Jump to content

The Most Stupid Ballistic Parachute Test I Have Ever Seen !


Guest Michael Coates
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Michael Coates

Silly test and a waste of time and money, the aircraft needs to be moving forward when the chute is actually deployed, perhaps on the back of a truck at the maximum speed you can do. That way it will check that the parachute mount locations can actually handle the added stresses which would be expected at speed. Doing a test like this is a waste of time and does not require the aircraft fuselage at all.

 

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see what was going to happen...... enjoy the stupidity !

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most silly one i saw was at Byron Bay in the 80's when the US Quicksilver guys were here. They did a real live test. Flying overhead the pilot actually leant out and cut the main flying wire, folded the wing then deployed the recovery chute. Now that's confidence in the product.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it looks like it was a test bed fuselage to prove the mounting and clean deployment of the setup. The mistake was it should have been conducted in still wind or should have had a quick release setup to cut away the canopy. just not thought through properly. But i do think it was a sucesssfull test as it cleared the enclosure and deployed properly without getting hung up anywhere on the airframe.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an long time skydiver i can say from both my own and others experiences that there are no guarantees that you can cover all contingencies when it comes to a second chance.

 

Take the automatic activation devices (AADs) that are fitted to reserves these days and are mandatory at some drop zones, some types are starting to prove that they can take lives instead of saving them. You weigh up the pros and cons and then make your decision whether on not to fit one or if you have one to turn it on or not.

 

ie yous pays your money and yous take your chances. that's life bro.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As some of us know that is also a major problem when they are used in aircraft in actual proper use scenarios too. The chits needs an easy collapse mechanism such as a single string but that runs the risk of accidental deflation, catch 22.

 

The Cessna Skycatcher was a good example of this happening for real as much of the damage was caused as it was dragged across the landing area after a pretty much successful landing under chute.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incident in the US recently with a structual failure followed by a successful deployment but unfortunatly an on board fire and both occupants ended up jumping to their deaths.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, unless all they wanted to test if it would punch through the hole, clear other surfaces and not break the airframe when it went off, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

Their "worst case stall scenario" explanation on the YouTube comments doesn't cut it; in the worst case stall scenario you would be going down at a few thousand feet per minute at least and still have some forward speed too.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...