They make such parachute systems for light aircraft, its really not that far fetched. Granted it would take a hell of a parachute for a 20k + lb helo vs. a 1,500 lb plane.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
NTSB Seeks On-Aircraft Birdstrike Solutions
- Thread starter Ken_gone_flying
- Start date
They make such parachute systems for light aircraft, its really not that far fetched. Granted it would take a hell of a parachute for a 20k + lb helo vs. a 1,500 lb plane.
Just reemphasizing for the non-believers.Those cones on an SR-71 served to manage the shock waves around the engines. Anything like that is going to disrupt airflow.
All a screen is going to do is dice the bird into cubes for the engine to eat. Read the ingredients on your slim jim...ever wonder exactly what "mechanically seperated chicken" is?
Granted it would take a hell of a parachute for a 20k + lb helo vs. a 1,500 lb plane.
Interestingly enough, it has more to do with true airspeed rather than with weight. Yes, weight is a consideration for the actual decent rate after deployment, but getting the thing slowed down enough to deploy is the big issue (obviously not so much on a helo, but on a FW the airspeed is the big driving force).
BRS, the company who makes the parachute for Cirrus and many other aircraft (mainly ultralights, however I spent 3 years working with BRS to implement a chute into the Lancair Evolution), has many different versions of chutes for different weight categories and true airspeeds flown. The chute for a 5000 lb plane weighs nearly 200 lbs itself...that's without any sort of pyro for timed/sequenced deployment of the chute. They have some chutes for dropping cargo in the range of 20k+ lbs, via static line and staged charges, but they are stupid heavy and expensive.
BRS is a good company, and after 3 years they finally changed my thinking about having a parachute on an airplane. I was completely against it for a very, very long time, but that's for another thread.
In the VT-27/28 hangars, they have those plastic owls suspended in the middle of the hangar, by a wire around their neck. If birds are scared of those, they must be retarded, because the owl is in the perched position, hanging from the ceiling. It looks like the owls committed suicide.
hurricane221
New Member
I’ve got it!
Quantum Tunneling, how hard could it be?
Sometimes things just get through….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunneling
Just to clear things up….
By the way, this is my solution for most of my problems.
Quantum Tunneling, how hard could it be?
Sometimes things just get through….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunneling
Just to clear things up….
By the way, this is my solution for most of my problems.
I know what the cones are for, I was referring to them for the shape and the way there angled. Your probably right though about the birds, screens just won't work.
They make such parachute systems for light aircraft, its really not that far fetched. Granted it would take a hell of a parachute for a 20k + lb helo vs. a 1,500 lb plane.
Ummmmm, that is what he said. I believe your picture is of a Cirrus SR22.
^^^Missed that. Pictures are nice anyway. 
What about those deer-whistles? Of course if you are super-sonic than no-go...but it could work, right?
What about those deer-whistles? Of course if you are super-sonic than no-go...but it could work, right?
All joking aside, for all practical purposes, nobody is doing >1.0M down low.
Brett
From what I remember reading a long time ago, it's good for OCF, as well. The scenario they used (and apparently happened) was a high-wing and a low-wing are in the patern, HW above the LW aircraft. Neither can see one another and swap paint. LW (Cirrus) stops flying and starts falling and <poof> out comes the 'chute. Cirrus pilot lives to fight another day.