On Sunday, July 1, 2018 at 2:22:38 PM UTC-7, Mike Schumann wrote:
On Sunday, July 1, 2018 at 4:00:18 PM UTC-5, Dave Walsh wrote:
At 19:04 30 June 2018, Mike Schumann wrote:
On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 1:45:05 PM UTC-5, Dave
Walsh wrote:
At 14:33 30 June 2018, Dan Marotta wrote:
To me the major advantages of a BRS over a
personal=20
parachute are the=20
speed and certainty of deployment.=C2=A0 Of course
either=20
system may fail or=20
malfunction, but with the BRS, you lose the difficulty
of=20
getting out=20
into space and deploying at in unfavorable position.
Simply=20
pull the=20
handle and enjoy the ride.

But, upon landing in a windy situation, you run the
very=20
real risk of=20
being killed in a tumbling, disintegrating wreck
being=20
dragged along the=20
ground.=C2=A0 Is there a jettison capability that could
be armed=20
by the=20
sudden deceleration of landing?=C2=A0 Perhaps an
automatic=20
jettison?=C2=A0 Might=20
that malfunction at 500' and give you a last thrilling
ride?

On 6/29/2018 10:49 PM, Charlie Quebec wrote:
Beacause floating around out of control under a=20
parachute is safer?
BRS sounds good, but in practice I would prefer
a=20
personal chute every
time.

--=20
Dan, 5J

Of course you could be struck by lightening as you
descend=20
under your BRS canopy but has anyone ever died
being=20
"dragged along the ground" after a successful BRS
escape?
Plenty have died following a conventional parachute mal-
function.
The bottom line is that BRS will work at a lower height
but is=20
hardly available in any common sailplane on sale today.
Retro fitting a BRS to an EASA sailplane would be a=20
expensive, possibly impossible, task. With ultra-light=20
sailplanes it's different.
The other major problem, as clearly explained on
DG's=20
website, is that "safety does not sell sailplanes". The=20
majority of DG sailplanes sold were NOT equipped with
the=20
NOAH system: the new buyers simply did not order
the=20
NOAH system. Even if BRS was available today how
many=20
buyers would buy it?
Dave W

If a BRS system were available factory installed at a
reasonable price, I
s=
uspect that a very large percentage of buyers would sign
up. It's a huge
s=
elling point if you are trying to get the OK from your
spouse to upgrade
to=
a new glider. =20

Offering a BRS system standard on all of their airplanes is
probably the
#1=
reason that Cirrus is now the largest piston engine aircraft
manufacturer
=
in the world.

Yes you're probably quite right about the Cirrus BUT in a
Cirrus you might well have wife and kids along for the ride.
The fact remains that the majority of DG customers do not
specify the NOAH system; it's actually relatively cheap
compared to the new cost of a DG808C or DG1000x. Why is
that?
Dave W


Maybe people think that the NOAH system is a half baked solution. Cirrus and Phoenix think that BRS systems are important enough that they make them standard and a significant part of their marketing.

The NOAH system is far from "half baked". DG actually developed a system that works, and they are the only ones that have for a glider. Approximately two thirds of the non-motor gliders sold, have sustainers engines where the BRS would go, hence the NOAH. This is an emergency assist. The chance of needing such a device is as rare as needing to jump, yet DG stepped up to the plate and designed and tested a solution, that is affordable (about 4,000 euro before installation). Comparing Phoenix and Cirrus aircraft, with their marketing, design, customers base, and funding sources, to gliding is with all due respect "half baked".