In my last post I talked about making an early decision to land out and
never attempting low saves ala 300' AGL. The many following posts are all
about low altitude departures from controlled flight.

Nobody thinks he'll die on this flight but, if I was an insurance
underwriter, I'd give lower premiums to those who commit to safe field
landings over those who attempt low saves.

I have a hard time accepting "safety lectures" which espouse safely pulling
your fat out of the fire rather than not letting it get there in the first
place.


"Bob Whelan" wrote in message
...
On 9/3/2012 9:43 AM, Dan Marotta wrote:
If I thought I was going to die every time I flew, I wouldn't fly.

Nor would I. I've never thought I "*was* going to die every time I flew,"
only that if I didn't get certain things "right enough" on THIS approach
that I *could* die. Big difference.

There's a long history of dead pilots - better and more experienced than
I - who *did* die from not getting some basic things right.
- - - - - -


The problem, as I see it, with these low altitude stall/spin accidents
stems
from the desire to get home rather than landing out. Back in the '70s
the
USAF called it "Get-Home-itis" and warned that it was a good way to get
killed. Pilots need to make the decision to terminate a flight before
there
is no option other than landing in an unlandable place or trying to make
a low
save a mile from home just to avoid the inconvenience of a retrieve.

Good thinking...with which I'm in 100% agreement.
- - - - - -


Long ago I made the commitment to never be outside of gliding distance of
a
suitable landing area. I also carry the phone numbers of people who have
told
me that they will come to get me if I land out. I always know where I
will
land if I don't get that next thermal so there's no problem if I don't
get it
and there are never any attempts to thermal at 300' AGL.

If my conservatism causes me to rarely get more than 500Km in a day, but
I can
*live* with that.

More good thinking, IMO! Most soaring pilots fly for personal
satisfaction, as distinct - say - from setting
state/national/international records. Learning how to intelligently expand
one's personal limits is a key piece of the soaring puzzle.
- - - - - -

For the record, my underlying reason to finger "misguided/absent thought
patterns" as a very real hazard within the sport of soaring comes from
decades of specifically ad-hoc discussions with the "committing PIC"
regarding "flaky patterns": e.g. "drunken sailor," low,
perplexing-to-me-under-the-circumstances, etc. Based purely on
non-quantifiable, lengthy, experience discussing these sorts of events
with the pilots involved, I think I've seen a consistent pattern of
"brains not where they need to be" in terms of not fundamentally focusing
on high-priority (to THAT pattern's ultimate outcome) items. Why that is -
e.g. complacency, distraction, pushing personal limits, whatever - is less
clear to me. In any event, how a pilot thinks, matters.

FWIW,
Bob W.