SNIP >
 > To my eyeball thinking experience, ANY kind of BRS

system is suited for ANY kind of aircraft

SNIP

Their reasoning is quite justifiable,......"Save my A-S
FIRST, (which is PRICELESS)............Be around to
worry about  beaurocracy LATER.

The only thing I worry about in the use of the BRS is
pilots relying greatly on it which COULD instill the
pilot with a false sense of security, in turn making him
sloppy. This could grow to a point where pilots will be
punching out if the engine burps....

Don Forsman wrote:

Didn't Henry Ford think that good brakes were only going to cause poorer
driving?

I almost always fly with a ballistic chute.  Never had to use it.  Ride
my motorcycle with a helmet (got used once).  If you have it and don't
need it, so what!  If you need it and don't have it . . . . .

The chute must be carefully matched to the craft it will be used on so
there won't be too much drift, and yet not too much descent.  And, of
course, some sort of reefing control suited to the speed of deployment.
I think a ballistic chute could probably be designed for anything that
flies.

We that use these things understand that it is only to be used to save
your bacon.  If you can still control the airplane, don't use the chute.
Practice dead sticks often.  Before you pull the red handle you must
understand that your airplane is going to be even more broken when you,
hopefully, walk away from it.  It's the walk away part that you want to
be around for.

Don.

 
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter.              Powered by Linux.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org