Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:19 AM - Re: Re: BRS chute repack time table (Richard Girard)
2. 04:04 AM - Re: Re: BRS chute repack time table (Matt Tucciarone)
3. 05:56 AM - Re: Re: BRS chute repack time table (Dan Billingsley)
4. 06:22 AM - Re: BRS chute repack time table (lucien)
5. 07:44 AM - Re: Re: BRS chute repack time table (George Myers)
6. 08:10 AM - This guy loves his BSR chute (ricklach)
7. 12:24 PM - Westach probes (Paul McAllister)
8. 06:25 PM - Re: Westach probes (FLYaDIVE)
9. 10:24 PM - Re: BRS chute repack time table (Roger Lee)
10. 10:40 PM - Re: BRS chute repack time table (Roger Lee)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BRS chute repack time table |
Roger et al, Took awhile to analyze and quantify the table of "saves" as
assembled by BRS. I used their reason for deployment and when there seemed
to be a crossover to another category I noted it.
First the table is not complete. BRS lists 255 saves, yet the highest number
of their numbering system is 240. BRS counts lives saved, yet their list is
by incident. There are also gaps in the numbering. All that being said there
are 149 separate incidents listed in 7 categories.
Loss of Control (LOC) 53 w/ additional info 15
Structural Failure (SF) 47 5
Engine Out Terrain (EOT) 22 2
Unknown (?) 16 3
Weather (WX) 8 5
Poor Assembly (PA) 2 0
Medical (RX) 1 0
So an LOC incident may say tumble, yet so does a WX incident or an LOC can
also say aerobatics and so will a SF.
WX had the highest percentage of incidents with additional info and 50% of
them listed tumbles. These were all hang gliders (if you've ever gone "over
the falls" exiting a thermal you'll understand). All these had the primary
reason as "violent air".
Of the (?) reasons the three incidents with additional info were for in
flight fire, midair collision and "struck an obstacle on approach".
Of the EOT's, the 2 with additional info were just engine out.
Taking them all together, of the 149, roughly 50% were simply pilot error,
poor judgement, or poor preflight inspection. I think this is fairly
conservative, since it could be argued that ALL the Loss of Control
incidents were due to pilot error.
Roger, All flying is unsafe. It can be mitigated with training, practice,
knowledge, and exercising good judgement. I fail to understand how adding a
device that can't be inspected during pre flight, has no circuit, sensor or
warning lamp to let a pilot know it is armed and ready, and for which the
pilot has no training whatsoever, makes flying safer.
Indeed, there is evidence to the contrary, that some pilots regard the BRS
as the out for everything. An instructor I know even had a student tell him
he didn't need to calculate fuel burn for a flight because if he ran out
he'd pull the cord. My friend sent him packing with the advice to forget
about learning to fly. Whether he did or not is unknown.
And then there is the fact that once the 'chute is deployed the pilot has no
control over anything. A test pilot for Cessna learned that one the hard way
when he was spin testing the model 162, Sky Catcher. Winds on the ground
were 20 gusting to 35 and when the airplane alighted it was dragged across
the ground and the pilot was injured trying to get out of the aircraft.
Just two weeks before that another Cessna test pilot, also spin testing the
162, attempted to deploy the BRS and it DID NOT FIRE. Fortunately he was
also wearing a conventional parachute. He exited the aircraft and landed
safely.
How many BRS's have done that? If one did, it certainly cancels out the idea
that an airframe parachute is a panacea.
Last, let me give you an example from my personal experience. I am a private
pilot and the phrase, "First fly the airplane" has been drilled into my
brain by every instructor I've ever trained with. Last year while departing
a local fly in I had an engine out. I attempted to restart the engine after
checking the fuel valve and when I was unable to get the engine to fire, I
resorted to training. Even though I had to fly upwind to get back to the
runway ( I was at pattern altitude so this was not an "impossible turn"
situation) I concentrated on maintaining best glide speed, on making sure
"the spot that doesn't move" was on the runway and watched for traffic and
obstructions. Even when the pilot of a twin took off downwind I took evasive
action and flew parallel to the runway to clear him, then slipped back to
the runway and completed the landing. At no time did I even think about the
red handle even though I have it mounted right on the stick in plain sight.
Throughout the incident, I heard Spence, my primary instructor throughout my
training saying, "First fly the airplane" as plainly as if he were sitting
next to me.
In conclusion, The cheapest BRS costs over $2000. That can buy a lot of
training. Studying about flying can be free if you use the local library and
even if you have to buy the books, they're cheap. Sitting in the aircraft
practicing emergency procedures is also free. Learning to say, "Not today",
can be hard, but the discipline it brings is priceless. All these will make
you a safer pilot. I am absolutely convinced a BRS does not.
Rick Girard
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Roger Lee <ssadiver1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> For me personally the chute makes perfect sense as an insurance policy and
> is just part of doing business since I fly. Way too many people have died
> that may have been saved. With 250+ saves under BRS's chute and more saves
> with other chutes around the world it's just a good idea.
> Here is the way I look at it since aircraft gets older and the skies more
> crowded.
>
> What would you give if you were plummeting towards the ground? The answer
> at that point in time is "anything and everything". So why not just give
> them a lot less (the cost of a chute) right up front and save yourself all
> that anxiety and money.
> Everyone talks a good game when we are upright and flying is good. Have it
> turn to crap and know you are going to die in the next few seconds changes
> all of us, especially since you could have easily prevented it.
>
>
> I am not trying to bash anyone here, but just appeal to good logic sense we
> have chosen to fly and committed to be safe and come home to our family.
>
> Which is another point. What happens when you take a friend or family
> member into the ground and kill them too. What about all the trauma to the
> survivors they leave behind.
>
>
> So my last parting comment is, "It's just money and that can be replaced".
>
> --------
> Roger Lee
> Tucson, Az.
> Light Sport Repairman - Maintenance Rated
> Rotax Repair Center
> 520-574-1080
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=310290#310290
>
>
--
Zulu Delta
Kolb Mk IIIC
582 Gray head
4.00 C gearbox
3 blade WD
Thanks, Homer GBYM
It is not bigotry to be certain we are right; but it is bigotry to be unable
to imagine how we might possibly have gone wrong.
- G.K. Chesterton
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BRS chute repack time table |
I agree with you Richard,
When I bought my Aventura II in 2003, it had a BRS 1200 on it. I never
felt comfortable with it on my plane. It's like you said, you can't
preflight it so you really don't know if it will work. Then you have to
be prepared as to when you would pull it. My decision was to only pull
if I lost control of the plane or if I was over the trees with an engine
out, at the last minute so as to slow the decent through the trees.
When 10 year mark came due on the rocket, I sold it on barnstormers. The
guy that bought it was going to put it on a kolb as is, out of date. I
am glad it is off my plane and I feel that I am a more cautious and
safer pilot. I find myself now always looking for that emergency landing
spot (something that I should have been doing anyway)
When you have a parachute on your plane I have to admit that in the
back of your mind you think "well if I get in real trouble, I can always
pull the chute".
My plane weighs 30 pounds less and I lost about a knot of drag.
From: Richard Girard
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 4:18 AM
Subject: Re: RotaxEngines-List: Re: BRS chute repack time table
Roger et al, Took awhile to analyze and quantify the table of "saves" as
assembled by BRS. I used their reason for deployment and when there
seemed to be a crossover to another category I noted it.
First the table is not complete. BRS lists 255 saves, yet the highest
number of their numbering system is 240. BRS counts lives saved, yet
their list is by incident. There are also gaps in the numbering. All
that being said there are 149 separate incidents listed in 7 categories.
Loss of Control (LOC) 53 w/ additional info 15
Structural Failure (SF) 47 5
Engine Out Terrain (EOT) 22 2
Unknown (?) 16 3
Weather (WX) 8 5
Poor Assembly (PA) 2 0
Medical (RX) 1 0
So an LOC incident may say tumble, yet so does a WX incident or an LOC
can also say aerobatics and so will a SF.
WX had the highest percentage of incidents with additional info and 50%
of them listed tumbles. These were all hang gliders (if you've ever gone
"over the falls" exiting a thermal you'll understand). All these had the
primary reason as "violent air".
Of the (?) reasons the three incidents with additional info were for in
flight fire, midair collision and "struck an obstacle on approach".
Of the EOT's, the 2 with additional info were just engine out.
Taking them all together, of the 149, roughly 50% were simply pilot
error, poor judgement, or poor preflight inspection. I think this is
fairly conservative, since it could be argued that ALL the Loss of
Control incidents were due to pilot error.
Roger, All flying is unsafe. It can be mitigated with training,
practice, knowledge, and exercising good judgement. I fail to understand
how adding a device that can't be inspected during pre flight, has no
circuit, sensor or warning lamp to let a pilot know it is armed and
ready, and for which the pilot has no training whatsoever, makes flying
safer.
Indeed, there is evidence to the contrary, that some pilots regard the
BRS as the out for everything. An instructor I know even had a student
tell him he didn't need to calculate fuel burn for a flight because if
he ran out he'd pull the cord. My friend sent him packing with the
advice to forget about learning to fly. Whether he did or not is
unknown.
And then there is the fact that once the 'chute is deployed the pilot
has no control over anything. A test pilot for Cessna learned that one
the hard way when he was spin testing the model 162, Sky Catcher. Winds
on the ground were 20 gusting to 35 and when the airplane alighted it
was dragged across the ground and the pilot was injured trying to get
out of the aircraft.
Just two weeks before that another Cessna test pilot, also spin testing
the 162, attempted to deploy the BRS and it DID NOT FIRE. Fortunately he
was also wearing a conventional parachute. He exited the aircraft and
landed safely.
How many BRS's have done that? If one did, it certainly cancels out the
idea that an airframe parachute is a panacea.
Last, let me give you an example from my personal experience. I am a
private pilot and the phrase, "First fly the airplane" has been drilled
into my brain by every instructor I've ever trained with. Last year
while departing a local fly in I had an engine out. I attempted to
restart the engine after checking the fuel valve and when I was unable
to get the engine to fire, I resorted to training. Even though I had to
fly upwind to get back to the runway ( I was at pattern altitude so this
was not an "impossible turn" situation) I concentrated on maintaining
best glide speed, on making sure "the spot that doesn't move" was on the
runway and watched for traffic and obstructions. Even when the pilot of
a twin took off downwind I took evasive action and flew parallel to the
runway to clear him, then slipped back to the runway and completed the
landing. At no time did I even think about the red handle even though I
have it mounted right on the stick in plain sight. Throughout the
incident, I heard Spence, my primary instructor throughout my training
saying, "First fly the airplane" as plainly as if he were sitting next
to me.
In conclusion, The cheapest BRS costs over $2000. That can buy a lot of
training. Studying about flying can be free if you use the local library
and even if you have to buy the books, they're cheap. Sitting in the
aircraft practicing emergency procedures is also free. Learning to say,
"Not today", can be hard, but the discipline it brings is priceless. All
these will make you a safer pilot. I am absolutely convinced a BRS does
not.
Rick Girard
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Roger Lee <ssadiver1@yahoo.com> wrote:
<ssadiver1@yahoo.com>
For me personally the chute makes perfect sense as an insurance policy
and is just part of doing business since I fly. Way too many people have
died that may have been saved. With 250+ saves under BRS's chute and
more saves with other chutes around the world it's just a good idea.
Here is the way I look at it since aircraft gets older and the skies
more crowded.
What would you give if you were plummeting towards the ground? The
answer at that point in time is "anything and everything". So why not
just give them a lot less (the cost of a chute) right up front and save
yourself all that anxiety and money.
Everyone talks a good game when we are upright and flying is good.
Have it turn to crap and know you are going to die in the next few
seconds changes all of us, especially since you could have easily
prevented it.
I am not trying to bash anyone here, but just appeal to good logic
sense we have chosen to fly and committed to be safe and come home to
our family.
Which is another point. What happens when you take a friend or family
member into the ground and kill them too. What about all the trauma to
the survivors they leave behind.
So my last parting comment is, "It's just money and that can be
replaced".
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Light Sport Repairman - Maintenance Rated
Rotax Repair Center
520-574-1080
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=310290#310290
==========
-List"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RotaxEngines-List
==========
http://forums.matronics.com
==========
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
Zulu Delta
Kolb Mk IIIC
582 Gray head
4.00 C gearbox
3 blade WD
Thanks, Homer GBYM
It is not bigotry to be certain we are right; but it is bigotry to be
unable to imagine how we might possibly have gone wrong.
- G.K. Chesterton
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BRS chute repack time table |
Roger, Well said. I don't have a BRS on my plane but I am looking at option
s of =0Ahow I might install it on a Kitfox IV. My plane has a stall speed o
f just under =0A40 mph which is awesome and in-most engine out situations
...no shute needed. I =0Afly in and out of airports that have alot of stude
nt pilots...very congested. It =0Aonly takes one wrong move on the part of
one pilot and I don't have a wing or =0Arudder. There isn't one pilot here
that wouldn't welcome that rip-chord to yank =0Aon at that moment. =0A=0ADa
n B=0AMesa, AZ=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Matt Tuc
ciarone <m.tucciarone@hotmail.com>=0ATo: rotaxengines-list@matronics.com=0A
Sent: Sat, August 28, 2010 4:03:40 AM=0ASubject: Re: RotaxEngines-List: Re:
BRS chute repack time table=0A=0A=0AI agree with you Richard,=0A-=0AWhen
I bought my Aventura II in 2003, it had a BRS 1200 on it. I never felt =0A
comfortable with it on my plane. It's like you said, you can't preflight it
so =0Ayou really don't know if it will work. Then you have to be prepared
as to when =0Ayou would pull it. My decision was to only pull if I lost con
trol of the plane =0Aor if I was over the trees with an engine out, at the
last minute so as to slow =0Athe decent through the trees. =0A=0A-=0AWhen
10 year mark came due on the rocket, I sold it on barnstormers. The guy
=0Athat bought it was going to put it on a kolb as is, out of date. I am gl
ad it is =0Aoff my plane and I feel that I am a more cautious and safer pil
ot. I find myself =0Anow always looking for that emergency-landing spot
-(something that I should-have =0Abeen doing anyway)=0A-=0A-When yo
u have a parachute on your plane I have to admit that in the back of =0Ayou
r mind you think "well if I get in real trouble, I can always pull the =0Ac
hute". =0A=0A-=0AMy plane weighs 30 pounds less and I lost about a knot o
f drag. =0A-=0A-=0A-=0A=0A=0AFrom: Richard Girard =0ASent: Saturday,
August 28, 2010 4:18 AM=0ATo: rotaxengines-list@matronics.com =0ASubject: R
e: RotaxEngines-List: Re: BRS chute repack time table=0ARoger et al, Took a
while to analyze and quantify the table of "saves" as =0Aassembled by BRS.
I used their reason for deployment and when there seemed to be =0Aa crossov
er to another category I noted it. =0A=0AFirst the table is not complete. B
RS lists 255 saves, yet the highest number of =0Atheir numbering system is
240. BRS counts lives saved, yet their list is by =0Aincident. There are al
so gaps in the numbering. All that being said there are =0A149 separate inc
idents listed in 7 categories.=0A=0ALoss of Control - - -(LOC) -
- 53 -w/ additional info 15=0AStructural Failure - - (SF) - - 4
7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5=0AEngine Out Te
rrain (EOT) - - 22 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-2=0AUnknown - - - - - - - - - (?) - - 16 - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - 3=0AWeather - - - -
- - - - (WX) - - -8 - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - 5=0APoor Assembly - - - -(PA) - - 2 - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -0=0AMedical - - - -
- - - - - (RX) - - -1 - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - 0=0A=0ASo an LOC incident may say tumble, yet so does a
WX incident or an LOC can also =0Asay aerobatics and so will a SF.=0AWX ha
d the highest percentage of incidents with additional info and 50% of them
=0Alisted tumbles. These were all hang gliders (if you've ever gone "over t
he =0Afalls" exiting a thermal you'll understand). All these had the primar
y reason as =0A"violent air".=0AOf the (?) reasons the three incidents with
additional info were for in flight =0Afire, midair collision and "struck a
n obstacle on approach".=0AOf the EOT's, the 2 with additional info were ju
st engine out.=0ATaking them all together, of the 149, roughly 50% were sim
ply pilot error, poor =0Ajudgement, or poor preflight inspection. I think t
his is fairly conservative, =0Asince it could be argued that ALL the Loss o
f Control incidents were due to =0Apilot error.-=0ARoger, All flying is u
nsafe. It can be mitigated with training, practice, =0Aknowledge, and exerc
ising good judgement. I fail to understand how adding a =0Adevice that can'
t be inspected during pre flight, has no circuit, sensor or =0Awarning lamp
to let a pilot know it is armed and ready, and for which the pilot =0Ahas
no training whatsoever, makes flying safer.-=0AIndeed, there is evidence
to the contrary, that some pilots regard the BRS as =0Athe out for everythi
ng. An instructor I know even had a student tell him he =0Adidn't need to c
alculate fuel burn for a flight because if he ran out he'd pull =0Athe cord
. My friend sent him packing with the advice to forget about learning to
=0Afly. Whether he did or not is unknown.=0AAnd then there is the fact that
once the 'chute is deployed the pilot has no =0Acontrol over anything. A t
est pilot for Cessna learned that one the hard way =0Awhen he was spin test
ing the model 162, Sky Catcher. Winds on the ground were 20 =0Agusting to 3
5 and when the airplane alighted it was dragged across the ground =0Aand th
e pilot was injured trying to get out of the aircraft.=0AJust two weeks bef
ore that another Cessna test pilot, also spin testing the 162, =0Aattempted
to deploy the BRS and it DID NOT FIRE. Fortunately he was also wearing =0A
a conventional parachute. He exited the aircraft and landed safely.-=0AHo
w many BRS's have done that? If one did, it certainly cancels out the idea
=0Athat an airframe parachute is a panacea.-=0ALast, let me give you an e
xample from my personal experience. I am a private =0Apilot and the phrase,
"First fly the airplane" has been drilled into my brain by =0Aevery instru
ctor I've ever trained with. Last year while departing a local fly =0Ain I
had an engine out. I attempted to -restart the engine after checking the
=0Afuel valve and when I was unable to get the engine to fire, I resorted t
o =0Atraining. Even though I had to fly upwind to get back to the runway (
I was at =0Apattern altitude so this was not an "impossible turn" situation
) I concentrated =0Aon maintaining best glide speed, on making sure "the sp
ot that doesn't move" was =0Aon the runway and watched for traffic and obst
ructions. Even when the pilot of a =0Atwin took off downwind I took evasive
action and flew parallel to the runway to =0Aclear him, then slipped back
to the runway and completed the landing. At no time =0Adid I even think abo
ut the red handle even though I have it mounted right on the =0Astick in pl
ain sight. Throughout the incident, I heard Spence, my primary =0Ainstructo
r throughout my training saying, "First fly the airplane" as plainly as =0A
if he were sitting next to me.=0AIn conclusion, The cheapest BRS costs over
$2000. That can buy a lot of =0Atraining. Studying about flying can be fre
e if you use the local library and =0Aeven if you have to buy the books, th
ey're cheap. Sitting in the aircraft =0Apracticing emergency procedures is
also free. Learning to say, "Not today", can =0Abe hard, but the discipline
it brings is priceless. All these will make you a =0Asafer pilot. I am abs
olutely convinced a BRS does not.=0A=0ARick Girard=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AOn Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Roger Lee <ssadiv
Lee" <ssadiver1@yahoo.com>=0A>=0A>For me personally the chute makes perfect
sense as an insurance policy and is =0A>just part of doing business since
I fly. Way too many people have died that may =0A>have been saved. With 250
+ saves under BRS's chute and more saves with other =0A>chutes around the w
orld it's just a good idea.=0A>Here is the way I look at it since aircraft
gets older and the skies more =0A>crowded.=0A>=0A>What would you give if yo
u were plummeting towards the ground? The answer at =0A>that point in time
is "anything and everything". So why not just give them a lot =0A>less (the
cost of a chute) right up front and save yourself all that anxiety and =0A
>money.=0A>Everyone talks a good game when we are upright and flying is goo
d. Have it turn =0A>to crap and know you are going to die in the next few s
econds changes all of us, =0A>especially since you could have easily preven
ted it.=0A>=0A>=0A>I am not trying to bash anyone here, but just appeal to
good logic sense we have =0A>chosen to fly and committed to be safe and com
e home to our family.=0A>=0A>Which is another point. What happens when you
take a friend or family member =0A>into the ground and kill them too. What
about all the trauma to the survivors =0A>they leave behind.=0A>=0A>=0A>So
my last parting comment is, "It's just money and that can be replaced".=0A>
=0A>--------=0A>Roger Lee=0A>Tucson, Az.=0A>Light Sport Repairman - Mainten
ance Rated=0A>Rotax Repair Center=0A>520-574-1080=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>Read t
his topic online here:=0A>=0A>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p
=310290#310290=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=========
===0A>-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Rotax
Engines-List=0A>============0A>http://forums.matronic
s.com=0A>============0A>le, List Admin.=0A>="_blank
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>==========
==0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A=0A=0A-- =0A=0AZulu Delta=0AKolb Mk IIIC=0A582 Gray h
ead=0A4.00 C gearbox=0A3 blade WD=0AThanks, Homer GBYM=0A=0AIt is not bigot
ry to be certain we are right; but it is bigotry to be unable to =0Aimagine
how we might possibly have gone wrong.=0A---G.K. Chesterton=0A=0A=0A
=0Ahref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RotaxEngines-List">http://www
.matronics.com/Navigator?RotaxEngines-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.c
om">http://forums.matronics.com=0A href="http://www.matronics.com/contrib
===== =0A
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BRS chute repack time table |
Ah, the chute thread - this is one of my favorites ;). So I'll toss in my viewpoint.
I'm sympathetic to both sides, but I think the cons of the chute end up outweighing
the potential benefits so I choose to fly without one. To me, the cons are:
- The worst problem with the chute is its use can't be practiced. As we all know,
practice is the life-blood of emergency procedures because when it hits the
fan, training is what will save your life. When you're thinking it through in
an emergency, it tends to be, ok, let's assess the situation, hmm, I think I
still have elevator control, but seems like I can still.... ok, I got the chute...
should I or shouldn't I.... kablooey! You get the picture... if you can't
_practice_ it, it is ultimately of very little utility in an emergency situation.
- There's not really any specific or clear protocol for when you should fire the
chute and when you shouldn't, nor can you actually go up and simulate those
eventualities. Everything between a rough engine over hostile terrain and the
wings snapping off is pretty much a gray area. I personally know of a couple of
near-misses that resulted from an improper firing of a chute even tho the aircraft
was still intact and under control and engine was running. The inability
to train in the chute's use and a good protocol was the direct culprit (pilot
hit a bad spot of turbulence on final but the plane was still intact. Fortunately,
he survived but he and his passenger were injured and plane was totalled
- he couldn't say if he could have flown the plane to a landing or not, but
admitted that he probably could have gone around).
- The case where it would _clearly_ be a good option (complete loss of control
or enough loss to not be able to fly/land the plane) is also the _rarest_ situation
for us. Far and away, our planes stay together and are still flyable in
most emergency situations. True it can happen, but it's also hard to justify the
expense, weight and bulk to prepare for so unlikely an event.
- the chute itself is a potential hazard. Imagine if an in-flight fire happens
to reach the rocket - you thought the situation was bad before...? Also there's
always a slight chance of accidental firing, which would really ruin your day
when it wasn't already ruined by something else.
- extra weight and cost. The cost is the main thing here, money that'd be far better
spent keeping the plane up, engine well maintained etc.
Anyway, those are the basic cons of the chute as I see them. I know about the pros
which have already been listed and accept them, but I still don't quite see
them as outweighing the cons....
LS
--------
LS
Titan II SS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=310373#310373
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BRS chute repack time table |
I personally do not use a BRS having removed them from both of my ELSA's,
BUT I was taking lessons at Boerne Stage Airfield 5C1 in Boerne TX in july
2009 in a Czech built Lambada Motor Glider LSA. Nice plane With a rotax 912.
In July of 2009 a week before I was scheduled to complete my check ride
(don't ask) the tail fell off of it at 3000 ft. in normal operations. The
pilot pulled the BRS and the plane came down in some pretty rough country
but he and a passanger survived. Needless to say my instructor, Dave White,
will not instruct in a plane without one now. I will be glad to supply
contacts to the people involved off list if desired.
George E. Myers Jr.
San Marcos, TX 78666
512-353-4860
Rans S-12 582 3 blade warp
>Roger, Well said. I don't have a BRS on my plane but I am looking at
options of how I might install it on a Kitfox IV. My plane has a stall speed
of just >under 40 mph which is awesome and in most engine out
situations...no shute needed. I fly in and out of airports that have alot of
student pilots...very >congested. It only takes one wrong move on the part
of one pilot and I don't have a wing or rudder. There isn't one pilot here
that wouldn't welcome that >rip-chord to yank on at that moment.
>Dan B
>Mesa, AZ
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | This guy loves his BSR chute |
Hope this YouTube link works. It's worth your time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnHuIET4P2s
Rick :D
--------
701Driver
N35 26.700, W118 16.743
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=310381#310381
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Hi all,
I was wondering if anyone has ever used these probes with a Grand Rapids EIS ?
They are K type thermocouples and the offer grounded and un grounds tips. If
anyone has experience with these I'd appreciate some feedback.
BTW. The probes that GRT sell are too long and now bang into the oil tank on
one side and the Intercooler on the other side.
Thanks, Paul
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Westach probes |
Paul:
I have a set of four grounded EGT probes with a 90 Deg hard tube bend. They
install very nicely and work great on grounded systems.
If you go this route I'll sel them at a very reduced price.
Barry
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Paul McAllister <l_luv2_fly@yahoo.com>wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I was wondering if anyone has ever used these probes with a Grand Rapids
> EIS ? They are K type thermocouples and the offer grounded and un grounds
> tips. If anyone has experience with these I'd appreciate some feedback.
>
> BTW. The probes that GRT sell are too long and now bang into the oil tank
> on one side and the Intercooler on the other side.
>
> Thanks, Paul
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BRS chute repack time table |
Hi All,
Any equipment is only as useful, practical and and safe as the operator. The rockets
don't explode in a fire, they are a solid propellant and if it's that bad
a fire your toast any way so that isn't a real consideration. When to use it
isn't about practice, but education on when and how to use it. You can practice
your muscle memory on grabbing the handle in case of a true emergency. Plus
nothing else to practice sense you have nothing to do, but float to the ground.
No accidental firings since it takes almost 35 lbs. of pull to activate it.
Plus the handle can come out of the socket about an inch before the cable goes
taught. You have to tell the families of the Zenith (6) aircraft that had wing
failure that they weren't a good idea or the other saves they have actually
had around the world. I bet everyone of those Zenith pilots were thinking nothing
wrong with my plane. Tell it to the pilot just recently at that air show
that lost a wing and floated safely to the ground. What about the other mornon
that runs into you while you are minding you own business? Or after the mechanic
forgets to install something. Part failure in experimental's is a big cause
of failures.
I guess my whole point is what ever the cause of a failure may not be by your hand
or it may be because you were complacent or you just overlooked something.
What we don't know can hurt us, regardless of the old saying that it can't hurt
us.
Your right that you'll never need it, until that one time and no one anywhere can
predict that. I came within 50' of a midair two years ago from an idiot not
using his radio and trying to cut in front of two planes already in the pattern.
To me there are no cons only pros and that view point comes from research
and education and no myths, but facts.
As a retired fireman I can't tell you how many thousands of times I have heard,
"Well that has never happened to me before". Wish I had a dollar for each time
I heard that statement and every time they said it they dialed 911. Being a
victim is easy, keeping from being one takes some fore thought.
I know there are two sides of the fence I just want to be on the side that lives
when I fall off.
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Light Sport Repairman - Maintenance Rated
Rotax Repair Center
520-574-1080
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=310452#310452
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BRS chute repack time table |
This is a Remos dealer 18 miles north of me. He hadn't sold one yet.
This is bad news.
2 injured in plane crash at Marana airport
Associated Press
Posted on August 28, 2010 at 11:31 PM
MARANA, Ariz. (AP) Officials say two people suffered serious injuries Saturday
morning after the plane they were flying in crashed at the Marana Northwest Regional
Airport.
Capt. Adam Goldberg of the Northwest Fire/Rescue District says the 46-year-old
flight instructor who was flying the single-engine Remos airplane suffered life-threatening
injuries.
A 16-year-old girl who was onboard as an introductory flight for possible flying
lessons also suffered serious injuries.
Goldberg says witnesses saw the plane take off, take a hard right, circle around,
miss the runway and land in a field next to the runway.
Federal Aviation Administration Kathleen Bergen says the federal agency was investigating
the crash.
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Light Sport Repairman - Maintenance Rated
Rotax Repair Center
520-574-1080
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=310455#310455
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|