Non-certified aircraft and known ice?

[FN FAL]

FN - that's fine, I totally understand the concept of backups...I'm just wondering what happens when someone does start tumbling during the freefall, etc.

-mini

You do the same as you would in an airplane, you regain control by flying flying your body. If you can't, due to lack of skill or injury, you still have options available to you.

If you suffer a broken arm during a skydive, you still have the option of regaining stability by compensating with your other "control surfaces" and if that isn't looking too positive in the outcome department, you can pull your main or reserve with the available hand. Some people will have the luxury of an automatic deployment device on their reserve.

 

[minitour]

You do the same as you would in an airplane, you regain control by flying flying your body. If you can't, due to lack of skill or injury, you still have options available to you.

If you suffer a broken arm during a skydive, you still have the option of regaining stability by compensating with your other "control surfaces" and if that isn't looking too positive in the outcome department, you can pull your main or reserve with the available hand. Some people will have the luxury of an automatic deployment device on their reserve.

Cool...so you have a plan in case of (what I would deem) an emergency.

...just like if my gyros go down, my plan is partial panel to the nearest suitable airport...even in a Single. I'd hope most pilots of single engine aircraft would do something similar...at least have a plan.

-mini

 

[Say Again Over]

A single parachute system, such as one used for base jumping, might be a better correlation to a single engine aircraft.

Let's see, single parachute failure: splat, single engine aircraft operation the same???? What are you thinking?

 

[minitour]

Let's see, single parachute failure: splat, single engine aircraft operation the same???? What are you thinking?

Of course, when you lose an engine in a single, you're just a heavy inefficient(sp) glider...so if it's still that dangerous, we need to ground all the gliders too.

-mini

 

[mtrv]

A backup generator attached to a vacum pump pad?

Yup. The "lower" amperage (25 amps) alternator bolts directly to the pad, and replaces the vacuum pump for an all electric system, as an essential buss backup.

Few single engine light piston driven airplanes have any redundancy at all.

However, a hand-held battery driven GPS such as a Garmin 296/396 offers loads of information that mimics a glass panel setup to a degree. Considering the engine is still running despite a loss of the electrical system, with it's own magneto's, we still have a reasonable amount of redundancy through the use of hand-held GPS's and radios. There are numerous accounts of where a simple hand-held GPS has saved someones bacon in IMC conditions.

edit: I know you know all this, as I've read your postings for years. You just don't seem to want to say it.

First of all, we don't do things in aviation based on "hope," and second, the Cirrus doesn't have a very enviable record, thus far.

Sure we do! I'd bet every time you rotate, you're thinking, I hope the engine doesn't die! And this applies to all singles, and many twins!

 

[FN FAL]

Let's see, single parachute failure: splat, single engine aircraft operation the same???? What are you thinking?

What are you thinking?

A plane has wheels, a base jumper's wheels are on his car. Silly you.

 

[Say Again Over]

Thanks for clearing that up, what was I thinking.

 

[avbug]

Of course, when you lose an engine in a single, you're just a heavy inefficient(sp) glider...so if it's still that dangerous, we need to ground all the gliders too.

You see a lot of instrument rated gliders, do you? Sailplanes certificated for and intended for use in instrument conditions? Ever wonder why there's an instrument rating for rotorcraft, and one for airplanes...but not for gliders? Again, very poor comparison, hardly apples to apples, and serves only to cloud the issue.

There are numerous accounts of where a simple hand-held GPS has saved someones bacon in IMC conditions.

There are a few cases, and only with respect to navigational ability...that handheld doesn't keep you upright, and doesn't even give you a heading...a course, perhaps, a direction to go...but little else. It does nothing for orientation in the axes.

Sure we do! I'd bet every time you rotate, you're thinking, I hope the engine doesn't die! And this applies to all singles, and many twins!

I'm not thinking that at all. I'm thinking of exactly what I will do when it DOES fail, because it's been planned, calculated, and I'm prepared for it. If I have to hope and guess, then I'm grounded, because I'm not going. What an utterly unprofessional concept, hoping that everything is okay. Flying is not a game of chance, nor should it be treated as such.

...just like if my gyros go down, my plan is partial panel to the nearest suitable airport...even in a Single.

Your backup, your plan, is that when things come apart you'll limp along in an unfamiliar emergency condition and hope you make it? You spend a lot of time flying partial panel in real world conditions? Everybody has done it for a few hours in training, often with a hood...but how often after that...and not on a nice calm day with an instructor sitting nearby, but in real, embedded, instrument weather? Lots of bravado about "all I need is needle, ball, and airspeed," but that's been claptrap since the 30's. Attitude instrumentation has been standard in cockpits for a great many decades, not as a matter of frivolity or luxurious excess.

Let's see, single parachute failure: splat, single engine aircraft operation the same????

No...working parachute systems and sport parachute systems use single parachutes...dual parachute systems are standard for civil and military applications (excepting some very specialized uses). Single parachute failure, it can quite possibly be cleared. If unable, reserve parachute use. If you're trying to make a comparison to base jumping...that might be more on par with single engine IFR...or more on par with instrument aerobatics.

I don't fly single engine IMC, nor do I base jump. Those who elect to do so may well be of the same mindset.

 

[mtrv]

ability...that handheld doesn't keep you upright, and doesn't even give you a heading...a course, perhaps, a direction to go...but little else. It does nothing for orientation in the axes.

Oh boy, it's time to update GPS's. A Garmin 296, along with numerous others, have a panel page that duplicates the basic six steam gauges. Surprisingly, combined with WAAS, these computerized gauges do a good job. I know, as I have a 296. With a moving map, a heading is of little use, compared to the "track". The Garmin 396, as well as others, also throw in up-linked satellite weather, that's very beneficial. Everyone I know, that has weather features, no longer cares to fly cross-country without it.

And in my case, the 296 also supplies the output, to keep my auto-pilot "upright".

I'm not thinking that at all. I'm thinking of exactly what I will do when it DOES fail, because it's been planned, calculated, and I'm prepared for it. If I have to hope and guess, then I'm grounded, because I'm not going. What an utterly unprofessional concept, hoping that everything is okay. Flying is not a game of chance, nor should it be treated as such.

I think you're just trying to piss me off, but I'm too old
Do you really think I'd not care about the aircraft's condition, and then just hope? Not hardly! That would be "utterly unprofessional"! Besides, I do own a Lyc, but would still "hope" it does not fail. I once flew a Piper Arrow, that suffered a catastrophic engine failure at night, in California. Four we're killed, and the engine failure had nothing to do with it's maintanance. I've since, hoped that it does'nt happen to me, yet I do also, plan for failure. If you're NOT hoping, everything is okay, then why are you planning for FAILURE?

If I were to minimize all risk's, I'd just stay ground bound, or no single engine mountainous flight. But I prefer the risk.

 

[avbug]

Do you really think I'd not care about the aircraft's condition, and then just hope? ... If I were to minimize all risk's, I'd just stay ground bound, or no single engine mountainous flight. But I prefer the risk.

Perhaps you should stay on the ground.

You're dangerous.