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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH
On Sunday, November 3, 2019 at 1:04:36 AM UTC-7, wrote:
We at Gliding International have just completed a three months study on the accident sitution in regard to our sport. We have examined (in detail) the 96 reported accidents which show that our problematic area of soaring flight relates to the landing phase. We took note of all accidents from 1/1/2019 to 31/08/2019 which indicates for sure (on the conservative side) that fatalities for the calendar year of 2019 will be 43. No organisation or sport should turn a blind eye to what is obviously a totally unacceptable situation. We haven't got an answer to this problem but we are open to discussion and be a catalyst for change. Also in our November issue is a report from Sebastian Kawa who has personally set out to explain his recent serious accident. An uphill landing into a very questionable landing zone with no options. He must be complimented for writing his report on the accident for our sport enthusiasts. He tells all how to avoid a repetition of the problem. Basically the accident emanated from the failure of his motor to start. He has quoted the number of experiences he has personally experienced with motor failures and has started a war on brands of motors that must be regarded as totally unreliable. JOHN ROAKE EDITOR This thread has gone awry...The primary topic was about an unusually hi fatality rate of 43 out of 96 reported accidents. Mr Kawa's unfortunate (or fortunate outcome in this case) was an example brought up by Gliding International, it matters but what most concerns me is the rest of the statistics and what we the soaring community could do about it. The reliability or unreliability of available powerplants at least in my case concerns me none. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH
Are the numbers quoted worldwide?
Ramy |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH
All this hand ringing... THIS IS NOT a complex problem!
The vast majority of accidents can be crammed into 4 general catagories: 1. False dependance on aux engine 2.aging of general soaring populous 3. Lack of “situational specific “ experience 4. Lack of currancy, not flying regularly ( related to #3. 1. The rash of motor equiped sailplane accidents speaks for itself and is Fricking up the insurance rates for all of us. Flying such that ya depend on that aux power is just plain criminal. 2. Guys are getting old me included and need to know when to reevaluate their declining skills. Some need to just know when to stop, or dial back into less complex flying and back into less complex machines. 3. Situational Specific experience refers to having experience in the specific type of flying one is doing. 10,000 hours flying airliners has ZERO application to flying a sailplane! My worse students are airline types! 10000 hours of flying a sailplane has zero application to flying jets. I hate the bull**** of guys claiming gobs of hours as if they mean something. They only count if they apply to the type of flying your doing on a given day. Example, a guys got 3,000 hours of glider time but its most all flying over the home field with little or no off field landing experience. That guy is an accident waiting to happen when he finds himself in an unusual off field landing situation. The guy who has been pursuing his gold badge and had only a couple hundred hours but has had to make 5 off field landings this past year had a hell of a lot more “situational experience”. 4. Related to the point above, even if I have 4,000 hours of xc flying time, if they are all from 20 years ago, I am at a dissadvantage. Whats needed is currant applicable time in order to keep the skills sharp. My two cents worth. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH
On Mon, 04 Nov 2019 04:52:22 -0800, uneekcowgirl wrote:
4. Lack of currancy, not flying regularly ( related to #3. That's easily fixed. In my club you won't get a launch without doing a checkride if you haven't flown for more than 6 weeks and there is always a duty instructor on the field when we're active. Do the same and watch the currency-related accidents diminish. -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH
On Sunday, November 3, 2019 at 1:04:36 AM UTC-7, wrote:
We at Gliding International have just completed a three months study on the accident sitution in regard to our sport... JOHN ROAKE EDITOR Thank you, John Roake for the study. This was an interesting edition. The old saying is "Live to fly another day." Your magazine's study on glider accidents helps support the additional version: "Fly to live another day." Raul Boerner |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH
On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 4:52:25 AM UTC-8, wrote:
All this hand ringing... THIS IS NOT a complex problem! The vast majority of accidents can be crammed into 4 general catagories: 1. False dependance on aux engine 2.aging of general soaring populous 3. Lack of “situational specific “ experience 4. Lack of currancy, not flying regularly ( related to #3. 1. The rash of motor equiped sailplane accidents speaks for itself and is Fricking up the insurance rates for all of us. Flying such that ya depend on that aux power is just plain criminal. 2. Guys are getting old me included and need to know when to reevaluate their declining skills. Some need to just know when to stop, or dial back into less complex flying and back into less complex machines. 3. Situational Specific experience refers to having experience in the specific type of flying one is doing. 10,000 hours flying airliners has ZERO application to flying a sailplane! My worse students are airline types! 10000 hours of flying a sailplane has zero application to flying jets. I hate the bull**** of guys claiming gobs of hours as if they mean something. They only count if they apply to the type of flying your doing on a given day. Example, a guys got 3,000 hours of glider time but its most all flying over the home field with little or no off field landing experience. That guy is an accident waiting to happen when he finds himself in an unusual off field landing situation. The guy who has been pursuing his gold badge and had only a couple hundred hours but has had to make 5 off field landings this past year had a hell of a lot more “situational experience”. 4. Related to the point above, even if I have 4,000 hours of xc flying time, if they are all from 20 years ago, I am at a dissadvantage. Whats needed is currant applicable time in order to keep the skills sharp. My two cents worth. For experienced pilots, you missed Number Zero: Leaving inadequate margin for error. This is a disease mostly specific to the experienced pilot, who has gotten away with it for a long time. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH
On Sunday, November 3, 2019 at 11:26:11 AM UTC-8, Mike C wrote:
I thought that electric systems were very dependable. In the Kawa case under discussion, it appears that the motor control system would not energize the motor because it did not detect that the mast was fully deployed. The culprit appears to be either the mast extension system which did not fully extend the mast, or the limit switch which did not properly detect that the mast was fully extended. Either way, it is a reminder that the more complicated your system is, the more potential points of failure it embodies. --Bob K. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH
On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 4:52:25 AM UTC-8, wrote:
All this hand ringing... THIS IS NOT a complex problem! The vast majority of accidents can be crammed into 4 general catagories: 1. False dependance on aux engine 2.aging of general soaring populous 3. Lack of “situational specific “ experience 4. Lack of currancy, not flying regularly ( related to #3. I beg to differ - IMHO this IS a complex problem because human psychology is complex. The 4 general categories listed above don't include psychological causes (usually referred to as human factors or human errors), which are at least a contributing factor in most accidents. A good example of an accident caused by the interplay of several psychological factors (loss aversion, plan continuation bias, confirmation bias and peer pressure), can be found he https://members.gliding.co.uk/wp-con...cus-G-CJUM.pdf Branko XYU |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH
Dave Nadler wrote on 11/3/2019 12:17 PM:
On Sunday, November 3, 2019 at 2:26:11 PM UTC-5, Mike C wrote: I thought that electric systems were very dependable. Really? Have I got a deal for you!! Do you think they are relatively dependable, compared to the gasoline powered systems? I suspect they are at least equal, and believe they will be better (maybe much better) than the gasoline users in the future; regardless, it's very difficult to know the dependability of either type, as we have no statistics on successful and failed starts. Personally, I've kept track, and it's over 170 inflight restart attempts during 25 years of owning my ASH26E, with one failure (cause unknown). -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me) - "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation" https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What has become of Gliding International? | 2G | Soaring | 7 | August 23rd 18 06:20 AM |
Gliding International | [email protected] | Soaring | 5 | March 25th 16 09:33 AM |
Gliding Research Assistance | Kevin Christner | Soaring | 2 | March 17th 13 09:13 PM |
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL | [email protected] | Soaring | 0 | February 20th 09 10:46 PM |
Gliding International | john | Soaring | 0 | May 4th 08 12:29 AM |