We have discussed this before. This time a lot of new information has come forth. Really good analysis IMO.
I’ve watched this twice in the last weeks.
Very sad. The pilot was overwhelmed and not confident enough to be assertive and get what she wanted. A very tragic event with many good lessons to learn.
Posts moved to existing thread.
The root cause of this crash is flying too slowly, I think. It has happened to quite a few pilots, and quite a few Cirrus pilots too. The plane, according to owners I have spoken to, bites very fast if it gets too slow. Same happened here (I spoke to the pilot).
Lot’s of things were done “wrong” there. First of all the pilot’s lack of maintaining flyable air speed. It doesn’t look to me like the ATC were used to that level of mixed traffic either (which were nothing at al really, one single Cirrus). Everything came as a surprise to them with poor and poorly communicated ad hoc solutions as a result. I remember during Trident Juncture a few weeks back. One light aircraft was holding on downwind at 1000 fet, another one at 1500 ft. Helicopters from the US Marine were in and out at 500- ft, and Boeings in and out on the runway. At one point I was directed to cross the runway at 1000 ft for a left downwind/hold as the congestion worsened.
What surprised me the most in that video was the lack of designated holding points/patterns. If she was instructed to hold on downwind, orbit left/right on downwind like we do, the result would have been very different. In a holding pattern you can relax and get an overview of the situation, and the ATC can schedule you in to land much more precise, without having to make up new solutions every single time.
I cant really agree about biting very fast. I think this is another view that has developed from Cirrus bashing. To be fair the side control doesnt provide the same feedback as a stick or yoke, but it isnt too bad and of course the stall warner works just fine. It is a high performance aircraft and it doesnt perform in the same way as a trainer – and patently it is not a trainer. Any reasonable Cirrus conversion, as with any aircraft conversion, should spend plenty of time exploring the stall characteristics. If this is done I dont feel it is likely to catch a pilot out much more than other aircraft of a similiar type. I have gone through a wing drop, and it will drop a wing quite quickly, albeit note “quite” quickly, but there is also nothing unexpected. To be fair, under stress, low level in the circuit, full power climb, pulling the nose too high, and, as ever, there is a recipe for disaster, and of course the Cirrus will bite more quickly than a trainer, but then, it is not a trainer. Does it bite more quickly than comparable aircraft, if it does it is very marginal, and I am not sure it does in the first place.
I think this is another view that has developed from Cirrus bashing
I got it from several SR22 owners, so blame them 
Along with “a Cirrus is flown mostly on the autopilot”, which also comes from those who fly them but cannot be posted in a forum
Along with “a Cirrus can do more hazardous flights because it has the chute”, which also comes from those who fly them but also cannot be posted in a forum
To be fair, under stress, low level in the circuit, full power climb, pulling the nose too high, and, as ever, there is a recipe for disaster, and of course the Cirrus will bite more quickly than a trainer, but then, it is not a trainer.
That is no doubt correct, too.
It is a pity that anything even remotely critical (note that “critical” is not the same as “negative”) about Cirrus gets interpreted as “bashing”. I don’t think it does the Cirrus community much good, but don’t we live in an age where so many things cannot be said about so many population groups?
The most abysmal ATC I have ever encountered.
June heat in Houston, an SR20 with 3? adults, a busy major airport and a pilot that is stressed/overwhelmed and is losing control.
US ATC is very good in my opinion, if she would have told them „I am confused/lost/stressed request radar vectors for a long final“ they would have done it.
Peter wrote:
a Cirrus can do more hazardous flights because it has the chute
Going 180kts the autopilot is nice to get wx and prepare for the approach. In the pattern not so. Handflying is easier and reaction to ATC quicker. I don’t think there’s a big difference to other planes.
I’d say the Cirrus has pros and cons like any other plane. It’s an excellent plane for touring, fast and comfortable. It’s not a good plane to mess with during slow flight in the pattern. A 172 or DA40 is better suited for that.
I’m not too fond of the springloaded sideyoke and think that a 172 or DA40, DA42, Piper 28 are a much nicer planes to handfly, but the combination of speed, comfort and the chute make it attractive. And the used prices of the Cirrus are mostly ok too.
Comments about hand flying the Cirrus are also interesting. Perhaps it is just me, but I have flown several hundred hours by hand in addition to those on autopilot. Personally, I enjoy hand flying generally and no less the Cirrus. I think the side stick is very comfortable for long periods of time. It is true the spring loading does reduce the feedback, and for me I would like a little more aileron (and rudder authority) for crosswind landings, but all in all they are very pleasant to hand fly – possibly the temptation to over use the a/p is part of the problem. Most of us fly for pleasure, so I also have never understood relinquishing control to the a/p, even in IMC, at least until you have had enough, the workload gets too great, or you cant fly accurately enough.
That sr20 was manufactured in 2012 so should have Garmin Envelope Protection (ESP). Cirrus will have to explain why it didn’t prevent the stall. I have ESP on my rv7/G3X but it never kicked in so far (I have the option to disconnect it before doing aerobatics, of course). I will start testing it.
