CASA Safety Notice warns against stalling Bristell aircraft - 19 Feb 2020

[M61A1]

I note that AOPA have advised that CASA intends to look into the stall/spin characteristics of up to fifty LSAs . So everybody who has had such enjoyment from sinking the boot into the Bristell may not find things quite so enjoyable from here on. The silence from Raaus on this matter has been deafening with no attempt made to support their members . Just lapdogs of CASA it would appear.

I don't find that surprising that many might have questionable stall spin recovery and speaking for myself, it's not about enjoying sinking the boot on. I don't.

I feel for the importers and those who own them, because I know that usually they will have put all the have into the enterprise, but........When I first saw one, I loved how it looked until I got to the rudder and fin. The Bristell is not alone in being designed for looks, (and they do look great) without proper regard to practicality.

[Guest Bristell]

BRM the Bristell manufacturer has advised that they are having all models retested by the German company that is recognised by the EASA for this purpose. If they pass as I‘m sure they will it will be happy days for us. If not we will have to live with CASA’s restrictions. The previous spin testing was carried out by Yury Vashchuk an engineer and test pilot involved in testing the Sukhoi S35. For unknown reasons CASA are not happy with his work, hence the need for an independent retest. By the way not liking the look of the fin and rudder does not mean it’s dangerous!

[SplitS]

I note that AOPA have advised that CASA intends to look into the stall/spin characteristics of up to fifty LSAs . So everybody who has had such enjoyment from sinking the boot into the Bristell may not find things quite so enjoyable from here on. The silence from Raaus on this matter has been deafening with no attempt made to support their members . Just lapdogs of CASA it would appear.

 

Unless you fly a Jabiru, then you can point and laugh.

[M61A1]

By the way not liking the look of the fin and rudder does not mean it’s dangerous!

It's not that it doesn't look nice.......I judge that bit on advice from a well known aeronautical engineer while on one of his courses on light aircraft design. The advice is as I posted previously with the image.

[kgwilson]

It's not that it doesn't look nice.......I judge that bit on advice from a well known aeronautical engineer while on one of his courses on light aircraft design. The advice is as I posted previously with the image.

I agree the rudder is shielded by the horizontal stabiliser when the aircraft is spinning

[Guest Bristell]

Well be that as it may. My point is that if the various Bristell models are retested with regard to spin recovery and are found to meet the standards, then CASA should remove their restriction.

[Old Koreelah]

Well be that as it may. My point is that if the various Bristell models are retested with regard to spin recovery and are found to meet the standards, then CASA should remove their restriction.

A new round of testing (especially if done in the light of the fatal crashes) might throw up a simple fix, such as strakes, or changes to the allowable CoG range. The engineer mentioned by M61A1 is renowned for his ability to "fix" the bad aspects of existing aircraft designs.

[Blueadventures]

All manufactures should be willing to redo the tests, do a video at the same time and all passes will add to thier respective advertising detail. Only the 'Boeing Max' types won't be happy.

[M61A1]

My point is that if the various Bristell models are retested with regard to spin recovery and are found to meet the standards, then CASA should remove their restriction

I sincerely hope that they test Ok, I will be pleasantly surprised if they do.

I do think that aircraft used for training should be able to recover from a spin relatively easily. Something difficult to recover is not something to send low hour pilots solo in (or low hour instructors for that matter).

 

Only the 'Boeing Max' types won't be happy.

I'd rather fly a Max with a busted AoA probe than spin some of these flash eurothingies with tiny rudders and fins.

[Thruster88]

7 fatal stall/spin GA crashes in the first 2 months of 2020 in the USA. Were the spin characteristics of any of the aircraft involved a factor? Unlikely, what is known is the aircraft departed controlled flight due to insufficient air speed. Marking (yes not legal) the airspeed indicator with minimum manoeuvring speed is a great idea, 3 for the price of one as it will be close to the best climb, best glide speed as well. I hope Dan can continue to gain traction with pilots on this and other safety issues, simple clear education or the big stick, only one works.

 

[Guest Machtuk]

How did us old codgers live this long with flying some real sh1t boxes over the years with if ya lucky a compass? I've said it all along its way too easy to get a plane drivers ticket these days! Not enuf time is spent on unusual recovery situations or practiced loss of controlled flight!

[pmccarthy]

There is an affinity for machinery that is important in flying. Some people can’t hear the bearings in a ride on mower flogging themselves to pieces. Or appreciate what is happening in an unhappy motorbike engine. Other people, and I would hope to be included, have a feel for the aeroplane and whether it is operating in a safe envelope. Of course, recent experience is necessary to keep that awareness working.

[kgwilson]

I can hear just about every piston firing or maybe the time one doesn't fire. I've taken friends flying and asked if they could hear something when I knew the engine wasn't singing the perfect song. When the balance tube came off the carb, at certain rpm the engine felt lumpy & the sound wasn't right. I knew it instantly but my passenger thought it was fine when I asked. There are other things that are imagined such as the engine not sounding right when flying over water.

[Old Koreelah]

...There are other things that are imagined such as the engine not sounding right when flying over water.

I've heard it said that "an aeroplane doesn't know what it's flying over", but the only times I've ever heard an engine splutter seemed to have been over water or Yowie country!

[M61A1]

I can hear just about every piston firing or maybe the time one doesn't fire. I've taken friends flying and asked if they could hear something when I knew the engine wasn't singing the perfect song. When the balance tube came off the carb, at certain rpm the engine felt lumpy & the sound wasn't right. I knew it instantly but my passenger thought it was fine when I asked. There are other things that are imagined such as the engine not sounding right when flying over water.

And someone usually makes a long winded radio transmission, complete with crappy background noises at exactly that moment as well...

[facthunter]

A reasonably good basic knowledge of Newtonian Physics is also required when flying. I feel we have let down many students by dumbing down flying training to "popularise" it getting quantity rather than quality. The Industry wants to sell planes, trips and flying hours. RAAus wants to be the NEW GA.. "EVERYONE can fly an aeroplane" is NOT correct anymore than everyone can ride a powerful motorbike safely. When somebody dies often taking others with them ,how often would some extra knowledge have prevented it.?..More often than you might think is my view. What woke me up to this realisation was later in my flying experience, getting re involved with Flying training I'd ask a pilot "Why don't you do such and such (technique)."The answer was I DIDN'T KNOW you could DO that. and sideslipping,.... forget it. Hardly anyone does it correctly.. I don't blame the student(s). Nev

[M61A1]

A reasonably good basic knowledge of Newtonian Physics is also required when flying.

I like the way you think, but apparently society doesn't see it that way. It's very obvious that most people who operate a machine like a car, bike or plane, have virtually no idea of the physics involved, nor are they required to. Perhaps a little less so with aircraft, as some knowledge is required to pass the exams. However, after meeting many engineers, it is obvious that knowing the theory and putting it into practice are very different things.

I can't imagine Joe public being happy about doing a type conversion when they sold the Commodore and bought a Nissan Skyline, in order to understand their systems.

[facthunter]

The application of physics is to principles of flight rather than the intricacies of the aircraft. When a car system fails you stop and pull over. In a plane you have many redundancies, moreso in a complex one. IF you don't know HOW they work you can't operate safely. Same with electrics, pressurisation antiicing and fuel systems and hydraulics. Bit more than a Nissan or GM car. There's no comparison really. Nev

[Guest Machtuk]

Whilst a good general sound knowledge of the machine you fly is important most times that knowledge wont help much if it's serious.

The theory of flight is something we know about even at a basic level which is important, the trick is NOT to become a test pilot outside of the limits!

[M61A1]

the trick is NOT to become a test pilot outside of the limits!

Part of the issue is that LSA are not required to be tested to the same standard as GA aircraft are. In a Cessna or Piper, you know that it has been tested and modified as necessary to be recoverable from a stable spin, not so with LSA. A slow moving instructor with a student in an LSA may quickly find themselves outside the limits to which the aircraft has been tested.

 

The application of physics is to principles of flight rather than the intricacies of the aircraft. When a car system fails you stop and pull over. In a plane you have many redundancies, moreso in a complex one. IF you don't know HOW they work you can't operate safely. Same with electrics, pressurisation antiicing and fuel systems and hydraulics. Bit more than a Nissan or GM car. There's no comparison really. Nev

My point was more about the principle. Drivers who understand how their ABS works are less likely to have a crash. Similarly drivers that drive blindly to the speed limit without any "feel" won't know that they are about to exceed the traction limits of their tyres on a slippery bit of road, and a pilot with "feel", will feel the interaction between the airframe and airflow and know they are right on the edge of where it will go bad. They have the "feel" because they understand what is going on and have made the effort to find the edge in a situation where it won't be fatal, rather than just taking off, climbing to a safe altitude, flying in a straight line, descending and landing on a long hard runway.

There are those who are interested in what they do and there are those that just do what they do without thought.

[Guest Machtuk]

Part of the issue is that LSA are not required to be tested to the same standard as GA aircraft are. In a Cessna or Piper, you know that it has been tested and modified as necessary to be recoverable from a stable spin, not so with LSA. A slow moving instructor with a student in an LSA may quickly find themselves outside the limits to which the aircraft has been tested.

 

 

My point was more about the principle. Drivers who understand how their ABS works are less likely to have a crash. Similarly drivers that drive blindly to the speed limit without any "feel" won't know that they are about to exceed the traction limits of their tyres on a slippery bit of road, and a pilot with "feel", will feel the interaction between the airframe and airflow and know they are right on the edge of where it will go bad. They have the "feel" because they understand what is going on and have made the effort to find the edge in a situation where it won't be fatal, rather than just taking off, climbing to a safe altitude, flying in a straight line, descending and landing on a long hard runway.

There are those who are interested in what they do and there are those that just do what they do without thought.

Like I said DON'T become a test pilot!

[facthunter]

Anytime you load your plane outside of the Cof G and weight limits that's what you are. Same if you encounter a willy-willy and end up inverted or have a jammed brake. You never quite know what's going to happen next. .You may have a wasp fill your pitot with mud . You should be able to do a safe circuit without the ASI. You might be a little fast, but should be safe. Nev

[Guest Machtuk]

Anytime you load your plane outside of the Cof G and weight limits that's what you are. Same if you encounter a willy-willy and end up inverted or have a jammed brake. You never quite know what's going to happen next. .You may have a wasp fill your pitot with mud . You should be able to do a safe circuit without the ASI. You might be a little fast, but should be safe. Nev

Be interesting to see how many could fly/land without the Speedo! Most fly with a GPS so that’s a huge advantage.

many years ago 80’s pre GPS I had a speedo failure in flight in a old station plane C172 I approached at cruise speed and touched down hot(Pt Hedland), taught me to practice every now & then!

[facthunter]

Mud blocked Pitot tubes were common at Rutherford. (West Maitland). Wasps did it in about 5 minutes sometimes. Most pilots practiced it at some stage without the advantage of the length of the Port Hedland runway. You would probably add about 20 knots for a good performance with a safety margin Attitude/power/configuration and all that.. Regardless of what's appearing on the "speedo" you should know/feel if she's a bit slow and do something about it. Nev

[pmccarthy]

Have done it, not a problem in a PA-28. It is a good idea to slow down and check that the stall warning is working while at altitude, then you know you have a safety margin.