Subject: slip
From: paul lamar
Date: 3/12/2017, 10:59 AM
To: A10-Me-Earthlink


That is an excellent idea for any first flight experimental aircraft.

I'll propose it to the pilot when he gets back.

Rancher Bob

I'll contribute the 1st $500. It's only money --the test pilot is
putting his butt on the line.There's a company in the Slovak/Czech
Republic, if I remember correctly, who have a proven product and at a
better price than the BRS people. Perhaps we could get a special deal
considering that this is an exciting and newsworthy project and could
get them a bunch of good publicity.

Bob Ripley

I'll put in $100 my self.

I'll get back to you Bob. I'll check with the boss.

Paul Lamar

I believe it is called MAGNUM BALLISTIC PARACHUTES

Vern Taylor

This is a wonderful idea for all home builts. IMHO it will significantly
make home building safer.

Paul Lamar

Something for everyone to remember is typically the ballistic chute
saves the pilot but writes off the plane. On a Cirrus the plane is junk
after using the chute it's only a last resort.

Bill Jepson

What fails on the airplane Bill?

Would a bigger chute help?

Paul Lamar


A bigger chute would likely help. The ballistic chute saves ultra
lights. But full size aircraft are descending at speeds that cause 20 g
impacts. If you look at the specs you will note that the gear will be
sure to fold and the bottom of the fuselage will get crumpled and the
stresses involved can effect the whole airframe. The pilot will be saved
which is the point of course, but BPs aren't going to save you with no
damage. If you want the plane back you will probably need to land it.

Bill Jepson


You can buy a chute for a 4,000 pound airplane from Magnum.
I suspect that would let our 1000 pound Harmon Rocket with the 650 HP
under 200 pound engine down lightly.

Paul Lamar

Writing off planes is only a matter of money. Writing off humans is
something else!

Bob Ripley


Hi Paul:

I second the call to add a Ballistic Parachute to the TTC Project ..........

If the engine ever quit for whatever reason (MOTEC switching to "limp-home" mode),

...........at idle RPM, the 80-inch prop would become a BRICK WALL!

And the airplane could not glide to a landing.

Keith Moore

I think what might be possible would be to convert what velocity he had to
add a bit of altitude and slow it down before firing the chute.


Paul Lamar



Perhaps I missed a post but all I know about this guy is that he is an experienced commercial pilot who made a decision to not fly an experimental aircraft. I could be described the same way, and the times I have decided to not fly have been respected and have born out to be the right move.

It has been pointed out that the mission for this aircraft is to set a new world record and showcase the amazing potential of the rotary engine. As such I would imagine all reading this would like to see sucess.

Our regulations here in Canada require flight testing when major changes to an airframe are made. In one case we changed a push rod in an anti servo tab circuit to an adjustable rod and then changed it back to the original, TC wanted an additional 10 hours. Of course we had some discussion over that but I would think that TC would be right if we had hotrodded the plane to the extent this one has been. This is not your Grannies ride to church on Sundays.

IMHO if I was the test pilot on this one, there would be a complete publication ban on all activities till such time as the record had been set. I am just as excited about this as the next guy, but it is not about me. I would also want enough time in the air to get a feel for the airplane in regular flight modes, including emergency procedures, before exploring the edges of the performance envelope. There is a lot of "stuff" with this engine that is not yet proven, as evidenced by the fixes, chronicled over the last few months. I personally don't think one or two quick hops and then an attempt at a world record is necessarily very prudent.

Further opinion, this a/c is purpose designed and built, its holy grail is its power to weight ratio. The base model of this design has good engine out performance and good low speed abilities thus in the event of engine failure a sucessful emergency landing should be reasonably realistic if the flights are conducted in an area conducive to such operations. If they are not, then the operations need to be moved elsewhere.

There is an area of high risk in the event of an engine failure, low and slow. Fortunately with this a/c that is a very small area and not one where ballistic chute will help and where good pilotage is the only option. Out side that area almost any emergency is most likely far better off being flown to a landing. With a ballistic chute you lose all control over your landing and thus you are more likely to have a bad out come. Structural failure or unrecoverable spin, ballistic chute for sure. Fire, pilot chute for sure. All other emergencies good pilotage for sure, after all this is why we choose a good pilot. The chances of the need for a ballistic chute occurring are very very small indeed and so adding the weight to /this/ particular aircraft are unnecessary and counter productive to the mission.


John Rogi

You have some good points but a 747 pilot is not necessarily a good home built test pilot.

A 747 pilot crashed a rotary powered tail dragger I did a lot of work on.
I had a 747 pilot friend tell me how to land a 747. Keep it on the glide slope
and have the co pilot call out 50 feet on the radar and then pull back on  the stick.

I know some airline pilots that never ever slip. Slipping is a good way
to land when your are directly over the runway or a field. I always slip the C182 just to
stay in practice. When people learn how how to fly they are never taught

how to slip.

Paul Lamar


Too true, it always surprised me how much work it could be typing a heavy tin
jockey into something you have to fly.

John Rogi

I had a instructor freq out on a bi annual when I slipped it in :-)
I was awarded my Oz pilot Licenses right after I took off and got half way down wind :-)

Paul Lamar


Why in the world would a CFI not teach how to slip? Maybe it's because of all that land y'all got out west. Where I grew up and when I grew up in the central Carolinas if you didn't learn how to slip then you couldn't enjoy the wide variety of hillside and pea patch airstrips that were all over the place back then, and some of them still are. Slipping, and coming out of it just in time, is FUN.
Bob Ansley


Once you learn how to do it gives you confidence that you can land almost anywhere.
Takes out the distance/altitude requirements with a conventional pattern approach.
IMHO it makes landing easier as it eliminates the altitude requirements.

You can be 100 feet  to infinity  altitude  with a dead engine over the field you want to land in.
Get it pointed into the wind and drop it down to the field.  You can slip to the right or
slip to the left.

Paul Lamar

The Rotary Engine free News Letter. Powered by Linux. If you want off
the list PLEASE let me know and I will remove  you.  ACRE NL web
site. http://www.rotaryeng.net You Tube http://tinyurl.com/beqqxas
Copyright 1998-2017 All world wide rights reserved.