Galaxy Chute Aft of Firewall?

[maxmirot]

This is good review of the BRS on the Cirrus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT58pzY41wA

I wish there were some more installation photos on the RV6,7,8 or 9.
I think a lot more people would be considering adding one if there a some more examples.

Anyone try adding the air bag seat belts to an RV ?

Max

[rocketman1988]

"...Sometimes we just have to be okay designing to mitigate risk vs having a certainty that there is no risk at all though..."

The only way to have no risk at all, in an airplane, is to not fly...of course, you could be getting out of bed, step on a Lego, fall and break something...

The other consideration in engineering a chute system for an untested aircraft, is unintended consequences. I am guessing that there isn't going to be many engineers out there that would sign off on a chute system without actually testing it.


"...Anyone try adding the air bag seat belts to an RV ?..."

Again, this really isn't an area for TLAR engineering. Van wrote a great article years ago about "simply" adding inertia reels to the shoulder harnesses. I seem to recall that instead of saving your life, those "simple" changes could actually create more problems...

[Roadjunkie1]

Originally Posted by skelrad

I know I've heard of someone installing a Galaxy chute aft of the firewall before, where it sits on the passenger side and exits vertically.

Having read this thread for several days, there have been some good points raised. If there was voting going on, I would vote NO. It would take some MAJOR designing to be an effective/safe device. There are so many HOWs in this, it doesn't seem to be a viable option to increasing the safety of the airplane. And who IS going to test it? It seems many more things could go WRONG with this than go right.

Cirrus had been extensively designed and tested prior to production. And it was tested. Having a Ballistic parachute does not guarantee a safe return to tera firma. Look at the safety record for Cirrus aircraft. The Cirrus stalls at +60kts, an RV 47-54; a difference if you are landing where you didn't plan to. There is a story out there that may be bogus about a Cirrus pilot that made an attempt to deploy and it failed, so the pilot went ahead and landed at the nearest airport.....

I'm not sure of the explosive mechanism that launches such a device but I am pretty sure I would NOT want that sitting in my lap fused and ready to go. If it did not deploy or time/altitude did not allow deployment, you have a bomb between you and the engine in a forced landing.

Interesting prospect to consider, putting one in an RV. Did I mention my vote would be NO?

[mburch]

Originally Posted by Roadjunkie1

There is a story out there that may be bogus about a Cirrus pilot that made an attempt to deploy and it failed

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2021/0...1-in-avra.html

[skelrad]

I was able to go back and forth with Galaxy on email and find out a little bit more about how their chute was put into an RV7 aft of the firewall. Bottom line, the space just aft of the firewall would make for a pretty decent location in all regards except for one - for most RVs, the gross weight is high enough that they would need to upsize the chute compared to the one-off that was done on the RV7 (which was designed for a max 750kg - 1653 lbs). They said that upsizing the chute adds just enough size that the full package won't fit into that same space without dealing with structural elements.

He sent a pic of the RV7 install. So the moral of the story is that this install location might work well for a single pilot, light load kind of scenario, but for the typical RV, the right size of chute just doesn't quite fit. While I could get the engineering resources to go nuts if I really wanted to and make this work somehow, I am not looking for that much of a challenge. I would have considered this if the chute size of their previous install was adequate. So I will move on to either considering the BRS solution and taking the CG hit (which, based on the Kitplanes article is not ideal, but manageable as long as you're okay giving up baggage weight) or just starting the slow drip "it'll be ok" conversation with my wife.

[Mancival]

I’m the one who designed and installed the first Galaxy chute in an RV7A. Already 4 years of happy flights, but never tested it yet :-)

[David Paule]

Don't ignore the necessity of adequate testing. If it's untested, it's unknown.

A few years ago I had the idea of an automatically deploying roll bar for my RV-3B. A friend of mine was the project lead for one of the life-critical deployable devices on the Orion spacecraft, so we talked about it. He was certain that not only could it be made, it wouldn't be too hard to do. In his view, the design and implementation was low-risk with a high probability of success. What shot down the idea was the need for testing and the expense and effort of that.

Dave

[Mancival]

I know, but somebody has to start (btw, everything was calculated with engineering methods). I know other builders have already installed the same in their rv7, after me.
The brs solution is equally untested, and messes up both cg AND aerodynamics (and I don’t like lateral deployment, it potentially generates dangerous lateral g during first seconds).

[rockwoodrv9]

If deploying the shoot was my last option, I would be happy to test it.

[Snowflake]

Do you want your "last option" to be testing something that may not work?