Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

As they say no sense no feeling.

 

Fancy flying one of those brick's 20ft above the trees, you are just asking for trouble.

 

Engine out, resultant effect ,a vertical descent.

 

 

Posted
As they say no sense no feeling.Fancy flying one of those brick's 20ft above the trees, you are just asking for trouble.

Engine out, resultant effect ,a vertical descent.

Max vertical speed 12fps, flare before impact reduces that to essentially zero with forward air speed about 15 kts. Not much of a brick in those figures.

 

About as threatening as falling of a bicycle.

 

Powered parachutes are an extremely fun way to fly, very forgiving and very safe with any imaginable incident expected to be survivable.

 

BUT if you want to go places they are one step up from useless and while having a very low frequency of serious accidents "incidents" are very common.

 

Davidh

 

 

Posted
G'day 727, your link gives me 5 pages of videos, which one are you referring to?

It worked earlier Doug. YouTube has removed it with this notice:

 

This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by a third party.

 

 

 

It was just the old wing-mounted vid on a rag and tube who takes off, turns immediately over a car park, and has an engine failure 10 feet above some tall trees. No time for anything but a wiggle of the thongs. I think I read he survived OK, but broke a couple of things.

 

Certainly wasn't planning for failure.

 

 

 

Posted

Hi David,

 

If it is a powered parachute then I stand corrected but I thought that it was something akin to a quicksilver which I know from experiance has the glide angle of a brick, everything happens around the 45 mph mark and when the engine stops what you see beneath you is basically where you land.

 

Also you have a better than 90% chance ending up inverted if the landing is on rough ground, the nose wheel becomes a nusiance in such circumstances.

 

Regards,

 

Rick-p

 

 

Posted

this vid has been on several sites now for some time. story was he had known carby problems and flew anyway. make matters worse he turned over the trees when he still had 600ft of runway in front of him. if you look carefully when the engine fails he applies full backstick. he was stalled when he hit the trees and ended up on a road. injuries where pretty severe pelvis hip ribs puntured lung ect. lessons to be learnt here.

 

ozzie

 

 

Posted

No donk.

 

Think that has been about for a while. So low over the trees is a bad idea when there are other alternatives. The stick pull-back is pretty instinctive. Can't see that there was much else available anyhow ..Nev..

 

 

Posted

Hi Rick-P

 

On second viewing it would seem that the aircraft was a Quicksilver type and not a PPC. There were enough wires in the frame to keep confuse me (pretty well my normal state).

 

Comments about PPCs in general still stand although in that tree top case even a PPC would have been at risk.

 

Flaring to near zero vertical speed could only occur at one height be it at the tree tops or ground level in either case he would have been in big trouble.

 

cheers

 

Davidh

 

 

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

I have seen that one before and previously thought it was a nanolight trike, but this time spotted the faint shadow of a 3 axis ultrlight as he passed over the carpark.

 

 

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...