DrZoos

Dieselten your opinion on this shocks me...that somehow people who choose chutes need cognitive behaviour therapy to know when to pull the handle... i take your point that they should pull and pull early, but its a big jump to think they all need CBT to achieve this...in fact it could more sensibly be argued the complete opposite, that those chosing to purchase a BRS are well aware of thier limitations compared to some people potentially inadvertantly stigmatising that choice.

There is no place for yobbos in flying....they won't last long if they make it at all... I think you will find the stubbies and esky brigade are either not in here, or only act dumb during the week when they are not around pilots.. Im yet to meet a moron pilot...Im sure they are out there, but they are a massive minority and probably wont recieve accolades in here for dissing on sensible conversations.

I though ammonia and perspex where fatal enemies. I worked today at a place that has perspex lockers and they have a sticker on them that say, no amonia based cleaning products.

Just remember if tha air is rough 25 nm out its probably rough above your airport as well...if you need to develop some nerves in turbulance, do it close to the airport, your only 6 minutes from lamding at most... If its cross country you fear , do it in the morning If its both...do one at a time.... A 7am nav can get you out to about 100 nm and back before much turbulance...im not suggesting 100 nm , but you get the gist... If you really are nervous just take an instructor or experienced pilot...

Then try staying closer to the nest on bumpy days and going further from the nest on still days...remember at this time of year it gets bumpier as the day goes on generally from the heat...so fly early when smooth, and if you want bumps to boost confidence fly later and closer... Dont worry we all have moments when the bumps cqn make us very uncomfortable...Recently from Fraser Island to Hervey Bay at 2 pm I really hated being in the air...it wasnt dangerous but it was horrible and very mentally fatigueing... had a similar flight out near Lake Keepit around 1 pm in the last month... From this point on for me till around March it will be early or late flying, no early afternoons ... I have a huge amount of recent flying and it still gets my nerves when it gets rough...I love tricky conditions eg cross winds and a bit gusty, but i hate continual turbulance I agree with others...more experience, more time in cockpit and more knowledge will help...if in doubt take an instructor or experienced pilot, or jump in as a passenger with others

For all of us without a $700,00k budget it is.......fit the chute and hope she works...in most cases its going to be significantly better than the alternative

cant believe we are worried about slowing any light aircraft...its not a 747

36 km/h is the approx impact speed , however there is a huge difference between 36kmh vertical speed and horizontal speed, especially when sitting with no legs to absorb vertical decelleration.

The pioneer of accident epidemiology, Professor Susan Baker, has this to say: ‘We tend to focus all our interest on an event rather than on the human damage we are trying to prevent. It also evokes questions of who is to blame, and that is almost always counterproductive. The big question is: “How do you keep people from getting hurt?”’ http://www.flightsafetyaustralia.com/2014/09/swinging-in-the-wind/ In 2014, with just under 6,000 airplanes in the fleet flying an estimated 1,000,000 flight hours, there were only 3 fatal Cirrus accidents. Considering the demanding weather conditions many of these airplanes operate in, that’s an impressively low number. This isn’t a fluke either: the number of fatal Cirrus accidents has dropped from a pretty awful 16 in 2011 to 10 in 2012, then 9 in 2013. The numbers tell quite a story. While fatal accidents have been dropping, the number of CAPS deployments have been increasing. In fact, 2014 marked the first time the two curves crossed, with more CAPS events (12) than fatal accidents (3). This is significant, because while pulling the red handle may total the airplane, the pilot and passengers will almost always survive if it’s done within the limitations of the system. Out of 51 total CAPS events, there have been 104 survivors and only one fatality. http://airfactsjournal.com/2015/02/fatal-cirrus-crashes-way-thank-parachute/

Geoff why is it some aircraft get an increased MTOW allowance for fitting a chute and others dont?

That's the entire pont behind chutes - things including pilots fail - then chutes save lives ..its a circular debate There will always be some people who say, you shouldn't need one, you should do ........... But the reality is there are none or very few cases where having a chute in the aircraft has been suggested or proven to cause the pilot to be more reckless or die, other than maintenance accidents There are now hundreds of documented cases of chutes saving lives, this makes around 500+ lives saved from chutes, 324 saved from BRS alone see http://www.brsaerospace.com/lives_saved.aspx around 2000 plus direct family members spared the unimaginable grief.. around 40,000 close extended family members, 100,000 friends and fellow flying colleagues... I really think this is something we should be embracing as a community...not forcing on anybody, but embracing those that do choose rather than stigmatising them as reckless or poorer pilots

Maybe all drivers of cars should avoid accidents as well. Reality is accidents occur. Sure do everything to avoid it, but they can and will still happen.

chute might help in Power loss Fuel starvation Fuel exhaustion Lost Darkness ?? Lightning strike Spin Spiral Imc Over cloud or fog or smoke Airframe failure Major Airframe damage eg bird, collision Control issues or failure Severe turbulance Pilot incapacitation Icing Serious Illness Etc

Maybe $6-7 k is worth it to some as insurance for life, loved ones and all sorts of possibilities. Failures, mishaps. Planning etc. for me as a co owner with my old man and my son flying it as well, its a no brainer if they would allow an mtow 15 kg increase. $3500 for a chute that is likely to stop a fatality. Well worth it imho

Hows the view from down there...i hope he had big side windows

Please pm me ta

Our club at Port Macquarie had a fly and spy with about 45 questions ......fantastic event , i highly recomend this type of event for any clubs... The best fun was listening to peoples strange logic and lack of logic when they came back and discussed answers...

Waht a sensational moment in the history of aviation...

I would think at some point, the L1 automatic rights will disappear...they have in every other industry in Australia

Well at least technically L1 isn't an auto accreditation any more... L2 is pretty comprehensive...I have been clocking my logbook and its very very comprehensive what is required now.. Im doing Kev McNalley's course soon, even though stupidly its not accredited, but it will certainly be looked upon favourably

Thats awesome you recognize that, and I think that if the L1 test made you realize this then its prob doing its job... some more questions on practical and less on policy would be great, as any nerd who studies with virtually no practical skills can pass the test they have made

Sadly it is time the govt pulled the pin on this.....

Do you honestly believe that is all they do?

CAMS for motorsports is around $260 plus club membership $120, plus $20 to $100 per event motorcycle N.sW is similar for motocross and enduro triathlon is $160 per year plus around $60 (shorter events) to $875 (Ironman) per event half marathons cost from $60 to $90 eaxh, Marathons $60 to '$130 .mountain bike about $100 per year plus $10 to $150 per event None of those include a glossy magazine None of these organisations deal with near the BS that RAA has to via CASA Unfortunately the high costs of compliance and user pays dictates that its pretty hard to join anything for less than about $80 p.a

In basic marketing circles, there is a matrix of market demand with four segments rainging from cash cow with high volume and margins , mass market down to hobby which has low margins and volume... Most new aircraft engines firmly fit into hobby category with low margins and volumes. rotax might have migrated to low volumes and high margins but any effort froma new manufacturer will take years or decades in aviation to achieve enough confidence to do so. This is one reason aviation has so few new successful entrants, so few new lasting names and so little growth....the odds are firmly stacked against any aviation engine or airframe manufacturer unless they can achieve either high margins or volumes or both...and in aviation volumes are limited...so margins become super critical New entrants may come in, but before they can overcome huge doubts in regards to durabilty and safety they will need to prove themeselves to the market, not just make claims and list features.... Lists of features do not sell, customer benefits do...and benefits require social proof , a track record and customer testimonials to actually sell. the more expensive the product, the more proof, history and testimonials required to achieve sales. ....... Bex or any new entrant needs to have deep enough pockets not only to design the thing , but also to establish its credibility at thier own expense, not at the risk of customers.... The biggest thing Bex could do is reverse the risk, so that he carries it and accellerate the process of testing, refferrals and social proof. Ie, supply the engines to people who will pike huge hours on the engine and become raving fans of its oerformance and reliability