Jump to content
Marty_d

Plane crash near Stawell

Recommended Posts

Dunno about thread drift pm... I reckon you illustrated Jaba-who's point very well.

The sea level has gone up and down and continents rise and fall in geologic time. When aborigines came here, there must have been a lot less sea to cross than there is now.

Changing the atmosphere almost instantly is what climate change is driven by, and this is a different thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Humans have a number of inbuilt cognitive biases.

One of them ( I forget it’s proper “xx bias” nomenclature ) is that when shown something new humans jump to an immediate opinion based on nothing more than a like or dislike.

 

The strength that that this belief is held varies from person to person and is highest in the poorly educated or poorly experienced and sadly is more affected the older you get.

In some studies age overrides experience or education.

 

Only after this position is in place they then seek reasons to back up their already placed preference.

 

Some people will go to extremes of irrational evidence to support this position while ignoring strong valid evidence that does not support their belief.

 

Interesting ...

 

It reinforces the major car manufacturers' decision to change their method of product promotion.

 

Some of you may recall that Ford, Holden, Toyota and the like used to produce very expensive big glossy multi-page brochures each time they released a new model. Then suddenly that all stopped. I was told that it was because the manufacturers had conducted market research among people who had just purchased a new vehicle and they found that the vast majority only looked at the various brochures quite some while after they'd already made their purchase, using them to confirm that they had in fact made the right decision, rather than to assist with making the decision in the first place. So as far as the manufacturer was concerned the brochure was a waste of money.

  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FT, did you know you were quoting those WW1 generals or whoever it was that denied their airmen parachutes?

I actually thought you did and so the posting was tongue in cheek.

For myself, I have worn a chute for about 50 years in gliders and never used one. And while the wings stay on, ( and its not on fire too much ) I reckon the plane is the better protection anyway, as long as you keep flying it right till you flare out on top of the scrub or wherever.

FT is just "trolling", I wouldn't waste your energy.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moment pilot's life saved by parachute attached to out-of-control aircraft - Deadline News

 

Lucky this one had a chute in it! Looks a lot like a Bristell but not certain.

Maybe a good idea if Bristell go down the same path as Cirrus and have chutes as standard equipment, there just seems to be a pattern emerging

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FT is just "trolling", I wouldn't waste your energy.

 

Mick, I can't believe you dragged yourself from building your beautiful plane to share that knowledge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Humans have a number of inbuilt cognitive biases.

One of them ( I forget it’s proper “xx bias” nomenclature ) is that when shown something new humans jump to an immediate opinion based on nothing more than a like or dislike.

 

The strength that that this belief is held varies from person to person and is highest in the poorly educated or poorly experienced and sadly is more affected the older you get.

In some studies age overrides experience or education.

 

Only after this position is in place they then seek reasons to back up their already placed preference.

 

Some people will go to extremes of irrational evidence to support this position while ignoring strong valid evidence that does not support their belief.

Behavioural Psychology is a fascinating subject; reading your post I had already branched off into "what's he really trying to say with this.............."

Every salesman is trained to "qualify" every single potential customer who walks through the door. About 95% don't listen to their trainer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting ...

 

It reinforces the major car manufacturers' decision to change their method of product promotion.

 

Some of you may recall that Ford, Holden, Toyota and the like used to produce very expensive big glossy multi-page brochures each time they released a new model. Then suddenly that all stopped. I was told that it was because the manufacturers had conducted market research among people who had just purchased a new vehicle and they found that the vast majority only looked at the various brochures quite some while after they'd already made their purchase, using them to confirm that they had in fact made the right decision, rather than to assist with making the decision in the first place. So as far as the manufacturer was concerned the brochure was a waste of money.

There's a US saying "Sell the sizzle not the steak" and the brochures are designed to trigger that instant response, and are absolutely frustrating if you are really trying to find out details of the car.

The Industry hasn't given up on them, but they were becoming horrifically expensive to produce in paper - millions of dollars per year, so you'll find them on the Manufacturers website up there in wide screen high definition and with instant and very accurate colour selection, so you can set "your" colour and the car will rotate through 360 degrees glistening and bulging without a speck of dirt or shadow and highlights which don't reflect any natural light sources. What is becoming much harder to find are detailed specifications. My daughter has been looking for a 4WD with low range to go off road in the mountains, and it's amazing how many SUVs are being sold that are really incapable of enough overall gear reduction to drag themselves out of sand, and how they avoid stating that they have a single gearbox only.

  • Like 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most SUVs are sold on looks, load capability and flashy gizmos. Most never go off road at all and are incapable of really decent 4WD use. Many are now only 2WD & the rest are all wheel drive with a single gearbox and no low ratio, & no separate transfer box. Even serious 4WDs now have electronic everything which can be a problem if it gets wet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That plane in the spin: I was looking for evidence of the pilot giving full right rudder but as far as I could see, his right leg was well back and not moving.

Also, there was not much forward stick in evidence.

Maybe the whole thing was staged ? Was the plane insured?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most SUVs are sold on looks, load capability and flashy gizmos. Most never go off road at all and are incapable of really decent 4WD use. Many are now only 2WD & the rest are all wheel drive with a single gearbox and no low ratio, & no separate transfer box. Even serious 4WDs now have electronic everything which can be a problem if it gets wet.

Exactly what I found when looking for a small(ish) 4WD to buy now that I've moved back to Oz (and like to go camping and surfing). All smaller "4WDs" are actually AWD, do not have low range, do not have lockable diff. With one exception: the 4WDs made by Suzuki, which is why I bought a Grand Vitara.

 

On a more general note, putting my academic hat on, I have been using the example of car advertising for some time now as a demonstration of how the publicity world has moved from fact & features based advertising to emotion-led advertising. This is on the back of a huge body of research showing that emotions trump "rational" cognition in many everyday decisions. That's also why cars are all curvy, with worse visibility due to smaller rear windows, than was previously the case - looks trump function at least to an extent. Even when we think we're thinking rationally, often it's a post hoc story to rationalise an emotional decision.

 

I don't know enough about recreational or general aviation to know if it's the same story there, but I know enough about human decision making to be pretty sure it would be.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Piper Tomahawk was involved in a number of incidents, but if the correct recovery actions were applied and maintained, it would come out of the spin OK ( I have spinned a Tomahawk on more than one occasion.)
One of the issues with the Tomahawk was that different examples of the type behaved differently and none conformed to the type design data per the prototype used for stall/spin testing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
....has moved from fact & features based advertising to emotion-led advertising. ...... I don't know enough about recreational or general aviation to know if it's the same story there, but I know enough about human decision making to be pretty sure it would be.
These days I generally only fly FAR 23 certified airplanes approved for intentional spins - anything different and I take a keen interest in the tech specs/testing/history of the type and I’ve declined to fly quite a few times. Even the shape and layout of a tail will put me off per previous discussion here.

 

PS: want to buy my 4WD Jeep as I’d like a red open top sports car now?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looking for a new woman DJ?

 

This would’ve done him Don . Had her for 10 years until recently. A real chic magnet, but he can have the MG plates cheap if required ......Bob 0F95F70E-2308-442D-B231-E06180D586CB.thumb.jpeg.14db91f247bd5f053a5e55f70d400986.jpeg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the best ads I ever saw was a fella selling his 911 Porsche.

 

It said -

 

My lovely Porsche got me a gorgeous girlfriend,

Now my girlfriend is my wife,

My wife doesn't want it to get me a girlfriend,

So the car has to go ... :-(

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You get them free with a red Ferrari... & then the costs skyrocket.
Thanks, but I've already got a skyrocket. I enjoy visiting Bill here ...
... check out the airspeed in the flat spin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That plane in the spin: I was looking for evidence of the pilot giving full right rudder but as far as I could see, his right leg was well back and not moving.

Also, there was not much forward stick in evidence.

Maybe the whole thing was staged ? Was the plane insured?

Looks like he has full right rudder as soon as it enters the spin, he take pressure of a couple of times and resumes full right rudder again, he then try's forward and back elevator and nothing seems to stop the spin. Why would someone stage that and rely on the chute that you have no control over, there are much better and safer ways to get rid of an aircraft for insurance purposes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's more to the story in comments/discussion here

- it would be good to see the video prior to the bit shown here, or get more detailed info from the pilot. Regardless, it does seem particularly relevant as the pilot stated that "I deployed the Chute because the aircraft would not recover from a Flat Spin!!!" His friend commented: "I actually know this guy and he's no lightweight in both fixed and rotary wing. Also did his time in the Airlines on jets. This was certification flying and things went wrong. I spoke with him about this and what you are seeing here is the latter stages of what became an unrecoverable spin." Yes, definitely relevant.
Edited by djpacro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The recent crash of the GIPPSAERO GA-10 during spin testing is also relevant ANC18LA042

The pilot reported that the first spin entry was initiated with wings level, power on, with flaps set to a landing configuration, which was followed by left rudder and right aileron inputs. The pilot said that the spin recovery took longer than expected, and the decision was made to repeat the test. The next spin entry produced very similar results, with the recovery at one additional spin turn. The accident flight spin entry was flown in the same configuration as the first two spins, except that the entry was from a 30° bank left turn. The pilot reported that the airplane entered a normal spin, and after one spin turn, he applied flight control inputs for the spin recovery; however, the airplane settled into a fully developed spin.

 

The pilot said that after the airplane attained three full spin turns, he heard the chase airplane personnel call "three turns" which was a predetermined flight test safety limit. The pilot reported that he then moved the control yoke full forward with full opposite rudder and right aileron in an attempt to arrest the spin, but to no avail. He said that the control yoke was then returned to neutral, then full forward and full right rudder. Around 10,000 ft msl, the pilot heard the chase airplane personnel call "chute, chute, chute" instructing the flight test crew to deploy the emergency anti-spin parachute. The pilot said that when the anti-spin parachute deployment lever was pulled aft, the anti-spin parachute did not deploy, even after repeated attempts. At about 8,500 ft msl, which was 500 ft. above the briefed minimum bailout altitude, both pilots bailed out.

The difference is that they were letting it go to the point required by FAR 23 before commencing recovery actions - i.e. after one turn.

 

One would expect any certified single engine aeroplane to recover from a spin if the correct recovery actions were initiated prior to one turn.

Edited by Guest
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sometimes wonder whether this smaller type of flat spin recovery parachute should be re-discovered for spin training/testing.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19800011745.pdf

Deployment doesn’t result in write-off the aircraft, nor occupant injury because the aircraft remains landable afterwards.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It takes about 3 turns for some planes to settle into a spin. I think how they get into it has a big bearing on some outcomes. Having to get out of it in one turn is a bit of an ask. An anti spin chute might also take a few turns to work and I'm not sure it was ALWAYS effective. Having a pilot chute is the final solution if your plane is that suspect, and that's a pretty dramatic scenario. Nev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For FAR 23 airplanes not approved for intentional spins - basically a controllability requirement from a delayed stall recovery - recover after one turn (or 3 seconds) of a spin within one additional turn; plus consider the effect of abnormal control actions during that first turn in which a further two turns is acceptable to recover.

 

Abnormal control actions "The parameters that need to be investigated depend on the design of the airplane as well as on the results of the normal spin tests. These checks include, as a minimum, the following: the effect of ailerons with and against the spin, the effect of elevator applied before the rudder at recovery, the effect of slow elevator release, the effect of entry attitude. Ailerons with and against the spin should be applied at entry and during spins. Elevator and rudder against the spin should be applied during the spin. Spinning should continue for up to three seconds, or for one full turn, while the effects of abnormal aerodynamic control inputs are observed. Apply normal recovery controls as outlined in paragraph c(2)." I have experienced most of those abnormal control actions just doing straight, power off stalls in flight reviews and refresher training with PPLs.

 

It is quite an extensive test program with different cg positions etc - a pilot can be reasonably confident in using such an airplane as a flight trainer doing all of the stall exercises in Part 61.

 

Para c(2): "recover by reducing power to idle, if not already at idle, apply full .... rudder followed by forward elevator".

 

LSA requirements are similar or identical (I haven't looked recently and I'm not familiar with all of their requirements). Difference is that LSAs are self-certified and FAR 23 airplanes are certified by the USA FAA who are extremely knowledgeable and skilled.

Edited by djpacro

Share this post


Link to post
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

×