![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 11, 10:24 am, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
I think pilots tend to poo poo safety innovations way to much. Anything that makes GA flying safer or at least the perception that GA flying is safer because of x, y or z is a plus. GA needs all the positive news it can get. I know that a parachute is no substitute for poor planning but an engine out right after takeoff in a no win situation or a midair or something similar a chute might be the only thing that will save your ass. An engine failure right after takeoff would likely leave too little altitude for the 'chute to do much good. Got to figure in your reflexes, too. A midair often tears the airplane to pieces and throws the occupants out. What good is a BRS there? Assuming the thing stays together enough, the 'chute itself might be damaged or the pilot incapacitated. Cirrus used it because they had to, to get the airplane certified. It has some nasty spin tendencies if the fuel load gets imbalanced or if the pilot is incompetent, and the 'chute is the only way to avoid drilling a big expensive hole in the ground. That's what I understand, anyway. Most accidents involve the same old avoidable factors. Engine failures are most commonly caused by carb ice (fuel injection removes that risk), then fuel starvation, then oil starvation, then catastrophic failure. The last two are WAY down the list. CFIT accidents involve flying into terrain that you didn't see or expect, often out of control because the pilot flew into weather he wasn't equipped for. The occasional developing CFIT might be avoided with a 'chute, but to use it the pilot is going to have to admit he screwed up and he might resist that. And, of course, a 'chute is useless in the rather common landing or takeoff accident where control is lost. It's like anti-skid brakes. People can't drive properly, can't be bothered or don't want to learn, and let the manufacturer convince them that the system is indispensable and will save your life. Except that it just breeds complacency and they drive more and more aggressively until they finally get the car into a situation that even the ABS can't save them from, and bang! another totally avoidable accident. A 'chute will instill a sense of security that might lead the pilot into stretching his fuel or poking the airplane into some clouds that might have granite in them. He'd be better off a little bit scared so that he doesn't do stupid things. See http://www.4vfr.com/?goto=view_artic...icle_key=29 6 Dan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ballistic Parachute Deployment Cessna 182 | [email protected] | Owning | 3 | March 17th 06 12:06 AM |
Recovery parachutes again! | Cub Driver | Piloting | 35 | July 8th 05 12:47 AM |
Ballistic parachutes - RVs | Ric | Home Built | 3 | September 19th 04 04:09 AM |
Ballistic parachutes with pushers | anonymous coward | Home Built | 18 | May 18th 04 11:28 PM |
Original Nasa Training Film being offered for sale! | Cameron | Military Aviation | 0 | October 29th 03 12:45 AM |