Sunday, November 06, 2022

Cirrus SR20 G6, N700YZ: Fatal accident occurred November 05, 2022 at Montgomery-Gibbs Executive Airport (KMYF), San Diego, California

Exyion Aviation Inc

https://registry.faa.gov/N700YZ 

Those who may have information that might be relevant to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation may contact them by email witness@ntsb.gov, and any friends and family who want to contact investigators about the accident should email assistance@ntsb.gov. You can also call the NTSB Response Operations Center at 844-373-9922 or 202-314-6290.

 


The pilot of a single-engine plane that crashed on takeoff at Montgomery-Gibbs Executive Airport was pronounced dead, the San Diego County Medical Examiner’s Office said Sunday.

The crash was reported at 11:56 a.m. Saturday. San Diego Fire-Rescue Department crews arrived at 12:06 p.m. at 8634 Gibbs Drive, near the northeast end of the airport, said SDFRD Deputy Chief of Operations Dan Eddy.

The pilot, Andre Roosevelt Green, 46, was trapped in the plane’s wreckage and was extricated by fire crews. He was taken to the hospital in critical condition and pronounced dead at 1:20 p.m. Saturday.

Green was the only person on board.

The runway was shut down and hazmat crews were called to the scene to clean up a fuel spill, Eddy said.

A total of 14 firefighting units were on the scene along with 41 firefighter personnel.



73 comments:

  1. The pilot declared an emergency and complained or runaway trim. Apparently a student on his first solo. About his 6th trip around the pattern. RIP young man

    ReplyDelete
  2. Lots of discussion on the COPA (Cirrus owner forum). In the ATC comms there is some mention about a trim issue.
    A number of the people commenting on the forum had flown this 2 year old flight school bird.
    This was not Andre's (pilots name) first solo however he was a low time guy.
    If you look at ADSB exchange you will see he got pretty slow on this circuit. These models with the new Garmin equipment have envelope (speed protection) This trim issue may be this system trying to push the nose down when the speed got slow.
    Lots of eyewitnesses and some video from the field. Witness comments about pitch and yaw oscillations before the nose went over and it went in.
    One of the COPA members on the field (bless him) jumped in a vehicle, was on scene comforting the pilot within a couple minutes before emergency personnel arrived for the extraction.
    New pilot, busy airspace, task saturation without much experience, fighting controls not realizing slow speed??? Lots can happen in these busy spaces.
    All speculation of course but seems to be a speed issue from early reports.
    Condolences to the family RIP Andre

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7rzkVVYxA Here’s a guy who apparently witnessed the accident and comforted the pilot in his final moments

      Delete
    2. Irrespective of his speed in the circuit the video appears to show him motoring along overhead at what, 100 knots plus? If so I would suggest a low speed stall is unlikely.

      Delete
    3. I saw that short clip of the plane flying past the buildings and he is chugging along at a high rate. I agree, stall spin unlikely with that speed so wonder if his trim drove him into the ground then ?

      Delete
  3. I would think a SR20 is not the type of aircraft for a low time pilot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing wrong with using 20s at all. Like with any flight training, it can be safe or dangerous depending on both the instructor and the student.

      Delete
    2. It's not like any training aircraft. It has a smaller wing designed for speed, and the airplane is less forgiving on on airspeed mistakes. It flies faster in the pattern than your traditional pattern, so everything happens quicker. I have about 30 hours in a G2 version and I would not recommend it for student pilot training.

      Delete
    3. I have recently started training ab initios in G6 SR20s. It´s not the easiest aircraft to do primary training in, but it´s a very safe aircraft if you treat it right.

      Delete
    4. Kenneth, I have 500+ dual given in the cirrus, and all of my students perform just fine. A bit complicated on the inside, but very easy to fly.

      Delete
    5. LOL..." complicated on the inside" and "easy to fly" are contrasting comments. If you have the hours, maybe....if you're a student or low-time pilot> No, they are not easy to fly.

      Delete
    6. >No, they are not easy to fly.
      Depends what you mean by "easy to fly." I learned with pilotage and VOR triangulation and NDB holds. Punching in the procedure in the G1000 is indeed "easier to fly". You can be a terrible Cirrus pilot and it won't be apparent to most onlookers until the fire department is called.

      Watch "traffic pattern tragedy" on air safety institute, or the "communication breakdown" video. All same stuff, Cirrus doesn't like being yanked around in the pattern, which is what students do.

      Delete
  4. Total of 15 hours to get my PPL, all done in a T-6. You're going to tell me that's easier than a Cirrus which does everything for you? Now I have 10K hours with zero incidents, so it wasn't a fluke.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. please detail ur "Total of 15 hours to get my PPL, all done in a T-6." elaborate solo and instructional totals !

      Delete
    2. Come on, man. Bare minimum of training hours required for Private license is 40 hours...but you got yours in 15 hours? When was that? 1920?

      Delete
    3. This post doesn’t pass the smell test.

      Delete
    4. I’m interpreting this as he’s 15hrs away from his checkride maybe?

      Delete
    5. Can't be 15hrs from checkride and say "Now I have 10K hours".

      Delete
    6. Give him a break....hes probably 80 years old...lol

      Delete
    7. "Total of 15 hours to get my PPL, all done in a T-6."

      Let me guess, Boomer, you call straight-ins everytime?

      Delete
    8. Quit bagging on the T-6 guy. I don't know what he meant by the 15 hours, but I learned to fly in the USAF in a twin-engined jet, the Cessna T-37. With proper training, you could teach a healthy normal person to fly a 747 initially. At around 100 hours I was flying a Northrup T-38, a supersonic aircraft. We also flew both aircraft in formation aerobatics, two ship and four ship. It all just takes the proper training. There are too many people with poor training and little experience and no knowledge of aviation coming on this site with opinions. Good for a laugh, I guess. Oh, and to the kid knocking "Boomers". You are pathetic.

      Delete
  5. First of all, the Cirrus has lower forgiveness tolerances than say the 172 or PA28 used as trainers. One only needs look at the wing design differences to understand why. Paying attention on AOA and coordinated flight means a lot more in a Cirrus than in one of the aforementioned.

    Second, I know of nobody who got a PPL at 15 hours, if you even want to consider military training a PPL from basic to primary training aircraft (and the T-6 was advanced, not primary). Even during WWII during crash course pilot training (literally in many tragic cases), nobody got into a T-6 until dozens of hours. Straight from the National Museum Of The USAF:

    "At the beginning of the war, flight training lasted nine months, with three months of primary, three months of basic, and three months of advanced training. Each pilot had 65 flying hours of primary training and 75 hours of both basic and advanced training. During the war, each phase was reduced first to 10 weeks and then to nine weeks. Primary training was accomplished in aircraft such as the PT-17, PT-19, PT-22 and PT-23 while basic training took place in mostly in the BT-9, BT-13, BT-14 and BT-15. Advanced training for fighter pilots took place in the AT-6, and training for multi-engine aircraft occurred in the AT-9 and AT-10 aircraft. The AT-11 was used to train bombardiers and navigators."

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am an advocate of primary instruction being basically stick and rudder, needle, ball, and airspeed. Why are student pilots put into high tech airplanes? In 1973, I learned in a 1946 BC-12D Taylorcraft. 65 hp engine, no flaps, brakes were not effective, 700 lbs empty, and you had to control it from the time you untied it until you tied it back down. That, to me, was good training. And I am still here to talk about it a few thousand hours, all in Alaska, later.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I own a BD-12 too great airplane!

      Delete
    2. TOTALLY agree on Student Pilot training--drill the stick and rudder skill sets into them until they demonstrate a high degree of performance. Today's aviation training has gone way to far with the so-called integration of high-tech and airmanship skills. As such we see these kinds of tragic events all to often. Stop selling the 'cool' looking plastic airplanes with the game like panels to gain revenue. Get back to the basics for Heaven's sake. From an 11,000-hr. pilot with 7,500-hrs. of CFI-ing in the logbook who "kicked tin" for the NTSB for many years.

      Delete
    3. Anyone thinking about being a pilot should learn to build scale RC aircraft and fly them for a few years, and I don't mean those foam electric toys. You get the same shaky legs flying a large scale RC aircraft as you do the real thing because they are the real thing, you're just not sitting in it.

      Delete
    4. I completely agree. A big R/C pilot (say, .40 or above) will, even if not instructed, find out what an accelerated stall is, airframe limitations, how to recognize and respond to pre-stall high AOA flight, and get the bad habits pushed out unless he wants to be constantly rebuilding his mangled plane. It is very good training for piloting actual small aircraft.

      Delete
    5. Sailplanes first, followed by a simple power plane, then maybe something like a Cirrus. If the poor kid had had better mentors he'd still be here.

      Delete
    6. >If the poor kid had had better mentors he'd still be here.

      Hardly a kid in his late 40s...
      Hardly poor if flying a sr22.

      Delete
    7. I would agree that initial training should include significant stick and rudder training, including acrobatics. If the pilots of the Asiana crash plane were confidant enough to turn the damned autopilot off they might have had the skill to land the airplane manually. And that isn't the only airline crash caused by lack of aviation skills. Third world countries are rushing ab initio students into the job.

      Delete
  7. I have about 50hrs in 700YZ. And lots of time in lots of others including the 152s and 172s. 0YZ was a wonderful plane. Beautifully maintained and almost too easy to fly. Absolutely nothing wrong with the 20 for flight training.

    Pure speculation, but sadly I think this one will have more to do with throttle setting than trim issues. Runaway trim in the cirrus is an annoyance, not an emergency. And 0YZ wasn’t that fast, but according to the ADS-B data, Saturday she flew the last mile straight and level over the runway at 130-140kts. You can’t do that without a lot (read full) throttle. And it looks like that started at the turn from base to final several miles out, and about when he first reported a trim problem. Again, pure speculation based only on what little data I have seen.

    Super sad event. My prayers are with the family.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good catch here. I’ve examined few of the ADS-B track logs. For the speed/altitude he was going for his last few patterns at KMYF, the left pattern for 28L looks consistently better than the right patterns he made around 28R. Also I saw the speed started to get a bit out-of-control at the downwind-base turn which ended up hot on final.

      Also look at the trip from CRQ to MFY the day before. 146 mph on a downwind abeam at the numbers?

      I remember from my early PPL training that I made similar mistake of failing to precisely control my speed in a descent during a turn by not putting (enough) back pressure. Plus I always refer to the look of the buildings of an airport to judge my height so going to a new airport or just switching to the parallel runway would make my landing all over the place. Also my transition from a C172, in which the cruise speed is not far away from the pattern speed anyway, to a high-performance airplane in which cruises at 150 kts but the stall speed (which dictates Vref etc.), took me some getting-used-to. Luckily my instructor pointed this out.

      Delete
  8. In response to AnonymousMonday, November 7, 2022 at 6:50:00 PM EST

    I would agree that the basics, tail wheels, etc. are fantastic- lots of newer pilots have no idea what adverse yaw really is other than on the page. While I am likely a bit younger than you, I was fortunate enough to learn in Champs/Cubs (couldn't fit in the T-Craft's). But.. the owner of my field was in his 80's at the time, and this was in the mid 90's when I was in my teens.

    I think one problem is that training fleet is old, not a lot of Champs/Cubs/T-Crafts around in the training fleets these days. Even 150/152's are old and there are fewer as well as 172's and Cherokee's it seems as well.

    I've never flown a SR20/22 but I am sure with proper instruction there is nothing inherently wrong in training in it. Different- but not worse. Given the newer fleet, there could be an argument made that these newer planes are setting the student up for what they'll fly going forward.

    Just my opinion and I am glad I learned to fly in those marvelous planes.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Another traffic pattern fatally in a Cirrus? Who would have guessed. These aircraft are so unforgiving in the critical phases of flight in the pattern. Do you absolutely have to be on your numbers or you will die. And no parachute is going to save you

    ReplyDelete
  10. Not a good idea to train or low time student pilot in a Cirrus. RIP.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. United Airlines and the United States Air Force both use SR20s for their ab-initio programs, but I'll pass it on to both that you feel it's not a good idea.

      Delete
    2. ^^That's cool - we'll see what happens in the upcoming years in the rush to find pilots and see how things fare when having to dip down into less than stellar skilled coordinated students....

      Delete
    3. Yes, we’ll when you talk to UA and the Air Force please remind them the the entire general aviation community is still waiting for them to open their training doors to every last student or licensed pilot.

      C’mon man.

      Delete
    4. UA & USAF have DEI targets to meet that influences who they will be opening their training doors to. Attracting lots of newbies who wouldn't normally be interested in becoming a pilot will reveal whether training in Cirrus aircraft is less forgiving of mistakes, just the same as the V-tail Bonanza has done for Doctors.

      Delete
  11. I am a working CFI training in 40 year old Cessna models with old technology navigation and instruments. I also have experience in Cirrus airplanes having completed a course at Western Michigan University a few years back. Cirrus are very expensive, but they are as safe or safer than any GA airplane. I see no one reason they would not be appropriate for primary instruction, provided the instructor is qualified and a good syllabus is used. The fact is that Cirrus and advanced technology airplanes are the future and we may as well get used to it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fair enough.....expect the accident rates for training pilots to go up then. The complacency of CFIS with many hours on here downplaying the complexity of these planes is pretty alarming.

      Delete
  12. Terrible situation that seems to have been avoidable. Quality instruction is not universal. I have had good instructors and not so good instructors. But students should also be aware of their limits and comfort zone. Within that relationship it seems that there could have (should have) been more awareness about the pilot’s readiness to solo that aircraft, in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Cirrus aircraft can't meet 14CFR23 23.221 without a chute. ACE-96-5 provides documentation of how "Equivalent Level of Safety" was granted by including the chute. Wouldn't have gotten certified without the chute. Could that mean that Cirrus aircraft are less forgiving as a trainer? Decide for yourself by reading about it.

    Access ACE-96-5 in FAA's system by entering in search box at:
    https://drs.faa.gov/search

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is a spin recovery issue

      Delete
    2. Chute inclusion has to do with spin recovery for certification

      Delete
    3. Could other aircraft designs that do satisfy spin recovery requirements without the chute be less likely to depart from controlled flight?

      Delete
    4. EASA doesn't waive spin recovery certs. The Cirrus recovers just fine from a spin with proper control inputs.

      Delete
    5. ^ "EASA doesn't waive spin recovery certs."

      EASA waived SF50 spin recovery, relying on chute for equivalent level of safety. Documented in the cert data sheet.

      Refer to Page 7 of the cert:
      https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/downloads/24242/en

      II.Certification Basis
      g. EASA Equivalent Safety Findings:
      Spin Requirements (TC6444 CH-A-F2)

      Delete
    6. This is false. Cirrus SR series aircraft have no issues meeting 14 CFR 23.211, and they recover from spins without issue (As demonstrated for EASA certification). Cirrus certified the SR in the US with the parachute simply because it saved a lot of cost. You have to remember that at the time, Cirrus was a new company certifying an aircraft for the first time. Since they had to deploy the BRS system for certification anyway, they decided to kill two birds with one stone and spin the aircraft and then pull the chute.

      Delete
    7. Instead of reciting the imaginary story, read the actual EASA cert. Clearly you just don't grasp what "Equivalent Level Of Safety" is.

      Delete
  14. All this back and forth, vis a vi Cirrus is a good/bad trainer, is worthless banter. At the end of the day, a low time pilot crashed an airplane, during what should have been a routine touch and go training exercise. It should not have happened, there is a failure somewhere, wait for the full report.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A Cirrus trainer with Hershey bar wing would kill fewer pilots. Fact.

      Delete
    2. On my 2nd or 3rd solo i had a runaway trim motor on a piper warrior, I didn't know what was happening, I flew over Taco Bell at about two hundred feet, at that same airport, MYF. I didn't recognize what was happening, I just knew it took a lot of strength to over come the out of trim condition and it was terrifying, the plane wanted to just nose dive into the earth. I flew in a cirrus, warrior, 172s, and Grumman's, its no worse than any of them, and in some case the descent was more stable.

      Delete
  15. As stated years and years ago, the Piper Cub is the safest airplane available. It can just barely kill you!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Took a look at the ADSB data and the video, and he motored over the field at approximately 130 kts. He had completed a normal landing and taxi-back, and then took off for another (apparently) circuit of the field and landing. All appeared normal until he turned final for the second landing, whereupon his speed increased dramatically instead of slowly decreasing for the descent to the runway. He descended somewhat below pattern altitude as he flew over the field at high speed with some pitch oscillations, then descended directly into the ground at the west end of the field at high speed. Runaway pitch trim? Stuck throttle? Perhaps a runaway pitch trim and his response was to advance the throttle and try a go-around. As others have mentioned, a runway pitch trim might be scary, but shouldn't cause a crash for an experienced pilot, which this person was not. The investigation will reveal important details about the trim and throttle positions, but this tragedy should not have happened, and perhaps we as pilots in whatever airplanes we fly need to review the procedures for dealing with situations like this. And perhaps this pilot was simply overwhelmed when confronted by an issue he was never trained to deal with or simply panicked and didn't really know what to do. So sad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Perhaps a runaway pitch trim and his response was to advance the throttle and try a go-around."

      I think you are correct. From what I understand, he had planned a full stop, taxi back. ATC, due to traffic on runway, advised him-3 times in the last minute of flight to go around with the last instruction to go around to the right of the runway. His last response was "I can't, I gotta land." He followed standard go around procedure by advancing the throttle without knowing that doing so would exacerbate the trim problem.

      Delete
    2. One can always overpower against full trim, but there is not even a great deal of "feedback" to the trim position given the electric trim system in the SR22 (I fly a G1 version, have ~500hrs in it). It would require a really significant and steady pull on the side yoke if max runaway, and you wouldn't know how/if it is changing unless you started to relieve pressure or got other annunciators (servo limit, etc). Any "letting go" would rapidly pitch down and require another pull, likely source of the oscillations seen.

      Delete
  17. A question for you Cirrus drivers; is there any way that a pilot (especially a new one) could inadvertently select nose-down trim without knowing it? I've never flown a Cirrus, but perhaps by the way the pilot is gripping the side controller? I know this may seem silly, but maybe if your left hand is more on top of the stick you might be pressing forward on the trim button. I know at times I've pressed the PTT switch inadvertently in my plane during a rough maneuver, but was wondering if during the pitch oscillations he was pressing the trim button forward or perhaps was reaching across with his right hand to 'unstick' the pitch trim button? Not trying to be weird here, just thinking out loud, and perhaps some insight from you Cirrus pilots might help regarding manipulation of the trim button.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ABSOLUTELY!
      Having flown lots of Cirrus, including 700YZ, that is exactly what I think happened. Totally my opinion here.

      Either way, the trim on a cirrus doesn’t directly alter a flight surface - only the neutral position of the centering spring. It is not hard, at all, to overcome. It would, however, get progressively harder if you kept the throttle in and let the airspeed build. And I imagine that would be scary to a low time pilot.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for your and the previous post about the trim issue which I couldn't understand.

      One small thing: in a conventional design aircraft an increase in thrust and thus briefly speed will make it climb at the previous speed. The pitch trim is technically/actually an AoA trim for the wing which at higher speeds generates more lift and climbs (at the same AoA, lift is a function of AoA, coefficient of lift (basically the individual wing design) and area of lift). That's why (during smooth maneuvers) pitch/altitude is actually controlled with thrust and speed with pitch/trim. Autothrust and FLCH in an autopilot are doing exactly that.

      Of course when already descending, it will accelerate while decreasing the descent angle, which is too slow close to the ground and requires pitch up
      (as well).

      Delete
    3. You could overcome complete, trim up or trim down with the side, stick in runaway trim on a Cirrus. Just saying. Ask me how I know.

      Delete
  18. Couldn't you just reduce power and pull the Trim breaker? Presumably the pilot had been properly briefed and wasproficienwt in the airplane in order to be solo. Sad story, RIP.

    ReplyDelete
  19. The problem wasn't the aircraft but the pilot.

    ReplyDelete
  20. First thing you do is locate the trim CB and the autopilot CB. By FAR they have to be CB switches. If you have runaway anything pull the CB. I recently ferried a C22T from the east coast to the west coast. First Cirus I flew. After flying over 122 make /model/types of airplanes i thought the Cirrus was the worst flying airplane i had ever flown. They will continue to crash untill they get rid of the side stick PIO..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mechanically linked side stick in the Cirrus is pretending to be the equivalent of the fly by wire control in Airbus. Gonna be the occasional pilot induced crash, as the side arrangement is not ergonomically natural in the same way as a yoke placed at the end of both arms or center stick.

      Delete
  21. Rule 1: FLY THE AIRPLANE UNTIL IT IS DONE FLYING. No student should be sent out solo until they understand this is Rule & Priority 1 with potentially fatal consequences for non-compliance.

    Our local airport has had two high profile accidents - one fatal, one not - in the last couple years where pilots simply stopped flying the airplane and the airplane took them to a very bad place. One was a T-210 shooting touch and goes in abysmal wind conditions and the pilot simply forgot to switch fuel tanks and ran one dry immediately after takeoff. All he had to do was lower the nose and aim for the interstate. But no. He was yelling over the radio and stalled the airplane, which plunged into trees and caught on fire, killing him. The other was a recently soloed student who pulled the mixture control to idle cut off on downwind rather than applying carburetor heat. This was on midfield downwind to a 6000' paved runway in near perfect day VFR conditions. He ended up in the trees after asking the tower for "help" - the tower is not the help desk. Thank goodness, he sustained only minor injuries and I understand he went on to resume training for his PPL - hopefully with a better CFI.

    Only time and and the NTSB investigation will reveal the cause of this accident. But yes, I've flown various Cirrus types and thought they were fine airplanes, although I agree with the comments above that letting new pilots train in them and solo them requires specialized instruction. A runway trim event in a Cirrus can be controlled by a properly trained pilot. So was this pilot appropriately trained? Was runaway trim simulated at a safe altitude? Was the student required to find and pull the appropriate CB's (there are two) blindfolded? I used to make my students operate the fuel valve, mixture, mags, and master switch of their training platform blindfolded in a dark hangar and then point to these controls unexpectedly during high workload phases of training flights.


    ReplyDelete
  22. Runaway (not runway) trim does require lots of strength and so captures all of your attention. Would be even worse with sidestick instead of two handed yoke. This unlucky soul could also have bumped the autopilot on while out of trim or out of control. I have not sampled the sidestick myself even though I am over 2000 hours. As far as fatal Cirrus accidents in the pattern, remember not all were low time students such as the woman who flew from Oklahoma to Houston and crashed onto a parked car after multiple tries to land in busy pattern. She had over 300 hours and over 300 in type (sr20) and she did have a pilots license and had two unlucky passengers. I do think there is something about the Cirrus and the idea of teaching students in the Cirrus, especially those who buy a high performance version like the SR22 and then learn to tame the beast and contribute to the Cirrus reputation and record. Someone that really knows about the stall recovery without using the chute needs to comment on it. I was under the impression that the only recovery from a stall in the Cirrus was the chute and before anyone goes out to try it, it was tried years ago by guys who died trying it and that I know really happened.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. >I was under the impression that the only recovery from a stall in the Cirrus was the chute

      No offense, but either you don't have 2000 hours or you need to proofread your incorrect and somewhat rambling post.

      Delete
  23. As a SR22 owner with nearly 2000 hours, I think the SR20 is probably a little slick for a newbie. I think my favorite trainer was a 172 since they are stable, forgiving and go fairly slow at touchdown. I also trained in a skipper but the 172 is my favorite

    ReplyDelete