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

Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old February 10th 12, 09:23 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
JJ Sinclair[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 359
Default Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...


I was the one getting the BFR and Jeffrey was providing me with some ridge
training during the flight phase of the review.


Forgive me Jim, but I just got to ask, did you pass the BFR?
:) JJ
  #52  
Old February 11th 12, 01:07 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 173
Default Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...

As a new student glider pilot, this thread holds a lot of interest to
me. When I first made the decision to start learning to fly, one of
the first tasks I undertook was looking into my life insurance
policy. Sure enough, my policy excluded aviation related activites
from payout. So, I went in search of new life insurance without
aviation exclusions.

I learned very quickly how dangerous the insurance industry believes
gliding is. Imagine the following paraphrased summary of my
conversation with multiple agents:
Me: Looking for new life insurance that does not exclude aviation
activites.
Agent: Oh wow, that's going to be expensive. Give me some details.
Me: Taking glider pilot lessons, want to be covered.
Agent: Gliders!!!!???!!! OH WOW! That is going to be *REALLY*
expensive since that is the highest risk aviation category.
Etc.

The point is, glider pilots have no one to blame but ourselves for the
very poor safety record we apparently have. And, as demonstrated by
the huge premiums I am now paying to be covered, the few bad apples
are definitely costing the reast of us dearly - both monetarily and in
reputation. I really appreciate those on this forum who are taking
safety seriously and hope that we all can reflect a bit and ask
ourselves if we're doing all we can to promote safety. If you can
answer yes then thank you! If you can't, then maybe Matt's comments
will strike a chord and provide the needed challenge to improve this
season.

Robert

On Feb 10, 10:55*am, matt michael wrote:
You partially misunderstand me Dan. *I'm not suggesting that we soar
because it's cool. *I'm saying that we need to foster a culture that
makes it cool to be "professional" in our conduct as soaring pilots,
cool to be a team player in our approach to safety.

Obviously, you already approach airmanship in a professional way and
by example have a positive influence on the culture of safety. You are
already a part of the solution. *It is true that the many pilots in
our sport operate safely and also true that they can do so without
formal safety programs. *But you have to understand that not everyone
has the backround, training, and respect for airmanship that you do.
This is true of some CFIGs too! * If good safe soaring pilots like
yourself go around saying "we don't need no stinking safety programs"
the pilots and would-be pilots that don't understand and respect
airmanship, the ones that really need recurrent training and ongoing
supervision wont sign up for it. *They don't have to and if the expert
pilots they respect don't bother with it why should they? *That's what
I mean about "cool". *We have to make it cool to and participate in
safety related programs in soaring so that all soaring pilots will be
motivated to join the team.

Good airmanship starts with the individual and must be a personal
commitment but until we are all on the same team we don't have a
chance of reducing our accident rates. The ones to look out for are
the ones who refuse to join the team, regardless of their backround,
knowledge, and experience.

Matt Michael

On Feb 10, 8:34*am, "Dan Marotta" wrote:



But... *We are *not* professionals. *Some of us, myself included, are or
have been professionals and have attended and participated in all of the
safety programs which you mention. *All of these programs have a positive
impact on safety, mainly with the threat of loss of livelihood. *You don't
play, we don't pay.


I fly gliders not because it's COOL - I do it because I love it and, since I
also love living, I operate my glider in a safe manner. *I suspect the
majority of us fly and operate for the same or similar reasons.


For the same reason as stated above, I also wear a DOT approved helmet when
I ride my motorcycle. *It is not required where I live but I do it for MY
SAFETY! *I've worn seat belts in my cars since the 60s, not because it's
required, but because it improves my safety.


Please don't misconstrue that I say to mean that I'm against safety (as I
know a certain individual will do), I am very much for safety. *We can
operate our aircraft safely without formal safety programs. *Our CFIGs can
arm us with the information we need to make rational judgments and they can
get all of the latest information and techniques from those programs
required by the FAA to maintain their certification. *Those who want to fly
because it's "cool" are the ones to look out for...- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


  #53  
Old February 11th 12, 02:12 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...

Matt,

You are absolutely correct - I misunderstood your position. What you said
below makes it perfectly clear.

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

Dan

"matt michael" wrote in message
...
You partially misunderstand me Dan. I'm not suggesting that we soar
because it's cool. I'm saying that we need to foster a culture that
makes it cool to be "professional" in our conduct as soaring pilots,
cool to be a team player in our approach to safety.

Obviously, you already approach airmanship in a professional way and
by example have a positive influence on the culture of safety. You are
already a part of the solution. It is true that the many pilots in
our sport operate safely and also true that they can do so without
formal safety programs. But you have to understand that not everyone
has the backround, training, and respect for airmanship that you do.
This is true of some CFIGs too! If good safe soaring pilots like
yourself go around saying "we don't need no stinking safety programs"
the pilots and would-be pilots that don't understand and respect
airmanship, the ones that really need recurrent training and ongoing
supervision wont sign up for it. They don't have to and if the expert
pilots they respect don't bother with it why should they? That's what
I mean about "cool". We have to make it cool to and participate in
safety related programs in soaring so that all soaring pilots will be
motivated to join the team.

Good airmanship starts with the individual and must be a personal
commitment but until we are all on the same team we don't have a
chance of reducing our accident rates. The ones to look out for are
the ones who refuse to join the team, regardless of their backround,
knowledge, and experience.

Matt Michael










On Feb 10, 8:34 am, "Dan Marotta" wrote:
But... We are *not* professionals. Some of us, myself included, are or
have been professionals and have attended and participated in all of the
safety programs which you mention. All of these programs have a positive
impact on safety, mainly with the threat of loss of livelihood. You don't
play, we don't pay.

I fly gliders not because it's COOL - I do it because I love it and, since
I
also love living, I operate my glider in a safe manner. I suspect the
majority of us fly and operate for the same or similar reasons.

For the same reason as stated above, I also wear a DOT approved helmet
when
I ride my motorcycle. It is not required where I live but I do it for MY
SAFETY! I've worn seat belts in my cars since the 60s, not because it's
required, but because it improves my safety.

Please don't misconstrue that I say to mean that I'm against safety (as I
know a certain individual will do), I am very much for safety. We can
operate our aircraft safely without formal safety programs. Our CFIGs can
arm us with the information we need to make rational judgments and they
can
get all of the latest information and techniques from those programs
required by the FAA to maintain their certification. Those who want to fly
because it's "cool" are the ones to look out for...


  #54  
Old February 11th 12, 06:44 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jim Wallis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...

Kudos to Matt Michael for moving the discussion on to the bigger picture.
I would add that I had just came from the SSA convention and, before that,
the PASCO safety seminar in November. Jeffrey was at the Convention, at
least, so I think it would be fair to say that both of us started the day
focused upon having a safe flight. Not only is Jeffrey a highly
experienced pilot, but there was nothing about the flight (a simple BFR)
that would tempt either of us into pushing the envelope.

I have been very intrigued with Richard Carlson's descriptions of the
"culture of safety" idea. Spent some time chatting with him about it at
the PASCO meeting and also attended the safety presentation at the SSA
convention. If it is possible to eventually use this incident as a
springboard to improving the safety of our sport then I fully support that.


To be honest, I'm not certain there is anything particularly special about
this landout - I've since heard of two others in this general vicinity
which have passed with little attention. On the other hand, nothing quite
captures your attention like landing on a ski slope - so perhaps that will
"sell" a little more safety to the soaring community.

- Jim

p.s. A couple of people have asked whether I passed the BFR. I wouldn't
answer this if it weren't JJ asking because no matter what the answer,
I have been concerned that someone would make an incorrect implication
about fault or cause/effect. So I trust all of you to be professional and
appreciate that (1) no CFIG in his right mind would let a student fly into
a potentially dangerous situation (2) that the BFR is neither structured
nor intended as a test, but rather as an instructional/recurrency
opportunity.

Quite simply, the sequence of events that led to the off field landing was
not connected to the BFR. That said, I can guarantee that I learned a heck
of a lot on that flight and I'm looking forward to sharing!

Yeah. I passed.

p.p.s. And to the new guy to soaring with the expensive insurance policy:
Insurers with no experience will often try to act scared of something -
that is their excuse to charge more for the policy. Shop it around some
more. There are outfits that will insure you to fly for a reasonable cost.


Incidentally, on Monday I heard the President of the trade association for
California ski resorts assert on the radio that skiing was "inherently
dangerous". This is true. While I was waiting on the slope to help with
the retrieve there were two separate life flight helicopter missions to
Heavenly for skiers who were seriously injured by skiing just in the course
of a couple of hours. Yet no one in the ski industry is calling for
additional safety training or safety precautions - to the contrary, the
reason for his interview was that he was RESISTING outside suggestions for
additional safety tools...

Flying is not inherently dangerous. The reason for the attention to safety
you are seeing in soaring now is precisely because we have so many people
who are absolutely willing to set aside personal interest and step up to
the plate when they see a problem.

Welcome to the sport. There is no other like it.

  #55  
Old February 11th 12, 07:57 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Robert S
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...

Yeah, I eventually ended up taking a policy with piclife. Its cost
was about twice the price of my original insurance policy. However,
traditional companies were all quoting around 8x my original policy
rate. Ouch.

Robert

On Feb 10, 11:44*pm, Jim Wallis
wrote:
..
p.p.s. *And to the new guy to soaring with the expensive insurance
policy:
Insurers with no experience will often try to act scared of something
-
that is their excuse to charge more for the policy. *Shop it around
some
more. *There are outfits that will insure you to fly for a reasonable
cost.

Welcome to the sport. *There is no other like it.

  #56  
Old February 11th 12, 09:54 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Ramy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 746
Default Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...

On Feb 10, 10:57*pm, Robert S wrote:
Yeah, I eventually ended up taking a policy with piclife. *Its cost
was about twice the price of my original insurance policy. *However,
traditional companies were all quoting around 8x my original policy
rate. Ouch.

Robert

On Feb 10, 11:44*pm, Jim wrote:

.
* p.p.s. *And to the new guy to soaring with the expensive insurance
policy:
*Insurers with no experience will often try to act scared of something
-
*that is their excuse to charge more for the policy. *Shop it around
some
*more. *There are outfits that will insure you to fly for a reasonable
cost.

*Welcome to the sport. *There is no other like it.


Did you look at the insurace that AOPA is offering (AVEMCO)? Ended up
costing me less than the prior life insurance I had.

Ramy
  #57  
Old February 11th 12, 11:30 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tom Gardner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 141
Default Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...

On Feb 11, 12:07*am, wrote:
As a new student glider pilot, this thread holds a lot of interest to
me. *When I first made the decision to start learning to fly, one of
the first tasks I undertook was looking into my life insurance
policy. *Sure enough, my policy excluded aviation related activites
from payout. *So, I went in search of new life insurance without
aviation exclusions.

I learned very quickly how dangerous the insurance industry believes
gliding is. *Imagine the following paraphrased summary of my
conversation with multiple agents:
Me: *Looking for new life insurance that does not exclude aviation
activites.
Agent: *Oh wow, that's going to be expensive. *Give me some details.
Me: *Taking glider pilot lessons, want to be covered.
Agent: *Gliders!!!!???!!! *OH WOW! *That is going to be *REALLY*
expensive since that is the highest risk aviation category.
Etc.


There are two points that may or may not be relevant.

Firstly many people think "gliding" is "hang gliding" or
"paragliding".
Sometimes it can be useful to explain what you're _not_ going to
be doing.

Secondly almost all insurers have their "target demographic", and
don't want to stray outside that. If you are outside that then they
quote outrageous premiums simply because the are not interested
in assessing the specific risks. In effect they are obliquely but
politely "cherry picking", and implying you should check another
insurer.
  #58  
Old February 11th 12, 04:09 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
JJ Sinclair[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 359
Default Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...


Quite simply, the sequence of events that led to the off field landing was
not connected to the BFR. *That said, I can guarantee that I learned a heck
of a lot on that flight and I'm looking forward to sharing!

Yeah. *I passed.


I have always believed that Rule #1 is to put the ship down in the
best location available and deal with the consequences later. I have
landed at Reno International without radio contact with the tower and
about a year later I plunked it down on the ramp at Edwards AFB
without radio contact with the tower......(seems to be trend here)!
Then there was the landing at a Nevada Cat-House and a wheat field
that we managed to incinerate in west Texas!
My rule has served me well with no violations or legal action for
nearly 40 years now. Any landing where nobody got injured is a good
landing in my book!
Hang in there Jim,
JJ
  #59  
Old February 11th 12, 06:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...

JJ,

Wasn't that Cat House story in Soaring Magazine? If not, it should be!


"JJ Sinclair" wrote in message
...

Quite simply, the sequence of events that led to the off field landing was
not connected to the BFR. That said, I can guarantee that I learned a heck
of a lot on that flight and I'm looking forward to sharing!

Yeah. I passed.


I have always believed that Rule #1 is to put the ship down in the
best location available and deal with the consequences later. I have
landed at Reno International without radio contact with the tower and
about a year later I plunked it down on the ramp at Edwards AFB
without radio contact with the tower......(seems to be trend here)!
Then there was the landing at a Nevada Cat-House and a wheat field
that we managed to incinerate in west Texas!
My rule has served me well with no violations or legal action for
nearly 40 years now. Any landing where nobody got injured is a good
landing in my book!
Hang in there Jim,
JJ

  #60  
Old February 11th 12, 07:35 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Marc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 78
Default Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding...

On Feb 10, 9:44*pm, Jim Wallis
wrote:
p.s. *A couple of people have asked whether I passed the BFR. *I wouldn't
answer this if it weren't JJ asking * *because no matter what the answer,
I have been concerned that someone would make an incorrect implication
about fault or cause/effect. *So I trust all of you to be professional and
appreciate that (1) no CFIG in his right mind would let a student fly into
a potentially dangerous situation (2) that the BFR is neither structured
nor intended as a test, but rather as an instructional/recurrency
opportunity.


On point (1) above, I would consider it a serious mistake to assume
that anyone, no matter what their perceived experience level, can be
depended upon not to allow you to "fly into a potentially dangerous
situation". Keep in mind, during a BFR you are the PIC, not a student.
If a CFI-G asks you to do something which you feel is unsafe during a
BFR, you should politely, but firmly, refuse. For all you know, it
may be part of what he's checking...

Marc

 




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
Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding... [email protected] Soaring 1 February 7th 12 08:52 AM
Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding... Mark Jardini[_2_] Soaring 0 February 7th 12 04:51 AM
Duo NV lands on Heavenly Ski Resort. Not kidding... Mark Jardini[_2_] Soaring 0 February 7th 12 04:46 AM
Our experience at Sky Bryce ski resort (video) John Harlow Piloting 1 February 1st 04 02:57 PM
Flying to a Ski Resort Victor Piloting 10 December 29th 03 09:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.