A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Emergency Exit



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old June 30th 18, 01:53 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tim Newport-Peace[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Emergency Exit

At 05:32 30 June 2018, Mike Schumann wrote:
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.

A Personal Chute assumes you are still a going concern. A friend of mine
was hit by a piece of wreckage as he left the aircraft. Had he had a BRS he
would still be with us.


  #22  
Old June 30th 18, 02:33 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 394
Default Emergency Exit

The Genesis-2 was designed for a BRS system, but production was stopped before testing was done. I have installed 36' BRS (1050) systems in a couple of G-2's. Several years back, I came close to a mid-air in the pattern..............I believe a BRS would have offered my only chance of surviving that day, had we hit. Having the little red handle available, gives me a great sense of confidence! At 84, I can hardly climb out of the cockpit, no way wearing a parachute! Add G forces that would be present in a hard-over rudder situation...........? BRS claims their system will work as low as 350'.
Wishing everyone, happy landings,
JJ
  #23  
Old June 30th 18, 02:50 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,383
Default Emergency Exit

Part of why some (me included) feel a static line is good. If you hit the tail after getting out, you may be unconscious (similar to your ship hitting the bottom of another, etc.).

Yes, you may get tangled in the line and it slows/prevents chute deployment.

I believe ours is usually 20' or so, enough to clear the tail. It is in a small coil (enough slack from cabin mount to rip cord of maybe 4') with a single wrap of electrical tape to maintain the coil until needed.
  #24  
Old June 30th 18, 03:33 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default Emergency Exit

To me the major advantages of a BRS over a personal parachute are the
speed and certainty of deployment.Â* Of course either system may fail or
malfunction, but with the BRS, you lose the difficulty of getting out
into space and deploying at in unfavorable position. Simply pull the
handle and enjoy the ride.

But, upon landing in a windy situation, you run the very real risk of
being killed in a tumbling, disintegrating wreck being dragged along the
ground.Â* Is there a jettison capability that could be armed by the
sudden deceleration of landing?Â* Perhaps an automatic jettison?Â* Might
that malfunction at 500' and give you a last thrilling ride?

On 6/29/2018 10:49 PM, 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.


--
Dan, 5J
  #25  
Old June 30th 18, 06:50 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 374
Default Emergency Exit

On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 3:33:11 PM UTC+1, Dan Marotta wrote:
To me the major advantages of a BRS over a personal parachute are the
speed and certainty of deployment.Â* Of course either system may fail or
malfunction, but with the BRS, you lose the difficulty of getting out
into space and deploying at in unfavorable position. Simply pull the
handle and enjoy the ride.

But, upon landing in a windy situation, you run the very real risk of
being killed in a tumbling, disintegrating wreck being dragged along the
ground.Â* Is there a jettison capability that could be armed by the
sudden deceleration of landing?Â* Perhaps an automatic jettison?Â* Might
that malfunction at 500' and give you a last thrilling ride?

On 6/29/2018 10:49 PM, 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.


--
Dan, 5J


For several glider types its a choice between an engine or a BRS chute (or neither!)
  #26  
Old June 30th 18, 07:12 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Paul Agnew
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 306
Default Emergency Exit

I'm curious about BRS system deployed when the aircraft/glider is spinning. Structural failures or loss of flight controls/wings in a midair could lead to an unrecoverable spin. Would it be better to eject or to hope the BRS won't get tangled by virtue of the rocket pulling the canopy clear of the spinning airframe. I must assume the manufacturers have already considered this.

https://youtu.be/OOl7Zg4Dyi4 Low deployment in a light sport aircraft on a test flight. (Why no emergency parachute for the test pilot?)

Paul A.

  #27  
Old June 30th 18, 07:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dave Walsh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 83
Default Emergency Exit

At 14:33 30 June 2018, Dan Marotta wrote:
To me the major advantages of a BRS over a personal

parachute are the
speed and certainty of deployment.Â* Of course either

system may fail or
malfunction, but with the BRS, you lose the difficulty of

getting out
into space and deploying at in unfavorable position. Simply

pull the
handle and enjoy the ride.

But, upon landing in a windy situation, you run the very

real risk of
being killed in a tumbling, disintegrating wreck being

dragged along the
ground.Â* Is there a jettison capability that could be armed

by the
sudden deceleration of landing?Â* Perhaps an automatic

jettison?Â* Might
that malfunction at 500' and give you a last thrilling ride?

On 6/29/2018 10:49 PM, 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.

--
Dan, 5J

Of course you could be struck by lightening as you descend
under your BRS canopy but has anyone ever died being
"dragged along the ground" after a successful BRS escape?
Plenty have died following a conventional parachute mal-
function.
The bottom line is that BRS will work at a lower height but is
hardly available in any common sailplane on sale today.
Retro fitting a BRS to an EASA sailplane would be a
expensive, possibly impossible, task. With ultra-light
sailplanes it's different.
The other major problem, as clearly explained on DG's
website, is that "safety does not sell sailplanes". The
majority of DG sailplanes sold were NOT equipped with the
NOAH system: the new buyers simply did not order the
NOAH system. Even if BRS was available today how many
buyers would buy it?
Dave W

  #28  
Old June 30th 18, 08:04 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Mike Schumann[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 177
Default Emergency Exit

On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 1:45:05 PM UTC-5, Dave Walsh wrote:
At 14:33 30 June 2018, Dan Marotta wrote:
To me the major advantages of a BRS over a personal

parachute are the
speed and certainty of deployment.Â* Of course either

system may fail or
malfunction, but with the BRS, you lose the difficulty of

getting out
into space and deploying at in unfavorable position. Simply

pull the
handle and enjoy the ride.

But, upon landing in a windy situation, you run the very

real risk of
being killed in a tumbling, disintegrating wreck being

dragged along the
ground.Â* Is there a jettison capability that could be armed

by the
sudden deceleration of landing?Â* Perhaps an automatic

jettison?Â* Might
that malfunction at 500' and give you a last thrilling ride?

On 6/29/2018 10:49 PM, 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.

--
Dan, 5J

Of course you could be struck by lightening as you descend
under your BRS canopy but has anyone ever died being
"dragged along the ground" after a successful BRS escape?
Plenty have died following a conventional parachute mal-
function.
The bottom line is that BRS will work at a lower height but is
hardly available in any common sailplane on sale today.
Retro fitting a BRS to an EASA sailplane would be a
expensive, possibly impossible, task. With ultra-light
sailplanes it's different.
The other major problem, as clearly explained on DG's
website, is that "safety does not sell sailplanes". The
majority of DG sailplanes sold were NOT equipped with the
NOAH system: the new buyers simply did not order the
NOAH system. Even if BRS was available today how many
buyers would buy it?
Dave W


If a BRS system were available factory installed at a reasonable price, I suspect that a very large percentage of buyers would sign up. It's a huge selling point if you are trying to get the OK from your spouse to upgrade to a new glider.

Offering a BRS system standard on all of their airplanes is probably the #1 reason that Cirrus is now the largest piston engine aircraft manufacturer in the world.
  #29  
Old July 1st 18, 09:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dave Walsh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 83
Default Emergency Exit

At 19:04 30 June 2018, Mike Schumann wrote:
On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 1:45:05 PM UTC-5, Dave

Walsh wrote:
At 14:33 30 June 2018, Dan Marotta wrote:
To me the major advantages of a BRS over a

personal=20
parachute are the=20
speed and certainty of deployment.=C2=A0 Of course

either=20
system may fail or=20
malfunction, but with the BRS, you lose the difficulty

of=20
getting out=20
into space and deploying at in unfavorable position.

Simply=20
pull the=20
handle and enjoy the ride.

But, upon landing in a windy situation, you run the

very=20
real risk of=20
being killed in a tumbling, disintegrating wreck

being=20
dragged along the=20
ground.=C2=A0 Is there a jettison capability that could

be armed=20
by the=20
sudden deceleration of landing?=C2=A0 Perhaps an

automatic=20
jettison?=C2=A0 Might=20
that malfunction at 500' and give you a last thrilling

ride?

On 6/29/2018 10:49 PM, Charlie Quebec wrote:
Beacause floating around out of control under a=20

parachute is safer?
BRS sounds good, but in practice I would prefer

a=20
personal chute every
time.

--=20
Dan, 5J

Of course you could be struck by lightening as you

descend=20
under your BRS canopy but has anyone ever died

being=20
"dragged along the ground" after a successful BRS

escape?
Plenty have died following a conventional parachute mal-
function.
The bottom line is that BRS will work at a lower height

but is=20
hardly available in any common sailplane on sale today.
Retro fitting a BRS to an EASA sailplane would be a=20
expensive, possibly impossible, task. With ultra-light=20
sailplanes it's different.
The other major problem, as clearly explained on

DG's=20
website, is that "safety does not sell sailplanes". The=20
majority of DG sailplanes sold were NOT equipped with

the=20
NOAH system: the new buyers simply did not order

the=20
NOAH system. Even if BRS was available today how

many=20
buyers would buy it?
Dave W


If a BRS system were available factory installed at a

reasonable price, I
s=
uspect that a very large percentage of buyers would sign

up. It's a huge
s=
elling point if you are trying to get the OK from your

spouse to upgrade
to=
a new glider. =20

Offering a BRS system standard on all of their airplanes is

probably the
#1=
reason that Cirrus is now the largest piston engine aircraft

manufacturer
=
in the world.


Yes you're probably quite right about the Cirrus BUT in a
Cirrus you might well have wife and kids along for the ride.
The fact remains that the majority of DG customers do not
specify the NOAH system; it's actually relatively cheap
compared to the new cost of a DG808C or DG1000x. Why is
that?
Dave W


  #30  
Old July 1st 18, 10:22 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Mike Schumann[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 177
Default Emergency Exit

On Sunday, July 1, 2018 at 4:00:18 PM UTC-5, Dave Walsh wrote:
At 19:04 30 June 2018, Mike Schumann wrote:
On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 1:45:05 PM UTC-5, Dave

Walsh wrote:
At 14:33 30 June 2018, Dan Marotta wrote:
To me the major advantages of a BRS over a

personal=20
parachute are the=20
speed and certainty of deployment.=C2=A0 Of course

either=20
system may fail or=20
malfunction, but with the BRS, you lose the difficulty

of=20
getting out=20
into space and deploying at in unfavorable position.

Simply=20
pull the=20
handle and enjoy the ride.

But, upon landing in a windy situation, you run the

very=20
real risk of=20
being killed in a tumbling, disintegrating wreck

being=20
dragged along the=20
ground.=C2=A0 Is there a jettison capability that could

be armed=20
by the=20
sudden deceleration of landing?=C2=A0 Perhaps an

automatic=20
jettison?=C2=A0 Might=20
that malfunction at 500' and give you a last thrilling

ride?

On 6/29/2018 10:49 PM, Charlie Quebec wrote:
Beacause floating around out of control under a=20
parachute is safer?
BRS sounds good, but in practice I would prefer

a=20
personal chute every
time.

--=20
Dan, 5J

Of course you could be struck by lightening as you

descend=20
under your BRS canopy but has anyone ever died

being=20
"dragged along the ground" after a successful BRS

escape?
Plenty have died following a conventional parachute mal-
function.
The bottom line is that BRS will work at a lower height

but is=20
hardly available in any common sailplane on sale today.
Retro fitting a BRS to an EASA sailplane would be a=20
expensive, possibly impossible, task. With ultra-light=20
sailplanes it's different.
The other major problem, as clearly explained on

DG's=20
website, is that "safety does not sell sailplanes". The=20
majority of DG sailplanes sold were NOT equipped with

the=20
NOAH system: the new buyers simply did not order

the=20
NOAH system. Even if BRS was available today how

many=20
buyers would buy it?
Dave W


If a BRS system were available factory installed at a

reasonable price, I
s=
uspect that a very large percentage of buyers would sign

up. It's a huge
s=
elling point if you are trying to get the OK from your

spouse to upgrade
to=
a new glider. =20

Offering a BRS system standard on all of their airplanes is

probably the
#1=
reason that Cirrus is now the largest piston engine aircraft

manufacturer
=
in the world.


Yes you're probably quite right about the Cirrus BUT in a
Cirrus you might well have wife and kids along for the ride.
The fact remains that the majority of DG customers do not
specify the NOAH system; it's actually relatively cheap
compared to the new cost of a DG808C or DG1000x. Why is
that?
Dave W


Maybe people think that the NOAH system is a half baked solution. Cirrus and Phoenix think that BRS systems are important enough that they make them standard and a significant part of their marketing.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Air exit vent with engine box? [email protected] Soaring 5 December 8th 15 05:14 AM
An elegant exit Frank Whiteley Soaring 2 May 15th 09 02:28 PM
Accident report - PDA's can restrict emergency exit Ramy Soaring 21 December 31st 06 06:45 PM
How do you exit a F-22 cockpit? John Dallman Naval Aviation 1 May 28th 06 02:51 PM
How do you exit a F-22 cockpit? Mike Naval Aviation 11 May 25th 06 08:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.