I agree with you Victor, including view points of many others on this matter, such as that of Larry's and Chris's questions and comments etc... However, it may be worth exploring on the installation of a chute, whether it is a pilot strap-on or have it mounted somewhere to the aircraft structure. The problem is that, paying attention to maintenance and pilot training are not nearly enough to help bent the accident curve downward over the years in the GA arena. Like you said, there are simply too many factors which affect the fatal accident rate and it is nearly impossible to eliminate fatal accident from happening regardless how FAA would put out any new red tapes on maintenance or pilot training beyond the annual inspections....
I have done some investigation on BRS add-ons and I don't think the extra weight will be too much of a concerns if you do a risk trade off assessment. An average of 30 to 40lb increase for a small BRS may not have significant impact on structural integrity such as the KR2, especially we can choose to sacrifice on the fuel capacity in exchange for safety assurances if necessary.... Yes, the speed at which the deployment of BRS occurring is indeed a significant risk factor, but this is something easy to avoid for pilots who are conscious about safety, especially knowing that there is BRS onboard. Other solutions could be considered as well, such as to restrict the BRS trigger point when the cruise air speed is beyond a certain point, say at greater than 150mph. Frankly, a pilot strap-on chute might be an easy and affordable solution to save lives from a loss of control risk scenario, because it will be easier to trigger open the canopy with minimal design modifications (including the seat belts release mechanism) during emergency as opposed to afford the complexity and higher cost of a full BRS instelation, agreed?! Dr. Hsu 713 513 0423 On Sun, Nov 7, 2021, 7:01 AM victor taylor via KRnet <krnet@list.krnet.org> wrote: > In reference to Dr Feng's safety concerns here is a lot to consider. Keep > in mind like Larry said that this is the first known wing failure of a KR > in 30 years. Let's see, Piper Cherokee lost a wing on a checkride in > Florida two years ago. Cessna 400 series and Beech 18 series both had to > have straps added to them due to multiple spar failures. This is very rare > but it dues happen to both certified and experimentals. Putting a chute on > an airplane is possible though isn't as simple as it might seem. I have > worked with Velocity for a long time and some customers have requested > chutes but when it was looked at closely there are many factors to > consider. Speed was the main concern in the Velocity. Engineering attach > points that will stand up to the deceleration loads imposed when the chute > inflates at 200 mph. > The KR has similar concerns plus additional weight that needs to be of > concern. Let's start with the weight of a KR. Remember that the original > KR2 weight just 480 lbs with a gross weight of just 900 lbs. If you > increase the weight of the airplane too much you have to change the spar > design to carry the load. Wearing a backpack chute is probably safer than > having a chute added to the KR. > Before we make assumptions about the strength which has never been > questioned up to this point we need to find out exactly what happened and > that may or may not be possible. Was it rot, flutter, overstressed, > additional holes drilled in the spar for various reasons etc? How had the > airplane been flown? How much stress had been put on it. Go out in your > average Cessna 150 and dive it to 200 mph and pull back hard on it like > many KR's do routinely and tell me the result. The result is a failed wing > long before it gets to that speed. Be carefull about adding weight to the > design. Remember the spars were only designed to carry a certain amount. > Bottom line is this is an experimental airplane that you as the builder can > add anything you want. > You are right in that there are a lot of deaths in experimentals and even > one is too many. Though finding the correct fix for a homebuilt is a lot > harder because unlike certificated aircraft there probably aren't two KR's > built exactly alike and there probably isn't any built exactly to the > plans. To find the correct fix also means that you have to determine the > exact cause of the failure. > The best insurance for reducing accidents is careful attention to > maintenance and safe flying. > Victor Taylor CFII, KR N47MG > ________________________________ > -Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > -Change list delivery options at > https://list.krnet.org/list/krnet.list.krnet.org/ Affinity List Info Board > -Search recent KRnet Archives at > https://list.krnet.org/empathy/list/krnet.list.krnet.org/ > -Search <https://list.krnet.org/empathy/list/krnet.list.krnet.org/-Search> > John Bouyea's decades of archive at > https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/ ________________________________ -Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html -Change list delivery options at https://list.krnet.org/list/krnet.list.krnet.org/ Affinity List Info Board -Search recent KRnet Archives at https://list.krnet.org/empathy/list/krnet.list.krnet.org/ -Search John Bouyea's decades of archive at https://www.mail-archive.com/krnet@list.krnet.org/
