Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: European S-LSA manufacturer seeking view...

Expand Messages
  • Helen Woods
    Abid, about 370 people get struck by lightning every year in the United States as well. I don t carry a personal lightning rod around either. Don t get me
    Message 1 of 19 , Feb 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Abid, about 370 people get struck by lightning every year in the United States as well.  I don't carry a personal lightning rod around either.

      Don't get me wrong, BRS's have there place - for flying over large expanses of forest, flying lots of hard IMC, or flying at night.  Most people just don't do much of any of those things in a light sport seaplane.

      On the other hand, pilots landing with incorrect gear position - regular occurrence.  Pilots landing seaplanes on water, regular occurrence.  I think its much more important to mitigate the risk of being trapped underwater in your seaplane than a mid air collision in your seaplane.

      Helen

      On 1/31/2011 11:55 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
      Helen,
      Watch this please:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk 

      Mid air collision in light single engine aircraft about 30 days or so ago in Virginia with two killed:
      http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/31/us-aviation-crash-idUSTRE6BU2QI20101231

      Mid air between an F-16 and a Cessna near Bradenton, FL
      http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php/310-Midair-collision

      Mid air near Co in Feb 2010
      http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2010/02/08/daily2.html

      etc. etc.

      Abid


      --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, "apollonorthamerica" <apollonorthamerica@...> wrote:
      >
      > Helen,
      > There have been two midair in Tampa Bay region alone in the last 5 years. The weakest link is still the pilot and pilots do some stuff that defies gravity (literally).
      > Abid
      >
      > --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods Helen_Woods@ wrote:
      > >
      > > Engine failure = glide straight ahead and land in a field or in the water
      > > Prop failure = kill the ignitions (Rotax does not windmill), glide
      > > straight ahead and land in a field or in the water
      > > IMC = Execute 180 degree turn
      > > Bird strike so sever as to cause the plane to crash or disabled pilot =
      > > remote possibility I would put in the same category of risk midair or
      > > wings falling off
      > >
      > > A much more realistic risk is a gear down water landing causing the
      > > plane to flip and sink.
      > >
      > > These are just my opinions. Take them or leave them.
      > >
      > > Helen
      > >
      > > On 1/31/2011 8:51 PM, medicbill@ wrote:
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > What about an engine failure, prop failure at altitude? Or those who
      > > > fly into IMC and are not instrument rated and become disoriented? Or
      > > > how about bird strikes or disabled pilot?
      > > > Bill
      > > > In a message dated 1/31/2011 5:43:52 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
      > > > Helen_Woods@ writes:
      > > >
      > > > I will concede the remote possibility that if a wing fell off or a
      > > > midair collision occurred bellow 1000' that the pilot may have
      > > > presence
      > > > of mind to quickly enough recognize his situation and deploy the
      > > > chute
      > > > before landing in the water but I still say it is impractical. Most
      > > > seaplane pilots are flying below 1000' over water. The chances of
      > > > a mid
      > > > air at that altitude are remote and the chances of a factory built
      > > > plane
      > > > suddenly having the wings fall off (Zodiac excepted) are even more
      > > > remote. Why would one total the airframe's structural integrity and
      > > > risk landing in an unusual attitude from a chute deployment both of
      > > > which increase the chances of sinking, rather than just landing
      > > > straight
      > > > ahead in the water?
      > > >
      > > > Helen
      > > >
      > > > On 1/31/2011 8:34 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
      > > > > Below 1000 feet BRS is useless??
      > > > > Where, how, who do you come up with that. Generally speaking a
      > > > BRS may open in as little as 300 feet. In fact I know of a sea
      > > > trike going down due to a bad wing sail repair after a previous
      > > > under water encounter and on this second one they opened their BRS
      > > > at around 500 feet and survived though hurt. According to them if
      > > > I remember the BRS opened just enough to make the water impact softer.
      > > > >
      > > > > Abid
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Helen Wrote:
      > > > > SeaReys have a sliding canopy and Aventuras are open or have
      > > > pop-open windows. Interestingly enough, just about every SeaRey
      > > > pilot I know has sunk their plane at least once with a gear down
      > > > water landing and swum away. By contrast, I looked at a Gannet a
      > > > few years back at OSH. The salesman gear downed it and drowned a
      > > > few months after I spoke with him. I'm not flying it unless I have
      > > > a way to escape.
      > > > >
      > > > > As for the BRS, most seaplane flying is done below 1000' where a
      > > > BRS isn't going to be of any use and there's plenty of runway all
      > > > about.
      > > > >
      > > > > Helen
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > ------------------------------------
      > > > >
      > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > ------------------------------------
      > > >
      > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • apollonorthamerica
      I agree that those are regular occurrences. But people generally do not die from landing with gear up and also from controlled landing in water (I think). Abid
      Message 2 of 19 , Feb 1, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        I agree that those are regular occurrences.
        But people generally do not die from landing with gear up and also from controlled landing in water (I think).
        Abid

        --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods <Helen_Woods@...> wrote:
        >
        > Abid, about 370 people get struck by lightning every year in the United
        > States as well. I don't carry a personal lightning rod around either.
        >
        > Don't get me wrong, BRS's have there place - for flying over large
        > expanses of forest, flying lots of hard IMC, or flying at night. Most
        > people just don't do much of any of those things in a light sport seaplane.
        >
        > On the other hand, pilots landing with incorrect gear position - regular
        > occurrence. Pilots landing seaplanes on water, regular occurrence. I
        > think its much more important to mitigate the risk of being trapped
        > underwater in your seaplane than a mid air collision in your seaplane.
        >
        > Helen
        >
        > On 1/31/2011 11:55 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > Helen,
        > > Watch this please:
        > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk
        > >
        > > Mid air collision in light single engine aircraft about 30 days or so
        > > ago in Virginia with two killed:
        > > http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/31/us-aviation-crash-idUSTRE6BU2QI20101231
        > > <Helen,%20Watch%20this%20please:%20http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk%20%20Mid%20air%20collision%20about%2030%20days%20or%20so%20ago%20in%20Virginia:%20http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/31/us-aviation-crash-idUSTRE6BU2QI20101231>
        > >
        > >
        > > Mid air between an F-16 and a Cessna near Bradenton, FL
        > > http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php/310-Midair-collision
        > >
        > > Mid air near Co in Feb 2010
        > > http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2010/02/08/daily2.html
        > >
        > > etc. etc.
        > >
        > > Abid
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, "apollonorthamerica"
        > > <apollonorthamerica@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Helen,
        > > > There have been two midair in Tampa Bay region alone in the last 5
        > > years. The weakest link is still the pilot and pilots do some stuff
        > > that defies gravity (literally).
        > > > Abid
        > > >
        > > > --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods Helen_Woods@ wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > Engine failure = glide straight ahead and land in a field or in
        > > the water
        > > > > Prop failure = kill the ignitions (Rotax does not windmill), glide
        > > > > straight ahead and land in a field or in the water
        > > > > IMC = Execute 180 degree turn
        > > > > Bird strike so sever as to cause the plane to crash or disabled
        > > pilot =
        > > > > remote possibility I would put in the same category of risk midair or
        > > > > wings falling off
        > > > >
        > > > > A much more realistic risk is a gear down water landing causing the
        > > > > plane to flip and sink.
        > > > >
        > > > > These are just my opinions. Take them or leave them.
        > > > >
        > > > > Helen
        > > > >
        > > > > On 1/31/2011 8:51 PM, medicbill@ wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > What about an engine failure, prop failure at altitude? Or those
        > > who
        > > > > > fly into IMC and are not instrument rated and become
        > > disoriented? Or
        > > > > > how about bird strikes or disabled pilot?
        > > > > > Bill
        > > > > > In a message dated 1/31/2011 5:43:52 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
        > > > > > Helen_Woods@ writes:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > I will concede the remote possibility that if a wing fell off or a
        > > > > > midair collision occurred bellow 1000' that the pilot may have
        > > > > > presence
        > > > > > of mind to quickly enough recognize his situation and deploy the
        > > > > > chute
        > > > > > before landing in the water but I still say it is impractical. Most
        > > > > > seaplane pilots are flying below 1000' over water. The chances of
        > > > > > a mid
        > > > > > air at that altitude are remote and the chances of a factory built
        > > > > > plane
        > > > > > suddenly having the wings fall off (Zodiac excepted) are even more
        > > > > > remote. Why would one total the airframe's structural integrity and
        > > > > > risk landing in an unusual attitude from a chute deployment both of
        > > > > > which increase the chances of sinking, rather than just landing
        > > > > > straight
        > > > > > ahead in the water?
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Helen
        > > > > >
        > > > > > On 1/31/2011 8:34 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
        > > > > > > Below 1000 feet BRS is useless??
        > > > > > > Where, how, who do you come up with that. Generally speaking a
        > > > > > BRS may open in as little as 300 feet. In fact I know of a sea
        > > > > > trike going down due to a bad wing sail repair after a previous
        > > > > > under water encounter and on this second one they opened their BRS
        > > > > > at around 500 feet and survived though hurt. According to them if
        > > > > > I remember the BRS opened just enough to make the water impact
        > > softer.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Abid
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Helen Wrote:
        > > > > > > SeaReys have a sliding canopy and Aventuras are open or have
        > > > > > pop-open windows. Interestingly enough, just about every SeaRey
        > > > > > pilot I know has sunk their plane at least once with a gear down
        > > > > > water landing and swum away. By contrast, I looked at a Gannet a
        > > > > > few years back at OSH. The salesman gear downed it and drowned a
        > > > > > few months after I spoke with him. I'm not flying it unless I have
        > > > > > a way to escape.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > As for the BRS, most seaplane flying is done below 1000' where a
        > > > > > BRS isn't going to be of any use and there's plenty of runway all
        > > > > > about.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Helen
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > ------------------------------------
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > ------------------------------------
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
      • Helen Woods
        No, but they do die from landing gear down in water when they don t have a way out. Helen
        Message 3 of 19 , Feb 2, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          No, but they do die from landing gear down in water when they don't have
          a way out.

          Helen

          On 2/1/2011 10:05 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
          > I agree that those are regular occurrences.
          > But people generally do not die from landing with gear up and also from controlled landing in water (I think).
          > Abid
          >
          > --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods<Helen_Woods@...> wrote:
          >
          >> Abid, about 370 people get struck by lightning every year in the United
          >> States as well. I don't carry a personal lightning rod around either.
          >>
          >> Don't get me wrong, BRS's have there place - for flying over large
          >> expanses of forest, flying lots of hard IMC, or flying at night. Most
          >> people just don't do much of any of those things in a light sport seaplane.
          >>
          >> On the other hand, pilots landing with incorrect gear position - regular
          >> occurrence. Pilots landing seaplanes on water, regular occurrence. I
          >> think its much more important to mitigate the risk of being trapped
          >> underwater in your seaplane than a mid air collision in your seaplane.
          >>
          >> Helen
          >>
          >> On 1/31/2011 11:55 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
          >>
          >>>
          >>> Helen,
          >>> Watch this please:
          >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk
          >>>
          >>> Mid air collision in light single engine aircraft about 30 days or so
          >>> ago in Virginia with two killed:
          >>> http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/31/us-aviation-crash-idUSTRE6BU2QI20101231
          >>> <Helen,%20Watch%20this%20please:%20http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk%20%20Mid%20air%20collision%20about%2030%20days%20or%20so%20ago%20in%20Virginia:%20http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/31/us-aviation-crash-idUSTRE6BU2QI20101231>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>> Mid air between an F-16 and a Cessna near Bradenton, FL
          >>> http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php/310-Midair-collision
          >>>
          >>> Mid air near Co in Feb 2010
          >>> http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2010/02/08/daily2.html
          >>>
          >>> etc. etc.
          >>>
          >>> Abid
          >>>
          >>>
          >>> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, "apollonorthamerica"
          >>> <apollonorthamerica@> wrote:
          >>>
          >>>> Helen,
          >>>> There have been two midair in Tampa Bay region alone in the last 5
          >>>>
          >>> years. The weakest link is still the pilot and pilots do some stuff
          >>> that defies gravity (literally).
          >>>
          >>>> Abid
          >>>>
          >>>> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods Helen_Woods@ wrote:
          >>>>
          >>>>> Engine failure = glide straight ahead and land in a field or in
          >>>>>
          >>> the water
          >>>
          >>>>> Prop failure = kill the ignitions (Rotax does not windmill), glide
          >>>>> straight ahead and land in a field or in the water
          >>>>> IMC = Execute 180 degree turn
          >>>>> Bird strike so sever as to cause the plane to crash or disabled
          >>>>>
          >>> pilot =
          >>>
          >>>>> remote possibility I would put in the same category of risk midair or
          >>>>> wings falling off
          >>>>>
          >>>>> A much more realistic risk is a gear down water landing causing the
          >>>>> plane to flip and sink.
          >>>>>
          >>>>> These are just my opinions. Take them or leave them.
          >>>>>
          >>>>> Helen
          >>>>>
          >>>>> On 1/31/2011 8:51 PM, medicbill@ wrote:
          >>>>>
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>> What about an engine failure, prop failure at altitude? Or those
          >>>>>>
          >>> who
          >>>
          >>>>>> fly into IMC and are not instrument rated and become
          >>>>>>
          >>> disoriented? Or
          >>>
          >>>>>> how about bird strikes or disabled pilot?
          >>>>>> Bill
          >>>>>> In a message dated 1/31/2011 5:43:52 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
          >>>>>> Helen_Woods@ writes:
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>> I will concede the remote possibility that if a wing fell off or a
          >>>>>> midair collision occurred bellow 1000' that the pilot may have
          >>>>>> presence
          >>>>>> of mind to quickly enough recognize his situation and deploy the
          >>>>>> chute
          >>>>>> before landing in the water but I still say it is impractical. Most
          >>>>>> seaplane pilots are flying below 1000' over water. The chances of
          >>>>>> a mid
          >>>>>> air at that altitude are remote and the chances of a factory built
          >>>>>> plane
          >>>>>> suddenly having the wings fall off (Zodiac excepted) are even more
          >>>>>> remote. Why would one total the airframe's structural integrity and
          >>>>>> risk landing in an unusual attitude from a chute deployment both of
          >>>>>> which increase the chances of sinking, rather than just landing
          >>>>>> straight
          >>>>>> ahead in the water?
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>> Helen
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>> On 1/31/2011 8:34 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>>> Below 1000 feet BRS is useless??
          >>>>>>> Where, how, who do you come up with that. Generally speaking a
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>> BRS may open in as little as 300 feet. In fact I know of a sea
          >>>>>> trike going down due to a bad wing sail repair after a previous
          >>>>>> under water encounter and on this second one they opened their BRS
          >>>>>> at around 500 feet and survived though hurt. According to them if
          >>>>>> I remember the BRS opened just enough to make the water impact
          >>>>>>
          >>> softer.
          >>>
          >>>>>>> Abid
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>> Helen Wrote:
          >>>>>>> SeaReys have a sliding canopy and Aventuras are open or have
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>> pop-open windows. Interestingly enough, just about every SeaRey
          >>>>>> pilot I know has sunk their plane at least once with a gear down
          >>>>>> water landing and swum away. By contrast, I looked at a Gannet a
          >>>>>> few years back at OSH. The salesman gear downed it and drowned a
          >>>>>> few months after I spoke with him. I'm not flying it unless I have
          >>>>>> a way to escape.
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>>> As for the BRS, most seaplane flying is done below 1000' where a
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>> BRS isn't going to be of any use and there's plenty of runway all
          >>>>>> about.
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>>> Helen
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>> ------------------------------------
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>>
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>> ------------------------------------
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>>
          >>>>>
          >>>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • apollonorthamerica
          I don t know Helen. Were there 57 gear down fatal sea plane crashes in sea-planes in the last 5 years? Because there were 57 midair collisions in the last 5
          Message 4 of 19 , Feb 2, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            I don't know Helen.
            Were there 57 gear down fatal sea plane crashes in sea-planes in the last 5 years?
            Because there were 57 midair collisions in the last 5 years according to NTSB with a vast majority of them in clear day VFR conditions near airports.

            Abid

            --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods <Helen_Woods@...> wrote:
            >
            > No, but they do die from landing gear down in water when they don't have
            > a way out.
            >
            > Helen
            >
            > On 2/1/2011 10:05 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
            > > I agree that those are regular occurrences.
            > > But people generally do not die from landing with gear up and also from controlled landing in water (I think).
            > > Abid
            > >
            > > --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods<Helen_Woods@> wrote:
            > >
            > >> Abid, about 370 people get struck by lightning every year in the United
            > >> States as well. I don't carry a personal lightning rod around either.
            > >>
            > >> Don't get me wrong, BRS's have there place - for flying over large
            > >> expanses of forest, flying lots of hard IMC, or flying at night. Most
            > >> people just don't do much of any of those things in a light sport seaplane.
            > >>
            > >> On the other hand, pilots landing with incorrect gear position - regular
            > >> occurrence. Pilots landing seaplanes on water, regular occurrence. I
            > >> think its much more important to mitigate the risk of being trapped
            > >> underwater in your seaplane than a mid air collision in your seaplane.
            > >>
            > >> Helen
            > >>
            > >> On 1/31/2011 11:55 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
            > >>
            > >>>
            > >>> Helen,
            > >>> Watch this please:
            > >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk
            > >>>
            > >>> Mid air collision in light single engine aircraft about 30 days or so
            > >>> ago in Virginia with two killed:
            > >>> http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/31/us-aviation-crash-idUSTRE6BU2QI20101231
            > >>> <Helen,%20Watch%20this%20please:%20http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk%20%20Mid%20air%20collision%20about%2030%20days%20or%20so%20ago%20in%20Virginia:%20http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/31/us-aviation-crash-idUSTRE6BU2QI20101231>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>> Mid air between an F-16 and a Cessna near Bradenton, FL
            > >>> http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php/310-Midair-collision
            > >>>
            > >>> Mid air near Co in Feb 2010
            > >>> http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2010/02/08/daily2.html
            > >>>
            > >>> etc. etc.
            > >>>
            > >>> Abid
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, "apollonorthamerica"
            > >>> <apollonorthamerica@> wrote:
            > >>>
            > >>>> Helen,
            > >>>> There have been two midair in Tampa Bay region alone in the last 5
            > >>>>
            > >>> years. The weakest link is still the pilot and pilots do some stuff
            > >>> that defies gravity (literally).
            > >>>
            > >>>> Abid
            > >>>>
            > >>>> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods Helen_Woods@ wrote:
            > >>>>
            > >>>>> Engine failure = glide straight ahead and land in a field or in
            > >>>>>
            > >>> the water
            > >>>
            > >>>>> Prop failure = kill the ignitions (Rotax does not windmill), glide
            > >>>>> straight ahead and land in a field or in the water
            > >>>>> IMC = Execute 180 degree turn
            > >>>>> Bird strike so sever as to cause the plane to crash or disabled
            > >>>>>
            > >>> pilot =
            > >>>
            > >>>>> remote possibility I would put in the same category of risk midair or
            > >>>>> wings falling off
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> A much more realistic risk is a gear down water landing causing the
            > >>>>> plane to flip and sink.
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> These are just my opinions. Take them or leave them.
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> Helen
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>> On 1/31/2011 8:51 PM, medicbill@ wrote:
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>> What about an engine failure, prop failure at altitude? Or those
            > >>>>>>
            > >>> who
            > >>>
            > >>>>>> fly into IMC and are not instrument rated and become
            > >>>>>>
            > >>> disoriented? Or
            > >>>
            > >>>>>> how about bird strikes or disabled pilot?
            > >>>>>> Bill
            > >>>>>> In a message dated 1/31/2011 5:43:52 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
            > >>>>>> Helen_Woods@ writes:
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>> I will concede the remote possibility that if a wing fell off or a
            > >>>>>> midair collision occurred bellow 1000' that the pilot may have
            > >>>>>> presence
            > >>>>>> of mind to quickly enough recognize his situation and deploy the
            > >>>>>> chute
            > >>>>>> before landing in the water but I still say it is impractical. Most
            > >>>>>> seaplane pilots are flying below 1000' over water. The chances of
            > >>>>>> a mid
            > >>>>>> air at that altitude are remote and the chances of a factory built
            > >>>>>> plane
            > >>>>>> suddenly having the wings fall off (Zodiac excepted) are even more
            > >>>>>> remote. Why would one total the airframe's structural integrity and
            > >>>>>> risk landing in an unusual attitude from a chute deployment both of
            > >>>>>> which increase the chances of sinking, rather than just landing
            > >>>>>> straight
            > >>>>>> ahead in the water?
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>> Helen
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>> On 1/31/2011 8:34 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>>> Below 1000 feet BRS is useless??
            > >>>>>>> Where, how, who do you come up with that. Generally speaking a
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>> BRS may open in as little as 300 feet. In fact I know of a sea
            > >>>>>> trike going down due to a bad wing sail repair after a previous
            > >>>>>> under water encounter and on this second one they opened their BRS
            > >>>>>> at around 500 feet and survived though hurt. According to them if
            > >>>>>> I remember the BRS opened just enough to make the water impact
            > >>>>>>
            > >>> softer.
            > >>>
            > >>>>>>> Abid
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>> Helen Wrote:
            > >>>>>>> SeaReys have a sliding canopy and Aventuras are open or have
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>> pop-open windows. Interestingly enough, just about every SeaRey
            > >>>>>> pilot I know has sunk their plane at least once with a gear down
            > >>>>>> water landing and swum away. By contrast, I looked at a Gannet a
            > >>>>>> few years back at OSH. The salesman gear downed it and drowned a
            > >>>>>> few months after I spoke with him. I'm not flying it unless I have
            > >>>>>> a way to escape.
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>>> As for the BRS, most seaplane flying is done below 1000' where a
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>> BRS isn't going to be of any use and there's plenty of runway all
            > >>>>>> about.
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>>> Helen
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>> ------------------------------------
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>>
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>> ------------------------------------
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>>
            > >>>>>
            > >>>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > ------------------------------------
            > >
            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
          • Helen Woods
            If you are going to compare the two and get meaningful numbers, you need to compare rates (percentage of amphibs with accidents vs. percentage of all aircraft
            Message 5 of 19 , Feb 3, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              If you are going to compare the two and get meaningful numbers, you need
              to compare rates (percentage of amphibs with accidents vs. percentage of
              all aircraft with mid airs) not raw numbers. The fact that it is
              impossible in the lower 48 to get insurance to rent out an amphib should
              tell you something about those rates.

              Helen

              On 2/2/2011 10:27 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
              > I don't know Helen.
              > Were there 57 gear down fatal sea plane crashes in sea-planes in the last 5 years?
              > Because there were 57 midair collisions in the last 5 years according to NTSB with a vast majority of them in clear day VFR conditions near airports.
              >
              > Abid
              >
              > --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods<Helen_Woods@...> wrote:
              >
              >> No, but they do die from landing gear down in water when they don't have
              >> a way out.
              >>
              >> Helen
              >>
              >> On 2/1/2011 10:05 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
              >>
              >>> I agree that those are regular occurrences.
              >>> But people generally do not die from landing with gear up and also from controlled landing in water (I think).
              >>> Abid
              >>>
              >>> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods<Helen_Woods@> wrote:
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>> Abid, about 370 people get struck by lightning every year in the United
              >>>> States as well. I don't carry a personal lightning rod around either.
              >>>>
              >>>> Don't get me wrong, BRS's have there place - for flying over large
              >>>> expanses of forest, flying lots of hard IMC, or flying at night. Most
              >>>> people just don't do much of any of those things in a light sport seaplane.
              >>>>
              >>>> On the other hand, pilots landing with incorrect gear position - regular
              >>>> occurrence. Pilots landing seaplanes on water, regular occurrence. I
              >>>> think its much more important to mitigate the risk of being trapped
              >>>> underwater in your seaplane than a mid air collision in your seaplane.
              >>>>
              >>>> Helen
              >>>>
              >>>> On 1/31/2011 11:55 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
              >>>>
              >>>>
              >>>>> Helen,
              >>>>> Watch this please:
              >>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk
              >>>>>
              >>>>> Mid air collision in light single engine aircraft about 30 days or so
              >>>>> ago in Virginia with two killed:
              >>>>> http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/31/us-aviation-crash-idUSTRE6BU2QI20101231
              >>>>> <Helen,%20Watch%20this%20please:%20http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk%20%20Mid%20air%20collision%20about%2030%20days%20or%20so%20ago%20in%20Virginia:%20http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/31/us-aviation-crash-idUSTRE6BU2QI20101231>
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>> Mid air between an F-16 and a Cessna near Bradenton, FL
              >>>>> http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php/310-Midair-collision
              >>>>>
              >>>>> Mid air near Co in Feb 2010
              >>>>> http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2010/02/08/daily2.html
              >>>>>
              >>>>> etc. etc.
              >>>>>
              >>>>> Abid
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, "apollonorthamerica"
              >>>>> <apollonorthamerica@> wrote:
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>>> Helen,
              >>>>>> There have been two midair in Tampa Bay region alone in the last 5
              >>>>>>
              >>>>>>
              >>>>> years. The weakest link is still the pilot and pilots do some stuff
              >>>>> that defies gravity (literally).
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>>> Abid
              >>>>>>
              >>>>>> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods Helen_Woods@ wrote:
              >>>>>>
              >>>>>>
              >>>>>>> Engine failure = glide straight ahead and land in a field or in
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>> the water
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>>>> Prop failure = kill the ignitions (Rotax does not windmill), glide
              >>>>>>> straight ahead and land in a field or in the water
              >>>>>>> IMC = Execute 180 degree turn
              >>>>>>> Bird strike so sever as to cause the plane to crash or disabled
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>> pilot =
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>>>> remote possibility I would put in the same category of risk midair or
              >>>>>>> wings falling off
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>>>> A much more realistic risk is a gear down water landing causing the
              >>>>>>> plane to flip and sink.
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>>>> These are just my opinions. Take them or leave them.
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>>>> Helen
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>>>> On 1/31/2011 8:51 PM, medicbill@ wrote:
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>> What about an engine failure, prop failure at altitude? Or those
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>> who
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>>>>> fly into IMC and are not instrument rated and become
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>> disoriented? Or
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>>>>> how about bird strikes or disabled pilot?
              >>>>>>>> Bill
              >>>>>>>> In a message dated 1/31/2011 5:43:52 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
              >>>>>>>> Helen_Woods@ writes:
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>> I will concede the remote possibility that if a wing fell off or a
              >>>>>>>> midair collision occurred bellow 1000' that the pilot may have
              >>>>>>>> presence
              >>>>>>>> of mind to quickly enough recognize his situation and deploy the
              >>>>>>>> chute
              >>>>>>>> before landing in the water but I still say it is impractical. Most
              >>>>>>>> seaplane pilots are flying below 1000' over water. The chances of
              >>>>>>>> a mid
              >>>>>>>> air at that altitude are remote and the chances of a factory built
              >>>>>>>> plane
              >>>>>>>> suddenly having the wings fall off (Zodiac excepted) are even more
              >>>>>>>> remote. Why would one total the airframe's structural integrity and
              >>>>>>>> risk landing in an unusual attitude from a chute deployment both of
              >>>>>>>> which increase the chances of sinking, rather than just landing
              >>>>>>>> straight
              >>>>>>>> ahead in the water?
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>> Helen
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>> On 1/31/2011 8:34 PM, apollonorthamerica wrote:
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>> Below 1000 feet BRS is useless??
              >>>>>>>>> Where, how, who do you come up with that. Generally speaking a
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>> BRS may open in as little as 300 feet. In fact I know of a sea
              >>>>>>>> trike going down due to a bad wing sail repair after a previous
              >>>>>>>> under water encounter and on this second one they opened their BRS
              >>>>>>>> at around 500 feet and survived though hurt. According to them if
              >>>>>>>> I remember the BRS opened just enough to make the water impact
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>> softer.
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>>>>>> Abid
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>> Helen Wrote:
              >>>>>>>>> SeaReys have a sliding canopy and Aventuras are open or have
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>> pop-open windows. Interestingly enough, just about every SeaRey
              >>>>>>>> pilot I know has sunk their plane at least once with a gear down
              >>>>>>>> water landing and swum away. By contrast, I looked at a Gannet a
              >>>>>>>> few years back at OSH. The salesman gear downed it and drowned a
              >>>>>>>> few months after I spoke with him. I'm not flying it unless I have
              >>>>>>>> a way to escape.
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>> As for the BRS, most seaplane flying is done below 1000' where a
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>> BRS isn't going to be of any use and there's plenty of runway all
              >>>>>>>> about.
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>> Helen
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>>>>
              >>>>>>
              >>>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>
              >>>>
              >>>
              >>>
              >>> ------------------------------------
              >>>
              >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>
              >>
              >
              >
              >
              > ------------------------------------
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • dangrunloh
              ... Strongly suggest chute users consider the new Second Chantz gas rocket system. I m having my old BRS canister upgraded to the new technology and price is
              Message 6 of 19 , Feb 6, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, "apollonorthamerica" <apollonorthamerica@...> wrote:
                >
                > BRS is indeed a complicated install and by the way we finish 4 to 6 aircraft in the time it takes BRS to build one parachute (6 months and waiting for 3 BRS still). I think BRS will be soon taken over by competing interests because of this kind of thing. If I had extra time, I would certainly myself jump into the BRS vacuum in the US right now. All their patents are expired and they do not care about LSA market judging by their actions and they don't build parachutes in the US anymore but in Mexico so their US manufactured advantage is nil.
                --------

                Strongly suggest chute users consider the new Second Chantz gas rocket system. I'm having my old BRS canister upgraded to the new technology and price is reasonable. Fast service promised. New gas systems in stock. Can upgrade chemical rocket if preferred.

                http://www.secondchantz.com/Second_Chantz/Home.html

                Incidentally based on 12 year service period and repack every 6 years
                it has cost me about $3.00 per flying hour to have the chute on board (while flying 100 hours per year). A busy trainer might be less.

                Historical BRS deployment rate is greater than 1:100 of units sold. Those are the successful non-fatal deployments. Actual pulls would be higher, maybe 1 in 75. (About 15,000 units sold and 150 or more successful.)

                --Dan Grunloh

                >
                > Having said all that, whatever people/dealers say to justify not getting a BRS doesn't really work when you are headed downward and wishing you had that last possible chance to pull that handle. $4500 seems pretty cheap at that time. Nothing is guaranteed to work and having a BRS does not mean you start to do aerobatics in a plane not rated for aerobatics or fly irresponsibly. Its the last chance chance you have when stuff hits the ceiling.
                >
                > Abid
                >
                >
                >
                > --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, palmettoe@ wrote:
                > >
                > > RC, BRS are a complicated and expensive install on SeaReys, so most
                > > dealers and owners rationalize you don't need them for that and different
                > > reasons. No A/C recovery system is guaranteed but BRS has recorded saves as low as
                > > 100 feet but (don't count on it).
                > > Now, the sliding canopy....seems to me a twisted or warped airframe as
                > > a result of a wheels down landing could prevent a sliding canopy from
                > > opening also.
                > > Helen, I enjoy your posts, but your dealership ambitions are beginning
                > > to surface.
                > >
                > > John
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > In a message dated 1/31/2011 5:49:17 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
                > > rckchp@ writes:
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Bob,
                > >
                > > Thanks for the info on what altitude is needed for BRS deployment.....I
                > > thought that might be the case but wasn't sure so I didn't make that point to
                > > Helen.
                > >
                > > ----- Original Message -----
                > > From: Bob Comperini <bob@>
                > > To: Sport Aircraft <Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com>
                > > Sent: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 22:39:11 -0000 (UTC)
                > > Subject: Re: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group European S-LSA
                > > manufacturer seeking views from US pilots, owners and others
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                > > >As for the BRS, most seaplane flying is done below 1000' where a BRS
                > > isn't going to be of any use and there's plenty of runway all about.
                > >
                > >
                > > Wellll.... BRS's only need 250-300 feet to deploy.
                > >
                > >
                > > --
                > >
                > > Bob Comperini
                > >
                > > e-mail: _bob@_ (mailto:bob@)
                > >
                > > WWW: _http:// www.fly-ul.com_ (http://www.fly-ul.com/)
                > >
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.