Just pull the little red handle!

I lost my best friend in a mid-air last November, a Cirrus hit a tow
plane in Colorado, we had a mid-air at Parowan and now the mid-air in
Uvalde!

I'm going ballistic as in Ballistic recovery system (BRS). At my age
there's no way I'm getting out of my ship unless it's straight and
level and under 1G.

For about $4500 bucks and a little work I can have a little red handle
that will extract me and my ship from a tumbling, lurching mass of
fiberglass that is doing everything but flying. Any body got the
straight skinny on the Uvalde mid-air? I'm thinking Chris did a flying
ground loop (air-loop) that spun him around so fast it broke the boom.

Little red handle anyone?
JJ

On Aug 29, 2:17*pm, JJ Sinclair wrote:
Any body got the
straight skinny on the Uvalde mid-air? I'm thinking Chris did a flying
ground loop (air-loop) that spun him around so fast it broke the boom.

If two gliders are exactly head on with a vertical separation such
that they will miss, but only just, then they will miss if neither
pilot does anything. If the top guy pulls at the last second, or the
bottom guy pushes at the last second it seems possible that the tail
boom of the top glider could come into violent contact with the
horizontal of the bottom glider.

I hope the NTSB with have done a careful examination of both gliders,
any photos, and any third party inspection reports and I look forward
to reading their report.

More likely it will just say that 2 gliders collided in unknown
circumstances.

Andy

Why not have a ballistic parachute option in your sailplane? Why not
double chute and have a BRS and a backpack parachute for multiple
options? I am relatively new and have found much resistance as I have
talked to the old timers around the air field. The common attitude is
that we already wear parachutes and we don't need any more. Cost is
another obvious issue. How many are planning the purchase of their
next new ship shipped from overseas. How many of us have an extra
$125K to blow on a new dream boat without divorce papers being
threatened. "I know honey that we just paid off the house but hey,
what's another 15 year mortgage going to hurt?"
I have put a lot of thought into the manufacturing question and
have wondered if it is a Euro stigma to American technology or safety
standards. It seems that most new sailplanes being produced do not
have this option. Most new sailplanes are being built in Europe.
American sailplanes seem to be the exception.
The one current production American sailplane builder is Windward
Performance they offer the BRS option with the Sparrowhawk. One of
the reasons I bought a Sparrowhawk was the BRS was a great safety
selling point for my wife and yes, I believe it too. From talking
with Greg Cole, all but one Sparrowhawk has the BRS option. This is a
strong embrace of the technology if it was more readily available.
The other recent sailplane from American design was the Genesis G2
which originally included a BRS in its design. I wondered if that is
why the full development and implementation of the BRS was never
finished as the production and final development was shipped over to
LAK in Lithuanian. Cirrus aircraft also another American company has
developed the BRS it into all of its piston aircraft and even into its
new Vision Jet. The ultralight aircraft have strongly embraced the
tech and most of the new ships have a BRS system although most never
carried parachutes in the first place.
I would really love to have a BRS system in my current DG-303 but
none is available. Is there even a modification available or are
there too many liability issues with our fat USA lawyers revving there
engines. Maybe the core reason of lack of availability is that the
American sailplane market is a very low demand market with declining
membership and current fiberglass ships that seems to last forever.
How many of your current glider pilot friends are talking about that
brand new ship they are planning on ordering from Europe for $125K.
Not many I would imagine. I long sometimes to travel back in time to
the age of the Schweitzers when the good old USA was the sailplane
manufacture of the world. We were the leaders of flight development
but have lost that in modern times. It's kind of sad I think.

JJ at least you have the option and panel built in your Genesis
fuselage that it is possible for you to get the upgrade. Eventually I
imagine that the availability of BRS will slowly trickle down to
standard options as it get recognized as a significant safety
benefit. Some of the old timers will get converted, some will die
off. Us young guys can hardly wait!

JJ, I too lost a friend here in Utah to a crash and wonder if a BRS
might have saved him. We readily spend $3K on new winglets but I have
yet to read about anyone bragging about his new BRS system.

Please, if anyone has some answers, please help! We need a few
converts to the benefits and increase in safety of BRS which might
come from the new younger generation to increase demand. If we
request it, they will build it. I know it is possible for the older
guys to get converted as I recently discovered in Parowan at the club
class Nationals that you JJ, are not a spring chicken. Your passion
and writing on the message boards for soaring lead me to believe that
you were much younger. Kudos us young kids would say.

John Ackerson

Here's a nice demo of a near worst case:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaU9PnXU1Pc

-Tom

On Aug 29, 4:06*pm, flyingmr2 wrote:
Why not have a ballistic parachute option in your sailplane? *

Please, if anyone has some answers, please help! *

Cost, weight, and availability, but perhaps not in that order.

Andy

On Aug 29, 5:06*pm, flyingmr2 wrote:
* ......The other recent sailplane from American design was the Genesis G2
which originally included a BRS in its design. *I wondered if that is
why the full development and implementation of the BRS was never
finished as the production and final development was shipped over to
LAK in Lithuanian.......

The reason the production Genesis gliders did not have a BRS is that
it was an option and no one ordered one.

One Genesis has been retrofitted with a BRS by the owner. It sounds
like JJ and I will be doing the same.

A BRS system large enough for a modern 15 meter glider weighs about 35
lbs. It also is rather tall and so having a deep fuselage helps with
fitting it in.

Robert J. Mudd
Genesis sn 2009

I flew a Ventus2BXR at Saint-Auban, France. The "R" stands for
"recovery parachute". It has a little yellow/black handle that needs
to be secured with a pin when on the ground, because the pyrotechnic
system going off in somebody's face when pushing the glider presents a
real safety problem. You have to take the safety pin off just when
ready for launching, and have to put it back before opening the canopy
after landing. I'm sorry to say I sometimes had some problems
remembering one or the other... There are also three items to add to
the preflight check: primary (maintenance) safety removed, safety wire
OK, electronics checked). And in France, having a ballistic recovery
parachute doesn't mean you no longer have to wear a personal chute...
Kind of belt and braces approach!

Many German glider types can be had with that system, but people
prefer adding a motor or fancy glide computers...

On Aug 29, 4:06*pm, flyingmr2 wrote:
Why not have a ballistic parachute option in your sailplane? *Why not
double chute and have a BRS and a backpack parachute for multiple
options? *I am relatively new and have found much resistance as I have
talked to the old timers around the air field. *The common attitude is
that we already wear parachutes and we don't need any more. Cost is
another obvious issue. *How many are planning the purchase of their
next new ship shipped from overseas. *How many of us have an extra
$125K to blow on a new dream boat without divorce papers being
threatened. *"I know honey that we just paid off the house but hey,
what's another 15 year mortgage going to hurt?"
* * I have put a lot of thought into the manufacturing question and
have wondered if it is a Euro stigma to American technology or safety
standards. *It seems that most new sailplanes being produced do not
have this option. *Most new sailplanes are being built in Europe.
American sailplanes seem to be the exception.
* * The one current production American sailplane builder is Windward
Performance they offer the BRS option with the Sparrowhawk. *One of
the reasons I bought a Sparrowhawk was the BRS was a great safety
selling point for my wife and yes, I believe it too. *From talking
with Greg Cole, all but one Sparrowhawk has the BRS option. *This is a
strong embrace of the technology if it was more readily available.
The other recent sailplane from American design was the Genesis G2
which originally included a BRS in its design. *I wondered if that is
why the full development and implementation of the BRS was never
finished as the production and final development was shipped over to
LAK in Lithuanian. *Cirrus aircraft also another American company has
developed the BRS it into all of its piston aircraft and even into its
new Vision Jet. *The ultralight aircraft have strongly embraced the
tech and most of the new ships have a BRS system although most never
carried parachutes in the first place.
* *I would really love to have a BRS system in my current DG-303 but
none is available. *Is there even a modification available or are
there too many liability issues with our fat USA lawyers revving there
engines. *Maybe the core reason of lack of availability is that the
American sailplane market is a very low demand market with declining
membership and current fiberglass ships that seems to last forever.
How many of your current glider pilot friends are talking about that
brand new ship they are planning on ordering from Europe for $125K.
Not many I would imagine. *I long sometimes to travel back in time to
the age of the Schweitzers when the good old USA was the sailplane
manufacture of the world. *We were the leaders of flight development
but have lost that in modern times. *It's kind of sad I think.

JJ *at least you have the option and panel built in your Genesis
fuselage that it is possible for you to get the upgrade. *Eventually I
imagine that the availability of BRS will slowly trickle down to
standard options as it get recognized as a significant safety
benefit. *Some of the old timers will get converted, some will die
off. *Us young guys can hardly wait!

JJ, I too lost a friend here in Utah to a crash and wonder if a BRS
might have saved him. *We readily spend $3K on new winglets but I have
yet to read about anyone bragging about his new BRS system.

Please, if anyone has some answers, please help! *We need a few
converts to the benefits and increase in safety of BRS which might
come from the new younger generation to increase demand. *If we
request it, they will build it. *I know it is possible for the older
guys to get converted as I recently discovered in Parowan at the club
class Nationals that you JJ, are not a spring chicken. *Your passion
and writing on the message boards for soaring lead me to believe that
you were much younger. Kudos us young kids would say.

John Ackerson

BRS offers a soft pack that measures 18" (L) X 11.5" (W) X 7.5" (H).
To modify an existing ship one would need to cut a hatch of those
dimensions in the top skin over the wing. It should fit the baggage
compartment of most existing sailplanes. Reinforce the skin and build
in a lip, the cut-out piece could become the hatch. Nylon webs attach
to all 4 lift fittings and the little red handle is routed forward and
mounted on the side of the instrument panel. I see no reason a ship
licenced experimental couldn't be so modified. The BRS-1350 has a 40'
chute and weighs 29#, good for max GW of 1350 and max speed of 138
mph.
Some ships may need to mount the chute farther back which can be done
with longer forward bridles, the Genesis uses 42" forward and 30"
rear. On deployment, some fuselage skin damage may occur, but what the
hell?
JJ

Here is information relating to a BRS system installed in a Schreder HP-16.
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder/HP...S_in_HP-16.htm



"JJ Sinclair" wrote in message ...
On Aug 29, 4:06 pm, flyingmr2 wrote:

BRS offers a soft pack that measures 18" (L) X 11.5" (W) X 7.5" (H).
To modify an existing ship one would need to cut a hatch of those
dimensions in the top skin over the wing. It should fit the baggage
compartment of most existing sailplanes. Reinforce the skin and build
in a lip, the cut-out piece could become the hatch. Nylon webs attach
to all 4 lift fittings and the little red handle is routed forward and
mounted on the side of the instrument panel. I see no reason a ship
licenced experimental couldn't be so modified. The BRS-1350 has a 40'
chute and weighs 29#, good for max GW of 1350 and max speed of 138
mph.
Some ships may need to mount the chute farther back which can be done
with longer forward bridles, the Genesis uses 42" forward and 30"
rear. On deployment, some fuselage skin damage may occur, but what the
hell?
JJ

On Aug 29, 7:06*pm, flyingmr2 wrote:
... * * I have put a lot of thought into the manufacturing question and
have wondered if it is a Euro stigma to American technology or safety
standards. *

Huh ? American technology ?
Are you aware of all the work Streifeneder has done ?
See: http://www.streifly.de/leistungen-e.htm
Or that this has been an option on some SH sailplanes ?

It seems that most new sailplanes being produced do not
have this option. *Most new sailplanes are being built in Europe.

Most pilots don't want it.
Its hard to fit both a chute and a sustainer engine,
most just buy the sustainer.
Lack of interest = lack of options from manufacturers.
Its extremely expensive to design, produce, certify,
and must be justified by actual sales...

*... We were the leaders of flight development...

Huh ? In gliders ? In 1906 for sure, I have a picture
of that flight on my office wall...

See ya, Dave