![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 1, 5:32*pm, Mike Ash wrote:
In article , *Mxsmanic wrote: Flaps_50! writes: I agree that removing the engine might reduce the probability of a mechanical failure, and yet the stats say gliders have more accidents. Both gliders and powered aircraft require a source of propulsion, even if it isn't the same source. Neither source of propulsion is completely reliable. The difference is that a glider's energy source is so UNreliable that no sane pilot would ever count on it being there, and the glide performance is necessarily so large, thus a safe landing spot is always kept within range. As for the stats, I speculate that the main reason the glider stats are worse is because the "GA" stat includes lots of big corporate jets which have more airliner-like safety stats. My *guess* is that comparing small planes to gliders will reveal more similar levels of risk, but I could easily be wrong on that. I posted the figures for single engine -not usually the class of a corporate jet... Seems like glider piloting is a problem (it can't be the iron fairy) or is there another cause? Cheers |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Flaps_50!" wrote in message ... Seems like glider piloting is a problem (it can't be the iron fairy) or is there another cause? Measuring accidents on the basis of flight hours does not necessarily give you the whole picture. If you had ever spent much time at a glider training operation, you would quickly see part of the difference between power training and glider training, and how the statistics can get skewed when you only look at flight hours. Glider primary training flights tend to be so short that students traditionally count "flights" rather than "hours". With gliders or airplanes, accidents happen overwhelmingly on takeoff or landing. As it turns out, glider students spend a greater percentage of their flight time in those two (statistically more dangerous) phases of flight. Vaughn |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"vaughn" wrote: "Flaps_50!" wrote in message ... Seems like glider piloting is a problem (it can't be the iron fairy) or is there another cause? Measuring accidents on the basis of flight hours does not necessarily give you the whole picture. If you had ever spent much time at a glider training operation, you would quickly see part of the difference between power training and glider training, and how the statistics can get skewed when you only look at flight hours. Glider primary training flights tend to be so short that students traditionally count "flights" rather than "hours". With gliders or airplanes, accidents happen overwhelmingly on takeoff or landing. As it turns out, glider students spend a greater percentage of their flight time in those two (statistically more dangerous) phases of flight. Very true, and there are a lot of other factors as well. 1) Gliders spend a significant amount of time flying in close proximity to tow planes and other gliders. Two people were just killed this past weekend in California in such an accident. Mid-air collisions are a bigger threat than they might be in powered aircraft. There's even a system called FLARM which was designed specifically to warn gliders of other gliders on a collision course. (Not yet available in the US due to our lawyerly nature, alas.) 2) A glider pilot's ideal day is very different from a power pilot's ideal day. A fantastic day with booming lift is not much different from a dangerous day where the winds are too dangerous, or thunderstorms will lurk. Activities like ridge running can put gliders in close proximity to terrain in strong turbulence for extended periods of time. 3) Many gliders are rigged by their pilots every day before flying. A mistake during rigging can be fatal. 4) Landing patterns must be adjusted to match conditions, because the pilot only has one shot at it and the amount of energy he has to land with is relatively small. If the pilot experiences strong sink, strong winds, or just arriving too low, he must have the mental flexibility to abandon a standard square pattern and do whatever it takes to get to the runway safely. Many will get stuck in their habitual pattern and it can be fatal when it doesn't work out. Of all of these, the only one that really happens *because* there's no engine, as opposed to simply being an aspect of a sport that's built on flying planes with no engines, is the last one. That one is not a substantial risk as long as you maintain the necessary mental flexibility in the pattern. #1 can be managed with smart procedures and equipment, although not eliminated. #2 is completely up to the individual pilot. Many people will stay home on a screaming ridge/wave day because it means strong turbulence and gusts at the airport, and they don't want to deal with it. I personally have substantially different standards for my own personal flying as compared to taking a passenger. #3, like so many things in aviation, can be mitigated with checklists, checklists, checklists. Is gliding more dangerous than regular powered flight? The stats seem to say so, and I won't disagree. However, I don't see the danger as being because there's no engine, as people sometimes ask me about, but rather other factors. -- Mike Ash Radio Free Earth Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 2, 9:32*am, "vaughn"
wrote: "Flaps_50!" wrote in message ... Seems like glider piloting is a problem (it can't be the iron fairy) or is there another cause? * Measuring accidents on the basis of flight hours does not necessarily give you the whole picture. * If you had ever spent much time at a glider training operation, you *would quickly see part of the difference between power training and glider training, and how the statistics can get skewed when you only look at flight hours. *Glider primary training flights tend to be so short that students traditionally count "flights" rather than "hours". *With gliders or airplanes, accidents happen overwhelmingly on takeoff or landing. * As it turns out, glider students spend a greater percentage of their flight time in those two (statistically more dangerous) phases of flight. I see. Thanks. About how many take off and landings does a student do before first solo? In a powered plane you do about 4 /flight hour in that phase (looking at my log book). My 3 hours solo consolidation logged 17 take off and landings. Is that very different to gliders? Cheers Cheers |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
check this... | billybeer | Owning | 0 | December 1st 04 01:28 AM |
Check it out | [email protected] | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | November 30th 04 09:35 PM |
Check it out! | [email protected] | Soaring | 1 | November 30th 04 01:21 AM |
Check this out! | [email protected] | Aerobatics | 0 | November 30th 04 12:58 AM |
check this out | Tony Verhulst | Soaring | 0 | February 27th 04 04:04 PM |