![]() |
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 Tuesday, June 26, 2012 1:21:13 AM UTC-5, Ramy wrote:
So I wouldn't consider those as true pilot errors, but as bad luck or outside cause, which happened to safe pilots. Ramy, I have to disagree a bit. We have remarkably few accidents that are due to mechanical failure out of the control of the pilot - the recent JS-1 rudder cable is apparently one of those. But just about every other glider accident we have seems to be the direct or indirect result of pilot error.. Direct in that the pilot intentionally does something stupid and breaks something. Indirect in that the pilot does something he doesn't know is stupid (due to poor training or lack of self-education) and breaks something. Midairs? Sure, it's hard to see another plane - but if we run into each other in a thermal - both pilots looking at the cu instead of clearing where they are going - is that bad luck, lazy lookout, or poor training? I think of myself as a safe, pilot (opinion not shared with some others, I fear). And I've done some really stupid things in gliders (only dinged one once, slightly). EVERY time I debriefed myself afterwards (as in, "YOU IDIOT, WTF WERE YOU THINKING!") it was pretty easy to see how I worked myself into the position to make a bad decision. That old chain of events is often glaringly obvious after the fact! My contribution to this safety thing? It's always pilot error. If the pilot hadn't flown the plane, there wouldn't have been an accident. So the pilot has to prepare himself to avoid situations that are dangerous, or if necessary, have the skill to get out of a dangerous situation. Expecting someone else to make you safe is NOT going to work. Kirk 66 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 4:45:38 AM UTC-7, kirk.stant wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 1:21:13 AM UTC-5, Ramy wrote: So I wouldn't consider those as true pilot errors, but as bad luck or outside cause, which happened to safe pilots. Ramy, I have to disagree a bit. We have remarkably few accidents that are due to mechanical failure out of the control of the pilot - the recent JS-1 rudder cable is apparently one of those. But just about every other glider accident we have seems to be the direct or indirect result of pilot error. Direct in that the pilot intentionally does something stupid and breaks something. Indirect in that the pilot does something he doesn't know is stupid (due to poor training or lack of self-education) and breaks something. Midairs? Sure, it's hard to see another plane - but if we run into each other in a thermal - both pilots looking at the cu instead of clearing where they are going - is that bad luck, lazy lookout, or poor training? I think of myself as a safe, pilot (opinion not shared with some others, I fear). And I've done some really stupid things in gliders (only dinged one once, slightly). EVERY time I debriefed myself afterwards (as in, "YOU IDIOT, WTF WERE YOU THINKING!") it was pretty easy to see how I worked myself into the position to make a bad decision. That old chain of events is often glaringly obvious after the fact! My contribution to this safety thing? It's always pilot error. If the pilot hadn't flown the plane, there wouldn't have been an accident. So the pilot has to prepare himself to avoid situations that are dangerous, or if necessary, have the skill to get out of a dangerous situation. Expecting someone else to make you safe is NOT going to work. Kirk 66 I think we all basically saying the same things. My main point was that to really be safer, we need to know better and understand better what kind of problems and mistakes can kill us and how. Will a forgotten tail dolly just embarrass us or can it kill us? What can go wrong if we put a toddler on our laps, should we bother wearing a parachute when not doing aerobatics or contests, etc. Those are just recent examples and perhaps obvious, but there were much less obvious causes. So the point is our poor job in analyzing accidents, sharing the results and finding solutions in a timely manner, rather than the all so lame reaction of "waiting for the NTSB report". This is perhaps the main thing we can do to try to improve our dismay safety record. Ramy |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 3:34:27 PM UTC-5, Ramy wrote:
I think we all basically saying the same things. My main point was that to really be safer, we need to know better and understand better what kind of problems and mistakes can kill us and how. Will a forgotten tail dolly just embarrass us or can it kill us? What can go wrong if we put a toddler on our laps, should we bother wearing a parachute when not doing aerobatics or contests, etc. Those are just recent examples and perhaps obvious, but there were much less obvious causes. So the point is our poor job in analyzing accidents, sharing the results and finding solutions in a timely manner, rather than the all so lame reaction of "waiting for the NTSB report". This is perhaps the main thing we can do to try to improve our dismay safety record. Ramy Ramy, analysing accidents after they happen is one source of information. But what we need to be doing better is analyzing potential accident scenarios before they happen, and getting a good idea of what can happen. To take your example of the tail dolly - the CG effect can be calculated, and the behaviour of the glider in question at aft CGs can be investigated, so that a good idea of what will happen if a tail dolly is left on can be developed. But there are other issues - the reduced angle of attack during the takeoff and landing roll due to the dolly wheel: longer takeoff roll? Tail first touchdown requiring a faster, flatter "wheel landing"? Loss of directional stability due to castering tailwheel and resulting groundloop if release during takeoff or at end of landing roll? The military and commercial aviation spent a lot of time developing emergency scenarios and practicing them in simulators (and in flight, by the way). I practice various contingencies in my glider - full spoiler landings, hard over rudder (yes mine will lock over, but easy to push back), bailout sequence, full flap spin entries, unusual attitude to spiral dive recoveries, etc. No-one tells me to do this - I do it because it is fun and keeps me sharper, I hope. Kirk |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PRN133 ranging now useable for SoL, at non precision approach level | macpacheco | Instrument Flight Rules | 18 | November 2nd 11 11:14 PM |
Galaxy XV / PRN 135 geo arrives at 133.1W, WAAS ranging back to 7.5meter UDRE | macpacheco | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | April 6th 11 07:17 PM |
USA / The Soaring Safety Foundation (SSF) Safety Seminars 2008 | [email protected] | Soaring | 0 | November 8th 07 11:15 PM |
NPR discussion on NAS | Neil Gould | Piloting | 9 | September 3rd 07 09:47 PM |
The Soaring Safety Foundation (SSF) Safety Seminars Hit The Road in the USA | [email protected] | Soaring | 0 | September 11th 06 03:48 AM |