Posted on 12/23/2004 6:21:20 AM PST by MississippiMasterpiece
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Albert Kolk's small plane banked uncontrollably in darkness over the Monashee mountains, then began spiraling. "Seat belts!" he barked to his teenage grandson and two young friends. Then he reached for a red lever in the cockpit. Suddenly, an orange-and-white parachute as big as a house opened above the plane and gently landed his stricken aircraft in a rocky clearing.
If the maker of the parachute that saved Kolk's life this past spring succeeds, one day commercial aircraft like regional commuter jets may have similar safety systems. First, though, there's the challenge of creating a parachute robust enough to rescue bigger, faster planes.
"Weight and speed are always the challenge," acknowledged Robert Nelson, chairman of Ballistic Recovery Systems Inc., which sold about 500 of its $16,000 parachute systems this year for use by small private planes and pilots like Kolk.
The company's most advanced parachute right now can accommodate nearly 4,000 pounds. While small planes can weigh up to 2,000 pounds and cruise about 175 miles per hour, regional jets weigh 80,000 pounds and fly at more than 600 miles per hour.
That's why Ballistic Recovery Systems is working with NASA -- which gave it $670,000 for research -- to design a new generation of emergency parachutes that would work on small jets and could be steered by pilots as they drift to the ground.
Kolk, a rancher who was piloting his private plane April 8 from Seattle to his ranch in British Columbia, remembered reaching for the parachute handle as his plane slipped into a dangerous flat spin over the mountains in British Columbia, "like how a dog chases its tail."
A seasoned pilot, Kolk said he had never experienced such a disaster in over a decade of private flying.
"I knew I was in trouble. I couldn't straighten out," Kolk said. "When that chute opened, it was a peaceful, wonderful feeling."
Kolk's experience is one of four cases where parachute-equipped planes landed safely beneath a canopy since U.S. regulators approved the system six years ago. Ballistic Recovery Systems, based in St. Paul, Minn., says eight lives were saved in those four incidents, plus dozens of other people in accidents involving smaller parachute-equipped ultralight planes that resemble motorized gliders.
The parachute, stored behind the rear seats in small planes, is fired with a rocket through the rear windshield; it's attached with high-strength lines to the plane's wings, nose and tail.
They are increasingly popular among private pilots, and for good reason: The government said 626 people died in general aviation crashes in 2003, compared with 81 people aboard commercial airlines.
Aviation experts question whether parachutes will ever be attached to the largest passenger jets, such as the Boeing 747, which weighs more than 900,000 pounds. "The speed and weight of those planes would seem to preclude a system like that," said James Hall, former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board.
Most of the estimated 500 parachute systems Ballistic Recovery Systems sold in 2004 went to aircraft manufacturer Cirrus Design Corp. of Duluth, Minn., which includes them as standard equipment on its line of small private planes. U.S. regulations allow owners of some Cessna small planes to install parachutes, but only about a dozen have bought the add-on equipment so far.
Brent Brown, a lawyer in Roanoke, Va., was having one added to his plane. Brown, who often flies twice a week over the mountains in western Virginia, said he couldn't imagine choosing to save money by not adding the new safety equipment. "I would feel awful silly on that terrible, terrible ride down," Brown said.
The emergency parachutes aren't flawless. Two families in Syracuse, N.Y., are suing Cirrus, Ballistic Recovery Systems and others for a combined $67.5 million over a fatal crash in April 2002. The case is pending in federal court.
The families said the pilot, a plastic surgeon who bought the plane six days earlier, tried to open the parachute but it failed. Defense lawyers have denied the system malfunctioned, and federal investigators concluded the parachute never opened "for undetermined reasons."
In another accident, one month before the Syracuse crash, pilot Paul Heflin of Lexington, Ky., repeatedly pulled hard on the parachute handle when his plane began a steep, uncontrolled dive from 3,000 feet. "He was pulling for his life," recalled Heflin's passenger, Benjamin Ditty. Both suffered minor injuries but walked away from the wreckage.
The parachute popped open just after the plane crashed, "which was not too convenient for us," Ditty said. Months after Heflin's crash, Cirrus ordered all its customers to immediately replace a vital cable in the parachute system.
Heflin said he still has faith in the parachute, but Ditty -- who also flies -- said he would never rely on one again. "It was supposed to work," he said.
Some pilots insist they'll never fly without a parachute.
"People are crazy not to fly with them," said William Graham of San Diego, an instructor pilot whose plane landed beneath a parachute this spring near Stockton, Calif., after it unexpectedly flipped upside down at 16,000 feet. Graham, who was flying with his wife, Barbara, said they drifted onto a farm field so gently the landing didn't break fragile Christmas ornaments and glass bottles aboard the plane.
Video of the parachute is available at:
http://wid.ap.org/video/video/airplanechute.rm
Flying (inadvertently) into clear ice is the first thing that comes to my mind.
I just got back from bringing my bride's car to the shop. It's eight below here, and her heater didn't work. It was 22 miles -- mighty cold.
Although it was over 25 years ago, spin recovery wasn't required but my instructor taught it anyway.
I might say that his excelent instruction, both private and instrument probably saved my life and my 5 passangers when I crashed my Saratoga in Mexico.
Every filght instructor I've had has said so. The common opinion is that they have a very high opinion of their skills ("I'm a Dr. I can do anything"), but as someone else said, they don't have the time to practice to be able to safely fly what they can afford. My brother in law is a Doc and scared himself badly enough in weather to give up flying and sell his plane.
when I crashed my Saratoga in Mexico...
Glad your still here. Why did you go down?
I'm not aware of any spin problems. The Cirrus is an all around great airplane with great looks, value, performance and safety. The parachute is a "nice to have but hope you never need it" option. There have already been a few cases of Cirrus owners deploying the chute, but I don't recall them being deployed as a result of a spin.
"...why would anyone want to pull a chute and crash land with the resulting damage?"
Because if crashing is inevitable, living through the crash is better than not living through the crash.
I can't imagine how anyone could even consider sending a student out solo without spin training. They still require spiral dive recovery I hope- that is scarier than a spin IMO because it develops so quickly.
I am envisioning flying into a huge invisible sheet of ice hanging in the sky : )
How do you inadvertently fly into icing conditions? All icing conditions are IFR by definition. If you are flying in IFR conditions you had better know what you are doing and anticipate icing. If you are flying in a storm the last thing you want to do is pull the chute (of course it would be the last thing you ever did).
Sure, if your airplane was completely disabled by ice (not on takeoff or landing) it would be nice to be able to pop the chute. Or if you flew into a thunderstorm and it ripped your wings off it would be nice to be able pop the chute (after you had fallen free of course, but how would you tell?).
My GlaStar in a full stall descends at 500 to 800 fpm with a forward velocity of about 30 knots. With a BRS it would descend at a rate of around 800 - 1200 fpm with minimal forward velocity. Which is better? I guess it depends on the conditions, so is it worth cutting my payload by 70+ lbs and spending $16,000 on something that may help me in only a couple of situations?
Transport Canada dropped the spin recovery from the flight test (replaced it with a power-on stall) but spin training is still mandatory here. I have met several American instructors and they all make their students do spins in spite of the fact that the FAA doesn't require it.
I wasn't trying to sell anyone a parachute. One can pick up a load of ice that wasn't forecast while flying IFR. It is a situation where a parachute might save your bacon.
"Why did you go down?"
Long story but basicly, I had a 240# nurse swap seats with a 95# doctor unknown to me when we went through a squall line about 100 miles below Guymas that put me 10" aft CG and when I set down on a dirt strip that was not only short it was adobe that was wet under the surface and was like landing on grease. I was able to get out but heading straight for power lines on 3 sides I tried to go under them and with her big fat ass in the rear seat it sunk out and slammed into a berm and mesquite at about 95k.
""People are crazy not to fly with them," said William Graham of San Diego, an instructor pilot whose plane landed beneath a parachute this spring near Stockton, Calif., after it unexpectedly flipped upside down at 16,000 feet. Graham"
This statement raises an eyebrow. 16k and he can't just continue the roll to upright. It ain't like he overturned a canoe in the Bearing Sea. Did they hit Clear air Turbulence and get rolled, then pull the "Oh Sh!t Handle???"
I hope were not getting the whole story.
"after it unexpectedly flipped upside down at 16,000 feet"
what a dork, he shouldn't be teaching anyone how to fly!
I got flipped in an imbedded thunderstorm crossing between El Monte and Seal Beach and it was only a problem to the 2 passangers that were totally spooked by it.
Transitioning that sector is a very confined corridor since it is crossing the landing approach to LAX. When I asked the controler to detour around those things his response was, they are only little ones and you only have 2 more to go!
Thanks a lot AH!
IMO, the only reason for these is primary structural failure, engine departure, or departure from controlled flight due to icing.
Primary structural failure can be better mitigated by inspection, they call it damage tolerance for a reason. Not to mention that this is extremely rare in airplanes not used for aerobatic flight (where parachutes are required by law, as well as minimum altitude)
Engine separation, and the resulting aft CG shift and departure from controlled flight, is generally caused by losing a propeller blade. Not much on an airplane that can kill you so fast is easier to inspect. I'd like to know how many prop failures resulted from a rapidly growing crack that was not easily caught on the ground. This scenario is avoided by some Aerobatic pilots and Bush pilots by tethering the engine to the mount. It can still be torn off, but won't separate from the airplane. Thus leaving the pilot broken but controllable machine.
As for icing, seems like active heating and pneumatic boots would be cheaper, safer, and more reliable (will this chute deploy with an inch of airframe ice?). Not to mention the STC already exist.With that said, I'm not against the Ballistic Chute technology, however I don't see it as a panacea.
I do think anyone who says your "crazy" for flying without it is either misguided, or on the payroll.
How many are going to idiot their way into a coffin corner fealing secure they can "pull the handle" when reality strikes?
BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.