This one reminds me of the beech musketeer crash up near whistler, bc last summer. Flew into a canyon with terrain they couldn't outclimb and stalled it a foot off of a glacier. Not a scratch on anyone in the aircraft and the musketeer didn't fair too badly either. Dumb luck.

gbflyer wrote:Damn. Do those have airbags like the ones you can get on a Sport Cub? Looks like a tough airframe.

Having been involved in a lot of composite airframe testing over the years, it's difficult to believe what good composite structure is capable of when you try to take the stuff to failure.

Now that you mention it I was looking at this accident video of a Cirrus , and surprised the pilot only had a broken arm.
Seems to be they do a good job at protecting the occupants.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... rotor-wash

Scolopax wrote:

gbflyer wrote:Damn. Do those have airbags like the ones you can get on a Sport Cub? Looks like a tough airframe.

Having been involved in a lot of composite airframe testing over the years, it's difficult to believe what good composite structure is capable of when you try to take the stuff to failure.

The stuff is amazing if you ask me. We have a CF cowl, wingtips, and panel in our Rans. Only thing I don't like about it is the way it burns. I put fire to one of the scraps. Goes like it's been dipped in diesel fuel.

Some folks get a kick out of picking on Cirrus. I think it's a pretty cool airplane. I'd fly in one no problem.

Scolopax wrote:Having been involved in a lot of composite airframe testing over the years, it's difficult to believe what good composite structure is capable of when you try to take the stuff to failure.

I met the manager of SFO a short time after the Asiana 777 crash. After the investigation, they needed to reduce what was left of the plane to manageable pieces. He said they bent both wing tips upward with heavy equipment until they were practically touching, and couldn't get them to fail. And of course this plane had already cartwheeled down a runway.
-DP

I find the close up picture of the plane very interesting. The wheels touched the snow maybe 15' from where the plane stopped and the wings moved about the width of the wing after impact. To me there was very little forward speed at contact. The way the tail is broken would indicate there was more vertical speed than there was forward speed. To me it looks like a parachute landing.

175 magnum wrote:I find the close up picture of the plane very interesting. The wheels touched the snow maybe 15' from where the plane stopped and the wings moved about the width of the wing after impact. To me there was very little forward speed at contact. The way the tail is broken would indicate there was more vertical speed than there was forward speed. To me it looks like a parachute landing.

That's what it looks like to me as well,

desmo wrote:This one reminds me of the beech musketeer crash up near whistler, bc last summer. Flew into a canyon with terrain they couldn't outclimb and stalled it a foot off of a glacier. Not a scratch on anyone in the aircraft and the musketeer didn't fair too badly either. Dumb luck.

Is there terrain a Muskateer can outclimb?