Predestined to Die?

On May 21, 3:45*pm, "S. Murry" wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:13:26 -0500, Bill D wrote:
On May 21, 2:20 pm, "S. Murry" wrote:
I don't want to hijack the thread about Walter Mueller's 75 gliding
anniversary (GO, Walter!) by talk about an early death...seems a bit
morbid. *But I have to comment on Bob's statement:

snip
However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said
participant
a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why
that
thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...

Bob W.

end snip

I think I agree with your statement, Bob, insofar as if you have a
belief
that you are predestined to die in any particular way (whether gliding
or
otherwise), you are either suicidal (and have picked out your method of
ending it all), have some kind of strange religious belief (i.e. that
you
know that God is going to kill you in some particular way), or are
suffering from some other psychosis and probably shouldn't be soaring.

On the other hand, if you are in this sport and don't realize that it
may
very well be one of the most dangerous sports out there, I submit to you
that you are deceiving yourself. *Obviously, you are still far from
"predestined to die in a sailplane" (statistically speaking, but of
course
your *individual results may vary), but if you don't recognize the risks
involved you may be more likely to avoid taking the necessary safety
precautions to prevent these risks from growing beyond those that are
inherent in this sport. *For this reason, I think it is actually quite
healthy to have a feeling that strapping on your sailplane may very well
be the most dangerous thing you do today...I think about this pretty
much
every time I suit up, and I think it helps to keep me focused on safety.

--
Stefan Murry

I feel uncomfortable blackening the sport of soaring with the label
"dangerous" without some caveats. *It is certainly dangerous for some
pilots and not so much for others - the variable part is the pilot not
the sport. *If the statement is, "Since I have no intention of
becoming a skilled pilot, this sport is dangerous for me", then I
would agree.

The essential part of being a pilot is making something inherently
dangerous into something inherently safe through the application of
knowledge and skill acquired through training and diligence. *I happen
to know many, many pilots who have made the effort to become highly
skilled. *This has resulted in a long lifetime of safe flying. *I try
not to get to know the other kind.

Bill,

I think we're almost in agreement here. *But I disagree that the sport can
ever be made "inherently safe". *It's just not. *Even highly skilled
pilots sometimes come to grief (Helmut Reichmann comes immediately to
mind, and Chris O’Callaghan at the nationals in 2010). *It's not by
mistake that I picked two pilots killed in midairs, since this seems to me
to be about as far away from anything that is within the control of the
pilot as any accident cause short of catastrophic mechanical failure. *Of
course, by not taking all appropriate precautions (including training and
proficiency enhancement), it can be downright UNSAFE, so I agree with you
there.

The nit that I pick with your line of reasoning is that most pilots THINK
that they're safe and proficient (regardless of whether they actually
are), and if you subscribe to the belief that this somehow inoculates you
against dying in a glider then it is very easy to become cavalier. *The
way I look at it, the sport is inherently unsafe. *Everything we do (or
should be doing) as pilots is in an attempt to make this inherently unsafe
activity safer.

In the end, "safe" and "unsafe" are all relative terms, as you
acknowledge. *Certainly, soaring is probably safer than, say, skydiving
(at least that's my guess, I don't know it for sure), but it's probably
less safe than, say, tennis (at least if you define safety as the
probability of not causing death). *At least I don't know many people that
died playing tennis, but do know several that have died flying gliders.

I fly a lot (in an attempt to maintain proficiency), read all I can about
soaring, attend and present FAA Safety seminars, try to maintain my glider
in good mechanical condition, etc. *In more than 25 years of flying, I've
never had an accident. *But I don't have any illusion that this makes
gliding safe (in comparison to many other activities that I might choose
to pursue), only that it makes it SAFER than if I didn't do these things.

Let's be honest. *We fly gliders because it's a thrill, a challenge and
because it touches on some primal desire within us. *We believe that the
benefits that we obtain by partaking in this activity outweigh the chances
of dying while participating. *But I think we'll all agree that if the
only factor in choosing a leisure activity were the avoidance of danger,
gliding wouldn't be our choice. *We'd all be playing croquet or
shuffleboard. *Gliding is inherently unsafe, but we can mitigate this to a
great extent with caution and training.

--Stefan

--
Stefan Murry

Stefan, you paint with too broad a brush. All accidents are
regrettable but 99% of them can be traced to pilot error. We need to
keep our focus on the real problem - the pilots. Saying "Soaring is
dangerous" because "pilots THINK they're good" is mis-direction at
best.

Bad pilots who think they're good are idiots. Those who just don't
care are worse. Good pilots know they will make mistakes. They plan
for those mistakes with safety margins so they don't get hurt. They
fly for a lifetime without accidents.

The sport can be made safer than it is using technology like FLARM but
fix the pilot and fix the real problem.

BTW, I have known a couple of people who died playing tennis.

On May 21, 5:04*pm, Bill D wrote:
On May 21, 3:45*pm, "S. Murry" wrote:









On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:13:26 -0500, Bill D wrote:
On May 21, 2:20 pm, "S. Murry" wrote:
I don't want to hijack the thread about Walter Mueller's 75 gliding
anniversary (GO, Walter!) by talk about an early death...seems a bit
morbid. *But I have to comment on Bob's statement:

snip
However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said
participant
a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why
that
thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...

Bob W.

end snip

I think I agree with your statement, Bob, insofar as if you have a
belief
that you are predestined to die in any particular way (whether gliding
or
otherwise), you are either suicidal (and have picked out your method of
ending it all), have some kind of strange religious belief (i.e. that
you
know that God is going to kill you in some particular way), or are
suffering from some other psychosis and probably shouldn't be soaring.

On the other hand, if you are in this sport and don't realize that it
may
very well be one of the most dangerous sports out there, I submit to you
that you are deceiving yourself. *Obviously, you are still far from
"predestined to die in a sailplane" (statistically speaking, but of
course
your *individual results may vary), but if you don't recognize the risks
involved you may be more likely to avoid taking the necessary safety
precautions to prevent these risks from growing beyond those that are
inherent in this sport. *For this reason, I think it is actually quite
healthy to have a feeling that strapping on your sailplane may very well
be the most dangerous thing you do today...I think about this pretty
much
every time I suit up, and I think it helps to keep me focused on safety.

--
Stefan Murry

I feel uncomfortable blackening the sport of soaring with the label
"dangerous" without some caveats. *It is certainly dangerous for some
pilots and not so much for others - the variable part is the pilot not
the sport. *If the statement is, "Since I have no intention of
becoming a skilled pilot, this sport is dangerous for me", then I
would agree.

The essential part of being a pilot is making something inherently
dangerous into something inherently safe through the application of
knowledge and skill acquired through training and diligence. *I happen
to know many, many pilots who have made the effort to become highly
skilled. *This has resulted in a long lifetime of safe flying. *I try
not to get to know the other kind.

Bill,

I think we're almost in agreement here. *But I disagree that the sport can
ever be made "inherently safe". *It's just not. *Even highly skilled
pilots sometimes come to grief (Helmut Reichmann comes immediately to
mind, and Chris O’Callaghan at the nationals in 2010). *It's not by
mistake that I picked two pilots killed in midairs, since this seems to me
to be about as far away from anything that is within the control of the
pilot as any accident cause short of catastrophic mechanical failure. *Of
course, by not taking all appropriate precautions (including training and
proficiency enhancement), it can be downright UNSAFE, so I agree with you
there.

The nit that I pick with your line of reasoning is that most pilots THINK
that they're safe and proficient (regardless of whether they actually
are), and if you subscribe to the belief that this somehow inoculates you
against dying in a glider then it is very easy to become cavalier. *The
way I look at it, the sport is inherently unsafe. *Everything we do (or
should be doing) as pilots is in an attempt to make this inherently unsafe
activity safer.

In the end, "safe" and "unsafe" are all relative terms, as you
acknowledge. *Certainly, soaring is probably safer than, say, skydiving
(at least that's my guess, I don't know it for sure), but it's probably
less safe than, say, tennis (at least if you define safety as the
probability of not causing death). *At least I don't know many people that
died playing tennis, but do know several that have died flying gliders.

I fly a lot (in an attempt to maintain proficiency), read all I can about
soaring, attend and present FAA Safety seminars, try to maintain my glider
in good mechanical condition, etc. *In more than 25 years of flying, I've
never had an accident. *But I don't have any illusion that this makes
gliding safe (in comparison to many other activities that I might choose
to pursue), only that it makes it SAFER than if I didn't do these things.

Let's be honest. *We fly gliders because it's a thrill, a challenge and
because it touches on some primal desire within us. *We believe that the
benefits that we obtain by partaking in this activity outweigh the chances
of dying while participating. *But I think we'll all agree that if the
only factor in choosing a leisure activity were the avoidance of danger,
gliding wouldn't be our choice. *We'd all be playing croquet or
shuffleboard. *Gliding is inherently unsafe, but we can mitigate this to a
great extent with caution and training.

--Stefan

--
Stefan Murry

Stefan, you paint with too broad a brush. *All accidents are
regrettable but 99% of them can be traced to pilot error. *We need to
keep our focus on the real problem - the pilots. *Saying "Soaring is
dangerous" because "pilots THINK they're good" is mis-direction at
best.

Bad pilots who think they're good are idiots. *Those who just don't
care are worse. *Good pilots know they will make mistakes. *They plan
for those mistakes with safety margins so they don't get hurt. *They
fly for a lifetime without accidents.

The sport can be made safer than it is using technology like FLARM but
fix the pilot and fix the real problem.

BTW, I have known a couple of people who died playing tennis.

All this talk about good pilots, bad pilots, safe pilots etc has me
curious. It seems rather subjective to me actually. Would a bad pilot
and an un-safe pilot be the same? What about a pilot with only a few
hundred hours that flies only a few times before a contest and then
flies a particularly challenging event in a technical environment.
Would that pilot be safe? Would they be exhibiting good judgement,
would they be seen by their peers as a "seasoned" veteran? I suppose
this is a moot point until "example" pilot crashes and then the events
leading up to the crash are painfully reconstructed here on RAS. Or
perhaps said pilot beats the pants off of everybody and is then seen
as a stick and rudder prodigy, one to mentor and give advice to
aspiring pilots............all that stands between "hero-to-zero"
could be one simple mistake. And unfortunately it seems one simple
mistake erases the hundreds of good choices that are made during each
flight, figuratively and literally.

How and who are we to know everything about a pilot to come to such
conclusions. Yes, I have seen examples of truly bad piloting skills,
I've also seen high time pilots do very questionable things. But
because I judge them against what I would or would not do, does that
indeed give me the imprimatur to judge them?

Like most posting to this topic, I think about the risks and the
possible outcomes of my flying decisions every time I fly. I am loath
to do something that will break my glider or my body, I do not want to
sit on the sidelines while my glider is being repaired, or worse yet
find myself out of the sport due to busted body and glider. Is it
possible that someone at my glider port might consider me "unsafe" or
a "bad" pilot? I suppose so.................but again, what behavior
or actions would they cite to make that claim? and would that claim be
supported by the gliding community? I submit that the pilots Peers and
the Gliding community are not mutually exclusive; there may be
crossovers, but not 100% continuity.

We're all now just a bad landing or a turn into the hill away from
being a "statistic" here on RAS. Who will be the next topic of "Crunch
Alert"? and more to the point, what will it change in anyone's
behavior?

Brad

On 5/21/2012 7:03 PM, Brad wrote:

Major snip...


We're all now just a bad landing or a turn into the hill away from
being a "statistic" here on RAS. Who will be the next topic of "Crunch
Alert"? and more to the point, what will it change in anyone's
behavior?

"{W]hat will it change in anyone's behavior?" is - to my way of thinking - the
sixty-four-thousand dollar question.

I'm inclined to think that if discussions as these - and the personal thought
that presumably is a part - does NOT change an individual's future behavior
(because it changes their outlook/thinking which in turn has power to alter
behavior), then so be it...but I'd ask a following question: Why not?

It's a serious question. A valid answer - in my mind - for NOT changing one's
outlook/behavior is the person is already "in the right place" mentally.
That's a great thing! (I like to think I got myself there regarding
inadvertent departures from controlled flight some time back in the 1980's,
for example.) Actually, that's the ONLY valid answer I've ever been able to
conjure up.

If there's anyone out there who seriously thinks differently, it certainly
seems a great topic for discussion!

Bob W.

On May 21, 11:03*pm, BobW wrote:
On 5/21/2012 7:03 PM, Brad wrote:

Major snip...



We're all now just a bad landing or a turn into the hill away from
being a "statistic" here on RAS. Who will be the next topic of "Crunch
Alert"? and more to the point, what will it change in anyone's
behavior?

"{W]hat will it change in anyone's behavior?" is - to my way of thinking - the
sixty-four-thousand dollar question.

I'm inclined to think that if discussions as these - and the personal thought
that presumably is a part - does NOT change an individual's future behavior
(because it changes their outlook/thinking which in turn has power to alter
behavior), then so be it...but I'd ask a following question: Why not?

It's a serious question. A valid answer - in my mind - for NOT changing one's
outlook/behavior is the person is already "in the right place" mentally.
That's a great thing! (I like to think I got myself there regarding
inadvertent departures from controlled flight some time back in the 1980's,
for example.) Actually, that's the ONLY valid answer I've ever been able to
conjure up.

If there's anyone out there who seriously thinks differently, it certainly
seems a great topic for discussion!

Bob W.

I'm going to ruin the continuity of this discussion to go in a
slightly different direction. This is how I see it. I always look at
the big picture first, then work backward. Prioritize safety by
looking at the accident statistics, and figure out how you will
mitigate the most prevalent dangers first. Then so on, down the
line. We are like one child growing up. How can we keep repeating
the same mistakes that seem so obvious? How can we not learn from
them, correct behavior and move to a higher level? Lazy, complacent,
unenlightened to the dangers?

I'm fairly new to soaring, and I'm very engaged. I read a lot, study a
lot, practice on a sim, follow RAS, watch OLC, read accident
statistics, read a lot about general aviation safety issues and human
factors. I'm very excited about venturing out on cross countries.
I'm sort of mystified at the low percentage of our club members that
seem to be engaged to my level. Very few seem interested in silver
badges and up. Hardly anyone has an iPaq or uses the club flight
recorder, knows about IGC files, tasks and such.

Maybe there is something to be said for the French method of continued
education. Maybe there is a sub set of pilots that tend to shut down
after getting their ticket.

Sorry for the disorganized rambling. ...Aaron

No one seems interested in this topic, but it seems to me that
competition flying increases risk substantially. From the outside
lookin in, it honestly looks pretty scary.

On May 22, 7:38*pm, akiley wrote:
On May 21, 11:03*pm, BobW wrote:









On 5/21/2012 7:03 PM, Brad wrote:

Major snip...

We're all now just a bad landing or a turn into the hill away from
being a "statistic" here on RAS. Who will be the next topic of "Crunch
Alert"? and more to the point, what will it change in anyone's
behavior?

"{W]hat will it change in anyone's behavior?" is - to my way of thinking - the
sixty-four-thousand dollar question.

I'm inclined to think that if discussions as these - and the personal thought
that presumably is a part - does NOT change an individual's future behavior
(because it changes their outlook/thinking which in turn has power to alter
behavior), then so be it...but I'd ask a following question: Why not?

It's a serious question. A valid answer - in my mind - for NOT changing one's
outlook/behavior is the person is already "in the right place" mentally..
That's a great thing! (I like to think I got myself there regarding
inadvertent departures from controlled flight some time back in the 1980's,
for example.) Actually, that's the ONLY valid answer I've ever been able to
conjure up.

If there's anyone out there who seriously thinks differently, it certainly
seems a great topic for discussion!

Bob W.

I'm going to ruin the continuity of this discussion to go in a
slightly different direction. *This is how I see it. *I always look at
the big picture first, then work backward. *Prioritize safety by
looking at the accident statistics, and figure out how you will
mitigate the most prevalent dangers first. *Then so on, down the
line. *We are like one child growing up. *How can we keep repeating
the same mistakes that seem so obvious? How can we not learn from
them, correct behavior and move to a higher level? *Lazy, complacent,
unenlightened to the dangers?

I'm fairly new to soaring, and I'm very engaged. I read a lot, study a
lot, practice on a sim, follow RAS, watch OLC, read accident
statistics, read a lot about general aviation safety issues and human
factors. * I'm very excited about venturing out on cross countries.
I'm sort of mystified at the low percentage of our club members that
seem to be engaged to my level. *Very few seem interested in silver
badges and up. *Hardly anyone has an iPaq or uses the club flight
recorder, knows about IGC files, tasks and such.

Maybe there is something to be said for the French method of continued
education. *Maybe there is a sub set of pilots that tend to shut down
after getting their ticket.

Sorry for the disorganized rambling. * ...Aaron

No one seems interested in this topic, but it seems to me that
competition flying increases risk substantially. *From the outside
lookin in, it honestly looks pretty scary.

Aaron, keep that attitude, stay engaged, and I predict a long an happy
flying career.

In all flying - you get the opportunity to set your own risk thresholds.

So - from the outside racing may look dangerous.
From the inside it sometimes looks/is dangerous.

The question is - what do you DO.

I am not particularly serious racing pilot - but have competed in a few
regional contests. My observation is that - things that people do
regularly, and without injury or harm may appear dangerous to the
uninitiated or uninformed. Once you have developed the skill and
experience - one has a more objective view of the risk. Some things are
inherently more dangerous, but in general a well informed and skilled
racing flight is seldom deliberately dangerous. It is hard to win a
contest with a broken glider. So - Racing certainly raises your skill
level, if you do it right. It will also lower your risk of injury etc.
by exposing you to an intense learning environment, some of the best
pilots and lots of motivation to push your own skills development.

What better environment for developing XC skills - there is a competent
daily weather forecast, task planning for the best use if the
conditions, retrieve and Search and Rescue is laid on and alert. Lots of
willing help if you land out. Objective information on how good your
decisions are in comparison to the other pilots.

There is nothing to compare with seeing a task on the briefing board
that is a full 50% further than you have ever flown XC, and completing
it safely... Conversely, watching a world champion go past 500 feet
above you when you thought you had a safe final glide is a learning
experience too. (I will give you a clue - it was not him who outlanded
4km short)

Sure - it may take a while before you and the rest of the gaggle is
comfortable. But it is not intrinsically dangerous. If everyone is
flying proficiently there is no higher risk than the twirly birding over
the field on a lazy afternoon.



--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771

On 5/22/2012 9:36 PM, Bill D wrote:
On May 22, 7:38 pm, wrote:

Major snip...

I'm going to ruin the continuity of this discussion to go in a
slightly different direction. This is how I see it. I always look at
the big picture first, then work backward. Prioritize safety by
looking at the accident statistics, and figure out how you will
mitigate the most prevalent dangers first. Then so on, down the
line. We are like one child growing up. How can we keep repeating
the same mistakes that seem so obvious? How can we not learn from
them, correct behavior and move to a higher level? Lazy, complacent,
unenlightened to the dangers?

I'm fairly new to soaring, and I'm very engaged. I read a lot, study a
lot, practice on a sim, follow RAS, watch OLC, read accident
statistics, read a lot about general aviation safety issues and human
factors. I'm very excited about venturing out on cross countries.
I'm sort of mystified at the low percentage of our club members that
seem to be engaged to my level. Very few seem interested in silver
badges and up. Hardly anyone has an iPaq or uses the club flight
recorder, knows about IGC files, tasks and such.

Maybe there is something to be said for the French method of continued
education. Maybe there is a sub set of pilots that tend to shut down
after getting their ticket.

Sorry for the disorganized rambling. ...Aaron

Snip...


Aaron, keep that attitude, stay engaged, and I predict a long and happy
flying career.

"What Bill said."

Bob W.

On May 21, 7:03*pm, Brad wrote:
On May 21, 5:04*pm, Bill D wrote:









On May 21, 3:45*pm, "S. Murry" wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:13:26 -0500, Bill D wrote:
On May 21, 2:20 pm, "S. Murry" wrote:
I don't want to hijack the thread about Walter Mueller's 75 gliding
anniversary (GO, Walter!) by talk about an early death...seems a bit
morbid. *But I have to comment on Bob's statement:

snip
However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said
participant
a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why
that
thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...

Bob W.

end snip

I think I agree with your statement, Bob, insofar as if you have a
belief
that you are predestined to die in any particular way (whether gliding
or
otherwise), you are either suicidal (and have picked out your method of
ending it all), have some kind of strange religious belief (i.e. that
you
know that God is going to kill you in some particular way), or are
suffering from some other psychosis and probably shouldn't be soaring.

On the other hand, if you are in this sport and don't realize that it
may
very well be one of the most dangerous sports out there, I submit to you
that you are deceiving yourself. *Obviously, you are still far from
"predestined to die in a sailplane" (statistically speaking, but of
course
your *individual results may vary), but if you don't recognize the risks
involved you may be more likely to avoid taking the necessary safety
precautions to prevent these risks from growing beyond those that are
inherent in this sport. *For this reason, I think it is actually quite
healthy to have a feeling that strapping on your sailplane may very well
be the most dangerous thing you do today...I think about this pretty
much
every time I suit up, and I think it helps to keep me focused on safety.

--
Stefan Murry

I feel uncomfortable blackening the sport of soaring with the label
"dangerous" without some caveats. *It is certainly dangerous for some
pilots and not so much for others - the variable part is the pilot not
the sport. *If the statement is, "Since I have no intention of
becoming a skilled pilot, this sport is dangerous for me", then I
would agree.

The essential part of being a pilot is making something inherently
dangerous into something inherently safe through the application of
knowledge and skill acquired through training and diligence. *I happen
to know many, many pilots who have made the effort to become highly
skilled. *This has resulted in a long lifetime of safe flying. *I try
not to get to know the other kind.

Bill,

I think we're almost in agreement here. *But I disagree that the sport can
ever be made "inherently safe". *It's just not. *Even highly skilled
pilots sometimes come to grief (Helmut Reichmann comes immediately to
mind, and Chris O’Callaghan at the nationals in 2010). *It's not by
mistake that I picked two pilots killed in midairs, since this seems to me
to be about as far away from anything that is within the control of the
pilot as any accident cause short of catastrophic mechanical failure. *Of
course, by not taking all appropriate precautions (including training and
proficiency enhancement), it can be downright UNSAFE, so I agree with you
there.

The nit that I pick with your line of reasoning is that most pilots THINK
that they're safe and proficient (regardless of whether they actually
are), and if you subscribe to the belief that this somehow inoculates you
against dying in a glider then it is very easy to become cavalier. *The
way I look at it, the sport is inherently unsafe. *Everything we do (or
should be doing) as pilots is in an attempt to make this inherently unsafe
activity safer.

In the end, "safe" and "unsafe" are all relative terms, as you
acknowledge. *Certainly, soaring is probably safer than, say, skydiving
(at least that's my guess, I don't know it for sure), but it's probably
less safe than, say, tennis (at least if you define safety as the
probability of not causing death). *At least I don't know many people that
died playing tennis, but do know several that have died flying gliders.

I fly a lot (in an attempt to maintain proficiency), read all I can about
soaring, attend and present FAA Safety seminars, try to maintain my glider
in good mechanical condition, etc. *In more than 25 years of flying, I've
never had an accident. *But I don't have any illusion that this makes
gliding safe (in comparison to many other activities that I might choose
to pursue), only that it makes it SAFER than if I didn't do these things.

Let's be honest. *We fly gliders because it's a thrill, a challenge and
because it touches on some primal desire within us. *We believe that the
benefits that we obtain by partaking in this activity outweigh the chances
of dying while participating. *But I think we'll all agree that if the
only factor in choosing a leisure activity were the avoidance of danger,
gliding wouldn't be our choice. *We'd all be playing croquet or
shuffleboard. *Gliding is inherently unsafe, but we can mitigate this to a
great extent with caution and training.

--Stefan

--
Stefan Murry

Stefan, you paint with too broad a brush. *All accidents are
regrettable but 99% of them can be traced to pilot error. *We need to
keep our focus on the real problem - the pilots. *Saying "Soaring is
dangerous" because "pilots THINK they're good" is mis-direction at
best.

Bad pilots who think they're good are idiots. *Those who just don't
care are worse. *Good pilots know they will make mistakes. *They plan
for those mistakes with safety margins so they don't get hurt. *They
fly for a lifetime without accidents.

The sport can be made safer than it is using technology like FLARM but
fix the pilot and fix the real problem.

BTW, I have known a couple of people who died playing tennis.

All this talk about good pilots, bad pilots, safe pilots etc has me
curious. It seems rather subjective to me actually. Would a bad pilot
and an un-safe pilot be the same? What about a pilot with only a few
hundred hours that flies only a few times before a contest and then
flies a particularly challenging event in a technical environment.
Would that pilot be safe? Would they be exhibiting good judgement,
would they be seen by their peers as a "seasoned" veteran? I suppose
this is a moot point until "example" pilot crashes and then the events
leading up to the crash are painfully reconstructed here on RAS. Or
perhaps said pilot beats the pants off of everybody and is then seen
as a stick and rudder prodigy, one to mentor and give advice to
aspiring pilots............all that stands between "hero-to-zero"
could be one simple mistake. And unfortunately it seems one simple
mistake erases the hundreds of good choices that are made during each
flight, figuratively and literally.

How and who are we to know everything about a pilot to come to such
conclusions. Yes, I have seen examples of truly bad piloting skills,
I've also seen high time pilots do very questionable things. But
because I judge them against what I would or would not do, does that
indeed give me the imprimatur to judge them?

Like most posting to this topic, I think about the risks and the
possible outcomes of my flying decisions every time I fly. I am loath
to do something that will break my glider or my body, I do not want to
sit on the sidelines while my glider is being repaired, or worse yet
find myself out of the sport due to busted body and glider. Is it
possible that someone at my glider port might consider me "unsafe" or
a "bad" pilot? I suppose so.................but again, what behavior
or actions would they cite to make that claim? and would that claim be
supported by the gliding community? I submit that the pilots Peers and
the Gliding community are not mutually exclusive; there may be
crossovers, but not 100% continuity.

We're all now just a bad landing or a turn into the hill away from
being a "statistic" here on RAS. Who will be the next topic of "Crunch
Alert"? and more to the point, what will it change in anyone's
behavior?

Brad

There are a lot of things to discuss in Brad's post. Obviously,
pilots come in many skill and experience levels but all can fly
safely. The key is mature judgement - knowing when an action will put
the pilot "in over his head". It has been said gliding is like chess
- you have to think several moves ahead.

One of the key steps in making good judgements is the questions asked
of oneself before committing, "What if this doesn't work?" and "What
if it does?" The answers are different for pilots with different
experience and skills and each answer can lead to an altered plan of
action. If the questions aren't asked or there are no answers, the
pilot is in over his head.

The turn into a ridge is an example. Once committed to the turn,
there are few options other than hitting the ridge if it doesn't
work. Given it's a near certain crash if it doesn't work, some extra
safety margin is in order. One of mine is to never do a 360 in a
suspected thermal on a ridge until well above the top - high enough to
dive to the upwind side 'if it doesn't work'.

There's a story of a pilot who tried to cross Point Loma flying south
from the Torry Pines ridge and succeeding - then finding himself over
San Diego Bay with no where to land. He had a plan if the crossing
didn't work but was clueless if it did.