Winch Launch Fatality

On Jun 22, 5:45*am, Del C wrote:
Generally it is OK to make 180 or 360 degree turns in a modern gliders, as
long as you start at at least 300ft and keep the airspeed up to a safe
manoeuvring speed. The failure to do the latter seems to have been the
probably cause of this accident.

Also US glider pilots, mostly trained on aerotows, may not have properly
thought through the options available after a winch launch cable break.

Derek Copeland (UK gliding instructor)

At 10:48 22 June 2009, Scott wrote:

The club in question probably winch launches more than any other in
the US. I'm not aware on any current winch operation not training to
an acceptable standard. There was one several years ago selling
endorsements in about six launches. That operation is now out of
business in the aero tow world also.

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:05:55 +1200, Dave Doe wrote:


How many times!!! - *don't* try to return to the field! OK, I don't
know the altitude (AGL) nor what was ahead of the field, but hey, we all
know, this is generally regarded as a no-no.

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but too
low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.

The crucial point is a thorough departure briefing.

We are speculating which is wrong.It could be a very experienced P2
reacting inapropiately and P1 not able to take over in time.The more
experienced "bloggs" the clever the traps they create for the
instructor.I think it unlikely that they made a basic land ahead/pattern
mistake, ,more likely failed to take over in time because P2 was nearly
right.Lets not insult the guys they paid a terrible price in the name of a
sport we all love.

At 12:20 22 June 2009, John Smith wrote:
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but too

low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.

The crucial point is a thorough departure briefing.

We don't know exactly what happened, but there are 3 main causes of
winching accidents.
A wing down on the ground run, causing the glider to cartwheel.
Too steep, too soon, resulting in a stalled wing and the start of a spin.
Both of these happen VERY fast.
Not achieving and maintaining a safe airspeed after a launch failure,
resulting in a stall or spin.
Here in the UK the BGA has been addressing winching accidents, and put out
good advice. It is worth looking at.
Dave






At 13:00 22 June 2009, Jonathon May wrote:
We are speculating which is wrong.It could be a very experienced P2
reacting inapropiately and P1 not able to take over in time.The more
experienced "bloggs" the clever the traps they create for the
instructor.I think it unlikely that they made a basic land ahead/pattern
mistake, ,more likely failed to take over in time because P2 was nearly
right.Lets not insult the guys they paid a terrible price in the name of
a
sport we all love.

At 12:20 22 June 2009, John Smith wrote:
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but
too

low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.

The crucial point is a thorough departure briefing.

As an instructor myself, I am very aware that it is my duty to protect both
the hardware (glider and launching equipment) and the software (student
pilot and myself).

In this case the student was a very experienced professional helicopter
pilot, but was having a trial flight with a view to taking up gliding as a
hobby (as I understand it). In view of his background it is fairly unlikely
that the the P2 would have panicked or interfered with the controls. .

Derek Copeland

At 13:00 22 June 2009, Jonathon May wrote:
We are speculating which is wrong.It could be a very experienced P2
reacting inapropiately and P1 not able to take over in time.The more
experienced "bloggs" the clever the traps they create for the
instructor.I think it unlikely that they made a basic land ahead/pattern
mistake, ,more likely failed to take over in time because P2 was nearly
right.Lets not insult the guys they paid a terrible price in the name of
a
sport we all love.

At 12:20 22 June 2009, John Smith wrote:
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but
too

low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.

The crucial point is a thorough departure briefing.

The only G103 Twin III I've flown was the SL version, this was the
ACRO version. I found the front seat distinctly different from the
Twin I's and II's I've flown. With parachutes on, it was close
quarters to say the least. Nevertheless, I was able to remain clear
of the controls on take off and climb out. Someone less familiar may
have inadvertantly interfered, but that's all spec. I know of one
case where a normal pattern in a ride glider resulted in a fatal spin
due to a hiking boot becoming lodged between the rudder pedal and the
side of the glider. Different glider make and model though.

Frank Whiteley

On Jun 22, 11:15*am, Del C wrote:
As an instructor myself, I am very aware that it is my duty to protect both
the hardware (glider and launching equipment) and the software (student
pilot and myself).

In this case the student was a very experienced professional helicopter
pilot, but was having a trial flight with a view to taking up gliding as a
hobby (as I understand it). In view of his background it is fairly unlikely
that the the P2 would have panicked or interfered with the controls. .

Derek Copeland

At 13:00 22 June 2009, Jonathon May wrote:

We are speculating which is wrong.It could be a very experienced P2
reacting inapropiately and P1 not able to take over in time.The more
experienced "bloggs" the clever the traps they create for the
instructor.I think it unlikely that they made a basic land ahead/pattern
mistake, ,more likely failed to take over in time because P2 was nearly
right.Lets not insult the guys they paid a terrible price in the name of
a
sport we all love.

At 12:20 22 June 2009, John Smith wrote:
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) *to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but
too

low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.

The crucial point is a thorough departure briefing.

On Jun 22, 11:57*am, Frank Whiteley wrote:
The only G103 Twin III I've flown was the SL version, this was the
ACRO version. *I found the front seat distinctly different from the
Twin I's and II's I've flown. *With parachutes on, it was close
quarters to say the least. *Nevertheless, I was able to remain clear
of the controls on take off and climb out. *Someone less familiar may
have inadvertantly interfered, but that's all spec. *I know of one
case where a normal pattern in a ride glider resulted in a fatal spin
due to a hiking boot becoming lodged between the rudder pedal and the
side of the glider. *Different glider make and model though.

Frank Whiteley

On Jun 22, 11:15*am, Del C wrote:

As an instructor myself, I am very aware that it is my duty to protect both
the hardware (glider and launching equipment) and the software (student
pilot and myself).

In this case the student was a very experienced professional helicopter
pilot, but was having a trial flight with a view to taking up gliding as a
hobby (as I understand it). In view of his background it is fairly unlikely
that the the P2 would have panicked or interfered with the controls. .

Derek Copeland

At 13:00 22 June 2009, Jonathon May wrote:

We are speculating which is wrong.It could be a very experienced P2
reacting inapropiately and P1 not able to take over in time.The more
experienced "bloggs" the clever the traps they create for the
instructor.I think it unlikely that they made a basic land ahead/pattern
mistake, ,more likely failed to take over in time because P2 was nearly
right.Lets not insult the guys they paid a terrible price in the name of
a
sport we all love.

At 12:20 22 June 2009, John Smith wrote:
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) *to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but
too

low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.

The crucial point is a thorough departure briefing.

The MHG has a Twin III Acro. I've given hundreds of rides in it.
There is nothing special about the front seat that would cause
concern. It's really a nice glider for rides with big comfortable
seats.

Like any glider, if you put a really big person with long legs in the
front seat with the pedals cranked all the way aft you might have a
control interference problem but that's a cockpit preparation issue
that should be detected by moving the controls to their limits as part
of the cockpit checklist if not when seating your passenger.

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:20:51 +0200, John Smith
wrote:

Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but too
low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.


Yup.
Standard procedure at my home airfield.

On Jun 22, 4:05*am, Dave Doe wrote:
In article ,
says...



At 04:03 19 June 2009, Dave Doe wrote:
In article ,
says...
Who knows details about this?

http://www.mlive.com/news/annarborne...news-32/124507....

There is some more info here...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2515...wi-pilot-named

United States police today released the name of a New Zealand pilot
killed last Sunday when the glider in which he was a passenger crashed..

Timothy John Moxham, 29, was a pilot for an air ambulance, Midwest
Medflight.

Police said a delay in releasing details of his identity was because of
the difficulty in reaching his parents in New Zealand.

Mr Moxham died in a glider owned by the Sandhill Soaring Club and flown
by the club president when it crashed near Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Preliminary investigation indicated a winch cable used to help the
aircraft take flight may have failed on takeoff, police chief William
Cook of the nearby Unadilla Township told the Daily Press and Argus
newspaper. The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating.

The glider pilot, Orrin Burns Beckham, 63, of Ann Arbor, is in a serious

condition in a local hospital.

A colleague of the New Zealander, Medflight paramedic Andrew King said
Mr Moxham took his job to heart.

"Not only did Tim love flying and love being a pilot, but he loved being

a part of the (team) and getting people to the appropriate hospitals."

Mr King said Mr Moxham's desire to go gliding was recent. He said prior

to the trip, Moxham told him: "This is true flying. It's just you and
(nature)."

The New Zealander had been flying for more than 15 years, starting at
the age of 13 when his father taught him, and had logged more than 3000
hours of flight time, including flying offshore, corporate work and
flight instruction.

He also held certification to an FAA standards on airframe construction
and engine mechanics.

"People say we've lost a pilot, but he was so much more than that,"
said
another colleague, Medflight nurse Doug Berry. "He had such compassion
for the job and the people we transported. He cared about people.

"He touched the lives of hundreds of people," Mr Berry added, choking
back tears. "He was amazing."

- NZPA

--
Duncan

NTSB prelim is at * *
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...15X13631&key=1

Thanks Ron.

I see...
"
Witnesses reported that the glider was launched with a winch and during
the procedure the winch cable broke. The pilot executed a 180-degree
turn apparently in an attempt to return to the airport. However, near
the completion of the turn, the nose of the glider dropped and it
impacted the terrain.
"

How many times!!! - *don't* try to return to the field! *OK, I don't
know the altitude (AGL) nor what was ahead of the field, but hey, we all
know, this is generally regarded as a no-no.

--
Duncan

I suggest you take a look at the Private Pilot Glider Practical Test
Guide. 180 (really 270) turns to a downwind landing are SOP for
gliders after a aerotow rope break.

180 turns to a downwind landing are NOT SOP for a winch launch failure
since at 200 feet the glider is still very near the approach end of
the runway - a 180 turn will leave you with nowhere to land. Downwind
landings are not necessary or even advisable with winch launch
failures.