Pilots and Parachutes. (Merged)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Auckland
Age: 43
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BRS Parachutes
All ..
I know the parachutes discussion has done the rounds in the past on this forum, but this is the first time that I have actually come across this website:
http://brsparachutes.com/default.aspx
I always used to think that parachutes mostly get added to aeroplanes as part of a factory fitted process, but it appears that this is not the case with all models as the above link suggests.
I have a couple of questions for those of you who might have some experience with these:
check out this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk
Anyway, as some of you know I'm not a qualified ppl yet so don't take the p1$$ if some of the questions are silly.
S
I know the parachutes discussion has done the rounds in the past on this forum, but this is the first time that I have actually come across this website:
http://brsparachutes.com/default.aspx
I always used to think that parachutes mostly get added to aeroplanes as part of a factory fitted process, but it appears that this is not the case with all models as the above link suggests.
I have a couple of questions for those of you who might have some experience with these:
- If you have one fitted, does it give you a much bigger sense of feeling safe?
- Is this easily available in the UK or more the US?
- Can it be fitted to say a Piper Warrior?
- And this might be a harder question, but if you have to think of all or some of the GA Fatal Incidents that you have read about or know of, what percentage of would possibly not have been fatal if this parachute system was fitted (a rough guess)? I guess the question should really read will this system prevent most fatalities.
check out this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk
Anyway, as some of you know I'm not a qualified ppl yet so don't take the p1$$ if some of the questions are silly.
S
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
There are so many questions, but here's two:
1) How many of the "lives saved" could have made a perfectly good forced landing?
2) What percentage of incidents fall outside of the operating parameters of the BRS due to lack of sufficient altitude?
I'll add though that I know two pilots (instructor and his student) whose lives were saved by conventional parachutes - they jumped from a Bulldog in 1979.
1) How many of the "lives saved" could have made a perfectly good forced landing?
2) What percentage of incidents fall outside of the operating parameters of the BRS due to lack of sufficient altitude?
I'll add though that I know two pilots (instructor and his student) whose lives were saved by conventional parachutes - they jumped from a Bulldog in 1979.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not just the parachute, the airframe is important as well.
In the case of the Cirrus for example there is a safety cage to protect the cabin and special high-G seats to protect the occupants. It's said that the impact is equivalent to jumping off a 10 foot wall. Now doing that is bad enough when you land on your legs and they bend to absorb the impact. Jumping off a 10 foot wall and landing on your @rse is in a different league.
Collapse of the undercariage and airframe structure will absorb some of the energy if its been designed for it (bit like crumple zones in a car). Just sticking a BRS into an airframe not designed for one won't necessarily provide much protection.
Then again longitudinal strength will come into it. A Cirrus is supported by strops that go more or less to the lower engine mount positions and to a point behid the cabin. On a conventional airframe those points almost certainly won't take upward wrenching loads and the thing might well fold up in the middle.
In the case of the Cirrus for example there is a safety cage to protect the cabin and special high-G seats to protect the occupants. It's said that the impact is equivalent to jumping off a 10 foot wall. Now doing that is bad enough when you land on your legs and they bend to absorb the impact. Jumping off a 10 foot wall and landing on your @rse is in a different league.
Collapse of the undercariage and airframe structure will absorb some of the energy if its been designed for it (bit like crumple zones in a car). Just sticking a BRS into an airframe not designed for one won't necessarily provide much protection.
Then again longitudinal strength will come into it. A Cirrus is supported by strops that go more or less to the lower engine mount positions and to a point behid the cabin. On a conventional airframe those points almost certainly won't take upward wrenching loads and the thing might well fold up in the middle.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And one cannot help wondering whether what might have turned out to be a successful forced landing is instead replaced by a parachute which dumps the aircraft and its occupants down in the middle of the M1 motorway where they are all promptly run over by a forty ton juggernaut. Clearly when and when not to deploy the chute is highly relevant
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Auckland
Age: 43
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers for the responses so far
flybymike - I agree, it would be great if a landing could be pulled off instead, but having a parachute does not mean use it willy nilly and i'm sure that most experienced pilots would look at other options first.
BUT
Would it not be nice to know you have it in case you have a jam in your control services? (if this is possible) Or at least give you peace of mind that if something like that happend you "might" be OK?
Hence my questions above ..
flybymike - I agree, it would be great if a landing could be pulled off instead, but having a parachute does not mean use it willy nilly and i'm sure that most experienced pilots would look at other options first.
BUT
Would it not be nice to know you have it in case you have a jam in your control services? (if this is possible) Or at least give you peace of mind that if something like that happend you "might" be OK?
Hence my questions above ..
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearly there are circumstances ( engine failure at night, airframe failure, jammed controls, inhospitable terrain, irrecoverable spins, even perhaps ditching) where a pilot might feel a lot happierwith a BRS prachute on board...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: england
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my point of view, it would be the last line of defence. 99% of problems could be sorted out with a forced landing, as even a bad one will still be a better option than a near vertical landing albeit somewhat cushioned...
Main things that would make it a no-brainer to pull the handle would be:
1) Inflight structural failure
2) Mid-air collision
3) unrecoverable spin ( but again, you have to be trying hard to spin accidently if you have passed your PPL)
4) No viable forced landing option.
Can never really see an extra option being a bad thing, as long as the user is aware that it is not a get out of jail free card.
In some ways I find that the more dangerous the activity, the more careful people are, hence aviation safty is very impressive, compared to road users who are molly-coddled by cars with a vast array of "idiot behind the wheel" driver aids such as: ABS/ traction control, stability control, airbags etc etc , and become complacent of (very very)poor driving, hence why road accidents are so common, 95% of the time a modern car covers up peoples appaling driving skills.
Main things that would make it a no-brainer to pull the handle would be:
1) Inflight structural failure
2) Mid-air collision
3) unrecoverable spin ( but again, you have to be trying hard to spin accidently if you have passed your PPL)
4) No viable forced landing option.
Can never really see an extra option being a bad thing, as long as the user is aware that it is not a get out of jail free card.
In some ways I find that the more dangerous the activity, the more careful people are, hence aviation safty is very impressive, compared to road users who are molly-coddled by cars with a vast array of "idiot behind the wheel" driver aids such as: ABS/ traction control, stability control, airbags etc etc , and become complacent of (very very)poor driving, hence why road accidents are so common, 95% of the time a modern car covers up peoples appaling driving skills.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Haywards Heath, West Sussex
Age: 39
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the reasons I can think of is that it would make the flight more uncomfortable.
If you compare gliding (which I have done only around 5 hours) the seats are made for a parachute (slightly different I know) and you wouldn't fly without one - partly because it's a nice cushion
If you compare gliding (which I have done only around 5 hours) the seats are made for a parachute (slightly different I know) and you wouldn't fly without one - partly because it's a nice cushion
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you were in the RAF you would wear one because they do. In the civil world they don't because thats what they do. Give civil pilots them the option to jump out??? you'd have the country littered with aeroplanes without pilots, encourages LMF etc etc.
You jump out of a plane if its on fire or the wing breaks, in all other cases landing is safer they say. Gliders fly right next to each other in thermals so higher risk of collision.
If the wing came off the aircraft it would be moving about spectacularly, a 100 mph wind would be the least of your worries.
I think we stopped wearing parachutes when they tried to make aeroplanes like cars, out with the 5 point harness, in with the 3 point inertia reel and comfy seats. Wearing a parachute means you will crash, scary (and it creases your suit)
You jump out of a plane if its on fire or the wing breaks, in all other cases landing is safer they say. Gliders fly right next to each other in thermals so higher risk of collision.
If the wing came off the aircraft it would be moving about spectacularly, a 100 mph wind would be the least of your worries.
I think we stopped wearing parachutes when they tried to make aeroplanes like cars, out with the 5 point harness, in with the 3 point inertia reel and comfy seats. Wearing a parachute means you will crash, scary (and it creases your suit)
If you want a parachute, get a ballistic parachute, for the plane. Airframe failures are so few, I prefer to save money, and fly a Jodel rather than a Cirrus.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Inside CAS
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF pilots wear parachutes as they are exposed to more risk than us PPLs.
Also very expensive to train RAF aircrew - i.e. investment protection.
I have considered getting one of those really slim chutes, but it doesn't really stand up to close scrutiny in PPL land..(exception, aeros obv). The only other scenario I can think of where a chute would be of realistic value in civi flying would an engine donk at altitude and you had time to gather your belongings and jump out whilst straight and level. Although, even then, I think I would rather do a forced landing and, hopefully, save the plane & persons on the ground.
I have often wondered if persons flying around in their shiney Cirrus machines fly Cirrus because it has a "I'm too rich to die like this, get me out of here" handle?
Also very expensive to train RAF aircrew - i.e. investment protection.
I have considered getting one of those really slim chutes, but it doesn't really stand up to close scrutiny in PPL land..(exception, aeros obv). The only other scenario I can think of where a chute would be of realistic value in civi flying would an engine donk at altitude and you had time to gather your belongings and jump out whilst straight and level. Although, even then, I think I would rather do a forced landing and, hopefully, save the plane & persons on the ground.
I have often wondered if persons flying around in their shiney Cirrus machines fly Cirrus because it has a "I'm too rich to die like this, get me out of here" handle?
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I have opened the door at 100kts, not easy, especially if the power is on but cut the power and raise the nose if poss and it is easy!
Snag a D ring on the way out and you end up with a pilot chute and bridle wrapped around the airframe and now you're a fatal mishap about to happen.
Ever been under canopy or in free fall?
Many who do wear parachutes, including for aerobatics, have never bothered to get proper instruction in the use of that parachute, parachute malfunctions, etc.
I've had a number of inflight emergencies, ranging from simple engine failures to inflight fires. I've yet to consider getting out, or need a parachute to do it. I've been jumping out of airplanes for years. I'm comfortable doing it. I've had several parachute malfunctions over the years, several reserve rides, and was once hospitalized in intensive care following a jump that ended badly.
I'm not sure the wearing and use of parachutes by the average general aviation pilot is warranted, or necessary.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Yorkshire
Age: 41
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i dont see how it would work in the real world. If it was a viable option more people would be wearing them.
Would there not be a real risk of hitting youself on the plane as you jumped, its all very nice jumping out of a plane when there is still a pilot flying it nice and steady.
And what about your passengers, i just dont see how it would work..
Would there not be a real risk of hitting youself on the plane as you jumped, its all very nice jumping out of a plane when there is still a pilot flying it nice and steady.
And what about your passengers, i just dont see how it would work..
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends what you're doing. If you're going on a Saturday morning hunt for a £100 bacon buttie, I would say it's pretty unnecessary. If you're planning to fly your aeroplane nearer to it's limits (aerobatics) or in close proximity to other aircraft (formation), I would never be without one.
A little less conversation,
a little more aviation...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bracknell, UK
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We've been round this one on a number of previous threads, and I've posted this link before as well but for those who haven't read it, I thoroughly recommend Eddie Goggins' article in the ANR
http://www.aerobatics.org.uk/Journal_Nov_07.pdf#page=39
However, this is in the context of aerobatic types designed with emergency egress by parachute in mind - the average GA touring type was never designed on this basis, which in general makes the whole proposition unfeasible (and that's before we consider the dynamics of getting three or more passengers over the side).
Regarding SN3Guppy's comments - yes, as with any piece of emergency equipment, the user needs to understand the appropriate means of operation and practice correct maintenance and inspection procedures, but whilst I wear a parachute on most occasions I fly, I have yet to make a planned or unplanned descent using one - in the same way that I don't smack my head violently against the tailplane of the Yak whilst wearing a Gentex helmet to make sure I'll be familiar with the experience should I need to jump over the side, or spend a couple of hours bobbing about in a life raft in the North Atlantic to be sure I understand what exposure feels like - I fully expect that should I ever need to use an emergency parachute, it will be a violent, brutally painful experience that will almost certainly result in a couple of broken legs, but that the experience will be preferable to the alternative - frankly, you'd have to be mad to want to use one.
http://www.aerobatics.org.uk/Journal_Nov_07.pdf#page=39
However, this is in the context of aerobatic types designed with emergency egress by parachute in mind - the average GA touring type was never designed on this basis, which in general makes the whole proposition unfeasible (and that's before we consider the dynamics of getting three or more passengers over the side).
Regarding SN3Guppy's comments - yes, as with any piece of emergency equipment, the user needs to understand the appropriate means of operation and practice correct maintenance and inspection procedures, but whilst I wear a parachute on most occasions I fly, I have yet to make a planned or unplanned descent using one - in the same way that I don't smack my head violently against the tailplane of the Yak whilst wearing a Gentex helmet to make sure I'll be familiar with the experience should I need to jump over the side, or spend a couple of hours bobbing about in a life raft in the North Atlantic to be sure I understand what exposure feels like - I fully expect that should I ever need to use an emergency parachute, it will be a violent, brutally painful experience that will almost certainly result in a couple of broken legs, but that the experience will be preferable to the alternative - frankly, you'd have to be mad to want to use one.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Can never really see an extra option being a bad thing, as long as the user is aware that it is not a get out of jail free card.”
How about when you clip the far hedge due to all the extra weight?
Rod1
How about when you clip the far hedge due to all the extra weight?
Rod1
Moderator
Having considered such additional safety equipment, and how or when I would have ever thought to use it, during more than 5000 hours of GA flying, the answer comes back to me: NEVER! Certainly one can speculate on conditions of aircraft failure where such an additional safety feature would be reassuring, but I assure you that in the real world of qualified, well prepared flight, of well maintained aircraft, failures which would justify a whole aircraft chute are so rare that I don't think they are statistically relevent.
There is quite a cost, weight penalty, and cabin space penalty for retrofits, along with recurring inspection costs.
Add to that the STC approved installation in the C150 has just been AD'd. The AD itself says that there are 6 such equipped aircraft in the US, and none in Canada.
It is my opinion that there are a wide variety of things a pilot/owner can do to assure a safe flight. If you are feeling insecure about the reliabilty of the aircraft you fly, get to know it by participating in some maintenance. Either you'll get to be much more reassured, and stop worrying; or realize that the particular aircraft is defective and either fix it, or ground it!
Pilot DAR
There is quite a cost, weight penalty, and cabin space penalty for retrofits, along with recurring inspection costs.
Add to that the STC approved installation in the C150 has just been AD'd. The AD itself says that there are 6 such equipped aircraft in the US, and none in Canada.
It is my opinion that there are a wide variety of things a pilot/owner can do to assure a safe flight. If you are feeling insecure about the reliabilty of the aircraft you fly, get to know it by participating in some maintenance. Either you'll get to be much more reassured, and stop worrying; or realize that the particular aircraft is defective and either fix it, or ground it!
Pilot DAR