tow rope brake practice crash, what can we learn...

It was noted...

While that's true it ignores the very
important point that a pilot will, particularly at low altitude, and
particularly if not monitoring the ASI and yaw string, tend to make
control inputs based on the observed movement of the glider over the
ground.

Not to whip a wounded horse, but this particular form of Darwinism (i.e.
"...not monitoring the ASI and yaw string") - apparently real enough per U.S.
accident lore/history - ought to serve as another reminder to
experienced/complacent/concerned pilots as to the conceptual soundness of
internalizing the fundamental thought, "This sort of accident *could* happen
to me...if I don't [do whatever] properly."

Inertial and vertical-wind-gradient effects noted, the plane does NOT know or
care what the wind-field is doing.

Bob - I believe mindset matters - W.

P.S. No need to quibble over what 'monitoring' means; if you have
useful/usable data available, using it is better than not using it when not
using it increases your chances of dying.


The effect is real. If you haven't experienced it be thankful. The
two fatal accident after rope breaks in strong wing conditions may be
related to this.

Don't you people have ridges?

I don't think anyone would be likely to get to solo here without being
very aware that the direction the glider is pointing has little to do
with the direction it is moving, and having experienced this a number
of times in 20+ knots winds, at low level, while doing a lot of 180
degree turns, with the instructor pointing it out if the string didn't
stay in the middle.

Berry wrote:
In article ,
Gilbert Smith wrote:


Have you ever considered a steeply banked side slipping turn ?
You may have a high rate of descent, but the radius of turn is so
small that the duration is very short, making the height loss small,
and you do not need to increase airspeed to do it.


We know that angle of attack is the concern in stall avoidance....any
stall spin accident off of low rope break has to have had too much
angle of attack, one way or another....This means too much stick back
pressure....This is why I like to see an obvious stick forward and
nose pitch down reaction upon rope break.....also smooth control
inputs....

Gilbert

What is the benefit of slipping?



To keep the inside wing from stalling during the turn? I have read a few
articles which recommend "slightly" slipping in a turn to prevent a tip
stall. A few other articles which pointed out that for the yaw string to
be straight in a turn, too much rudder needed to be input (because addition
of thr the sink rate shows the yaw string offset to the outside)

I don't know why people are talking about landing downwind from 200ft.
When I've done practice rope breaks it's been about a 90 degree turn
onto a short downwind for the crosswind runway, but almost invariably
when you get onto base for that you figure you've got plenty of height
to turn that into a close in downwind for the active runway.
Certainly, if there's a reasonable wind (20 - 25 knots, say) then it's
easy (and better) to go right around and land upwind even if you land
a fair way up the active runway and/or still at a 20 or 30 degree
angle to it.

How tall are the trees around your glider port?

On Jul 15, 2:48*pm, Tom Stock wrote:
I don't know why people are talking about landing downwind from 200ft.
When I've done practice rope breaks it's been about a 90 degree turn
onto a short downwind for the crosswind runway, but almost invariably
when you get onto base for that you figure you've got plenty of height
to turn that into a close in downwind for the active runway.
Certainly, if there's a reasonable wind (20 - 25 knots, say) then it's
easy (and better) to go right around and land upwind even if you land
a fair way up the active runway and/or still at a 20 or 30 degree
angle to it.

How tall are the trees around your glider port?

I've flown from a dozen or so gliding sites around New Zealand, plus
in the USA I've visited California City, Tehachapi, Turf Soaring,
Estrella, Chicago GC.

At none of them were trees a significant factor in PTT.

That's not to say that none of them had trees. Far from it, especially
here in NZ, but also at CGC.

A good friend of mine, Don Gurnett, suffered a rope break at about 150
feet on tow at a competition and he was loaded with water ballast. He
said he turned back and started dumping instantly and was able to land
on a taxi-way in a crowded environement.

Prof. Tom Schnell of the Universtiy of Iowa Operators Performance
Laboratory, a glider pilot, but the way, gave a talk last week about a
training device they are working on with the Navy. It involves real,
simulated and constructed (artificially simulated) flight. He wires
the test pilots with all kinds of electrodes on the head and torso.
They use either a 3 or 1 screen sophisticated simulator and also
actually fly the back seat of an L-29. The test pilots are mostly
National Guard fighter pilots. Dr. Schnell showed a number of
graphics which showed the increased stress level displayed in various
simulated and actual situaitons. He repeated a number of times that
the brain knows when you are truly at risk and that it is very hard to
get the simulator to duplicate the stresses a pilot feels when really
at physical risk. (One way is considerable task overload.)

I was impressed that simulators may let one practice certain maneuvers
or deal with certain situations in a non-risk environment, but
performing a give way in the simulator does not mean the body will
react the same way when it knows there is physical risk. I am not
saying simulators are not useful. I am only saying they are not
necessarily 100% predictive. Yes, I know that new airline pilots get
their training in a simulator and their first real flight is a revenue
flight.

Here is the OPL site. http://www.ccad.uiowa.edu/opl/

On Jul 13, 7:52*pm, Kevin Christner wrote:
On Jul 11, 5:38*pm, wrote:

On July 7, 2011 at Nowy Targ in southern Poland, glider Puchacz
crashed during training flight 2/3 mile from the airport. The
instructor (~64-67) and the student pilot (~18-19) are dead. *It was a
tow rope brake practice flight with down wind turn for down wind
landing from about 130-150 m of altitude (400 feet).
What can we learn from this?
Are these training flights mendatory under FAA rules?
Can pilot request opt-out from "rope brake" during Biennial Flight
Review to avoid getting killed?
I remember once during BFR the instructor pulled the release on me in
the Blanik at about 200 feet, I had to do 180 turn and land down wind
from very low altitude. I think it was dangerous and unnecessary even
for an experienced pilot as me. Andre

http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/regionalne...bowca-w-nowym-.......

Can anyone tell me if they've had an actual rope break below ~200 or
even ~400ft. *I have never, ever heard of one.

KJC

I have had ONE actual rope break below 400' on Aero tow. I have had
more than a few actual rope breaks below 200' while taking a ground
(auto) tow.

On Jul 15, 11:55*am, Dave White wrote:
On Jul 12, 9:43*am, John Cochrane
wrote:









On Jul 12, 8:43*am, Frank Paynter wrote:

On Jul 12, 8:34*am, wrote:

Frank, Hank:

You're both right. The key here is to separate the two things that are
learned by this training 1) practicing the maneuvers you will execute
to recover from a low-altitude rope break or other PTT event 2)
understanding and practicing the psychological part of reacting to any
emergency situation.

Hank's right that #2 is really not well simulated in Condor. *But
Frank is right that #1 can be practiced a lot in Condor, and then
executing maneuvers will be much easier in the air.

The same approach is useful, I think, for flight training. At our
club, most of our instructors no longer do a lot of unannounced 200
foot rope breaks. This mixes #1 and #2, creating a "real" emergency.

Instead, we brief, demonstrate and have students practice 200 foot
rope breaks, so they are comfortable with the maneuver required.
Believe me, the first 4-5 times, "you're going to do a 200 foot rope
break on this flight" keeps the adrenaline level up high enough!

We also *give them lots *of practice with unplanned emergencies, but
all at reasonable altitude. 500' rope breaks, engine failures,
spoilers coming out; "ok the spoiliers are stuck out/closed, now land
it", pretending half the runway is suddenly unusable, and so on are
all great exercises.

If you've got the mechanical skills to do a planned 200 foot break
flawlessly, and the emergency-handling skills to do all the higher-
altitude emergencies with aplomb, you're fairly prepared. We can
discuss whether practicing an actual combination, an unplanned 200'
rope break, is a useful final sanding, or an invitation to practice
stall/spin recovery from 200 feet. But at least we should get to that
point by practicing the mechanical skill and the emergency-handling
skill separately.

John Cochrane

Some additional points--first, like all simulators, Condor is a
PROCEDURES trainer. *You learn the steps to take so they become
automatic in the real world, which is far different from a
simulation. *I have and use Condor for many purposes, and have set up
a Condor simulator at my club. *It is a great piece of software for
training and practice, but it is not the real world--hot, noisy,
bouncing around, and generally not acting like the computer said it
would.

Second, the best way to avoid being killed in a glider is to stay out
of them. *Refusing to do a particular event on the basis that you
might get hurt is simply nonsense (and I would not sign off a flight
review for someone who refused to do a rope break). *You may convince
an instructor that you don't wish to do a 200' PT3 (Premature
Termination of the Tow) but that won't convince the rope or weak link
or tow hook to protect you at all times. *Would you rather your first
PT3 in a long time be a solo surprise? *That's why we practice them--
so training will get you past the "What the *&^%^*#@ just happened?"
phase to a successful landing!

Third, remember that the glider doesn't know what altitude it's at.
You do. *If you memorize and do the immediate actions*, then fly a
coordinated glider through a pre-planned profile, you should be quite
successful and stress-free during the maneuver. *The previous posters
have made the point that there is a time and a place for practicing
200 foot PT3s--their cautions are to be observed and considered in
preparing to do one. * Think about it--if the rope breaks at a higher
altitude and you do an abbreviated downwind return, you still will
likely end up doing that same 180-degree turn to final from 200 feet
AGL! *The very same maneuver you would do at the other end of the
runway, with the same temptations to skid around the turn cause those
trees are so BIG!

Finally, in teaching PT3s, I believe that the initial ones should
always be pre-briefed and not surprises until an acceptable level of
proficiency is reached. *After that, and on flight reviews, it can
happen at any time. *Just like in the real world! *(BTW, on FRs, a PT3
does count as a pattern altitude flight, and does in fact satisfy the
FAR requirement.)

*Here is one version of Immediate Actions for a PT3: *Lower the nose,
check airspeed. *Verify altitude. *Start a 45-degree bank turn in the
shortest direction toward the runway. *Pull the release twice. *(Once
all that stuff is done and you get eyes on the runway, you can *re-
evaluate your plan and do the pre-landing checklist.)

Appears there was another PTT fatality today.

http://wusa9.com/news/article/158647...Md-Plane-Crash

Recently reported as sold on W&W

Fairly routinely - On my last instruction checkout the CFI wanted to
ensure the trees were not bothering me. So we had an on-purpose PT3 at
300 feet. Then we did some "stuff", then we get sent to land from the
most unbelievable position possible - so we end up doing the approach to
the runway from below treetop level, on the far side of the line of
trees (80 foot Eucalypus) on the property boundary that end at the
threshold. Twin Astir at 50 feet agl - going the wrong way, Rocks and
bushes and fences below, irrigation pivots in the field ahead.
Fly around them and land on the runway is the only option.

Certainly focusses you on flying co-ordinated and getting it right first
time and all that.

Prepares you for those moments when you or a student have just made the
perfectly wrong decision. Far better to be discovering that you can get
home without breaking anything with the 8700 hour noisy baggage in the
back than on your own.
Far better to have done a couple of these so that you know what you can
and can't do.

I have seen a couple of gliders damaged because the pilot was sure that
they had run out of options and HAD to get it down now - when there was
still ample opportunity to make a considered choice and land somewhere
else safely...
--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771

On Jul 15, 11:22*pm, Frank Whiteley wrote:
On Jul 15, 11:55*am, Dave White wrote:





On Jul 12, 9:43*am, John Cochrane
wrote:

On Jul 12, 8:43*am, Frank Paynter wrote:

On Jul 12, 8:34*am, wrote:

Frank, Hank:

You're both right. The key here is to separate the two things that are
learned by this training 1) practicing the maneuvers you will execute
to recover from a low-altitude rope break or other PTT event 2)
understanding and practicing the psychological part of reacting to any
emergency situation.

Hank's right that #2 is really not well simulated in Condor. *But
Frank is right that #1 can be practiced a lot in Condor, and then
executing maneuvers will be much easier in the air.

The same approach is useful, I think, for flight training. At our
club, most of our instructors no longer do a lot of unannounced 200
foot rope breaks. This mixes #1 and #2, creating a "real" emergency.

Instead, we brief, demonstrate and have students practice 200 foot
rope breaks, so they are comfortable with the maneuver required.
Believe me, the first 4-5 times, "you're going to do a 200 foot rope
break on this flight" keeps the adrenaline level up high enough!

We also *give them lots *of practice with unplanned emergencies, but
all at reasonable altitude. 500' rope breaks, engine failures,
spoilers coming out; "ok the spoiliers are stuck out/closed, now land
it", pretending half the runway is suddenly unusable, and so on are
all great exercises.

If you've got the mechanical skills to do a planned 200 foot break
flawlessly, and the emergency-handling skills to do all the higher-
altitude emergencies with aplomb, you're fairly prepared. We can
discuss whether practicing an actual combination, an unplanned 200'
rope break, is a useful final sanding, or an invitation to practice
stall/spin recovery from 200 feet. But at least we should get to that
point by practicing the mechanical skill and the emergency-handling
skill separately.

John Cochrane

Some additional points--first, like all simulators, Condor is a
PROCEDURES trainer. *You learn the steps to take so they become
automatic in the real world, which is far different from a
simulation. *I have and use Condor for many purposes, and have set up
a Condor simulator at my club. *It is a great piece of software for
training and practice, but it is not the real world--hot, noisy,
bouncing around, and generally not acting like the computer said it
would.

Second, the best way to avoid being killed in a glider is to stay out
of them. *Refusing to do a particular event on the basis that you
might get hurt is simply nonsense (and I would not sign off a flight
review for someone who refused to do a rope break). *You may convince
an instructor that you don't wish to do a 200' PT3 (Premature
Termination of the Tow) but that won't convince the rope or weak link
or tow hook to protect you at all times. *Would you rather your first
PT3 in a long time be a solo surprise? *That's why we practice them--
so training will get you past the "What the *&^%^*#@ just happened?"
phase to a successful landing!

Third, remember that the glider doesn't know what altitude it's at.
You do. *If you memorize and do the immediate actions*, then fly a
coordinated glider through a pre-planned profile, you should be quite
successful and stress-free during the maneuver. *The previous posters
have made the point that there is a time and a place for practicing
200 foot PT3s--their cautions are to be observed and considered in
preparing to do one. * Think about it--if the rope breaks at a higher
altitude and you do an abbreviated downwind return, you still will
likely end up doing that same 180-degree turn to final from 200 feet
AGL! *The very same maneuver you would do at the other end of the
runway, with the same temptations to skid around the turn cause those
trees are so BIG!

Finally, in teaching PT3s, I believe that the initial ones should
always be pre-briefed and not surprises until an acceptable level of
proficiency is reached. *After that, and on flight reviews, it can
happen at any time. *Just like in the real world! *(BTW, on FRs, a PT3
does count as a pattern altitude flight, and does in fact satisfy the
FAR requirement.)

*Here is one version of Immediate Actions for a PT3: *Lower the nose,
check airspeed. *Verify altitude. *Start a 45-degree bank turn in the
shortest direction toward the runway. *Pull the release twice. *(Once
all that stuff is done and you get eyes on the runway, you can *re-
evaluate your plan and do the pre-landing checklist.)

Appears there was another PTT fatality today.

http://wusa9.com/news/article/158647...-In-Md-Plane-C...

Recently reported as sold on W&W

I saw the video, no sound. But the printed article is worthless. All
speculation, look what we tripped over reporting.
Two seat glider? Tow plane involved? Details?
T

On Jul 16, 5:16*am, BruceGreeff wrote:
Fairly routinely - On my last instruction checkout the CFI wanted to
ensure the trees were not bothering me. So we had an on-purpose PT3 at
300 feet. Then we did some "stuff", then we get sent to land from the
most unbelievable position possible - so we end up doing the approach to
the runway from below treetop level, on the far side of the line of
trees (80 foot Eucalypus) on the property boundary that end at the
threshold. Twin Astir at 50 feet agl - going the wrong way, Rocks and
bushes and fences below, irrigation pivots in the field ahead.
Fly around them and land on the runway is the only option.

Certainly focusses you on flying co-ordinated and getting it right first
time and all that.

Prepares you for those moments when you or a student have just made the
perfectly wrong decision. Far better to be discovering that you can get
home without breaking anything with the 8700 hour noisy baggage in the
back than on your own.
Far better to have done a couple of these so that you know what you can
and can't do.

I have seen a couple of gliders damaged because the pilot was sure that
they had run out of options and HAD to get it down now - when there was
still ample opportunity to make a considered choice and land somewhere
else safely...
--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771

A little extreme, but the CFI has obviously done this before. If you
still have L/d to the field, and know you can fit through or around
the trees.

We concentrate on "landing anywhere on the field that's safe" it does
not always have to be "on the runway."
T