Thoughts on crash/article in Soaring?
Clearly Jim Skydell is a sincere stand-up guy. It took a LOT of courage to
present his mea culpa in so public an arena. Just as clearly, he wants to
do his best to help others avoid his mistakes and, moreover, the thought
processes that led to them. I'm sure he would agree that his actions that
day were dumb. It strikes me from the responses here that he has
accomplished a great deal.
We are all human and therefore can make big mistakes. The take home lesson
is that we need to check and re-check our actions to avoid those big
mistakes
I think we all owe Jim a vote of thanks for his openness and his public
sacrafice made on our behalf..
Bill Daniels
wrote in message
ps.com...
I could not agree with you more. The only change I would make in your
comments would be to put the words "STUPID, MORONIC," in front of your
statement "dumbass high parasitic drag approach".
Any one of us can make a mistake when flying and that is just the
nature of being human. It sometimes happens. But to rationalize the
event as this article has done is beyond belief. The only thing I can
think of that is worse is that the SSA published the article.
I have spent more than enough time over the last several weeks
explaining this article to my students. More than one has asked about
the "high parasitic drag approach" and mentioned that I never taught
that to them. My answer is the same each time. "No I have not taught
this to you and I never will. It is NOT the way to land a sailplane.
Period." (Unless, of course, you want to fly through a 6,000 ft
runway and crash on the far end of it. Or, on the other hand, maybe
this method of "approach" had nothing to do with the crash and should
not have even been mentioned in the article. Even if the latter is the
case this approach method, in my opinion, is not an acceptable method
for landing a sailplane and should not be used nor "taught".)
Frank Reid
MS wrote:
Does anybody have anything to say about the accident described in
Soaring magazine concerning a pilot who could not land to a stop on a
6,000 foot paved runway or the parallel dirt runway to the South?
I know this sounds very judgemental and I don't ordinarily make
negative comments about an accident, but holy cow, if I couldn't make
a 6,000 ft runway with or without spoilers, I'll quit the sport. I
believe the private pilot PTS states the applicant has to land and roll
to a stop within 200 ft of a predesignated spot. Most students can do
that every time prior to solo. I fly at an operation with a 4,000 ft
runway where we only use 1/2 for landing and the other 1/2 for launch.
Even new solo students don't need the full 4,000 feet! I know the
pilot got the gear and spoiler handles mixed up, but good grief.
Also, what's with the dumbass "high parasitic drag approach"?
Spoilers and slipping works fine. If you can't hit a 6000 ft runway
from 350 ft on final with spoilers or a forward slip, choose another
sport. The high parasitic drag approach described in the article does
not sound like a stable approach to landing.
The article should be renamed "Is conservative safe? YES, but bozos
who blame their instruction/instructors for being clueless are not."
He mainly blamed his conservative instruction and instructors instead
of admitting he was not thinking properly that day. I can't believe
his instructors went along with that attitude. He must have a problem
with freezing up and tunnel vision if something goes slightly wrong and
he can't salvage the situation he got himself into.
Flame away if it makes you feel better, but nothing will change my
mind.
|