Put your money where the risk is

At 21:12 28 November 2019, Branko Stojkovic wrote:
On Thursday, November 28, 2019 at 11:57:58 AM UTC-8,
Jonathan St. Cloud
wro=
te:
The air in which we fly is not uniform, sometimes not even
honest. Peter
=
Masak, was a great pilot. He met fate flying in an area and
conditions he
=
was familiar with. While I did not view his GPS trace I did
speak with a
p=
ilot whom did. Nothing unusual noted in the GPS.

Yes, ridge/mountain flying presents increased risk compared to
flying in
th=
e flat lands. I personally take the following precautions in order
to
minim=
ize the additional risk associated with mountain flying:

I fly a short winged glider in the mountains (12.6m span).

I fly with an instrument that calculates wind speed and
direction in near
r=
eal time (LX 9000).

I apply good airmanship when ridge flying, by maintaining
generous margins
=
in airspeed and distance from the ridge.

I only fly competitions in flat lands.

Branko XYU

Yes, interesting approach to mountain flying. However a 12.6m
wingspan (low performance) is going to mean you spend a LOT
more time down near the rocks than if you were in an 18m ship?
It's been suggested that European Alpine statistics show that
15m ships have a worse accident rate than 25m ships? I don't
know how these figures were generated: there are a lot more
15/18m ships flying than 25+m ships; is the analysis based on
Alpine hours flown? For sure it's dangerous; just look at where
most French glider pilots die: the Alps.
Dave Walsh