![]() |
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 6/15/2014 8:18 PM, Tom Claffey wrote:
While I agree that landing straight ahead is best if there is room, your sequence of events is wrong. On an aerotow the question whether to land ahead or turn should be made on every launch! "Then ask the question" will lead to overload and grief! On tow, once you have decided you cannot land ahead then it may be a turn to an off-field landing if possible, followed by a 180 turn back to runway when safe. (That will invariably be at least 200') I repeat: after a failure is not the time to be thinking about where to go! Tom No, what I was taught and what I teach applies to ALL launch failures, winch, auto tow, and aerotow as detailed above. The first action is to select the appropriate attitude, at least approach attitude and make sure that you have a minimum of approach speed. Then ask the question, "Can I land ahead" If and ONLY if the answer is NO or NOT SURE should any other action be considered. That's how I was taught - first immediate action - fly the glider. Then assess. I was sent solo in a T21 at Portmoak, flying off winch from the SW end, accompanied by a sandbag in the RH seat. Two 360 degree turns and a good landing. Woohoo. Ok - now for the second solo flight - cable break at 300 feet. All I remember of my thought processes at the time was to get the nose down out of full climb immediately before speed bled off, get rid of cable and then assess - unsure about straight ahead (20/20 hindsight - full spoiler and land would have worked), too low for short circuit (maybe), so I made a 90 degree left turn to get some room, turned back to right and landed across the main onto the alternative area across from the hangars, passing in front of the winch. I explained my thought process to the instructor and we reviewed what I had done - got a slow nod and a well done lad. Good enough for me and a credit to my instructors. Was sent back up once we had towed the T21 back to the launch point. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
At 09:44 16 June 2014, Fred Bear wrote:
On 6/15/2014 8:18 PM, Tom Claffey wrote: While I agree that landing straight ahead is best if there is room, your sequence of events is wrong. On an aerotow the question whether to land ahead or turn should be made on every launch! "Then ask the question" will lead to overload and grief! On tow, once you have decided you cannot land ahead then it may be a turn to an off-field landing if possible, followed by a 180 turn back to runway when safe. (That will invariably be at least 200') I repeat: after a failure is not the time to be thinking about where to go! Tom No, what I was taught and what I teach applies to ALL launch failures, winch, auto tow, and aerotow as detailed above. The first action is to select the appropriate attitude, at least approach attitude and make sure that you have a minimum of approach speed. Then ask the question, "Can I land ahead" If and ONLY if the answer is NO or NOT SURE should any other action be considered. Spot on, run away to the south field, worked for me too That's how I was taught - first immediate action - fly the glider. Then assess. I was sent solo in a T21 at Portmoak, flying off winch from the SW end, accompanied by a sandbag in the RH seat. Two 360 degree turns and a good landing. Woohoo. Ok - now for the second solo flight - cable break at 300 feet. All I remember of my thought processes at the time was to get the nose down out of full climb immediately before speed bled off, get rid of cable and then assess - unsure about straight ahead (20/20 hindsight - full spoiler and land would have worked), too low for short circuit (maybe), so I made a 90 degree left turn to get some room, turned back to right and landed across the main onto the alternative area across from the hangars, passing in front of the winch. I explained my thought process to the instructor and we reviewed what I had done - got a slow nod and a well done lad. Good enough for me and a credit to my instructors. Was sent back up once we had towed the T21 back to the launch point. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In the event of a launch failure (or a bounce on landing) I was
taught to 'adopt the attitude that you would be at that height during a normal approach', which I think is a clear and good description of the 'appropriate attitude' that Don recommends. I completely agree with Don's advice about then checking speed, and landing ahead as the first choice. I was worried by writers in this thread who have mentioned aerotowing at sites where a straight ahead landing from a low PT3 could not be safely made. Single-engine power pilots often accept catastrophic risks (e.g. from engine failures) but we glider pilots don't have to. If the PT3 danger is only to the glider, I guess that's ok, if the owners and their insurance company have no objection. But if personal injury is risked by PT3, I hope everyone agrees that such sites should not be used for aerotowing gliders. At 22:14 15 June 2014, Don Johnstone wrote: No, what I was taught and what I teach applies to ALL launch failures, winch, auto tow, and aerotow as detailed above. The first action is to select the appropriate attitude, at least approach attitude and make sure that you have a minimum of approach speed. Then ask the question, "Can I land ahead" If and ONLY if the answer is NO or NOT SURE should any other action be considered. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 6:46:14 PM UTC+12, Andrew wrote:
I was worried by writers in this thread who have mentioned aerotowing at sites where a straight ahead landing from a low PT3 could not be safely made. Single-engine power pilots often accept catastrophic risks (e.g. from engine failures) but we glider pilots don't have to. If the PT3 danger is only to the glider, I guess that's ok, if the owners and their insurance company have no objection. But if personal injury is risked by PT3, I hope everyone agrees that such sites should not be used for aerotowing gliders. I disagree. Options in the event of a tow failure include: 1) land ahead 2) land cross wind 3) do a (approx) 180 and land downwind 4) do a (approx) 180, enter an abbreviated downwind leg, land crosswind 5) do a (approx) 180, enter an abbreviated downwind leg, land upwind 6) do a (approx) 180, do a normal downwind leg, land upwind As long as at least *one* of those options is available at all times the site is fine. Which ones are appropriate does change according to conditions. For example 3) is likely to be a bad idea in all but the lightest winds. But as the wind strength picks up the opportunities for the others increases quickly. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 3:17:59 AM UTC-6, Bruce Hoult wrote:
On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 6:46:14 PM UTC+12, Andrew wrote: I was worried by writers in this thread who have mentioned aerotowing at sites where a straight ahead landing from a low PT3 could not be safely made. Single-engine power pilots often accept catastrophic risks (e.g. from engine failures) but we glider pilots don't have to. If the PT3 danger is only to the glider, I guess that's ok, if the owners and their insurance company have no objection. But if personal injury is risked by PT3, I hope everyone agrees that such sites should not be used for aerotowing gliders. I disagree. Options in the event of a tow failure include: 1) land ahead 2) land cross wind 3) do a (approx) 180 and land downwind 4) do a (approx) 180, enter an abbreviated downwind leg, land crosswind 5) do a (approx) 180, enter an abbreviated downwind leg, land upwind 6) do a (approx) 180, do a normal downwind leg, land upwind As long as at least *one* of those options is available at all times the site is fine. Which ones are appropriate does change according to conditions. For example 3) is likely to be a bad idea in all but the lightest winds. But as the wind strength picks up the opportunities for the others increases quickly. I agree with Bruce. However, all those actions require the pilot to have at least basic airmanship abilities which is clearly missing in some posts to this thread. When applied to flight training, I find terms like "KISS" and "lowest common denominator" to be infuriating. Aviation is not simple and never will be. When I read "KISS, I'm reminded of Forrest Gump: "Stupid is as stupid does". Rather than aiming to accommodate the "lowest common denominator" in students, demand excellence. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sunday, May 25, 2014 2:40:01 PM UTC-6, Don Johnstone wrote:
"we do not practice very low winch launch failures, just after liftoff" That's one of several reasons why the UK has such a terrible safety record on winch launch. I watched a UK 'trained' instructor destroy a glider and put himself in the hospital from a real low failure because he didn't know what to do next. Lacking training, he simply continued the rotation into the climb until the glider stalled. I insist on simulated low failures just after lift-off. Given a pilot with minimum airmanship skills, there is no danger whatsoever. It's exactly like flying a bungee launch. "In any event I would never simulate a launch failure at 200 ft if there was not room to land ahead." Nor would I - on a winch launch. On aero tow, where rules are different, a 200' failure will be beyond the departure end of the runway where there is often no choice but to turn back. Pilots trained to do so have a better chance of survival. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Parowan Fatal Crash | ContestID67[_2_] | Soaring | 30 | July 3rd 09 03:43 AM |
Rare fatal CH-801 crash | Jim Logajan | Home Built | 8 | June 22nd 09 03:24 AM |
Fatal crash in NW Washington | Rich S.[_1_] | Home Built | 1 | February 17th 08 02:38 AM |
Fatal Crash | Monty | General Aviation | 1 | December 12th 07 09:06 PM |
Fatal Crash in Fittstown, OK | GeorgeC | Piloting | 3 | March 7th 06 05:03 AM |