Bateleur crashes

[Lynn Erickson]

IDENTIFICATION

Regis#: 38PC Make/Model: EXP Description: BATELEUR 2000 EXP

Date: 11/11/2007 Time: 1602

 

Event Type: Accident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N

Damage: Destroyed

 

LOCATION

City: OSSIPEE State: NH Country: US

 

DESCRIPTION

AIRCRAFT CRASHED DURING ACROBATIC MANEUVERS; AT 1500 FEET THE PILOT EJECTED

AND PARACHUTED TO THE GROUND, OSSIPEE, NH

 

INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0

# Crew: 1 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:

# Pass: 0 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:

# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:

 

WEATHER: VFR

 

OTHER DATA

Activity: Unknown Phase: Unknown Operation: OTHER

 

 

FAA FSDO: PORTLAND, ME (EA65) Entry date: 11/13/2007

[TMann]

THE PILOT EJECTED AND PARACHUTED TO THE GROUND

Well why the hell do these guys wear parachutes?

I may just get one myself!

 

....... ah what the heck, nobody ever uses them, right!

Thanks for the post Lynn.

[Cozy Girrrl]

Crumbs, I camped up there in Ossipee a few times, up near the White Mtns?.. if I recall its all mountains up there, not a great place to be doing aerobatics at 1500 ft?

What was he doing aerobatics at 1500 ft for?

...Chrissi

[TMann]

From what I read, he got out by 1500' AGL.

[Jason Heath]

Well why the hell do these guys wear parachutes?

Because he is legally suppose to, but you already know that. The pilots quote: "My training and my experience and my background prepared me to do what I did today" as well as the 1000+ jumps that he already has under his belt. Read: http://www.aero-news.net/news/sport.cfm for the news report. That still doesn't answer the bigger question I had a few weeks ago, what happens to your passenger? Flight testing and solo flights, wear one! Flying your friends and family around, not likely.

[TMann]

Well ....... maybe that's because the thread got hijacked.

Besides....... read your regs. He does not have to wear a parachute when performing aerobatics.

 

I never said anything about asking my passengers to wear a parachute but ....... you can bet I'll have one on (as any forward thinking individual would) while I'm crankin' and bankin' my way through the flight test phase.

 

....... but then I'm not as good at this as you are. I just might have missed something.

 

And yes, at a 1000+ jumps, he counts the same way I do and that is by hours of freefall time ....... not by number of jumps.

[Marc Zeitlin]

Because he is legally suppose to, but you already know that.

Actually, when solo, there's no requirement to where a parachute. Only when carrying passengers, per 91.307©.

 

Read: http://www.aero-news.net/news/sport.cfm for the news report.

So unless the pilot doesn't know what kind of aircraft he's flying, it was NOT a Bateleur, but an "Ultimate Biplane":

 

http://www.ultimatebiplane.com/

 

and:

 

http://moleski.net/ULTBIPE/n38pc.htm

 

What's interesting is that the FAA database HAS the plane listed as a Bateleur. The above web site says:

 

"This aircraft was completed in 1993 and has been designated as a Bateleur 2000 named "Plumb Crazy".

 

Makes no sense, but there you are. I'm guessing it's a confluence of names, and nothing more.

 

So, we can now say that this particular accident has zero applicability to Rutan Derivative canard aircraft, rather than just epsilon (if it was a Bateleur canard), since it's a dissimilar aircraft (conventional biplane), designed for aerobatics, in a maneuver that our aircraft cannot enter.

[Jason Heath]

Besides....... read your regs. He does not have to wear a parachute when performing aerobatics.

Yes Tmann, I was being sarcastic again, the quote below was from the last go round with parachutes which was promptly corrected (again) by Marc. My apologies

..... so then why is it the FARs require you to wear a chute when doing aerobatics?.

[TMann]

Yes Tmann, I was being sarcastic again......

Ha, ha haaaa....... what are the odds of that?

Yeah, I was thinking about that exchange as I was going through my last copy of EAA Sport Pilot (11/2007 page 36) .......... and trying to figure out what the manufacturer was of the parachute the guy was wearing.

 

Of course it is of little use if you can't get out.

[Lynn Erickson]

So unless the pilot doesn't know what kind of aircraft he's flying, it was NOT a Bateleur, but an "Ultimate Biplane":

 

http://www.ultimatebiplane.com/

 

and:

 

http://moleski.net/ULTBIPE/n38pc.htm

 

What's interesting is that the FAA database HAS the plane listed as a Bateleur. The above web site says:

 

"This aircraft was completed in 1993 and has been designated as a Bateleur 2000 named "Plumb Crazy".

 

Makes no sense, but there you are. I'm guessing it's a confluence of names, and nothing more.

 

So, we can now say that this particular accident has zero applicability to Rutan Derivative canard aircraft, rather than just epsilon (if it was a Bateleur canard), since it's a dissimilar aircraft (conventional biplane), designed for aerobatics, in a maneuver that our aircraft cannot enter.

makes more since now, it was powered by a AEIO 360. but why did he bail and was he doing aerobatics at 1500 feet or is that when he decided to bail after trying to recover

[TMann]

makes more since now, it was powered by a AEIO 360. but why did he bail and was he doing aerobatics at 1500 feet or is that when he decided to bail after trying to recover

The training you have in sport parachuting dictate that when things go bad, you make a decision by 1700' AGL and execute it by 1500' AGL.

That's about 1 second is standard freefall.

It could be that he had a structural failure of some sort, fought it to 1700 and the training takes over from there.

I've only had 1 parachute I couldn't get to open for me and it is incredible how long that single second can be ........... but it's real easy to execute a rehearsed procedure.

[rogerbacon]

Is it possible to bail out of a pussher like a Long-EZ or COZY without getting sliced and diced?

[Waiter]

Yes, I don't know of anyone who's done it, nor to I want to be the first :-)

 

 

I can think of two instances where I would bail out, while the aircraft was still controllable (By the way, your odds of surviving this are very high)

 

1) imminent structural failure. The only example I can think of that would qualify for "Imminent" would be a severe airframe fire, but I'm at to high of an altitude to preclude landing before things start coming apart.

 

2) Flight over very hostile terrain and the engine quirts, and not able to glide to reasonably flat surface for a controlled crash. In this case, if the odds of surviving a controlled crash are not good (rocks, boulders, cliff, etc) I would probably make the decision to "Hit the Silk".

 

Most cases that people "Think" they would use a chute would be during some sort of catastrophic structural breakup i.e wings falling off. Unfortunately, when this happens, the human body also experiences the same breakup as the airframe . The airframe is substantially stronger than the body. The odds of surviving a breakup, let alone having the sense to activate a parachute, are not very good.

 

OH, this is my BAILOUT CHECKLIST

 

1) Pull the throttle to Idle,

2) Kill the mags

3) Mixture to Cutoff

4) Loosten Lap Belt and Remove Shoulder Harness ONLY

5) Pull knees out of panel holes and tuck up into chest

6) Duck Head and shoulders as low as possible, Release Canopy Latch

7) When Canopy is OPEN or Cleared, release lap belt and JUMP UP as hard as you can out of the seat.

 

 

Waiter

[Tyson]

Yes, I don't know of anyone who's done it, nor to I want to be the first :-)

There is one pilot of an Ez (a Varieze I believe) who bailed out after thinking that the plane was hit (shot) by ground fire. The author recounting the incident stated that the pilot was a veteran and was presumably of sound mind, even though the circumstances were suspect. He lived, I don't know if the prop was turning.

 

I thought I read about this in the CPs, but I can't find the reference. Maybe someone else can substantiate where this story came from.

[TMann]

The thing to keep in mind here is that you are moving at the same rate as the airplane when you leave. I had a pilot 'float' me out the door of a cessna 182 once. (I was a jumpmaster at the time.)

He takes the big rainbow arc to get you off the floor and then kicks the rudder to move the plane out from under you.

 

I tucked up and did a summersault to get some distance between me and the plane and as I came around the first time I looked over at him and I was still eyeball-to-eyeball with him (with the big difference being he was in the plane and I was not.)

 

Point being that you are on the same course as the plane and a push-off like John mentioned should get you clear.

[emteeoh]

OH, this is my BAILOUT CHECKLIST

 

1) Pull the throttle to Idle,

2) Kill the mags

3) Mixture to Cutoff

4) Loosten Lap Belt and Remove Shoulder Harness ONLY

5) Pull knees out of panel holes and tuck up into chest

6) Duck Head and shoulders as low as possible, Release Canopy Latch

7) When Canopy is OPEN or Cleared, release lap belt and JUMP UP as hard as you can out of the seat.

 

 

I guess the people putting the canopy hinge at the front of their cozy will have some difficulties with #7...

[TMann]

I guess the people putting the canopy hinge at the front of their cozy will have some difficulties with #7...

Uh ........ yeah. Mine hinges from the back. I catch a lot of flak about that, but that's why.

 

I will say this: If you do decide to hinge from the rear, you best be making the appropiate safety mods to avoid an unplanned canopy ejection because it will depart very fast.

 

For that matter, if it takes out the prop you won't even need to jump!

Just release the restraints, lean forward and pop the chute. You and the plane will part company instantly.

 

Might be a consideration when you reach that last 300 feet.

[Edge 513]

5) Pull knees out of panel holes and knees up to chest

6) Duck Head and shoulders as low as possible, Release Canopy Latch

7) When Canopy is OPEN or Cleared, release lap belt and JUMP UP as hard as you can out of the seat.

 

 

Waiter

This sounds well and good until you bring Jason's reoccurring theme to these flight ops...and that is getting your wife and two kids or backseat friends, to all do the same and exit the aircraft.... In fact trying to get everyone on the family trip to see Grams and Gramps in the 172 do the same to exit the aircraft due to an "emergency" **doesn't track to well. Heck, If my wife is complaining about wearing a headset cuz it will muff up her coif...I dunna think the parachute thing is gonna fly to well with her..=]

IMO, the whole family isn't going to don 'chutes to go for that 100 buck burger at Harris Ranch...or see Gramps, or anywheres for that matter.

I guess you guys are talking about during testing phases.

Oh, and I did hear from reputable sources that upon entering the atmosphere, you won't immediately become prop fodder...you and the plane are going to part company amicably...Tmann illustrated the concept admirably.

 

**BTW, In the effort of planning for "every friggin' contingincy", just what kind of emergency are we talking about to get the whole family outside to collectively River Dance out on the wing...=/

[TMann]

....... so no plan is better:D

 

I've heard that argument here before. It does not address the question of is it possible to jump?

The answer is yes.

 

Do I see most people wearing a chute in general aviation? No

 

Will I be wearing one when I test my plane (or when engaging in aerobatics)? that's a sure bet.

[chasingmars]

Point being that you are on the same course as the plane and a push-off like John mentioned should get you clear.

Well, only if you have similar acceleration vectors (or ones in different directions)... that's the point of the big rainbow arc you mentioned, to get you and the plane both on an approximately free fall trajectory.

 

In level flight, the plane is like the ground, if you jump, you'll come back down on it shortly thereafter (approximately, with wind and all that pushing you around, and level flight being not exactly rock solid after you let go)... so, if your bail proceedure involves jumping straight up, ask yourself if standing in the cockpit, you could do a standing high jump over the prop, cause in level flight, that's what you have to do. Unless you put the plane in a dive. Otherwise I think trying to go over the prop is asking to be mulched. I remember reading at one time something about Dick Rutan saying his proceedure is to go under the strake and down, which strikes me as better. Also that he wouldn't want to try it.

[Waiter]

The saving grace of this argument is "If in Level Flight" This implies that the aircraft is still controllable (to some degree). If this is true, you should be able to pull the throttle to idle, Mixture to cutoff, Mags Off, and slow the plane down to stop the prop (maybe).

 

Regardless if the prop is turning or not, a decision will need to be made as to where I want to take my chances, Inside the plane or outside. That big meat grinder at the back of the plane is just another data point in the decision making process.

 

NOTE: When I do first flight or flutter testing, I sometimes carry a section of log chain with me ( 25 - 30 lbs).

 

The chain has a dual purpose, 1) Move the CG forward to the "First Flight Box" AND, 2) A meat grinder removal tool.

 

In the event I can do a controlled bailout, I throw the chain out first, then I go over the side.

 

Waiter

[Waiter]

This sounds well and good until you bring Jason's reoccurring theme to these flight ops...and that is getting your wife and two kids or backseat friends, to all do the same and exit the aircraft....

I normally don't wear a parachute. I do wear a chute when doing high risk type flying activities:

 

1) Flight Testing (Usually only first flight and flutter testing)

2) ACM - Air Combat Maneuvering flying

3) Formation

4) Acrobatics - but only if I have a passenger (They wear one also) . If I'm by myself, I normally don't wear a parachute while doing acrobatics.

 

 

SO, WHAT IN WALLET (What's your plan?)

 

Waiter

[Edge 513]

I normally don't wear a parachute. I do wear a chute when doing high risk type flying activities:

 

1) Flight Testing (Usually only first flight and flutter testing)

2) ACM - Air Combat Maneuvering flying

3) Formation

4) Acrobatics - but only if I have a passenger (They wear one also) . If I'm by myself, I normally don't wear a parachute while doing acrobatics.

 

 

SO, WHAT IN WALLET (What's your plan?)

 

Waiter

I'm not sure who the finger here is pointed at..but since I seem to be the detractor, I will answer for me.

 

1.Certainly during testing... but I don't think beyond the first 10 hours, I will have to check the schedule of procedures and after the mundane flights start occurring to just get to the 40th- no chute. A future question is, Where does one rent a slim-line style parachute- or maybe that a 800.00 purchase I hadn't thought of before..

 

2.No air combat testing...With a 540, the flybys will be incredibly fast [i loved my ride in Chris E's when out of the corner of my eye I saw 226 kts on his speedo....the pullup was butt flattening- oh yea!...but thats going to be pretty much it as far as maneuvers...

 

3.Who the heck am I going to formation fly with?

 

4. Not planning on Acrobatics...I do that during Pilates and Yoga...but for Aerobatics-Not entring that arena, except rolls and immelmans, so will decide on that. That will not be at gross.

 

So thats me...I obviously have a different set of mission objectives than you Longeze drivers. I am pretty sure most all of us Cozy pilots have near the same. My earlier point about getting the family to vacate the piper...is to illustrate the "out-of-the-ordinariness" of what you guys are writting about. All this talk about leaving the airplane behind is so far from normalcy as to cast a burden on our canards. We are flying FAR SAFER aircraft than what GA would have us pile our families into, and new folks reading these pages might get the slant that your Top Gun desires translate into a possible NEED, and it is NOT. Is this where I insert the smiley icon now?

Its just that the beauty of the Cozy aircraft is in their safety record...I LOVE IT that I will be able to fly my wife and friends safely and quickly for travel, and thumb my nose at the time shackling normal commercial airline travel scenario. The flight stories of Longeze and Cozy drivers overtaking normal GA aircraft or expensive twins flying along side or below them is just a treat. The fact that we do it in stall and spin resistant machines of our own creation that are far safer is the icing on the cake.

All that is left in the equation is weather amd pilot judgement...and that is a different can-o-nutz.

[Marc Zeitlin]

3.Who the heck am I going to formation fly with?

I've flown formation a few times - it's a lot of fun (and work). Don't want to do it all the time, but it's great practice for controlling the aircraft.

 

We are flying FAR SAFER aircraft than what GA would have us pile our families into,

As much as I'd like to agree with you, I don't. See:

 

http://www.cozybuilders.org/Oshkosh_Presentations/2007_OSH_Presentation.pdf

 

Slide #9. There are many assumptions there in attempting to get at a COZY accident rate (both fatal and non), but it's reasonably clear that while the numbers might be massaged to get the COZY accident rate to be about the same as the overall GA accident rate, it's not reasonable to claim that the COZY is safer than other GA aircraft - the numbers just do NOT support the claim. If anything, it's more reasonable to claim that they're somewhat less safe.

 

Now, many of the accidents have occurred during the 40 hour Phase I period, so you could make the argument that once we get the plane out of the "experimental" phase, the accident rate drops close to that of the rest of the GA population, and I think that's a valid argument. But what that shows is that the issue with aircraft accidents isn't which plane you fly, but the pilot flying it, and we mostly already know that.

 

Its just that the beauty of the Cozy aircraft is in their safety record...The fact that we do it in stall and spin resistant machines of our own creation that are far safer is the icing on the cake.

The only reason I responded to this is the repeated claims of "far safer" - it's just not correct, as much as I'd like it to be so, since I fly one.

 

The plane IS stall/spin resistant, and that eliminates one accident mode, but apparently that accident mode is a small enough percentage of the total accidents that it doesn't affect the overall rate significantly.

 

Sorry, Dennis, but you'll just have to remove this argument as a justification for flying a COZY instead of something else.

[Edge 513]

Marc, Whaaaaaa?

 

Whaaaat?

 

I have been under a false ASSumtion all of this time.

 

Wheres the For sale thread here on this list? My project might be up for sale. Maybe this new guy wants it....

Maybe Rick Maddy saw this light?

Maybe thats why Dick Rutan is flying a 152 lately?.....

 

Maybe an RV? Maybe they are safer?