Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #43516
From: John Hafen <j.hafen@comcast.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML] Apologies to the farmer's daughter
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:19:17 -0400
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>

Rob Wolf says:  “They told us that they want the airplane to land slightly nose down.  If we were going to land tail first, they would have insisted on head-rest-type protection features.”

 

The benefits of crashing “slightly nose down” are not clear to me (you could cut your head open on the Rosen sun visor).  Maybe Cirrus should go ahead and install head rest protection features and let her crash tail first to absorb more shock.

 

My friend’s son, and 3 of his buddies, were circling 10,000 foot Maple Mountain in central Utah, scoping for elk.  They found a herd and wanted to get in closer for a better look.  It was a hot day, so the pressure altitude was well over 10k, and the 172 had four big guys in it with ¾ of max fuel.  You can guess the rest.  They got in close, took a look, and couldn’t make it out of the canyon.  As they were about to crash into the mountain side, a wing hit a tree and spun them around 180 degrees and they crashed tail first into the mountain.  They walked away with minor injuries.  And it was a million year old Cessna without “head rest type protection features.”

 

I don’t know if a carbon fiber tail cruncher would absorb energy as well as an aluminum tail of an old Cessna, but it might be worth looking into.

 

Shuttle pilots withstand a Brazilian G’s in a reclined position.  So do F-16 pilots.  Maybe we should all try to crash tail first.

 

Maybe BRS systems should cant the plane so as to use the tail to absorb the shock.

 

John Hafen

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of rwolf99@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 7:25 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Apologies to the farmer's daughter

 

Guys --

Richard Titsworth pointed out to me that the 25 foot-per-second descent rate with a BRS *is* 1500 feet per minute.  Gee, I get the "turkey of the day" award...

Anyway, they claim that 25 fps (1500 fpm) is survivable.  They told us that they want the airplane to land slightly nose down.  If we were going to land tail first, they would have insisted on head-rest-type protection features.

You know, 25 fps didn't sound all that fast to me, but 1500 fpm seems pretty darn fast to be crunching into the ground.

- Rob Wolf


AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster