![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"kirk.stant" wrote in message
oups.com... Plus, 20 seconds is an eternity when it comes to getting out of the way. I asked this question several times, and never saw a convincing answer: exactly how do you use even the 20 seconds if you have them to avoid something coming at you at 300 (or, it was suggested, possibly much more) knots? If you start in a thermalling glider at minimum sink speed, you can't seem to run fast enough far enough given the rate of closure -- and the lack of time to estimate relative motion precisely enough. We don't have targeting radars in most of the gliders (not sure about Space Shuttle though). -- Yuliy |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yuliy Gerchikov wrote:
"kirk.stant" wrote in message oups.com... Plus, 20 seconds is an eternity when it comes to getting out of the way. I asked this question several times, and never saw a convincing answer: exactly how do you use even the 20 seconds if you have them to avoid something coming at you at 300 (or, it was suggested, possibly much more) knots? Stop turning and stick the nose down steeply at the same time. That's about the quickest way to exit a given volume of air that I can think of if you're starting from a low airspeed. I'll be interested to hear of anything that would be faster and/or of something what would work if you're too low to dive away from the threat. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org | |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If you are on a collision course, how are you going to know whether going
down is the right solution? He might be 50 ft below you, and you are going to dive right into him. Or he might also decide to descend. This brings to mind an interesting suggestion that I was taught when I got my power license about avoiding collisions with birds: Always climb, as the birds will tend to dive. Mike Schumann "Martin Gregorie" wrote in message ... Yuliy Gerchikov wrote: "kirk.stant" wrote in message oups.com... Plus, 20 seconds is an eternity when it comes to getting out of the way. I asked this question several times, and never saw a convincing answer: exactly how do you use even the 20 seconds if you have them to avoid something coming at you at 300 (or, it was suggested, possibly much more) knots? Stop turning and stick the nose down steeply at the same time. That's about the quickest way to exit a given volume of air that I can think of if you're starting from a low airspeed. I'll be interested to hear of anything that would be faster and/or of something what would work if you're too low to dive away from the threat. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org | |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Schumann wrote:
If you are on a collision course, how are you going to know whether going down is the right solution? He might be 50 ft below you, and you are going to dive right into him. Or he might also decide to descend. Or you could just sit there with your eyes closed and do nothing, if you have trouble making decisions. If you don't have the eye to know what is the best move fairly quickly, almost instinctively, either aviation is not for you, or else you need more hours in the air with an experienced PIC. Get into the ball sports where an appreciation for spatial relationships, hand-eye coordination, relative motion on all planes, and accelerations is programmed into your brain -- though this is best begun at a very early age. --- Going down is good if you have the space; turning can work -- I have most often done both; going up is a very limited option in a glider so it's here that your timing and judgment are most critical. If I had to suggest a rule of thumb, it would be to maneuver to a position behind and below the traffic, and do not delay. The most natural tendency seems to be to go up as an initial fright response, so I would anticipate the other pilot will do that, if anything. By the time you have identified the threat as necessitating an avoidance reaction and begun your maneuver, his opportunity to make the situation either better or worse has probably already been considerably reduced. Of course there is always somebody out there who is both slow to react and also tends to make exactly the wrong move. But, if you are doing your part in the see-and-avoid dance you should already have solved both his problem and yours. Early awareness goes a long way toward simplifying the decision and enhancing your execution. This brings to mind an interesting suggestion that I was taught when I got my power license about avoiding collisions with birds: Always climb, as the birds will tend to dive. The birds don't always dive, I promise you. If they are as good at see-and-avoid as they should be, they frequently do so. Some of them aren't any better than some of us, however, when it comes to traffic awareness. The lone hunters tend to be the sharpest, not surprisingly. The flockers, not so much. Jack |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
My point is not to try to avoid the collision, but show how big of a problem
it is when you get too close to some fast iron. It really gets to be problematic to figure out what the best evasive maneuver is when you have a very high closure rate. The best solution is to try to avoid getting into this situation in the 1st place. Having an operational transponder would be a good way to start. Mike Schumann "588" wrote in message t... Mike Schumann wrote: If you are on a collision course, how are you going to know whether going down is the right solution? He might be 50 ft below you, and you are going to dive right into him. Or he might also decide to descend. Or you could just sit there with your eyes closed and do nothing, if you have trouble making decisions. If you don't have the eye to know what is the best move fairly quickly, almost instinctively, either aviation is not for you, or else you need more hours in the air with an experienced PIC. Get into the ball sports where an appreciation for spatial relationships, hand-eye coordination, relative motion on all planes, and accelerations is programmed into your brain -- though this is best begun at a very early age. --- Going down is good if you have the space; turning can work -- I have most often done both; going up is a very limited option in a glider so it's here that your timing and judgment are most critical. If I had to suggest a rule of thumb, it would be to maneuver to a position behind and below the traffic, and do not delay. The most natural tendency seems to be to go up as an initial fright response, so I would anticipate the other pilot will do that, if anything. By the time you have identified the threat as necessitating an avoidance reaction and begun your maneuver, his opportunity to make the situation either better or worse has probably already been considerably reduced. Of course there is always somebody out there who is both slow to react and also tends to make exactly the wrong move. But, if you are doing your part in the see-and-avoid dance you should already have solved both his problem and yours. Early awareness goes a long way toward simplifying the decision and enhancing your execution. This brings to mind an interesting suggestion that I was taught when I got my power license about avoiding collisions with birds: Always climb, as the birds will tend to dive. The birds don't always dive, I promise you. If they are as good at see-and-avoid as they should be, they frequently do so. Some of them aren't any better than some of us, however, when it comes to traffic awareness. The lone hunters tend to be the sharpest, not surprisingly. The flockers, not so much. Jack |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Schumann wrote:
My point is not to try to avoid the collision, but show how big of a problem it is when you get too close to some fast iron. It really gets to be problematic to figure out what the best evasive maneuver is when you have a very high closure rate. The best solution is to try to avoid getting into this situation in the 1st place. Having an operational transponder would be a good way to start. Start with PCAS it's cheaper, uses less power, and helps you control your own destiny -- if you only have room for one unit. However, the transponder/PCAS combination gives you everything you need to avoid the scary big fast airplanes, AND the friendly little gliders in your own club which are the ships you are most likely to hit. If all gliders were so equipped we would all be safer. Stall/spin in the pattern, midair anywhere -- these are the things that kill glider pilots. I suspect that after a pilot has flown with PCAS for awhile and has come to realize how much traffic there is that he was not aware of before, that pilot will be even more likely to want the transponder, too. Jack |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Schumann wrote:
If you are on a collision course, how are you going to know whether going down is the right solution? He might be 50 ft below you, and you are going to dive right into him. Or he might also decide to descend. If you need to get out from in front while thermalling, you'll need some more airspeed to do so and that means lowering the nose to accelerate while, hopefully, turning to aim off to one side of him. The opposition has first to see you in order to decide to descend. If we assign equal probabilities to him climbing, turning or diving then anything you do to move away from his current course has a 75% chance of being right. Now lets be generous and give him a 50% chance of seeing you. Probabilities multiply when they are combined, so that gives you an 87% chance of being right. This brings to mind an interesting suggestion that I was taught when I got my power license about avoiding collisions with birds: Always climb, as the birds will tend to dive. That's only useful if you have an engine or airspeed. If you're thermalling and try that you'll end up descending about 2 seconds later and, if the opposition saw you pull up, he'll be down there waiting for you. Besides, if he read the same book you're quoting he'll be more likely to pull up than to dive. In any case, you didn't say what you'd do, so I'll ask again. What would you do that's better than diving out of the way? -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org | |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Martin Gregorie
writes Mike Schumann wrote: If you are on a collision course, how are you going to know whether going down is the right solution? He might be 50 ft below you, and you are going to dive right into him. Or he might also decide to descend. If you need to get out from in front while thermalling, you'll need some more airspeed to do so and that means lowering the nose to accelerate while, hopefully, turning to aim off to one side of him. The opposition has first to see you in order to decide to descend. If we assign equal probabilities to him climbing, turning or diving then anything you do to move away from his current course has a 75% chance of being right. Now lets be generous and give him a 50% chance of seeing you. Probabilities multiply when they are combined, so that gives you an 87% chance of being right. This brings to mind an interesting suggestion that I was taught when I got my power license about avoiding collisions with birds: Always climb, as the birds will tend to dive. That's only useful if you have an engine or airspeed. If you're thermalling and try that you'll end up descending about 2 seconds later and, if the opposition saw you pull up, he'll be down there waiting for you. Besides, if he read the same book you're quoting he'll be more likely to pull up than to dive. In any case, you didn't say what you'd do, so I'll ask again. What would you do that's better than diving out of the way? Most of the threats round these parts find it a lot easier to avoid you at the last second by pulling up, so I reckon Martin's advice is the best going. One day about 15 years ago I was downwind to land on 03 in the tug. I saw an A-10 passing west to east about at 500ft over the approach to this runway. Of course, he would be long gone by the time I got there, so no problem. When I landed, people rushed up and said "Did you see him?" "Who?" "The A-10" "Oh, yes, but he was half a mile away over the end of the airfield" "No, not him. The other one, which we saw screaming towards you when you were downwind. He must have seen you at the last moment, he pulled up and missed you by about 5 feet. We thought we'd be looking to get a new tug." I never saw the second A-10. But I'm glad they all went home when the cold war ended. -- Mike Lindsay |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Assigning equal probabilities won't always work. In the case of the Hawker
collision, the jet was descending, so diving would not have increased separation as fast as climbing. In that particular region, jets are more likely to be descending than climbing, so maybe the choice should be influenced by what one knows about likely traffic in the area. South of Reno, climb. North of Reno, dive. 'Course, that depends on which way ATC is directing traffic... which is why Minden's glider educational materials tell us to listen to ATC once in a while. But that aside, on average it seems to me that (in a glider) diving would be better because one will accelerate over time, increasing the distance from where one started out. Zooming would not be as effective because speed will decay, so the separation will initially grow but then will not grow so much. Then one will either have to stay up there or descend back down through the original altitude. Since both pilots are nearly equally likely to choose climbing or diving, leaving a 50% chance of ending up near each others' altitude, it seems to me that diverting horizontally 90 degrees (perpendicular to the approaching aircraft's heading) will help just as much as as changing altitude. Again, both pilots could choose to turn the same way, so a 50% chance of still being on a collision course. So turn AND climb/dive, and you end up with more like a 25% chance of being in each others' way. Roger (who's only had close encounters of the feathered kind) "Martin Gregorie" wrote in message ... Mike Schumann wrote: If you are on a collision course, how are you going to know whether going down is the right solution? He might be 50 ft below you, and you are going to dive right into him. Or he might also decide to descend. If you need to get out from in front while thermalling, you'll need some more airspeed to do so and that means lowering the nose to accelerate while, hopefully, turning to aim off to one side of him. The opposition has first to see you in order to decide to descend. If we assign equal probabilities to him climbing, turning or diving then anything you do to move away from his current course has a 75% chance of being right. Now lets be generous and give him a 50% chance of seeing you. Probabilities multiply when they are combined, so that gives you an 87% chance of being right. This brings to mind an interesting suggestion that I was taught when I got my power license about avoiding collisions with birds: Always climb, as the birds will tend to dive. That's only useful if you have an engine or airspeed. If you're thermalling and try that you'll end up descending about 2 seconds later and, if the opposition saw you pull up, he'll be down there waiting for you. Besides, if he read the same book you're quoting he'll be more likely to pull up than to dive. In any case, you didn't say what you'd do, so I'll ask again. What would you do that's better than diving out of the way? -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org | |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Considering that the glider in question was in a left thermalling turn, that
the pilot caught just a brief glimpse of the inbound jet, just enough to identify it as having two engines, before it tore into his glider, and that the Hawker hit his upper wing about mid-span (or so I'm told), pulling up may not have been such a good idea (g). As someone else posted, most power pilots are trained to pull up for birds, as the bird will invariably fold its wings and dive. I'd venture to say that absent definitive altitude information about the threat, most power pilots will pull up to avoid an impact. My choice goes to diving to avoid a collision while flying a glider. If one is thermalling at a relatively low speed, there's not going to be a lot of energy to climb much, or fast. bumper "Roger Worden" wrote in message . net... Assigning equal probabilities won't always work. In the case of the Hawker collision, the jet was descending, so diving would not have increased separation as fast as climbing. In that particular region, jets are more likely to be descending than climbing, so maybe the choice should be influenced by what one knows about likely traffic in the area. South of Reno, climb. North of Reno, dive. 'Course, that depends on which way ATC is directing traffic... which is why Minden's glider educational materials tell us to listen to ATC once in a while. But that aside, on average it seems to me that (in a glider) diving would be better because one will accelerate over time, increasing the distance from where one started out. Zooming would not be as effective because speed will decay, so the separation will initially grow but then will not grow so much. Then one will either have to stay up there or descend back down through the original altitude. Since both pilots are nearly equally likely to choose climbing or diving, leaving a 50% chance of ending up near each others' altitude, it seems to me that diverting horizontally 90 degrees (perpendicular to the approaching aircraft's heading) will help just as much as as changing altitude. Again, both pilots could choose to turn the same way, so a 50% chance of still being on a collision course. So turn AND climb/dive, and you end up with more like a 25% chance of being in each others' way. Roger (who's only had close encounters of the feathered kind) "Martin Gregorie" wrote in message ... Mike Schumann wrote: If you are on a collision course, how are you going to know whether going down is the right solution? He might be 50 ft below you, and you are going to dive right into him. Or he might also decide to descend. If you need to get out from in front while thermalling, you'll need some more airspeed to do so and that means lowering the nose to accelerate while, hopefully, turning to aim off to one side of him. The opposition has first to see you in order to decide to descend. If we assign equal probabilities to him climbing, turning or diving then anything you do to move away from his current course has a 75% chance of being right. Now lets be generous and give him a 50% chance of seeing you. Probabilities multiply when they are combined, so that gives you an 87% chance of being right. This brings to mind an interesting suggestion that I was taught when I got my power license about avoiding collisions with birds: Always climb, as the birds will tend to dive. That's only useful if you have an engine or airspeed. If you're thermalling and try that you'll end up descending about 2 seconds later and, if the opposition saw you pull up, he'll be down there waiting for you. Besides, if he read the same book you're quoting he'll be more likely to pull up than to dive. In any case, you didn't say what you'd do, so I'll ask again. What would you do that's better than diving out of the way? -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org | |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VQ-1's P4M-1Q crash off China - 1956 | Mike | Naval Aviation | 0 | May 6th 06 11:13 PM |
Yet another A36 crash | H.P. | Piloting | 10 | April 23rd 05 05:58 PM |
Seniors Contest | Bob Fidler | Soaring | 68 | March 17th 05 03:50 AM |
Sport Pilot - School Won't Offer | Gary G | Piloting | 38 | February 16th 05 10:41 AM |
Announce/USA: FAA Glider Flying Handbook / Bob Wander | SoarBooks | Soaring | 0 | August 11th 03 03:55 PM |