I looked at the asme video and it looked to me that it all worked excatly as is was meant to
the carbon fibre tail section was designed to come off before the chute deployed
And that seh walked away had nothing to do with luck, it was more to do with it being a very well designed streamliner
G
The rules require the chutes deploy automatically when the bike tilts 45 degrees or more. I guess I missed the section where it says; or when the bike is breaking apart during the crash.
I generally don’t pass along private correspondence but this is probably the most critical safety issue when designing a motorcycle streamliner and anyone building or contemplating building a streamliner should take heed.
From Tom Burkland:
Mike,
Absolutely spot on assessment. BUB7 spent a long period of time sliding on the right side in a full 90 degree roll, and eventually rolls full inverted to loose the canopy in a massive spray of excavated salt.
Both parachutes (Denis subscribes to the small high speed canopy that stabilized but doesn’t provide much braking) were deployed together by the impact that broke the tail area.
Canopy retention is a significant safety feature for rider protection and aerodynamic stability. This one has always been too light for my taste, as proven by the early loss in this accident.
Thanks,
Tom Burkland
From Rocky Robinson:
Hi Mike,
I watched the slow-mo a few more times and you are right, the chutes should have deployed as the bike went on its side initially, but did not until after the second impact. When I drove that machine we had several chute failures. They use shear pins to hold the tail pieces in place and the air rams on several occasions didn’t have enough hit to break them. I was surprised the carbon shell held up as well as it did. I agree she was damn lucky to walk away without injury.
Rocky Robinson
www.rocky-robinson.comThe failure of the chutes to deploy can have dire consequences. If you don’t believe me ask Cliff Gullett, Leo Hess or Sam Wheeler.
She is very very lucky to walk away.