 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.co
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:33 pm Post subject: BRS revisited |
 |
|
Guys,
I recently listened to the pros and cons of why we need a whole-plane ballistic recoverery system. I am still "on the fence", let's say.
I think both sides certainly present very valid arguments for their repective positions. That being said, I just came across this video.
Here is one guy's story, and it ain't no b.s. Watch this video, and let me know what you think.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/738998/ballistic_chute_deployment/
I have to admit, this video helps one side of the argument, for sure!!
Mike Welch MkIII
Do Not Archive
_________________________________________________________________
Put your friends on the big screen with Windows Vista® + Windows Live™.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_MediaCtr_bigscreen_102007
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jindoguy(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:44 pm Post subject: BRS revisited |
|
|
Yes, it's impressive. What's more impressive is the way they skip
right over the fact that the pilot of the deployment aircraft was in
violation of the FAR's when he failed to yield the right of way to the
aircraft towing the glider. This guy is completely oblivious to the
fact that the "accident" was entirely his responsibility to avoid. He
shouldn't be extolling the virtues of BRS (or whomever), what we ought
to see is a group of angry fliers demanding that this selfish idiot be
grounded for life and after having that done, he be prosecuted for
reckless endangerment and sent to jail. Just my opinion.
Rick
On Nov 18, 2007 7:33 PM, Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> wrote:
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kolbmark3
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 40
Location: Mt Clemens, MI
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 1:45 am Post subject: BRS revisited |
|
|
I did not see a glider, just a plane that may have been towing a glider
before but was now just another airplane. I don't think there is any
requirement to yield to a "plane that dad been towing a glider", just a reg
to yield to a glider itself.
That said, blame could be spread equally for both pilots failure to "see and
avoid" each other.
Jim
Mark III
---
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
Jim
Mark III
Mt. Clemens, MI |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jb92563
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 314
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:37 am Post subject: Re: BRS revisited |
|
|
Accidents like that happen when some pilots are oblivious to their surroundings and have no Situational Awareness when flying.
I fly gliders in a shared operation with a skydiving center and the airspace is a very busy drop zone, plus all the gliders that fly just out side the drop zone.
I can't tell you how many times I've observed a small plane fly directly under the drop zone seconds after I heard the jump plane call "Jumpers Away" at 14,000'
I myself have been on tow in a glider and had oblivious traffic on a collision course.....the tow pilot told me to prepare for evasive manuevers and we did fast 90 to avoid a group of ultralights that would not yield us our right of way....a less experienced student would of had to release which is probably why there was no glider on the end of that rope in the video.
The tow plane descends immediately after release so there is no other reason why he would be still climbing like that unless he was still towing the glider moments before the accident, fortunately the glider saw the situation and released to avoid a collision.
I concur that the dumb ass pilot flying into the line should be staked to the ground and given 50 lashes by the tow pilot and the glider pilot who released early, and have his license revoked.
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
Ray
Kolb UltraStar (Cuyuna UL-202)
Moni MotorGlider
Schreder HP-11 Glider
Grob 109 Motorglider
Do Not Archive |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jindoguy(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:45 am Post subject: BRS revisited |
|
|
Jim, Let's start with the basics, first.
FAR 91.113 Right-of-way rules:Except water operations.
b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether
an operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual flight
rules, vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an
aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft. When a rule of this
section gives another aircraft the right-of-way, the pilot shall give
way to that aircraft and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless
well clear.
d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging at
approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the
aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way. If the aircraft are
of different categories--
(1) A balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of
aircraft;
(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, powered
parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.
(3) An airship has the right-of-way over a powered parachute,
weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.
However, an aircraft towing or refueling other aircraft has the
right-of-way over all other engine-driven aircraft.
The bold text shows the relevant FAR's. In the film, the towing aircraft comes from the deployment aircraft's right. The towing aircraft has the right-of -way, even if he wasn't towing. The film says the rope was being used to tow a glider. The last bold sews it up.
In sum: The deployment aircraft failed to yield the right-of-way to an aircraft approaching from his right. He failed to yield to an aircraft towing another aircraft.
The film shows the pilot pulling up when the tow aircraft crossed his path, and he says, "I pulled up a little".
Now let's look at what the FAR's have to say about how to yield the right-of-way.
(e) Approaching head-on. When aircraft are approaching each other head-on, or nearly so, each pilot of each aircraft shall alter course to the right.
(f) Overtaking. Each aircraft that is being overtaken has the right-of-way and each pilot of an overtaking aircraft shall alter course to the right to pass well clear.
We have a bit of a quandry because the FAA doesn't have a strict rule about aircraft converging on a common point at right angles to each other. (government under regulation; e gads!  )
However, in the two cases given, alter course to the right is prescribed.
This pilot chose to climb. Perhaps it was instinct from a previous German visit to France, but the person alleged to be the pilot in the film doesn't look quite that old.
Curious that the pilot or his narrator says the rope wrapped around the propeller, and his first action was to stop the engine. His next was to pull the handle, NOT, "then I scanned the aircraft for damage as I attempted to resume normal flight."
Perhaps the French do not have similar rules to the FAR's. If they do, they're fortunate to have the guillotine, too.
Rick
On Nov 19, 2007 3:46 AM, flykolb <flykolb(at)wowway.com (flykolb(at)wowway.com)> wrote:
[quote] --> Kolb-List message posted by: "flykolb" < flykolb(at)wowway.com (flykolb(at)wowway.com)>
I did not see a glider, just a plane that may have been towing a glider
before but was now just another airplane. I don't think there is any
requirement to yield to a "plane that dad been towing a glider", just a reg
to yield to a glider itself.
That said, blame could be spread equally for both pilots failure to "see and
avoid" each other.
Jim
Mark III
---
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.co
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:35 am Post subject: BRS revisited |
|
|
Rick,
When I first saw this video, and then suggested everyone look at it, I wasn't trying to stir up a hornet's nest...again. There is absolutely NO doubt the deployment aircraft failed to lead the right of way. I mean, how in the hell can he be surprised that all of a sudden there is an approaching aircraft, dragging a tow rope? Shouldn't he be scanning for other traffic? He didn't appear to be.
But, regardless of who was at fault, if the time ever rose, some people feel certain a BRS can save their life.
Funny thing, though. Although this Goober flew his plane into this rope, and it appears that all the rope did was stop his prop. Didn't look like any structural damage. No torns off wings. No significant damage, you'd think then, why that would merit deployment of the BRS?
Curious. Was this another BRS "life save" in a perfectly flyable glider? (I say glider, assuming he can't restart his engine. And that makes you wonder...why DIDN'T he try to restart his engine?)
It appears this guy doesn't watch were he's flying, and when faced with an in-flight emergency, ignors all the Standard Operating Proceedures to handle an emergency.
Again, I wasn't trying to ruffle feathers. I just don't know if a BRS is as warranted as the BRS numbers say.
MIke Welch
________________________________
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:44:01 -0600
From: jindoguy(at)gmail.com
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: BRS revisited
Jim, Let's start with the basics, first.
FAR 91.113 Right-of-way rules:Except water operations.
b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether
an operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual flight
rules, vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an
aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft. When a rule of this
section gives another aircraft the right-of-way, the pilot shall give
way to that aircraft and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless
well clear.
d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging at
approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the
aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way. If the aircraft are
of different categories--
(1) A balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of
aircraft;
(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, powered
parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.
(3) An airship has the right-of-way over a powered parachute,
weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.
However, an aircraft towing or refueling other aircraft has the
right-of-way over all other engine-driven aircraft.
The bold text shows the relevant FAR's. In the film, the towing aircraft comes from the deployment aircraft's right. The towing aircraft has the right-of -way, even if he wasn't towing. The film says the rope was being used to tow a glider. The last bold sews it up.
In sum: The deployment aircraft failed to yield the right-of-way to an aircraft approaching from his right. He failed to yield to an aircraft towing another aircraft.
The film shows the pilot pulling up when the tow aircraft crossed his path, and he says, "I pulled up a little".
Now let's look at what the FAR's have to say about how to yield the right-of-way.
(e) Approaching head-on. When aircraft are approaching each other head-on, or nearly so, each pilot of each aircraft shall alter course to the right.
(f) Overtaking. Each aircraft that is being overtaken has the right-of-way and each pilot of an overtaking aircraft shall alter course to the right to pass well clear.
We have a bit of a quandry because the FAA doesn't have a strict rule about aircraft converging on a common point at right angles to each other. (government under regulation; e gads! )
However, in the two cases given, alter course to the right is prescribed.
This pilot chose to climb. Perhaps it was instinct from a previous German visit to France, but the person alleged to be the pilot in the film doesn't look quite that old.
Curious that the pilot or his narrator says the rope wrapped around the propeller, and his first action was to stop the engine. His next was to pull the handle, NOT, "then I scanned the aircraft for damage as I attempted to resume normal flight."
Perhaps the French do not have similar rules to the FAR's. If they do, they're fortunate to have the guillotine, too.
Rick
On Nov 19, 2007 3:46 AM, flykolb <flykolb(at)wowway.com> wrote:
[quote]
I did not see a glider, just a plane that may have been towing a glider
before but was now just another airplane. I don't think there is any
requirement to yield to a "plane that dad been towing a glider", just a reg
to yield to a glider itself.
That said, blame could be spread equally for both pilots failure to "see and
avoid" each other.
Jim
Mark III
---
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jindoguy(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 1:59 pm Post subject: BRS revisited |
|
|
Mike, I hope you don't think any of the comments I made were to criticize
anyone for posting and commenting on this video. Funny thing, though, I held
back commenting on the deployment except upon his decision making. For not
wanting to suffer any comments on my militancy I withheld comment on the
relative lack of damage to the aircraft. I'm glad someone pointed it out.
I believe this film SHOULD cause a stir among pilots. This is brought to you
by the same people who talk of cars losing control on the freeway to
describe an accident. Phony safety arguments are the major product of our
times, but this one is so blatantly phony, it's insulting.
Rick
On Nov 19, 2007 11:33 AM, Mike Welch <mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]
Rick,
When I first saw this video, and then suggested everyone look at it, I
wasn't trying to stir up a hornet's nest...again. There is absolutely NO
doubt the deployment aircraft failed to lead the right of way. I mean, how
in the hell can he be surprised that all of a sudden there is an approaching
aircraft, dragging a tow rope? Shouldn't he be scanning for other traffic?
He didn't appear to be.
But, regardless of who was at fault, if the time ever rose, some people
feel certain a BRS can save their life.
Funny thing, though. Although this Goober flew his plane into this rope,
and it appears that all the rope did was stop his prop. Didn't look like
any structural damage. No torns off wings. No significant damage, you'd
think then, why that would merit deployment of the BRS?
Curious. Was this another BRS "life save" in a perfectly flyable glider?
(I say glider, assuming he can't restart his engine. And that makes you
wonder...why DIDN'T he try to restart his engine?)
It appears this guy doesn't watch were he's flying, and when faced with
an in-flight emergency, ignors all the Standard Operating Proceedures to
handle an emergency.
Again, I wasn't trying to ruffle feathers. I just don't know if a BRS is
as warranted as the BRS numbers say.
MIke Welch
________________________________
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:44:01 -0600
From: jindoguy(at)gmail.com
To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: BRS revisited
Jim, Let's start with the basics, first.
FAR 91.113 Right-of-way rules:Except water operations.
b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether
an operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual flight
rules, vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an
aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft. When a rule of this
section gives another aircraft the right-of-way, the pilot shall give
way to that aircraft and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless
well clear.
d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging at
approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the
aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way. If the aircraft are
of different categories--
(1) A balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of
aircraft;
(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, powered
parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.
(3) An airship has the right-of-way over a powered parachute,
weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.
However, an aircraft towing or refueling other aircraft has the
right-of-way over all other engine-driven aircraft.
The bold text shows the relevant FAR's. In the film, the towing aircraft
comes from the deployment aircraft's right. The towing aircraft has the
right-of -way, even if he wasn't towing. The film says the rope was being
used to tow a glider. The last bold sews it up.
In sum: The deployment aircraft failed to yield the right-of-way to an
aircraft approaching from his right. He failed to yield to an aircraft
towing another aircraft.
The film shows the pilot pulling up when the tow aircraft crossed his
path, and he says, "I pulled up a little".
Now let's look at what the FAR's have to say about how to yield the
right-of-way.
(e) Approaching head-on. When aircraft are approaching each other head-on,
or nearly so, each pilot of each aircraft shall alter course to the right
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
d-m-hague(at)comcast.net
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jb92563
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 314
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:11 am Post subject: Re: BRS revisited |
|
|
Sounds like a spring deployed paraglider/hang glider reserve.
These offer more capacity and are even simpler....just grab the handle and throw over your head(In an Ultrastar).
http://www.mojosgear.com/html/crsrv98.htm Annular 30 is rated for ~440 lbs .....Hand thrown.... new $800 includes deployment bag.
http://www.americanparagliding.com/apco/mayday.htm or the APCO Mayday Tandem reserve ~440 lbs new $800 includes deployment bag.
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
Ray
Kolb UltraStar (Cuyuna UL-202)
Moni MotorGlider
Schreder HP-11 Glider
Grob 109 Motorglider
Do Not Archive |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
