![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You've had a whack, but everything feels fine. Do you stay in the
glider, or leave? Just how reliable are the parachutes we use? I understand that they're fairly simple quick-opening designs, but there's no reserve, right? Has a glider-pilot parachute ever failed? Dan |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
failure rate is one per low thousands, your chances
of leaving the glider are 50/50 if you lose some wing it spins, if the tailplane comes of it bunts, then is to late...... I recall there was a deployment failure in the uk, but apparently caused by the diy backpad preventing proper operation of the chute I also know of at least one case where a pilot stayed and the glider failed to low to bail out. if you have a stable jump platform use it. I know at least 4 people who have baled out of gliders ok, but they were all no brainers, one of them was a K21 which turned into a dart shortly after being struck by lighting! (I saw that one happen) Pete At 21:06 10 September 2007, Dan G wrote: You've had a whack, but everything feels fine. Do you stay in the glider, or leave? Just how reliable are the parachutes we use? I understand that they're fairly simple quick-opening designs, but there's no reserve, right? Has a glider-pilot parachute ever failed? Dan |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() You've had a whack, but everything feels fine. Do you stay in the glider, or leave? Just how reliable are the parachutes we use? I understand that they're fairly simple quick-opening designs, but there's no reserve, right? Has a glider-pilot parachute ever failed? Dan [/quote] Dan, Simply, there is no blanket answer, way too many variables exist. Derek Piggot writes a fascinating account of his bail-out in some of his gliding books, I would suggest reading them. Gliding Kiwi has a great article this month on a NZ instructor landing a rudderless puch with a PAX - more heart stopping reading! Basically if it does fly after a hit, check to see that it will keep flying with some harsh movements -height limits withstanding- long enough to land. Landing manuevering can be rough, you want to be sure the thing doesnt fail at 100 feet after nursing down from a good bail out height. Rough rule has been bandied about RAS about 1500 ft as a minimum bail-out altitude, many would disagree, but if you dont have a choice..... Bottom line is you are worth more than a glider, if in doubt, get out fly safe Bagger bagger |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "bagmaker" wrote in message ... - You've had a whack, but everything feels fine. Do you stay in the glider, or leave? Just how reliable are the parachutes we use? I understand that they're fairly simple quick-opening designs, but there's no reserve, right? Has a glider-pilot parachute ever failed? Dan - Dan, Simply, there is no blanket answer, way too many variables exist. Derek Piggot writes a fascinating account of his bail-out in some of his gliding books, I would suggest reading them. Gliding Kiwi has a great article this month on a NZ instructor landing a rudderless puch with a PAX - more heart stopping reading! Basically if it does fly after a hit, check to see that it will keep flying with some harsh movements -height limits withstanding- long enough to land. Landing manuevering can be rough, you want to be sure the thing doesnt fail at 100 feet after nursing down from a good bail out height. Rough rule has been bandied about RAS about 1500 ft as a minimum bail-out altitude, many would disagree, but if you dont have a choice..... Bottom line is you are worth more than a glider, if in doubt, get out fly safe Bagger I've twice faced the decision to jump or land a crippled glider. The first was a Pratt-Read badly damaged from a mid-air. I had fresh jump training, a fresh repack and a stable jump platform but I decided to land it anyway. The critical decision was whether I could control the glider from the time it decended below a safe jump altitude until it was on the ground. I could and did. For the record, the other pilot in the mid-air did the same thing. The second was an experimental flying wing where a suposedly secure lead shot bag shifted in flight so as to jam the elevator/aileron bellcranks. I found I could steer with rudder and slow it to 70Kts with trim. That let me hit the runway on a fast, shallow glide. It was a rough landing but the glider and I survived to fly again. In both cases there was intense discussion post flight about the wisdom of my decisions. A slim majority said the conservative action was to have abandoned ship. My view was if the thing is more or less controllable, and you have a big airfield to aim at, land it. If it is an airplane loaded with fuel, that might shift the decision toward jumping. However, a glider that can be flown to hit a large flat area at a shallow angle is likely to be safer than the 'chute. If there is any doubt that the glider will remain controllable - jump. The real problem here is struggling to rise from a reclining position and crawl over the side with a 15 pound 'chute on your back. That's difficult. Being old, out of shape and/or overweight makes it impossible. This is where the NOAH system from DG is so significant. Of all the safety related things that one could spend money on, the NOAH system tops the list for me. Bill Daniels |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bill,
I too applaud DG for developing the NOAH system. However, complexity, cost, and it's "one time use" nature may limit its appeal for many. After suffering a bout of "frozen shoulder" last year, that made it difficult for me to even exit my glider on the ground, I've decided there's a need to develop a more simple air-lift bag for my glider. This bag would probably be made of coated nylon and be inflated with an easily refillable compressed air bottle. Inflation would be via a quarter-turn manual valve with no safety devices except perhaps a manual interlock pin (if a solenoid valve were used, a canopy-open interlock could be incorporated). The intent would be to design the "air-lift under cushion" for ground use only, to assist the pilot in exiting the ship. If this system were marketed, restricting it to ground use would hopefully help eliminate the liability concerns of a system intended to assist a bail out. Like many of my ideas, I may not find the time to make this. And if do, I may only make one to test in my glider. (I'm still questioning the decision to market the Quiet Vent and MKII Yaw String :c). Comments, suggestions welcome. bumper ZZ Minden "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote in message . .. "bagmaker" wrote in message ... - You've had a whack, but everything feels fine. Do you stay in the glider, or leave? Just how reliable are the parachutes we use? I understand that they're fairly simple quick-opening designs, but there's no reserve, right? Has a glider-pilot parachute ever failed? Dan - Dan, Simply, there is no blanket answer, way too many variables exist. Derek Piggot writes a fascinating account of his bail-out in some of his gliding books, I would suggest reading them. Gliding Kiwi has a great article this month on a NZ instructor landing a rudderless puch with a PAX - more heart stopping reading! Basically if it does fly after a hit, check to see that it will keep flying with some harsh movements -height limits withstanding- long enough to land. Landing manuevering can be rough, you want to be sure the thing doesnt fail at 100 feet after nursing down from a good bail out height. Rough rule has been bandied about RAS about 1500 ft as a minimum bail-out altitude, many would disagree, but if you dont have a choice..... Bottom line is you are worth more than a glider, if in doubt, get out fly safe Bagger I've twice faced the decision to jump or land a crippled glider. The first was a Pratt-Read badly damaged from a mid-air. I had fresh jump training, a fresh repack and a stable jump platform but I decided to land it anyway. The critical decision was whether I could control the glider from the time it decended below a safe jump altitude until it was on the ground. I could and did. For the record, the other pilot in the mid-air did the same thing. The second was an experimental flying wing where a suposedly secure lead shot bag shifted in flight so as to jam the elevator/aileron bellcranks. I found I could steer with rudder and slow it to 70Kts with trim. That let me hit the runway on a fast, shallow glide. It was a rough landing but the glider and I survived to fly again. In both cases there was intense discussion post flight about the wisdom of my decisions. A slim majority said the conservative action was to have abandoned ship. My view was if the thing is more or less controllable, and you have a big airfield to aim at, land it. If it is an airplane loaded with fuel, that might shift the decision toward jumping. However, a glider that can be flown to hit a large flat area at a shallow angle is likely to be safer than the 'chute. If there is any doubt that the glider will remain controllable - jump. The real problem here is struggling to rise from a reclining position and crawl over the side with a 15 pound 'chute on your back. That's difficult. Being old, out of shape and/or overweight makes it impossible. This is where the NOAH system from DG is so significant. Of all the safety related things that one could spend money on, the NOAH system tops the list for me. Bill Daniels |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
bumper wrote:
This bag would probably be made of coated nylon and be inflated with an easily refillable compressed air bottle. Inflation would be via a quarter-turn manual valve with no safety devices except perhaps a manual interlock pin (if a solenoid valve were used, a canopy-open interlock could be incorporated). The intent would be to design the "air-lift under cushion" for ground use only, to assist the pilot in exiting the ship. If this system were marketed, restricting it to ground use would hopefully help eliminate the liability concerns of a system intended to assist a bail out. A friend of mine (Bob Moore) had an "elderly pilot's assist" (not that I'm suggesting bumper is elderly, since I'm a bit older myself!) installed in his PIK 20 E. He used it to enter and exit the glider on the ground. It was a cloth bag with (I think) two aircraft tire tubes, one on top of the other, inside the bag. A small 12 VDC pump run from the glider battery inflated the tubes to raise the pilot; a valve released the air to lower the pilot. It allowed him another couple years of flying. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly * "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4 * "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
bumper,
I find my yaw string always swings out to one side or the other - should I use a heavier string? Jon ;-) "bumper" wrote in message ... Bill, I too applaud DG for developing the NOAH system. However, complexity, cost, and it's "one time use" nature may limit its appeal for many. After suffering a bout of "frozen shoulder" last year, that made it difficult for me to even exit my glider on the ground, I've decided there's a need to develop a more simple air-lift bag for my glider. This bag would probably be made of coated nylon and be inflated with an easily refillable compressed air bottle. Inflation would be via a quarter-turn manual valve with no safety devices except perhaps a manual interlock pin (if a solenoid valve were used, a canopy-open interlock could be incorporated). The intent would be to design the "air-lift under cushion" for ground use only, to assist the pilot in exiting the ship. If this system were marketed, restricting it to ground use would hopefully help eliminate the liability concerns of a system intended to assist a bail out. Like many of my ideas, I may not find the time to make this. And if do, I may only make one to test in my glider. (I'm still questioning the decision to market the Quiet Vent and MKII Yaw String :c). Comments, suggestions welcome. bumper ZZ Minden "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote in message . .. "bagmaker" wrote in message ... - You've had a whack, but everything feels fine. Do you stay in the glider, or leave? Just how reliable are the parachutes we use? I understand that they're fairly simple quick-opening designs, but there's no reserve, right? Has a glider-pilot parachute ever failed? Dan - Dan, Simply, there is no blanket answer, way too many variables exist. Derek Piggot writes a fascinating account of his bail-out in some of his gliding books, I would suggest reading them. Gliding Kiwi has a great article this month on a NZ instructor landing a rudderless puch with a PAX - more heart stopping reading! Basically if it does fly after a hit, check to see that it will keep flying with some harsh movements -height limits withstanding- long enough to land. Landing manuevering can be rough, you want to be sure the thing doesnt fail at 100 feet after nursing down from a good bail out height. Rough rule has been bandied about RAS about 1500 ft as a minimum bail-out altitude, many would disagree, but if you dont have a choice..... Bottom line is you are worth more than a glider, if in doubt, get out fly safe Bagger I've twice faced the decision to jump or land a crippled glider. The first was a Pratt-Read badly damaged from a mid-air. I had fresh jump training, a fresh repack and a stable jump platform but I decided to land it anyway. The critical decision was whether I could control the glider from the time it decended below a safe jump altitude until it was on the ground. I could and did. For the record, the other pilot in the mid-air did the same thing. The second was an experimental flying wing where a suposedly secure lead shot bag shifted in flight so as to jam the elevator/aileron bellcranks. I found I could steer with rudder and slow it to 70Kts with trim. That let me hit the runway on a fast, shallow glide. It was a rough landing but the glider and I survived to fly again. In both cases there was intense discussion post flight about the wisdom of my decisions. A slim majority said the conservative action was to have abandoned ship. My view was if the thing is more or less controllable, and you have a big airfield to aim at, land it. If it is an airplane loaded with fuel, that might shift the decision toward jumping. However, a glider that can be flown to hit a large flat area at a shallow angle is likely to be safer than the 'chute. If there is any doubt that the glider will remain controllable - jump. The real problem here is struggling to rise from a reclining position and crawl over the side with a 15 pound 'chute on your back. That's difficult. Being old, out of shape and/or overweight makes it impossible. This is where the NOAH system from DG is so significant. Of all the safety related things that one could spend money on, the NOAH system tops the list for me. Bill Daniels |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bill Daniels wrote:
The real problem here is struggling to rise from a reclining position and crawl over the side with a 15 pound 'chute on your back. That's difficult. Being old, out of shape and/or overweight makes it impossible. This is where the NOAH system from DG is so significant. Of all the safety related things that one could spend money on, the NOAH system tops the list for me. It would be interesting to construct a list of these things, and prioritize them by their cost/benefit ratio. Bill seems like a very safety conscious pilot, so he probably is at the point where a NOAH system would give him the most safety increase for the buck. I'll bet a lot, maybe most, pilots aren't in that situation. A simple example is the Roeger hook (or a variant) that is part of every new glider with a forward opening canopy, ensuring it can be jettisoned safely. DG makes a retrofit available for all their older gliders, yet relatively few have purchased one. I know Schleicher offers retrofits for at least one glider (I bought and installed one), and perhaps others. How many pilots have a "spoilers open during takeoff" warning? I believe more pilots have died because of this than those that couldn't bail out of a glider because the G forces were to great. Here's a start on a safety equipment list, ordered by cost/benefit: A list for the *Serious Cross-Country Pilot* "spoilers open on takeoff" warning ($100) parachute ($1200) Roeger hook ($600 - my cost) PCAS transponder detector ($450) Transponder ($3000) NOAH ($5000) ELT ($1000 - 406 hz unit) PLB ($200 - $500) My list reflects my situation. I'm sure there should probably be several lists that account for where you fly and the kind of flying you do. What do other pilots think this list should include, where would you place things in the list, and what pilots is it intended for? -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly * "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4 * "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Add:
Gear warning system $20 Condom $1.50 "Eric Greenwell" wrote in message news:aZCFi.2495$rw3.2350@trndny04... Bill Daniels wrote: The real problem here is struggling to rise from a reclining position and crawl over the side with a 15 pound 'chute on your back. That's difficult. Being old, out of shape and/or overweight makes it impossible. This is where the NOAH system from DG is so significant. Of all the safety related things that one could spend money on, the NOAH system tops the list for me. It would be interesting to construct a list of these things, and prioritize them by their cost/benefit ratio. Bill seems like a very safety conscious pilot, so he probably is at the point where a NOAH system would give him the most safety increase for the buck. I'll bet a lot, maybe most, pilots aren't in that situation. A simple example is the Roeger hook (or a variant) that is part of every new glider with a forward opening canopy, ensuring it can be jettisoned safely. DG makes a retrofit available for all their older gliders, yet relatively few have purchased one. I know Schleicher offers retrofits for at least one glider (I bought and installed one), and perhaps others. How many pilots have a "spoilers open during takeoff" warning? I believe more pilots have died because of this than those that couldn't bail out of a glider because the G forces were to great. Here's a start on a safety equipment list, ordered by cost/benefit: A list for the *Serious Cross-Country Pilot* "spoilers open on takeoff" warning ($100) parachute ($1200) Roeger hook ($600 - my cost) PCAS transponder detector ($450) Transponder ($3000) NOAH ($5000) ELT ($1000 - 406 hz unit) PLB ($200 - $500) My list reflects my situation. I'm sure there should probably be several lists that account for where you fly and the kind of flying you do. What do other pilots think this list should include, where would you place things in the list, and what pilots is it intended for? -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly * "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4 * "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 20:34:14 +0000, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Here's a start on a safety equipment list, ordered by cost/benefit: A list for the *Serious Cross-Country Pilot* "spoilers open on takeoff" warning ($100) parachute ($1200) Roeger hook ($600 - my cost) PCAS transponder detector ($450) Transponder ($3000) NOAH ($5000) ELT ($1000 - 406 hz unit) PLB ($200 - $500) My list reflects my situation. I'm sure there should probably be several lists that account for where you fly and the kind of flying you do. What do other pilots think this list should include, where would you place things in the list, and what pilots is it intended for? The obvious omission: Flarm (US $400 - $500). My first hand experience is that in terms of cost/benefit, it belongs up with the chute, maybe even above it. Even if you are fortunate enough not to need one of these devices, remember it also offers protection for the other pilot who might not see you. It is time someone developed a version that is accepted world wide and can be fitted to power aircraft as well, while keeping the costs "VFR affordable". Ian |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
70 kg 31:1 glider is here to stay? | Andre Volant | Soaring | 57 | November 27th 04 11:21 AM |
Region 1 Contest - will trade place to stay | Quebec Tango | Soaring | 0 | May 10th 04 03:17 PM |
How Aircraft Stay In The Air | Sarah Hotdesking | Military Aviation | 145 | March 25th 04 05:13 PM |
The Bud Light logo will stay | Cub Driver | Military Aviation | 8 | November 24th 03 01:08 AM |
The Bud Light logo will stay | Cub Driver | Piloting | 7 | November 24th 03 01:08 AM |