saving an aircraft in the air

Further to the question of whether there are "decleration devices"
that would enable a crippled aircraft to land safely, this evidently
is breaking news:

Parachute saves light plane's passengers

VANCOUVER/ CKNW (AM980) -- Four people are alive today thanks to a
relatively new parachute system for light planes.

Captain Johann Duce of Victoria Search and Rescue says their plane
went
down Thursday evening, just west of Lower Arrow Lake in the West
Kootenay, during a flight from Kelowna to Lethbridge, Alberta.

Duce says rescuers feared the worst, but the aircraft had a "BRS
recovery system" - which is a parachute that can be manually activated
by the pilot that shoots out the top of the aircraft, lowering the
aircraft to the ground. He notes it's not a gentle descent - it's
about
30-kilometres an hour as it comes down. But Duce says that speed is
still survivable.

He says the four people aboard the plane were uninjured.

A Cormorant rescue helicopter from CFB Comox picked up the four and
took
them back to Kelowna.

(from www.cknw.com)
all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! blog www.vivabush.org

Thanks for the input, Dan. Our disucssion has been whether and how something
like the BRS could be made to work for a large airliner,

Problems would include velocity, attitude,
structual integrity, touchdown (to whit, bad experieces in F-111/B-1A capsule
touchdowns) and pilot vs automatically actuated.

Parachute saves light plane's passengers

VANCOUVER/ CKNW (AM980) -- Four people are alive today thanks to a
relatively new parachute system for light planes.

Captain Johann Duce of Victoria Search and Rescue says their plane
went
down Thursday evening, just west of Lower Arrow Lake in the West
Kootenay, during a flight from Kelowna to Lethbridge, Alberta.

Duce says rescuers feared the worst, but the aircraft had a "BRS
recovery system" - which is a parachute that can be manually activated
by the pilot that shoots out the top of the aircraft, lowering the
aircraft to the ground. He notes it's not a gentle descent - it's
about
30-kilometres an hour as it comes down. But Duce says that speed is
still survivable.

He says the four people aboard the plane were uninjured.

A Cormorant rescue helicopter from CFB Comox picked up the four and
took
them back to Kelowna.

(from www.cknw.com)
all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put

In article ,
(SteveM8597) wrote:

Thanks for the input, Dan. Our disucssion has been whether and how something
like the BRS could be made to work for a large airliner,

Problems would include velocity, attitude,
structual integrity, touchdown (to whit, bad experieces in F-111/B-1A capsule
touchdowns) and pilot vs automatically actuated.

Parachute saves light plane's passengers

VANCOUVER/ CKNW (AM980) -- Four people are alive today thanks to a
relatively new parachute system for light planes.

http://brsparachutes.com/

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Chad Irby wrote in message m...
In article ,
(SteveM8597) wrote:

Thanks for the input, Dan. Our disucssion has been whether and how something
like the BRS could be made to work for a large airliner,

Screw the airplane. Give me a Martin-Baker seat. I really appreciated
the one I used.
Walt BJ

Problems would include velocity, attitude,
structual integrity, touchdown (to whit, bad experieces in F-111/B-1A capsule
touchdowns) and pilot vs automatically actuated.

The USAF has documented one case of the F-111 escape capsule impact attenuation
bag failing to deploy after ejection. The crew ejected successfully on October
8, 1982, however as noted, the impact attenuation bags did not deploy and the
the pilot (and Wing Commander) suffered an injured spinal cord. The weapons
system officer was not injured.

During my tenure in the F-111, I personally knew several colleagues who had
ejected. Each and all of them walked away from the capsule after it landed.
The F-111 escape capsule system has the second best "in the envelope" success
rate after the ACES II system.

Either the pilot or the weapons system officer could initiate ejection. No
automatic actuation system existed.





Kurt Todoroff


Markets, not mandates and mob rule.
Consent, not compulsion.

Remove "DELETEME" from my address to reply

Any F-11 maintainers here? It has been my understanding that the egress sysrem
on the plane and its 600+ pryotechnics charges were major maintenance
headaches.

I seem to recall a couple of fatal capsule ejections in SEA but I don't recall
the causes.




Problems would include velocity, attitude,
structual integrity, touchdown (to whit, bad experieces in F-111/B-1A
capsule
touchdowns) and pilot vs automatically actuated.

The USAF has documented one case of the F-111 escape capsule impact
attenuation
bag failing to deploy after ejection. The crew ejected successfully on
October
8, 1982, however as noted, the impact attenuation bags did not deploy and the
the pilot (and Wing Commander) suffered an injured spinal cord. The weapons
system officer was not injured.

During my tenure in the F-111, I personally knew several colleagues who had
ejected. Each and all of them walked away from the capsule after it landed.
The F-111 escape capsule system has the second best "in the envelope" success
rate after the ACES II system.

Either the pilot or the weapons system officer could initiate ejection. No
automatic actuation system existed.

Any F-11 maintainers here? It has been my understanding that the egress
sysrem
on the plane and its 600+ pryotechnics charges were major maintenance
headaches.

Far from a major maintenance headache, the components that you refer to were
static items that didn't wear out any more than the capsule's, or any other
ejection system's, rocket motor. I'm not sure what information led you to this
understanding. Can you cite some sources?





Kurt Todoroff


Markets, not mandates and mob rule.
Consent, not compulsion.

Any F-111 maintainers here? It has been my understanding that the egress
sysrem
on the plane and its 600+ pryotechnics charges were major maintenance
headaches.

Far from a major maintenance headache, the components that you refer to were
static items that didn't wear out any more than the capsule's, or any other
ejection system's, rocket motor. I'm not sure what information led you to
this
understanding. Can you cite some sources?


Sure. I was an F-4 maintenance officer at RAF Lakenheath UK in the 70s until
the F-111Fs repalced the F-4Ds. We (the Lakenheath maintenenace staff) had
numerous dialogs with the F-111E (IIRC) guys at Upper Heyford not far away.
They showed us the major system maintenance manhour drives and the capsule
pyros were right near the top. All the pyros were time change items and many
required pulling a lot of hardware to access and change. Not a problem on a
low hour plane but as the plane accumulated hours the time change requirements
increased.