Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Private Flying
Reload this Page >

Rans S-9 loses wing, pulls chute, pilot OK (15 Aug 2010)

Private Flying LAA/BMAA/BGA/BPA The sheer pleasure of flight.

Rans S-9 loses wing, pulls chute, pilot OK (15 Aug 2010)

Old 18th Aug 2010, 01:58
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rans S-9 loses wing, pulls chute, pilot OK (15 Aug 2010)

Clearly this guy was not short of luck, to walk out from a chute pull with less-than-ideal dangling attitude and post-touchdown fire! (the interesting bit starts at 1:50)

Deeday is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2010, 07:20
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sth Bucks UK
Age: 60
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A superb ending to a very frightening incident.
Not a good advert for Rans perhaps but an excellent one for BRS!
A very slow descent rate and consequent light impact with the ground is impressive, it's just a shame that the shute got wrapped around the fuselage on deployment (I presume) leading to the nose down attitude.
Otherwise the aircraft may well have been salvageable too.
stickandrudderman is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2010, 07:51
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Frinton-on-Sea
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Amazing and terrifying. Other than the obvious, what on earth could have happened?
Greg2041 is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2010, 08:08
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Age: 46
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It looked to me like that was how the BRS was attached, I don't think it was caught on the fuse, just that's it's natural hang point probably.

As for re-using an aircraft after a chute pull, I don't think that's the norm is it, the stresses put on an aircraft through a deployment would at a minimum require a complete strip and rebuild I'd imagine.

I think this is a good advertisement for BRS chutes for aerobatic aircraft, this is exactly what they are best for, catastrophic structural failure, without the chute, this poor fellow would have been very much dead.

Well done that man!
sleemanj is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2010, 08:26
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wow, impressive, well done the man and congrats!

Also quite amazing how the announcer doesn't miss a beat but asks everyone to remain calm and where they are and then goes on to explain the reason for the fire and that the pilot has walked away.

BRS
172driver is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2010, 12:19
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
More pics

Better resolution pictures of the failed wing and tangled chute on Airliners.net.
Deeday is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2010, 12:03
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How could this happen? The aircraft didn’t seem to be doing anything that might overstress the airframe immediately before the wing fell off…and then in an interview the pilot diagnoses the issue as "metal fatigue". As someone currently flying around in a 1979 cessna, without parachute, the idea of random metal fatigue is kinda concerning!
codemonkey is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2010, 13:31
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The aircraft didn’t seem to be doing anything that might overstress the airframe immediately before the wing fell off…
I'd imagine that manoeuvre (inverse outside loop?) would put some pretty serious negative G on the aircraft, which could show up any weaknesses (fatigue, prior overstress, bad build.. any number of potential causes)

Not something you'd be doing in a Cessna (hopefully)
oversteer is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2010, 16:20
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sth Bucks UK
Age: 60
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't care how good the engineers were, I wouldn't fancy flying an aeroplane which had suffered an in-flight structural failure in which the wing fell off, then a parachute deployment, then a drop onto the ground at 20mph.
Plenty of Spitfires around that have suffered far worse than that and are flying again!
An aircraft, like any machine, is merely an assembly of parts. Any damaged parts can always be replaced and the machine restored to as new condition, it's just a matter of whether it's economically viable or not.
If man can make it, man can repair it.
stickandrudderman is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2010, 19:32
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
the aircraft was designed for the 503 or 582 two stroke power plants, and at the MTOW you get when you use these powerplants it might be +6/-4 G. However, rumour has it that engines up to 100 horse power have been fitted to the airframe. This must increase the all up weight somewhat and thus reduce the G you can safely pull. I wonder what engine was in the display aircraft, it certainly didn't look short of climb performance. Still, it was most impressive up to the point where the pilot wished he was flying an Edge 540!

Rans6..
rans6andrew is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2010, 10:00
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nightmare scenario for any pilot, what an advertisement for BRS though! It seems to have worked very effectively in this case. Well done that man!
b.a. Baracus is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2010, 10:22
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 52
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I wonder what engine was in the display aircraft, it certainly didn't look short of climb performance.
According to their own website a Rotax 912(S). They have a page that details the conversion here:

http://www.hangardelcielo.com/sistemasfotos.htm

Google translation of the conversion:
From 1996 to date we have developed and tested the systems needed to make our aircraft powered by Rotax 912 and 912S inverted flight and allow all kinds of acrobatic maneuvers without alterations in the supply of fuel and lubricating oil. In the same way the system was developed to apply to the exhaust fumes from the engine.
They even quote a price. Some of the photos and videos look very good indeed. Like this one here:



It looks like the airframes have had quite a hard life performing in many airshows. They do not hold back.

It flies is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2010, 10:26
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: suffolk
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I like the vertical shot. The pilot has got the stick back in his guts and is leaning about as far backwards as he can!

Interesting shot above , I thought it looked wrong in the video, thats an S10 NOT a 9.
hatzflyer is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2010, 10:39
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 52
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I thought it looked wrong in the video, thats an S10 NOT a 9.
I think they have two S-9's and an S-10. But I don't read Spanish so I'm guess-reading here:

http://www.hangardelcielo.com/laescuadrilla.htm
It flies is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2010, 11:47
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Trust

Quote I don't care how good the engineers were, I wouldn't fancy flying an aeroplane which had suffered an in-flight structural failure in which the wing fell off, then a parachute deployment, then a drop onto the ground at 20mph.

No one I know would put an aircraft back together if they did not think it was safe to do so, a year or so back I saw a Cirrus writen off not because we were unable to fix it but because it was perceived that the market price for the aircraft would be to low due to "damage history" and not for any good technical reason.

It was a shame to see a good aircraft go to the junk yard for no good reason
A and C is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2010, 12:52
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: EGTT
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looking through the COPA magazine there are companies out there who will repair your Cirrus after a CAPS recovery. I wonder if many people would opt for repair or push their insurers for a new aircraft using a similar excuse given to A and C.
1800ed is offline  

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.