BD-5 crash in Australia

On Tue, 22 May 2007 02:40:11 GMT, George wrote:

Bob Martin wrote:
RapidRonnie wrote:
I don't think Richard Van Grunsven puts a lot of crashworthiness
effort in the RVs, either. They do fly better than Bede designs
though.


The one guy I know of to crash an RV hit a large concrete block and
flipped completely over. He broke the canopy open and crawled out with
minor injuries. The airplane (RV-6A) was essentially a total writeoff
though.

Unfortunately, he died of a heart attack a couple years ago.

As far as extracting someone from a wreck, I was taught to never move
someone unless they are in some other form of imminent danger (the most
common example given was a burning vehicle).

Right on, and one other thing that is relevant, if loss of life isn't
imminent, burns will heal, a severed spinal cord probably won't. That is
why accident rescues should be left to professionals, not bystanders.
But then hindsight is easy to use, forsight is almost impossible, and
the current situation almost always seems more critical than it is.

YMMV

my mileage does vary.
skin burns are superficial. lung tissue burns are often fatal.
the guys in the circumstances did absolutely follow the correct course
of actions. if he had been in the flames any longer the lung tissue
damage would have been fatal. as it is now he is alive but cannot
survive without oxygen supplementation.the spinal damage was already
done, sadly.

I'm proud of the efforts of my fellow pilots. they took some gutsy
actions at considerable personal risk.
.....and I often doubted that they ever had it in them.

Stealth Pilot
member of the Sport Aircraft Builders Club of Western Australia.

Stealth Pilot wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2007 02:40:11 GMT, George wrote:

Bob Martin wrote:
RapidRonnie wrote:
I don't think Richard Van Grunsven puts a lot of crashworthiness
effort in the RVs, either. They do fly better than Bede designs
though.

The one guy I know of to crash an RV hit a large concrete block and
flipped completely over. He broke the canopy open and crawled out with
minor injuries. The airplane (RV-6A) was essentially a total writeoff
though.

Unfortunately, he died of a heart attack a couple years ago.

As far as extracting someone from a wreck, I was taught to never move
someone unless they are in some other form of imminent danger (the most
common example given was a burning vehicle).
Right on, and one other thing that is relevant, if loss of life isn't
imminent, burns will heal, a severed spinal cord probably won't. That is
why accident rescues should be left to professionals, not bystanders.
But then hindsight is easy to use, forsight is almost impossible, and
the current situation almost always seems more critical than it is.

YMMV

my mileage does vary.
skin burns are superficial. lung tissue burns are often fatal.
the guys in the circumstances did absolutely follow the correct course
of actions. if he had been in the flames any longer the lung tissue
damage would have been fatal. as it is now he is alive but cannot
survive without oxygen supplementation.the spinal damage was already
done, sadly.

I'm proud of the efforts of my fellow pilots. they took some gutsy
actions at considerable personal risk.
....and I often doubted that they ever had it in them.

Stealth Pilot
member of the Sport Aircraft Builders Club of Western Australia.

Thanks for the "rest of the story," that wasn't readily apparent in the
news write up. That makes it a different story all together. But I stand
by my "if loss of life isn't imminent" comment, from your comments
apparently it WAS imminent, it just didn't show in the text or pics.
And you are right, lung tissue is the one soft tissue that is as fragile
as a spinal cord, gotta have it. Glad your fellow pilots got him out of
there alive.

George

Stealth,

Do you know if this was a compressive spine injury? I've read a bit
about German Me-163 pilots being killed by using the wrong landing
skid setting. It seems that if you don't unlock the skid, that ship
would land hard enough to crush vertibrae (sp?) I've also read about a
particular early model ultralight, don't know the type, that used
nothing more than a canvas sling for a seat. On hard landing, pilots
would impact the Earth with their backsides causing spinal injuries
and/or death. Ditto several incidents of paraglider pilots, who fly
supine, impacting terrain.

I may be the only one on the NG with a plane that WAS designed to
crash. The elevator was placed in front of the wing because Wilbur
Wright wanted as much structure in front of him as possible when the
enevitable crash occurred. The rudder also hinges up in pantograph
fashion to help prevent damage. Of course, after 10 seconds in the
cradle, you too would be convinced that a Wright machine can kill you
in at least 100 ways. I'm still not entirely convinced that I want to
try flying it.

Harry

On 22 May 2007 09:41:35 -0700, wright1902glider
wrote:

Stealth,

Do you know if this was a compressive spine injury?

I must show peter these posts one day. he refuses news interviews and
would probably be embarrassed by me making comment.

I dont think the full medical investigation has been done but the
answer is probably.
his seat was the standard BD5 seat I think, with an inch of temperfoam
or similar under his bum. the BD5 is a pretty small aircraft and would
be worse than a wittman w8 tailwind for sink rates on the back side of
the performance curve. the engine hiccup occurred below best glide
speed and I think he was caught by high sink rates with stuff all time
to react.
in this respect the BD5 is no different than the Robinson R22 where
there is a period after liftoff and before best climb speed where an
interruption in power means that you are in for a bruising.

btw I was a thousand Kilometers away in Newman when this occurred and
I've only seen the dramatic newspaper shots.
like you guys I'm not morbidly fascinated by his misfortune but by the
engineering and aerodynamic considerations of designing a small very
fast aircraft.

I discussed the seating considerations with the other BD5 pilot last
night (there are 2 bd5's on our airfield, the only two flying in
australia) the sheer small size of the fuselage restricts the ability
to pad the seating any more than what they've done. having the wheels
up didnt help any either.

designwise it is interesting that having the engine behind the pilot
seems not to have been a factor in the success or failure during the
prang of the aircraft. it is conjectural what contribution the extra
weight of the turbo honda engine would have made to the sink rates.
induced drag would be the bugger here I think.

oh so much for the idea that having the wing below you improves
survivability rates. it makes no difference in some situations.

maybe the hotdog method of achieving liftoff then maintaing low level
horizontal flight and accelerating like hell before climb out is a
better way of flying them.
interesting.
Stealth Pilot

"Stealth Pilot" wrote

maybe the hotdog method of achieving liftoff then maintaing low level
horizontal flight and accelerating like hell before climb out is a
better way of flying them.
interesting.

You may have finally made a positive point for hot-dogging. Anyone think of
a down side?
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:
"Stealth Pilot" wrote

maybe the hotdog method of achieving liftoff then maintaing low level
horizontal flight and accelerating like hell before climb out is a
better way of flying them.
interesting.


You may have finally made a positive point for hot-dogging. Anyone think of
a down side?

Not a one.

Richard

On Thu, 24 May 2007 03:28:10 GMT, cavelamb himself
wrote:

Morgans wrote:
"Stealth Pilot" wrote

maybe the hotdog method of achieving liftoff then maintaing low level
horizontal flight and accelerating like hell before climb out is a
better way of flying them.
interesting.


You may have finally made a positive point for hot-dogging. Anyone think of
a down side?

Not a one.

Richard
-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Yes, and I'm surprised there is no rebuttal.
If it was better, it wouldn't be called 'hot-dogging.' ;-)

For openers...
The FAA is not known to support 'hot-dogging'.
Neither do legit aircraft manufacturers, AFAIK.

Why?
Like has been said...
It's just hot-dogging.

hot-dogging;

1. to perform in a recklessly or flamboyantly skillful manner,
show off.

2. intended or done to draw attention; showy or sensational.


Although speed can be traded for altitude,
you won't get as much with this technique
or as much opportunity to pick a crash site.


Blast away.
Nomex union suit - ON.


- Barnyard BOb -

("Stealth Pilot" wrote)
I'm proud of the efforts of my fellow pilots. they took some gutsy
actions at considerable personal risk.
....and I often doubted that they ever had it in them.

Stealth Pilot
member of the Sport Aircraft Builders Club of Western Australia.


....and proud you should be!


Montblack