![]() |
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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Further to the question of whether there are "decleration devices" that would enable a crippled aircraft to land safely, this evidently is breaking news: Parachute saves light plane's passengers VANCOUVER/ CKNW (AM980) -- Four people are alive today thanks to a relatively new parachute system for light planes. Captain Johann Duce of Victoria Search and Rescue says their plane went down Thursday evening, just west of Lower Arrow Lake in the West Kootenay, during a flight from Kelowna to Lethbridge, Alberta. Duce says rescuers feared the worst, but the aircraft had a "BRS recovery system" - which is a parachute that can be manually activated by the pilot that shoots out the top of the aircraft, lowering the aircraft to the ground. He notes it's not a gentle descent - it's about 30-kilometres an hour as it comes down. But Duce says that speed is still survivable. He says the four people aboard the plane were uninjured. A Cormorant rescue helicopter from CFB Comox picked up the four and took them back to Kelowna. (from www.cknw.com) all the best -- Dan Ford email: (put Cubdriver in subject line) The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com Viva Bush! blog www.vivabush.org |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the input, Dan. Our disucssion has been whether and how something
like the BRS could be made to work for a large airliner, Problems would include velocity, attitude, structual integrity, touchdown (to whit, bad experieces in F-111/B-1A capsule touchdowns) and pilot vs automatically actuated. Parachute saves light plane's passengers VANCOUVER/ CKNW (AM980) -- Four people are alive today thanks to a relatively new parachute system for light planes. Captain Johann Duce of Victoria Search and Rescue says their plane went down Thursday evening, just west of Lower Arrow Lake in the West Kootenay, during a flight from Kelowna to Lethbridge, Alberta. Duce says rescuers feared the worst, but the aircraft had a "BRS recovery system" - which is a parachute that can be manually activated by the pilot that shoots out the top of the aircraft, lowering the aircraft to the ground. He notes it's not a gentle descent - it's about 30-kilometres an hour as it comes down. But Duce says that speed is still survivable. He says the four people aboard the plane were uninjured. A Cormorant rescue helicopter from CFB Comox picked up the four and took them back to Kelowna. (from www.cknw.com) all the best -- Dan Ford email: (put |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Problems would include velocity, attitude,
structual integrity, touchdown (to whit, bad experieces in F-111/B-1A capsule touchdowns) and pilot vs automatically actuated. The USAF has documented one case of the F-111 escape capsule impact attenuation bag failing to deploy after ejection. The crew ejected successfully on October 8, 1982, however as noted, the impact attenuation bags did not deploy and the the pilot (and Wing Commander) suffered an injured spinal cord. The weapons system officer was not injured. During my tenure in the F-111, I personally knew several colleagues who had ejected. Each and all of them walked away from the capsule after it landed. The F-111 escape capsule system has the second best "in the envelope" success rate after the ACES II system. Either the pilot or the weapons system officer could initiate ejection. No automatic actuation system existed. Kurt Todoroff Markets, not mandates and mob rule. Consent, not compulsion. Remove "DELETEME" from my address to reply |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Any F-11 maintainers here? It has been my understanding that the egress sysrem
on the plane and its 600+ pryotechnics charges were major maintenance headaches. I seem to recall a couple of fatal capsule ejections in SEA but I don't recall the causes. Problems would include velocity, attitude, structual integrity, touchdown (to whit, bad experieces in F-111/B-1A capsule touchdowns) and pilot vs automatically actuated. The USAF has documented one case of the F-111 escape capsule impact attenuation bag failing to deploy after ejection. The crew ejected successfully on October 8, 1982, however as noted, the impact attenuation bags did not deploy and the the pilot (and Wing Commander) suffered an injured spinal cord. The weapons system officer was not injured. During my tenure in the F-111, I personally knew several colleagues who had ejected. Each and all of them walked away from the capsule after it landed. The F-111 escape capsule system has the second best "in the envelope" success rate after the ACES II system. Either the pilot or the weapons system officer could initiate ejection. No automatic actuation system existed. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chad Irby wrote in message m...
In article , (SteveM8597) wrote: Thanks for the input, Dan. Our disucssion has been whether and how something like the BRS could be made to work for a large airliner, Screw the airplane. Give me a Martin-Baker seat. I really appreciated the one I used. Walt BJ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Any F-11 maintainers here? It has been my understanding that the egress
sysrem on the plane and its 600+ pryotechnics charges were major maintenance headaches. Far from a major maintenance headache, the components that you refer to were static items that didn't wear out any more than the capsule's, or any other ejection system's, rocket motor. I'm not sure what information led you to this understanding. Can you cite some sources? Kurt Todoroff Markets, not mandates and mob rule. Consent, not compulsion. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Any F-111 maintainers here? It has been my understanding that the egress
sysrem on the plane and its 600+ pryotechnics charges were major maintenance headaches. Far from a major maintenance headache, the components that you refer to were static items that didn't wear out any more than the capsule's, or any other ejection system's, rocket motor. I'm not sure what information led you to this understanding. Can you cite some sources? Sure. I was an F-4 maintenance officer at RAF Lakenheath UK in the 70s until the F-111Fs repalced the F-4Ds. We (the Lakenheath maintenenace staff) had numerous dialogs with the F-111E (IIRC) guys at Upper Heyford not far away. They showed us the major system maintenance manhour drives and the capsule pyros were right near the top. All the pyros were time change items and many required pulling a lot of hardware to access and change. Not a problem on a low hour plane but as the plane accumulated hours the time change requirements increased. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "SteveM8597" wrote in message ... Any F-111 maintainers here? It has been my understanding that the egress sysrem on the plane and its 600+ pryotechnics charges were major maintenance headaches. Far from a major maintenance headache, the components that you refer to were static items that didn't wear out any more than the capsule's, or any other ejection system's, rocket motor. I'm not sure what information led you to this understanding. Can you cite some sources? Sure. I was an F-4 maintenance officer at RAF Lakenheath UK in the 70s until the F-111Fs repalced the F-4Ds. We (the Lakenheath maintenenace staff) had numerous dialogs with the F-111E (IIRC) guys at Upper Heyford not far away. They showed us the major system maintenance manhour drives and the capsule pyros were right near the top. All the pyros were time change items and many required pulling a lot of hardware to access and change. Not a problem on a low hour plane but as the plane accumulated hours the time change requirements increased. Presumably in modern aircraft with digital data buses most of the wiring harnesses would be replaced by the bus thus substantially reducing the number of charges. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Here's more on the plane that "bailed out" the other day, from Aero-News email newsletter this morning: ************************************************** ****************** "Minutes after departure, I started experiencing instrument failures, one after another. No warning. No smoke. No clues. Just gauges going out one after another." As the first gauge failed, Jeff told Center he wanted to turn back. Center immediately gave him vectors for the return, but thereafter the perceived succession of failures made the turn-around seem fairly iffy. Ippoliti was stunned. Not only were gauges failing, but they were failing in systems that didn't appear to be related. In a matter of seconds, just hundreds of feet from the ground and untold obstacles obscured by IMC, he really didn't know what to trust. This couldn't be good. With an unknown number of hazards looming, he informed ATC that he was clearly in trouble. And after some initial hope of heading back, the SR22 pilot realized that turning back to the airport was something he wasn't sure he could do with his gauges continuing to fail in "rapid succession." "I told center I couldn't turn back... that I was going to pull the chute." Jeff then told ANN that one of the few responses he remembered from that moment on was center responding, "you're going to pull what?" From there, Ippoliti's activities were quick and assured. "I'd thought about this... but I never expected to have to do it." Jeff pulled the power back, killed the engine and reached up for the BRS CAPS handle... and pulled. Despite all his trepidation, Jeff noted that the pull went well, "No problem with that, it pulled easily." BANG! The chute OPENED. Ippoliti then described feeling a little 'G' as the plane slowed, swung around a bit, and then things calmed down remarkably fast. "From there it was almost a non-event. The ELT went off right away and prevented me from understanding Center because it was so loud, and the pilot door came off as the chute fired... but the ride down lasted only seconds as I came down on some trees and just... stopped." Ippoliti was alive and had landed in a local park. The aircraft was not only intact, but surprisingly suffered limited damage... "a lot less than what might have been," he noted. He doesn't have much to say about the landing impact, as the trees apparently absorbed most of the energy, and turned history's third emergency CAPS landing into a "relative non-event." all the best -- Dan Ford email: (put Cubdriver in subject line) The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com Viva Bush! blog www.vivabush.org |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 40 | October 3rd 08 03:13 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | October 1st 04 02:31 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | September 2nd 04 05:15 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | May 1st 04 07:29 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | April 5th 04 03:04 PM |