Fatal accident in Ireland 14/6/2019
 

Irish news reports 2 killed in a BRM NG5, with a pic showing apparently a clean fuselage break behind the wings, with the empenage looking undamaged. Cockpit canopy also looks o.k. www.rte.ie
The type said to be metal, and not homebuild, when Googled. Unusual accident damage.

Damage apart from the tail breaking off at a transport/ construction joint looks utterly benign. Must have been a flat vertical impact?

Incl pic: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...pact-1.3926112

One of the pilots was a friend of mine. A very experienced Instructor. Very familiar with spins in various aircraft.
It looks like a flat spin and having read the other thread about previous accidents you have to wonder if there's a problem with the type.

Hmm!. With two spin accidents in Australia, now this one plus the one in Europe with the test pilot this is not a good look for the type.

When one looks at the design of the tail plane one can see that the airflow in a spin might well have the rudder blanked off to reduce or stop the air flow needed for recovery.

Do I understand that the Australian CASA is working with the local CAA for an exchange of information re the spin handling of the Bristell?

c of G issue
 

LAA and now AAIB have discovered that all Bristells are using the wrong data for Cof G calculations. The data was supplied by Bristell. The position for the pilot and passenger has to be moved rearward by 150mm. Given that the CofG range is 132mm, this is a substantial increase in aft CoG. It makes flying with 2 people on board very, very restrictive!
I am sure that the incidents in Ireland and Australia will now be reassessed.

Certainly have no confidence in spinning a Bristell if this is any guide.

That video is terrifying! I know nothing of the type, and now know more than I want to. But yes, for my experience, the C of G position of the plane will greatly affect spin recovery - something which you may not come to understand until you enter a spin. If there was an error in the C of G specifications for the type, that's bad. In the mean time, routine weights and in particular, empty C of G position calculations are one of the most frequently buggered up things I encounter when reviewing information about specific planes. I find a stand back and look twice sanity check very worthwhile for new W&B documents.

Sorry for the misleading video, turns out it is of a Triton Skytrek, not a Bristell, though to look at the two you could be forgiven they were the same type, y'tube had the video listed as "Bristell flat spin".

https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/defaul...m-aero-ltd.pdf

This earlier notice is a bit of an eye opener on what can happen with the self-declaration of meeting standards policies in the LSA world which avoids costly certification requirements......

https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/defaul...accessible.pdf

"Pilots and operators of Bristell light sport aircraft (LSA) are strongly advised to avoid conducting any manoeuvre that may lead to an aerodynamic stall of the aircraft - either intentionally or unintentionally. This includes any flight training for stalls. The manufacturer has previously declared to CASA that the Bristell LSA meets the applicable certification requirements for LSA. Recent information received by CASA from the aircraft manufacturer shows that the aircraft may not meet the LSA standards as it does not appear to have been adequately tested (as required by the certification standards) for its ability to recover from spins. Worldwide, a number of Bristell aircraft have been involved in fatal accidents following unrecovered spins. Further investigation and discussion with the manufacturer is ongoing and an update will be provided as new information becomes available.

SAFETY ISSUES
Light Sport Aircraft are required to meet a range of international standards for certification. The manufacturer has declared that the aircraft meets the standards published by ASTM International. The standard (ASTM Standard F2245, section 4.5.9) specifies the spinning performance requirements, including the ability to recover from a spin. CASA has been engaging with the aircraft manufacturer, BRM Aero which is based in the Czech Republic, seeking to confirm that the four variants presently operating in Australia meet the standard. We are concerned that contrary to the formal declarations made by the manufacturer, the aircraft may not have been adequately tested for compliance with the ASTM standard for spin recovery. There have been several fatal accidents worldwide (including in Australia) where Bristell aircraft have entered a spin (including during stall flight training) and failed to recover.

BACKGROUND
Manufacturers of LSA (either registered with CASA or otherwise) are able to certify or make a self declaration, that the aircraft meets accepted standards, such as the ASTM standards when making application to CASA for a special certificate of airworthiness (COA) as an LSA. This scheme, which has been adopted internationally, lowers manufacturer compliance costs, reduces the time to bring a design to market, and enables a more timely response to design and technology change. It is less rigorous than schemes which require a manufacturer to hold a production certificate issued by a National Aviation Authority such as CASA, EASA, or the FAA. BRM Aero has previously declared that the Bristell variants meet these standards, however, subsequent to investigations which followed a number of fatal accidents involving these aircraft the manufacturer has been unable to provide satisfactory evidence that the design is compliant with the requirements of the ASTM standards applicable to light sport aircraft.

FURTHER INFORMATION
CASA continues to engage with BRM Aero in relation to this issue and is considering a range of proportionate safety related actions designed to mitigate the identified safety risks and will provide more information as it becomes available. If you have any urgent questions, please contact: [email protected]"

Use extra caution with non-certified aircraft including Light Sport Aircraft. Maybe let someone else operate at the margins of the envelope a few times before you do it.

re: Megan's video above - Not familiar with the type but,I seem to recall the standard spin recovery was: Throttle closed (the pilot seemed to be adding some power at times) followed by full opposite rudder then stick neutrally forward until the spin stops (that did not seem to be so).
However the 'chute is a great final addioion to the recovery

For some reason, I missed this thread until today. I am very familiar with that BRS video. It is a Skytrek, as megan pointed out and not a Bristell. The pilot is a well-known and highly-experienced Kiwi instructor, who flies many types on wheels or floats, with wings or rotors. I know him well - he did the BFR that qualified me for a Kiwi PPL and he also gave me my first helicopter lesson.

He was employed as the factory test-pilot and was doing a routine flight test. The YouTube video only shows the later stages of the spin. I discussed it with him and he told me that he had tried the standard spin-recovery techniques prior to the start of the video clip, where he can be seen trying other potential methods of recovery.

I find it ironic that the only injury he suffered was a bang on the head from the canopy while exiting!