Missing plane from Gympie yesterday

[bexrbetter]

make ballistic parachutes compulsory for all RAA aircraft, save a few more lives.

Does not need to be "ballistic".

 

BUT I DON'T think we should make them mandatory.

Why not?

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

RAAus is unlikely to ever mandate something more onerous than GA have had imposed on them.....If you adopt the approach of mandate until we really are safe then of course you would mandate a PLB for anytime your main wheels rise more than 30cms off the ground, a SPoT tracker cause EPIRBS only work if people remember to switch them on. No single flight because having a flying pal in another aircraft can mean your found faster if bad stuff happens...but 2 can collide so make that 3........etc etc

 

If we mandate anything we simply raise the cost bar for someone who might want to get involved.....If however we educate people they can choose to take up a risk mitigation option or not as their personal risk profile drives them.

 

Its my personal view that Australia has more than (MUCH more than) enough legislation as it is and people don't read it, wont read and cant read it even if they wanted to......Now Education on the otherhand......that can make all the difference!

 

ADSB is an alternate to EPIRB and SPoT that the gov boys want us to take up...why not mandate that at the same time... given strict liability fines....they can now simply drop a fine in the mail everytime you cruise at a non hemispherical level, or go closer to a CTA boundary than you should...or GASP even cross into the CTA......

 

 

[fly_tornado]

if you can afford to fly safely, should you be flying?

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

I presume your can is meant to be cant..... your idea of safe and someone else's idea of safe are likely not exactly the same. Having a BRS, for me, doesn't equate to safer because in my aircraft with OEM mandated maintenance I believe the likelihood of an inflight catastrophic failure is so low as to not need mitigating....your idea of so low may well be lower than mine......

 

If in the fullness of time you turn out to be more correct feel free to drop a "told you so" to this thread...I suspect I wont be in any fit state ever more, to take umbrage.....

 

 

[poteroo]

Granted, Nev, however, it takes us back to the age old question, " What direction should the RAA be taking"?GA, has been instructing for IMC for a long time before I started flying and to my knowledge they still do, so, it`s very simple really, anyone want some training for IMC, go to a GA school, but remember, RAA currently requires you fly VFR.

 

Frank.

It may help if we were to introduce pilots to conditions of more 'marginal' visibility than we currently do. Only by flying around with vis of say 3nm, or 5nm, can the pilot learn just what this looks like. It's a bit akin to learning your 'height above ground level' when beginning low level training. We set QFE for a farm strip in out LL training area, then fly the 'student' @ progressively lower heights, eg 500-400-300-200-100 agl. and encourage them to 'recognise' these for future reference. I believe the same thing needs to be done for visibility, and maintaining VFR criteria. anyone?

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

yeah except that the rules apply to all of us, instructors as well, unless you have alternate CASA based licensing then going into marginal, or not VFR conditions to show what marginal/not VFR looks like would need some significant legislative changes to our exemptions I think....

 

That aside to me it is logical

 

Andy

 

 

[Doug Evans]

make ballistic parachutes compulsory for all RAA aircraft, save a few more lives.

Not for me thanks

 

 

[Birdseye]

Not for me thanks

Nor for me. They are also no good for resolving any CFIT issues.

 

 

[ev17ifly2]

make ballistic parachutes compulsory for all RAA aircraft, save a few more lives.

Why single out RAA ! What about those hunreds of ageing Cesnas clunking around the sky's. Not to mention all those "rag and stick" aircraft that some of us fly .

Give it a rest !

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Seems to me that the deceleration forces at play with a BRS are pretty significant, so not exactly a case of find somewhere that looks solidish and bolt on.....I wouldn't mind betting that a non engineered addition of a BRS would in the case of pull big red handle just result in 2 or more separate parts of the aircraft ending up on the ground to be latter covered by a floating down gently silk canopy....

 

 

[fly_tornado]

the ballistic parachute is still cheaper than a funeral

 

 

[Happyflyer]

What height do need to be at to safely deploy your parachute and be assured of a soft landing?

 

 

[farri]

It may help if we were to introduce pilots to conditions of more 'marginal' visibility than we currently do.

I would like to think that by the time a student has obtain an RA-Aus cross country endorsement, they would know how to recognize IMC and how to avoid it, if they don`t, then their instructor hasn`t done their job properly!

 

Frank.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I would like to think that by the time a student has obtain an RA-Aus cross country endorsement, they would know how to recognize IMC and how to avoid it, if they don`t, then their instructor hasn`t done their job properly!Frank.

That's the million dollar question! Have they received formal Met training with practical examples, or have they been trained at all?

 

 

[SDQDI]

What height do need to be at to safely deploy your parachute and be assured of a soft landing?

Well firstly, you won't be getting a 'soft' landing. Of course it will be softer than a nose dive but it is still going to hurt. As for safe deploying height, it seems to vary a bit depending on design I guess and propulsion system (spring/rocket ect) but I have seen some claim to be able to do very low level deploy and recovery.

My only two reasons to have one would be for structural failure and pilot incapacitation (I fly with the wife and kiddies and other non pilot pax and don't relish the thought of incapacitation leaving them without options)

 

As for why I don't think they should be mandated......... Firstly the existing fleet couldn't be retrofitted without huge expense and forcing that on them would see a lot of people stop flying for financial reasons, secondly forcing all future kits/planes to be built with them will again raise the expense (remember they aren't mandated even in GA) and again will see a lot of people unable to afford a plane. YES I do think they should be available as an option for those willing and able to afford them but don't stop people flying because they can't or don't want to fit them. (CASA does a good enough job of regulating us out of the air without us helping them!!!)

 

Remember at the end of the day the whole idea is to be affordable and a ballistic chute is an ongoing cost not just a capital outlay, they are not exactly cheap to have checked/repacked. By all means encourage people to have them but don't regulate another mandatory cost onto everyone.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Let's not get carried away.Flying into cloud is one of the biggest killers in GA flying too.

Then let GA carry that. RAAus can remove that element from the frap list.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Then let GA carry that. RAAus can remove that element from the frap list.

And as McCormick said "back into the weeds from were you came."

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

No the AH didn't MAKE him fly into the cloud but it shirley did give him the tool to do it. And the mistake old mate with the blindfold made was trying to fly the aircraft, should have just let the aircraft do the flying, it know how to fly straight and level.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

 

 

My only two reasons to have one would be for structural failure and pilot incapacitation

 

 

 

Engine out over tiger country and water.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Firstly the existing fleet couldn't be retrofitted without huge expense and forcing that on them would see a lot of people stop flying for financial reasons,

 

 

No one yet mentioned how they might be implemented so your point is moot.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Secondly forcing all future kits/planes to be built with them will again raise the expense and again will see a lot of people unable to afford a plane.

 

 

I've already done quite a bit of research and am continuing into the area. They are not expensive and just because Cirrus options them at 256 trillion dollars, as they do with everything, doesn't mean that's the way it is. I'm at $600 USD at the moment but I need a bit more info yet which will not come until I get Stateside and visit the manufacturer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Seems to me that the deceleration forces at play with a BRS are pretty significant, so not exactly a case of find somewhere that looks solidish and bolt on...

Quite true, Andy. It's not a plug-in item. Even though BRS has a system for gradually opening the canopy I bet quite a few Gs are focussed on the mounting point. A lot of engineering is involved in the suspension points.

My BRS came with pretty extensive fitting instructions and the company insisted on being sent pix of the installation.

 

Some people seem to have the idea that after they pull the red handle everything will be rosy.

 

BRS say their 'chute will slow the aircraft's descent to 7m/sec. (nearly 1,400'/min.) That's approaching the ground faster than most of us could in an extreme side slip- with no round-out! If you are carrying extra weight (let's be honest, don't we all?) you're coming down even faster. That would hurt, so the aircraft should descend at a distinct nose-down attitude so the undercarriage absorbs much of the impact.

 

The down side of a BRS (as well as the price and expensive maintenance): it adds 3% to the weight of your plane.

 

 

[alf jessup]

I think the pilots who consistently fly smart and safe, do thorough preflight and fly disciplined just keep doing what your doing

 

All all others who don't how about you start as it can and does happen to not only someone else

 

That might keep the fatal accidents to a minimum

 

There is a risk in every day life so to survive a life time requires a minimal exposure & some luck

 

We all end up dead in the end but some sooner than they expected by their own choice of actions

 

 

[bexrbetter]

That would hurt,

Most likely, but the point is to not die.

 

The down side of a BRS (as well as the price and expensive maintenance): it adds 3% to the weight of your plane.

Why are you lot fixated on one specific type.

 

There is a large array of chutes out there for different purposes and has been for a long time, from a kid throwing a plastic soldier up in the air to dropping a tank out of a C30.

 

 

[Pearo]

It's worth while trying not to get into it. The question remains though do we do some training? I've often taken the view that to teach it is to encourage it ....PERHAPS.?

If you have done the training I have done, you know damn well you dont want to get into IMC. The basic 2 hours IF for a PPL does nothing to convince you not to fly into IMC. Getting blindfolded and putting yourself into a spiral dive and not being able to fix it is a good way to scare you out of flying into IMC.

 

 

 

[motzartmerv]

I reckon that video has killed more people than its saved.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

What height do need to be at to safely deploy your parachute and be assured of a soft landing?

there are recorded incidents of ultralights deploying at 100' and 200' and walking away. I would think an LSA would need 3-400' AGL to wash off speed.