Letter to the FAA

Walt's concern is valid. He's identified a risk, albeit one that we've known about for decades.

I think Andy's post is spot on: the most effective way to save lives in soaring is to stop flying. If we reject that Draconian solution, everything else involves balancing risk vs. reward. We can never reduce the risk to zero, and anyone who wishes to can stop flying right now. The goal should be to reduce or mitigate the risks we can at a reasonable cost and continue to be vigilant about those that remain.

To me there are two questions:

1. How serious is the risk of using Schweizer tow releases? There are two components: a) how likely is it that a serious upset can occur?; and b) what are the consequences if it does? Statistics seem to indicate it's very unlikely, though not zero. The consequences if it does occur depend on the skill of the pilots, the altitude of the tow combination, the breaking strength of the rope, the specific installation, and probably some other factors, and range from a few exciting seconds to a potential fatality. I suspect the total risk as I've defined it is very small. But it's significant enough (especially if you're a tow pilot) that you would like to reduce it.

2. How to manage this risk? Steve offers a series of actions, most of which require someone to take the lead. Walt is "offering" to take the lead because it's the only thing he sees that he can do. Whether he's serious or terribly misguided in calling in the Feds, he's certainly gotten our attention..

And, yes, the FAA read RAS just like they used to read Charlie Spratt's posts about sailplane racing. Years ago, one of those triggered a visit from two knowledgeable-but-concerned employees at a Western contest site the day after Charlie reported, ironically, on a non-accident towing incident.

I should add that insulting others on social media because they don't agree with you doesn't work very well. So who wants to take the lead and show that soaring can manage this risk intelligently?

I'm not even a power pilot, much less a tow pilot.

Chip Bearden
"JB"

I'll ask again...why isn't the Soaring Safety Foundation taking the lead on this issue? I find it perplexing.

Paul A.

On Thursday, June 22, 2017 at 3:54:47 PM UTC-6, Paul Agnew wrote:
I'll ask again...why isn't the Soaring Safety Foundation taking the lead on this issue? I find it perplexing.

Paul A.

How many deaths, accidents or injuries have been recorded due to the Schweizer tow release over the past 60 years? A substantial number would probably initiate some concern.


Mike

The obvious right answer here is for the FAA to expedite the paperwork to replace Schweitzer hooks with Tost hooks. I'm not an expert, but it would seem that a letter from headquarters to field offices saying, if there is a legal Schweitzer hook in place, accept a 337 to replace it with Tost. Why not write a letter asking for that positive step? Dear FAA. There is a safety problem. There is a solution. Your paperwork is what makes it hard for people to solve the problem. Please fix.

Or am I, of all people, being incredibly naive about FAA regulatory inertia?

John Cochrane

Originally Posted by John Cochrane[_3_]

The obvious right answer here is for the FAA to expedite the paperwork to replace Schweitzer hooks with Tost hooks. I'm not an expert, but it would seem that a letter from headquarters to field offices saying, if there is a legal Schweitzer hook in place, accept a 337 to replace it with Tost. Why not write a letter asking for that positive step? Dear FAA. There is a safety problem. There is a solution. Your paperwork is what makes it hard for people to solve the problem. Please fix.

Or am I, of all people, being incredibly naive about FAA regulatory inertia?

John Cochrane

I'm no expert either John and I am trying to write this letter with the purpose of limiting the negative effect it might have on the sport. I try to ignore the flippant, blasé, self serving responses and give thought to some of the more intelligent suggestions. The one thing I am NOT willing to do is let this go. I have learned much in my analysis and have much more to do. You are right, paperwork is often the problem.

The obvious answer is for the SSA and SSF to step forward and take charge of this situation, my contact with them proves that they have no intention of doing so. The British Gliding Association did so long, long ago. While accidents still happen their mandates at least give the tow pilot a fighting chance when he needs it most.

Question: Are you the Economist? If so I read your blog and papers on occasion.

Walt

How many unreported and undocumented near tragedies have been averted at the last minute?

We tend to hide our mishaps and shrug them off as singular events, but Walt had two in the same week! Even so, we all seem to want him to count his blessings and forget about it rather than recognize a possible harbinger of a major safety issue that should be carefully reviewed.

Paul A.

Originally Posted by Paul Agnew

I'll ask again...why isn't the Soaring Safety Foundation taking the lead on this issue? I find it perplexing.

Paul A.

Paul,

The SSA made their position crystal clear to me thru their government liaison representative. I'm not a member of the club.....

Walt

So who wants to take the lead and show that soaring can manage this risk intelligently?
Statistics show we are doing OK managing the known failure mode of Elmira Death Hooks. Before anyone gets the vapors over 'known failure mode' remember everything that moves has a known failure mode of some sort. How about we write a letter to the FAA asking them to ban low altitude skidding turns? That'd spare some blood. Or we could go for the really low hanging fruit and get the gov to mandate seat belts and helmet use in our golf carts. Golf carts kill more people in a year than Elmira Death Hooks have ever. Which brings up a funny for the happy gov't regulation folks. If you have juniors working your line, know it is illegal in some states for those under 18 to operate a golf cart. Ain't safety mandated by law great?