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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Eric Greenwell wrote: Dave Houlton wrote: This parachute discussion has me thinking about the rocket-deployed chutes we used to have for hang gliding, and the BRS systems now in Cirrus (Cirrii?) and small Cessnas. Probably no improvement w.r.t weight or cost considerations, but for convenience, comfort, and "always there when you need it" they would seem ideal. I don't actually know the repack requirements, but I would guess they're annually or even longer. Are there any gliders out there today with whole-ship BRS-type chutes? Some of the Russia AC-4 gliders in the US are equipped with them, and the SparrowHawk has it available as a $2200 option. At least one SparrowHawk has it installed. Neither the Russia nor the SparrowHawk people have tested the BRS in a glider yet. From reading the saves on http://brsparachutes.com/PI_saves.mgi I'd say glider construction is so well done compared to some ultralights that we are unlikely to see a glider use for some time... |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Ian MacArthur wrote: Just wondering... Do Americans wear parachutes whilst flying in competitions? I believe the chutes aren't just worn in competitions (regional and national), but they are required for sanction of the contest. Is this true? I don't have references... |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Daniels wrote:
Eric Greenwell wrote My understanding is the "whole glider" German rescue systems will lower the glider nose down at about 40 degrees or so. If it is more level, it is likely to oscillate wildly so much the descent and impact can't be controlled. So, the landing gear is irrelevant, but the cockpit structure is extremely important. The nose must absorb the "landing". A Nimbus 2 might be a poor candidate for installing a system that won't be tested, except when you really need it. Your safety might be better served by selling the Nimbus and buying newer glider with a more crash tolerant cockpit. At least in the US, crashing while landing (meaning the last 100' of altitude) still claims more pilots than unsuccessful bailouts. To summarize the thread so far: The BRS requires a reinforced cockpit to absorb the non-trivial landing impact forces. Most accidents involve premature termination of tow or landing errors where a BRS 'chute wouldn't help anyway. Or perhaps, mid-air collisions at an altitude where a personal 'chute is the equal for a BRS for survivability. A BRS is likely to require non-trivial pilot training and discipline in its operation and maintenance. Injuries should be expected with the used of either personal or BRS 'chutes. On the other hand, taking the 'chute off the back of the pilot and putting it on the glider adds significantly to ergonomics and comfort. The BRS can be deployed at low altitudes where a pilot with a personal 'chute is unlikely to make a successful egress. This altitude band favoring a BRS probably expands where the pilot is old or infirm. Maybe it's something to think about on a new glider but retrofitting an older glider is problematical. A BRS is perhaps a useful option but not a panacea. I remain skeptical but open to ideas. I think that's a good summary. For me, it's not possible because I have a motor glider. That also excludes about half the German production. I don't think the on-ground safety aspects are difficult - remember, these units have been used successfully (BRS lists 159 saves so far) in ultralight aircraft for many years and they have systems for the Cessna 150, 172, 180, and Cirrus, so it's not like the basic system is new. -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill Daniels" wrote in message ...
OK, crank these numbers. Consider my Nimbus 2C (Experimental, so I could install a BRS) at 650 Kilos with water (which takes 5 minutes to dump). The gear strut will give 30mm on impact and the tire will give 50mm more. The cockpit shell is just fiberglass with no crush structure. I pop a BRS at 300 meters AGL with the surface wind at 15 knots. What are my chances? Give BRS weights, 'chute diameters and descent rates. Bill Daniels Hi, Bill. Please don't take what follows in any sort of argumentitive way. I've played out the scenario you describe in making my decision to buy the BRS. As I reread it, it sounds harsh, but it certainly isn't meant harshly...just heart-felt. Thanks for taking it in the spirit it is intended...Dave answered the primary question you had...a 15 knot collision with the earth is gonna hurt for sure. However let's put you in your Nimbus, busted...at around 980 feet, plummeting earthward at...oh, let's just say...80 mph. You need to pull your ripcord at a minimum of, what, 350 feet? That would be borderline...I'd rather try it at 500 feet. Ok, you have (117 fps down) 3-4 seconds to open (jettison) your canopy, unfasten your belts and get out of and away from your glider and pull the ripcord. Pretty much half the amount of time it took to read that last sentence out loud. Do you really think you can? Add the g-forces associated with any significant damage and just making the decision...If you can, you are a better man than I. Put me in the same position in my BRS equipped glider...I need to reach over my right shoulder and pull...much the same move as your first move to jettison the canopy...but in a different direction, of course :-). I am now under canopy. I am hanging nose down (I figure around 45 degrees or so) I've got (around 22 fps down) 20 seconds (assuming I wind up under canopy at 500 feet) to get my landing gear down, tighten my straps, brace and take the impact. The glider hits nose first (with an impact which is a significant fraction of the total force...let's call it 75% of the force...so about what I would get by running into a brick wall at 12 mph), and the rest of the force is dissipated by the glider rotating down to the landing gear...one would expect that it would take the rest with minimum loading on my body. I'm hurting but alive, most likely. You're dead, most likely. God forbid either one of us explore this scenario...but I prefer my chances over the non-BRS equipped glider. Jim |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Are there any gliders out there today with whole-ship BRS-type chutes? Every SparrowHawk built has been fitted with a BRS. Every customer has selected this option so far. We expect this to continue. Number 10 will fly in a couple of weeks and will have a BRS. Regards Greg Cole |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Here is a link that shows Jim's HP-16 BRS installation.
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder/HP...S_in_HP-16.htm The HP-16's stub box spar across the fuselage is ideal for a BRS application. Wayne http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder "Jim Harper" wrote in message om... "Bill Daniels" wrote in message ... OK, crank these numbers. Consider my Nimbus 2C (Experimental, so I could install a BRS) at 650 Kilos with water (which takes 5 minutes to dump). The gear strut will give 30mm on impact and the tire will give 50mm more. The cockpit shell is just fiberglass with no crush structure. I pop a BRS at 300 meters AGL with the surface wind at 15 knots. What are my chances? Give BRS weights, 'chute diameters and descent rates. Bill Daniels Hi, Bill. Please don't take what follows in any sort of argumentitive way. I've played out the scenario you describe in making my decision to buy the BRS. As I reread it, it sounds harsh, but it certainly isn't meant harshly...just heart-felt. Thanks for taking it in the spirit it is intended...Dave answered the primary question you had...a 15 knot collision with the earth is gonna hurt for sure. However let's put you in your Nimbus, busted...at around 980 feet, plummeting earthward at...oh, let's just say...80 mph. You need to pull your ripcord at a minimum of, what, 350 feet? That would be borderline...I'd rather try it at 500 feet. Ok, you have (117 fps down) 3-4 seconds to open (jettison) your canopy, unfasten your belts and get out of and away from your glider and pull the ripcord. Pretty much half the amount of time it took to read that last sentence out loud. Do you really think you can? Add the g-forces associated with any significant damage and just making the decision...If you can, you are a better man than I. Put me in the same position in my BRS equipped glider...I need to reach over my right shoulder and pull...much the same move as your first move to jettison the canopy...but in a different direction, of course :-). I am now under canopy. I am hanging nose down (I figure around 45 degrees or so) I've got (around 22 fps down) 20 seconds (assuming I wind up under canopy at 500 feet) to get my landing gear down, tighten my straps, brace and take the impact. The glider hits nose first (with an impact which is a significant fraction of the total force...let's call it 75% of the force...so about what I would get by running into a brick wall at 12 mph), and the rest of the force is dissipated by the glider rotating down to the landing gear...one would expect that it would take the rest with minimum loading on my body. I'm hurting but alive, most likely. You're dead, most likely. God forbid either one of us explore this scenario...but I prefer my chances over the non-BRS equipped glider. Jim |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
GMC wrote: Are there any gliders out there today with whole-ship BRS-type chutes? Every SparrowHawk built has been fitted with a BRS. Every customer has selected this option so far. We expect this to continue. Number 10 will fly in a couple of weeks and will have a BRS. Regards Greg Cole Greg Cole! bows down again and again, "we are not worthy" chanted...etc :- Outstanding! It seems to make a TON of sense both from the customer AND manufacturer perspective. I don't want to take up to much of your time (you SHOULD be in the shop building a twin-jet Sparrowhawk . But did you use the 8" or 7" diameter systems? And how did the weight and balance work out? Is it true you get a weight increase on the "ultralight" definition from using a BRS? Older FAA docs seemed to indicate this weight increase was only for "powered" ultralights. Is the weight increase 24 pounds, or what? Great stuff. I hope you sell two dozen more Sparrowhawks this year. I can't wait to touch one in person... |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Dave
Your post struct a note with me. My son is 8 years old and is desperate to 'go gliding with dad'. I have considered buying a Caproni or Silene ( both side by side two seaters) to ensure that I could get him out with me and I have investigated static line triggered chutes ( throw him out knowing it would deploy ) but I realised whilst reading your post that it has never crossed my mind to fly without 'chutes. Thinking about it now I might consider it just for a flip on a quite day with little other traffic but I simply couldn't do it on a regular basis. Personally I think the BRS is a good idea. Ian "Dave Houlton" wrote in message ... It does help - thanks, Jim! I'm flying club gliders now, but I expect I'll eventually be an owner - and based on this discussion I'll quite likely opt for an experimental. It just makes sense to me that if you're trying to leave yourself an out for when things go Really Bad, you want that out to be usable in as many phases of flight as possible - including low on tow or in the pattern. BRS seems like the only game in town in those situations. I never put on a chute at all during training (including full-turn spins, of course), but I started thinking more about it this fall when I took my 8-yr-old son for his first glider ride. Along the lines of "I should grab us some parachutes. But I'm not confident he'd be able to get out and deploy, and I'm obviously not leaving without him... Anyway, this is just a pattern tow and a sled ride - we'll never be high enough to use them anyway." Perfectly reasoned but not very reassuring. Dave Houlton |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
just out of interest, how many of those of us who wear
chutes, use a deployment line attached to that odd looking ring usually found by your left shoulder? |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
On 12 Feb 2004 08:10:23 GMT, Pete Zeugma
wrote: just out of interest, how many of those of us who wear chutes, use a deployment line attached to that odd looking ring usually found by your left shoulder? Once. In an ASK-23 at the Wasserkuppe: I believe a 5 m static line is mandated for German club gliders. Before you ask, I did remember to take the chute off before walking away from the cockpit. -- martin@ : Martin Gregorie gregorie : Harlow, UK demon : co : Zappa fan & glider pilot uk : |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Parachute fails to save SR-22 | Capt.Doug | Piloting | 72 | February 10th 05 05:14 AM |
Puchaz spin count 23 and counting | henell | Soaring | 116 | February 20th 04 12:35 AM |
Cessna 150 Price Outlook | Charles Talleyrand | Owning | 80 | October 16th 03 02:18 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |