Parowan midair?

No information, but the thought of a 75 mile flight with 5 feet of
wing missing is not something I'd like to face.

-John

On Jun 16, 2:48 pm, Andy wrote:
SSA contest report indicates that 2 gliders made contact on the first
day. If the gliders are identified correctly then one continued to
win the day and the other returned to the airport missing part of one
wing and so far has no log posted.

Any more information available?

Andy.

On Jun 16, 12:02*pm, jcarlyle wrote:
No information, but the thought of a 75 mile flight with 5 feet of
wing missing is not something I'd like to face.

-John

On Jun 16, 2:48 pm, Andy wrote:



SSA contest report indicates that 2 gliders made contact on the first
day. *If the gliders are identified correctly then one continued to
win the day and the other returned to the airport missing part of one
wing and so far has no log posted.

Any more information available?

Andy.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What about completing a contest task, and winning it, with unknown
damage to the fuselage?

Andy

There's several words to describe that - "competitor" and "big brass
ones".

-John

On Jun 16, 3:08 pm, Andy wrote:
What about completing a contest task, and winning it, with unknown
damage to the fuselage?

Andy

On Jun 16, 12:34*pm, jcarlyle wrote:
There's several words to describe that - "competitor" and "big brass

Actually, I'd call it pretty irresponsible. That glider could, at any
moment have a system failure due to weakened structure. The only
smart response is to land IMMEDIATELY, and definitely avoid overflying
any people on the ground.

Just checked the rules, and there's nothing in there regarding a
pilot's responsibility after a collision.

But several years ago, at a national contest, there was some heated
debate at the mandatory meeting about what a pilot should do in such a
case. If I recall correctly, an immediate landing for inspection was
mandated, with one or two vocal "I'm here to WIN!!!" dissents.

Nothing bad happened this time. But what if someone had been hurt or
killed due to a system failure while the pilot continued to soar?
What would be reported in the media? What would the NTSB response be?

-Tom

On 6/16/2010 10:20 PM, 5Z wrote:
On Jun 16, 12:34 pm, wrote:
There's several words to describe that - "competitor" and "big brass

Actually, I'd call it pretty irresponsible. That glider could, at any
moment have a system failure due to weakened structure. The only
smart response is to land IMMEDIATELY, and definitely avoid overflying
any people on the ground.

Just checked the rules, and there's nothing in there regarding a
pilot's responsibility after a collision.

But several years ago, at a national contest, there was some heated
debate at the mandatory meeting about what a pilot should do in such a
case. If I recall correctly, an immediate landing for inspection was
mandated, with one or two vocal "I'm here to WIN!!!" dissents.

Nothing bad happened this time. But what if someone had been hurt or
killed due to a system failure while the pilot continued to soar?
What would be reported in the media? What would the NTSB response be?

-Tom
Not only was this irresponsible, but it was most likely a violation of
the FARs:

49CFR § 830.5 Immediate notification.
The operator of any civil aircraft, or
any public aircraft not operated by the
Armed Forces or an intelligence agency
of the United States, or any foreign
aircraft shall immediately, and by the
most expeditious means available, notify
the nearest National Transportation
Safety Board (Board) field office when:
(a) An aircraft accident or any of the
following listed incidents occur:
(1) Flight control system malfunction
or failure;
(2) Inability of any required flight
crewmember to perform normal flight
duties as a result of injury or illness;
(3) Failure of structural components
of a turbine engine excluding compressor
and turbine blades and vanes;
(4) In-flight fire; or
(5) Aircraft collide in flight.
(6) Damage to property, other than
the aircraft, estimated to exceed $25,000
for repair (including materials and
labor) or fair market value in the event
of total loss, whichever is less.
(7) For large multiengine aircraft
(more than 12,500 pounds maximum
certificated takeoff weight):
(i) In-flight failure of electrical systems
which requires the sustained use
of an emergency bus powered by a
back-up source such as a battery, auxiliary
power unit, or air-driven generator
to retain flight control or essential
instruments;
(ii) In-flight failure of hydraulic systems
that results in sustained reliance
on the sole remaining hydraulic or mechanical
system for movement of flight
control surfaces;
(iii) Sustained loss of the power or
thrust produced by two or more engines;
and
(iv) An evacuation of an aircraft in
which an emergency egress system is
utilized.
(b) An aircraft is overdue and is believed
to have been involved in an accident.

It is hard to see how you could meet the requirements of this section if
you 1st finish flying the contest.

--
Mike Schumann

Not only was this irresponsible, but it was most likely a violation of
the FARs:

49CFR § 830.5 Immediate notification.
The operator of any civil aircraft, or
any public aircraft not operated by the
Armed Forces or an intelligence agency
of the United States, or any foreign
aircraft shall immediately, and by the
most expeditious means available, notify
the nearest National Transportation
Safety Board (Board) field office when:
(a) An aircraft accident or any of the
following listed incidents occur:
[....]
(5) Aircraft collide in flight.
[....]
It is hard to see how you could meet the requirements of this section if
you 1st finish flying the contest.

By using your radio to ask your ground crew to phone the nearest NTSB
office? One could even argue that this IS the "most expeditious means
available."

B.

On 6/17/2010 2:22 PM, Bart wrote:
Not only was this irresponsible, but it was most likely a violation of
the FARs:

49CFR § 830.5 Immediate notification.
The operator of any civil aircraft, or
any public aircraft not operated by the
Armed Forces or an intelligence agency
of the United States, or any foreign
aircraft shall immediately, and by the
most expeditious means available, notify
the nearest National Transportation
Safety Board (Board) field office when:
(a) An aircraft accident or any of the
following listed incidents occur:
[....]
(5) Aircraft collide in flight.
[....]
It is hard to see how you could meet the requirements of this section if
you 1st finish flying the contest.

By using your radio to ask your ground crew to phone the nearest NTSB
office? One could even argue that this IS the "most expeditious means
available."

B.

B.

It will be interesting to see if that's what actually happened.

--
Mike Schumann

On 6/21/2010 8:32 PM, Stephen! wrote:
Mike wrote in news:ByoSn.73380
:

Not only was this irresponsible, but it was most likely a violation of
the FARs:

49CFR õ 830.5 Immediate notification.

What is the FAA's definition of "immediate"?


I think 49CFR830.5 is pretty clear. Logic would say that you are OK if
you are delayed because you are dealing with the accident, helping
victims, etc. I suspect that delaying the notification because you were
busy being interviewed by a TV reporter would probably be frowned on. A
delay caused by your desire to finish a race would probably rank
significantly lower than that.

Not to say that you might be able to get around the reporting problem if
you had someone else make the call for you while you were otherwise
distracted. You'd still have to deal with the issue of whether your
actions were reckless.

--
Mike Schumann

What is the FAA's definition of "immediate"?

It's the NTSB's rule, it would need to be their definition.

Jim

jcarlyle wrote:
There's several words to describe that - "competitor" and "big brass
ones".

-John

On Jun 16, 3:08 pm, Andy wrote:
What about completing a contest task, and winning it, with unknown
damage to the fuselage?

Andy


I imagine an accident investigator would have called it reckless operation.

Brian W