MS wrote:
Nothing personal at all. I guess it's because the absurdity of not
being able to land a glider on a 6,000 foot runway using the
conventional forward slip or spoilers.

I used to fly a BG-12. In ground effect, with flaps down, and in no
wind conditions, I have used nearly the entire runway length to set
down because I was taught to never close the flaps.

"It couldn't be me making several
huge lapses in judgement, so it must be my instructors fault for not
providing me proper training. My instructors are too conservative.
They did not teach me everything I needed to know." The author never
stated it that way, but that's what I got out of the article.

Perhaps you and I read different articles. Or maybe instead of raking
him over the coals in 3rd party discussions, it is because I bothered
to actually ask Mr. Skydell--whom, I repeat, I do not know--about his
article and thus got a better briefing?

I was once accused of something by Larry Sanderson--whom I also do not
know. Did he ever contact me about it? No! He found it much more
effective to get up in a meeting of the National Soaring Museum and
make his accusations against me. That was not fair to the NSM Board of
Trustees (I was not even a member of the NSM) nor was it fair to me.
When I tried to draw him out, he dismissed me as being insignificant.

If "MS" has a problem with Mr. Skydell, he needs to talk to, or at
least do as I did and email him about it. "Flaming" him in ras serves
no purpose and only shows what a pompus ass "MS" is. Or, like
Sanderson with me, is Mr. Skydell beneath "MS" and thus not worth
talking to?

I have a real problem with people who stab someone in the back but
never take the opportunity to actually talk to the person. It shows
just how small that stabber is. Yes, I am talking about you "MS." I
may be doing this in a public forum, but that is because I do not know
who you are (my name and email is below) since you hide behind a
"handle" and this is the only way I can get your attention. Contact me
privately and maybe we can have a civil discussion.

I am an aviation safety counselor

Then you should know that all kinds of things CAN happen to normally
good, or even just adequate pilots. We are sometimes distracted or
frustrated. Sometimes when things go wrong, we get tunnel vision. Not
a good thing, but it happens. See the other posting about gear up
landings.

and I once had to counsel an ATP who
ran out of fuel on a personal flight.
Although he admitted to some of the
error, he was still in denial that ithe series of pilot errors he made
could be 100% avoided by him or other people.

No, it can never be avoided 100% by anyone because they are human.
People make mistakes, sometimes they are little mistakes sometimes they
are major ones. Why do you think that OSHA is still in business?

I wouldn't have the problem with the article if the author did not
blame "conservativism" or his conservative flight training as the real
blame for his lack of airmanship, forethought and planning.

Again, I think we read different articles. He basically said, as I
recall, "I am a conservative pilot and I screwed-up." Not, "I am a
conservative pilot and that caused me to screw-up." Being a
conservative pilot did not make him raise his landing gear instead of
opening his spoilers.

spoilers and a slip, I can induce 1,000 ft per minute sink at 60kts
which should be sufficient to land on a 6,000 ft runway from 500 ft AGL
over the numbers.

You seem to always miss the point. Mr. Skydell was practicing a
technique that someone, a friend, a CFIG, someone, has shown him. He
was NOT trying to make a normal landing but was practicing something
which, even to him, was unusual. He was right to practice the
technique but he had a cascade of screw-ups and ended up using the
entire runway and crashing. He admits to his mistakes and he admits he
screwed-up.

Geeze, as thick as you seem to be "MS", I will not be surprised in the
future to read a similar article about--but certainly not by--you. I
know you just as well as I know Mr. Skydell, but frankly, "MS," it is
my observation that people who belittle others have serious insecurity
issues of their own (no, I am not a shrink).

The article should have stated the inherent dangers with using a high
drag approach,

BUT IT DIDN"T. You have made your point about that. Get over it! You
cannot unring a bell.

Maybe a follow-up could/should be made, but the initital article did
not say the technique was dangerous. I get that, why can't you? I do
not know the technique (nor am I anxious to learn it) so I do not know
it is dangerous except that I don't know it and would likely botch it
if I did not have a good instructor teach it to me. The technique was
not the direct cause of Mr. Skydell's accident, although it did
contribute to it. His inability to do it right and then making a
series of errors was the cause of the accident.

I think Mr. Skydell should be commended for having the nerve to write
the article and Soaring should be congratulated for publishing it--no
matter what the flaws in the article might be. It was something we ALL
can learn something from--even you, "MS." Beating up Mr. Skydell or
Soaring serves no purpose.

Frankly, I would like to meet both of you, "MS" and Mr. Skydell. That
is the only way I will know which of you are right and which is the
idiot.

"MS" (and anyone else), I will sign my name and add my email address to
this one, write me if you want--Raul Blacksten