>
> It appears to me as likely that an airplane that lost a critical part of
> its flying surface will start gyrating, tumbling, spinning, and not
> continue with straight and level flight. If the latter would be true, it
> could probably be landed and you wouldn't need a chute. I can further
> imagine that if you deploy a chute from a wildly gyrating, spinning and
> tumbling airplane it will wind up the chute lines or possible wrap the
> entire chute around itself. What about balance? Doesn't the aircraft
> need to be somehow in balance under the chute? And what if that balance
> is lost due to loosing an engine (prop blade failure) or wing?
Frans,
I have understood that the only limiting factor to use BRS is certain level
speed,
which must be below BRS max operational speed. If you have lost the control
of the plane because of IMC or what so ever, BRS in your only hope. It works
like an ejection seat launched by a rocket. It is a life saver - not a plane
saver.
Over cities or rough terrain - how to make a succesful emergency landing?
There was some years ago an old couple flying Cirrus SR22 over New York City.
They decided to join Mile High Club and started to make love with autopilot on.
Somehow they found themselves from the back seat and the plane went out of the
balance totally.
They used BRS with success. Normal parachutes were not their option in this case
(hard to make love with backbacks on).
>
> In the statistics I found about BRS, most (if not all) situations where
> the BRS was used was in a pilot induced emergency. Inadvertent flight
> into IMC, icing, and two cases of pilot incapacitation. None after
> structural failure, so we don't have proof that it would work in such a
> situation.
Maybe so but it is much more challenging task to enter out of the plane than
just
pull a red T-bar marked "BRS".
>
> If the airplane gets written off anyway, then what is the advantage of a
> BRS over personal parachutes? A BRS is heavier and probably more
> expensive, and requires modifications to the airplane (and unless
> someone has gone this route before, it will remain an experiment how it
> works out on an Europa).
Personally, I think a plane must plan around BRS. It is very difficult or even
impossible to add BRS later.
In Europas case I do not believe there is an armed and fully operational usable
BRS before I have seen it.
>
> So, I was considering the option of using individual parachutes. So far
> nobody seems to have an opinion on this....
So - with Europa - this is only possibility to use personal chute.
For you - a sporty couple like - it is also a realistic possibility.
But not for all...some people cannot enter into or out from Europa even on the
ground.
Price - my guess is that an ordinary chute is around 1000 euros and BRS over
10.000
euros + installing costs if even possible.
I wish we never need any chute. I have jumped out from the plane two times:
first
and last time with one single jump.
Cheers, Raimo
OH-XRT
|