Ballistic Chute....

[Bacchus]

Hi there!
I am so new to the whole microlight scene its just not true. Still training and done some 9 hours or so already. There is so much you hear every day, your mind spins. What I want to know is how important is it to have a parachute for the trike. People talk about wings folding in etc.etc. But I dont see any trikes with those things on. Is it really really important to buy something like that. I know some will say you cannot spend enough money to save your life, but i suppose then you might just as well stayed on the ground!
I just need some objective advise regarding this topic please.
Thanks a mill.

[Morph]

I think there are two reasons why ballistic chutes are not common place on microlights, weight, and cost. There are no arguments against them other than these two things.

However circumstances where you will get full structural failure of a plane is very rare and usually only in a case of extreme neglect or pushing the capabilities of the plane beyond it's limits.

The only other times you would consider using a chute is if you are over inhospitable terrain and you experience engine failure or weather conditions become so bad you cannot fly or see.

If you can afford it, there is no question, put one on.

Follow this thread http://microlighters.co.za/viewtopic.ph ... stic+chute

[Tumbleweed]

Hi,

I just recieved my GRS Ballistic, for installation. Was amazed how big it is and the weight.

Also got some weird looks and comments from some 'high milers' like, 'you land yourself out of trouble' and 'opening in inhospitable terrain will probably get you chucked against a cliff anyway', but my reasons were simple;

It adds the R20 000 value to the trike,
I got a 582 so as not to worry about nearing the maximum weight,
My wife thinks a pre-condition to loading my brats for a flip,
I'd rather invest in my trike than household kak this xmas.

Now, to lean onto some 'brains' on how best to fit this mother.

I got great service from Dave @ Dreamwings. www.dreamwings.co.za

[Tumbleweed]

Sorry, another thing,

Being bugging my Insurance broker, amongst various microlight premium loading, whether installing a ballistic chute to your trike would not minimise your risk, and whether they would acknolege this with a reduction in the pemium 'load'.

Oviously, he has not been abled to get an informed reply, but it would make sense to me if the insurance companies would acknolege this.

After all, it mimises their exposure and if a rate reduction motivates more installation, increased demand should lower the price.

I've tried to phone MISASA but in 3 months have not got through or been able to leave a message or been told when I could phone and get someone in the office who can help.

My biggest concern then ( just completed my licence test) was that no life is available to learner pilots. You either don't fly, in which case the microlight 'risk' comes into play in the event of a claim, or you submit you licence number. No student number accepted.

This is not an industry known to have decision makers but base all policies on statistics.

If this is true then it means that student pilots under instruction are so brilliant that no risks have yet been established.

[gertcoetzee]

I argued the point with Jankelow brokers - "In the case of the Ballistic parachute, deployment will render it useless, and therefore I cannot see how one can insure this. On the other hand, by installing a ballistic parachute I am now reducing the risk to the insured Trike. Should I now find myself in a position where I need to use the ballistic parachute, the chance is that the Trike will not be written off, and merely be damaged, possibly to such an extend that my excess payment would be suffice for repairs. Thus, it is not unreasonable that the quotation should take this in account."

They did not budge.

Bring on reasonable insurance!

[DieselFan]

All the flight schools I spoke with don't insure theirs and said that if you break whilst solo u pay ALL, if you break with pax then you pay half? Huch much is ins on these things?

[Morph]

I think Delta VV was referring more to life insurance than insurance on the trike.

As far as the Life insurance companies go, a ballistic chute whould reduce their risk. However the last thing we need is for the insurance houses to insist in a chute being installed.

[Chaz]

Heya Baccus

I think one of the foremost reasons i fitted a ballistic to my kite was for lifecover. Typical of the insurance industry my ex-broker informed me 4 years ago that it was stated to Discovery that i fly microlights and that it was noted on my policy. On checking up recently i found that this was not the case(my own fault) but needless to say ive been paying 4years on a policy. I dont know what they base there loadings on(other than bullsh1t saying its dangerous) but my life cover would cost me 1500 a month more, over and above what i am already paying. In the event of something happening and i dont have the loading i was told i have no life cover which means the past four years of levy's were for nothing.

Other than all the reasons already stated here on the forum that was my main reason for fitting one. I would advise all other MPL's just to check on there life/disability cover. However with a loading of 1500 a month extra in a year i have paid for a ballistic. Obviously i have peace of mind that goes with it as well.

Your's in Flying
CHAZ

[DarkHelmet]

My life insurance loading is only R300 per month - after 100hrs solo it is waived - if I keep doing at least 100 a year.

[Tumbleweed]

Morpheus, you're correct.

I personally would'nt bother with short -term cover, coz if trash your, it's the least of your worries.

Sharing a hangar with 'fire hazzard manne' is another issue, but a life claim has more hidden issues i.e. exsisting life cover, those hidden bond cover clauses and your neighbour's public liability claim against your estate coz his wife joined you on your last pleasure trip and you wiped someone's dream holiday home.

It sounds ridiculous, but giving a pleasure trip involves risk to your estate and would'nt it look sick if just before you take off, out comes the blank indemnity form and you say 'fill in the form whilst I strap you in tight.'

I had a broker re-evaluate my policies and for the same monthly premiums, cancelled 'dead' polices and added a few to doubled my life cover.

Whilst I wait for my MPL number and modify the policies to include the dreaded 'microlight pilot' perhaps if a fellow microlighter in the Life Industry could enlighten us all, perhaps sketch a few 'guestimates', it could add value to the forum.

Certainly skrik a few sober.

[gertcoetzee]

(1) Life insurance
When I did my PPL I contacted three different companies where I am covered and got the same answer from all e.g. "Insurance does not take potentially dangerous activities into account and will not impose any exclusions for this reason when underwriting a member's health". I went through the same correspondence when I got my MPL conversion, and got the same answer, in writing.

(2) Indemnity Form
This was debated in this forum before. From experience in another field it is clear to me that written conscent/a signature on an idemnity form is worth nothing. Lawyers will find something wrong, and if there is money to be made, will keep going - at your/their client's cost.

In my mind it is quite simple, no-one is forced to climb into that passenger seat of my microlight/car/Vespa. If something happens to us while in the air/on the road and I am shown to have been deliberately negligent or I have deliberately withheld information from my passger regarding my abilities I will be held responsible. If asked, I quote the mortality figures per million hours and compare with helicopters, light planes and others (from UK Safety Data)

UK SAFETY - UK REGISTERED AIRCRAFT

Helicopters <5700kg mtwa 18.1 Fatalities per million hours
Gyroplanes 109.0 Fatalities per million hours
Microlights 18.0 Fatalities per million hours

AND from the USA


fatalities
Activity per million hrs
-------- ---------------
Skydiving 128.71
General Aviation 15.58
On-road Motorcycling 8.80
Scuba Diving 1.98
Living (all causes of death) 1.53
Swimming 1.07
Passenger cars .47
Water skiing .28
Bicycling .26

[Morph]

Gyroplanes 109.0 Fatalities per million hours

Wow, Gyros so high. And all this time we have a gyro guy at our airfield who is very arrogant and I have on tape him talking to CLU-less regarding going for a flight in my plane and I quote "are you going flying in that thing "

Maybe I should share some facts with him Besides, in the last year he has been the only one in our entire club to crash and write off an aircraft. Hmmm

Seriously though, this is astounding, it's almost as high as skydiving.

[DieselFan]

And ML's twice as high as that of Bikes

[CloudBase]

The introduction to the report this was taken from - CAP735 states:

This Aviation Safety Review examines UK civil aviation safety over the last ten years, 1992 to 2001, and serves as an update to specific UK information contained in the previous Review, CAP 701 issued in October 2000. It brings together aviation safety related information into a single source document, to be used by the aviation community for statistical references.

Chapter 11.4 - the section that covers gyroplanes states:

11.4 Gyroplanes
There have been 29 reportable accidents to UK gyroplanes, of which 5 were fatal. These reportable accidents resulted in 5 fatalities and 2 serious injuries. The average rate of fatal accidents per million hours flown is 109, however, it should be noted that the current rate of utilisation is extremely low.

The table included in the report to substantiate the data continues:

Date Aircraft Location Operation Description of accident
11-Dec-93 Bensen nr. Wimborne Private Lost control and crashed during climb
20-Apr-96 Air Command Long Marston Private Lost control and tumbled vertically to ground
13-Jun-98 Bensen Coll, Lewis Private Entered steep climb, stalled and crashed inverted
16-Apr-00 Bensen Carlisle Private Crashed during attempt to land in field next to runway end
01-Jun-01 Cricket Henstridge Private Crashed on approach

The full report is available at UK CAA. It makes interesting reading.

You'll notice that the reported incidents are single-seat Bensen style gyroplanes and the reason for the warped statistics is the very low (estimated) utilisation. The stats are however accurate in that take-off and landings are potentially hazardous phases of operation in a gyroplane.

[CloudBase]

For South Africa, I did this little calculation making some assumptions.

The number of pilots on the CAA register have grown from about 50 to about 100.

If we asume that every pilot have flown an average of 150 hours per year and there was a linear growth of 5 new pilots every year, it calculates to a total of 109000-odd hours flown over 10 years.

There had been one fatality that is still being investigated by CAA.

The math still leaves us with a statistical somewhat puzzling analysis of 9.2 fatalities per 1,000,000 hours flown.