"Morgans" wrote in message
news

"Garry O" wrote

One of the themes developing here it the recoverability of the air frame,
what a crock!!

I don't think that was the thrust in this part of the thread. It perhaps
was elsewhere, but here, the level parachute landing vs. tail up or tail
down is being discussed. It seemed someone said the ultralight type
aircraft they were talking about had the chute rigged from the tail. I
was stating that the fuselage, landing gear and seats offered much better
crush distance (equating directly to peak G forces experienced by the
occupants) that would a tail up landing. I stick by that observation for
well designed aircraft. The landing gear will crush, and so will proper
seat supports, thus giving maximum protection to the people in the plane.

if the pilot feels that the situation is so far beyond his/her
capabilities then I think that any damage to the airframe is the furthest
thing from their mind and rather they have taken a course of action
designed to make their survivability a priority.
honestly do you think someone would pull the chute if they only thought
"maybe I can't do this" or when they thought "****!! this is going to
hurt"

I never have been in a position to pull a chute in a plane, but I
purposely drove off an inline in a van rather than roll down the incline,
and in that case, I most definitely thought "this is going to hurt" in one
millisecond during the crash. I made the right choice, because I did not
roll, and I most certainly would have if I had not made the conscious
choice to drive directly off of the drop-off.

If a person decides to pull a chute, they most likely have decided the
plane is a write-off. It only could be a bonus if it is not.
--
Jim in NC

My fault, I was replying to Oliver Arend and in particular this part "Even
if you have a BRS installed, it is advisable to try an emergency
landing in a suitable field, since very likely the structure of the airplane
will suffer less damage"
A sentiment that others seemed to share. I by no means think that is all
they thought of but rather they seemed fixated on that particular argument.
While none of the AC I have flown have had a BRS installed I know that I
would not pull the handle unless all other options had been exhausted and
F^(K the airframe, if it gave up its life saving mine then so be it, AC can
be re-built or another purchased, my kids and wife can not so easily replace
me, or so I would like to think ;-)

--
Garry O