Emergency Exit

On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 7:00:07 PM UTC+1, Dave Walsh wrote:
At 16:13 29 June 2018, wrote:
On Wednesday, June 27, 2018 at 5:15:06 PM UTC+1, Dave
Walsh wrote:

Or, of course, you could just fly a DG with their NOAH
system? It seems a pity that more manufacturers do not
offer NOAH given the age of many pilots...
I had one in a DG808C and although I never had cause
to
use it I miss it.
Dave W

Were there any downsides to the NOAH system in day to
day use of the glider
- comfort, thickness of the inflatable bag, space for the gas
cylinder (I
presume there is a cylinder) etc?

John Galloway

No, no downsides to the system in daily use. There is one
extra cable to the pilots seat harness buckle; not really a
problem. There is also the "bag", un-inflated of course,
beneath the seat cushion, again no problem. In use this bag
is inflated by a gas bottle permanently fixed to the airframe
(in the DG it's behind the seat/oxygen bottle). The whole
system just requires the pilot to pull one handle.

There are of course maintenance and inspection costs, I
think the tank and the bag have a 10 year life?

In the unlikely event the pilot activates the system without
jettisoning the canopy the bag deflates. Plenty of detail and
videos on DG's website; just search NOAH.

The DG8800 designs have low cockpit walls. Some gliders
have significantly higher cockpit walls; I'd rate the rear seat
of a DuoDiscus as significantly more difficult to get out of
than a DG800; the front Duo seat is more difficult too.

For the older pilot I think NOAH might be a life saver.

Dave W

Obviously in the case of accidental activation it is good that the Noah airbag deflates rapidly but I I guess that means that if you do activate it in an emergency and for some reason you don't get out of the cockpit immediately then the benefit is lost. Unlikely I know.

At 18:17 29 June 2018, wrote:
On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 7:00:07 PM UTC+1, Dave
Walsh wrote:
At 16:13 29 June 2018, wrote:
On Wednesday, June 27, 2018 at 5:15:06 PM UTC+1,
Dave=20
Walsh wrote:

Or, of course, you could just fly a DG with their
NOAH=20
system? It seems a pity that more manufacturers do
not=20
offer NOAH given the age of many pilots...
I had one in a DG808C and although I never had
cause=20
to=20
use it I miss it.
Dave W

Were there any downsides to the NOAH system in day
to=20
day use of the glider
- comfort, thickness of the inflatable bag, space for the
gas=20
cylinder (I
presume there is a cylinder) etc?

John Galloway

No, no downsides to the system in daily use. There is
one=20
extra cable to the pilots seat harness buckle; not really
a=20
problem. There is also the "bag", un-inflated of
course,=20
beneath the seat cushion, again no problem. In use this
bag=20
is inflated by a gas bottle permanently fixed to the
airframe=20
(in the DG it's behind the seat/oxygen bottle). The
whole=20
system just requires the pilot to pull one handle.
=20
There are of course maintenance and inspection costs,
I=20
think the tank and the bag have a 10 year life?
=20
In the unlikely event the pilot activates the system
without=20
jettisoning the canopy the bag deflates. Plenty of detail
and=20
videos on DG's website; just search NOAH.
=20
The DG8800 designs have low cockpit walls. Some
gliders =20
have significantly higher cockpit walls; I'd rate the rear
seat=20
of a DuoDiscus as significantly more difficult to get out
of=20
than a DG800; the front Duo seat is more difficult too.
=20
For the older pilot I think NOAH might be a life saver.
=20
Dave W

Obviously in the case of accidental activation it is good that
the Noah
air=
bag deflates rapidly but I I guess that means that if you do
activate it
in=
an emergency and for some reason you don't get out of
the cockpit
immediat=
ely then the benefit is lost. Unlikely I know.

Look at the videos on DG's site: you'd be hard put to remain
in the cockpit when the bag inflates!
Dave W

On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 1:00:07 PM UTC-5, Dave Walsh wrote:
At 16:13 29 June 2018, wrote:
On Wednesday, June 27, 2018 at 5:15:06 PM UTC+1, Dave
Walsh wrote:

Or, of course, you could just fly a DG with their NOAH
system? It seems a pity that more manufacturers do not
offer NOAH given the age of many pilots...
I had one in a DG808C and although I never had cause
to
use it I miss it.
Dave W

Were there any downsides to the NOAH system in day to
day use of the glider
- comfort, thickness of the inflatable bag, space for the gas
cylinder (I
presume there is a cylinder) etc?

John Galloway

No, no downsides to the system in daily use. There is one
extra cable to the pilots seat harness buckle; not really a
problem. There is also the "bag", un-inflated of course,
beneath the seat cushion, again no problem. In use this bag
is inflated by a gas bottle permanently fixed to the airframe
(in the DG it's behind the seat/oxygen bottle). The whole
system just requires the pilot to pull one handle.

There are of course maintenance and inspection costs, I
think the tank and the bag have a 10 year life?

In the unlikely event the pilot activates the system without
jettisoning the canopy the bag deflates. Plenty of detail and
videos on DG's website; just search NOAH.

The DG8800 designs have low cockpit walls. Some gliders
have significantly higher cockpit walls; I'd rate the rear seat
of a DuoDiscus as significantly more difficult to get out of
than a DG800; the front Duo seat is more difficult too.

For the older pilot I think NOAH might be a life saver.

Dave W

Why not just install a ballistic recovery chute in the glider? That's a lot cleaner solution and saves your butt at a lot lower altitude than bailing out.

I believe there is also a cable to the canopy jettison lever, you can't "fire the NOAH" until it's armed by dumping the canopy.

Why not just install a ballistic recovery chute in the glider? That's a lot cleaner solution and saves your butt at a lot lower altitude than bailing out.

Because "just installing" a ballistic recovery chute for a particular airframe takes a very large amount of structural analysis, determination of proper attach points, modification of the fuselage for installation of the rocket extraction system, blow-off panels to allow for chute extraction, actuation cable routing, FAA approvals for certified aircraft or approvals from an IA to determine the feasibility and installation of a system that very few certified aircraft mechanics (IA or A&P) have any familiarity with. This also applies to sailplanes certified as Experimental.

It's not just strapping a pack to your glider. It is WAY more complex and has to be done right.

I started flying hang gliders with a Ballistic Recovery System (BRS) in 1993. I have had two systems from BRS Inc. and one gas propelled unit from (now defunct) Second Chantz. Never had to actually use either one, but I see the advantages for sailplanes. Unfortunately, the mechanics and complex design issues pretty much eliminate practical retrofits to existing airframes.

It is sad that sailplane manufacturers do not seem to be interested in providing the guidance and engineering to incorporate ballistic recovery systems in current designs.

The only glider I know of that has a factory installed BRS system is the TsT-14 Bonus, which operates in the US with a Desert Aerospace installed retractable jet engine capable of self launch and in-flight engine extension and startup. (www.desertaerospace.com)

There may be other sailplanes incorporating ballistic recovery systems, but I have no knowledge of them. If there are others, perhaps RAS participants can offer their input.

On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 9:27:10 PM UTC-5, wrote:
Why not just install a ballistic recovery chute in the glider? That's a lot cleaner solution and saves your butt at a lot lower altitude than bailing out.

Because "just installing" a ballistic recovery chute for a particular airframe takes a very large amount of structural analysis, determination of proper attach points, modification of the fuselage for installation of the rocket extraction system, blow-off panels to allow for chute extraction, actuation cable routing, FAA approvals for certified aircraft or approvals from an IA to determine the feasibility and installation of a system that very few certified aircraft mechanics (IA or A&P) have any familiarity with. This also applies to sailplanes certified as Experimental.

It's not just strapping a pack to your glider. It is WAY more complex and has to be done right.

I started flying hang gliders with a Ballistic Recovery System (BRS) in 1993. I have had two systems from BRS Inc. and one gas propelled unit from (now defunct) Second Chantz. Never had to actually use either one, but I see the advantages for sailplanes. Unfortunately, the mechanics and complex design issues pretty much eliminate practical retrofits to existing airframes..

It is sad that sailplane manufacturers do not seem to be interested in providing the guidance and engineering to incorporate ballistic recovery systems in current designs.

The only glider I know of that has a factory installed BRS system is the TsT-14 Bonus, which operates in the US with a Desert Aerospace installed retractable jet engine capable of self launch and in-flight engine extension and startup. (www.desertaerospace.com)

There may be other sailplanes incorporating ballistic recovery systems, but I have no knowledge of them. If there are others, perhaps RAS participants can offer their input.

I totally agree that retrofitting a BRS system in a glider is a major undertaking. I am baffled why someone like DG would be screwing around with cockpit extraction systems rather than making a BRS system available for their gliders.

One example of a manufacturer who has their act together is the Phoenix Motorglider. It comes standard with a BRS system.

Beacause floating around out of control under a parachute is safer?
BRS sounds good, but in practice I would prefer a personal chute every time.

Schempp-Hirth does offer a BRS for the Ventus.

On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 11:49:33 PM UTC-5, Charlie Quebec wrote:
Beacause floating around out of control under a parachute is safer?
BRS sounds good, but in practice I would prefer a personal chute every time.

If you are in a midair 500 ft above the ground, a BRS will save you. You'd never make it trying to bail out with a personal chute.

I have seen no data for the reliability of ballistic recovery
systems in sailplanes (or, indeed, in ULM/Microlights) but the
German data for survivability of conventional parachute bail-
outs from gliders makes very sobering reading.
I'd be very surprised if ballistic recovery chutes didn't turn out
to have a better record than conventional parachutes.
A majority of ULM/Microlights here in France have ballistic
recovery systems; you don't here of malfunctions very often,
but again I have no data.
I know three glider pilots who have had mid-airs, all three
bailed out, only one is still alive.
Dave W