First-hand video of a BRS deployment.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Kev writes:

Never mind, I googled it myself, and here's a good summary from the
USAF:


What's the URL, and what else did they have to say about the problem?

I have asked you on a number of occasions to attribute statements
you have made to determine the context. Why do you have the temerity to ask
someone to cite a source and provide context when you have consistently
refused to do the same?

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Scott writes:

VORs? Who flies over VORs? GPS eliminated VOR in my vocabulary in 1993


Anyone who wants to stay safe in the air flies VORs periodically. I
practice
it regularly.

What will you do when GPS is jammed in your area?

--

NOTICE!!!!
Mxsmanic is NOT a pilot, has NEVER flown an aircraft and is NOT qualified to
issue competent information regarding any aspect of the operation of any
aircraft.

Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Casey Wilson writes:

I have asked you on a number of occasions to attribute statements
you have made to determine the context. Why do you have the temerity to ask
someone to cite a source and provide context when you have consistently
refused to do the same?

I was just curious about the rest of the report and I wanted to read it. Why
is this your concern?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 22:21:22 -0000, Jim Logajan
wrote:

I got the following link to this video via the Matronics Zenith e-mail
list. What's interesting and fascinating about it is that it contains video
from a cockpit camera that shows the impending mid-air collision and the
cockpit view when the aircraft hits the ground under the chute:

http://www.turbopilot.com/copa/image3/brs.wmv

I guess cockpit cameras are becoming common enough that this sort of video
would be inevitable.

(Not sure why the pilot didn't see the towing aircraft - unless it was
because the other plane was coming up from below to his right.)

I don't know what it is about that site, but my firewalls and blockers
will not accept it. At least one of them has it on the blocked list.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 23:28:38 -0000, Jim Logajan
wrote:

Jim Logajan wrote:
wrote:
Amazing video...

I just noticed that the pilot appears to have been following another
aircraft (white winged). At least that is the way it looks because the
white area moves relative to the ground at times.

Further followup with a bite more info:

Here's what appears to be the full cockpit video from collision to
touchdown:

They called it a "near collision. Unless the other video shows contact
this one does not. They appear to be about 30 to 50 feet apart.
Did they or did they not collice?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_JAg1ZedGo

This site I could get to with no problem.

My question is, "why pull the chute" if they didn't collide, I don't
see any reason for the chute excpet panic.


According to the comments, he was flying a Rans S6. Also, the CNN video was
also posted to YouTube, and based on the dates of those postings this
appears to have been reported back in December (around Christmas) of last
year.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"chris" wrote:
Aircraft can be incredibly hard to see, believe it or not.....

In this case, perhaps it is possible that the tow-plane was in a blind spot
where the Rans S-7 pilot couldn't see him? If one assumes a plane on a
collision course appears to hold roughly a steady bearing, then the tow-
plane would have been visible to the Rans pilot several degrees below the
horizontal (the tow-plane appeared to be climbing as it passed in front,
left to right) and somewhere off to the right - the cowling or camera(!)
blocking the view of the other plane. And then there is all the ground
clutter the pilot in the higher plane has to process to see anything lower
that also happens to be nearly stationary with respect to the scenery.

So (and this is all speculation of course!) it seems to me the tow-plane
pilot might possibly have had the better view to "see and avoid" - since
there were no less than two planes above his altitude that he was heading
toward.

On 10 Feb 2007 16:25:25 -0800, "Kev" wrote:

On Feb 10, 4:20 pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"Jim Carriere" wrote

Hmm! At first glance that conclusion seems counterintuitive, but I guess
you learn something new every day.

But leaving an event up to chance as the avoidance mechanism, is not
something that sits well with people. I have to feel that way, in that the
results of "winning" the odds are so dire.

Absolute agreement. To me, it's a good reason to be "heads up" when
flying over VORs, since they can really concentrate aircraft. Most
of us are spending more time on the gauges watching for the arrow to
change.

I see more aircraft close to VORs than any other place except in the
traffic pattern. When you are headed one way and opposing VFR traffic
is only 500 feet above or below if they are right on altitude they
look *CLOSE*. :-))

Still, maybe it's a non-issue, since we don't seem to hear of lots of
collisions around VORs. Seems like mid-airs are mostly around
airports. Anyone know the real stats of locations offhand?

I don't have any stats, but from what I remember in the news in recent
years "it seems" as if most mid airs are close to airport. OTOH there
are some outstanding exceptions such as the two jets last fall or
summer down in South America.

Thanks, Kev
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"Bart D. Hull" wrote:
Why pull the parachute?

Just speculating, but when he ran into the tow rope it definitely shook
the plane bad enough that it moved the camera around in its mount (or may
be that the pilot knocked the camera when he cutoff the engine).

It appears the prop cleared the tow rope and he didn't lose any
control surfaces, in fact it looked like he was gliding in control for
awhile before he pulled the 'chute. He even sounded like he shut down
the engine, that the engine didn't quit and it didn't sound too rough
like it was misbalanced.

First, the pilot (and reporter) said in the CNN report that the prop
struck the tow rope.

Secondly, consider the following:

In the "original" cockpit video (link quoted below), it sounds like the
BRS rocket is fired at about 11 seconds into the video and the plane hits
the ground at about 51 seconds into the video. Assuming nothing was cut
from the video, it took about 39 seconds to descend under the chute. The
BRS web site says descent rates are typically between 15 fps and 28 fps
at 5000 ft density altitude. That puts the altitude possibly somewhere in
the range of 600 to 1100 feet agl. The Rans web site lists the glide
ratio of the Rans S-6 at about 9:1. So the pilot would have had between 1
and 2 miles of best-glide distance to find a good landing spot. I don't
know what the best glide speed of the Rans S-6 is; I'll guesstimate 60
mph. That gives the pilot between 1 and 2 minutes of air time - absolute
max. Decision height for the BRS is around 300 feet.

Given the altitude, unknown condition of plane and insufficient time to
determine the extent of the damage, the decision to deploy the chute was,
in my very humble opinion, the correct one. It is just the sort of
situation that I believe ballistic chutes were originally designed for.

I always wondered if the availability of such a device made for more
accidents or less. It sure sounded like a rather solid landing!

He did walk away though.

I most definitely disagree - the parachute no more caused this accident
than the pilot's seatbelt did.

Solid landing perhaps, but as the CNN story mentioned, not only did the
pilot walk away, he was able to rebuild his plane - with of course a new
chute.

The end result appears no different than a typical successful emergency
landing where some damage occurs.


Bart D. Hull

Tempe, Arizona

Check http://www.inficad.com/~bdhull/engine.html
for my Subaru Engine Conversion
Check http://www.inficad.com/~bdhull/fuselage.html
for Tango II I'm building.

Remove -nospam to reply via email.

Jim Logajan wrote:
Jim Logajan wrote:
wrote:
Amazing video...
I just noticed that the pilot appears to have been following another
aircraft (white winged). At least that is the way it looks because
the white area moves relative to the ground at times.

Further followup with a bite more info:

Here's what appears to be the full cockpit video from collision to
touchdown:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_JAg1ZedGo

According to the comments, he was flying a Rans S6. Also, the CNN
video was also posted to YouTube, and based on the dates of those
postings this appears to have been reported back in December (around
Christmas) of last year.

Roger wrote:
I don't know what it is about that site, but my firewalls and blockers
will not accept it. At least one of them has it on the blocked list.

While checking BRS parachute descent rates, I discovered that BRS has
almost the same video on their web site (linked from their home page):

http://brsparachutes.com/Movies/CNN_OFF_AIR.wmv

("Roger" wrote)
I don't know what it is about that site, but my firewalls and blockers
will not accept it. At least one of them has it on the blocked list.


Try YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTemKnL8X30
Mid-air


Montblack