Nimbus 4DT accident 31 July 2000 in Spain.

I want to thank Don and Stefan and others from Europe and the UK for
stepping in here.

I am fighting a lonely battle to convince my fellow USA pilots that winch
launch is a perfectly normal way to launch gliders and not some invention of
the devil. Those few US pilots who have experienced a winch launch have
most likely done so using horrendously inadequate equipment that would not
have been allowed to operate in your countries. There is no standard
training manuals so each instructor makes up their own. The results range
from hilarious to deadly.

With oil prices exceeding $60US/barrel in the last few days, and aviation
fuel prices heading into uncharted territory, the viability of our 'air tow
only' soaring operations comes into question. If oil prices continue on to
$100/barrel, as the world bank and many investment houses predict, the US
soaring community is in for some rough times if we don't quickly adopt a
more fuel efficient launch method.

To quickly shift to winch launch means that we will have to adopt the best
practices of other countries who have developed winch launch to a high level
of performance and safety.

I appreciate your continued inputs.

Bill Daniels

Stefan writes
I'm sure you instruct your students correctly. The only thing I jumped
on was the statement that there was something "abnormal" in a winch
launch. Again, different conditions require different techniques, which
means different normalities.

I think we're generally agreed that the conditions during a routine
winch launch are quite "normal" for a glider and its usual modes of
flight.

The assertion, which I agree with, is that the conditions of a launch
failure are abnormal to the normal modes of operation for the glider and
so need peculiar training and discipline to handle safely. But that's no
more a slur against winch launching than the risk of a turbulence
induced incipient spin is a discouragement to thermalling a glider. As
long as you know better than to just "pull back hard on the stick" to
prevent the spin developing and don't try to scratch away from stupidly
low heights it's a non-issue.

This is the approach I take: Normality depends on cirumstance, so
broaden your view and your repertoire of techniques.

However, the obvious extension of such a relativistic view is to argue
that abnormality is a fabrication of perception and that everything can
be termed "normal" within the context of itself. Which may be all well
and good but is catastrophically useless when it comes to defining
anything in terms that are any more than halfway useful.

That said, I can't say I don't agree with you

--
Bill Gribble
http://www.scapegoatsanon.demon.co.uk
- Learn from the mistakes of others.
- You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself.

I found it difficult, in practice, to pull the stick back far enough to
park the nose on the horizon. Very couterintuitive (for me, at least),
though I can see how any pilot at low altitude might let a canopy full
of terrain misinform his better judgement.

BTW, throughout a dozen or more of these maneuvers, the glider never
spun. I'll give details. And remember, the point of the exercise wasn't
to show how misapplied controls might cause a sudden spin (this was
more than clear throughout the maneuver), but what would happen if I
paid accute attention to coordination.

Glad to inject some humor into your life.

I too am amused by the risks we accept through habituation. I regularly
take off in tailwinds exceeding 15 knots, with water, on a runway only
2,600 feet long. I'm used to it, and accept the risk as a byproduct of
where I fly. Most pilots would consider these practices insane. As a
result, I stood in a amazement at a US Nationals when pilots were
showing grave concern over the safety of a launch with less than 7
miles per hour of tail wind.

For pilots who winch launch regularly, the definition of normal flight
attitudes is greatly expanded. But I think you'll all agree that it is
a highly specialized type of flying (even if you are used to it). Pull
on the stick to go faster. Push to go slower. If the cable breaks, no
messing around... stick right forward until the nose is well below the
horizon, then ease it back gently, paying attention to your airspeed.
Abrupt control motions, significantly reduced g, large angles of nose
up and nose down, close to the ground, special considerations regarding
turns... sounds to me like a pretty threatening environment, sort of
like taking off downwind at gross from a short runway. Deserves some
special consideration. And occasional reexamination to prevent the
complacency of experience.

Chuckle.

OC

I missed your last paragraph. As I noted to Andreas, it's all a matter
of what you are used to. A 200 foot rope break in the absence of
strong winds or turbulence is completely benign, at least for me,
having done hundreds of them.

What I'm finding interesting is the need to make fairly dramatic
motions of the controls as part of a cable break recovery. So again,
I'll flirt with the term aerobatic, not as a maneveur designed to
thrill and excite and audience or a passenger, but as a way to
differentiate use of the controls given these circumstances.

Even if you fail to observe the moment the rope breaks on aerotow, and
only become aware of it as you fail to maintain position behind the tow
plane, use of the controls is not nearly so dramatic as post cable
break. Nor, apparently, quite as critical. Though I think we can both
agree that they each represent real emergencies demanding preplanned
action.

I know we are getting off the original thread but winch
launching holds no fear for me. On the other hand a
rope break on aero tow is something that I have little
experience of. I do however have a plan and that I
believe is the key.

Understanding the problems, the differences if you
like is what training should all be about. In many
ways with the right training winch launching is safer
than aero tow, if it goes wrong you always have the
airfield to land on.

At 14:24 27 June 2005, wrote:
Glad to inject some humor into your life.

I too am amused by the risks we accept through habituation.
I regularly
take off in tailwinds exceeding 15 knots, with water,
on a runway only
2,600 feet long. I'm used to it, and accept the risk
as a byproduct of
where I fly. Most pilots would consider these practices
insane. As a
result, I stood in a amazement at a US Nationals when
pilots were
showing grave concern over the safety of a launch with
less than 7
miles per hour of tail wind.

For pilots who winch launch regularly, the definition
of normal flight
attitudes is greatly expanded. But I think you'll all
agree that it is
a highly specialized type of flying (even if you are
used to it). Pull
on the stick to go faster. Push to go slower. If the
cable breaks, no
messing around... stick right forward until the nose
is well below the
horizon, then ease it back gently, paying attention
to your airspeed.
Abrupt control motions, significantly reduced g, large
angles of nose
up and nose down, close to the ground, special considerations
regarding
turns... sounds to me like a pretty threatening environment,
sort of
like taking off downwind at gross from a short runway.
Deserves some
special consideration. And occasional reexamination
to prevent the
complacency of experience.

Chuckle.

OC

wrote:

What I'm finding interesting is the need to make fairly dramatic
motions of the controls as part of a cable break recovery. So again,
I'll flirt with the term aerobatic,

Last weekend I flew in the mountains. Conditions were rough and I had to
make fairly dramatic motions of the controls to keep the blue side up.
I'll log it as an aerobatic flight, then.

Even if you fail to observe the moment the rope breaks on aerotow, and
only become aware of it as you fail to maintain position behind the tow
plane,

Awareness and prompt reaction are indispensable to survive which
launches. A winch launch *is* dangerous, in the way as there is a very
small margin for errors and it asks for your full focus.

Stefan

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:23:05 UTC, Don Johnstone
wrote:

: I know we are getting off the original thread but winch
: launching holds no fear for me.

It bleeding terrifies me - but I think that's pretty healthy!

I spend quite a lot of time each year introducing children to the joys
of soldering. After I have explained how hot the iron is, how
important it is not to touch the metal bits, and so on, I ask if
anyone is scared. A few timid hands always go up - at which point I
say "Well done! You've been listening - there are some things in life
which it is right to be scared of, and soldering is one of them".

"Anything to do with aviation, and especially winch launching" is one
of the others, I suggest!

Ian

--

Bill Daniels wrote:

I am fighting a lonely battle to convince my fellow USA pilots that winch
launch is a perfectly normal way to launch gliders and not some invention of
the devil.

Just three things to consider:

A which launch brings you to a certain altitude above the site. At some
places, this gives you enough options to find a thermal, at other sites,
it does not.

A winch operation doesn't mix well with other traffic. It's doable, if
everybody is willing.

And, most important: If done correctly, a winch launch is safe. But
there is an extremely small margin for errors. I love winch launches,
but they are dead serious, literally.

Stefan

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:48:07 UTC, Stefan
wrote:

: Last weekend I flew in the mountains. Conditions were rough and I had to
: make fairly dramatic motions of the controls to keep the blue side up.
: I'll log it as an aerobatic flight, then.

All this seems to hinge on what's meant by "aerobatic". Frankly, it
seems like a pretty pointless term to me, since it seems to depend on
the intention of the pilot rather on the manoevres flown. Why, for
example, is a loop aerobatic yet a tight thermalling turn, involving
similar stresses on the glider, is not?

To me, it makes more sense to categorize manoevres as high load / low
load and high risk / low risk, where "load" relates to forces on the
glider and "risk" relates to the speed with which things will go wrong
if the pilot misreacts.

That gives four permutations:

1) low load / low risk (normal flight)
2) low load / high risk (inverted flight)
3) high load / low risk (loop, tight thermalling)
4) high load / high risk (spin or spiral dive recovery)

This is off the top of my head, and I am sure we could argue about the
categories (should there be a "medium" in each case?) and
categorisations (how hard is a loop) for ages.

However, I think I would put many display aerobatic manoevres and
winch launching together in the high load / high risk category: it's
not that winch launching is aerobatic (whatever that means) but it is
also a time when the glider is being flown with higher than normal
structural loadings and when pilot error can cause things to go very
nasty very quickly.

I'd put mountain flying, from the little I have done, in the low load
/ high risk category at the very least, and probably high / high on
rough days.

Ian


--