BRS chutes. Why doesn't everyone use them?

On Jan 19, 11:35*pm, Sparkorama Sparkorama.
wrote:
I'm just getting back into the sport after a long hiatus. I've seen that
a lot of glider pilots fly with parachutes (ones they wear) and I have
seen Ballistic Recovery System parachutes in planes as well. From my
layman's view, it appears that getting out of a plane using a
traditional chute after a mid-air collision seems exceedingly difficult
and time-consuming. On the other hand, BRS chutes seem to deploy very
fast and can be deployed very close to the ground. They can lower the
entire plane safely to the ground in almost any terrain, and a few
bruises to your bird or your body seems a lot better than certain death
if you can't get out of a plane after a mid-air. So if this is true, and
I am happy to say I am no expert, then why isn't everyone using these
things? I think they should be mandatory in every new glider built.
Thoughts?
Spark

--
Sparkorama

Here we go with this mandatorys stuff again!!

First of all you have at least one misconception......the aircraft is
not "lowered to the ground with only a few bruises". The opening of
the chute is a major event, the shock can cause considerable damage by
itself. The descent rates are high, so considerable damage upon
striking the ground. The device is "life saving" but not "aircraft
saving".

I has strongly considered a BRS when building my homebuilt
plane......I ruled it out for a number of reasons. The greatest
reason was that the design and structure of the aircraft wuld have had
too have been highly modified.....strengthened....coping with strong
force loads in the oposite direction......to with stand the opening
shock of the chute............this required the doubling of the
cockpit side walls, installation of metal cross members, etc. This
alone would have added too much weight to the aircraft, not to mention
the complications and weight of the mounting of the BRS unit
itself.........

Yeah, and then the cost...........

Now on the other hand, there are many factory built aircraft with
BRS....Like Cirrus.....a few gliders too..........these companies feel
that the BRS is a good selling point....enhanced safety and all
that....

In the world of ultralights, BRS type chutes are the "norm" fairly
common in Light Sport aircraft too......I believe that just about ALL
hanglider guys have a ballistic chute of some type.

Cookie

On Jan 20, 7:47*am, "
wrote:

Here we go with this mandatory stuff again!!

I think it's a January thing. My daughter's 4th grade class was
assigned to write up a proposed new state law, due this morning. My
suggestion was that she propose a law keeping government noses out of
private business :-). She came up with the idea of limiting internet
tracking all on her own, so perhaps there's hope for the youngsters,
yet!

-Evan Ludeman / T8

On Jan 20, 7:47*am, "
wrote:
On Jan 19, 11:35*pm, Sparkorama Sparkorama.



wrote:
I'm just getting back into the sport after a long hiatus. I've seen that
a lot of glider pilots fly with parachutes (ones they wear) and I have
seen Ballistic Recovery System parachutes in planes as well. From my
layman's view, it appears that getting out of a plane using a
traditional chute after a mid-air collision seems exceedingly difficult
and time-consuming. On the other hand, BRS chutes seem to deploy very
fast and can be deployed very close to the ground. They can lower the
entire plane safely to the ground in almost any terrain, and a few
bruises to your bird or your body seems a lot better than certain death
if you can't get out of a plane after a mid-air. So if this is true, and
I am happy to say I am no expert, then why isn't everyone using these
things? I think they should be mandatory in every new glider built.
Thoughts?
Spark

--
Sparkorama

Here we go with this mandatorys stuff again!!

First of all you have at least one misconception......the aircraft is
not "lowered to the ground with only a few bruises". *The opening of
the chute is a major event, the shock can cause considerable damage by
itself. *The descent rates are high, so considerable damage upon
striking the ground. *The device is "life saving" but not "aircraft
saving".

I has strongly considered a BRS when building my homebuilt
plane......I ruled it out for a number of reasons. *The greatest
reason was that the design and structure of the aircraft wuld have had
too have been highly modified.....strengthened....coping with strong
force loads *in the oposite direction......to with stand the opening
shock of the chute............this required the doubling of the
cockpit side walls, installation of metal cross members, etc. * This
alone would have added too much weight to the aircraft, not to mention
the complications and weight of the mounting of the BRS unit
itself.........

Yeah, and then the cost...........

Now on the other hand, there are many factory built aircraft with
BRS....Like Cirrus.....a few gliders too..........these companies feel
that the BRS is a good selling point....enhanced safety and all
that....

In the world of ultralights, BRS type chutes are the "norm" * fairly
common in Light Sport aircraft too......I believe that just about ALL
hanglider guys have a ballistic chute of some type.

Cookie

Correction!

I was just taken to task by a hang glider (and sailplane) pilot
friend......

Hang gliders use "hand thrown" chutes, not "ballistic".


Cookie

Correction!

I was just taken to task by a hang glider (and sailplane) pilot
friend......

Hang gliders use "hand thrown" chutes, not "ballistic".

Cookie

Happily, everybody is right. :-) both hand-thrown and ballistic chutes
are available to the hang glider community. See
http://www.highenergysports.com/arti...ontroversy.htm for a
start

Tony LS6-b, USHPA 7826

On Jan 25, 7:05*pm, Tony V wrote:
Correction!

I was just taken to task by a hang glider (and sailplane) pilot
friend......

Hang gliders use "hand thrown" chutes, not "ballistic".

Cookie

Happily, everybody is right. :-) both hand-thrown and ballistic chutes
are available to the hang glider community. Seehttp://www.highenergysports.com/articles/ballistic_controversy.htmfor a
start

Tony LS6-b, USHPA 7826

Yes, according to my expert, both ballistic and hand thrown parachutes
have been and are used on hang gliders. But mostly hand thrown by a
large margin.

But my original point was that hang gliders widely use parachute
recovery systems, you could say "everybody uses them" and you could
say they are "mandated". I believe that the hang glider people have
decided to self regulate (as opposed to government regulation) and
require chutes at any "sanctioned" gliding site.

This is not the case in sailplanes however, for the reasons given in
this thread. Sailplanes are very different in some respects, than
hang gliders. I think that the "personal" parachute is the preferred
solution for sailplanes. Soaring also self regulates to some degree
as chutes are required in contests.

Cookie