A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Aerobatics
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Of parachutes and things



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old July 19th 04, 04:40 PM
Al MacDonald
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Shawn,

My Pitts S1- C (with D fuselage) came with a National chairpack. What I
didn't know at the time was the previous owner had set a piece of plywood
across the seat bottom frame to increase his eye height. This is a good
combination, as the visibility is as good as it can be, and when I'm hanging
upside down I can just feel my dangling hair touch the canopy. I took the
plywood out to try some circuits one day, and the 1.5" less height seriously
reduced the visibility (and the quality of my landings). This chairpack
doesn't give me good lumbar support, which I can feel on a cross-country
flight, but it's fine for g's. I can actually feel the diaper through my
rear end, but because the packed parachute is quite firm on the bottom
portion it doesn't tend to move or squish on higher g's. Without the
plywood, I think a seatpack would be the best for this aircraft and me
(6'160#). I don't think any type of backpack would be comfortable in this
aircraft, and even worse in a 'C' fuselage.

The parachutes are all tested and TSO'd in different categories. Older
style systems were either low speed (under 150mph) or standard category.
Military surplus are all standard category. Drop testing was done to a
standard that (theoretically) imparted a shock load on the system, which
decided in which category the system fit. 3000 and 5000 lbs seems to ring a
bell here. Later TSO requirements of C23c allowed for 3 different
categories, cat B being the most common -- a drop testing of 300 lbs at
175kts, with placarding at 254lbs at 150 kts. TSO C23D allowed for more
categories with different weight/speed restrictions, which was great for the
extra lighter or heavier user who may need different requirements. Current
day standards call for a "full-stow" diaper on a round parachute, which
stages the parachute deployment, thus increasing the reliability of the
opening. Without a diaper the parachute is allowed to open before the lines
become taut -- imagine the shock when the lines finally tighten up on a
parachute partially open already! In the days before the full stow diaper,
the lines were unstowed from the pack tray, which allowed for the potential
of arms and legs to get tangled up in the unstowing lines (especially for a
pilot making his first jump and not maintaining balance/stability on the
relative airflow). The full stow diaper carries all of the line stows on
it, so the lines unstow from the top down, and once the parachute is out of
the container the the lines are well out of the reach of an unstable pilot.

The opening speeds here are very important, as the drag from the opening
parachute increases in square to the speed increase. My Pitts has a VNE of
203mph/176kt, which could easily cause damage to a parachute rated at only
150 kts. Higher speed parachute systems incorporate other staging devices
to inhibit the opening of the parachute for a very short period of time
while the parachute and user slow down; all to reduce the opening shock to
an acceptable level. Altitude above sea level plays a part here as well, as
parachutes tend to open faster/harder in thinner air (don't ask me why) and
they land faster too. Landing a parachute may be a consideration here as
well. While the cockpit may only have enough room for a 24' parachute, the
200 pound user may find extensive lower leg and back injuries a real
possibility after a successful bailout, and our bones take longer to heal as
we get older....

I manufacture, repair, repack and sell all kinds of parachute equipment for
my business. Good luck on picking the 'right' system for you and your
Pitts.

Al MacDonald
Flying High Manufacturing Inc.




"ShawnD2112" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Was hoping to get a bit of expertise here. I'm in the market for an
emergency bailout chute for flying in my Pitts S-1D. The top US

contenders
seem to be National and Softie but with no experience in the field, and
parachutes not exactly being the kind of object you can try on for size in
the shop, I don't really know what to look for and what to avoid. I'd
appreciate any tips anyone out there could provide. Are there any

European
models that anyone has any experience with? Obviously comfort and space

in
the cockpit are major considerations.

Thanks!
Shawn




Ads
  #32  
Old July 20th 04, 07:38 AM
ShawnD2112
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Al,
Thanks for the info - the most informative response to date. In the
meantime since my first post, and based on the reponses I got here, I've
gone with the Softie seat pack. Confirmed the order last week and it should
arrive soon. Looking forward to receiving it and seeing how it all fits.

Cheers,
Shawn
"Al MacDonald" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Shawn,

My Pitts S1- C (with D fuselage) came with a National chairpack. What I
didn't know at the time was the previous owner had set a piece of plywood
across the seat bottom frame to increase his eye height. This is a good
combination, as the visibility is as good as it can be, and when I'm

hanging
upside down I can just feel my dangling hair touch the canopy. I took the
plywood out to try some circuits one day, and the 1.5" less height

seriously
reduced the visibility (and the quality of my landings). This chairpack
doesn't give me good lumbar support, which I can feel on a cross-country
flight, but it's fine for g's. I can actually feel the diaper through my
rear end, but because the packed parachute is quite firm on the bottom
portion it doesn't tend to move or squish on higher g's. Without the
plywood, I think a seatpack would be the best for this aircraft and me
(6'160#). I don't think any type of backpack would be comfortable in this
aircraft, and even worse in a 'C' fuselage.

The parachutes are all tested and TSO'd in different categories. Older
style systems were either low speed (under 150mph) or standard category.
Military surplus are all standard category. Drop testing was done to a
standard that (theoretically) imparted a shock load on the system, which
decided in which category the system fit. 3000 and 5000 lbs seems to ring

a
bell here. Later TSO requirements of C23c allowed for 3 different
categories, cat B being the most common -- a drop testing of 300 lbs at
175kts, with placarding at 254lbs at 150 kts. TSO C23D allowed for more
categories with different weight/speed restrictions, which was great for

the
extra lighter or heavier user who may need different requirements.

Current
day standards call for a "full-stow" diaper on a round parachute, which
stages the parachute deployment, thus increasing the reliability of the
opening. Without a diaper the parachute is allowed to open before the

lines
become taut -- imagine the shock when the lines finally tighten up on a
parachute partially open already! In the days before the full stow

diaper,
the lines were unstowed from the pack tray, which allowed for the

potential
of arms and legs to get tangled up in the unstowing lines (especially for

a
pilot making his first jump and not maintaining balance/stability on the
relative airflow). The full stow diaper carries all of the line stows on
it, so the lines unstow from the top down, and once the parachute is out

of
the container the the lines are well out of the reach of an unstable

pilot.

The opening speeds here are very important, as the drag from the opening
parachute increases in square to the speed increase. My Pitts has a VNE

of
203mph/176kt, which could easily cause damage to a parachute rated at only
150 kts. Higher speed parachute systems incorporate other staging devices
to inhibit the opening of the parachute for a very short period of time
while the parachute and user slow down; all to reduce the opening shock to
an acceptable level. Altitude above sea level plays a part here as well,

as
parachutes tend to open faster/harder in thinner air (don't ask me why)

and
they land faster too. Landing a parachute may be a consideration here as
well. While the cockpit may only have enough room for a 24' parachute,

the
200 pound user may find extensive lower leg and back injuries a real
possibility after a successful bailout, and our bones take longer to heal

as
we get older....

I manufacture, repair, repack and sell all kinds of parachute equipment

for
my business. Good luck on picking the 'right' system for you and your
Pitts.

Al MacDonald
Flying High Manufacturing Inc.




"ShawnD2112" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Was hoping to get a bit of expertise here. I'm in the market for an
emergency bailout chute for flying in my Pitts S-1D. The top US

contenders
seem to be National and Softie but with no experience in the field, and
parachutes not exactly being the kind of object you can try on for size

in
the shop, I don't really know what to look for and what to avoid. I'd
appreciate any tips anyone out there could provide. Are there any

European
models that anyone has any experience with? Obviously comfort and space

in
the cockpit are major considerations.

Thanks!
Shawn






  #33  
Old July 20th 04, 11:19 PM
Al MacDonald
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Shawn, I forgot something very important!

I'd strongly suggest you make a habit of putting on the parachute and then
getting in the Pitts. Get out of the Pitts with the parachute on, then
remove it. Do NOT get in the habit of getting out of the plane without your
parachute on, as it could cultivate a very bad habit (and make you look
rather stupid in the obituary). I know it's a bit of a pain with my
chairpack, and probably even more so with the seat pack, but well worth the
extra effort.

One other thing: repacks. In Canada there are no laws/regulations requiring
you to wear a parachute or when it has to be repacked. Not so in the USA,
where the repack cycle is currently 120 days and wearing an out of date
parachute is breaking one of the FARs. It may be a good idea to check into
what your legal requirements are in the UK, if I understood correctly that
is where you are from. While I feel somewhat obligated to advise my
customers on the rules in Canada vs. the US in this department vs. the
manufacturers instructions, realistically most of the glider parachutes are
lucky to show up here for an annual repack.

That's all.

al.



"ShawnD2112" wrote in message
...
Al,
Thanks for the info - the most informative response to date. In the
meantime since my first post, and based on the reponses I got here, I've
gone with the Softie seat pack. Confirmed the order last week and it

should
arrive soon. Looking forward to receiving it and seeing how it all fits.

Cheers,
Shawn
"Al MacDonald" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Shawn,

My Pitts S1- C (with D fuselage) came with a National chairpack. What I
didn't know at the time was the previous owner had set a piece of

plywood
across the seat bottom frame to increase his eye height. This is a good
combination, as the visibility is as good as it can be, and when I'm

hanging
upside down I can just feel my dangling hair touch the canopy. I took

the
plywood out to try some circuits one day, and the 1.5" less height

seriously
reduced the visibility (and the quality of my landings). This chairpack
doesn't give me good lumbar support, which I can feel on a cross-country
flight, but it's fine for g's. I can actually feel the diaper through

my
rear end, but because the packed parachute is quite firm on the bottom
portion it doesn't tend to move or squish on higher g's. Without the
plywood, I think a seatpack would be the best for this aircraft and me
(6'160#). I don't think any type of backpack would be comfortable in

this
aircraft, and even worse in a 'C' fuselage.

The parachutes are all tested and TSO'd in different categories. Older
style systems were either low speed (under 150mph) or standard category.
Military surplus are all standard category. Drop testing was done to a
standard that (theoretically) imparted a shock load on the system, which
decided in which category the system fit. 3000 and 5000 lbs seems to

ring
a
bell here. Later TSO requirements of C23c allowed for 3 different
categories, cat B being the most common -- a drop testing of 300 lbs at
175kts, with placarding at 254lbs at 150 kts. TSO C23D allowed for more
categories with different weight/speed restrictions, which was great for

the
extra lighter or heavier user who may need different requirements.

Current
day standards call for a "full-stow" diaper on a round parachute, which
stages the parachute deployment, thus increasing the reliability of the
opening. Without a diaper the parachute is allowed to open before the

lines
become taut -- imagine the shock when the lines finally tighten up on a
parachute partially open already! In the days before the full stow

diaper,
the lines were unstowed from the pack tray, which allowed for the

potential
of arms and legs to get tangled up in the unstowing lines (especially

for
a
pilot making his first jump and not maintaining balance/stability on the
relative airflow). The full stow diaper carries all of the line stows

on
it, so the lines unstow from the top down, and once the parachute is out

of
the container the the lines are well out of the reach of an unstable

pilot.

The opening speeds here are very important, as the drag from the opening
parachute increases in square to the speed increase. My Pitts has a VNE

of
203mph/176kt, which could easily cause damage to a parachute rated at

only
150 kts. Higher speed parachute systems incorporate other staging

devices
to inhibit the opening of the parachute for a very short period of time
while the parachute and user slow down; all to reduce the opening shock

to
an acceptable level. Altitude above sea level plays a part here as

well,
as
parachutes tend to open faster/harder in thinner air (don't ask me why)

and
they land faster too. Landing a parachute may be a consideration here

as
well. While the cockpit may only have enough room for a 24' parachute,

the
200 pound user may find extensive lower leg and back injuries a real
possibility after a successful bailout, and our bones take longer to

heal
as
we get older....

I manufacture, repair, repack and sell all kinds of parachute equipment

for
my business. Good luck on picking the 'right' system for you and your
Pitts.

Al MacDonald
Flying High Manufacturing Inc.




"ShawnD2112" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Was hoping to get a bit of expertise here. I'm in the market for an
emergency bailout chute for flying in my Pitts S-1D. The top US

contenders
seem to be National and Softie but with no experience in the field,

and
parachutes not exactly being the kind of object you can try on for

size
in
the shop, I don't really know what to look for and what to avoid. I'd
appreciate any tips anyone out there could provide. Are there any

European
models that anyone has any experience with? Obviously comfort and

space
in
the cockpit are major considerations.

Thanks!
Shawn








  #34  
Old July 21st 04, 03:31 AM
Doug Carter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Al MacDonald" wrote in message news:[email protected]
Shawn, I forgot something very important!

Do NOT get in the habit of getting out of the plane without your
parachute on, as it could cultivate a very bad habit (and make you look
rather stupid in the obituary).


Freely admitting that I unbuckle my chute and leave it in the plane
(after landing...), are there any actual documented accounts of
someone unbuckling their chute *before* bailing out?
  #35  
Old July 21st 04, 06:13 PM
Al MacDonald
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Doug,

While I don't know of any actuals, I can tell you this. My father was the
CFI for a 104 squadron for several years. They all spent lots of time in
the sim, as it was cheaper to fly than the real thing. Each year they would
do a major ride, where things started going wrong. And more wrong, and more
wrong. At some point the pilot decided to abandon ship, and the hot seat
would not fire so he/she would have to get out manually. According to my
father, some 95% of the pilots would undo all of the straps and get out with
no parachute. I think this is partly because they were under a lot of
stress and somewhat rattled, plus they were practicing what they had done
for years every day..... undo everything and get out.

We all preplan and practice our emergency procedures so we don't have to
figure it out when under the gun, so it only seems logical that this be
carried through with the parachute too.

My $.02 ($.05 CDN) worth.

al.


"Doug Carter" wrote in message
om...
"Al MacDonald" wrote in message

news:[email protected]
Shawn, I forgot something very important!

Do NOT get in the habit of getting out of the plane without your
parachute on, as it could cultivate a very bad habit (and make you look
rather stupid in the obituary).


Freely admitting that I unbuckle my chute and leave it in the plane
(after landing...), are there any actual documented accounts of
someone unbuckling their chute *before* bailing out?



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.