Puchaz spin - now wearing 'chutes

On 11 Feb 2004 08:50:00 -0800, (Jim Harper) wrote:

Mike Borgelt wrote in message . ..

some snippage
The whole ship chute concept is a bit of a worry. There you are in a
large heavy object with absolutely no control. With a personal chute
you do have steering on most rigs nowadays.

With a whole ship chute would it just ruin your day to have save and
then hit the high voltage lines, fall out of a tree, fall over a cliff
etc?
some MORE snippage

Mike Borgelt

Actually, Mike, on that we disagree.

Unless you are using a square canopy for your personal chute, you have
very little choice on where you are gonna land...and hitting the tree,
high voltage lines or over the cliff are gonna suck less if you have
some aluminum or fiberglass around you. Well, that was my decision for
sure.

Oh, and keep in mind that as I disagree with you, I do it with all due
deference to someone as distinguished in our sport as yourself (no
sarcasm, I meant that!)

Jim


I figure that the choice with a personal chute is small but with a
whole ship chute it is zero.

The guy who taught me to pack a chute gave me escape instructions from
the glider and then said "enjoy the ride" as you were likely to be
confused and shocked anyway. He wouldn't have been as his real job not
long before had been giving the Viet Cong a hard time as a member of
the Australian SAS.

The other problem with whole ship chutes is that there is no room for
them - the engine occupies that space!

I once saw a movie of the BRS drop test on a C150 simulating its
arrival under a deployed BRS chute. I doubt that the Cessna was
useable again even though it was a symmetrical level attitude when it
hit with no drift. I'd hate to hit at a similar descent rate in a
glider. In Oz we've had a few people do hard landings in the last
couple of years. Some are considered lucky to be walking but the
gliders are repairable. Air bags may be essential.

Are your gliding club members smart enough to avoid inadvertent
deployment of a ballistic chute in the hangar? At one club I used to
belong to the new ASW20B got wheeled up twice in a month or so - in
the hangar as people said "what does this lever do?". In the chute
case you would hope nobody else was standing behind the wing looking
into the cockpit.

About 12 years ago we did a precision altimeter project for an RAAF
test project. The chief aero engineer of the research and development
unit was building an ultralight of his own design. I asked if he was
fitting a BRS chute. He said he was designing the aircraft basically
to high enough standards that like a FAR 23 power plane it was
reliable enough in its structure and control systems that flying
without a chute was a good risk. His opinion was that the whole ship
chutes at the time couldn't meet their claimed descent rates with the
chute sizes used. His first job had been with a parachute manufacturer
so I had to take some notice of his opinion.

Mike Borgelt

Mike Borgelt wrote in message . ..
snip
I once saw a movie of the BRS drop test on a C150 simulating its
arrival under a deployed BRS chute. I doubt that the Cessna was
useable again even though it was a symmetrical level attitude when it
hit with no drift. I'd hate to hit at a similar descent rate in a
glider. In Oz we've had a few people do hard landings in the last
couple of years. Some are considered lucky to be walking but the
gliders are repairable. Air bags may be essential.

Of course I would expect that the glider wouldn't be reusable after
using the BRS...I would only pull the thing is a situation that would
lead to me leaving the airplane, should I have had a parachute. In
that case, the airplane is a write-off. As I have previously
recounted, I have the thing set up to lower the airplane nose down
somewhat...one hopes that the forces will be somewhat dissipated by
the landing attitude. Of course the risk of injury exists for a
successful bail-out as well. It's interesting that in this dialogue
folks worry about hitting under canopy IN the glider, and don't
discuss the myriad of risks associated with hitting under canopy OUT
of the glider.

I parachuted in the military and in sport. I have seen more than a few
broken bones, broken backs, internal injuries and others. And those
were with trained parachutists jumping under controlled situations and
the best possible conditions, with prepared...or at least
planned...drop-zones. I don't think that to be the case for the
typical emergency bail-out from a broken glider.

We've had this debate on this board more than once and in each case,
it seems to me that we set a double standard...somehow we assume that
the guy who leaves the glider and deploys a round canopy for his first
parachute jump ever will arrive on the ground unscathed...and the guy
who pulls the BRS lever is subjecting himself to an extraordinary
amount of risk, because he _might_ hit the ground in a manner that
_might_ lead to injury.

The reality is that when the decision to deploy either your personal
canopy OR the BRS is made, your only other option is very likely
death. If I can fly the airplane, I am going to fly the airplane. If
my airplane is damaged beyond the point that I can fly it, I am going
to deploy. If when I land I am injured, I still firmly believe that I
am going to be far better off than if I had ridden the glider to the
ground without a parachute. And no question...if I had room in the
cockpit/no weight constraints, I would ALSO wear a square emergency
parachute for those cases where I AM high enough to choose that
egress. I think that I would STILL have the BRS, though, for the
collision in the pattern or the like. And I have far more experience
under a parachute canopy than 99% of glider pilots.


Are your gliding club members smart enough to avoid inadvertent
deployment of a ballistic chute in the hangar? At one club I used to
belong to the new ASW20B got wheeled up twice in a month or so - in
the hangar as people said "what does this lever do?". In the chute
case you would hope nobody else was standing behind the wing looking
into the cockpit.

The BRS system has a remove before flight safety pin. With the pin in
place, the BRS cannot be deployed. If some yahoo starts playing with
my glider and REMOVES the safety tag/pin and then pulls the handle? I
would, under those circumstances, hope he DOES have his face in front
of it. He will certainly have exceeded any reasonable "what does THIS
lever do" level of curiosity in my book.

About 12 years ago we did a precision altimeter project for an RAAF
test project. The chief aero engineer of the research and development
unit was building an ultralight of his own design. I asked if he was
fitting a BRS chute. He said he was designing the aircraft basically
to high enough standards that like a FAR 23 power plane it was
reliable enough in its structure and control systems that flying
without a chute was a good risk. His opinion was that the whole ship
chutes at the time couldn't meet their claimed descent rates with the
chute sizes used. His first job had been with a parachute manufacturer
so I had to take some notice of his opinion.

Mike Borgelt

One hopes one's glider isn't going to go poof in flight. However,
certificated gliders HAVE gone poof in flight. Further, our sport has
a much higher (at least theoretical) risk of collision in the air than
the usual spam-can. My glider is better built than most of them out
there, and I don't carry the BRS in expectation of a wing
spontaneously folding up. Nor do I plan on running into someone in a
gaggle. But if it happens, I am comforted in knowing that it's there.

BRS parachutes DO meet their claimed descent rates. Look at their
data. They have tested these things extensively. I would suggest that
an aero engineer who had worked for a parachute manufacturer may have
had a bias just like any other fellow...and that WAS 12 years ago. I
guess that if you are making a decision based on one person's opinion
during the last millenium, no matter how experienced, well, more power
to you. I prefer doing a bit more research than that. Once again, with
all due respect, and no offense intended.

Jim

Jim Harper wrote:

Are your gliding club members smart enough to avoid inadvertent
deployment of a ballistic chute in the hangar? At one club I used to
belong to the new ASW20B got wheeled up twice in a month or so - in
the hangar as people said "what does this lever do?". In the chute
case you would hope nobody else was standing behind the wing looking
into the cockpit.


The BRS system has a remove before flight safety pin. With the pin in
place, the BRS cannot be deployed. If some yahoo starts playing with
my glider and REMOVES the safety tag/pin and then pulls the handle? I
would, under those circumstances, hope he DOES have his face in front
of it. He will certainly have exceeded any reasonable "what does THIS
lever do" level of curiosity in my book.

THe BRS web site says it is a 35-40 pound pull, a rather stout effort,
and well beyond what you need to collapse the gear on an ASW20B. A key
lock could be used to prevent removal of the safety tag and pin, if one
is really concerned.
--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 06:29:51 +1000, Mike Borgelt
wrote:

I figure that the choice with a personal chute is small but with a
whole ship chute it is zero.

I once saw a movie of the BRS drop test on a C150 simulating its
arrival under a deployed BRS chute. I doubt that the Cessna was
useable again even though it was a symmetrical level attitude when it
hit with no drift. I'd hate to hit at a similar descent rate in a
glider. In Oz we've had a few people do hard landings in the last
couple of years. Some are considered lucky to be walking but the
gliders are repairable. Air bags may be essential.

I know an FK-9 ultralight that has already survived three (!)
parachute landings (and is still flying - here's the photo:
http://www.fk-lightplanes.com/FK-History/9Mk3_3_57.jpg), and I read
about one SR-20 or 22 that is also flying again after a chute landing.

The problem of a glider that my butt is two inches from the ground in
a worst-case impact at 20 ft/sec (but the BRS systems for gliders are
designed in order to get an impact at 45 degrees nose down attitude,
maximizing the energy absorption of the fuselage nose).

Not to mention the possible extremely high (220 kts) speed of a
glider with a missing tail or wing. The deployment speed of the BRS of
the Cirrus is limited to a pretty low speed (iirc 150 kts IAS).

In Germany BRS systems are mandatory for ultralight aircraft (some of
these little planes reach cruise speeds in excess of 140 kts (limited
by the maximum deployment speed of the BRS) at a weight of about 1.000
pounds. Each year there are a couple of successful BRS savings.


Bye
Andreas

In article ,
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Not to mention the possible extremely high (220 kts) speed of a
glider with a missing tail or wing. The deployment speed of the BRS of
the Cirrus is limited to a pretty low speed (iirc 150 kts IAS).

Several BRS saves were quite a bit faster than the "rated"
system velocity.

Like parachute repack recommendations and Vne, the velocity recommendations
are primarily to protect the manufacturer from liability, and
are generously safesided to be far within the
actual limits of the equipment.

I'm a bit miffed with the obtuse information about BRS chutes. Name one, just
one, save done by a BRS chute in an airplane, or glider, that was NOT an
ultralight or hang glider, and was done from an out-of-control situation.



In article 402c2ce4$1@darkstar, (Mark James Boyd)
wrote:
In article ,
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Not to mention the possible extremely high (220 kts) speed of a
glider with a missing tail or wing. The deployment speed of the BRS of
the Cirrus is limited to a pretty low speed (iirc 150 kts IAS).

Several BRS saves were quite a bit faster than the "rated"
system velocity.

Like parachute repack recommendations and Vne, the velocity recommendations
are primarily to protect the manufacturer from liability, and
are generously safesided to be far within the
actual limits of the equipment.

d b wrote:
I'm a bit miffed with the obtuse information about BRS chutes. Name one, just
one, save done by a BRS chute in an airplane, or glider, that was NOT an
ultralight or hang glider, and was done from an out-of-control situation.

There's the Cirrus save, and the Cirrus is a four seater airplane, but
it was done from controlled flight.

At the same time, I don't know of any failed BRS attempts, from
controlled flight or otherwise. Anybody have stats on that? That'd be
good data to have too.

"d b" wrote in message
ink.net...
I'm a bit miffed with the obtuse information about BRS chutes. Name one,
just
one, save done by a BRS chute in an airplane, or glider, that was NOT an
ultralight or hang glider, and was done from an out-of-control situation.

Easy, the BRS "saves" list is right he
http://brsparachutes.com/PI_saves.mgi?page=2 and I believe it is up to 159.
You are correct in that the list is populated almost exclusively with hang
gliders and ultralights, but it does include one real glider (Alpin TST-1)
and one real airplane (Cirrus SR-22). The Alpin was a loss of control and
the SR22 was a structural failure.

Vaughn

Vaughn Simon wrote:

"d b" wrote in message

one, save done by a BRS chute in an airplane, or glider, that was NOT an
ultralight or hang glider, and was done from an out-of-control situation.

Easy, the BRS "saves" list is right he
http://brsparachutes.com/PI_saves.mgi?page=2 and I believe it is up to 159.
You are correct in that the list is populated almost exclusively with hang
gliders and ultralights, but it does include one real glider (Alpin TST-1)
and one real airplane (Cirrus SR-22). The Alpin was a loss of control and
the SR22 was a structural failure.

The Cirrus accident doesn't quite count as "out of control", according
to the NTSB report. One aileron was jammed (and ultimately lost), and
the pilot was able to maintain level flight long enough to deploy the
BRS. I suspect it may well have been landable in the state it was in,
but if I had a BRS (or a parachute) under those circumstances, I'd use it...

Marc

Marc Ramsey wrote:

Vaughn Simon wrote:

"d b" wrote in message

one, save done by a BRS chute in an airplane, or glider, that was NOT an
ultralight or hang glider, and was done from an out-of-control
situation.


Easy, the BRS "saves" list is right he
http://brsparachutes.com/PI_saves.mgi?page=2 and I believe it is up to
159.
You are correct in that the list is populated almost exclusively with
hang
gliders and ultralights, but it does include one real glider (Alpin
TST-1)
and one real airplane (Cirrus SR-22). The Alpin was a loss of control
and
the SR22 was a structural failure.


The Cirrus accident doesn't quite count as "out of control", according
to the NTSB report. One aileron was jammed (and ultimately lost), and
the pilot was able to maintain level flight long enough to deploy the
BRS. I suspect it may well have been landable in the state it was in,
but if I had a BRS (or a parachute) under those circumstances, I'd use
it...

Marc
IIRC another Cirrus pilot tried to deploy the BRS, but the handle pull
was too great to activate. Landed safely, resulted in an AD for the
pull force on the handle.

Shawn