Cirrus - Pawnee Midair Collison Near Boulder, Colorado
A Cirrus SR-20 single engine aircraft collided with a Pawnee tow plane that was pulling a glider. It was reported that the Cirrus ran into the Pawnee's tow line. The Pawnee crashed and the pilot was killed. The occupants of the Cirrus were also killed. The glider pilot, however, recognized the impending collision, released his aircraft from the tow line, and landed without injury to himself or his two passengers.
Each Cirrus aircraft is equipped with a rocket-propelled parachute. One purpose of
the parachute is to safely return the aircraft to earth if it is damaged in a mid-air collision. Unfortunately, the parachute didn't help in this case. Video of the Cirrus wreckage, on fire, descending beneath its canopy is here.
Some questions:
Who had the right of way?
Gliders and tow planes have the right of way over other aircraft.
Why couldn’t the Cirrus pilot see and avoid the Pawnee's tow line?
The tow lines are nearly invisible in the air. But despite the news reports, the Cirrus most likely collided with the Pawnee tow plane itself, not with the tow line. That explains the tremendous damage to the Cirrus and the Pawnee, and the immediate fireball that resulted, as reported by the glider pilot.
Doesn’t the Cirrus have radar to help avoid other aircraft?
No radar, but some Cirrus aircraft are equipped with other devices to detect and help avoid other traffic. That equipment is optional, however, and may not have been installed in this particular Cirrus. Even if it was installed, it only detects aircraft that h
ave an operating transponder. Most gliders don’t have transponders. We don’t know whether the Pawnee’s transponder was on.
What good is the Cirrus parachute if the aircraft burns after a midair collision?
Some argue that the Cirrus is not crashworthy because it is prone to post-impact fires. That's because it is made largely of fiberglass rather than aluminum.
It is true that aircraft should be designed so as not to burn after an accident. However, that standard applies only when the accident is otherwise survivable. The impact forces in this accident appear to have been so great that the accident was not survivable. That makes it hard to blame the design of the aircraft for the post impact fire. In fact, the occupants were likely killed on impact, making the fire irrelevant to the tragic outcome. (The parachute was likely deployed as a result of impact forces acting on the parachute's igniter cable, not by the aircraft's occupants.)
Was this a freak accident?
Maybe, maybe not. Here is a video of a remarkably similar accident. The camera plane hit a tow plane's cable, rather than the tow plane itself. The camera plane was equipped with a parachute, like the Cirrus was in this case. The pilot deployed the parachute and ultimately walked away from the crash.
ns fewer overall crashes (especially ocean ditches), but more crashes into mountainsides hidden in the clouds. The number of fatal crashes remained the same..jpg)
hanical failure. However, assuming for argument's sake that the crash was caused by pilot error, the workers' compensation laws prohibit the families from suing either the pilot's estate or the pilot's employer.
members from suing the government regardless of whether the crash was caused by the negligence of a military mechanic, air traffic controller, dispatcher or pilot.
The exact cause of the accident doesn't matter. The passenger does not need to prove that the airline was negligent, or that the airline did anything wrong at all. The airline is automatically required to compensate any injured passenger. 
to proceed to trial against the defendant who appears blameworthy. Experienced aviation lawyers think carefully, however, before following that course, for fear of creating an "empty chair" in the courtroom.