Monday, January 31, 2011

Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Forced / Off Field Landing

On Jan 31, 2011, at 7:57 PM, "wj18001900" <swferris@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> What should your plan be to best handle a potential forced / off field landing if you are flying over one of these mega city metro areas? . . . Cities that to me do not seem to have any suitable potential locations for a forced / off field landing for many, many, many miles in all directions.
>

Since I live and fly in the Los Angeles area, I tend to keep my route of flight within landing distance of an airport. If that's not possible there are other places to land, although you will never know them by looking at a chart. I still can never fathom using a chute for an engine failure even in that situation, because once the chute is used you have absolutely no say in where you will land

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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



Here are some others including into the water fatal crashes of GA airplanes right around here in Tampa, FL.

http://suncoastpasco.tbo.com/content/2009/jul/09/091735/search-planes-passengers-continues-gulf/


Another midair killing 3 in March 2010 in Florida
http://avstop.com/news_march_2010/two_aircraft_collide_killing_both_pilots_in_levy_county.htm

http://www.nwfdailynews.com/articles/destin-35175-disappears-landing.htm
 l

A week or so ago a trike pilot in North Carolina found a bullet hole through his wing that he didn't even know he had after a flight. Like I said pilots and people do some weird things.
Abid




--- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, "apollonorthamerica" <apollonorthamerica@...> wrote:
>
> Helen,
> Watch this please:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKaxp6Rlk
> <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-idUSTRE6BU2Q\
> I20101231
> <Helen,%20Watch%20this%20please:%20http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXQKax\
> p6Rlk%20%20Mid%20air%20collision%20about%2030%20days%20or%20so%20ago%20i\
> n%20Virginia:%20http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/31/us-aviation-cr\
> ash-idUSTRE6BU2QI20101231>
>
> Mid air between an F-16 and a Cessna near Bradenton, FL
> http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php/310-Midair-collision
> <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
> <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
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

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



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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

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

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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Forced / Off Field Landing

I live in the St. Louis metro area, and considering the short landing distance ability of most Light Sport Aircraft, even if you were flying over a fairly congested part of this particular metro area, under most circumstances, you could probably do a forced / off field landing safely and relatively easily (especially if you had been flying at a relatively high altitude prior to experiencing the problem with your aircraft, thus giving you time to pick out a suitable landing spot).

However, with an employer that I had in the past, I had numerous business trips to Chicago, Los Angeles, New York City, etc. I was impressed with how geographically huge and very densely built the largest cities of the United States are.

What should your plan be to best handle a potential forced / off field landing if you are flying over one of these mega city metro areas? . . . Cities that to me do not seem to have any suitable potential locations for a forced / off field landing for many, many, many miles in all directions.

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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



On a Lycoming or Continental you can stall the prop by slowing the plane.  Been there, done that.

Yes massive bird strikes happen.  Yes wings fall off planes.  I just don't think either happen enough to warrant a BRS.

As for the pilot who got himself into IMC and a spin (which would only be unrecoverable if he was low to the ground or loaded the plane out of CG), sounds to me like he needs a good flight instructor more than a BRS!

Helen

On 1/31/2011 9:37 PM, medicbill@aol.com wrote:
Engine failure- Yes, by the book that is what your suppose to do but not always practical such as over mountainous terrain or forested area. Is it better to crash into trees or come down through them at a slower speed?
 
Prop failure+Many examples of props falling off. Not all BRS equipped planes use Rotax engines. See above.
IMC- Yes another text book answer if don't become disoriented while you are in it.
Bird strike- Great example on AOPA where a bird came through injuring the pilot and having difficulty with his eye site, While he was able to make it back if he had a BRS he would have had another option to save his ass if need be.
Oh yes what about the unrecoverable spin?
 
In a message dated 1/31/2011 5:59:39 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, Helen_Woods@verizon.net writes:


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@aol.com 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@verizon.net 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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
    Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

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



Engine failure- Yes, by the book that is what your suppose to do but not always practical such as over mountainous terrain or forested area. Is it better to crash into trees or come down through them at a slower speed?
 
Prop failure+Many examples of props falling off. Not all BRS equipped planes use Rotax engines. See above.
IMC- Yes another text book answer if don't become disoriented while you are in it.
Bird strike- Great example on AOPA where a bird came through injuring the pilot and having difficulty with his eye site, While he was able to make it back if he had a BRS he would have had another option to save his ass if need be.
Oh yes what about the unrecoverable spin?
 
In a message dated 1/31/2011 5:59:39 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, Helen_Woods@verizon.net writes:


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@aol.com 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@verizon.net 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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
    Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

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



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@aol.com 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@verizon.net 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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
    Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

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



On Jan 31, 2011, at 5:51 PM, medicbill@aol.com wrote:

What about an engine failure, prop failure at altitude? 

Sorry Bill, but I can not ever imagine an engine or prop failure being a reason to use a chute.

Over inhospitible terrain without sufficient altitude to land safely? Well you shouldn't have been in that position to begin with.  


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group European S-LSA manufacturer seeking views from US pilots, owners and others

On Jan 31, 2011, at 5:42 PM, Helen Woods <Helen_Woods@verizon.net> wrote:

> 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?
>

You realize they are mounted such that the plane come down in a "wheels down" attitude, right?


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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



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@verizon.net 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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
    Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

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

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.

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/)
>


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group European S-LSA manufacturer seeking views from US pilots, owners and others

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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group European S-LSA manufacturer seeking views from US pilots, owners and others

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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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



Or resting upside down, canopy to the mud, on the bottom of a river.

Helen

On 1/31/2011 6:43 PM, medicbill@aol.com wrote:
Or at least carry emergency bottles that you can get for scuba diving and racing boat drivers carry. Of course if your unconscious it is not going to matter.
 
In a message dated 1/31/2011 2:10:30 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, Helen_Woods@verizon.net writes:


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


Jan 31, 2011 03:56:44 PM, Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com wrote:




----- Original Message -----
From: Helen Woods
To: Sport Aircraft
Sent: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:31:49 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group European S-LSA manufacturer seeking views from US pilots, owners and others



Hi Helen,

That's a pretty big "must"......I can't recall any seaplanes (boat hull or pontoon plane) that has a sliding canopy....does the SeaRey your school is going to use have sliding canopy?

Also, I don't understand your reasoning that a BRS is "fairly useless" for a seaplane. I believe in an extreme emergency, such as midair resulting in loss/failure of wing or flight controls, etc., a BRS enabling a soft descent to land or water is a valid safety system.

I value most of your opinions on LSA but I think your reasoning is a "stretch" on this particular subject.

Regards,

Rich A.

&nb sp;


Hi there.  I took your survey and the biggest the concern I have about the plane that does not appear to be addressed is the ability to egress a sunken plane.  Your survey mentions a BRS as safety equipment, which in my opinion is fairly useless in a seaplane.  A sliding canopy that can be opened underwater is a must in my book though and one that has not be addressed by most of the SLSA flying boat manufacturers.

My two cents.
Helen





__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

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



We became a SeaRey dealer BECAUSE I and others on my staff thought it was the only amphib safe enough for training, not vice versa.

Helen

On 1/31/2011 6:25 PM, palmettoe@aol.com 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@comcast.net 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@fly-ul.com>
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@fly-ul.com

WWW: http:// www.fly-ul.com





__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

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



Or at least carry emergency bottles that you can get for scuba diving and racing boat drivers carry. Of course if your unconscious it is not going to matter.
 
In a message dated 1/31/2011 2:10:30 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, Helen_Woods@verizon.net writes:


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


Jan 31, 2011 03:56:44 PM, Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com wrote:




----- Original Message -----
From: Helen Woods
To: Sport Aircraft
Sent: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:31:49 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group European S-LSA manufacturer seeking views from US pilots, owners and others



Hi Helen,

That's a pretty big "must"......I can't recall any seaplanes (boat hull or pontoon plane) that has a sliding canopy....does the SeaRey your school is going to use have sliding canopy?

Also, I don't understand your reasoning that a BRS is "fairly useless" for a seaplane. I believe in an extreme emergency, such as midair resulting in loss/failure of wing or flight controls, etc., a BRS enabling a soft descent to land or water is a valid safety system.

I value most of your opinions on LSA but I think your reasoning is a "stretch" on this particular subject.

Regards,

Rich A.

&nb sp;


Hi there.  I took your survey and the biggest the concern I have about the plane that does not appear to be addressed is the ability to egress a sunken plane.  Your survey mentions a BRS as safety equipment, which in my opinion is fairly useless in a seaplane.  A sliding canopy that can be opened underwater is a must in my book though and one that has not be addressed by most of the SLSA flying boat manufacturers.

My two cents.
Helen





__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

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



   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@comcast.net 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@fly-ul.com>
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@fly-ul.com

WWW: http:// www.fly-ul.com





__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___