Glider Crash - Minden?

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

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

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