BRS for emergencies

At 17:00 13 September 2007, Shawn wrote:
Bob Kuykendall wrote:
One major challenge for sailplane BRS systems is water
ballast.

snip

I suppose the savvy glider developer could also embed
a steel cable
into the wing skin, and tie it into the BRS harness
so that deployment
unzips the wing and liberates the water. That'd be
a sight to see.

How about embedding det cord around each wing, connected
to go off with
the BRS rocket? Zip the wings off, along with the
water ballast. With
just the fuselage to lower, the 'chute can be smaller
too ;-)


Shawn

BOMBS AWAY!

Paul

At 17:36 13 September 2007, Bikensoar wrote:
On Sep 13, 9:05 am, JS wrote:
The Sparrowhawk which was repeatedly flown far over
redline, ripping
the wings off, provided an interesting BRS experiment.
Opening shock was sufficient to launch the pilot out
of the fuselage.
Fortunately he was wearing a pilot emergency parachute.
There is evidently more to develop in BRS technology.
Aircraft which
deploy ballistic chutes don't always look or behave
like the Cirrus or
Discus used in the certification experiments.
Jim


Jim......You are misinformed about the Owl project.
The BRS was
never deployed by the pilot. The glider went well
past redline. It
reached flutter speed. the glider literally disintegrated
with the
pilot
being ejected through the canopy still strapped into
the seat pan.

The BRS deployed somehow on its own and the wreckage
descended
safely to the ground.

It would be difficult for any recovery system to work
well once the
aircraft was 40-50 knots over redline.

The fact that the BRS worked at those speeds is very
encouraging
to me.

The truly amazing thing about a system like BRS is
the lives that
have been saved at very low deployment altitudes.
There have
been saves as low as 200 ft. agl.

And once again, spreading half facts and misinformation
on this
site does a disservice to BRS and Windward Performance.

George Y

George, I just attended the ESA (Experimental Sailplane
Association, formerly SHA) western workshop in Tehachapi
where Greg Cole (Sparrowhawk designer/Windward Perf
owner for the uninformed) covered the 'Owl Project
incedent' in his presentation, and Jim is basically
correct. BTW, this is the incident I was referring
to in my earlier post about a flutter breakup and how
smart it was for the pilot to also have a personal
chute cause' it saves his a$$ when the BRS ejected
him, but did not want to mention names at that point,
out of respect. But since it is out for open discussion,
I will add this. The wings fluttered off at 170kts
(the calculated flutter speed BTW) during a botched
'extreme envelope test' involving manually performed
aerobatic maneuvers to gather data for an autopilot
system destined for it's UAV application. When the
BRS was deployed, by the pilot, he was ejected through
the airframe under the extreme G's (I forgot the exact
number they calculated, but it was very high) pulled
during the ensuing deceleration in lawn dart configuration.
Good thing he had his personal chute (and I believe
a helmet too for that matter)...
I am not at all against the BRS (and certainly not
against Windward, I personally love the Sparrowhawk,
which performs quite admirably within it's design parameters),
I just think a BRS should not be considered a 'substitute'
for a personal chute, but rather a nice addition. Most
people need a cushion in the cockpit. Yours can be
made of dirty laundry if you wanted, but I will always
use a chute to fill that role, and think that others
should be encouraged to do the same. I have had this
conversation with several of the pilots at my club,
where incidentally the only fatality there was a fellow
who was not wearing his chute (that day only) when
his HP-14 controls jammed and a spin became unrecoverable.
A BRS would have done the job nicely that time, but
from 5,000 AGL he also had plenty of altitude to jump
ship.
Wear your chutes folks, accidents are not planned events
and you can't guarantee the BRS will operate properly
after an incident/accident that requires you to use
it, but get a BRS if you can as they are indeed great
inventions.

Paul Hanson
"Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi

On Sep 13, 11:33 am, Paul Hanson
wrote:
At 17:36 13 September 2007, Bikensoar wrote:



On Sep 13, 9:05 am, JS wrote:
The Sparrowhawk which was repeatedly flown far over
redline, ripping
the wings off, provided an interesting BRS experiment.
Opening shock was sufficient to launch the pilot out
of the fuselage.
Fortunately he was wearing a pilot emergency parachute.
There is evidently more to develop in BRS technology.
Aircraft which
deploy ballistic chutes don't always look or behave
like the Cirrus or
Discus used in the certification experiments.
Jim

Jim......You are misinformed about the Owl project.
The BRS was
never deployed by the pilot. The glider went well
past redline. It
reached flutter speed. the glider literally disintegrated
with the
pilot
being ejected through the canopy still strapped into
the seat pan.

The BRS deployed somehow on its own and the wreckage
descended
safely to the ground.

It would be difficult for any recovery system to work
well once the
aircraft was 40-50 knots over redline.

The fact that the BRS worked at those speeds is very
encouraging
to me.

The truly amazing thing about a system like BRS is
the lives that
have been saved at very low deployment altitudes.
There have
been saves as low as 200 ft. agl.

And once again, spreading half facts and misinformation
on this
site does a disservice to BRS and Windward Performance.

George Y

George, I just attended the ESA (Experimental Sailplane
Association, formerly SHA) western workshop in Tehachapi
where Greg Cole (Sparrowhawk designer/Windward Perf
owner for the uninformed) covered the 'Owl Project
incedent' in his presentation, and Jim is basically
correct. BTW, this is the incident I was referring
to in my earlier post about a flutter breakup and how
smart it was for the pilot to also have a personal
chute cause' it saves his a$$ when the BRS ejected
him, but did not want to mention names at that point,
out of respect. But since it is out for open discussion,
I will add this. The wings fluttered off at 170kts
(the calculated flutter speed BTW) during a botched
'extreme envelope test' involving manually performed
aerobatic maneuvers to gather data for an autopilot
system destined for it's UAV application. When the
BRS was deployed, by the pilot, he was ejected through
the airframe under the extreme G's (I forgot the exact
number they calculated, but it was very high) pulled
during the ensuing deceleration in lawn dart configuration.
Good thing he had his personal chute (and I believe
a helmet too for that matter)...
I am not at all against the BRS (and certainly not
against Windward, I personally love the Sparrowhawk,
which performs quite admirably within it's design parameters),
I just think a BRS should not be considered a 'substitute'
for a personal chute, but rather a nice addition. Most
people need a cushion in the cockpit. Yours can be
made of dirty laundry if you wanted, but I will always
use a chute to fill that role, and think that others
should be encouraged to do the same. I have had this
conversation with several of the pilots at my club,
where incidentally the only fatality there was a fellow
who was not wearing his chute (that day only) when
his HP-14 controls jammed and a spin became unrecoverable.
A BRS would have done the job nicely that time, but
from 5,000 AGL he also had plenty of altitude to jump
ship.
Wear your chutes folks, accidents are not planned events
and you can't guarantee the BRS will operate properly
after an incident/accident that requires you to use
it, but get a BRS if you can as they are indeed great
inventions.

Paul Hanson
"Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Paul
The Owl pilot also had trouble with his parachute. There
were some canopy frame or fuselage parts that were
preventing him from deploying his parachute. He finally
was able to deploy his chute at around 500' agl. He is
very lucky to be alive. He only had a couple more
seconds.

I am happy to have a BRS in my Sparrowhawk.
Because of my height, I am unable to wear a parachute
in most gliders. All I have in my SH is a piece of sheep
skin on the seat pan. That gives me about 1/2 in.
clearance for the canopy.
George

On Sep 13, 7:33 pm, Paul Hanson
wrote:
Wear your chutes folks

A pilot in Britain died in 2002 when his glider was damaged in a
collision but he did not have a parachute. The pilot who had flown the
glider previously did not use a parachute due to his size, and when
the accident pilot got into the glider afterwards he did not get a
parachute to use himself. When a person helping him board commented on
the lack of a parachute, the accident pilot replied "it'll be
alright".


Dan

On 14 Sep, 10:05, Dan G wrote:
On Sep 13, 7:33 pm, Paul Hanson

wrote:
Wear your chutes folks

A pilot in Britain died in 2002 when his glider was damaged in a
collision but he did not have a parachute. The pilot who had flown the
glider previously did not use a parachute due to his size, and when
the accident pilot got into the glider afterwards he did not get a
parachute to use himself. When a person helping him board commented on
the lack of a parachute, the accident pilot replied "it'll be
alright".

But remember the Idaflieg survey which found no evidence that anyone
had ever made the decision to use a parachute from a glider below
500m and survived. There were a fair number of cases when the actual
deployment happened much lower but it seems that the time it takes to
leave a glider as about the time it takes a badly damaged glider to
fall 500m.

I don;t wear a parachute when flying myself: I prefer "not hitting
things" to "trying to survive after hitting things"...

Ian

I assume that you also don't wear the safety belt in your car, and have
disabled the airbags...

Bert

"Ian" wrote in message I don;t wear a
parachute when flying myself: I prefer "not hitting
things" to "trying to survive after hitting things"...

Ian

On 14 Sep, 13:23, "Bert Willing"
wrote:

"Ian" wrote in message

I don;t wear a
parachute when flying myself: I prefer "not hitting
things" to "trying to survive after hitting things"...

I assume that you also don't wear the safety belt in your car, and have
disabled the airbags...

I wear a safety belt because it's there and easy. On the other hand,
when I delivered a friend's Daimler Dart a few hundred miles last
year, I didn;t wear a seat belt because it doesn't have them.

None of my cars have airbags fitted and I do not wish a car which has
them. In seatbelt wearing cultures - unlike the US - the benefits are
marginal at best, and I have absolutely no faith that these things
will remain stable and reliable as the cars age.

Did you know that there is now good evidence that the thick A-posts
required for side airbags reduced visibility to such an extent that
the accident rate is noticeably increased. The casualty rate too,
because an airbag does little for the pedestrian you hit ...

My glider has a parachute. It is of unknown make and unknown type and
has not, to my certain knowledge, been serviced for twelve years. I
barely even trust it as a cushion on the grass. Sure, I could go out
and buy a nice new one, but it's just not high on my list of things to
spend good money on. If others want to buy parachutes - fine. Their
decision. And mine.

Lots of clubs use parachutes all the time in two seaters, even for
winch circuits. They are utterly useless for those flights, since
there simply isn't time to get out and use them if something does
happen. So the only result is that the parachutes get chucked around
more and the chances of damage leading to a malfunction if/when they
ever are needed is increased...

Ian

PS Do you ever drive at more than 50kph?

Finally ...

On 9/14/07 5:36 AM, in article
, "Ian"
wrote:

On 14 Sep, 10:05, Dan G wrote:
On Sep 13, 7:33 pm, Paul Hanson

wrote:
Wear your chutes folks

A pilot in Britain died in 2002 when his glider was damaged in a
collision but he did not have a parachute. The pilot who had flown the
glider previously did not use a parachute due to his size, and when
the accident pilot got into the glider afterwards he did not get a
parachute to use himself. When a person helping him board commented on
the lack of a parachute, the accident pilot replied "it'll be
alright".

But remember the Idaflieg survey which found no evidence that anyone
had ever made the decision to use a parachute from a glider below
500m and survived. There were a fair number of cases when the actual
deployment happened much lower but it seems that the time it takes to
leave a glider as about the time it takes a badly damaged glider to
fall 500m.

I don;t wear a parachute when flying myself: I prefer "not hitting
things" to "trying to survive after hitting things"...

Ian


Here in the US authorities tried for many years to teach drivers to avoid
having accidents. It just didn't work, and the injury and fatality rate from
motor vehicle accidents only began to come down when seat belts, airbags,
better designed highways, better crash design of vehicles, a more deployed
and trained EMS system and many other innovations came into being.

"Just don't crash" just doesn't work. It's a delusion to believe otherwise.

Respectfully,
Bullwinkle

On 14 Sep, 13:40, Bullwinkle wrote:

Here in the US authorities tried for many years to teach drivers to avoid
having accidents. It just didn't work, and the injury and fatality rate from
motor vehicle accidents only began to come down when seat belts, airbags,
better designed highways, better crash design of vehicles, a more deployed
and trained EMS system and many other innovations came into being.

And how many of these things would have been necessary if driving
training was as stringent as flying training?

"Just don't crash" just doesn't work. It's a delusion to believe otherwise.

The only alternative is "Just don't fly". Expecting /anything/ to save
you is insanity.

Ian

Ian schrieb:
I don;t wear a parachute when flying myself: I prefer "not hitting
things" to "trying to survive after hitting things"...

Ian,

Just in case you are serious about the above:
that is about the dumbest comment i have read on RAS in a loooong time.

A friend of mine:
- didn't want a collision!
- had a FLARM! (as had his opponent)
- had a parachute!

- died anyway in a collision approx. 200m above a mountain two months ago in
our glider.

HE did not have enough time to bail out... but others had the time.
And i guess they also thought "i wont ever hit anything...".

..... argh... i just hope your sarcasm cought me unaware.

Happy landings
Markus