I guess there are similarities with another thread regarding a Cirrus that was “badly” handled by ATC following several aborted approaches in the States. This does demonstrate how easy it is to stall and not recover at low level (in any aircraft, not just a Cirrus) with one wing drop followed quickly by another in the opposite direction.
I’ve been a PAX once on a flight where the pilot did a 360 on final “for separation”. It scared the hell out of me!
Maybe this is common practice for pilots that have a background in gliding? But in a high performance SEP it should be avoided at all cost:
- you’re close to the ground, so no room for recovery
- other traffic in the circuit don’t expect you to do a 360
- its easy to lose situational awareness
The best way is to leave and rejoin the circuit…
In this specific case the chute was of no use. What probably helped with the survivability of this crash are the honeycomb seats which are designed to crush. And the landing gear which is made to absorb the shock of a parachute landing.
" But in a high performance SEP it should be avoided at all cost:"
Why is a 360° turn at low level dangerous in a high performance GA aircraft? I’ve no experience of high performance aircraft, but do turns at low level. For other aircraft, I assume it was announced on the radio.
I met the pilot of the SR22 in the 1st post, some time ago. They were flying fairly slowly in the circuit, to remain behind other circuit traffic as one is supposed to, and then got a TAS/TCAS contact which they tried to avoid, and got too slow. That’s my recollection. If you fly a type which breaks from flight quickly upon stalling, this sort of thing can get you.
