On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 18:41:36 +0200, BruceGreeff
wrote:

From the little I have been able to ascertain.

The German system is very de-centralised - and federated.
If there is an accident or incident it is generally dealt with locally.
Apparently - Only serious events make it up the hierarchy to the LBA/DaEC.

I have seen more than one glider where the log book does not record what
in local terms would have been "Moderate" damage and would definitely
have been reported. But again it is not possible to generalise this to
current practice. These gliders are, in general, decades old. So the
reporting standards were different when this happened. From the
difference in national numbers, one can only deduce that the reporting
methods differ.

Any of our European friends able to comment?

Raises a hand

The German system is not de-centralized at all concerning aircraft
certification and accident analysis.
All of this is handled centrally by the German equivalent of the FAA,
the "Luftfahrt Bundesamt" (LBA) and the German Federal Bureau of
Aircraft Accident Investigation (BFU).

http://www.bfu-web.de/EN/Home/homepa...8D1EF.live2051


In Germany *any* incident that causes a severe damage to the glider
(severe damage: a damage that compromises an aircraft's
airworthiness), its pilot or third party property is definitely
reported to the LBA.

Minor incidents without damage but deemed noteworthy are also
reported. This is practiced at least since the early 1980's.

The only accidents that are not reported are minor outlanding damages.

http://www.bfu-web.de/DE/Publikation...html?nn=223244



One things needs to be mentioned: There is no relation between a
damage report to the LBA and an entry in the gllider's log book.

For a long time it was accepted practice that a damage report and its
corresponding repair report were not reported in the log book, but
rather in the maintenance history file. Some owners did not feel the
necessity to include these in this file in order to increase the
resale value...



Cheers
Andreas