Bruce Tuncks Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 There is a video showing a trike where the chute deployed as it was taking off, killing the pilot. The trike reared up and went over backwards and did a figure "9" .... it was sickening to watch how hard it hit. ... Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alf jessup Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 There is a video showing a trike where the chute deployed as it was taking off, killing the pilot. The trike reared up and went over backwards and did a figure "9" .... it was sickening to watch how hard it hit.... Bruce Bruce If it is the one I am thinking of it was at Porepunkah I think many years back I'm sure I heard the activation handle wad fitted to the control bar and when he pushed out to take off it activated the chute I think it was a spring loaded one not the rocket fired type but don't quote me on this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayavner Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 A couple of situations i can think of where the chute would be the wrong thing at the wrong time... floating back to earth serenely whilst the airframe is on fire, or ditching then having the canopy gently settle over you, shrink-wrapping the plane and contents snugly to the surface of the water. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 I saw that on you tube in the US a 103 trike, looked terrifying. It was apart of a complication of horror clips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ave8rr Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 The past few pages of this thread have little to do with the thread title. Mods can, you please place the BRS posts in a new thread. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 A BRS is not much use to you if you smash into the side of a hill at cruise speed. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 Or if a fluttering wing comes off at low level ... No I don't have any inside information except a momentary glimpse of aerial footage when the wreck was discovered. Since then I've only seen pics of one wing in trees but the 'glimpse' showed large pieces spread over 500m or more. We've discussed my flight in a Jab with a friend before, who was happy to exceed VA in all conditions because the Jab is "built tough". Similarly this unfortunate pilot previously mentioned in the media his 8cyl 4ft chord big wing (which presumably has a lower Va) having a cruise speed of 130kts - which is the Vne I think, and it was a windy day in mountainous terrain. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 A BRS is not much use to you if you smash into the side of a hill at cruise speed. Nothing is much use to you in that situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poteroo Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 exceed VA in all conditions because the Jab is "built tough A subject of much importance to GA and RAAus. For most of our aircraft having a stated load factor of + 3.8 and - 1.9, your Va = approx. 1.95 x Vs. (I use a rule-of-thumb of x2 Vs). So, the higher the stalling speed,(read weight), - the higher the Va. There is quite a range for Va in most aircraft - can be as much as 15 kts. I'm often stunned to hear pilots describing the Vno speed, (top of the green/bottom of the yellow arc) as being Va. We need to increase the amount of instruction in this subject, especially as our aircraft now have ever wider speed ranges. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 HIC. That's a good point. I often cringe when pilots boast if such speeds etc, with 19 rego seems to be the common things. I've jad discussion with one guy who built his own 160.. When asked what the vne is, he answerd, it doesn't matter... It's homebuilt. Not saying it had a part in this accident, just a culture thing I have noticed, particularly with jab home builders. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 If speed was a desired outcome then for my homey Jab the last thing I would want is the J250 wings........ Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planedriver Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 Whilst probably every pilot would love to have all the modern gismos that are available, if it was a mandatory requirement, many would probably not be in a position to partake in relatively inexpensive recreational flying as a hobby. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 In fact the whole J258 beast seems a bit of a dichotomy.......wings are the slowest of the large Jab airframe wings....the engine is the most powerful......tie the 2 together and you have a slower aircraft that can presumably outclimb a jet.......except that the really big engine has a heating problem and probably doesn't like slow speeds associated with big climb rates....... Seems to me like a perfect square wheel at first glance So those that knew the airplane what were its best features and its reason for being? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 Whilst probably every pilot would love to have all the modern gismos that are available Nope!!!! Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVOCET Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 I didnt like the forward swept wing on 258 , i think from mem. About 45 mm , or 70 mm , to bring the C/G forward to accomodate the 8 cyl . Wing through attatchments ( change of direction ) of load paths , in gusts and turbulance . I have a j250 wing and its definatly not a speed wing , 115 knts feels ok , Mike 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 When asked what the vne is, he answerd, it doesn't matter... It's homebuilt. Well that's just plain disturbing. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keenaviator Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 The Vans RV's, Sonerai and Sonex aircraft have a low aspect deep chord wing and these have a wide speed range and high VNE. I would have thought the Jabiru 250 wing which also has a low aspect and deep chord would be stronger than the long wing variants, including my UL 450's. And therefore have a higher VNE. Could this accident be an example of CFIT? I believe a local wasn't keen on the weather conditions for flying at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 Another first hand witness flying at a higher altitude saw the valleys socked in by cloud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 I didnt like the forward swept wing on 258 , i think from mem. About 45 mm , or 70 mm , to bring the C/G forward to accomodate the 8 cyl .Wing through attatchments ( change of direction ) of load paths , in gusts and turbulance . I have a j250 wing and its definatly not a speed wing , 115 knts feels ok , Mike With the greatest respect Mike, the way it 'feels' at any particular speed really has nothing to do with it. It'll feel quite different at 115kts in turbulent conditions compared with smooth conditions and it'll feel quite different at 115kts in turbulent conditions when heavily loaded compared with when it's lightly loaded. You really can't make any assessment of the safe manoeuvring speed (Va) by how it 'feels'. I'm sure it'd feel fine at 250kts too, or even 350kts, if it was heavily loaded and in smooth air. We had a good discussion about this in the Va - Manoevring Speed thread, there was a fair bit of pre-amble at first demonstrating the difficulty many of us have with fully comprehending the implications of Va and a couple of explanations in laymens' terms in later posts 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 Once again gentlemen we have gone off on a completely different tangent in discussion on this accident without having any direct knowledge. And once again I ask you in respect to the pilot and family to hold any judgements until an investigation is concluded by the very capable people involved with conducting it. We appear here to now be attacking the freedoms allowed in the 19 category which this builder had embraced, both with his accident aircraft and the one designed and built after. We are all very vocal about defending those freedoms when the time comes, so your current direction of discussion seem to me a little hypocritical ?..... The 19 catogory by its very nature is experimental, and this aircraft was very much a hybrid as is Robs later 'bush boar ' which has also been proven to be a great design. Rob was certainly no amateur at designing and building aircraft. In noting that AVOCETS fine design also uses the 250 wing, it is also (I presume) 19 rego, and also that it has suffered a crash and been rebuilt. Such is the nature and freedom of the category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Evans Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 guys please have some thought for family & friends with your comments . Rob was a great person he has built a lot of Aircraft . and for what ever reason he chose to use what ever aircraft design or do his own design is not on debate here at this time ,as for what happen the weather at the time was good the aircraft was a gem and i can tell u that Robs planes are top notch to any flying these days so please let the RAA run it course . 1 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 hold any judgements until an investigation is concluded What investigation Ross? The police one which is kept secret? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 What investigation Ross? The police one which is kept secret? Our ops and Tech manager visited the site to conduct their investigation.....they directly assist the police in charge of the investigation, and it is the police who then prepare and presents the report for the Coroner. As I have said before on this post, in all fatal accidents it is the Coroner and he/she alone who releases, or doesn't release a report or details. Please understand the RAAus cannot release information about a fatal crash unless authorised by the State Coroner.....period, that's the rules folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 What investigation Ross? The police one which is kept secret? Teck, assuming you are referring to our latest fatality , even if the ATSB were doing the investigation it would be unlikely that anything would be published this early , unless , in the unlikely event , it was deemed to be a matter of general safety concern to pilots . Some ATSB investigations have taken many months or even years before a final report issued . This investigation and subsequent process to Coroners Inquest must be allowed to take its course however long it takes . We just have to wait . You can however ,be assured that the team conducting the investigation - your fellow RAAus pilots, are well resourced ,trained and professional in their approach and , in my opinion , are the best people to assist in the investigation ....... Bob 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ave8rr Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Teck, assuming you are referring to our latest fatality , even if the ATSB were doing the investigation it would be unlikely that anything would be published this early..... Bob Bob, ATSB usually publish a prelim report with in 30 days of an accident they attend. e.g. the Mudgee RV6 fatal accident on 14 Sep last year. Prelim report published 31 Oct. http://www.atsb.com.au/publications/investigation_reports/2014/aair/ao-2014-149.aspx 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now