Pilot Uninjured In Cirrus Jet CAPS Pull - AVweb

We have non-ethanol auto gas available from local gas stations in many places of the country. We haver aviation mogas in several parts of the country. We have a huge number of low compression big inch air-cooled aircraft engines in a very large percentage of current flying in the US that have run on mogas/autogas for decades. Both manufacturers that originally designed and manufactured these 80/87 octane engines are still in business. So why not use what we have already? Between three oft noted mogas STC owner’s exhaustive STC certification tests, we know what works plus have decades of continued use to back up any questions or challenges.

As Paul pointed out, it is easier and faster to go to the moon using calculators and slide rules combined with 51 year old computers than solve the 100LL replacement. It is not rocket science that GA piston aircraft sales do not offer enough scale of economy to allow FAA certification of EFI, electronic ignition systems, and variable cam timing that is decades use by the auto industry.

Instead have Continental and Lycoming get some federal grant for resurrection of production of mogas capable engines rather that pay repeated board, commission, or fact finding think tanks regarding both the replacement and repeated inquiries to the miniscule lead exhaust content consequences emitted by GA aircraft. In other words, since we can go the moon, land “rovers” on Mars, and send satellites beyond Pluto while assembling and maintaining an old space station, lets forget the debacle called a drop in 100LL replacement and build what already works.

Continental E series dry sump engines powered the first 4-5,000 Bonanzas including the E-225-8 installed in my D-35. That solves the borderline bizarre solution to the Cirrus SR22’s narrow cowling design that requires a 0-550 running with a eight quart pan. (yeah…550 cid engine having only eight quarts max with a recommended 7 quart in the sump but no less than 6 for normal flight attitudes to help cool and lube it). Beech needed a low profile powerplant and Continental delivered a slow turning, big inch, dry sump, external 10 quart oil tank which includes its own oil cooler. 470 cubic inches of non-ethanol burning, Walmart 91 octane $2-2.50 cent per gallon autogas. The pressure carb operates very close to throttle body fuel injection. Efficient, rarely has any carb ice issues (never for me so far), great fuel economy, good fuel distribution when you know how to fine tune the manifold pressure.

Auto fuel extends the life of cylinders because it does not generate all the internal combustion “dirt” that 100LL does making for cleaner oil, less blow by, cooler CHT’s…all properties that extend cylinder life with excellent performance. All the development costs have been born on the first generation Bonanzas. All that is required is dust off the tooling and resume production. Shouldn’t take too much new" technology, dough, and research to dust off old tooling and castings. Yet another piece of 75+ year old engineering that has a proven successful track record of safe, reliable performance on 80/87 avgas and mogas juxtaposed against the decades long quest for 100LL drop in replacement that so far, does not exist.

Next would be the Continental 0-470 series of wet sump engines that have been installed in many thousands of aircraft since the initial run of the E series dry sump engines. Likewise, proven performance in the 230-260HP range that can run on unleaded non-ethanol auto fuel. All that development technology as also paid for long ago. Just ramp up production.

Lycoming has 0-540’s that run on 93 octane mogas. A quick call to Pipistrel will verify that was the powerplant of choice for their Panthera. I predict when the Chinese resurrect production of the Continental E-series and 0-470, A65/75/85/90, 0-200, 0-300 engines that also run on mogas, Lycoming will get their 4 cylinder’s approved for mogas very quickly.

No EFI? No problem! We already have the PS5C pressure carb. No electronic ignition? No problem, we have Slick and Bendix magnetos. No mogas at the airport? Go to Walmart for their “drop in” replacement 91 octane non-ethanol premium. We buy booze, prescription drugs, fast food, via the drive through lanes. All we have to do is readjust our thinking with advanced planning using ancient technology solving the so far unsolvable problem of a drop in replacement for 100LL. We can use a new catch phrase…drive through avgas replacement!

Car manufacturers installed cupholders, extra power receptacles, coolers, and TV monitors when they realized we live in our cars, raising our kids in the backseat of our cars, living a large percentage of life behind the wheel of our daily grocery getters. It won’t take long for them to install adequate tankage for our drive through auto fuel needs. I predict the EAA will lobby Ford with the Blue Oval offering a 25 gallon aux tank option for the Explorer that can be used for extended range on the road or used for filling up one’s mogas approved airplane, complete with its own fuel pump! All we have to do is drive up and stick the hose in the airplane’s tank.

I am sure Chinese Cirrus can make a couple of calls to the Chinese Continental headquarters getting an auto-gas approval for the 0-550 series in very short order. It may not be fashionable to buy Walmart fuel for a million dollar airplane. But I am sure some ad agency or PR maven will post proper high end etiquette allowing use of mogas or locally accessed auto fuel preserving all social requirements.

To move forward in GA, the signs of the times require us to look backward. Forget all the diatribes about govmit red tape, bureaucratic malaise mixed with complexity, and an over abundance of paychecks to boards, commissions, and think tanks. Forget an automotive alternative. Let’s keep GA “pure” from all things new. Lets be thankful, Beechcraft took advantage of all that was learned in WWII, taking advantage of thinking forward because there was little govmit interference in pushing performance boundaries to meet customer expectations, allowing a narrow historical window to actually use innovation for improvement in private airplanes. As a result, we have 185-220mph 4-6 place, all electric airplanes with retractable gear that has influenced and birthed just about every other airplane design outside of the Cub. Today we have new Cub clones and the rest are Bonanza clones. Both have made it possible to fly low and slow or high and fast.

It appears, 1933-47 were the only years for GA to grow beyond tradition. That narrow window of time has not repeated itself. Consequently, we can either hope for what has been proven historically not to happen eventually squeezing all private aircraft flight to a mere trickle when the EPA wipes out 100LL. Or look backwards, flying 1945-55 technology that still matches or exceeds in many ways the performance of what is currently unaffordable for the majority, but very viable, affordable, and available for far more aviators. Embrace the old. It may be the only way to fly.

“I suspect you’re not clamoring for a lead-free fuel…”

Oh, but I am. Have been, on and off, since 1986. Now I can’t even schlep mogas to the airport because they won’t sell it without ethanol in it.

So I keep doing more oil changes and budgeting for higher maintenance costs than I should have to.

But I’m a small-volume buyer. I get that.

I stated before in another article that the world pumps more unleaded fuel in a day than what leaded fuel gets pumped in a year. That said, how many leaded wheel weights get used and discarded every year on passenger vehicles? Me thinks the EPA needs to focus on other issues and leave aviation to the FAA.

Wow, I’d be really intrested to know how a modern and relatively new jet engine just “lost power”.

Arthur,
The Cirrus Jet is designed with the Williams FJ33 engine, a very similar design to the more ubiquitous FJ44 engine that other notable light jet designs are certified with. In the roughly 1500 hours I have logged in aircraft with that engine, I have experienced two separate engine-related events in flight, in two different aircraft – a complete FADEC disruption in cruise flight and a total powerplant failure.

It will be interesting to see what can be gleaned from the engine data and the reason for the powerplant’s loss of thrust once the investigation is complete.

Your comment is just as applicable to all the multi-engine/rotor “contraptions” that are popping out as fast as weeds grow. Reliability is directly proportional to complexity / parts count. I hope all of 'em have a CAPS system installed because if the FADEC system IS at fault here … that’s a bad omen. At least a Cirrus can glide and has a backup parachute.

“applicable to all the multi-engine/rotor “contraptions” that are popping out as fast as weeds grow. Reliability is directly proportional to complexity / parts count.”

You’re joking, right?

There are tens of thousands of parts in a turbine engine, and thousands of parts in a piston engine. Electric motors have maybe 100 at most. Even if an urban air mobility aircraft has 10 motors, even if they all tilt, it will still have fewer parts than a single piston engine.

“Thousands” of in a piston aircraft engine? Are we talking about a Super-Connie, or DC-7 engine having 2000 parts or more each?

Wow! So the reliability of a modern jet engine is now no better than one sensor or one fuse? That sort of defeats a lot of the reason for such an engine.

An engine is not just cylinders, pistons, crankcase, and crankshaft.

There’s every component of the valvetrain, every component of the oil system, every component of the accessory drive, every component of the magnetos, every component of the starter, every component of the alternator, every component of the injectors or carb (hundreds of parts on its own), seals, gaskets, bolts, nuts, washers, studs, shafts, pins, bearings, wires, connectors, sensors, covers, clamps, etc. On an IO-540, there are 22 parts on the generator mount alone, 86 parts on the fuel lines, 257 parts on the oil sump and induction housing.

Pilot uninjured.
Property damage minimal.
I would call that a WIN.
Kudos to Cirrus AND the pilot. ??

If counting nuts and bolts, than there are lot of those in electric power applications also. Tesla’s do burst into flames periodically. Just last week for example.

so a commercial pilot, highly trained, in a part 135 plane walked away with some wet feet because he pulled the chute, YES this is definitely a win. Mr. Borrup lives and gets to see his family again. no lives in the plane were lost, no innocent lives on the ground harmed ( that plane fell so slowly that even Paul Bertorelli could get out of its way) , and it looked like zero property damage on the ground in a fairly populated area.
GREAT work Tim, Cirrus and BRS!

I agree. It should not take long to figure out what happened since the plane is still intact and most current avionics record engine parameters.

I dunno … PB has SO many pilot stripes in his online pic that he must be at least 100 ? And his walker ain’t motorized :slight_smile:

Bummer it ended up in the water and everything might have been ruined from moisture, is there a provision for being a powered parachute and at least trying to pick a spot to land? :slight_smile:

The video shows the plane coming down from MUCH higher than 900 feet.

Wow!
The nerve to correct a liberal anti-fossil fueler!

WOW, by the comments this went off the rails quickly.

At the start of the video, there seems to be (what could be) a smoke trail near the plane. I wonder if that’s from an engine failure?