A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old November 4th 19, 03:45 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
6PK
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 209
Default 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.
Ads
  #22  
Old November 4th 19, 04:57 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Ramy[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 467
Default GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH

Are the numbers quoted worldwide?

Ramy
  #23  
Old November 4th 19, 01:52 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 135
Default 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  
Old November 4th 19, 02:31 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Martin Gregorie[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 293
Default 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  
Old November 4th 19, 04:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,788
Default GLIDING INTERNATIONAL -- RESEARCH

That was worth well more than* 2 cents.

On 11/4/2019 5:52 AM, 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.


--
Dan, 5J
  #26  
Old November 4th 19, 04:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default 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  
Old November 4th 19, 05:01 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
jfitch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 937
Default 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  
Old November 4th 19, 06:23 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bob Kuykendall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,292
Default 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  
Old November 4th 19, 06:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Branko Stojkovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 35
Default 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  
Old November 4th 19, 06:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,238
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 10:33 AM
Gliding Research Assistance Kevin Christner Soaring 2 March 17th 13 10:13 PM
GLIDING INTERNATIONAL [email protected] Soaring 0 February 20th 09 11:46 PM
Gliding International john Soaring 0 May 4th 08 12:29 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.