On 12 Sep, 16:12, "Bryan" wrote:

However, I would appreciate
any information or thoughts concerning the effectiveness of BRS deployment
and if the current ground-impact energy absorption systems are proving
effective for pilot protection.

The main disadvantage I see about ballistic recovery systems is that
they absolutely guarantee you an uncontrollable crash landing.
Electrical substation below you? Railway line? Motorway? There is
nothing you can do about it - that's where you're going to land.

The slower descent rate and controlled attitude does mean, of course,
that in any of the above cases it's better than an uncontrolled
plummet in a fuselage. The Big Midair Question is therefore "How much
control do I have?" If the answer is "None" then the answer is obvious
- press the button. If the answer is "Plenty" then the answer is
obvious - land as near normally as possible.

The difficulty comes with an answer of "Some" - because you then need
to assess how much that is, and what choice is likely to lead to the
best landing.

I have an additional doubt about the whole idea. The most obvious case
for using a BRS is when the glider is completely uncontrollable.
However, the most likely reason for the glider being completely
uncontrollable is major structural damage following a midair collision
- and how much use is a BRS going to be for a glider which has
suffered major structural damage. Someone elsewhere in the thread
suggests configuring things to land tail first for energy absorption.
That's an excellent idea ... unless the BR is being deployed because
the tail boom has been broken off in midair ...

Overall in gliding as in sailing I am sceptical about technological
post crash "solutions." I think it's much better simply to avoid
having the crash in the first place ...

Ian