Ballistic chutes

[Guest Rocko]

Given the sad events on the Gold Coast over the weekend, I found myself contemplating the effectiveness of Ballistic chutes in light aircraft.

 

We all hear the sales pitch, and the "tested" results, but they still seem fairly far down on the list of equipment we consider priority.

 

But has anyone on the forum actually been in an aircraft in a real-life situation when one was deployed? I wondered if anyone could give us an account on what happened when it was deployed, and their thoughts on the safety factor involved in having one?

 

Plus, if they need repacking every 5 years, how easy is this in Australia?

 

Anyone have any information?

 

Scotty

 

 

[shafs64]

Hi i saw a Picture on the news once of a aircraft crash and it had a chute and i think both people died.as for repacking i think there is people who can do it here. but then it depends on the type.

 

If i owned and aircraft i would have one yesterday. but at the moment i i have to hire and i have never seen one in a hire aircraft.

 

Paul

 

 

[sain]

Personally those things make me nervous. How do you control them once they are deployed? what happens when you arrive at the ground and the wind is still blowing? will the plane get dragged, or is there a quick release mechanism?

 

There was a site I found when I was first researching stuff about flying and it cited an example in the US where a plane in trouble had deployed their chute, decended to the ground safely and then been flipped and dragged along the ground for a couple of miles killing the occupants.

 

I think in certain situations they could be life savers, but a lot of thought needs to be given by the operators as to when they are best used. If treated as the option of last resort, not the first thing you pull when the engine cuts out, I think they are a wonderful idea.

 

 

[Guest airsick]

I too think they are like anything else. If they are used appropriately I think they can be a very valuable piece of kit to have on board. Fired off at the first sign of panic though and who knows.

 

As for the people who were killed I wonder what would have happened if they didn't fire it. Would they have died anyway? What were the circumstances of the accident. I imagine that if it was something like an engine failure then perhaps they stood a chance. If a wing fell of though it was probably their best option. The quick release mechanism is a good idea in these conditions.

 

 

[Guest Rocko]

All the ones I've seen have either been on very high-end ultralights, or basic rag and tube models, like Drifters and Thrusters. In between, they seem pretty few and far between.

 

Haven't heard of anyone crashing a drifter or the like for a while. Nor any expensive high end stuff.

 

If you can afford to buy a $130K aircraft, what's another $5k for a BRS? Nothing, really. 3% of the cost of the aircraft?

 

Seems kinda ironic that a person flying a "cheap" basic rag and tube aircraft sees the sense in having a BRS, but they don't seem to be needing them either. Most of the Drifter-style aircraft crashing recently seem to be due to pilot error, which a BRS can't help with. But a reasonable number of those pilots, I suppose because of prior old history of unreliability or such, seem comfortable with spending $5K plus investment for a BRS on a $25K aircraft.

 

So. that leaves all the rest of us in the middle without a chute, and that category seem to be the ones having the stats against them recently.

 

To my understanding, noone actually supplies them WITHIN Australia. Several people import them as required, but unless they're stocked and serviced here, the costs are too high.

 

Guess that works against them.

 

I suppose another point is the time to deployment.

 

It's pointless for a manufacturer to say "they can be deployed as low as 300ft" if the pilot doesn't do so till 100 feet.

 

If, by any chance, the observer from last weeks sad event was accurate, would a pilot recognise a problem such as a wing departing at 1000 feet, and be able to go through all the judgements involved before activating a BSR, before descending too low?

 

So, that leads to the question, for the average pilot, below what height are they ineffective, due to delays in launching?

 

What qualifies as last resort? If your engine stops, you generally have time to make some quick decisions. If a major structural failure occurs, or a canopy departs, or anything similar, perhaps the best thing is to immediately go for the BRS.

 

But what happens then if you suddenly find it wasn't as bad as you thought, but actually a engine stall?

 

This Youtube video made me think long and hard about how important they really are...

 

 

Apart from the fact the pilots survived, I noticed 2 things which are food for thought.

 

First, both aircraft weren't too badly damaged, so were perhaps somewhat flyable after the incidents. Yet they both had chutes, and they both went for them, one immediately.

 

Second, the Cirrus guy stated he "gained control after dropping 1000 feet". Before releasing the chute after finding a more suitable place to deploy.

 

Regardless, my next plane will have one, methinks.

 

Scott

 

 

[Guest Rocko]

Grinz. I reread the above, and winced.

 

No, I'm not bagging Drifters there. Quite the opposite.

 

What I meant was that, in the early days, since all ultralights were basically rag and tube, and the instruction and reliability of engines, aircraft structure and training weren't up to todays standards, lots of rag and tube aircraft seemed to crash.

 

Now, with many of the mechanical issues sorted out, and much better training, aircraft like Drifters have far fewer mechanical and structural issues causing crashes. It's more pilot error that does it, like every other aircraft type.

 

So, what I actually meant, was the fact they still see the sense in buying a BRS, even given the low relative cost of the aircraft, and the much improved mechanical and structural safety record, was meant to be a compliment ;)

 

Scotty

 

Hopefully, not now being slapped to death by irate Drifter owners ;>

 

 

[Guest Rocko]

They're not exactly a recent invention, apparently...

 

 

Fascinating video

 

 

[Guest airsick]

The point about the delay in delpoyment is an interesting one. It is similar to ejection seats though. Ok, so military pilots receive a hell of a lot more training than us civvy's but they are also going a lot faster. I figure if they can keep their heads and make decisions while flying >500kts then it isn't too much to ask us to keep our heads at (mostly) sub 120kts when thinking about deploying a chute.

 

Either way, I'd rather have one and be able to choose to use it or not, than not have one and wish I did.

 

 

[Guest Redair]

Greetings each, the thought of BRS has been on my mind with regard to whatever aircraft I eventually get, but I do have some doubts about them. Yes they most certainly are going to give you a far better chance of survival if a wing falls off, but having said that, if the wing falls off whan you are near the ground, would there be time to operate the thing, let alone time enough for it to deploy? Secondly, and this is the bit that worries me more... I have seen video clips of these things going off by themselves, (for what ever reason) and one in particular, was a trike that was just taking off. The result was very sudden and I guess the pilot didn't even have time to realise what was happening before he was flipped over backwards and slammed into the ground. To watch it was scary, the thing just acted like a huge anchor and swung the trike around at the end of the lines, looping it into the ground. I think a quick release mechanism would certainly be a good idea, but care would be needed to make sure the levers or firing mechanisms were used in the correct order... no good letting go before you deploy! And in cases unexpected deployment, would you be able to react quickly enough to prevent the chute from throwing you out of the air?

 

And a final thought, if deployed, either intentionally or not, how much damage would be caused to the airframe from the sudden stress loading?

 

Redair.

 

 

[Guest Flyer40]

The Cirrus that went down near the M7 in Sydney not long ago was an interesting case study. After an engine failure the pilot first attempted a forced landing, when that didn't work he deployed the chute, but by then it seems he was too low and it became tangled around the empennage.

 

The ATSB report is only brief and doesn't explore the pilots decision making. But reading the report you get the impression that if he had committed to one or the other he and his pax may have been better off.

 

I'm not criticising the guy, he seems to have been an experienced pilot who didn't pull the red handle at the first sign of trouble.

 

But it's always good to learn from others' misfortune and I think the take home message from this incident is that if the chute isn't deployed by the minimum recommended alt, you're committed to a forced landing.

 

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2007/AAIR/pdf/aair200700361_001.pdf

 

 

[eastmeg2]

Hi Red,

 

I think you'd find that the Youtube trike video you saw had some home improvised chute system, and the trike itself was a Nanolight trike probably with a home made base. In the USA single seat trikes under 112kg empty weight don't require registration or any kind of certification.

 

One good thing about trikes is that if we do bend something, it's a tube that can be replaced by ordering a replacement one from the factory. With metal/composite??? 3 axis aircraft I think it's a different story and have been told by some pilots that once they deploy the chute the insurance company owns the plane because it's back would be broken.

 

I think you would need to read up on the literature that each ballistic chute maker produces for the particular model chute you are considering. They all have different deployment speeds and minimum deployment altitudes depending on what type of aircraft it's for.

 

All ballistic chutes need to be treated like a loaded gun once the safety pins are removed.

 

Rgds,

 

Glen

 

 

[philipnz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1PX7G0u0yI

[Yenn]

From the above comments it seems that you are not committed to chutes for several reasons.

 

Deployment too low. What are the options, if you need a chute low down, you are in trouble either with or without it. It probably won.t make the situation worde.

 

Airframe failure. No matter what the chute must be a good option. If you can't fly it you can at least slow down it's descent rate.

 

It isn't as bad as you originally thought. That is always a possibility with any situation, but that is what a pilot is trained for. Always assess the situation. In a lot of cases a knee jerk reaction can be the wrong decision and aparrt from major structural failure you usually have time to make an assessment.

 

Getting dragged along the ground. It would be better to be dragged along by the wind than arriving at high velocity without a chute.

 

Remember that the usual parachute could cause fatal injury when landing but our airmen in the war still used it. Even earlier there was a lot of controversy about having chutes for aircrew in the first world war, many said they were a danger or would allow airmen to bale out rather than fight.

 

Personally I think they are good for those who worry, but i have faith in my plane and maybe a fatalistic approach to life, but I have never been in a situation where I would have wanted a ballistic rescue chute, although I have used the other kind a few times.

 

 

[Guest brentc]

The Cirrus Chute on the M7 was ineffective because there was a problem with the deployment mechanism in the chute and as a result an AD was issued for all Cirrus CAPS systems.

 

There was an RA aircraft that was dragged by the chute after crashing, however it was apparently released / broke out after the aircraft had impacted.

 

The Avid at Latrobe Valley had one when hit from behind by the Cessna, however the locking pin was still in.

 

I think a properly installed and professional / expensive chute is well worth the money and this has been proven by a number of Cirrus owners out there.

 

 

[shafs64]

You wonder why. he would fly with the pin in. like going to a gunfight with no bullets

 

shafs

 

 

[Guest Rocko]

Pulling the pin

 

Poor preflight?

 

How hard is it to remove the pin, say during flight? Make it a 2 step process, instead of one?

 

1. Remove pin

 

2. Pull lever to deploy chute

 

Sort of like a fire extinguisher

 

Or is the pin located in such a way as to make it difficult to remove once airborne?

 

I'm curious, cause I can't say I've ever inspected the pin location IRL. Is it near the handle, or at the canister/Pack?

 

Scott

 

 

[eastmeg2]

The BRS chutes I've seen only have a safety pin on the firing handle.

 

The GRS chute I have came with the same safety pin on the handle as well as a safety bolt through the firing mechanism on the rocket. I use both when I finish flying.

 

 

[shafs64]

The aircraft in this picture has a BRS. i was haveing a look at it and the handle is behind and above the pilot.

 

shafs

 

 

[Guest brentc]

I've flown the Cirrus before and not taken the pin out. Probably because I knew I wasn't going high and or was to remain in the circuit. There's always that feeling in the back of my mind that if I pull the arming pin out that it *might* go off.

 

 

[Guest disperse]

I love the BRS Argument ...... it's just the same as when airbags came out in cars...

 

I've seen a number of pic's of a blood splatted car with a deployed airbag hanging out of the dash...... ooop's didn't work !!!

 

But I spent a week in hospital across from a bloke that hit a concrete telegraph pole at 110k's ..... and didn't break a bone...Airbags all round (he was pretty sore though)

 

if you put a BRS in a plane and think your bullet proof .... I think your a bit of a ????

 

but you've got a bit more of a chance in a bad situation

 

 

[shafs64]

I was in a small car crash about five years ago not my fault it was about 80ks

 

I got a Call From RMIT in melbounre who where doing a study on small car crashes.

 

They asked me a lot of questions then siad i was lucky to be alive. they siad it had a lot to do with the airbags

 

Paul

 

 

[Mick]

See this thread for a previous interesting discussion regarding ballistic chutes.

 

http://www.recreationalflying.com/forum/showthread.php?p=31138#post31138

 

I have not changed my mind, my current Skylark has one, but my future aircraft will not.

 

Cheers

 

Mick

 

 

[Ultralights]

the technam i hire has a BRS, i never plan on using it, but in the event of a major structural failure, i will be glad its there, or if you get in a situation where you cannot control the aircraft, such an inverted spin, i might think aboit it then if the ground seams to be getting closer at a faster rate than i can recover the aircraft.

 

 

[w3stie]

There's a lot more that can be done to improve crash survivability. Passenger cars have really outstripped aircraft in that regard. I was apalled at the level of safety in the old Cessnas and Pipers when I started my flying training. Seats that felt like they came from a 1950 Morris and a worn strip of material for a belt. The seat even came loose while taxiing. But flying is costly and pilots don't want to make it more costly by adding on minimum levels of safety and crash protection.

 

 

[antzx6r]

I also hire a Tecnam with BRS. I never really thought too much about it before but since starting nav training I consider it an added comfort. Two things worry me in flying. Stuctural failure and going down in tiger country. Tiger country isn't so bad because you can avoid it. The BRS just means I don't need to fear it so much. But structural failure can be a hairline fracture somewhere that can't be preflight checked. I like the idea of always having options. In my view the advantages outweigh the freak misshaps. So the plane flipped and dragged the pilots causing death. You could stubb your toe and bleed to death too. Its the old addage "better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it".

 

It's not like I'll never fly anything without it either. It's just another comfort, like gps or radio for a mayday call. It's not a must have. But an extra chance for survival.

 

Ant.