Winch Signals

At 21:45 13 April 2009, Big Wings wrote:
Laws & Rules edn 16.3 does not say that the BGA recommends lights... I
could interpret it to mean the opposite!

5.6 One of the following procedures must be used for all launches, other
than bungey launches,

unless a serviceable telephone or radio system is installed between the
person in charge of the glider end of the cable and the winch or car
driver or tug pilot.


Big Wings is correct. it can only mean the opposite. Bats or lights are a
fall back system if the primary system of a radio or telephone is not
available. That is how the current rules are written.

Another gliding myth then that lights are the primary system. I suspect
this may come from the Air Cadets where lights are, or were compulsory,
but the BGA has always done things differently. As a matter of interest
the Air Cadets are still using the old system of the pilot giving the
signal to launch, one or two fingers waved appropriately. Makes a complete
nonsense of the assertion that the launch marshall system is safer. Both
systems are safe if used correctly, one wonders how a particular system
can be safe in one organisation and viewed as unsafe in another. One thing
the Air Cadets can say with absolute certainty is that they have never
launched a dead or unconcious pilot.

It is far safer to have your left hand on the release knob than waving
fingers of that hand around in the air. That way you can release quickly
in the event of a wing drop, loss of directional control, or any other
emergency situation.

Also a launch marshall or launch point controller has a much better all
round view and situational awareness than the pilot, who can't see what
is happening behind him or her. If the pilot does see a problem ahead
he/she should just pull off and shout or radio "Stop".

Air Cadets, being young and fit, should be less likely to die or become
unconcious at the controls, than the general, somewhat aged, UK glider
pilot poulation. If I am acting as launch point controller, I would
certainly recheck that the pilot is still OK and ready to launch if there
is any delay between hooking the cable on and taking up slack.

Most of the major clubs in the south of England use light signals as the
primary method of signalling, including mine. It is simple, reliable and
free from possible interferences. Bats would be difficult to see from the
winch if you have a decent length winch run, or if the airfield is at all
humped.

On the subject of glider to winch speed signals, the UK system is to yaw
the glider with rudder for 'too fast' and to lower the nose for 'too
slow'. The latter also reduces the chance of stalling or spinning by
reducing the effective wing loading, notwithstanding the dangers of
manoeuvring close to the stall. BTW, we no longer ease forward to unload
the glider before signalling too fast, as this could initially be
misinterpreted as a too slow signal. If the launch is very much too fast,
or doesn't slow down after signalling, pilots are advised to climb to a
minimum safe circuit height and then pull off. The biggest loads on the
glider's structure occur near the top of the launch.

Some of the German Clubs I have flown at rocked the wings for too fast and
waggled the rudder rather rapidly over a small range for too slow. The
latter was intended as a signal to the launch marshall to tell the winch
driver to speed up via the landline telephone that they have to have in
that country.

Derek Copeland



At 23:30 15 April 2009, Don Johnstone wrote:
At 21:45 13 April 2009, Big Wings wrote:
Laws & Rules edn 16.3 does not say that the BGA recommends lights...
I
could interpret it to mean the opposite!

5.6 One of the following procedures must be used for all launches,
other
than bungey launches,

unless a serviceable telephone or radio system is installed between the
person in charge of the glider end of the cable and the winch or car
driver or tug pilot.


Big Wings is correct. it can only mean the opposite. Bats or lights are
a
fall back system if the primary system of a radio or telephone is not
available. That is how the current rules are written.

Another gliding myth then that lights are the primary system. I suspect
this may come from the Air Cadets where lights are, or were compulsory,
but the BGA has always done things differently. As a matter of interest
the Air Cadets are still using the old system of the pilot giving the
signal to launch, one or two fingers waved appropriately. Makes a
complete
nonsense of the assertion that the launch marshall system is safer. Both
systems are safe if used correctly, one wonders how a particular system
can be safe in one organisation and viewed as unsafe in another. One
thing
the Air Cadets can say with absolute certainty is that they have never
launched a dead or unconcious pilot.

At 06:15 16 April 2009, Derek Copeland wrote:
It is far safer to have your left hand on the release knob than waving
fingers of that hand around in the air. That way you can release quickly
in the event of a wing drop, loss of directional control, or any other
emergency situation.

If that were the case then we should have seen the result by now. The
statistics just do not support the assertion that the one method is safer,
or less safe than the other. Given that the organisation that is solely
winch launched still uses the pilot in command system one would have
thought there should be some statistical evidence by now. The reality is
that Air Cadet winch launching is statistically far safer than other
organisations.


Air Cadets, being young and fit, should be less likely to die or become
unconcious at the controls, than the general, somewhat aged, UK glider
pilot poulation. If I am acting as launch point controller, I would
certainly recheck that the pilot is still OK and ready to launch if
there
is any delay between hooking the cable on and taking up slack.

It is absolutely certain that an incapicitated pilot is not going to give
the signal. If he is so incapicitated that he is unable to initiate a STOP
then he certainly cannot give the go. The potentially fatal flaw is the
possibility of launching an incapacitated pilot remembering that the
system relies on an unknown quality of launch marshall. Your argument that
incapacitation is less likely makes AC operations more suitable for launch
marshalls however they steadfastly refuse to convert because of the
inherent dangers involved, and the statistical data that shows they are
right not to change.

Neither system is perfect, both are perfectly valid and safe IF OPERATED
CORRECTLY and therein lies the nub, it does seem that many of our rules
are formulated because of a basic inability to ensure correct procedures
are followed, and instead of working on correcting a problem we invent a
way of avoiding it. Sometimes this medicine is more harmful than the
disease.
OK we probably got away with killing a pilot who was launched when
incapacitated once, we may not be so lucky again.
Before this gets flamed, all I am suggesting is that the evidence does not
support the assertion that the pilot control method was unsafe, rather the
contrary.
On balance I suppose the launching of an incapacitated pilot is not that
much of a problem, not likely to occur very often, and of course the pilot
is unlikely to complain.

Once again there is the BGA way and there is Don's way!

The BGA recommendations are distilled wisdom and best
practice. It allows for common methodologies and a lack of
misunderstanding.

When P1 my left hand is going to be on the release; if I am
launch controller and the pilot waves fingers at me I will abort
the launch. The pilot may be experiencing tingling in the fingers
and about to have a heart attack!

As to never having launched a dead or unconscious pilot,
hmmm. How dead Don? Only from the neck up!
Best wishes

JohnR-K

"OK we probably got away with killing a pilot who was launched when
incapacitated once, we may not be so lucky again."

What????????

Is that the luck o' the Irish?


At 09:30 16 April 2009, Don Johnstone wrote:
At 06:15 16 April 2009, Derek Copeland wrote:
It is far safer to have your left hand on the release knob than waving
fingers of that hand around in the air. That way you can release
quickly
in the event of a wing drop, loss of directional control, or any other
emergency situation.

If that were the case then we should have seen the result by now. The
statistics just do not support the assertion that the one method is
safer,
or less safe than the other. Given that the organisation that is solely
winch launched still uses the pilot in command system one would have
thought there should be some statistical evidence by now. The reality is
that Air Cadet winch launching is statistically far safer than other
organisations.


Air Cadets, being young and fit, should be less likely to die or become
unconcious at the controls, than the general, somewhat aged, UK glider
pilot poulation. If I am acting as launch point controller, I would
certainly recheck that the pilot is still OK and ready to launch if
there
is any delay between hooking the cable on and taking up slack.

It is absolutely certain that an incapicitated pilot is not going to
give
the signal. If he is so incapicitated that he is unable to initiate a
STOP
then he certainly cannot give the go. The potentially fatal flaw is the
possibility of launching an incapacitated pilot remembering that the
system relies on an unknown quality of launch marshall. Your argument
that
incapacitation is less likely makes AC operations more suitable for
launch
marshalls however they steadfastly refuse to convert because of the
inherent dangers involved, and the statistical data that shows they are
right not to change.

Neither system is perfect, both are perfectly valid and safe IF OPERATED
CORRECTLY and therein lies the nub, it does seem that many of our rules
are formulated because of a basic inability to ensure correct procedures
are followed, and instead of working on correcting a problem we invent a
way of avoiding it. Sometimes this medicine is more harmful than the
disease.
OK we probably got away with killing a pilot who was launched when
incapacitated once, we may not be so lucky again.
Before this gets flamed, all I am suggesting is that the evidence does
not
support the assertion that the pilot control method was unsafe, rather
the
contrary.
On balance I suppose the launching of an incapacitated pilot is not that
much of a problem, not likely to occur very often, and of course the
pilot
is unlikely to complain.

At 12:30 16 April 2009, John Roche-Kelly wrote:
Once again there is the BGA way and there is Don's way!

Not my way at all, the way of the Air Cadet movement who have the benefit
of advice from the Central Flying School and the Flight Safety
organisation, Royal Air Force. They deem the launch marshall system to be
unsafe and unfit for purpose, I happen to agree with them.

The BGA recommendations are distilled wisdom and best
practice. It allows for common methodologies and a lack of
misunderstanding.

When P1 my left hand is going to be on the release; if I am
launch controller and the pilot waves fingers at me I will abort
the launch. The pilot may be experiencing tingling in the fingers
and about to have a heart attack!

The current winch launch marshall was introduced as a response to a
perceived problem by pilots being unable to operate the release if their
hand was not on it. There was very little distilled wisdom involved.
Analysis of the statistical data since introduction provides no evidence
to support this assertion, in fact the opposite. If the original assertion
had been correct there would have been a divergence in accident rates
between the two organisations and a reduction in launch events within the
BGA related to late release. I have seen no evidence to show that either
is the case, if you have evidence please produce it.
Given that the AC movement carry out a large number of winch launches one
would expect that the statistics would have highlighted a disparity by
now, why have they not?

As to never having launched a dead or unconscious pilot,
hmmm. How dead Don? Only from the neck up!
Best wishes

Allowing a third party to initiate a launch always carries the risk that
the marshall is not aware of the full picture, depending on his
competence. If a pilot suffers incapacitation between having the cable
attached and the launch, it is possible for the launch to take place
despite that incapacitation, that is a matter of fact not conjecture. If a
pilot is incapcitated to the level that prevents him giving a stop signal
it follows that he would be unable to give the signal to initiate the
launch.

Why you have to make this a personal thing beats me, what happened to open
discussion. It is only by full and open discusiion that problems will be
solved, not by slavish adherence to the status quo or name calling.


JohnR-K

How much time is there between accepting the cable to being
launched? What likelihood is there of the pilot being
incapacitated in this short time?

I would opine that P1 is more likely to drop a wing and would
therefore concentrate on this risk, therefore hand on the
release. I am sure I am not the only person, when LM, who
looks at the pilot as well as around and behind as I give the
signals. This covers all the bases don't you think?

My apologies if the remarks were seen as personal, they were
not intended to be, after all, that I can do that to your face, can
I not?
Best wishes

JohnR-K

On 16 Apr, 00:30, Don Johnstone wrote:

As a matter of interest
the Air Cadets are still using the old system of the pilot giving the
signal to launch, one or two fingers waved appropriately. Makes a complete
nonsense of the assertion that the launch marshall system is safer. Both
systems are safe if used correctly, one wonders how a particular system
can be safe in one organisation and viewed as unsafe in another.

No system like this is "safe" or "unsafe" - it's all a matter of
degree, The BGA change was pushed through because a few argumentative
people shouted IT'S SAFER and nobody like to argue against safety.

Ian

On 16 Apr, 07:15, Derek Copeland wrote:
It is far safer to have your left hand on the release knob than waving
fingers of that hand around in the air. That way you can release quickly
in the event of a wing drop, loss of directional control, or any other
emergency situation. *

And pull the knob accidentally in a gust or when a wheel hits a bump.
Having your hand on th erelease at take-off is a Very Bad Idea ... in
my humble opinion, of course.

Anyway, who's to say that the hand is on the release knob? When
fingers were waved, you knew that a hand was available for release and
not titivating the GPS.

Ian

On 16 Apr, 10:30, Don Johnstone wrote:

Neither system is perfect, both are perfectly valid and safe IF OPERATED
CORRECTLY and therein lies the nub, it does seem that many of our rules
are formulated because of a basic inability to ensure correct procedures
are followed, and instead of working on correcting a problem we invent a
way of avoiding it.

Hear, hear. Many, many people have died - in many areas of human
endeavour - because they thought that A System would keep them safe.

Ian