Attitudes & Reality

One of the really nice things about flying "out west" is having cloud
bases above 20,000' MSL.Â* I never go above 18,000' any more, it's just
too cold!

On 5/1/2018 1:24 PM, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
At cloud base you have violated FARs. How many Western pilots actually know and adhere to cloud clearance regulations above 10,000ft?

111 1,000 ft below; 1,000 above and 1 sm horizontal

....Again I go back to - your opinion may be that you are safe at cloud base ....

--
Dan, 5J

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 9:07:48 AM UTC-7, BobW wrote:
A post from another thread is timely - this being the start of the most active
part of the U.S. soaring season. Excerpted from another thread:

Beginning of Excerpt...

"There's a personality type that won't be convinced. I stopped to talk to a
pilot who was launching on a wave day at Minden. Foehn gap was dynamic,
tentacles moving and reaching in with drizzle earlier as I drove north on
Foothill to Minden airport. The gap, and a lone sucker hole about half way to
the Pinenuts, were the only holes through an otherwise solid deck at about
9,000'.

"He was the only one launching in his Carat. I'd asked him before about no
chute, said they were uncomfortable, I suggested he sit in my glider to see
what he thought - he countered, "You don't use a chute in your Mooney, do you?
Well, my Carat is certified too".

"He was relatively new to soaring, so I cautioned him about going above and
leaving the gap. He said he wouldn't do that as he didn't have O2 because of a
slow leak - he declined my offer to fill his tank. There was more, but to keep
it short . . . he died that day as I was eating lunch at the Taildragger. He
was a retired airline pilot, lot's of experience but no attitude gyro. Kept
his GPS off in the side pocket until he needed it. He went IMC. The debris
field was 5 miles long. My golden retriever and I would be the last to ever
greet him.

"Really good pilots don't need Flarm. Don't need a chute either. He was not
THAT good."

End of Excerpt...

I'm likely not the only RASident to remember this particular pilot from his
tenure-on/contributions-to RAS. I didn't know the man, or his background,
beyond what was self-revealed in his posts, but I remember certain aspects (as
they seemed to me) of his post-centric-personality triggered tiny flags of
concern in my noodle. Unsurprisingly to me, nothing from the excerpt above is
at odds with those now-ancient recollections. The flags all had to do with
what seemed-to-me to be "unwarranted certitude" relative to certain
safety-related opinions held by the poster. My never-verbalized take then, was
along the lines of: I hope your future PIC realities don't exceed your
"expressed certitudes." Reality always wins.

Soaring - everything - has risks. It's up to J. Pilot to intelligently
mitigate 'em. Apparently, the pilot in the cautionary tale above could have
done a better job of mitigating those related to his soaring "career."
Sometimes warning flags are raised in others' minds; sometimes not. Reason for
this post is to encourage more toward the "active awareness" portion of
reading pilots' brains, the *possibility* that their attitudes - and decisions
relating thereto - may have "quite direct, negative" influences upon their
flight outcomes. The trick - in my view - is to actively seek to bias "future
reality" in your favor as much as reasonably possible. What that motherhood
and apple pie statement means is (almost) entirely up to J. Pilot. FLARM,
transponder, parachute, ATC vs. Experimental certification, pure or
engine-assisted ship, XC, competition, wave or ridge or thermal-only
soaring... J. Pilot gets - and *needs* - to choose. Many an accident report
strongly suggests it DOESN'T go without saying, "Choose wisely."

Avoidable loss of life is always a tragedy in my view, regardless of the
proximity of the personal relationship.

Bob W.

P.S. For the record, if any reader's main takeaway from reading my opinions as
expressed in this post, is something along the lines of, "Man! This guy is
really good at second-guessing someone else's decisions," I'll regretfully
have to conclude my self-selected little safety sermon hasn't been entirely
successful! In any event have - safe - fun out there, everyone!!!

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

I have a very simple rule of thumb: I would rather be on the ground wishing I was up there, than be up there wishing I was on the ground!

Tom

Right up there with comments like......
Runway behind you
Altitude above you
Fuel at the filling station.

See and avoid is still primary unless real IFR (IFR in VFR does NOT mean you don't look outside).

At our field, when we get to 5000', it pays to look to the north/northeast now and then. We are under an airway to the major airports in the NY metro area. We have tried to have ATC keep heavy iron above cloud base on weekends.

We are also about 18 miles from a VOR, so we look more when in that area.

But we should always be looking.
Black boxes and screens are nice to add to the mix, but I still rely on my eyeballs.

On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 8:49:11 AM UTC-4, wrote:
You think you are safe at cloudbase because you have a transponder and or Flarm? Hooked up to a hobby battery with wires and connectors from radio shack. Lolz. Good number of the posts on RAS are about our glider electronics malfunctioning. And with working gadgets we still have the monkey brain electronic gadget interface incompatibilities.

Actually no, I've never thought I was "safe" in a glider, at cloudbase or otherwise. Soaring, like most activities that involve human control of lots of energy is *inherently* dangerous. It's my job to mitigate the risks. Statistically, we know that the biggies are take off emergencies and bad landings, frequently seasoned with a measure of poor judgement (go/no-go decisions, etc). Mid air threats are secondary, but nasty buggers because our monkey brains and monkey eyes have inherent limitations. Flarm looks through all 4 pi steriradians at once for other flarms and adsbs, and it does a great job. Smart pilots look at flarm as part of a layered defense against midair threats.

T8

Or the old one:

Never run out of altitude, airspeed and ideas at the same time.

That has to go back at least to WWII I bet.

On Friday, May 4, 2018 at 11:00:38 AM UTC-5, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)

See and avoid is still primary unless real IFR (IFR in VFR does NOT mean you don't look outside).

At our field, when we get to 5000', it pays to look to the north/northeast now and then. We are under an airway to the major airports in the NY metro area. We have tried to have ATC keep heavy iron above cloud base on weekends.

We are also about 18 miles from a VOR, so we look more when in that area.

But we should always be looking.
Black boxes and screens are nice to add to the mix, but I still rely on my eyeballs.

The trouble is, eyeballs don't work for **** when you really need them. Big Sky is still the main collision avoidance system when flying gliders, unfortunately.

If you don't believe that, think a little about how the best eyeball scan is going to see a small, fast mover coming up behind you on a collision course while you are cruising between thermals.

Ever heard a plane before you saw it? I have - jets even - it's pretty spooky!

Don't get me wrong - eyeballs will keep YOU from hitting someone else. But they have a bad track record working the other way. Which is why I'll use any technology I can afford and fit In my glider to help me detect and avoid traffic.

Kirk
66

On Friday, May 4, 2018 at 5:18:18 PM UTC-4, kirk.stant wrote:
On Friday, May 4, 2018 at 11:00:38 AM UTC-5, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)

See and avoid is still primary unless real IFR (IFR in VFR does NOT mean you don't look outside).

At our field, when we get to 5000', it pays to look to the north/northeast now and then. We are under an airway to the major airports in the NY metro area. We have tried to have ATC keep heavy iron above cloud base on weekends.

We are also about 18 miles from a VOR, so we look more when in that area.

But we should always be looking.
Black boxes and screens are nice to add to the mix, but I still rely on my eyeballs.

The trouble is, eyeballs don't work for **** when you really need them. Big Sky is still the main collision avoidance system when flying gliders, unfortunately.

If you don't believe that, think a little about how the best eyeball scan is going to see a small, fast mover coming up behind you on a collision course while you are cruising between thermals.

Ever heard a plane before you saw it? I have - jets even - it's pretty spooky!

Don't get me wrong - eyeballs will keep YOU from hitting someone else. But they have a bad track record working the other way. Which is why I'll use any technology I can afford and fit In my glider to help me detect and avoid traffic.

Kirk
66

Traffic warnings are no guarantee. Posted one of these before https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGQmdoK_ZfY
Consider all the gear up warnings that get ignored. Just because something beeps doesn't mean we will notice. And all the traffic alerts that aren't a factor are a distraction from flying and looking for the one with our name on it. ADS-B alerts train pilots to be distracted and stressed by traffic that isn't a collision risk. While adding to risk homeostasis.
With widespread adoption of this stuff you will see just as many if not more midairs.

And all the traffic alerts that aren't a factor are a distraction from flying and looking for the one with our name on it. ADS-B alerts train pilots to be distracted and stressed by traffic that isn't a collision risk. While adding to risk homeostasis.
With widespread adoption of this stuff you will see just as many if not more midairs.

Actually, the FLARM only alerts to properly configured (i.e., a glider is set as a glider) traffic. If it alerts, there is a collision risk. The algorithms they've been working on for a dozen or so years are very good. So you don't get "...all the traffic alerts that aren't a factor..."

I have a very simple rule of thumb: I would rather be on the ground wishing I was up there, than be up there wishing I was on the ground!

Tom


I use 'think how your decision will look on the accident report'

On Friday, May 4, 2018 at 4:12:48 PM UTC-7, wrote:

I have a very simple rule of thumb: I would rather be on the ground wishing I was up there, than be up there wishing I was on the ground!

Tom


I use 'think how your decision will look on the accident report'

Or on the front page of the newspaper for all your relatives and friends to read.

Tom