Wide-ranging Safety Discussion...?

On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 4:05:48 PM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:54:09 PM UTC-4, soartech wrote:
So the next issue of Soaring magazine will come off the press without
a single word about this horrible accident... like it never happened!!

The way it works over time is this: 1)you get hooked on the sport, 2)you become vaguely aware that it's dangerous and that you need to be careful, 3)you come to terms with the fact that it can kill you. 4)A friend or acquaintance gets killed or maimed.

Think about it. If the first thing you learned about soaring was that it can kill you, what would happen? You'd probably plow your thousands of dollars into some really nifty RC model gliders. My copy of Soaring goes to my local library. Maybe somebody will pick it up and take up soaring. Don't list the departed souls.

Soaring Magazine has a lot in it every month about the hazards of soaring, but it's almost always hypothetical. A simple tally sheet of crashes and injuries would drive the point home without anyone getting sued. But the SSA chooses to not do that. Why? It's a glaring omission. THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. When you suggest that there is something wrong with this picture, you get a knee-jerk reaction. Wierd.

Someone tell me why there is never a tally of accidents in Soaring Magazine.

Good points, although there used to be a regular accident column written by Thelen until few years ago. Since then there is an occasional accident report.
But indeed many of us picked up soaring since we were told that it is safer than driving to the airport. By the time we realized the truth, we were already hooked. I would probably still flying hang gliders today if I knew back then that sailplanes are more dangerous. But I have no regrets. I understand the risks and willing to take them to be able to enjoy this amazing sport. But I am sure that most new pilots and ride passengers do not understand the risks.

Ramy

On Jun 26, 5:27*pm, Ramy wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 4:05:48 PM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:54:09 PM UTC-4, soartech wrote:
So the next issue of Soaring magazine will come off the press without
a single word about this horrible accident... like it never happened!!

The way it works over time is this: 1)you get hooked on the sport, 2)you become vaguely aware that it's dangerous and that you need to be careful, 3)you come to terms with the fact that it can kill you. *4)A friend or acquaintance gets killed or maimed.

Think about it. *If the first thing you learned about soaring was that it can kill you, what would happen? *You'd probably plow your thousands of dollars into some really nifty RC model gliders. *My copy of Soaring goes to my local library. *Maybe somebody will pick it up and take up soaring. *Don't list the departed souls.

Soaring Magazine has a lot in it every month about the hazards of soaring, but it's almost always hypothetical. *A simple tally sheet of crashes and injuries would drive the point home without anyone getting sued. *But the SSA chooses to not do that. *Why? It's a glaring omission. *THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. *When you suggest that there is something wrong with this picture, you get a knee-jerk reaction. Wierd.

Someone tell me why there is never a tally of accidents in Soaring Magazine.

Good points, although there used to be a regular accident column written by Thelen until few years ago. Since then there is an occasional accident report.
But indeed many of us picked up soaring since we were told that it is safer than driving to the airport. By the time we realized the truth, we were already hooked. I would probably still flying hang gliders today if I knew back then that sailplanes are more dangerous. But I have no regrets. I understand the risks and willing to take them to be able to enjoy this amazing sport. But I am sure that most new pilots and ride passengers do not understand the risks.

Ramy

It really sounds if you want someone else to look out for you. It
isn't going to happen - you're on your own. If you can't deal with
that, maybe RC gliders are better for you.

Gliders rarely hurt anyone. Pilots, on the other hand, have hurt
many, many gliders. Saying "soaring is dangerous" is nonsense -
dangerous nonsense. It detracts from careless and unprepared pilots
who ARE dangerous. 99.9 % of the time, one millisecond before impact,
it was a perfectly airworthy glider. The glider didn't put itself in
that position, the pilot did.

If you are going to get hurt, there's a 99.9% chance it will be your
fault. Don't blame soaring for that.

There's a wonderful old WWII era saying that goes, "The 99% of air
crashes are caused by a LOOSE NUT ON THE CONTROL STICK meaning the
pilot. Even then, pilots were the weak link.

Do new pilots understand this? They damn well better. It's part of
their basic training.

Agh, I give up. Every attempt to try to say something about the need for better safety culture will encounter resistant from those who claim there is nothing wrong with the system and the only problem is the pilots. I guess this is their way of convincing themselves they safe since they will never do such mistakes themselves.
Good luck.

Ramy ( who does NOT need anyone to look after him)

On Jun 26, 9:11*pm, Ramy wrote:
Agh, I give up. Every attempt to try to say something about the need for better safety culture will encounter resistant from those who claim there is nothing wrong with the system and the only problem is the pilots. I guess this is their way of convincing themselves they safe since they will never do such mistakes themselves.
Good luck.

Ramy ( who does NOT need anyone to look after him)

One group of pilots here in the US believe that they are sufficiently
trained to avoid making the stupid errors that cause others to end up
in the accident reports. Any pilot who makes this sort of error and
crashes, obviously did not have the skills necessary to be safe in
this sport. A rigorous training regimen, taught only by elite
instructors, will provide training to levels sufficient to address all
possible circumstances encountered during soaring flight. This will
result in soaring being safer than any other form of aviation, at
least for the 100 or so pilots left.

A second group of pilots likely remember times when they were lucky to
recover from situations in which their skill and experience levels
were nearly overwhelmed. Say, things that sometimes happened at the
ends of long days of flying, perhaps aided by a bit of dehydration or
hypoxia, a bit distracted by encountering something unexpected, or
just a touch of complacency because they have final glide nailed. Add
a momentary lapse of situational awareness, missing the clue that
suggests things aren't going to work out quite as expected, etc., and
suddenly one is staring into the abyss. A greater willingness in the
community to talk honestly talk about mistakes that they and others
make, would lead to increased levels of safety. There is always going
to be some amount of risk, as humans are not perfect.

The obvious solution, of course, is for the pilots in the first group
to convince the pilots in the second group to retire from soaring ;^)

Marc

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 23:56:22 -0700 (PDT), Marc
wrote:

One group of pilots here in the US believe that they are sufficiently
trained to avoid making the stupid errors[.....]
result in soaring being safer than any other form of aviation, at
least for the 100 or so pilots left.
[...]
The obvious solution, of course, is for the pilots in the first group
to convince the pilots in the second group to retire from soaring ;^)


Occasionally, also some of the most experienced and safest pilots
(based on a long, immaculate safety record), crash.
Too much confidence, too small safety margins (margins? doh!), or just
a plain, simple lapse of the moment.
This can happen to anyone, and that's when we need margins. Most
probably, we will not be grateful to those safety margins, as we won't
recognize they saved us on that occasion.

aldo cernezzi

On 6/27/2012 12:56 AM, Marc wrote:
On Jun 26, 9:11 pm, Ramy wrote:
Agh, I give up. Every attempt to try to say something about the need for
better safety culture will encounter resistant from those who claim there
is nothing wrong with the system and the only problem is the pilots. I
guess this is their way of convincing themselves they safe since they
will never do such mistakes themselves. Good luck.

Ramy ( who does NOT need anyone to look after him)

One group of pilots here in the US believe that they are sufficiently
trained to avoid making the stupid errors that cause others to end up in
the accident reports. Any pilot who makes this sort of error and crashes,
obviously did not have the skills necessary to be safe in this sport. A
rigorous training regimen, taught only by elite instructors, will provide
training to levels sufficient to address all possible circumstances
encountered during soaring flight. This will result in soaring being safer
than any other form of aviation, at least for the 100 or so pilots left.

A second group of pilots likely remember times when they were lucky to
recover from situations in which their skill and experience levels were
nearly overwhelmed. Say, things that sometimes happened at the ends of
long days of flying, perhaps aided by a bit of dehydration or hypoxia, a
bit distracted by encountering something unexpected, or just a touch of
complacency because they have final glide nailed. Add a momentary lapse of
situational awareness, missing the clue that suggests things aren't going
to work out quite as expected, etc., and suddenly one is staring into the
abyss. A greater willingness in the community to talk honestly talk about
mistakes that they and others make, would lead to increased levels of
safety. There is always going to be some amount of risk, as humans are not
perfect.

The obvious solution, of course, is for the pilots in the first group to
convince the pilots in the second group to retire from soaring ;^)

Marc


Great discussion! (Yeah, I know - as the one who started this thread - I can
be accused of 'priming the pump' or 'self promotion' or something else
disparaging, but I don't care.)
- - - - - -

Ramy - I think I can understand "where you're coming from" insofar as wanting
to see "a better safety culture" within our amazing sport. Brad's observations
seem to me to bear out the - not universal, to be sure, but IMHO undoubtedly
real - need.

I also think I understand where Bill D. and Kirk are coming from, which is to
say (without intending to put words in their mouths) both seem to me to be
opining from the perspective of people who've already concluded "it's obvious
Joe PIC is the fundamental problem (a perspective with which I agree)...(and
by implication,) hasn't everyone else already concluded the same?" Clearly
that latter can never be the case, as provable to every reader who can
remember their original ignorance about flying and safety.

IOW, in this thread-to-date I haven't detected a fundamental disagreement as
to individual attitudes toward "the heart of piloting safety" so much as I
sense (unsurprising) differences in assessments of what might "best be done to
improve soaring's safety stats."

FWIW, I always encourage everyone who feels strongly about something to do
their best to change/improve things. My rationale is the effort might in time
prove to have zero effect, but if no effort is put out at all, then you're
*guaranteed* of having no effect. Shoot, this very thread reflects application
of my rationale! :-)
- - - - - -

Marc - Chortle! Pretty darned accurate simplification, methinks.
- - - - - -

Everyone - thanks for chiming in! Any silent fence-sitters? Please!! Share
your thoughts, too.

Bob W.

On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 11:11:29 PM UTC-5, Ramy wrote:
Agh, I give up. Every attempt to try to say something about the need for better safety culture will encounter resistant from those who claim there is nothing wrong with the system and the only problem is the pilots. I guess this is their way of convincing themselves they safe since they will never do such mistakes themselves.
Good luck.

Ramy ( who does NOT need anyone to look after him)

Then what are you asking for? There is a LOT of safety information and training available. Many old, experienced pilots still around. Good instructors.

What culture would you impose? How would you enforce it?

The only group in soaring that really enforces a safety culture is, oddly enough, the racing community - parachutes, ELTs, radios, FLARM, skill requirements, training camps, etc. - If the rest of the soaring community had the same requirements, it might improve safety.

Or not.

Bottom line. Our gliders are incredibly safe. Pilots are not. Our initial and recurrent training system is minimal, and requires individual commitment to learn and practice safe soaring.

If you know how to fix that - please let us know! It gets old having to lie about how safe our sport really is!

Meanwhile, I'm not waiting for someone else to make me safer. I'll do that myself, thankyou.

Kirk
66

On Jun 26, 4:05*pm, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:54:09 PM UTC-4, soartech wrote:
So the next issue of Soaring magazine will come off the press without
a single word about this horrible accident... like it never happened!!

The way it works over time is this: 1)you get hooked on the sport, 2)you become vaguely aware that it's dangerous and that you need to be careful, 3)you come to terms with the fact that it can kill you. *4)A friend or acquaintance gets killed or maimed.

Think about it. *If the first thing you learned about soaring was that it can kill you, what would happen? *You'd probably plow your thousands of dollars into some really nifty RC model gliders. *My copy of Soaring goes to my local library. *Maybe somebody will pick it up and take up soaring. *Don't list the departed souls.

Soaring Magazine has a lot in it every month about the hazards of soaring, but it's almost always hypothetical. *A simple tally sheet of crashes and injuries would drive the point home without anyone getting sued. *But the SSA chooses to not do that. *Why? It's a glaring omission. *THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. *When you suggest that there is something wrong with this picture, you get a knee-jerk reaction. Wierd.

Someone tell me why there is never a tally of accidents in Soaring Magazine.

When we had 2 of our club members collided in a mid-air the result was
finger pointing at the pilots (non-CFIG) who mentored them. It was
intimated that they were not ready for this kind of activity and that
those of us that actively flew in the mountains were somehow
responsible for encouraging them to do something they were not "ready"
for. Ironically some of those who criticized the most were the ones
who never left the vicinity of the airport, unless they were flying a
motorglider.

Another club member spun his motorglider into an unfamiliar field. He
was a low time pilot in a brand new ship with less than 20 hours on
it............he felt the need to try flying a "new" site, took a
check ride in that clubs Blanik (a sailplane he was very familiar
with) and did a great job. After soaring his TST-Atlas for several
hours he came back, did a Blanik approach in a 40:1 ship, realized at
mid-field he was to high and tried to do either a 360 or a 180, we'll
never know because he spun it in and killed himself.

Last year one of our CFIG's died during the filming of the "Cadillac"
commercial. There was a "list" of incidents that took place that made
it out thru the gossip channels that raised some eyebrows. None of
that was shared publicly (as far as I know) and none was shared within
the clubs official channels.

I'm pretty sure that some open, honest and heartfelt discussions about
all these accidents could have really benefited our club. Instead all
that was mentioned was how great these pilots all were, how careful
they were and how they had tons of experience....................which
was seen as somewhat ironic by those of us that personally knew them.

This is the culture we need to change.

Brad

On 6/26/2012 5:39 PM, Brad wrote:
On Jun 26, 4:05 pm, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:54:09 PM UTC-4, soartech wrote:
So the next issue of Soaring magazine will come off the press without a
single word about this horrible accident... like it never happened!!

The way it works over time is this: 1)you get hooked on the sport, 2)you
become vaguely aware that it's dangerous and that you need to be careful,
3)you come to terms with the fact that it can kill you. 4)A friend or
acquaintance gets killed or maimed.

Think about it. If the first thing you learned about soaring was that it
can kill you, what would happen? You'd probably plow your thousands of
dollars into some really nifty RC model gliders. My copy of Soaring goes
to my local library. Maybe somebody will pick it up and take up soaring.
Don't list the departed souls.

Soaring Magazine has a lot in it every month about the hazards of
soaring, but it's almost always hypothetical. A simple tally sheet of
crashes and injuries would drive the point home without anyone getting
sued. But the SSA chooses to not do that. Why? It's a glaring omission.
THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. When you suggest that there is something
wrong with this picture, you get a knee-jerk reaction. Wierd.

Someone tell me why there is never a tally of accidents in Soaring
Magazine.

When we had 2 of our club members collided in a mid-air the result was
finger pointing at the pilots (non-CFIG) who mentored them. It was
intimated that they were not ready for this kind of activity and that those
of us that actively flew in the mountains were somehow responsible for
encouraging them to do something they were not "ready" for. Ironically some
of those who criticized the most were the ones who never left the vicinity
of the airport, unless they were flying a motorglider.

Another club member spun his motorglider into an unfamiliar field. He was a
low time pilot in a brand new ship with less than 20 hours on
it............he felt the need to try flying a "new" site, took a check
ride in that clubs Blanik (a sailplane he was very familiar with) and did a
great job. After soaring his TST-Atlas for several hours he came back, did
a Blanik approach in a 40:1 ship, realized at mid-field he was to high and
tried to do either a 360 or a 180, we'll never know because he spun it in
and killed himself.

Last year one of our CFIG's died during the filming of the "Cadillac"
commercial. There was a "list" of incidents that took place that made it
out thru the gossip channels that raised some eyebrows. None of that was
shared publicly (as far as I know) and none was shared within the clubs
official channels.

I'm pretty sure that some open, honest and heartfelt discussions about all
these accidents could have really benefited our club. Instead all that was
mentioned was how great these pilots all were, how careful they were and
how they had tons of experience....................which was seen as
somewhat ironic by those of us that personally knew them.

This is the culture we need to change.

Brad

"What Brad said!!!" Certain micro-cultures are "obviously sub-optimum."

I've been a member of the same soaring club for 20+ years, and varyingly
intimately familiar with it for over 36 years. In that time I've watched its
"personality" (culture, if you will) evolve. Historically, my club's
personality change has occurred slowly over time...except when
(safety-related) issues arose which simply could not be ignored. I can recall
at least twice when (poor/ugly) safety-related issues "forced
introspection/change". Actually, all it "forced" was "cheap talk", but a
topical part of the cheap talk quickly became the need (or not) for cultural
change.

In neither case was the club seriously at risk of folding...but in both cases
it was a painful, protracted (in the pain sense) yet brief (in the objective
passage of time sense), process that resulted in years' long "cultural change"
that benefited the club and arguably prevented it from continuing to add
incidents/accidents to national stats. In any event, the club's stats clearly
reflected a before-change/after-change effect, when measured over multi-year
periods.

The second instance's effects still appear to be part of the club's normal
culture more than a decade after the need for change became unignorable...and
(IMHO) that's a good thing!

Perfection? Not a chance. Improvement (stats and culture)? Darn tootin'!
- - - - - -

While making no claims for having a guaranteed recipe for "change success,"
the analytical part of me thinks it saw in both instances some things that may
have been crucial in overcoming varied and obvious obstacles to change, e.g.:
personalities; hurt feelings; inertia; denial; personality-based cliques; etc.

These include: persistence; discussionally remaining (as in relentlessly
returning to being) "on topic"; patience (letting people speak, willingness to
not settle everything in a single meeting or night or session); mutual respect
(agreeing to disagree; calling out/cutting off ad-hominem arguments the
instant they appeared).

But perhaps THE crucial element in both instances was having at least one
"club leader" (officer, board member, etc.) sufficiently motivated to
"oversee"/push the process forward until the consensus was a consensus had
been reached. None of this "fizzling out" nonsense allowed.

I've also some first hand experience with a club which could benefit itself,
the sport of soaring, and probably its safety record if "it effected some sort
of internal cultural change(s?)" but which has been "board resistant" to such
change over decades. Terribly unfortunate. IMO.

Bob W.

Why do high time pilots have accidents?

Some would say this proves the sport itself is dangerous. Some might
say it's arrogance.

I would disagree with both. I think it's a subtle, unconscious
reduction in safety margins as experience is gained. If it were a
conscious decision to cut margins, it could be addressed with
counseling and additional training. If the pilot doesn't realize his
safety margins are thinning, it can be hard to deal with.

The key starting point for all of us is to realize experience itself
is not a safety margin. Safety margins are things like speed,
altitude and options in hand - in other words, they're quantifiable.

An example might be consistent low and slow approaches perhaps because
the pilot wants to stop in front of his trailer. Having been
successful for a season or two, this has become the new normal
approach. As long as he doesn't encounter unexpected severe sink, it
will continue to work - but there's no safety margin, no Plan B, no
self-questioning, "What if this doesn't work?"

If you always fly with generous safety margins, you control your own
destiny. The thinner the safety margins get, the more you gamble.
"It's like playing Russian Roulette" a friend said over lunch, "Note
there are no world class Russian Roulette players."


On Jun 27, 2:18*pm, Bob Whelan wrote:
On 6/26/2012 5:39 PM, Brad wrote:









On Jun 26, 4:05 pm, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:54:09 PM UTC-4, soartech wrote:
So the next issue of Soaring magazine will come off the press without a
single word about this horrible accident... like it never happened!!

The way it works over time is this: 1)you get hooked on the sport, 2)you
become vaguely aware that it's dangerous and that you need to be careful,
3)you come to terms with the fact that it can kill you. *4)A friend or
acquaintance gets killed or maimed.

Think about it. *If the first thing you learned about soaring was that it
can kill you, what would happen? *You'd probably plow your thousands of
dollars into some really nifty RC model gliders. *My copy of Soaring goes
to my local library. *Maybe somebody will pick it up and take up soaring.
Don't list the departed souls.

Soaring Magazine has a lot in it every month about the hazards of
soaring, but it's almost always hypothetical. *A simple tally sheet of
crashes and injuries would drive the point home without anyone getting
sued. *But the SSA chooses to not do that. *Why? It's a glaring omission.
THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. *When you suggest that there is something
wrong with this picture, you get a knee-jerk reaction. Wierd.

Someone tell me why there is never a tally of accidents in Soaring
Magazine.

When we had 2 of our club members collided in a mid-air the result was
finger pointing at the pilots (non-CFIG) who mentored them. It was
intimated that they were not ready for this kind of activity and that those
of us that actively flew in the mountains were somehow responsible for
encouraging them to do something they were not "ready" for. Ironically some
of those who criticized the most were the ones who never left the vicinity
of the airport, unless they were flying a motorglider.

Another club member spun his motorglider into an unfamiliar field. He was a
low time pilot in a brand new ship with less than 20 hours on
it............he felt the need to try flying a "new" site, took a check
ride in that clubs Blanik (a sailplane he was very familiar with) and did a
great job. After soaring his TST-Atlas for several hours he came back, did
a Blanik approach in a 40:1 ship, realized at mid-field he was to high and
tried to do either a 360 or a 180, we'll never know because he spun it in
and killed himself.

Last year one of our CFIG's died during the filming of the "Cadillac"
commercial. There was a "list" of incidents that took place that made it
out thru the gossip channels that raised some eyebrows. None of that was
shared publicly (as far as I know) and none was shared within the clubs
official channels.

I'm pretty sure that some open, honest and heartfelt discussions about all
these accidents could have really benefited our club. Instead all that was
mentioned was how great these pilots all were, how careful they were and
how they had tons of experience....................which was seen as
somewhat ironic by those of us that personally knew them.

This is the culture we need to change.

Brad

"What Brad said!!!" Certain micro-cultures are "obviously sub-optimum."

I've been a member of the same soaring club for 20+ years, and varyingly
intimately familiar with it for over 36 years. In that time I've watched its
"personality" (culture, if you will) evolve. Historically, my club's
personality change has occurred slowly over time...except when
(safety-related) issues arose which simply could not be ignored. I can recall
at least twice when (poor/ugly) safety-related issues "forced
introspection/change". Actually, all it "forced" was "cheap talk", but a
topical part of the cheap talk quickly became the need (or not) for cultural
change.

In neither case was the club seriously at risk of folding...but in both cases
it was a painful, protracted (in the pain sense) yet brief (in the objective
passage of time sense), process that resulted in years' long "cultural change"
that benefited the club and arguably prevented it from continuing to add
incidents/accidents to national stats. In any event, the club's stats clearly
reflected a before-change/after-change effect, when measured over multi-year
periods.

The second instance's effects still appear to be part of the club's normal
culture more than a decade after the need for change became unignorable....and
(IMHO) that's a good thing!

Perfection? Not a chance. Improvement (stats and culture)? Darn tootin'!
- - - - - -

While making no claims for having a guaranteed recipe for "change success,"
the analytical part of me thinks it saw in both instances some things that may
have been crucial in overcoming varied and obvious obstacles to change, e..g.:
personalities; hurt feelings; inertia; denial; personality-based cliques; etc.

These include: persistence; discussionally remaining (as in relentlessly
returning to being) "on topic"; patience (letting people speak, willingness to
not settle everything in a single meeting or night or session); mutual respect
(agreeing to disagree; calling out/cutting off ad-hominem arguments the
instant they appeared).

But perhaps THE crucial element in both instances was having at least one
"club leader" (officer, board member, etc.) sufficiently motivated to
"oversee"/push the process forward until the consensus was a consensus had
been reached. None of this "fizzling out" nonsense allowed.

I've also some first hand experience with a club which could benefit itself,
the sport of soaring, and probably its safety record if "it effected some sort
of internal cultural change(s?)" but which has been "board resistant" to such
change over decades. Terribly unfortunate. IMO.

Bob W.