fly_tornado Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 I don't know why people are so against them. Dead pilots have no regrets?
Dieselten Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 A BRS will not make you a better pilot. A BRS will not improve your judgement of conditions. A BRS will not manufacture confidence from thin air...if you need a BRS to get enough confidence to fly, stop flying! A BRS might save you after a mid-air - provided you aren't already dead from the impact or fire. A BRS might save you in the event of structural failure...but how and why did you get into a situation where the structure failed in the first place? A BRS will deny you any further control over the aircraft's position, attitude and landing after you deploy it. You're just along for the ride. A BRS might save you if you are flying extreme manoeuvres...but why would a recreational pilot be flying in such a manner? A BRS will probably kill you if the aircraft catches fire in mid-air. A BRS might save you if you have an engine failure over inhospitable terrain...but why are you flying a recreational aircraft over such terrain in the first place? A BRS is no substitute for good judgement, proper maintenance, a thorough pre-flight inspection, a proper lookout and adequate situational awareness. A BRS is "a device of last-resort". The pilot and aircraft have been defeated by whatever caused the BRS to be activated. Ultimately each aircraft-owner must decide whether to install one or not - and accept the consequences of that decision.
geoffreywh Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 That sounds exactly like the argument against fitting an artificial horizon, and I believe equally invalid. The wing broke off that aerobatting aeroplane!! ... with the above logic applied the pilot would now be dead. What an odd stand to take....
jakej Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 and.....I have to agree with Dieselten ...once deployed, you are out of control & along for the ride (crash?) be it into rocks, water or maybe powerlines that's the scary issue for me. Learn to handle the 'emergencies' & while the aircraft is controllable & you are still breathing never give up - aircraft don't usually fall apart (like in the movies) unless overstressed by the pilot.
Sapphire Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 You use the the BRS when the situation is out of control, so you gave up nothing in deploying it. The "why did you get in that situation" syndrome applies to all pilots at some time. The last time that happened to me, I was squashed between a tow plane and a glider thermalling on down wind.
geoffreywh Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 Jake........But isn't that just the point. The BRS is your last gasp. Something has gone horribly wrong , for whatever reason, instead of dying in the middle of a scream. You kiss your aeroplane goodbye and pull the handle. Of course the pilot overstressed the aerobat, or maybe he didn't but the bloke before him did? Or maybe he didn't mean to get lost in cloud over a forest....why does it matter, he's not going to die today. The punishment for a mistake doesn't have to be death.... 3
Gentreau Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 . . . . A BRS is "a device of last-resort". The pilot and aircraft have been defeated by whatever caused the BRS to be activated. All those statements are true, but the one that matters is the last one. ......The punishment for a mistake doesn't have to be death.... A great way to express it, well said. .
fly_tornado Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 I didn't realise they made pilots so dangerous. During the first world war, they banned pilots from wearing parachutes. Apparently, they made pilots a bit weak and lack the ticker to take the fight to the enemy! A BRS will not make you a better pilot.A BRS will not improve your judgement of conditions. A BRS will not manufacture confidence from thin air...if you need a BRS to get enough confidence to fly, stop flying! A BRS might save you after a mid-air - provided you aren't already dead from the impact or fire. A BRS might save you in the event of structural failure...but how and why did you get into a situation where the structure failed in the first place? A BRS will deny you any further control over the aircraft's position, attitude and landing after you deploy it. You're just along for the ride. A BRS might save you if you are flying extreme manoeuvres...but why would a recreational pilot be flying in such a manner? A BRS will probably kill you if the aircraft catches fire in mid-air. A BRS might save you if you have an engine failure over inhospitable terrain...but why are you flying a recreational aircraft over such terrain in the first place? A BRS is no substitute for good judgement, proper maintenance, a thorough pre-flight inspection, a proper lookout and adequate situational awareness. A BRS is "a device of last-resort". The pilot and aircraft have been defeated by whatever caused the BRS to be activated. Ultimately each aircraft-owner must decide whether to install one or not - and accept the consequences of that decision.
M61A1 Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 I didn't realise they made pilots so dangerous. During the first world war, they banned pilots from wearing parachutes. Apparently, they made pilots a bit weak and lack the ticker to take the fight to the enemy! From what I've read, despite being fitted with a recovery chute, Cirrus figure disproportionately in fatalities. I do not think the devices are a bad thing, but I think perhaps when the mentality changes from "last resort" to "first resort", that they are sometimes used when other options may have been safer or more prudent.
geoffreywh Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 You are so correct....The BRS could become an avenue of first resort instead of last resort.....That could be a real problem.... I think that pilots that feel and act like that are doomed anyway... It's really the same thought process as "My Artificial horizon must be broken?" It says I am upside down when I feel I am the right way up, so I'll roll the aircraft...You can't trust instinct, you cant trust senses, you have to fall back on training....Remember the OODA loop on you tube...
Zibi Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 From what I've read, despite being fitted with a recovery chute, Cirrus figure disproportionately in fatalities. I do not think the devices are a bad thing, but I think perhaps when the mentality changes from "last resort" to "first resort", that they are sometimes used when other options may have been safer or more prudent. There's been an article recently about a Cirrus in Australia that has deployed a BRS. It came with a picture of a plane with collapsed landing gear on a perfectly flat open field with no trees, power lines or anything that would prevent a normal dead stick landing. The pilot was very happy about how he handled the situation, and didn't even attempt to land the plane. I think the fact that it wasn't his own aircraft may have had a huge impact, cause he was very happy that the whole landing gear collapsed as it was designed to do.
DGL Fox Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Ok you have made a bad mistake in judgement or whatever...like the post above said...but you and and maybe a pax don't have die because of your mistake...no matter where you stand on this I would think the main thing is that you will be alive to go home to your loved one's and the next day you can learn from your mistake so that it never happens again...
jakej Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 You are so correct....The BRS could become an avenue of first resort instead of last resort.....That could be a real problem.... I think that pilots that feel and act like that are doomed anyway... It's really the same thought process as "My Artificial horizon must be broken?" It says I am upside down when I feel I am the right way up, so I'll roll the aircraft...You can't trust instinct, you cant trust senses, you have to fall back on training....Remember the OODA loop on you tube... That can be the problem with these 'aids' - another example is twin engined aircraft, 2 engines are better than 1 in a lot of peoples eyes. However good the theory it's been proven that what happens in practice is an entirely different matter & pilots haven't necessarily used the best option. What happens in the air, when things go seriously wrong is usually totally different to the pontification on the ground.
fly_tornado Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 I don't think a lot of older pilots are as capable as they think they are. How many engine failures have you seen that ended with a stall? There's been an article recently about a Cirrus in Australia that has deployed a BRS.It came with a picture of a plane with collapsed landing gear on a perfectly flat open field with no trees, power lines or anything that would prevent a normal dead stick landing. The pilot was very happy about how he handled the situation, and didn't even attempt to land the plane. I think the fact that it wasn't his own aircraft may have had a huge impact, cause he was very happy that the whole landing gear collapsed as it was designed to do. 1
Sapphire Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 I don't think a lot of older pilots are as capable as they think they are. How many engine failures have you seen that ended with a stall? If every pilot had a glider endorsement there would be no stalls. I find those kind of accidents incredible. Shows no skill or preparation.
DGL Fox Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Yes maybe a glider endorsement would be like the equivelent of a defensive driving program where it takes you to the next level in being aware of all things around you and your flying skills...sounds like a good idea to me !!
geoffreywh Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Didn't I see an episode of "Air Crash Investigations" Wherein a 2 thousand hour pilot stalled a huge airliner right down to the ground while his crew watched on..Unbelievable.....But still, I believe I have enough nous to observe what is happening ,understand what is happening and take corrective action, I'm certainly not going to pop the chute with paddocks within reasonable gliding distance!...
M61A1 Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Found the article I read, http://airfactsjournal.com/2012/05/dicks-blog-whats-wrong-with-cirrus-pilots/, it would appear that it has little to do with recovery chutes. Perhaps a little of the stereotypical "Volvo driver" mentality- "I'm in the safest car I can be in, nothing can hurt me". I think they(the chutes) are a good last resort, but I also think that some have been used as a first resort. The reality is though, that it is not up to me to decide when they should use it.
Kyle Communications Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Well I reckon most of you are full of it. You are all pontificating about whys and wherefore and should haves and wanted to.....we all know there are things that happen and its called "SH*T" where no matter what or when you did it you are about to die. This is when the BRS comes into play. Its a last gasp effort to stay alive...who cares about what sort of control you have over it once it is deployed. Sometimes you guys look way way past the big picture to the next parallel universe. Its quite simple IF YOU CAN AFFORD THE 5 GRAND TO INSTALL ONE and you are only putting it in as a last gasp or resort then do it. All this other discussion is really crap in my opinion...I think its a easy decision if you have the bucks and a inclination to live Standing by for the flame throwers Mark 3 1
Sapphire Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 No flane throwers, just common sense. If your option is to deploy the shute or die, then the answer is there. Quite often there are other better options if you have the skill to use them.
Kyle Communications Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 That is what I am saying. I cant believe all the pontificating...I will have a BRS soon in my aircraft but it only there for a last resort structural failure or mid air. It is there for NO other reason. Any other issue with fuel or engine or where I am flying I would not be using that chute unless it was the last gasp. You can get the option still at around 150 to 200 ft from the ground so more than likely you should have well enough time to try to salvage a good outcome with out destroying the aircraft by using the chute. But if you have to destroy the aircraft so be it. From what i have read I agree they are used a lot by pilots who really shouldnt be using them for the purpose they have been but it is there prerogative...most have been deployed after they have run out of fuel over tiger country...well that really is cardinal sin number ONE. And that goes to training and I agree with all of these comments...but the colour of this discussion was getting far away from the original question I believe I am also sure it is a rule now in a lot of european countries that there must be BRS fitted to factory builts after july just gone..not sure if it is true I thought I read that somewhere
Gentreau Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 ...........I am also sure it is a rule now in a lot of european countries that there must be BRS fitted to factory builts after july just gone..not sure if it is true I thought I read that somewhere I believe that's only in Germany, certainly not the case for France or the UK .
Yenn Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 I think the Cirrus all have BRS fitted and the reason is that they could not demonstrate a safe recovery from a spin. they could not be certified as they were and the chute allows for certification. the chute is therefore not there for inflight break up but for saving your life in a spin. One of the firdt to use a chute ended up in a wheelchair, because the plane came down in a dam. The undercarriage didn't absorb part of the descent force as it would do on land.
M61A1 Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 I think the Cirrus all have BRS fitted and the reason is that they could not demonstrate a safe recovery from a spin. they could not be certified as they were and the chute allows for certification. the chute is therefore not there for inflight break up but for saving your life in a spin. One of the firdt to use a chute ended up in a wheelchair, because the plane came down in a dam. The undercarriage didn't absorb part of the descent force as it would do on land. One of the comments in the link I posted said that the Cirrus was quite safe to spin and had been tested but not certified.......the truth is out there.....somewhere.
Kyle Communications Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 I believe that's only in Germany, certainly not the case for France or the UK . I wasnt sure I did read it somewhere a couple of years ago they were bringing the rule in but I thought it was a lot more than just Germany Mark
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now