Looking at the chart, an overshoot off 36R for KCLT, it's actually appears far closer to proceed to the IAF for runway 2 at concord that return to set up into the sequence for another attempt at KCLT. Sounds reasonable what the controller recommended to a pilot having an (unknown) issue and limited fuel, at Concord he would have no pressure from other traffic and a long runway. Ceiling was 500 so a big factor...[/quote]
Don't know for sure what his distance from CLT on initial contact but he had been told to turn east immediately by tower. Non-LPV minimums for the GPS on 02 are slightly higher than 500 feet, in other words, it was likely at or below minimums and weather can change or be old. Meanwhile he was likely within 5 miles of CLT to the east. If I were the controller, I would move traffic out of the way so he has no traffic and sequence him as #1 with two right turns and 200 foot minimums and known reasonable weather. He may very well have done the missed at Concord due to the weather.[/quote]
Good point I've assumed he had WAAS but Im not positive on that. MY thought off overshoot to KCLT is controller might assume a pilot having unknown difficulty -- he wandered on first approach -- would need plenty of space to set up. Than might mean 10 miles back to IAF behind him, and 7-8 mile final, much longer than to Concord. Perhaps could have been more assertive, both sides in resolving.
Cirrus IFR Approach KCLT
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore
Re: Cirrus IFR Approach KCLT
Interesting that the report did not mention much of what was discussed on this thread such as fuel issues and ATC restricting where the pilot could land.
Just shows that the accident investigators don't tell us all significant information that is out there and available to them. On another thread, there was a discussion about whether CVR's should be released. One thing about having them released is that some of the information limiting that may be done by the investigating agency is mitigated allowing the reader to get a better picture of what happened.
Just shows that the accident investigators don't tell us all significant information that is out there and available to them. On another thread, there was a discussion about whether CVR's should be released. One thing about having them released is that some of the information limiting that may be done by the investigating agency is mitigated allowing the reader to get a better picture of what happened.
Re: Cirrus IFR Approach KCLT
I don't know anything about Cirrus's, but at one point while enroute to Concorde the pilot tells the controller that he has 14 gallons of fuel left. When asked how much time that gives him the pilot stated "a little less than a hour" and that when he lands he will have 11 gallons left. After the first approach at Concorde the pilot tells the controller he has 11 gallons/25 minutes of fuel left. Pretty accurate numbers and it sounds like he was reading it off some kind of flight management system. Early in the process the controller breaks another aircraft off the approach due to an emergency in progress, but later asks the pilot if he was declaring an emergency and the response was "not at this time". Fuel doesn't seem to be a real problem - at least not before the pilot's first approach in Concorde anyway.
It's reasonable to me that with other excellent options available the controllers would clear the busy area and direct the Cirrus to another airfield very close by. They do have a lot of other airplanes to worry about after all and keeping the Cirrus at CLT was becoming an issue. The controller was very helpful ensuring the pilot had the right approach in Concorde even confirming waypoints for him. However the controller kept asking if the pilot was capable of "GPS" approaches, and the pilot confirmed he was able to conduct "RNAV GPS" approaches. The terminology is misleading because with the weather indicated the pilot needed to conduct an "LPV" approach to be able to make it in which requires WAAS. I suspect it is, but can someone confirm the Cirrus is capable of LPV approaches?
In any event, it appears the Cirrus was having serious control problems in both CLT and Concorde and that's what ultimately caused the pilot to deploy the chute.
It's reasonable to me that with other excellent options available the controllers would clear the busy area and direct the Cirrus to another airfield very close by. They do have a lot of other airplanes to worry about after all and keeping the Cirrus at CLT was becoming an issue. The controller was very helpful ensuring the pilot had the right approach in Concorde even confirming waypoints for him. However the controller kept asking if the pilot was capable of "GPS" approaches, and the pilot confirmed he was able to conduct "RNAV GPS" approaches. The terminology is misleading because with the weather indicated the pilot needed to conduct an "LPV" approach to be able to make it in which requires WAAS. I suspect it is, but can someone confirm the Cirrus is capable of LPV approaches?
In any event, it appears the Cirrus was having serious control problems in both CLT and Concorde and that's what ultimately caused the pilot to deploy the chute.
Re: Cirrus IFR Approach KCLT
Control problems from the autopilot do seem to be the focus of the report. It does mention that the aircraft started climbing and banking after engaging the autopilot. He then selected straight and level on the autopilot which did not seem to help. Then he deployed the parachute. It is quite possible that much information is missing from the report but it does not mention about pushing the autopilot disengage button first which would seem to be the logical thing to do.
I believe this is a later version of the SR22 if it has a straight and level autopilot function. On the SR22 G1 version which I am familiar with, the A/P disengage button is simply just pushing down on the "coolie hat" trim button on the sidestick.
Like any of the modern aircraft, I can tell from experience on the Cirrus that if you are not quite familiar with the avionics, wrong buttons get pushed and the aircraft does undesirable things.
Serious flight control problems?.....Believe that if you like, and no doubt the investigators will look into that(which is likely done on initial investigation at the crash site). But they will no doubt also be checking to see if any autoflight malfunctions can be replicated if the investigation is continued beyond that point(due to no flight control faults found). Which is why the PFD, the autopilot computer, and the multi-function display were forwarded to the NTSB lab. Fortunately, the parachute landing means little damage to the aircraft.
I believe this is a later version of the SR22 if it has a straight and level autopilot function. On the SR22 G1 version which I am familiar with, the A/P disengage button is simply just pushing down on the "coolie hat" trim button on the sidestick.
Like any of the modern aircraft, I can tell from experience on the Cirrus that if you are not quite familiar with the avionics, wrong buttons get pushed and the aircraft does undesirable things.
Serious flight control problems?.....Believe that if you like, and no doubt the investigators will look into that(which is likely done on initial investigation at the crash site). But they will no doubt also be checking to see if any autoflight malfunctions can be replicated if the investigation is continued beyond that point(due to no flight control faults found). Which is why the PFD, the autopilot computer, and the multi-function display were forwarded to the NTSB lab. Fortunately, the parachute landing means little damage to the aircraft.
Last edited by pelmet on Mon Jan 25, 2016 12:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Cirrus IFR Approach KCLT
You see reports like this over and over, relating to AP issues or programming on approaches. Most don't turn out with happy endings. If I'm uncomfortable for a moment with what my AP is doing, it goes straight to heading mode, or off.pelmet wrote:Control problems from the autopilot do seem to be the focus of the report. It does mention that the aircraft started climbing and banking after engaging the autopilot. He then selected straight and level on the autopilot which did not seem to help. Then he deployed the parachute. It is quite possible that much information is missing from the report but it does not mention about pushing the autopilot disengage button first which would seem to be the logical thing to do.
I believe this is a later version of the SR22 if it has a straight and level autopilot function. On the SR22 G1 version which I am familiar with, the A/P disengage button is simply just pushing down on the "coolie hat" trim button on the sidestick.
Like any of the modern aircraft, I can tell from experience on the Cirrus that if you are not quite familiar with the avionics, wrong buttons get pushed and the aircraft does undesirable things.
IMO If one can't accurately hand fly an aircraft in IMC when the AP isn't cooperative, dual is required. Relying completely on technology without ability to take over can be Russian roulette.
Re: Cirrus IFR Approach KCLT
It may not be just a question of control either. In something like this disorientation could have become a problem over time as well.
-
whistlerboy02
- Rank 3
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 7:20 pm
Re: Cirrus IFR Approach KCLT
+1 Rookie
I fly piston single pilot and I also fly jets and sometimes you just need to disengage the autopilot and hand fly while it sorts itself out or you figure out what is wrong.
Children on the Magenta anyone?
It used to be a problem of the Jet guys but now as private aircraft become more automated it's becoming relevant.
Confession....I had to hand fly while I figured out how to embed this YouTube Link!
I fly piston single pilot and I also fly jets and sometimes you just need to disengage the autopilot and hand fly while it sorts itself out or you figure out what is wrong.
Children on the Magenta anyone?
It used to be a problem of the Jet guys but now as private aircraft become more automated it's becoming relevant.
Confession....I had to hand fly while I figured out how to embed this YouTube Link!
