Anyone Fitted A BRS To A Thruster?

[jackc]

Subject says it all, wondering IF anyone has done this?  Was looking at a canister  type on the main tail boom?  On top of wing?

I will have to probably engineer the mounting system as there will be no factory information?

 

[BrendAn]

On 09/09/2021 at 6:21 PM, jackc said:

Subject says it all, wondering IF anyone has done this?  Was looking at a canister  type on the main tail boom?  On top of wing?

I will have to probably engineer the mounting system as there will be no factory information?

 

Hi. I have just purchased a t300 /582. And was wondering the same thing.   

[jackc]

5 hours ago, BrendAn said:

Hi. I have just purchased a t300 /582. And was wondering the same thing.   

Well, I called the RAA about fitting BRS,  and spoke with the Tech Manager and all he said was submit the required MARAP Tech Form 014 with my  information.  Seems they look at the submission and give a quote for engineering the fitment.

He did not want to seem to enter into any other conversation etc other than submit the form and wait!

I sort of got the impression someone pee’d in his Weeties that morning, as he did not sound real happy:-)

He wants to remember some of my membership fees, feed him every week!

 

[BrendAn]

3 hours ago, jackc said:

Well, I called the RAA about fitting BRS,  and spoke with the Tech Manager and all he said was submit the required MARAP Tech Form 014 with my  information.  Seems they look at the submission and give a quote for engineering the fitment.

He did not want to seem to enter into any other conversation etc other than submit the form and wait!

I sort of got the impression someone pee’d in his Weeties that morning, as he did not sound real happy:-)

He wants to remember some of my membership fees, feed him every week!

 

Thanks  for that. Sounds like it will be pia .i won't worry about it

[jackc]

I will do the application and see how it goes……IF it’s an untenable situation, I have already got a price for a thin pack Aerolite wearable parachute…..glider pilots wear them.

[BrendAn]

4 minutes ago, jackc said:

I will do the application and see how it goes……IF it’s an untenable situation, I have already got a price for a thin pack Aerolite wearable parachute…..glider pilots wear them.

Keep us posted if you don't mind. 

[jackc]

Surely will 🙂

[facthunter]

You have actually given him a considerable problem to nut out something that the plane may not be suitable for. He's most likely to not have even seen a thruster. Nev

[jackc]

Nev,   Well I looked at it all and figured out how to make it work…….but a knuckle dragger like me should not be doing that stuff because I am not qualified.  So I have to be come entangled in the system and I don’t have a lot of faith in it to produce a workable solution at a viable cost, unfortunately.

[facthunter]

I'm not sure it's possible Jack. Structurally and aerodynamically and you have the extra weight all the time as well. How much disturbed air will the package create? Nev

[BrendAn]

26 minutes ago, facthunter said:

I'm not sure it's possible Jack. Structurally and aerodynamically and you have the extra weight all the time as well. How much disturbed air will the package create? Nev

They fit them to xairs so i would imagine a thruster wouldn't be much different.   

[facthunter]

I don't know how much weight that view will have with the bloke that has to approve it  The Xair is cleaner and has a tricycle U/C. Thrusters like a bit of airflow over the tailfeathers. . Nev

[jackc]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

I'm not sure it's possible Jack. Structurally and aerodynamically and you have the extra weight all the time as well. How much disturbed air will the package create? Nev

Nev,  Apparently  Thrusters originally had a problem with their angled muffler disturbing air flow over the tail feathers?  That was fixed by facing the muffler straight back.  Maybe a BRS could produce the same problem?  Weight?  I have been told it’s OK to fit a Rotax 912 to a Thruster, so maybe weight is not so much a problem?  That is  something I would never do.

i guess I have to submit the paperwork and see what happens 🙂

[jackc]

17 hours ago, facthunter said:

You have actually given him a considerable problem to nut out something that the plane may not be suitable for. He's most likely to not have even seen a thruster. Nev

Something I have always done is research IF I am shy of knowledge on a subject.  I would only hope IF someone is on the staff of RAA they would make sure they schooled themselves on any thing that has wings, pertaining to Recreational Aviation.

 

[facthunter]

Recreational plane design is a little more "How's your father" than more conventional ones. I'd start with the airflow issue myself.  The structural aspect is more straightforward. 3 pointing Thrusters has never been easy. Nev

[Thruster88]

I would be most surprised if you can find an engineer that will sign off on the install. In the past people would have just bought a  brs and installed it, I have seen one on a thruster. In the certified world BRS are in all Cirrus and they have kits for retrofitting Cessna 172 and 182.  Why are there not more BRS kits for certified aircraft, could be the cost of the EO, engineering order.

[jackc]

35 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

I would be most surprised if you can find an engineer that will sign off on the install. In the past people would have just bought a  brs and installed it, I have seen one on a thruster. In the certified world BRS are in all Cirrus and they have kits for retrofitting Cessna 172 and 182.  Why are there not more BRS kits for certified aircraft, could be the cost of the EO, engineering order.

Ordinarily I would just find what I thought would do the job and DIY the whole thing. Nothing I ever designed and built in the last 55 years has ever fallen down, come apart, compromised anyone’s safety etc.  BUT IF I do this to a 25 Rego aircraft, some snitch would see me in RAA gaol 😞  I have seen too many engineers have major FUBAR in my life.  

Well maybe I need to find pics of that Thruster so fitted, so I can submit it with my application 🙂 

They are mandatory fit in Europe now……

[Old Koreelah]

8 hours ago, facthunter said:

I'm not sure it's possible Jack. Structurally and aerodynamically and you have the extra weight all the time as well. How much disturbed air will the package create? Nev

Nev I can’t see the problem; the Thruster is a simple design, the main structural members are easy to access and I reckon a small cansiter-style BRS could be mounted above the wing without adding too much drag.
Even better, the original designer is still around to advise.

[pmccarthy]

But why? You would have to be at or above 1000ft and experience a structural failure. Otherwise better to glide to an emergency landing. What is the chance of that structural failure?

[jackc]

Medical emergency, pilot becomes sick or incapacitated and realises they can no longer fly the aircraft…..

[BrendAn]

10 hours ago, facthunter said:

I don't know how much weight that view will have with the bloke that has to approve it  The Xair is cleaner and has a tricycle U/C. Thrusters like a bit of airflow over the tailfeathers. . Nev

Fair enough. Makes sense. I am still learning . 

[BrendAn]

1 hour ago, pmccarthy said:

But why? You would have to be at or above 1000ft and experience a structural failure. Otherwise better to glide to an emergency landing. What is the chance of that structural failure?

I read up on the brs and they have been used as low as 100 ft and saved people even though they recommend 300 ft minimum. What did surprise me was how many cirrus aircraft have deployed the brs. I think its around 95 which seems a lot for a plane that has only been around for 20 or 30 years. I am not a pilot yet so i am no expert but it makes one wonder if some pilots panic and pull the handle when there may have been other choices. 

[turboplanner]

The BRS saves them from walletitis. They've got the money to buy the complex aircraft but not the time to learn properly or stay current, and they tend to disregard weather as a nuisance, so a perfect market for BRS.

[aro]

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

They've got the money to buy the complex aircraft but not the time to learn properly or stay current

That might apply if you only fly day VFR over open country, but people do fly single engine aircraft at night, IFR, and out of suburban airports like Moorabbin. In any of those circumstances a BRS chute is good insurance.

 

Even landing in a paddock after engine failure... in something like a SR22 the landing speed is 80 knots so you're doing 150 km/h over a paddock you've never seen before, with tiny wheels, rudimentary suspension and lets face it, not much in the way of steering. If all goes well that should still work out, but the parachute might be the higher percentage play. Just because most aircraft don't give you that choice doesn't mean it's bad.

[turboplanner]

2 hours ago, aro said:

That might apply if you only fly day VFR over open country, but people do fly single engine aircraft at night, IFR, and out of suburban airports like Moorabbin. In any of those circumstances a BRS chute is good insurance.

 

Even landing in a paddock after engine failure... in something like a SR22 the landing speed is 80 knots so you're doing 150 km/h over a paddock you've never seen before, with tiny wheels, rudimentary suspension and lets face it, not much in the way of steering. If all goes well that should still work out, but the parachute might be the higher percentage play. Just because most aircraft don't give you that choice doesn't mean it's bad.

Agree with you; I was talking about one of the types of buyers that show up regularly in accident reports rather than applications.

a BRS makes Night VFR saleable to employers because you avoid the potential of a simple forced landing due to fuel exhaustion, contaminated fuel, electrical fault engine issue etc to turn into a fatal because you couldn't see the ditches, concrete walls or windmills in the dark. Same reason with IFR.