BD-5 crash in Australia

http://www.thewest.com.au/default.as...ontentID=29246

After checking the pics of how he was extricated I think we can explain
the "spinal injuries."

George

On Mon, 21 May 2007 11:08:29 GMT, George wrote:

After checking the pics of how he was extricated I think we can explain
the "spinal injuries."

George

wrong call. they were from the impact.
I spoke to him tonight in hospital.
Stealth Pilot

Stealth Pilot wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007 11:08:29 GMT, George wrote:

After checking the pics of how he was extricated I think we can explain
the "spinal injuries."

George

wrong call. they were from the impact.
I spoke to him tonight in hospital.
Stealth Pilot

That was meant to be "tongue in cheek" I just forgot the smiley.

Hope he recovers quickly.

George

On Mon, 21 May 2007 12:50:49 GMT, George wrote:

Stealth Pilot wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007 11:08:29 GMT, George wrote:

After checking the pics of how he was extricated I think we can explain
the "spinal injuries."

George

wrong call. they were from the impact.
I spoke to him tonight in hospital.
Stealth Pilot

That was meant to be "tongue in cheek" I just forgot the smiley.

Hope he recovers quickly.

George

he is in amazingly good spirits.
burns arent too bad externally.
lung damage a problem.
spinal injuries likely to have permanent effect unfortunately.

amazingly he says that that is the only time in his entire life he has
seen a fire extinguisher actually extinguish a fire.

Stealth Pilot

"the only time an aircraft can have too much fuel is when the
*******'s on fire" Sir Charles Kingsford Smith.

"George" wrote in message
t...
After the pics of how he was extricated I think we can explain the "spinal
injuries."

George

And exactly how would you have extracted him the small cockpit of a burning
BD-5? Jaws of death after the fire was out? Wait for a hoist?

My guess is that the "spinal injuries" occured on impact. The BD-5's
cockpit design offers little to no pilot protection.

"Stealth Pilot" wrote

wrong call. they were from the impact.
I spoke to him tonight in hospital.


The quick extraction may not have been good for a traumatized spine, but
sometimes there is no choice in the matter.

What engine did it have? Any other pertinent details on the engine failure,
if that was the cause?
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:
"Stealth Pilot" wrote

wrong call. they were from the impact.
I spoke to him tonight in hospital.


The quick extraction may not have been good for a traumatized spine, but
sometimes there is no choice in the matter.

What engine did it have? Any other pertinent details on the engine failure,
if that was the cause?

The quickness of the extraction was not what I noted, that was
understandable with one of the rescuers standing in flames (see the
photos) and noted in the text that some of the rescuers were injured
(burned) in the attempt.

What I noticed was what appeared to be a "twisting, angular" form of
extraction (pulled over to one side). From my time as an Army combat
medic and a qualified rescue diver I know this is not an ideal manner of
removal. Sometimes in the stress of an emergency removal such methods
are used but often tissue damage is the result. The gain/loss potential
must be considered, but never overlooked.

Ymmv

George

On May 21, 8:12 am, "Wayne Paul" wrote:
"George" wrote in message

t...

After the pics of how he was extricated I think we can explain the "spinal
injuries."

George

And exactly how would you have extracted him the small cockpit of a burning
BD-5? Jaws of death after the fire was out? Wait for a hoist?

My guess is that the "spinal injuries" occured on impact. The BD-5's
cockpit design offers little to no pilot protection.

Jim Bede openly felt that was unnecessary because most BD-5s would
never fly or if they did would either only fly a few hours and be
junked when the owner died or would crash so badly it would make
little difference how he built it.

I don't think Richard Van Grunsven puts a lot of crashworthiness
effort in the RVs, either. They do fly better than Bede designs
though.

Earlier, RapidRonnie wrote:

Jim Bede openly felt that was unnecessary because most
BD-5s would never fly or if they did would either only fly a few
hours and be junked when the owner died or would crash so
badly it would make little difference how he built it.

If Bede was "Open" about that, you should have no trouble providing a
cite for that assertion. Please do so.

Thanks, Bob K.