Stay in, or get out?

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

I don't understand the NOAH system. Why not just put a ballistic recovery
chute in the glider? That way you don't need to worry about getting out,
you are somewhat protected when you hit the ground, and your chute will
deploy even if you pull the cord at 300 ft.

Mike Schumann

"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




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Mike Schumann" wrote in message
.. .
I don't understand the NOAH system. Why not just put a ballistic recovery
chute in the glider? That way you don't need to worry about getting out,
you are somewhat protected when you hit the ground, and your chute will
deploy even if you pull the cord at 300 ft.

Mike Schumann

Mike, I think this is still open to debate. I have stated that I have an
aversion to landing in a sitting position with no crush structure under me.
The Cirrus SR22 uses the landing gear which punches up through the wing to
absorb impact. A glider doesn't have that. However, I'm going to keep an
open mind.

There is a strange dynamic going on with the existing ballistic 'chute
systems. There have been a lot of deployments - a lot more than anyone
thought there would be. On one side the proponents say the system is
working. On the other side, detractors say many of the deployments were
unneccessary.

One theory is that many pilots fly in a state of near panic. Give them a
panic button and they'll push it. If no panic button, they'll just fly back
and land. If this is true, insurance claims are going to skyrocket for
ballistic 'chute equipped aircraft.

Bill Daniels

"Dan G" wrote in message
ups.com...
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


That depends. The chute is very reliable..super high tech yet very simply
elegant. How reliable are you? Have you ever jumped before? Would you be
stable in free fall, and have your wits about you to pull the ripcord in a
stable position?

Jim Vincent wrote:

That depends. The chute is very reliable..super high tech yet very simply
elegant. How reliable are you? Have you ever jumped before? Would you be
stable in free fall, and have your wits about you to pull the ripcord in a
stable position?

Does it matter how stable you are with an emergency parachute? My
observation is untrained people that get out of the glider get the
parachute open and land with minimal injury. Apparently, the emergency
parachutes are so well designed, no training is needed to do an adequate
job. The real problem appears to be getting out, and there aren't any
places offering training in that. If the glider manufacturer offers a
Roeger hook, pilots can improve their chances considerably by
retrofitting a one to older gliders that don't have one.

--
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

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
news:k_lFi.1688$eh3.572@trndny07...
Jim Vincent wrote:

That depends. The chute is very reliable..super high tech yet very
simply elegant. How reliable are you? Have you ever jumped before?
Would you be stable in free fall, and have your wits about you to pull
the ripcord in a stable position?

Does it matter how stable you are with an emergency parachute? My
observation is untrained people that get out of the glider get the
parachute open and land with minimal injury. Apparently, the emergency
parachutes are so well designed, no training is needed to do an adequate
job. The real problem appears to be getting out, and there aren't any
places offering training in that. If the glider manufacturer offers a
Roeger hook, pilots can improve their chances considerably by retrofitting
a one to older gliders that don't have one.

37 years ago while flying in an A-6A Intruder I was faced with the decision
to "stay in, or get out." With the starboard engine and wing on fire, the
decision process was simple. If I "stayed in" I would die. If I got out I
might live.

I feel the same decision process applies to sailplanes. If the bird is out
of control, you most likely will die and your emergency chute becomes your
hope of survival.

That being said, jump training will give confidence and reading accident
reports like the following will further your understanding of unforeseen
perils that may be encountered.
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder/Stories/Bailout.htm

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/

That depends. The chute is very reliable..super high tech yet very simply
elegant. How reliable are you? Have you ever jumped before? Would you be
stable in free fall, and have your wits about you to pull the ripcord in a
stable position?

Jim, while I appreciate your concern about being stable in freefall
(having tried it myself, long long time ago), I think you overestimate
the need to get into a stable free fall in an emergency bailout
situation. In most cases, there will be no need to delay opening
until lower altitude (wave flights excepted). So the real task is to
successfully exit the glider, find the ripcord (not any of the other
hard shiny things on the harness), then pulling it with enough
altitude to get a good chute. Tens of thousands of military aircrew
managed to do this for real and survive, and I am pretty sure 99.9%
didn't have ANY training in getting into a stable arch before pulling!

My concern is that someone with only a little training might be more
concerned with "style points" and delay opening too late - especially
back east where a lot of time is spent below 3000' agl, and a midair
with another glider or a spamcan is a real risk.

I know I'm not going to even think about getting into a nice hard arch
- I'm getting clear of the glider as fast as I can, looking for the D-
ring, grabbing it with both hands, and yanking that sucker ASAP! If
it hurts the old nads during opening, so be it - I can deal with that
later.

Absolutely agree that every glider pilot who wears a chute should try
to experience a tandem or static line jump, if possible - great
confidence builder, and a lot of fun, too!

Cheers,

Kirk
66

On Sep 10, 8:50 pm, "Jim Vincent" wrote:
"Dan G" wrote in message

ups.com...

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

That depends. The chute is very reliable..super high tech yet very simply
elegant. How reliable are you? Have you ever jumped before? Would you be
stable in free fall, and have your wits about you to pull the ripcord in a
stable position?

There was a thread about 2-3 years back on static lines. I know
they're in common use in Europe, but not in the US. Anyone ever get
to the bottom of that?

P3

There are some good article on the DG web site about
safety features, they do explain why they went for
the NOAH system. given the cost and structural issues
with balistic recorery systems and the life of plastic
gliders (50-100 years?) it would be a very long time
before many people had one. I dont think they can cope
with water ballast (200kg+ in newer 15/18m)

80-90% of new German gliders have an engine, so space
and the extra weight are also issues, even turbos reduce
weak weather perfformance

the Noah can be retrofitted to a lot of the existing
DG fleet and is not prohibitively expensive. To be
fair it is also more likely to give DG a return on
the investment. The system will only work with a mushroom
type instrument binnacle or similar which you legs
can get round either side

the reaon for the Noah is why i would lean toward using
the stable platform. Some test were done a while ago
to simulate bailout with spin G loading by strapping
weights to pilots of various ages, and seing if they
could roll out of a static cockpit, the older ones
simply could not get out of the cockpit

as for the airbrake open warning DG also make the Piggot
Hook, which is a sawtooth plate which catches the airbrake
handle if it trys to slide back when not locked, could
easily be copied and retrofitted to lots of types,
especially in Experemental world.

Pete

At 21:01 11 September 2007, Mike Schumann wrote:
I don't understand the NOAH system. Why not just put
a ballistic recovery
chute in the glider? That way you don't need to worry
about getting out,
you are somewhat protected when you hit the ground,
and your chute will
deploy even if you pull the cord at 300 ft.

Mike Schumann

'Bill Daniels' 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




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

At 21:01 11 September 2007, Mike Schumann wrote:
I don't understand the NOAH system. Why not just put
a ballistic recovery
chute in the glider? That way you don't need to worry
about getting out,
you are somewhat protected when you hit the ground,
and your chute will
deploy even if you pull the cord at 300 ft.

Mike Schumann

1. Not all gliders can have a BRS installed (probably
goes for the NOAH as well)
2. With a BRS, you can not guarantee you will still
be attached to the part of the glider with the BRS
installed, nor that it will function properly in the
case of catastrophic damage

Even if you have the BRS, I highly recommend still
flying with your emergency bailout chute, and please
continue to 'worry' about how you may get out if you
need to. If the BRS works- hey, great! If not you still
have an option (not below 300 AGL though) There is
already a known case of this very scenario, and it
was a flutter breakup and not even a midair that caused
it. Skillfully (not luckily cause' it's not called
luck when you prepare for the unexpected) the pilot
had his personal chute (and presence of mind) and was
able to live to tell about it. Plus with a personal
chute you can steer away form power lines or cliff
faces and other hazards just as deadly as no protection
at all.
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 Hanson
"Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi