GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH

On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 5:15:17 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
wrote on 11/4/2019 10:53 AM:
Eric 6 i know of personally in the last 2 years

All in the US, and all due to false dependence on aux power? Who?

--
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

There were 2 in the Northeast this year. Not a secret, both previously reported to the world at large.

As a wise instructor once told me "Its not the fall that kills you its the sudden stop at the end"!

CH

nbnbn wrote on 11/4/2019 3:02 PM:
There were 2 in the Northeast this year. Not a secret, both previously reported to the world at large.

Can you supply more information? My search of the NTSB accident database did not
find any fatal motorglider accidents in the Northeast for the last 24 months. It
did find two motorglider accidents, but those were in Utah and NV, and three
fatalities in Vermont, but in a 2-32.


--
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

On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 6:53:29 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
nbnbn wrote on 11/4/2019 3:02 PM:
There were 2 in the Northeast this year. Not a secret, both previously reported to the world at large.

Can you supply more information? My search of the NTSB accident database did not
find any fatal motorglider accidents in the Northeast for the last 24 months. It
did find two motorglider accidents, but those were in Utah and NV, and three
fatalities in Vermont, but in a 2-32.


--
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

I know of 3 in the Northeast this year.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...relim&IType=LA

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...relim&IType=LA

The other is a motor glider that ran out of gas and landed (with substantial damage but no injuries) in a swamp. That one isn't in the database.

T8

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.

I searched for all glider accidents in the US this year - there were 18. Two involved motorgliders - NEITHER involved an attempted restart in flight, BOTH involved a landing accident.

So, your premise that motorgliders driving up insurance costs because of failed engine restarts is JUST FLAT WRONG!

Tom

2G Your welcome to pay my insurance for next year. The majority of fatal accidents this past year have involved high performance machines, some with aux power some without. Not 1-26’s, not 2-33’s, not dusters or cherokees or phoebus or libelles. But the very fact that I now have to pay thru the nose for my very low performance machine due to the idiocy of “pilots� with way more money than aeronautic sense is very graiting!

On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 7:58:39 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
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.

I searched for all glider accidents in the US this year - there were 18. Two involved motorgliders - NEITHER involved an attempted restart in flight, BOTH involved a landing accident.

So, your premise that motorgliders driving up insurance costs because of failed engine restarts is JUST FLAT WRONG!

Tom

Semantics. Running out of gas/battery power is not a mechanical engine failure. They are engine operator failure same results. Without the engine present something different would have happened. The professional odds makers don't have a lot of faith in motorglider reliability- doesn't matter if it is mechanical or meat bag failure costs the insurance company the same.

Eric Greenwell wrote on 11/4/2019 3:53 PM:
nbnbn wrote on 11/4/2019 3:02 PM:
There were 2 in the Northeast this year.* Not a secret, both previously reported
to the world at large.

Can you supply more information? My search of the NTSB accident database did not
find any fatal motorglider accidents in the Northeast for the last 24 months. It
did find two motorglider accidents, but those were in Utah and NV, and three
fatalities in Vermont, but in a 2-32.

I think I see my problem: I've been filtering on "Fatal" instead of "All". I now
see the Silent that landed on house, and the others. I'm looking through the
complete list, trying to pick out the aux-engine related incidents.



--
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

wrote on 11/4/2019 5:23 PM:
2G Your welcome to pay my insurance for next year. The majority of fatal
accidents this past year have involved high performance machines, some with
aux power some without. Not 1-26’s, not 2-33’s, not dusters or cherokees or
phoebus or libelles. But the very fact that I now have to pay thru the nose
for my very low performance machine due to the idiocy of “pilots� with way more
money than aeronautic sense is very graiting!

Is it possible the insurance companies know that, and set the rates accordingly?
And why wouldn't they know that - obviously, they have lots of data on the
situation! And, we know they adjust their rates, based on the pilot's hours,
rating, and - I believe - the kind of glider he flies. If so, you are not paying
more because a high performance glider has an accident. Perhaps you have some
evidence that an accident to a $200,000 motorglider raises the rate on a 1-26?

Mr. Costello has had articles in Soaring and given talks on insurance company
costs. AT times, ground damage has been the major cost, not crashes. Stuff like
trailer accidents, cars hitting gliders, canopies damaged, wings dropped during
assembly, hangar fires (Barstow!), wind damage, etc.

--
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

My glider insurance premiums with Costello are pretty much the same every year except when I upgrade my glider. The only insurance premiums I have which are not rising by nearly 10% a year from one reason or another.
So blaming rates increase on the pilots of recent crashes is uncalled for.

Ramy