To me, it isn’t obvious that a non-BRS ditching would have failed.
It is even less obvious that a non-BRS aircraft would have stayed afloat for less time. It is pretty scary how quickly that SR22 sunk due to scooping up water as the chute dragged it along the surface. Had there been four people in there, of average-modern size and fitness, they would have been working hard to get out. I guess the prospect of imminent death is a significant motivator but an SEP is supposed to float quite a bit longer than that.
If the GA industry was actually functional, every plane would have BRS
One could equally say that if the GA industry was actually functional, every plane would have full TKS. That would save many times more lives, on a regular basis, greatly improve the utility of the aircraft, and for a similar weight and cost penalty. Yet, while many (most?) IFR tourers can have full TKS, very few people choose to get it. The BRS chute saves lives just once.
Ditching is actually the type of emergency landing that works out ok most of the time in light aircraft. But I am not sure in this case, because the waves were pretty high.
Yes, it was scary that the plane was turned over by the chute so quickly. The surface wind was around 30 knots, stronger than in most similar cases. I am not sure that it sank though.
I agree that it would have been hard for the rear seat passengers to get out.
BRS/TKS: I think the Chute can save you in many more cases. TKS will not save you if the icing is severe, but CAPS will still save you then!. For the average pilot, who will avoid ice as much as possible BRS is the better life saver, I think.
TKS will not save you if the icing is severe
Are there any recorded accidents of TKS de-iced aircraft crashing (or even getting into trouble) due to the TKS being overwhelmed? And is there any difference between certified and non-certified systems? I know there are plenty examples for boots…
Other than that – tricky decision. Before seeing this video, I would definitely have pulled the chute. Afterwards, probably still, but would have been a lot less smug on the way down…
Anyway, Cirrus/BRS ought to finally come up with a mechanism that automatically gets rid of the chute after crashing into the ground. Most probably they have looked into it a long time ago and didn’t suceed – either technically or economically.
IIRC, there was a deployment some time ago where the aircraft crashed into the plains somewhere in the US. The aircraft was still mostly intact by that time. Problem is, the strong wind took the plane and dragged it through the countryside for minutes, before it finally got stuck somewhere. Passengers were significantly bruised from the post-crash rollercoaster ride and the aircraft was then nothing more than a pile of junk.
Well, there’s accidents of fully de-iced planes like the TBM700 crashing in sever ice. So i do not think that TKS would do better in severe conditions.
But I do not know how much better TKS works, or not
Bosco,
this has been discussed for a while. I think it’s really a technical problem and since it’s only a FEW accidents in which the plane comes down in strong wind conditions they probably didn’t push the topic.
There is a difference between the non-approved (non-FIKI) Cirrus aircraft with a TKS system and the FIKI (flight-into-known-icing) approved SR22 turbo that I fly. The certification includes backup pump, another stall warning device, indicator in the cockpit of how much TKS is left and better protection of the surfaces of the aircraft. The drawback of TKS is that you can run out of TKS fluid while with boots you can’t run out of them. When getting into severe ice situations with ice building up fast in seconds, the SR22T has this boost button where the TKS output is maximum but only lasts for approx. 20-30 minutes max. Might be enough to get out of the severe icing situation.
About CAPS: It has saved a lot of lives already as you can see here: https://www.cirruspilots.org/copa/safety_programs/w/safety_pages/720.caps-saves-and-fatal-accidents.aspx?1
The feature sells great to my wife and I see it as a spare engine when flying at night.
Then the ditching close to Hawai. There were 2 ditching incidents on the same day. One with the Cirrus where the pilot walked away without a scratch and another one with a Cessna where the situation was not the same. They survived but were carried away on stretchers.
The SR22 NA (non FIKI) like mine has two settings aswell, normal and high, but then it lasts only 30 minutes. I understand the TKS output in “high” or “boost” must be much higher in the FIKI version, because my NA has a much smaller TKS tank and it still lasts 30 minutes in “high”.
Whatever, I think – FIKI or not – non of these planes are built for SEVERE ice.
They are not made for severe icing indeed. No plane is. However, the larger airliners have so much thrust power that they just blast their way to the top of the weather and in addition have bleed air. A SEP doesn’t have the bleed air. The de-icing is there to get you out of trouble, not to continue to fly in severe weather conditions.
I don’t think any aircraft is made for severe icing. The defination of severe icing is that the de/anti icing can’t reduce or control the hazard.
