says? The sections of the manual that I have quoted were cut and
pasted from Cirrus' web site.