How Low to Spin??

wrote:

scurry wrote:

Interesting thing about the flight; By following the ridge lines
keeping wind and sun in mind, I was able to run out of the hills at
300-400 feet over the ridges, maintaining my altitude until I had enough
altitude to circle comfortably (which, remember includes the thermals
spreading out enough to be useful).



Ridge flying is practised currently *much* closer to the ridge than that, in
fact so close than not touching some tree is the real problem.

Right, but I didn't want to burn up 300 feet just to get down to the
ridges. The terrain west of Boulder, CO drops rapidly to the east (and
the airport). I was just wanting to get over lower ground so I could
thermal. I'm pretty sure I was using thermal and orographic lift as I
snuck out of the foothills.
Later in that flight after regaining some altitude, I was ridge soaring
much closer to the Flatirons. Very nice views.
http://tinyurl.com/4zotd

Shawn

scurry wrote:
wrote:

scurry wrote:

Ridge flying is practised currently *much* closer to the ridge than that, in
fact so close than not touching some tree is the real problem.

Carl Herold has stated he no longer does ridge soaring because
he finds it too dangerous. On the other hand, he has so many other
forms of lift available in the Sierras, I suspect this isn't
a problem

If you land with pine needles in your ailerons, you are
too close...
--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA

Paul,

First and foremost, I was not "proud" of the flight I showed you, and I'm
disappointed (in fact, a little shocked) that you took it that way. Maybe I
should work on my presentation a little (I know it can be a little eager
sometimes). I learn from my experiences (positive and negative) by being
honest and open about them, not by pretending they didn't happen, and this
was no different (if I couldn't take the slings and arrows, I'd just keep
everything to myself). I had already told two other highly experienced
pilots (GY and AZ2) that I wondered at the time if I'd made the right
decisions. That isn't pride; it's concern about wanting to do it better
next time.

When I made my statement "My glider doesn't spin", you quickly (and
appropriately) noted that they were the famous last words of many a dead
pilot. I immediately recognized the ridiculousness of my statement and
offered you an honest correction: I haven't been able to get *my* glider to
spin (which is certainly not to say that it can't happen). Now, we can
argue about the relative safety value of that attitude, but I was
maintaining minimum 58 knots AIS, much higher than my normal dry thermaling
speed, so the stall/spin risk at that point was no higher than at any point
in any normal landing pattern.

(My CFIGs were very good at instilling in me the importance of maintaining
airspeed close to the ground. I have read all the stories about pilots
flying low, looking at the ground and thinking they have lots of airspeed,
and learning the hard way they didn't, and of pilots flying low over
mountains and getting bit by wind sheer. Not for a second am I so proud to
think that these things can't happen to me.)

The IGC file shows the lowest point on my downwind leg at 310'. I was up to
400' when I turned onto base. (There is a big difference between 300' and
400'.) At 58 knots AIS, 4 knots up, no traffic anywhere, and no wind, I
simply continued the turn as I had started it. If it turned into sink, there
was still plenty of altitude to finish the turn and land. Did I make the
right decision? I will eagerly absorb any and all constructive feedback I
get on that question, positive and negative (the "you-stupid-idiot" lectures
some people so enjoy giving are more entertaining than they are useful).

As far as I'm concerned, the most glaring mistake I made was allowing myself
to get into the position of being at 300' AGL halfway through my downwind
leg. Now *that* was dumb, and I need no feedback on that count.

About the mountain flying: at no point in my flight was I not within easy
gliding distance of at least two safe landing areas (one dirt strip and one
airport). If you had a question about that, I wish you would have asked. If
there's anything I consistently do right in my flying, it's staying within
safe distance of good landing areas (see previous paragraph); I always have
the nearest landing spot dialed in on my flight computer, maintaining a
positive arrival at MC 3. I am particularly satisfied with this aspect of
my x/c flying -- I can even call myself "proud" on this count, though it
usually puts a damper on my contest speeds

Paul, the next time I say something that scares you silly, just call me on
it, *especially* if it looks like my pride is in the way. I have a
tremoundous amount of respect for the feedback I get from guys like you and
GY and you will NOT hurt my feelings by speaking up in person.

That I promise, my friend --

-ted

P.s. At the time of the flight I had 232 hours total time in the glider and
340 total PIC.

Ted Wagner wrote:
Paul,

Snip 1st hand account.

I can understand the temptation to keep turning. Its *safe* to say
everyone should land in under same circumstances. Doesn't mean it can't
be done, just that IMHO (and most everyone else's too) it shouldn't.
The trail of blood is pretty compelling in this case, Ted.
Scroll to the bottom for a survivor's account.
http://tinyurl.com/3jw2w

Shawn

Thanks Shawn, I'll take a look.

Btw, so say "It's *safe* to say everyone should land (blah blah blah)" is,
well, stating the obvious (kinda like saying "It's safe to stay on the
ground"). The pertinent question is whether it was *unsafe* for me to
continue the turn in the precise circumstances in which I found myself. I
remain open to the possibility that it was not, but in the same spirit,
being over tiger country out of reach of landable points is questionably
unsafe, yet I hear regularly of pilots doing this as a matter of routine,
especially in contests, and if I continue flying contests long enough (and I
hope to be doing them for many years), I will have to take that step many
times myself. I want to err on the side of safety, but at the same time, I
want to be reasonable and competitive.

I treat my flights like I do my skydives (4500 safe ones and counting, knock
on wood) -- from the time the plane leaves the ground, I am a dead man,
until my feet are safely back upon it; it is my responsibility to make the
right decisions and pull the right handles at the right times to avert that
fate.

-ted

"scurry" wrote in message
...
Ted Wagner wrote:
Paul,

Snip 1st hand account.

I can understand the temptation to keep turning. Its *safe* to say
everyone should land in under same circumstances. Doesn't mean it can't
be done, just that IMHO (and most everyone else's too) it shouldn't.
The trail of blood is pretty compelling in this case, Ted.
Scroll to the bottom for a survivor's account.
http://tinyurl.com/3jw2w

Shawn

Ted Wagner wrote:

Thanks Shawn, I'll take a look.

Btw, so say "It's *safe* to say everyone should land (blah blah blah)" is,
well, stating the obvious (kinda like saying "It's safe to stay on the
ground"). The pertinent question is whether it was *unsafe* for me to
continue the turn in the precise circumstances in which I found myself. I
remain open to the possibility that it was not, but in the same spirit,
being over tiger country out of reach of landable points is questionably
unsafe, yet I hear regularly of pilots doing this as a matter of routine,
especially in contests, and if I continue flying contests long enough (and I
hope to be doing them for many years), I will have to take that step many
times myself. I want to err on the side of safety, but at the same time, I
want to be reasonable and competitive.

Was it unsafe? No, not that time. Here you are! Definitely risky though.
Thermalling at low altitude isn't like thermalling aloft. Thermals are
less consolidated and much smaller in area. Wind shear due to ground
features alters the way thermals behave relative to higher up on the
same day, in the same wind. Perspective is different as well. The
ground appears to disappear under the lower wing near the ground (moving
front to back), whereas at altitude it appears from under the lower
wing. If you try to "fix" this picture automatically, you'll keep
finding yourself in a skidding turn every time you scan past the yaw string.
Do most pilots routinely fly over tiger country out of glide of anywhere
landable? I think people talk it up more than they do it. Plus, being
at 19,000 feet (by GPS) over Nevada desert with cloud streets as far as
the eye can see is a different judgment call than being 2000 feet over a
Louisiana swamp with a wisp of a cloud dome up ahead.
The way I'll keep looking at it, is how I was trained. Once I commit to
landing, I'll land. And yes, I can imagine exceptions, but they would
involve the landing option being very very bad anyway (e.g. trees).
Much better not to get into such a situation in the first place.
FWIW its very good you're asking these questions now, and not the next
time you're in lift on downwind.

Shawn

Circling at 400ft while being able to land anywhere doesn't mean unsafe
operations by definition. I frequently start circling over a ridge at less
than half of this altitude. But not always.
Everything depends on experience (with that glider), current training level
(with that glider), personal daily fitness, wind conditions and lift
conditions.
And you have to put the question "is it safe" every single time - but then,
this does hold for every manoeuvre.
You just have to accept that sometimes the answer to this question is "no".

--
Bert Willing

ASW20 "TW"


"scurry" a écrit dans le message de
...
Was it unsafe? No, not that time. Here you are! Definitely risky
though.
Thermalling at low altitude isn't like thermalling aloft. Thermals are
less consolidated and much smaller in area. Wind shear due to ground
features alters the way thermals behave relative to higher up on the
same day, in the same wind. Perspective is different as well. The
ground appears to disappear under the lower wing near the ground (moving
front to back), whereas at altitude it appears from under the lower
wing. If you try to "fix" this picture automatically, you'll keep
finding yourself in a skidding turn every time you scan past the yaw
string.
Do most pilots routinely fly over tiger country out of glide of anywhere
landable? I think people talk it up more than they do it. Plus, being
at 19,000 feet (by GPS) over Nevada desert with cloud streets as far as
the eye can see is a different judgment call than being 2000 feet over a
Louisiana swamp with a wisp of a cloud dome up ahead.
The way I'll keep looking at it, is how I was trained. Once I commit to
landing, I'll land. And yes, I can imagine exceptions, but they would
involve the landing option being very very bad anyway (e.g. trees).
Much better not to get into such a situation in the first place.
FWIW its very good you're asking these questions now, and not the next
time you're in lift on downwind.

Shawn

scurry wrote:
Ted Wagner wrote:

Thanks Shawn, I'll take a look.

Was it unsafe? No, not that time. Here you are! Definitely risky though.
Thermalling at low altitude isn't like thermalling aloft. Thermals are
less consolidated and much smaller in area. Wind shear due to ground
features alters the way thermals behave relative to higher up on the
same day, in the same wind. Perspective is different as well. The
ground appears to disappear under the lower wing near the ground (moving
front to back), whereas at altitude it appears from under the lower
wing. If you try to "fix" this picture automatically, you'll keep
finding yourself in a skidding turn every time you scan past the yaw string.

An excellent point. I've found myself more than once skidding
because of wind creating an illusion close to the ground. The
only way I've found to counter it is being aware of the wind, and
using slow roll rates and shallow banks close to the ground (so I don't
need much rudder anyway).
--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA

Ted Wagner wrote:

Thanks Shawn, I'll take a look.

Btw, so say "It's *safe* to say everyone should land (blah blah blah)" is,
well, stating the obvious (kinda like saying "It's safe to stay on the
ground"). The pertinent question is whether it was *unsafe* for me to
continue the turn in the precise circumstances in which I found myself. I
remain open to the possibility that it was not, but in the same spirit,
being over tiger country out of reach of landable points is questionably
unsafe, yet I hear regularly of pilots doing this as a matter of routine,
especially in contests,

We must know entirely different groups of pilots, because I sure don't
hear pilots talking about this, unless it starts out "Boy, did I screw
up today...". The story often ends with "... so I ended up ground
looping (or "scaring myself sh--less", "hitting the fence", "breaking
the tail", etc)".

and if I continue flying contests long enough (and I
hope to be doing them for many years), I will have to take that step many
times myself.

No, you certainly don't have to. Pilot's choice, you know. It some areas
in some conditions, the lift can be so reliable that you can actually
count on it, but if done regularly, you will find the times when you
misjudge the weather.

I want to err on the side of safety, but at the same time, I
want to be reasonable and competitive.

Take a look at the flight traces from the top pilots. See if they are
really taking these chances. The ones I've flown with didn't seem to
take these kinds of chances. I think the philosophy for many of them is
"there is always another day and another contest, and if you break your
glider, you won't even win this day or this contest".

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Eric,

Well said.

To reemphasize, contest pilots do not put their aircraft or lives at
risk for the sake of points. They make balanced decisions. If they
appear to some to be "dangerous," it probably points to a difference
in skill and experience between the performer and the observer. Don't
get into the habit of assuming that the only way to win is to take
unreasonable risks. Such thinking can get you into far more trouble
than you (or any other pilot) could hope to handle.

Eric Greenwell wrote in message ...
Ted Wagner wrote:

Thanks Shawn, I'll take a look.

Btw, so say "It's *safe* to say everyone should land (blah blah blah)" is,
well, stating the obvious (kinda like saying "It's safe to stay on the
ground"). The pertinent question is whether it was *unsafe* for me to
continue the turn in the precise circumstances in which I found myself. I
remain open to the possibility that it was not, but in the same spirit,
being over tiger country out of reach of landable points is questionably
unsafe, yet I hear regularly of pilots doing this as a matter of routine,
especially in contests,

We must know entirely different groups of pilots, because I sure don't
hear pilots talking about this, unless it starts out "Boy, did I screw
up today...". The story often ends with "... so I ended up ground
looping (or "scaring myself sh--less", "hitting the fence", "breaking
the tail", etc)".

and if I continue flying contests long enough (and I
hope to be doing them for many years), I will have to take that step many
times myself.

No, you certainly don't have to. Pilot's choice, you know. It some areas
in some conditions, the lift can be so reliable that you can actually
count on it, but if done regularly, you will find the times when you
misjudge the weather.

I want to err on the side of safety, but at the same time, I
want to be reasonable and competitive.

Take a look at the flight traces from the top pilots. See if they are
really taking these chances. The ones I've flown with didn't seem to
take these kinds of chances. I think the philosophy for many of them is
"there is always another day and another contest, and if you break your
glider, you won't even win this day or this contest".