Boy Who Flew With Condors - Dick Johnson? Other Comments

On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 2:19:58 AM UTC-5, wrote:
I have had numerous climb-outs from 200' in a Woodstock 11.9m. I used to practice them daily around 8:00 am at Zapata, TX.

However, in the prototype Carbon Dragon I once had a 63' agl climb-out at Hobbs at the beginning of a World Record attempt. This was witnessed by an FAI Official Observer who was appointed out of Geneva (pre-Paris) and who rigorously analyzed the barogram after the fact, being rather amazed at the time. This was utillizing mid morning, "soft" thermals which derived more than 50% of their bouyancy from latent heat in the humidity. There was some wind, and the only challenging moment was when I had to narrow my bank angle to make sure my inside wing lifted over a telephone wire while drifting by.

Gary Osoba

Gary, let's be careful with anecdotes such as yours. What you are doing in a small, very light wing-load glider is not applicable to the kind of soaring we normally do. In fact it might lead to others trying that kind of flying in a Discus or '27. My club had just yesterday a safety meeting around the topic of "Normalization of Deviance". Thermaling lower and lower and getting away with it fits that definition and has lead to numerous fatalities in our sport. Your stories are the opposite of what we need. The fact that I can throw my Discus-launch RC glider in the air and soar for long times does not mean that's the future of soaring. Please modify your post.
Herb

On 8/28/2016 8:00 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 2:19:58 AM UTC-5, wrote:
I have had numerous climb-outs from 200' in a Woodstock 11.9m. I used to
practice them daily around 8:00 am at Zapata, TX.

However, in the prototype Carbon Dragon I once had a 63' agl climb-out at
Hobbs at the beginning of a World Record attempt. This was witnessed by
an FAI Official Observer who was appointed out of Geneva (pre-Paris) and
who rigorously analyzed the barogram after the fact, being rather amazed
at the time. This was utillizing mid morning, "soft" thermals which
derived more than 50% of their bouyancy from latent heat in the humidity.
There was some wind, and the only challenging moment was when I had to
narrow my bank angle to make sure my inside wing lifted over a telephone
wire while drifting by.

Gary Osoba

Gary, let's be careful with anecdotes such as yours. What you are doing in
a small, very light wing-load glider is not applicable to the kind of
soaring we normally do. In fact it might lead to others trying that kind of
flying in a Discus or '27. My club had just yesterday a safety meeting
around the topic of "Normalization of Deviance". Thermaling lower and lower
and getting away with it fits that definition and has lead to numerous
fatalities in our sport. Your stories are the opposite of what we need. The
fact that I can throw my Discus-launch RC glider in the air and soar for
long times does not mean that's the future of soaring. Please modify your
post. Herb


Modify how? As you've accurately pointed out, wingloading makes for some very
real differences in ship-thermaling capabilities. As a Big Believer in
education (externally-/self-directed, both), I also believe discouraging
discussion is some combination of
pointless/self-defeating/non-positively-authoritarian. (Yes, there's a place
for "positive authoritarianism" as parents of young children and dog-owners
generally understand )

Darwinism is likely ineradicable from life. The trick for us glider pilots is
to avoid making those mistakes that will kill us. Arguably, drawing uninformed
conclusions from RAS has "Very Real death potential," simultaneously with RAS
information also having fundamental educational potential. Life's full of
contradictory conundrums (conumdra?).

Margins. Respect them, cuz they don't respect anything!

Respectfully,
Bob W.

On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 12:57:01 PM UTC-4, BobW wrote:
... young children and dog-owners generally understand )

Are you calling RAS-ers young children and dogs??
Now you've gone and offended young children and dogs...

On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 3:00:22 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 2:19:58 AM UTC-5, wrote:
I have had numerous climb-outs from 200' in a Woodstock 11.9m. I used to practice them daily around 8:00 am at Zapata, TX.

However, in the prototype Carbon Dragon I once had a 63' agl climb-out at Hobbs at the beginning of a World Record attempt. This was witnessed by an FAI Official Observer who was appointed out of Geneva (pre-Paris) and who rigorously analyzed the barogram after the fact, being rather amazed at the time. This was utillizing mid morning, "soft" thermals which derived more than 50% of their bouyancy from latent heat in the humidity. There was some wind, and the only challenging moment was when I had to narrow my bank angle to make sure my inside wing lifted over a telephone wire while drifting by.

Gary Osoba

Gary, let's be careful with anecdotes such as yours. What you are doing in a small, very light wing-load glider is not applicable to the kind of soaring we normally do. In fact it might lead to others trying that kind of flying in a Discus or '27. My club had just yesterday a safety meeting around the topic of "Normalization of Deviance". Thermaling lower and lower and getting away with it fits that definition and has lead to numerous fatalities in our sport. Your stories are the opposite of what we need. The fact that I can throw my Discus-launch RC glider in the air and soar for long times does not mean that's the future of soaring. Please modify your post.
Herb

Herb-

I clearly identified the gliders I experienced low saves in. It's fine that you are calling attention to important factors such as W/S. I would not attempt a 63' save in my 27. Or the modified Sigma, which flies at a higher W/S than any other sailplane in the world- the other end of the W/S spectrum from the Carbon Dragon which flies at the lightest W/S in the world. However, I would not attempt pitch-based dynamic soaring in the Carbon Dragon although the Sigma is well suited to it.

The subject was low saves in a manned sailplane, not playing with your RC gliders. I'm sorry that something I have experienced- and done safely given the circumstances- appears to be offensive to you. When you have flown these gliders in these circumstances, you can recommend more actions to me. Otherwise, this is the only "modification" to my post I will make.

Gary

Hello Gary
No problem with you or I making low saves. Anything above 400 ft is fine with me and my very low wing loading ship. Are you going to be anywhere around S TX early june? We are going down to Refugio to make some record runs. We have tows set up for a whole week from the club, very reasonable price and are pushing for 800k in 1-26’s. Your sure welcome to jump in with us if Jim Neff hasn’t already gotten the word out to you.
Dan

On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 7:00:22 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 2:19:58 AM UTC-5, wrote:
I have had numerous climb-outs from 200' in a Woodstock 11.9m. I used to practice them daily around 8:00 am at Zapata, TX.

However, in the prototype Carbon Dragon I once had a 63' agl climb-out at Hobbs at the beginning of a World Record attempt. This was witnessed by an FAI Official Observer who was appointed out of Geneva (pre-Paris) and who rigorously analyzed the barogram after the fact, being rather amazed at the time. This was utillizing mid morning, "soft" thermals which derived more than 50% of their bouyancy from latent heat in the humidity. There was some wind, and the only challenging moment was when I had to narrow my bank angle to make sure my inside wing lifted over a telephone wire while drifting by.

Gary Osoba

Gary, let's be careful with anecdotes such as yours. What you are doing in a small, very light wing-load glider is not applicable to the kind of soaring we normally do. In fact it might lead to others trying that kind of flying in a Discus or '27. My club had just yesterday a safety meeting around the topic of "Normalization of Deviance". Thermaling lower and lower and getting away with it fits that definition and has lead to numerous fatalities in our sport. Your stories are the opposite of what we need. The fact that I can throw my Discus-launch RC glider in the air and soar for long times does not mean that's the future of soaring. Please modify your post.
Herb

I never liked the phrase "normalization of deviance" - it is just too clinical. A better understood phrase that means exactly the same thing, and is understood by all, is "pushing the limits."

On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 9:47:01 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 7:00:22 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 2:19:58 AM UTC-5, wrote:
I have had numerous climb-outs from 200' in a Woodstock 11.9m. I used to practice them daily around 8:00 am at Zapata, TX.

However, in the prototype Carbon Dragon I once had a 63' agl climb-out at Hobbs at the beginning of a World Record attempt. This was witnessed by an FAI Official Observer who was appointed out of Geneva (pre-Paris) and who rigorously analyzed the barogram after the fact, being rather amazed at the time. This was utillizing mid morning, "soft" thermals which derived more than 50% of their bouyancy from latent heat in the humidity. There was some wind, and the only challenging moment was when I had to narrow my bank angle to make sure my inside wing lifted over a telephone wire while drifting by.

Gary Osoba

Gary, let's be careful with anecdotes such as yours. What you are doing in a small, very light wing-load glider is not applicable to the kind of soaring we normally do. In fact it might lead to others trying that kind of flying in a Discus or '27. My club had just yesterday a safety meeting around the topic of "Normalization of Deviance". Thermaling lower and lower and getting away with it fits that definition and has lead to numerous fatalities in our sport. Your stories are the opposite of what we need. The fact that I can throw my Discus-launch RC glider in the air and soar for long times does not mean that's the future of soaring. Please modify your post.
Herb

I never liked the phrase "normalization of deviance" - it is just too clinical. A better understood phrase that means exactly the same thing, and is understood by all, is "pushing the limits."

2G,
I Think a good case can be made that "normalization of deviance" is not the same as "pushing limits" Generally, I think pushing limits has a factor of knowing what the limits are and intentionally exceeding them. Example, performing aerobatics when not trained for them, or flying over vne or overgross.

Both U.S. space shuttles were lost due to "normalization of deviance" first was
a cold weather launch, second was external tank foam shedding and damaging shuttle wing. I do not think anybody was knowingly "pushing limits"

If a pilot has an incident during pushing limits, they might think "crap!"
If a pilot has an incident resulting from "N.O.D." they will probably think
"what is happening"
Normalization of deviance is much more subtle and gradual.

Respect,
Scott