Mangalore incident today (19/2/2020)

[kgwilson]

I know of one instance of a structural failure in a motor glider when one wing failed at the root and folded over the top of the canopy pinning the pilot & passenger to their seats and forcing the throttle wide open. Neither the pilot nor passenger could reach the handle for the ballistic chute. It happened in mountainous terrain at around 11,000 feet and the aircraft pitched straight up & came down tail first onto a scree slope. No-one was hurt. Lotto tickets all round I'd say.

[SplitS]

BRS's are expensive and have to be repacked another large expense. However if your wing's have fallen off you would be happy you spent the money. As long as you had not exceeded the vne for chute deployment which would happen very very quickly. There are plenty of cases where the chute simply rips off.

If you are flying European rubbish metal spin machines they might be a good idea you do however have to be high enough for them to work. If you are flying a Jabiru your touch down speed is going to be about the speed off a ballistic chute anyway, with an almost unspinable aircraft your not going to be in a stall spin situation. Properly designed LSA do not need BRS. The cheapest option is wear your own chute glider style and modify the doors to come off. Something would have to be really wrong for you to want to leave the protection of a Jabiru cockpit.

[Jaba-who]

BRS's are expensive and have to be repacked another large expense. However if your wing's have fallen off you would be happy you spent the money. As long as you had not exceeded the vne for chute deployment which would happen very very quickly. There are plenty of cases where the chute simply rips off.

If you are flying European rubbish metal spin machines they might be a good idea you do however have to be high enough for them to work. If you are flying a Jabiru your touch down speed is going to be about the speed off a ballistic chute anyway, with an almost unspinable aircraft your not going to be in a stall spin situation. Properly designed LSA do not need BRS. The cheapest option is wear your own chute glider style and modify the doors to come off. Something would have to be really wrong for you to want to leave the protection of a Jabiru cockpit.

 

the other thing is retrofitting a parachute to something not designed fit it. I spoke with either Jamie Cook or Rod Stiff ( can’t remember which) specifically about retrofitting one to a Jab 430.

they advised they had no idea where or how to install nor where to attach the lines and that you can’t just plug em on anywhere. Needs lots of testing and trials to find the positions that won’t just rip the fuselage apart when it deploys. And they haven’t done any testing. You’d have to do it with your own aircraft and first trial could well be the end of it. So even if you’d like to it’s pretty much impossible with a jabiru anyway.

[Paulmilo]

You point out the problems , fine, but how is VFR , IFR ? .100% on instruments is not VFR. No horizon means you need a substitute for the horizon for determination of aircraft attitude.. The Artificial Horizon was introduced with the concept of ATTITUDE Instrument flying skjlls being taught. Most of them toppled when pitch and bank limits were exceeded. IF you did Aeros you CAGED the gyro instruments before doing them so they would not damage themselves. Nev

 

Instrument FLIGHT RULES - IFR really doesn’t have anything to do with having a visible horizon. It’s all about the rules. NVFR is visual FLIGHT RULES despite you being 100% on instruments for various portions of the flight such as take off and when in cruise without a visible horizon. In the circuit you are visible for the turn to final, but can be on instruments for other portions of the circuit when you might not be able to see the RWY lights. You fly a heading, altitude and attitude. That’s when VFR may be incorrectly referred to as IFR as opposed to being VFR on instruments.

[facthunter]

Sorry, Can't follow that Paulmilo… IF you are flying in a circuit and not on an instrument approach that you are qualified to perform, you shouldn't be below LSALT for the sector unless visual and able to stay so and if you are manoeuvring in the circuit at not below the specified circling minima you must be visual day or night. Nev

[biggles]

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2020/aair/ao-2020-012/

[SplitS]

Both had working ADSB and both where talking to ATC. Lucky they spent all that money on ADSB/ATC other wise they mite have crashed.

The take away here is make sure you have ADSB in and don't rely on anyone else. If one or both of these aircraft had ADSB in this crash would most likley have been avoided.

[MattP]

the other thing is retrofitting a parachute to something not designed fit it. I spoke with either Jamie Cook or Rod Stiff ( can’t remember which) specifically about retrofitting one to a Jab 430.

they advised they had no idea where or how to install nor where to attach the lines and that you can’t just plug em on anywhere. Needs lots of testing and trials to find the positions that won’t just rip the fuselage apart when it deploys. And they haven’t done any testing. You’d have to do it with your own aircraft and first trial could well be the end of it. So even if you’d like to it’s pretty much impossible with a jabiru anyway.

I’ve been lurking here for a while but only just decided to post, so hello everyone. I find the BRS debate interesting and found myself thinking about this particular incident and if as a last resort it would have made a difference, and to SplitS post if its there and available, I’m pulling. What it doesn’t do is address the root cause of this problem, which is also a wide and varied debate.

 

Some perspective on BRS from my experience is that I’ve found my attitude changing over time as I’ve had my mission and priorities change. In the early days I thought I was invincible, and well a parachute for your plane, who woulda thunk it? Then as I got into rec flying versus certified, I started noticing these red handles and thought ok cool, but it’s just me and I’d back my skills to forced land this bird into a paddock over the mercies of floating down, especially lower inertia LSA types. Even had a few people suggest to leave the pin in!

 

Then along comes family and a need to carry more on longer trips. Looking at the 40+ year old spam cans on the flight line as a renter, I wanted more. Getting the other half to sign off on family trips was made a load easier by showing her a cirrus. New yep, comfortable, yep feels like something you’d pay the stupid amounts you pay to fly for, and it’s got that parachute....

 

I was initially skeptical but I found the conversion training to be amongst the best delivered content I’ve experienced for aviation training I’ve had and their take not what I expected (was expecting hours of shots of caps handles) but they‘ve worked hard to detail the use of another system you as pic have available and can decide to use or not. Making this part of your workflow is handled well as is the pre flight brief to the point it just becomes part of what you do.

 

At the end of the day if it saves my bacon or someone I care about, then I’m a fan and will use it. The fitment of a BRS has become a no go item for the family trips or nervous passenger flights, whereas flying with other pilots / aviation tragics allows a higher level of informed risk acceptance.

[facthunter]

Mid air collisions you might already be seriously injured or dead. If a passenger jet has a mid air with anything it's going down. THEY don't have anything like one, A fire you need to get on the ground FAST. Over water the chute may impede you getting out. especially if it's windy. Getting in cloud when you shouldn't have (well you shouldn't have). Anywhere near the ground it won't help you. It's a hazard to rescuers. It's a weight you carry all the time, and it needs servicing. The ROD with the chute extended is enough to still cause injury depending on how and where you land and the plane is usually a write off. That's the other side of it.. It's your decision and you don't have to justify it to anyone else. Nev

[Flightrite]

Mid air collisions you might already be seriously injured or dead. If a passenger jet has a mid air with anything it's going down. THEY don't have anything like one, A fire you need to get on the ground FAST. Over water the chute may impede you getting out. especially if it's windy. Getting in cloud when you shouldn't have (well you shouldn't have). Anywhere near the ground it won't help you. It's a hazard to rescuers. It's a weight you carry all the time, and it needs servicing. The ROD with the chute extended is enough to still cause injury depending on how and where you land and the plane is usually a write off. That's the other side of it.. It's your decision and you don't have to justify it to anyone else. Nev

 

I tend to think along the same lines. The BRS is more aimed at putting the airframe down in a "more" survivable manor from say an engine failure of basic structural failure, not guaranteed at all. As we all know flying is a risk, a calculated risk. We are somewhat fortunate here in Oz our WX is manageable & the terrain mostly survivable.

I accept the risks cause I imimize them as much as I can without having to go as far as never getting out of bed,just in case?

[facthunter]

The terrain is not to difficult but the northern storms have tested a few planes anti-icing etc over the years, till they could fly above a lot of it. Nev

[Jerry_Atrick]

There is no silver bullet to make flying absolutely risk free. The BRS is another weapon in the arsenal to help survivability in certain - but not all situations. Trained properly, it can save you in circumstances where you may otherwise stand a much lower probability of suvivability. Use it in some of the abovementioned situations and at best it doesn't aid you a bit; at worst it can kill you.

 

There are times in Aus, I have taken the long way around to avoid tiger country.. would I go more direct with a chute? Not sure.. . From my closest airfield, the shortest route to France includes a water crossing over the channel of c. 120nm... If I have a chute, I will still do what I do today when I fly to France - fly along the coast to Kent and take the c. 20nm crossing from near enough to Folkestone.. Adds c. an hour to the trip - but within my risk appetite.. I would not think of deplying a chute over water... At present, as I don't have a BRS a/c, if I fly to Northern Italy (well, outside COVID-19), it is down the western side of the alps/Central Massif in France to the coast, low level (c. 1,000') follow the coast east to Italy and then into the North of the country. If I had a chute, I may be tempted to go over the alps. Pilots think I am nuts.. but I don't care.

 

There are some things that can happen that, if they do.. nothing will save you.

[Old Koreelah]

The terrain is not to difficult but the northern storms have tested a few planes anti-icing etc over the years, till they could fly above a lot of it. Nev

Pilots in the Yukon told me they're glad they don't have the extreme storms we get in Oz.

That surprised me because I thought their weather gets far worse.

[facthunter]

The inter-tropic convergence zone between Darwin and Timor has Cu's to 60 OOO feet that look green like a wall of ice. There's more energy in tropical areas especially where there's a lot of ocean and some high country as well. giving lots of unstable tropical maritime air, the cradle of powerful cyclones and heavy monsoonal rains. The ITCZ follows the thermal equator. There's times of the year when the almost daily thunder and lightning display is worth being in Darwin to see and feel.. All fine if you aren't trying to get some where in a plane at that time. . Airborne weather radar enables you to find the bigger cells and if you are half smart you give them a wide berth. Nev

[Old Koreelah]

They are collossal storms and too high for most people to go over Nev, but at least we don't get the blizzards they do in North America

[Flightrite]

The inter-tropic convergence zone between Darwin and Timor has Cu's to 60 OOO feet that look green like a wall of ice. There's more energy in tropical areas especially where there's a lot of ocean and some high country as well. giving lots of unstable tropical maritime air, the cradle of powerful cyclones and heavy monsoonal rains. The ITCZ follows the thermal equator. There's times of the year when the almost daily thunder and lightning display is worth being in Darwin to see and feel.. All fine if you aren't trying to get some where in a plane at that time. . Airborne weather radar enables you to find the bigger cells and if you are half smart you give them a wide berth. Nev

 

Oh that brings back ugly memories! Did some contract work out of DN some years ago, the vertical development of some storms was staggering even though we where at 49K ft!

[kgwilson]

BRS, well as has been said it is a personal choice. I have looked at the issues and disregarded the cost but my answer still came out No.

[Jerry_Atrick]

This is Cirrus centred (and possibly sponsored??), but I think it vindicates @MattP's thinking. Also interesting is dthe deplpomnt over water.. .I guess if there is a decent horizontal wind component, it can be beneficial...

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

<snip> Also interesting is dthe deplpomnt over water.. </snip>

 

 

I hope y'all can read pig English...

(sorry.. or in today's parlance... soz)

[Thruster88]

This is Cirrus centred (and possibly sponsored??), but I think it vindicates @MattP's thinking. Also interesting is dthe deplpomnt over water.. .I guess if there is a decent horizontal wind component, it can be beneficial...

 

This save happened in Aus, the cause loss of control.

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2014/aair/ao-2014-083/

[facthunter]

Can't see how a wind reduces the ROD otherwise OK He's good at explaining most things.

Plane with chute descends at 19 mph wind at 19 gives a vector of 1.4 x 19 equals around 28 . More wind even more velocity. On uneven ground that's getting to where you are knocked around. In water you can get tangled in the shrouds if the chute acts as a sail. I'm not against having one. it's just not a complete answer. IF you are on fire getting on the ground quicker is the priority..and IF you are still flying it you have some control over how and where it hits the deck. Nev

[jackc]

Can't see how a wind reduces the ROD otherwise OK He's good at explaining most things.

Plane with chute descends at 19 mph wind at 19 gives a vector of 1.4 x 19 equals around 28 . More wind even more velocity. On uneven ground that's getting to where you are knocked around. In water you can get tangled in the shrouds if the chute acts as a sail. I'm not against having one. it's just not a complete answer. IF you are on fire getting on the ground quicker is the priority..and IF you are still flying it you have some control over how and where it hits the deck. Nev

Probably the only thing that can save your arse in a Fire is wear a backpack chute and take a chance on bailing out. I would like to know statistics on RAA aircraft incidents with fire and what the survival rate is......

[Garfly]

See here for a thorough discussion of one fire-on-board incident, a few years back:

 

https://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/incident-13-may-15.25427/#post-303516

[Flightrite]

Fire in the cockpit is probably one of my most concerns. Recently I had my master switch let out some magic smoke, the area around it next to the ignition switch got very hot! Finally popped the CB. Traced it back to one switch wire very close to the frame, after years of pushing it on & off the switch mounting got a little lose so it touched! Luckily I was still, on the ground! I now carry a fire ext. not fool proof but some insurance.

[gibby]

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/santa-maria-van-nuys-central-california-plane-crash-school-video/2365863/

 

This happened a few days ago in the states, BRS don't always work as planned, but they do have a place and in some instances they would of saved lives