A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Fatal crash Arizona



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 15th 14, 11:14 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Don Johnstone[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 398
Default Fatal crash Arizona

At 21:18 15 June 2014, Bill D wrote:

I cannot argue against the above. From what I have read in this thread

I
have gained the impression that in the event of a launch failure at

200ft
or above the recommended procedure is to turn back to the runway. This

is completely different from what I have taught for 45 years. In the
event of
any launch failure the question that should be asked is "Can I land

ahead"
If the answer is "yes" then land ahead, height does not come into it at
all. If, and only if the answer is "No" or "Not sure" should another

action be considered and executed.=20


In any event I would never simulate a launch failure at 200 ft if there

was
not room to land ahead. I would and do simulate launch failures at

300ft

and above if there is no room to land ahead and allow students to

practice
this, turning back as necessary. The reason is simple, while a pilot

may
be
faced with having to turn back at 200 ft the risks in doing so are not
justified in training, in the same way that we do not practice very low
winch launch failures, just after lift off, or practice ground loops to

avoid
obstacles both of which are covered by briefings. We do set up the

ultra
low level launch failure situation from a normal approach but we never
simulate it off the launch because of the dangers involved.=20
There will always be circumstances where the "normal" procedure is not
possible but we do stress that the important part of the outcome is

that
the pilot has the best chance of survival, an undamaged glider is not a
priority in these circumstances.


What you were taught relates to winch launch only. Different rules apply
t=
o aero tow. With aero tow at 200' AGL on departure it is almost never
poss=
ible to land ahead on the runway. Either turn or land in whatever

terrain
=
is available off the end of the runway. In many aero tow only airfields,
t=
hat terrain is not suitable for a safe landing.


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.


  #2  
Old June 16th 14, 01:18 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tom Claffey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 47
Default Fatal crash Arizona

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.




  #3  
Old June 16th 14, 08:15 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jim White[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 286
Default Fatal crash Arizona

May I offer a practical tip? Talk to yourself all the way up the launch to
a safe height (perhaps 500ft), deciding where you will go at every moment
should the rope / tug break. Should it then happen you already have the
decision made and only have to execute it well.

If you, or your trainee, start to do this every launch you will be amazed
at what poor decisions you would make to begin with. These get better with
the doing of it.

Jim

At 00:18 16 June 2014, 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.






  #4  
Old June 16th 14, 09:13 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Z Goudie[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 35
Default Fatal crash Arizona

At 07:15 16 June 2014, Jim White wrote:
May I offer a practical tip? Talk to yourself all the way up the launch t
a safe height (perhaps 500ft), deciding where you will go at every momen
should the rope / tug break. Should it then happen you already have th
decision made and only have to execute it well.


I thought that was supposed to be part of the training!

  #5  
Old June 16th 14, 03:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Fred Bear
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Fatal crash Arizona

On 6/16/2014 4:13 AM, Z Goudie wrote:
At 07:15 16 June 2014, Jim White wrote:
May I offer a practical tip? Talk to yourself all the way up the launch t
a safe height (perhaps 500ft), deciding where you will go at every momen
should the rope / tug break. Should it then happen you already have th
decision made and only have to execute it well.


I thought that was supposed to be part of the training!



Z - the very man who sent me solo at Portmoak all those years ago.
  #6  
Old June 16th 14, 05:06 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jonathon May
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default Fatal crash Arizona

At 14:44 16 June 2014, Fred Bear wrote:
On 6/16/2014 4:13 AM, Z Goudie wrote:
At 07:15 16 June 2014, Jim White wrote:
May I offer a practical tip? Talk to yourself all the way up the

launch
t
a safe height (perhaps 500ft), deciding where you will go at every

momen
should the rope / tug break. Should it then happen you already have th
decision made and only have to execute it well.


I thought that was supposed to be part of the training!



Z - the very man who sent me solo at Portmoak all those years ago.


The thing that concerns me is the change to rotax tugs.
On Sunday I watched one tow a skylark up,perfect ,but 2 fat pilots in a
duo full of water and we are talking curve of the earth,assuming you can
get it rolling in the first place.Historicly we had accidents and learned
how to not have them.
But heavier gliders,weaker tugs and steam comes from my ears when I see the
launch point set up 1/3 of the way down the runway,because its easier to
get passengers to the glider and you can land behind.Explain that to the
family after Joe pilot coudn't land ahead because it was more convenient.
Rant over,my sinsera condolances to the family of the pilot who started
this at a terrible price.


  #7  
Old June 16th 14, 08:05 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bruce Hoult
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 961
Default Fatal crash Arizona

On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 4:06:19 AM UTC+12, Jonathon May wrote:
At 14:44 16 June 2014, Fred Bear wrote:
But heavier gliders,weaker tugs and steam comes from my ears when I see the
launch point set up 1/3 of the way down the runway,because its easier to
get passengers to the glider and you can land behind.


Yeah, we did that recently when we had an away weekend at a 6500 ft strip on a dairy farm instead of our usual 2000 ft strip in the middle of a town. Definitely convenient.
  #8  
Old June 18th 14, 01:47 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
CindyB[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 157
Default Fatal crash Arizona

On Monday, June 16, 2014 12:15:07 AM UTC-7, Jim White wrote:
May I offer a practical tip? Talk to yourself all the way up the launch to

a safe height (perhaps 500ft), deciding where you will go at every moment

should the rope / tug break. Should it then happen you already have the

decision made and only have to execute it well.



If you, or your trainee, start to do this every launch you will be amazed

at what poor decisions you would make to begin with. These get better with

the doing of it.



Jim


Delightful. Since it was about a hundred posts ago I offered the same concept, may I say, "Thank you."
I am heartened to know that there are others out there who prefer to be prepared and updating their situational awareness during launch, rather than becoming off-launch and then begin 'assessing' the choices.

If the assessment is ongoing, the execution of the 'best choice' becomes pretty relaxed. And if we fly to the landing, it is so much more likely to be survivable than falling to an impact.

Thanks, Jim.
Cindy B

  #9  
Old June 18th 14, 02:18 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bruce Hoult
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 961
Default Fatal crash Arizona

On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:47:20 PM UTC+12, CindyB wrote:
On Monday, June 16, 2014 12:15:07 AM UTC-7, Jim White wrote:
May I offer a practical tip? Talk to yourself all the way up the launch to
a safe height (perhaps 500ft), deciding where you will go at every moment


Delightful. Since it was about a hundred posts ago I offered the same concept, may I say, "Thank you."


!!!!

It would never have occurred to me that this was not assumed by all in the conversation.

Here in NZ, students are frequently asked "where would you go now?"
  #10  
Old June 18th 14, 05:51 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andrew[_13_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Fatal crash Arizona

At 01:18 18 June 2014, Bruce Hoult wrote:

Here in NZ, students are frequently asked "where would you go

now?"


Hi Bruce, can you tell us what the teaching is in NZ is about this? Do
you teach 180 degree turns at 200ft?

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.