LAX07FA021

The pilot contacted a flight service station (FSS) specialist to file an instrument flight plan. He stated that he had onboard weather and did not need a weather briefing; however, the FSS specialist did not provide information about adverse weather conditions along the route of flight, as required by FAA directives. The pilot then departed on the cross-country flight. While en route to his destination, the pilot told the air traffic controller that he needed to deviate around weather. The air traffic controller was aware of thunderstorms along the pilot's route of flight, as well as an icing report north of his position. The air traffic controller did not advise the pilot of the known weather information, as required by FAA directives. The pilot continued and then stated that they had an emergency due to icing conditions. Meteorological conditions at the time of the accident showed that the pilot encountered rime/mixed icing of at least moderate intensity, in convection. Thunderstorms were in the area and turbulence was also possible. The airplane then stalled and entered a spin. There was no evidence that the pilot attempted to activate the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS), although activation of the system is the only approved recovery of the airplane after its entry into a spin. Weather information transmitted to the airplane's onboard weather system contained weather forecasts of icing, turbulence, and thunderstorms. Whether or not the pilot reviewed this information could not be determined. Testing showed that a fluid line of the anti-icing system could disconnect at higher pressure; however, under normal system pressure the line stayed secured. No other mechanical anomalies were identified during the examinations.

"This case was amended March 5, 2008."

History of flight

On October 25, 2006, at 1208 mountain standard time (MST), a Cirrus SR22, N121LD, reported icing conditions at approximately 12,000 feet mean sea level (msl) and impacted terrain about 24 nautical miles (nm) northeast of Meadview, Arizona. The pilot was operating the airplane under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. The instrument rated private pilot and three passengers sustained fatal injuries; the airplane was destroyed. A combination of visual and meteorological conditions prevailed along the route of flight and a pop-up instrument flight rules (IFR) flight clearance was issued at 1150. The pilot departed from Lake Tahoe Airport (TVL), South Lake Tahoe, California, about 1030 Pacific daylight time, and was destined for the Grand Canyon National Park Airport (GCN), Grand Canyon, Arizona.

According to family friend, the pilot met his wife and two children in the San Francisco, California area on October 23. They flew to South Lake Tahoe, spent the night, and then planned to depart for the Grand Canyon to go hiking. The morning of the accident, the pilot was delayed due to an overnight frost accumulation on the airplane. About 1015, the pilot told the family friend that they were going to the Grand Canyon and would call when they arrived. Following the trip to the Grand Canyon, they had plans to travel to Phoenix, Arizona.

Review of flight service station (FSS) data showed that the pilot contacted flight service to file an instrument flight plan. At the conclusion of filing the flight plan, the specialist asked if the pilot needed any additional services. The pilot stated that, "It's beautiful weather so I got weather on board, and we're set." There was no record of the pilot obtaining a weather briefing from FSS or via direct user access terminal (DUAT) service for the accident flight.

A fixed base operator employee at Lake Tahoe Airport stated that the pilot arrived at the airport the day prior from Reno, Nevada. The airplane was secured at the ramp and no fueling services were provided. The pilot returned to the airport the following morning and found frost on the airplane. He and his family waited while the sun rose and melted the frost accumulation. They departed about 1030. The employee indicated that the weather conditions at the Lake Tahoe Airport were "very good" with clear skies.

Personnel information

The pilot held a private pilot certificate with an instrument rating. The pilot's last medical was issued on July 2, 2005, and was a third class. It had no limitations or waivers.

The pilot attended the Cirrus transition course at the Cirrus factory from November 15- 21, 2005. The pilot accrued 20.4 dual hours, 6.0 oral instruction hours, 1.5 dual day hours, 8.4 instrument hours, 34 landings, and 8.7 pre/post flight briefing hours.

The pilot's personal flight logbook was recovered from the accident site. The entries in the logbook were dated from July 1996 to October 2006. Excluding the last four entries that were for future planned flights, the pilot's total logged time was about 892 hours. The pilot obtained an instrument rating in July of 2005 which equated to his most recent flight review as outlined in FAR 61.56 (d). The pilot had accrued about 384 hours in the accident airplane. In the pilot's logbook, he logged almost all flights in the accident airplane under "actual instrument conditions." An accurate estimate of his actual instrument flight time could not be determined.

From April 25 to 29, 2006, the pilot logged a trip from Atlanta, Georgia, round trip via Gulfport and Tunica, Mississippi. In the remarks section he noted that thunderstorms were encountered.

Airplane information

The airplane was a Cirrus SR22 manufactured in 2005. The pilot purchased the airplane from the factory in November 2005. A Teledyne Continental Motors (TCM) IO-550-N equipped with a Harztell PHC-J3YF-1RF powered the airplane. The pilot had previously owned a Cessna 172M, which his logbook indicated was purchased in June 2004. Federal Aviation Administration records showed that the pilot sold the Cessna 172M on April 15, 2005.

The airplane's production flight testing was completed on October 30, 2005, and its airworthiness certificate was issued on November 7, 2005. The first annual inspection was due no later than November 30, 2006. The last maintenance performed on the airplane was on October 12, 2006, at a total time of 406.2 hours.

The airplane was last refueled at a fixed base operator at the Reno/Tahoe International Airport on October 23. The fueling invoice indicated that the right and left fuel tanks were filled with the addition of 24.1 total gallons of fuel. On the invoice, the pilot's estimated departure time from the airport was noted as 1000 on October 24.

Meteorological information

Meteorological Factual Report

A Safety Board meteorologist reviewed weather data surrounding the time and location of the accident. The area forecast issued on October 25, at 0345 MST and valid until 1645 MST reported that the northern half of Arizona was forecast to have cloud layers from 7,000 to 8,000 feet broken, and 11,000 feet broken, with cloud tops at 14,000 feet. After 1300, winds were forecast to be westerly at 17 knots gusting to 27 knots.

The local weather included AIRMETS (Airman's Meteorological Information) for icing, approximately 65 nautical miles northeast of the accident site, and moderate turbulence (within the accident site area).

A convective SIGMET (Significant Meteorological Information) was issued for an area encompassing the accident site. Area thunderstorms were moving from 290 degrees at 20 knots with cloud tops to 28,000 feet mean sea level (msl). A convective SIGMET implies severe or greater turbulence, severe icing, and low-level wind shear.

XM Satellite Weather

The airplane was equipped with an XM Satellite Weather System. According to the supplement in the pilot's operating handbook, the XM Satellite Weather System enhances situational awareness by providing the pilot with real time, graphical weather information depicted on the MFD. The weather information is not an FAA-approved weather source.

The company that supplies weather information for the unit provided data showing that weather data, including the convective SIGMET, was available to the pilot. When the information is displayed to the pilot, it is shown on a specific page of the multi-function display (MFD). Although the unit has non-volatile memory, the page(s) of data that the pilot was viewing during the flight is not a recorded parameter.

Comparison of the weather radar data available to the pilot using the airplane's onboard weather display, with recorded weather radar information obtained following the accident, showed that the images available on the pilot's weather display did not compare exactly with radar images obtained by the Safety Board meteorologist. According to the weather provider, both the recorded radar and pilot's radar display showed similar locations of precipitation, but had the pilot's display lacked some of the lighter precipitation. The data that the pilot had displayed at the time of the accident is not a recorded parameter.

Wreckage and impact

The Safety Board investigator, a Safety Board specialist from the Office of Research and Engineering, and investigators from Cirrus, Ballistic Recovery Systems, AmSafe, and Teledyne Continental Motors, responded to the accident site on October 26, 2007. Two Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspectors from the Las Vegas Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) and one investigator from the FAA Aircraft Accident Investigation division also responded to the site.

The airplane impacted 20-degree sloped desert terrain at a terrain elevation of 4,520 feet mean sea level. All of the control surfaces were attac