Hi Frans,
Mike Duane said "I am not a skydiver.....that's the wife's fortay. I have
built my Europa and will probably do the first flight and flight testing. I
have purchased an slim backpack emergency parachute and will put up with
it's uncomfortable seating while I am flying off my 40 hours and putting my
project through it's paces. If the unforseen happens then I would prefer to
try and fight to get out of the aircraft rather than just sit and wait for
the ground to come up at me. I figure if I have an inflight fire and don't
have a parachute, then I don't have any other option than to stay with the
plane. I remember a movie about WWI flyers that carried a pistol for just
such events. So along that train of thought. I would prefer to have a
parachute, contemplate my options, and decide whether or not to use it,
rather than not have the choice. So I guess it's personal opinion."
I have to agree with him, and a helmet would be useful too - all my comments
ignored the test flying phase of flying as we don't have quite the same
system in UK.
To answer your points, Frans:
1. Jump planes only throttle back to 80-100 knots in the drop run in, so not
getting the Europa back to stall speed won't matter at all.
2. My guess is that having your plane controls welded by lightning is quite
a low probability......albeit a bit unfortunate when it does happen....
3. Just to be clear, I'm not saying you will definitely be seriously injured
landing in rough terrain .... I just think you will more often be less
injured steering the airframe into trees, river, rocks etc and letting it
take the impact instead of you.
4. Round chute landings are compared with jumping off a 12 foot high wall -
if you carry out a properly executed Parachute Landing Fall (PLF) then you
can minimise the risk of injury, but if you cannot control whether you are
landing in trees, water, cliff faces etc, then you may not always be able to
carry out a PLF.
5. I have done just one round chute jump in a controlled environment and I
wouldn't volunteer to repeat it.
6. The ideal is to get some training if you believe that using a parachute
is an option you would prefer. If you can jump with a square, steerable
reserve, then a lot of these risks reduce significantly. Also, the risk of
not deploying your parachute properly is much reduced if you are trained. I
learned to skydive initally because I flew hang gliders and paragliders a
lot and I wanted the training and confidence to use my reserve. But hang
gliders and paragliders don't give you much protection in a crash so it
wasn't quite the same reasoning as I would apply to flying a light aircraft.
And of course, are you going to get your passenger trained to skydive as
well....?
I have flown aerobatics briefly (just spin avoidance / recovery training for
PPL) and been required to wear a parachute and you can get over the comfort
factor if you have to. It is a question of personal risk assessment as Mike
says. My personal view (in a world where UK builders aren't allowed much
freedom to change the original Europa design) is that all of the Europa
accidents I have heard of so far in my few years on this forum, have
occurred on take or landing when a parachute wouldn 't help. However, other
builders may have much better knowledge than me on that front.
Good luck with your personal risk assessment!
RCC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frans Veldman
Sent: 15 December 2009 00:24
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Emergency parachutes, opinions?
--> <frans@paardnatuurlijk.nl>
Richard Churchill-Coleman wrote:
> --> <richard.churchill-coleman@sky.com>
>
> Hi Frans,
>
> I'm one of those rare pilots who also enjoys baling out of serviceable
> aircraft as a pastime.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge and experience.
One reason I asked was that I heard the story of one Dutch homebuilder who
was found in mounteneous terrain. Examination revealed that he got struck by
lightning, because the controls where welded and could not be moved.
Estimates where that he had been a passenger in his own airplane for some 20
minutes until he finally hit a mountain. He was alive until the moment of
impact.
I imagine that he would have had a fair chance if he would have had a
parachute. So this triggered the idea that parachutes might be a "must have"
option.
So, hence my question about the odds of getting out in level flight at
cruise speed. Your suggestion about slowing down to almost stall speed
doesn't apply here, but I guess the idea remains the same. ;-)
I further assumed that a jump out over rough terrain (rocks, trees) would be
a walk away, but apparently it is not that easy. So I underestimate the
landing speed and/or forward speed. Could you give me an estimate about
these?
If bailing out over rough terrain does not improve chances of survival very
much then a significant part of the reasons to consider a parachute is gone.
Same with a water landing, you took that away as well. ;-)
> Given the choice, I would spend the money and the weight allowance on
> a fire extinguisher, first aid kit and EPIRB instead.
Ok, guess you are right. I will think about it some more.
Thanks!
Frans
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
07:52:00
|