Stay in, or get out?

I've always thought it would be a good idea to take
hold of the rip-cord handle before finally leaving
the glider. Did you do that, and, if you didn't, did
you get hold of the handle quickly and easily?

At 11:00 12 September 2007, Peld wrote:
Dan,
I had the unfortunate experience of having to leave
my glider in
January after a mid air. The other glider had impacted
my left wing
and severed it about half a metre from the root,and
also broke the
tail boom midway between the wing and the tail. He
was able to land
but I had to make a quick exit, which was my first
parachuting
experience. I had no doubts that I would have to jump,
and previous
training and preparation took over.
The glider had started a spin to the left and it took
some time to
get rid of the canopy (PUSH on it after you activate
the releases!),
but I was actually surprised how easy it was to get
out of the
cockpit. Having undone the harness it seemed like no
trouble at all to
just roll over the canopy rail and out into the wild
blue yonder. I
have a below knee artificial right leg so I had considered
this
scenario for some time, expecting to have a lot of
trouble just
getting my leg past the instrument panel, but no, it
was really a
piece of cake. I put it down to the fact the gravitational
force was
less as the glider was diving and all I had to do was
push away from
it. A NOAH sytem would have been redundant I feel.
Luckily, the spin
hadn't developed to the stage where the centrifugal
forces were high,
even though it had seemed to take forever to get out;
in fact it was
probably only seconds.
The chute worked as advertised (it had been repacked
2 months
previously), opening in 3 seconds (or so it seemed)
and there was no
way I was going to do any stabilising. I used that
ripcord as soon as
I could. Adrenalin does amazing things. I was upside
down when the
chute opened, but the shock of it soon had me the right
way up. I did
get some pretty severe bruising around the groin and
shoulders, but I
was alive and thats what counted. Then there was the
landing. I
couldn't see the ground properly because the shock
of the opening
chute ripped my glasses off, and I hit before I was
ready, and I hit
very heavily, once again with absolutely no proper
tecnique, but I was
alive.
As far as I am concerned everything worked and the
end result was
good. I just hope no one else has to try out their
parachute.

Phil

Eric Greenwell wrote:

A list for the *Serious Cross-Country Pilot*
(updated Sept 12, 2007)

"spoilers open on takeoff" warning ($100 - includes "gear up" warning)
parachute ($1200)
Roeger hook ($600 - my cost; for other gliders $??)
FLARM ($600Euro - for pilots in Europe and Australia)
PCAS transponder detector ($450)
Transponder ($3000)
NOAH ($5000)
ELT ($1000 - 406 hz unit)
PLB ($200 - $500)

--
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

On Sep 11, 4:33 pm, Paul Hanson
wrote:


For the really safety minded (and thick walleted) a
BRS, NOAH, a personal chute, a helmet (might have saved
more lives than you may think) and all the other gizmos
mentioned already, including the condom, although admittedly
the helmet may significantly reduce the need for that
one

Paul,

I have been thinking it would be nice to have a study of crashes to
determine if a helmet wold have saved many lives. We fly at speeds up
to 200 mph, yet do not require a helmet of pilots. I have been
looking at helmet types that would allow good vision and movement in
gliders without excessive weight for the G's we pull. Has anyone done
this type of study and/or tried flight helmets etc in gliders?

Tim

Pigot hooks. Why is DG the only company really pushing these. I've had
the spoilers try to "self deply" on a DG-1000S while on low tow, just
hit a sharp bump and they popped, so much for properly closing them.
The "hook" on the spoiler handle stops the spoiler from very far and
the spoiler vibrate up and down and makes a loud noise immediately
drawing your attention to the wings. Parts costs are ridiculously low,
it is a piece of sheet metal. Glider manufacturers should be giving
these away to current owners for PR value and for reduced accident
rates on their fleet.

I'd add upgrading to decent brakes if the glider does not have them,
so you can stop when needed in that tight field. I upgraded my DG-303
from cable brakes to hydraulic brakes. A big improvement. The old
brakes could stop the glider but would get out of adjustment and you
have more control with the hydraulic brakes. Cost $1k I believe.

A handheld VHF radio. Handy as a backup. A big help and sometimes a
safety issue when pushing gliders around busier airports I fly at.
Maybe some spare batteries and some way to jury rig this to the glider
batteries if you crash and land out. A few hundred dollars. I was
reminded of the use of these yesterday when a Cessna 152 compete with
student pilot taxied past me as I was walking around the ramp area at
my airport. he had a flat nose tire just about running on the rim. I
did not have my handheld on me and could not get his attention by
waiving etc. He managed to takeoff, wonder what happened on his
landing.

New batteries for the glider every few years or whenever the batteries
show problems, and a good charger designed for AGM batteries. $100-
$150. Not listening to people complain about glider battery problems.
Priceless.

A nice printed out/laminated post assembly and pre-take off checklist
(and use it). ~$1. Include "Positive Control Check" - that will save a
few lives. I just do not get that some people still will skip this. I
refused to run somebody's wing earlier this year until he did a
positive check - apparently standing around talking to other pilots
waiting for a tow was more important than doing a positive.

Beyond all these I hope people carry lots of water and basic survival
gear, tie down stuff, any medications needed etc. Find some way to put
a few key things on your parachute (use one of Allen Silver's SMAK
packs).

Darryl

On Sep 12, 9:06 am, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Eric Greenwell wrote:

A list for the *Serious Cross-Country Pilot*
(updated Sept 12, 2007)

"spoilers open on takeoff" warning ($100 - includes "gear up" warning)
parachute ($1200)
Roeger hook ($600 - my cost; for other gliders $??)
FLARM ($600Euro - for pilots in Europe and Australia)
PCAS transponder detector ($450)
Transponder ($3000)
NOAH ($5000)
ELT ($1000 - 406 hz unit)
PLB ($200 - $500)

--
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" atwww.motorglider.org

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

On 9/12/07 10:46 AM, in article
, "Tim Taylor"
wrote:

On Sep 11, 4:33 pm, Paul Hanson
wrote:


For the really safety minded (and thick walleted) a
BRS, NOAH, a personal chute, a helmet (might have saved
more lives than you may think) and all the other gizmos
mentioned already, including the condom, although admittedly
the helmet may significantly reduce the need for that
one

Paul,

I have been thinking it would be nice to have a study of crashes to
determine if a helmet wold have saved many lives. We fly at speeds up
to 200 mph, yet do not require a helmet of pilots. I have been
looking at helmet types that would allow good vision and movement in
gliders without excessive weight for the G's we pull. Has anyone done
this type of study and/or tried flight helmets etc in gliders?

Tim

The US Army has done a huge amount of research in this area, primarily at
the Aeromedical Research lab at Fort Rucker, AL. Low speed (less than 200
konts) is the realm of Army helicopters, and head injuries have been a
problem since before Vietnam.

The SPH-4 series of helmets emerged from all this research. SPH means "sound
protective helmet", and that feature is of no concern to us glider types.
The shell of those helmets are designed to limit penetration, which is also
less of an issue, unless weapons become approved in glider contests (in
which case "I got shot down" could have a different meaning).

The inner shell is the part that would be of benefit to us, in that it
limits impact forces to the head.

The problem with using these in gliders is that they make your head larger:
the impact absorbing bits require space to do their thing, and that space
makes your head taller, wider, and longer. Not a problem for some, a big
problem for others.

Having spent many, many hours in hueys and other helicopters, I can say that
I always felt right to have a helmet on.

Perhaps a bicycle helmet, without all the aerodynamic shell/fairings would
be useful?

bullwinkle

On Sep 12, 12:46 pm, Tim Taylor wrote:
On Sep 11, 4:33 pm, Paul Hanson

wrote:
For the really safety minded (and thick walleted) a
BRS, NOAH, a personal chute, a helmet (might have saved
more lives than you may think) and all the other gizmos
mentioned already, including the condom, although admittedly
the helmet may significantly reduce the need for that
one

Paul,

I have been thinking it would be nice to have a study of crashes to
determine if a helmet wold have saved many lives. We fly at speeds up
to 200 mph, yet do not require a helmet of pilots. I have been
looking at helmet types that would allow good vision and movement in
gliders without excessive weight for the G's we pull. Has anyone done
this type of study and/or tried flight helmets etc in gliders?

Tim

How many pilots could have been saved by a helmet ?

I can't recall reading too many accident reports that claim the pilot
died of head injuries, when there wasn't enough other injuries to be
fatal.

Data any one ?

Todd Smith
3S

At 19:00 12 September 2007, Toad wrote:
On Sep 12, 12:46 pm, Tim Taylor wrote:
On Sep 11, 4:33 pm, Paul Hanson

wrote:
For the really safety minded (and thick walleted)
a
BRS, NOAH, a personal chute, a helmet (might have
saved
more lives than you may think) and all the other
gizmos
mentioned already, including the condom, although
admittedly
the helmet may significantly reduce the need for
that
one

Paul,

I have been thinking it would be nice to have a study
of crashes to
determine if a helmet wold have saved many lives.
We fly at speeds up
to 200 mph, yet do not require a helmet of pilots.
I have been
looking at helmet types that would allow good vision
and movement in
gliders without excessive weight for the G's we pull.
Has anyone done
this type of study and/or tried flight helmets etc
in gliders?

Tim

How many pilots could have been saved by a helmet ?

I can't recall reading too many accident reports that
claim the pilot
died of head injuries, when there wasn't enough other
injuries to be
fatal.

Data any one ?

Todd Smith
3S

Look up the details (if you can find them) of the most
recent US glider fatality (Ridge Soaring Gliderport,
July 14 2007). That pilot was still alive when rescue
crew got to him, but died of his head injuries by the
time he arrived at the hospital according to the newspaper
article I read. I have heard of others as well, but
that one comes to mind off the top of my unprotected
head.

Paul Hanson
"Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi

Helmets!?



Just say 'No!'

toad wrote:
On Sep 12, 12:46 pm, Tim Taylor wrote:
On Sep 11, 4:33 pm, Paul Hanson

wrote:
For the really safety minded (and thick walleted) a
BRS, NOAH, a personal chute, a helmet (might have saved
more lives than you may think) and all the other gizmos
mentioned already, including the condom, although admittedly
the helmet may significantly reduce the need for that
one
Paul,

I have been thinking it would be nice to have a study of crashes to
determine if a helmet wold have saved many lives. We fly at speeds up
to 200 mph, yet do not require a helmet of pilots. I have been
looking at helmet types that would allow good vision and movement in
gliders without excessive weight for the G's we pull. Has anyone done
this type of study and/or tried flight helmets etc in gliders?

Tim

How many pilots could have been saved by a helmet ?

I can't recall reading too many accident reports that claim the pilot
died of head injuries, when there wasn't enough other injuries to be
fatal.

Data any one ?

This accident is also a good argument for the Roeger hook:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...08X07737&key=1



Shawn