Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:11 AM - Re: BRS chute repack time table (Thom Riddle)
2. 05:26 AM - Re: BRS chute repack time table (Catz631@aol.com)
3. 05:52 AM - Re: BRS chute repack time table (FLYaDIVE)
4. 07:06 AM - Re: BRS chute repack time table (lucien)
5. 07:13 AM - Re: BRS chute repack time table (lucien)
6. 07:25 AM - Re: Re: BRS chute repack time table (Blumax008@aol.com)
7. 07:35 AM - Re: BRS chute repack time table (Blumax008@aol.com)
8. 07:53 AM - Re: BRS chute repack time table (Roger Lee)
9. 10:18 PM - Re: Re: BRS chute repack time table (Paul Kuntz)
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 |
How did the BRS religion discussion get on the ROTAX ENGINE thread????
Or perhaps a better question is why is it still being discussed here?
do not archive
--------
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)
Kolb Slingshot SS-021
Jabiru 2200A #1574
Tennessee Prop 64x32
Illegal aliens have always been a problem in the United States. Ask any Indian.
- Robert Orben
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=310592#310592
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 |
Roger,
I am 100% in your court on this one. When I bought my Kitfox 4 it had a
very nicely installed BRS chute. That to me was a big plus. As a retired
military pilot the value of a chute is well ingrained in me. All the training and
knowledge in the world will not help you if you were to have an inflight
failure and could not control the aircraft (which would be the reason for the
chute)
I have had two "deadsticks' while serving as an instructor in the Navy in
the North American T-28 Trojan ( engine blew at 3000 ft on one, the other
the prop came off with fire) Both aircraft are on a stick now(static display
in a couple of towns) I was very fortunate. It was nice to know that I had a
chute in case I needed it.
My only civillian crash was in a Pitts when I was going vertical at 200!
AGL. Engine quit cold turky and I put that one upside down in a
field.Couldn't have used a chute in that one but again if I have a choice of a
chute or
no chute on board...I will take the chute.
Dick Maddux
Milton,Fl
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 |
Dick & Roger:
I have been reading with interest the thread on chutes.
I recall a few articles and NTSB reports about SR-22's having their chutes
pulled while the plane was at a high altitude. The report did not directly
say so but the indication was they were pulled prematurely and it might have
to do with human nature and the back of the mind idea that there was a chute
available. Could the plane have been flown to a good off airport spot or
even to a airport? That was not mentioned.
Do I like chutes? I would say yes. I only had to ware them when skydiving
and aerobatics. I have also been lucky; I had a few engine out situations
and was able to limp or glide back to an airport. Would I have jumped? No,
only because of lack of altitude and I had a passenger that would have
froze.
Hey Dick - THANK YOU FOR SERVING.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
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 |
rickofudall wrote:
> Lucien, FAR 91.307
>
> (c) Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved parachute,
> no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember)
> may execute any intentional maneuver that exceeds
>
> (1) A bank of 60 degrees relative to the horizon; or
>
> (2) A nose-up or nose-down attitude of 30 degrees relative to the horizon.
>
> (e) For the purposes of this section, *approved parachute *means
>
> (1) A parachute manufactured under a type certificate or a technical
> standard order (C23 series); or
>
> (2) A personnel-carrying military parachute identified by an NAF, AAF, or AN
> drawing number, an AAF order number, or any other military designation or
> specification number.
>
> NO BRS meets these requirements, NONE.
>
> Rick
>
True, but 2 things:
- of course, nobody's suggesting that the BRS should _substitute_ for the personal
chute requirement. Or at least, I'm not suggesting such a thing and I don't
think Roger is either, etc.
- this reg doesn't say you _can't_ use a supplemental safety device like a BRS
during aerobatic flight. The FARs normally only specify _minima_ and they're doing
so in this case too. You're quite right the BRS by itself wouldn't meet this
minimum, but having the BRS fitted to the plane in addition to the approved
parachute isn't barred either.
Well, now I'm actually kind of on the other side again, ;), but when they're right
they're right ;).
Like I said, I still tend towards the no-chute camp for our normal ops for the
reasons I've stated, but credit still has to go where it's due....
LS
--------
LS
Titan II SS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=310632#310632
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 |
rickofudall wrote:
> Lucien, FAR 91.307
>
> (c) Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved parachute,
> no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember)
> may execute any intentional maneuver that exceeds
>
> (1) A bank of 60 degrees relative to the horizon; or
>
> (2) A nose-up or nose-down attitude of 30 degrees relative to the horizon.
>
> (e) For the purposes of this section, *approved parachute *means
>
> (1) A parachute manufactured under a type certificate or a technical
> standard order (C23 series); or
>
> (2) A personnel-carrying military parachute identified by an NAF, AAF, or AN
> drawing number, an AAF order number, or any other military designation or
> specification number.
>
> NO BRS meets these requirements, NONE.
>
> Rick
>
True, but 2 things:
- of course, nobody's suggesting that the BRS should _substitute_ for the personal
chute requirement. Or at least, I'm not suggesting such a thing and I don't
think Roger is either, etc.
- this reg doesn't say you _can't_ use a supplemental safety device like a BRS
during aerobatic flight. The FARs normally only specify _minima_ and they're doing
so in this case too. You're quite right the BRS by itself wouldn't meet this
minimum, but having the BRS fitted to the plane in addition to the approved
parachute isn't barred either.
Well, now I'm actually kind of on the other side again, ;), but when they're right
they're right ;).
Like I said, I still tend towards the no-chute camp for our normal ops for the
reasons I've stated, but credit still has to go where it's due....
LS
--------
LS
Titan II SS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=310636#310636
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: | Re: BRS chute repack time table |
I wonder when Daddy is going to issue instructions on how to wipe our own
ass? I'm sure there'll be a fee to go along with it...an escalating fee
that is.
In a message dated 8/30/2010 10:06:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
lstavenhagen@hotmail.com writes:
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: "lucien"
<lstavenhagen@hotmail.com>
rickofudall wrote:
> Lucien, FAR 91.307
>
> (c) Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved
parachute,
> no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any person (other than a
crewmember)
> may execute any intentional maneuver that exceeds=EF=BD
>
> (1) A bank of 60 degrees relative to the horizon; or
>
> (2) A nose-up or nose-down attitude of 30 degrees relative to the
horizon.
>
> (e) For the purposes of this section, *approved parachute *means=EF
=BD
>
> (1) A parachute manufactured under a type certificate or a technical
> standard order (C=EF=BD23 series); or
>
> (2) A personnel-carrying military parachute identified by an NAF, AAF,
or AN
> drawing number, an AAF order number, or any other military designation
or
> specification number.
>
> NO BRS meets these requirements, NONE.
>
> Rick
>
True, but 2 things:
- of course, nobody's suggesting that the BRS should _substitute_ for the
personal chute requirement. Or at least, I'm not suggesting such a thing
and I don't think Roger is either, etc.
- this reg doesn't say you _can't_ use a supplemental safety device like
a
BRS during aerobatic flight. The FARs normally only specify _minima_ and
they're doing so in this case too. You're quite right the BRS by itself
wouldn't meet this minimum, but having the BRS fitted to the plane in add
ition
to the approved parachute isn't barred either.
Well, now I'm actually kind of on the other side again, ;), but when
they're right they're right ;).
Like I said, I still tend towards the no-chute camp for our normal ops fo
r
the reasons I've stated, but credit still has to go where it's due....
LS
--------
LS
Titan II SS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=310632#310632
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: BRS chute repack time table |
What people don't realize is that a deployment could actually put you in a
much more dangerous situation. I was doing some high alititude photography
one day on the Gulf coast. I had a strong north wind howling southward out
over the Gulf. I got to thinking...if that chute accidentally deployed, I'd
be blown out to sea for many miles. At that point I realized a person
needs to be aware of his particular flight situation before he deploys. In my
case at 15,000 ft. I would've had to ride a crippled aircraft down to a
couple thousand before I could attempt a deployment without going for a swim.
Use your noggin'.
In a message dated 8/30/2010 8:52:50 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
flyadive@gmail.com writes:
Dick & Roger:
I have been reading with interest the thread on chutes.
I recall a few articles and NTSB reports about SR-22's having their chutes
pulled while the plane was at a high altitude. The report did not
directly say so but the indication was they were pulled prematurely and it might
have to do with human nature and the back of the mind idea that there was a
chute available. Could the plane have been flown to a good off airport
spot or even to a airport? That was not mentioned.
Do I like chutes? I would say yes. I only had to ware them when
skydiving and aerobatics. I have also been lucky; I had a few engine out
situations and was able to limp or glide back to an airport. Would I have jumped?
No, only because of lack of altitude and I had a passenger that would have
froze.
Hey Dick - THANK YOU FOR SERVING.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RotaxEngines-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
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: BRS chute repack time table |
Hi ll,
I have to take the blame for starting this thread. I had just talked to BRS for
a bunch of people on another site as thought I would just pass along the info
here since many have chutes. I thought it was going to be pretty
harmless, little did I know. [Laughing] All is good.
--------
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=310647#310647
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 |
OK, I'll contribute to the thread, since it's still kicking along.
I'm building a Pipistrel Sinus motorglider (see
http://www.pipistrelbuilders.com ) that will have a ballistic chute
installed. When I visited the Pipistrel factory in Slovenia, I asked if
their chute installation had ever been involved in a save. There has been
one instance, involving a high-time glider pilot soaring his fairly new
Pipistrel over the Alps. When he was done for the day and ready to head
back home, he wasn't paying close attention, and did what he was used to
doing -- he put the nose down and pointed it toward the airport. It's a
pretty clean airplane, so it quickly went to what they later estimated was
60+ knots over VNE. The wings fluttered and came off the airplane. The
fuselage then pitched forward and went inverted, at which point he pulled
the handle and fired the chute in about the worst possible attitude. That
is, he fired the chute pretty much directly against the aircraft's velocity
vector at very high speed. It worked as advertised and the pilot and
passenger walked away. Convinced me.
Regards,
Paul Kuntz
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 10:23 PM, Roger Lee <ssadiver1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> 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. W!
> hat 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
>
>
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! --
|