I don't want to hijack the thread about Walter Mueller's 75 gliding
anniversary (GO, Walter!) by talk about an early death...seems a bit
morbid. But I have to comment on Bob's statement:

<<snip>>
However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said participant
a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why that
thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...

Bob W.

<<end snip>>

I think I agree with your statement, Bob, insofar as if you have a belief
that you are predestined to die in any particular way (whether gliding or
otherwise), you are either suicidal (and have picked out your method of
ending it all), have some kind of strange religious belief (i.e. that you
know that God is going to kill you in some particular way), or are
suffering from some other psychosis and probably shouldn't be soaring.

On the other hand, if you are in this sport and don't realize that it may
very well be one of the most dangerous sports out there, I submit to you
that you are deceiving yourself. Obviously, you are still far from
"predestined to die in a sailplane" (statistically speaking, but of course
your individual results may vary), but if you don't recognize the risks
involved you may be more likely to avoid taking the necessary safety
precautions to prevent these risks from growing beyond those that are
inherent in this sport. For this reason, I think it is actually quite
healthy to have a feeling that strapping on your sailplane may very well
be the most dangerous thing you do today...I think about this pretty much
every time I suit up, and I think it helps to keep me focused on safety.

--
Stefan Murry

On May 21, 2:20*pm, "S. Murry" > wrote:
> I don't want to hijack the thread about Walter Mueller's 75 gliding
> anniversary (GO, Walter!) by talk about an early death...seems a bit
> morbid. *But I have to comment on Bob's statement:
>
> <<snip>>
> However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
> predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said participant
> a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why that
> thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...
>
> Bob W.
>
> <<end snip>>
>
> I think I agree with your statement, Bob, insofar as if you have a belief
> that you are predestined to die in any particular way (whether gliding or
> otherwise), you are either suicidal (and have picked out your method of
> ending it all), have some kind of strange religious belief (i.e. that you
> know that God is going to kill you in some particular way), or are
> suffering from some other psychosis and probably shouldn't be soaring.
>
> On the other hand, if you are in this sport and don't realize that it may
> very well be one of the most dangerous sports out there, I submit to you
> that you are deceiving yourself. *Obviously, you are still far from
> "predestined to die in a sailplane" (statistically speaking, but of course
> your *individual results may vary), but if you don't recognize the risks
> involved you may be more likely to avoid taking the necessary safety
> precautions to prevent these risks from growing beyond those that are
> inherent in this sport. *For this reason, I think it is actually quite
> healthy to have a feeling that strapping on your sailplane may very well
> be the most dangerous thing you do today...I think about this pretty much
> every time I suit up, and I think it helps to keep me focused on safety.
>
> --
> Stefan Murry

I feel uncomfortable blackening the sport of soaring with the label
"dangerous" without some caveats. It is certainly dangerous for some
pilots and not so much for others - the variable part is the pilot not
the sport. If the statement is, "Since I have no intention of
becoming a skilled pilot, this sport is dangerous for me", then I
would agree.

The essential part of being a pilot is making something inherently
dangerous into something inherently safe through the application of
knowledge and skill acquired through training and diligence. I happen
to know many, many pilots who have made the effort to become highly
skilled. This has resulted in a long lifetime of safe flying. I try
not to get to know the other kind.

On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:13:26 -0500, Bill D > wrote:

> On May 21, 2:20 pm, "S. Murry" > wrote:
>> I don't want to hijack the thread about Walter Mueller's 75 gliding
>> anniversary (GO, Walter!) by talk about an early death...seems a bit
>> morbid. But I have to comment on Bob's statement:
>>
>> <<snip>>
>> However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
>> predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said
>> participant
>> a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why
>> that
>> thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...
>>
>> Bob W.
>>
>> <<end snip>>
>>
>> I think I agree with your statement, Bob, insofar as if you have a
>> belief
>> that you are predestined to die in any particular way (whether gliding
>> or
>> otherwise), you are either suicidal (and have picked out your method of
>> ending it all), have some kind of strange religious belief (i.e. that
>> you
>> know that God is going to kill you in some particular way), or are
>> suffering from some other psychosis and probably shouldn't be soaring..
>>
>> On the other hand, if you are in this sport and don't realize that it
>> may
>> very well be one of the most dangerous sports out there, I submit to you
>> that you are deceiving yourself. Obviously, you are still far from
>> "predestined to die in a sailplane" (statistically speaking, but of
>> course
>> your individual results may vary), but if you don't recognize the risks
>> involved you may be more likely to avoid taking the necessary safety
>> precautions to prevent these risks from growing beyond those that are
>> inherent in this sport. For this reason, I think it is actually quite
>> healthy to have a feeling that strapping on your sailplane may very well
>> be the most dangerous thing you do today...I think about this pretty
>> much
>> every time I suit up, and I think it helps to keep me focused on safety.
>>
>> --
>> Stefan Murry
>
> I feel uncomfortable blackening the sport of soaring with the label
> "dangerous" without some caveats. It is certainly dangerous for some
> pilots and not so much for others - the variable part is the pilot not
> the sport. If the statement is, "Since I have no intention of
> becoming a skilled pilot, this sport is dangerous for me", then I
> would agree.
>
> The essential part of being a pilot is making something inherently
> dangerous into something inherently safe through the application of
> knowledge and skill acquired through training and diligence. I happen
> to know many, many pilots who have made the effort to become highly
> skilled. This has resulted in a long lifetime of safe flying. I try
> not to get to know the other kind.
>
Bill,

I think we're almost in agreement here. But I disagree that the sport can
ever be made "inherently safe". It's just not. Even highly skilled
pilots sometimes come to grief (Helmut Reichmann comes immediately to
mind, and Chris O’Callaghan at the nationals in 2010). It's not by
mistake that I picked two pilots killed in midairs, since this seems to me
to be about as far away from anything that is within the control of the
pilot as any accident cause short of catastrophic mechanical failure. Of
course, by not taking all appropriate precautions (including training and
proficiency enhancement), it can be downright UNSAFE, so I agree with you
there.

The nit that I pick with your line of reasoning is that most pilots THINK
that they're safe and proficient (regardless of whether they actually
are), and if you subscribe to the belief that this somehow inoculates you
against dying in a glider then it is very easy to become cavalier. The
way I look at it, the sport is inherently unsafe. Everything we do (or
should be doing) as pilots is in an attempt to make this inherently unsafe
activity safer.

In the end, "safe" and "unsafe" are all relative terms, as you
acknowledge. Certainly, soaring is probably safer than, say, skydiving
(at least that's my guess, I don't know it for sure), but it's probably
less safe than, say, tennis (at least if you define safety as the
probability of not causing death). At least I don't know many people that
died playing tennis, but do know several that have died flying gliders.

I fly a lot (in an attempt to maintain proficiency), read all I can about
soaring, attend and present FAA Safety seminars, try to maintain my glider
in good mechanical condition, etc. In more than 25 years of flying, I've
never had an accident. But I don't have any illusion that this makes
gliding safe (in comparison to many other activities that I might choose
to pursue), only that it makes it SAFER than if I didn't do these things..

Let's be honest. We fly gliders because it's a thrill, a challenge and
because it touches on some primal desire within us. We believe that the
benefits that we obtain by partaking in this activity outweigh the chances
of dying while participating. But I think we'll all agree that if the
only factor in choosing a leisure activity were the avoidance of danger,
gliding wouldn't be our choice. We'd all be playing croquet or
shuffleboard. Gliding is inherently unsafe, but we can mitigate this to a
great extent with caution and training.

--Stefan





--
Stefan Murry

On May 21, 3:45*pm, "S. Murry" > wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:13:26 -0500, Bill D > wrote:
> > On May 21, 2:20 pm, "S. Murry" > wrote:
> >> I don't want to hijack the thread about Walter Mueller's 75 gliding
> >> anniversary (GO, Walter!) by talk about an early death...seems a bit
> >> morbid. *But I have to comment on Bob's statement:
>
> >> <<snip>>
> >> However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
> >> predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said
> >> participant
> >> a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why
> >> that
> >> thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...
>
> >> Bob W.
>
> >> <<end snip>>
>
> >> I think I agree with your statement, Bob, insofar as if you have a
> >> belief
> >> that you are predestined to die in any particular way (whether gliding
> >> or
> >> otherwise), you are either suicidal (and have picked out your method of
> >> ending it all), have some kind of strange religious belief (i.e. that
> >> you
> >> know that God is going to kill you in some particular way), or are
> >> suffering from some other psychosis and probably shouldn't be soaring.
>
> >> On the other hand, if you are in this sport and don't realize that it
> >> may
> >> very well be one of the most dangerous sports out there, I submit to you
> >> that you are deceiving yourself. *Obviously, you are still far from
> >> "predestined to die in a sailplane" (statistically speaking, but of
> >> course
> >> your *individual results may vary), but if you don't recognize the risks
> >> involved you may be more likely to avoid taking the necessary safety
> >> precautions to prevent these risks from growing beyond those that are
> >> inherent in this sport. *For this reason, I think it is actually quite
> >> healthy to have a feeling that strapping on your sailplane may very well
> >> be the most dangerous thing you do today...I think about this pretty
> >> much
> >> every time I suit up, and I think it helps to keep me focused on safety.
>
> >> --
> >> Stefan Murry
>
> > I feel uncomfortable blackening the sport of soaring with the label
> > "dangerous" without some caveats. *It is certainly dangerous for some
> > pilots and not so much for others - the variable part is the pilot not
> > the sport. *If the statement is, "Since I have no intention of
> > becoming a skilled pilot, this sport is dangerous for me", then I
> > would agree.
>
> > The essential part of being a pilot is making something inherently
> > dangerous into something inherently safe through the application of
> > knowledge and skill acquired through training and diligence. *I happen
> > to know many, many pilots who have made the effort to become highly
> > skilled. *This has resulted in a long lifetime of safe flying. *I try
> > not to get to know the other kind.
>
> Bill,
>
> I think we're almost in agreement here. *But I disagree that the sport can
> ever be made "inherently safe". *It's just not. *Even highly skilled
> pilots sometimes come to grief (Helmut Reichmann comes immediately to
> mind, and Chris O’Callaghan at the nationals in 2010). *It's not by
> mistake that I picked two pilots killed in midairs, since this seems to me
> to be about as far away from anything that is within the control of the
> pilot as any accident cause short of catastrophic mechanical failure. *Of
> course, by not taking all appropriate precautions (including training and
> proficiency enhancement), it can be downright UNSAFE, so I agree with you
> there.
>
> The nit that I pick with your line of reasoning is that most pilots THINK
> that they're safe and proficient (regardless of whether they actually
> are), and if you subscribe to the belief that this somehow inoculates you
> against dying in a glider then it is very easy to become cavalier. *The
> way I look at it, the sport is inherently unsafe. *Everything we do (or
> should be doing) as pilots is in an attempt to make this inherently unsafe
> activity safer.
>
> In the end, "safe" and "unsafe" are all relative terms, as you
> acknowledge. *Certainly, soaring is probably safer than, say, skydiving
> (at least that's my guess, I don't know it for sure), but it's probably
> less safe than, say, tennis (at least if you define safety as the
> probability of not causing death). *At least I don't know many people that
> died playing tennis, but do know several that have died flying gliders.
>
> I fly a lot (in an attempt to maintain proficiency), read all I can about
> soaring, attend and present FAA Safety seminars, try to maintain my glider
> in good mechanical condition, etc. *In more than 25 years of flying, I've
> never had an accident. *But I don't have any illusion that this makes
> gliding safe (in comparison to many other activities that I might choose
> to pursue), only that it makes it SAFER than if I didn't do these things.
>
> Let's be honest. *We fly gliders because it's a thrill, a challenge and
> because it touches on some primal desire within us. *We believe that the
> benefits that we obtain by partaking in this activity outweigh the chances
> of dying while participating. *But I think we'll all agree that if the
> only factor in choosing a leisure activity were the avoidance of danger,
> gliding wouldn't be our choice. *We'd all be playing croquet or
> shuffleboard. *Gliding is inherently unsafe, but we can mitigate this to a
> great extent with caution and training.
>
> --Stefan
>
> --
> Stefan Murry

Stefan, you paint with too broad a brush. All accidents are
regrettable but 99% of them can be traced to pilot error. We need to
keep our focus on the real problem - the pilots. Saying "Soaring is
dangerous" because "pilots THINK they're good" is mis-direction at
best.

Bad pilots who think they're good are idiots. Those who just don't
care are worse. Good pilots know they will make mistakes. They plan
for those mistakes with safety margins so they don't get hurt. They
fly for a lifetime without accidents.

The sport can be made safer than it is using technology like FLARM but
fix the pilot and fix the real problem.

BTW, I have known a couple of people who died playing tennis.

On May 21, 5:04*pm, Bill D > wrote:
> On May 21, 3:45*pm, "S. Murry" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:13:26 -0500, Bill D > wrote:
> > > On May 21, 2:20 pm, "S. Murry" > wrote:
> > >> I don't want to hijack the thread about Walter Mueller's 75 gliding
> > >> anniversary (GO, Walter!) by talk about an early death...seems a bit
> > >> morbid. *But I have to comment on Bob's statement:
>
> > >> <<snip>>
> > >> However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
> > >> predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said
> > >> participant
> > >> a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why
> > >> that
> > >> thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...
>
> > >> Bob W.
>
> > >> <<end snip>>
>
> > >> I think I agree with your statement, Bob, insofar as if you have a
> > >> belief
> > >> that you are predestined to die in any particular way (whether gliding
> > >> or
> > >> otherwise), you are either suicidal (and have picked out your method of
> > >> ending it all), have some kind of strange religious belief (i.e. that
> > >> you
> > >> know that God is going to kill you in some particular way), or are
> > >> suffering from some other psychosis and probably shouldn't be soaring.
>
> > >> On the other hand, if you are in this sport and don't realize that it
> > >> may
> > >> very well be one of the most dangerous sports out there, I submit to you
> > >> that you are deceiving yourself. *Obviously, you are still far from
> > >> "predestined to die in a sailplane" (statistically speaking, but of
> > >> course
> > >> your *individual results may vary), but if you don't recognize the risks
> > >> involved you may be more likely to avoid taking the necessary safety
> > >> precautions to prevent these risks from growing beyond those that are
> > >> inherent in this sport. *For this reason, I think it is actually quite
> > >> healthy to have a feeling that strapping on your sailplane may very well
> > >> be the most dangerous thing you do today...I think about this pretty
> > >> much
> > >> every time I suit up, and I think it helps to keep me focused on safety.
>
> > >> --
> > >> Stefan Murry
>
> > > I feel uncomfortable blackening the sport of soaring with the label
> > > "dangerous" without some caveats. *It is certainly dangerous for some
> > > pilots and not so much for others - the variable part is the pilot not
> > > the sport. *If the statement is, "Since I have no intention of
> > > becoming a skilled pilot, this sport is dangerous for me", then I
> > > would agree.
>
> > > The essential part of being a pilot is making something inherently
> > > dangerous into something inherently safe through the application of
> > > knowledge and skill acquired through training and diligence. *I happen
> > > to know many, many pilots who have made the effort to become highly
> > > skilled. *This has resulted in a long lifetime of safe flying. *I try
> > > not to get to know the other kind.
>
> > Bill,
>
> > I think we're almost in agreement here. *But I disagree that the sport can
> > ever be made "inherently safe". *It's just not. *Even highly skilled
> > pilots sometimes come to grief (Helmut Reichmann comes immediately to
> > mind, and Chris O’Callaghan at the nationals in 2010). *It's not by
> > mistake that I picked two pilots killed in midairs, since this seems to me
> > to be about as far away from anything that is within the control of the
> > pilot as any accident cause short of catastrophic mechanical failure. *Of
> > course, by not taking all appropriate precautions (including training and
> > proficiency enhancement), it can be downright UNSAFE, so I agree with you
> > there.
>
> > The nit that I pick with your line of reasoning is that most pilots THINK
> > that they're safe and proficient (regardless of whether they actually
> > are), and if you subscribe to the belief that this somehow inoculates you
> > against dying in a glider then it is very easy to become cavalier. *The
> > way I look at it, the sport is inherently unsafe. *Everything we do (or
> > should be doing) as pilots is in an attempt to make this inherently unsafe
> > activity safer.
>
> > In the end, "safe" and "unsafe" are all relative terms, as you
> > acknowledge. *Certainly, soaring is probably safer than, say, skydiving
> > (at least that's my guess, I don't know it for sure), but it's probably
> > less safe than, say, tennis (at least if you define safety as the
> > probability of not causing death). *At least I don't know many people that
> > died playing tennis, but do know several that have died flying gliders.
>
> > I fly a lot (in an attempt to maintain proficiency), read all I can about
> > soaring, attend and present FAA Safety seminars, try to maintain my glider
> > in good mechanical condition, etc. *In more than 25 years of flying, I've
> > never had an accident. *But I don't have any illusion that this makes
> > gliding safe (in comparison to many other activities that I might choose
> > to pursue), only that it makes it SAFER than if I didn't do these things.
>
> > Let's be honest. *We fly gliders because it's a thrill, a challenge and
> > because it touches on some primal desire within us. *We believe that the
> > benefits that we obtain by partaking in this activity outweigh the chances
> > of dying while participating. *But I think we'll all agree that if the
> > only factor in choosing a leisure activity were the avoidance of danger,
> > gliding wouldn't be our choice. *We'd all be playing croquet or
> > shuffleboard. *Gliding is inherently unsafe, but we can mitigate this to a
> > great extent with caution and training.
>
> > --Stefan
>
> > --
> > Stefan Murry
>
> Stefan, you paint with too broad a brush. *All accidents are
> regrettable but 99% of them can be traced to pilot error. *We need to
> keep our focus on the real problem - the pilots. *Saying "Soaring is
> dangerous" because "pilots THINK they're good" is mis-direction at
> best.
>
> Bad pilots who think they're good are idiots. *Those who just don't
> care are worse. *Good pilots know they will make mistakes. *They plan
> for those mistakes with safety margins so they don't get hurt. *They
> fly for a lifetime without accidents.
>
> The sport can be made safer than it is using technology like FLARM but
> fix the pilot and fix the real problem.
>
> BTW, I have known a couple of people who died playing tennis.

All this talk about good pilots, bad pilots, safe pilots etc has me
curious. It seems rather subjective to me actually. Would a bad pilot
and an un-safe pilot be the same? What about a pilot with only a few
hundred hours that flies only a few times before a contest and then
flies a particularly challenging event in a technical environment.
Would that pilot be safe? Would they be exhibiting good judgement,
would they be seen by their peers as a "seasoned" veteran? I suppose
this is a moot point until "example" pilot crashes and then the events
leading up to the crash are painfully reconstructed here on RAS. Or
perhaps said pilot beats the pants off of everybody and is then seen
as a stick and rudder prodigy, one to mentor and give advice to
aspiring pilots............all that stands between "hero-to-zero"
could be one simple mistake. And unfortunately it seems one simple
mistake erases the hundreds of good choices that are made during each
flight, figuratively and literally.

How and who are we to know everything about a pilot to come to such
conclusions. Yes, I have seen examples of truly bad piloting skills,
I've also seen high time pilots do very questionable things. But
because I judge them against what I would or would not do, does that
indeed give me the imprimatur to judge them?

Like most posting to this topic, I think about the risks and the
possible outcomes of my flying decisions every time I fly. I am loath
to do something that will break my glider or my body, I do not want to
sit on the sidelines while my glider is being repaired, or worse yet
find myself out of the sport due to busted body and glider. Is it
possible that someone at my glider port might consider me "unsafe" or
a "bad" pilot? I suppose so.................but again, what behavior
or actions would they cite to make that claim? and would that claim be
supported by the gliding community? I submit that the pilots Peers and
the Gliding community are not mutually exclusive; there may be
crossovers, but not 100% continuity.

We're all now just a bad landing or a turn into the hill away from
being a "statistic" here on RAS. Who will be the next topic of "Crunch
Alert"? and more to the point, what will it change in anyone's
behavior?

Brad

On 5/21/2012 2:20 PM, S. Murry wrote:
> I don't want to hijack the thread about Walter Mueller's 75 gliding
> anniversary (GO, Walter!) by talk about an early death...seems a bit morbid.
> But I have to comment on Bob's statement:
>
> <<snip>>
> However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels predestined
> to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said participant a real favor by
> suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why that thought persists is
> in order. Just sayin'...
>
> Bob W.
>
> <<end snip>>
>
> I think I agree with your statement, Bob, insofar as if you have a belief that
> you are predestined to die in any particular way (whether gliding or
> otherwise), you are either suicidal (and have picked out your method of ending
> it all), have some kind of strange religious belief (i.e. that you know that
> God is going to kill you in some particular way), or are suffering from some
> other psychosis and probably shouldn't be soaring.
>
> On the other hand, if you are in this sport and don't realize that it may very
> well be one of the most dangerous sports out there, I submit to you that you
> are deceiving yourself. Obviously, you are still far from "predestined to die
> in a sailplane" (statistically speaking, but of course your individual results
> may vary), but if you don't recognize the risks involved you may be more
> likely to avoid taking the necessary safety precautions to prevent these risks
> from growing beyond those that are inherent in this sport. For this reason, I
> think it is actually quite healthy to have a feeling that strapping on your
> sailplane may very well be the most dangerous thing you do today...I think
> about this pretty much every time I suit up, and I think it helps to keep me
> focused on safety.
>

Thanks for giving the topic its own thread. I couldn't think of a semi-decent
way to segue into another philosophically-based safety topic, and certainly
didn't mean to take the spotlight away from Walter Mueller's awesome
achievement. Actually, I envy him his vitality!

What I was alluding to was if any reader knows any soaring pilot(s) with a
sufficiently fatalistic attitude about the risks inherent to the sport that
they choose to use those risks as justification for not working as hard as
they otherwise might be working to improve themselves (knowledge, judgment and
skills), then such an inert/fatalistic pilot is - in my view - doing
themselves a dis-service.

Maybe I've set up a straw man here...but maybe not. If any reader knows a
soaring pilot who believes - about any particular aspect of the sport -
something along the lines of "there's nothing I can do about (this or that)
risk in this sport, so therefore I'm not going to worry about trying to
mitigate them, that might be a person who could benefit from a change in
outlook/attitude. The sort of risks I have in mind are those which ARE
mitigatable by increased pilot awareness, knowledge, judgment and skill of
course (e.g. inadvertent departures from controlled flight, group thermalling,
final glides, etc.).

In any event, my sense is you and I are in general agreement that a healthy
sense of one's mortality is likely a good thing for helping create and
maintain "a safe soaring pilot."
- - - - - -

Not that anyone has yet asked, but what I imagine I'm really hoping to
accomplish by actively discussing these sorts of ideas and attitudes on RAS
might be two things:

1) actively encouraging a pilot or two to focus on upgrading some aspect of
their piloting that they might not otherwise be inclined to do. (I've known
many a pilot who seemed to actively open their minds to learning mostly when
they're "obviously" taking instruction [meaning, from a government-approved
instructor]. I think that's a shame, and in some cases it's actively worried
me for their futures.)

2) encourage a pilot or two who might not feel "sufficiently personally
empowered" to speak up at their club (or wherever) when they witness
difficult-to-comprehend, marginally safe, outright dangerous piloting antics,
etc., to actually SPEAK UP! (None of us has a monopoly on good judgment,
knowledge or skills, and all of us - good judgment/knowledge/skills-wise -
exist relative to the rest of our peers...meaning each of us individually has
a good chance of being able to engage in useful "peer discussions" when we
witness anything that puzzles or dismays or otherwise attracts our attention
in a way that vaguely triggers an internal safety alarm. Look for reasons to
have those discussions, rather than hope "someone else will fix it." In my
experience, you'll typically learn something useful, and occasionally feel
you've actually contributed something good to the sport we all love, even if
not "a government approved instructor.")

Bob W.

On 5/21/2012 7:03 PM, Brad wrote:

<Major snip...>

>
> We're all now just a bad landing or a turn into the hill away from
> being a "statistic" here on RAS. Who will be the next topic of "Crunch
> Alert"? and more to the point, what will it change in anyone's
> behavior?

"{W]hat will it change in anyone's behavior?" is - to my way of thinking - the
sixty-four-thousand dollar question.

I'm inclined to think that if discussions as these - and the personal thought
that presumably is a part - does NOT change an individual's future behavior
(because it changes their outlook/thinking which in turn has power to alter
behavior), then so be it...but I'd ask a following question: Why not?

It's a serious question. A valid answer - in my mind - for NOT changing one's
outlook/behavior is the person is already "in the right place" mentally.
That's a great thing! (I like to think I got myself there regarding
inadvertent departures from controlled flight some time back in the 1980's,
for example.) Actually, that's the ONLY valid answer I've ever been able to
conjure up.

If there's anyone out there who seriously thinks differently, it certainly
seems a great topic for discussion!

Bob W.

On May 21, 7:03*pm, Brad > wrote:
> On May 21, 5:04*pm, Bill D > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 21, 3:45*pm, "S. Murry" > wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:13:26 -0500, Bill D > wrote:
> > > > On May 21, 2:20 pm, "S. Murry" > wrote:
> > > >> I don't want to hijack the thread about Walter Mueller's 75 gliding
> > > >> anniversary (GO, Walter!) by talk about an early death...seems a bit
> > > >> morbid. *But I have to comment on Bob's statement:
>
> > > >> <<snip>>
> > > >> However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
> > > >> predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said
> > > >> participant
> > > >> a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why
> > > >> that
> > > >> thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...
>
> > > >> Bob W.
>
> > > >> <<end snip>>
>
> > > >> I think I agree with your statement, Bob, insofar as if you have a
> > > >> belief
> > > >> that you are predestined to die in any particular way (whether gliding
> > > >> or
> > > >> otherwise), you are either suicidal (and have picked out your method of
> > > >> ending it all), have some kind of strange religious belief (i.e. that
> > > >> you
> > > >> know that God is going to kill you in some particular way), or are
> > > >> suffering from some other psychosis and probably shouldn't be soaring.
>
> > > >> On the other hand, if you are in this sport and don't realize that it
> > > >> may
> > > >> very well be one of the most dangerous sports out there, I submit to you
> > > >> that you are deceiving yourself. *Obviously, you are still far from
> > > >> "predestined to die in a sailplane" (statistically speaking, but of
> > > >> course
> > > >> your *individual results may vary), but if you don't recognize the risks
> > > >> involved you may be more likely to avoid taking the necessary safety
> > > >> precautions to prevent these risks from growing beyond those that are
> > > >> inherent in this sport. *For this reason, I think it is actually quite
> > > >> healthy to have a feeling that strapping on your sailplane may very well
> > > >> be the most dangerous thing you do today...I think about this pretty
> > > >> much
> > > >> every time I suit up, and I think it helps to keep me focused on safety.
>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Stefan Murry
>
> > > > I feel uncomfortable blackening the sport of soaring with the label
> > > > "dangerous" without some caveats. *It is certainly dangerous for some
> > > > pilots and not so much for others - the variable part is the pilot not
> > > > the sport. *If the statement is, "Since I have no intention of
> > > > becoming a skilled pilot, this sport is dangerous for me", then I
> > > > would agree.
>
> > > > The essential part of being a pilot is making something inherently
> > > > dangerous into something inherently safe through the application of
> > > > knowledge and skill acquired through training and diligence. *I happen
> > > > to know many, many pilots who have made the effort to become highly
> > > > skilled. *This has resulted in a long lifetime of safe flying. *I try
> > > > not to get to know the other kind.
>
> > > Bill,
>
> > > I think we're almost in agreement here. *But I disagree that the sport can
> > > ever be made "inherently safe". *It's just not. *Even highly skilled
> > > pilots sometimes come to grief (Helmut Reichmann comes immediately to
> > > mind, and Chris O’Callaghan at the nationals in 2010). *It's not by
> > > mistake that I picked two pilots killed in midairs, since this seems to me
> > > to be about as far away from anything that is within the control of the
> > > pilot as any accident cause short of catastrophic mechanical failure. *Of
> > > course, by not taking all appropriate precautions (including training and
> > > proficiency enhancement), it can be downright UNSAFE, so I agree with you
> > > there.
>
> > > The nit that I pick with your line of reasoning is that most pilots THINK
> > > that they're safe and proficient (regardless of whether they actually
> > > are), and if you subscribe to the belief that this somehow inoculates you
> > > against dying in a glider then it is very easy to become cavalier. *The
> > > way I look at it, the sport is inherently unsafe. *Everything we do (or
> > > should be doing) as pilots is in an attempt to make this inherently unsafe
> > > activity safer.
>
> > > In the end, "safe" and "unsafe" are all relative terms, as you
> > > acknowledge. *Certainly, soaring is probably safer than, say, skydiving
> > > (at least that's my guess, I don't know it for sure), but it's probably
> > > less safe than, say, tennis (at least if you define safety as the
> > > probability of not causing death). *At least I don't know many people that
> > > died playing tennis, but do know several that have died flying gliders.
>
> > > I fly a lot (in an attempt to maintain proficiency), read all I can about
> > > soaring, attend and present FAA Safety seminars, try to maintain my glider
> > > in good mechanical condition, etc. *In more than 25 years of flying, I've
> > > never had an accident. *But I don't have any illusion that this makes
> > > gliding safe (in comparison to many other activities that I might choose
> > > to pursue), only that it makes it SAFER than if I didn't do these things.
>
> > > Let's be honest. *We fly gliders because it's a thrill, a challenge and
> > > because it touches on some primal desire within us. *We believe that the
> > > benefits that we obtain by partaking in this activity outweigh the chances
> > > of dying while participating. *But I think we'll all agree that if the
> > > only factor in choosing a leisure activity were the avoidance of danger,
> > > gliding wouldn't be our choice. *We'd all be playing croquet or
> > > shuffleboard. *Gliding is inherently unsafe, but we can mitigate this to a
> > > great extent with caution and training.
>
> > > --Stefan
>
> > > --
> > > Stefan Murry
>
> > Stefan, you paint with too broad a brush. *All accidents are
> > regrettable but 99% of them can be traced to pilot error. *We need to
> > keep our focus on the real problem - the pilots. *Saying "Soaring is
> > dangerous" because "pilots THINK they're good" is mis-direction at
> > best.
>
> > Bad pilots who think they're good are idiots. *Those who just don't
> > care are worse. *Good pilots know they will make mistakes. *They plan
> > for those mistakes with safety margins so they don't get hurt. *They
> > fly for a lifetime without accidents.
>
> > The sport can be made safer than it is using technology like FLARM but
> > fix the pilot and fix the real problem.
>
> > BTW, I have known a couple of people who died playing tennis.
>
> All this talk about good pilots, bad pilots, safe pilots etc has me
> curious. It seems rather subjective to me actually. Would a bad pilot
> and an un-safe pilot be the same? What about a pilot with only a few
> hundred hours that flies only a few times before a contest and then
> flies a particularly challenging event in a technical environment.
> Would that pilot be safe? Would they be exhibiting good judgement,
> would they be seen by their peers as a "seasoned" veteran? I suppose
> this is a moot point until "example" pilot crashes and then the events
> leading up to the crash are painfully reconstructed here on RAS. Or
> perhaps said pilot beats the pants off of everybody and is then seen
> as a stick and rudder prodigy, one to mentor and give advice to
> aspiring pilots............all that stands between "hero-to-zero"
> could be one simple mistake. And unfortunately it seems one simple
> mistake erases the hundreds of good choices that are made during each
> flight, figuratively and literally.
>
> How and who are we to know everything about a pilot to come to such
> conclusions. Yes, I have seen examples of truly bad piloting skills,
> I've also seen high time pilots do very questionable things. But
> because I judge them against what I would or would not do, does that
> indeed give me the imprimatur to judge them?
>
> Like most posting to this topic, I think about the risks and the
> possible outcomes of my flying decisions every time I fly. I am loath
> to do something that will break my glider or my body, I do not want to
> sit on the sidelines while my glider is being repaired, or worse yet
> find myself out of the sport due to busted body and glider. Is it
> possible that someone at my glider port might consider me "unsafe" or
> a "bad" pilot? I suppose so.................but again, what behavior
> or actions would they cite to make that claim? and would that claim be
> supported by the gliding community? I submit that the pilots Peers and
> the Gliding community are not mutually exclusive; there may be
> crossovers, but not 100% continuity.
>
> We're all now just a bad landing or a turn into the hill away from
> being a "statistic" here on RAS. Who will be the next topic of "Crunch
> Alert"? and more to the point, what will it change in anyone's
> behavior?
>
> Brad

There are a lot of things to discuss in Brad's post. Obviously,
pilots come in many skill and experience levels but all can fly
safely. The key is mature judgement - knowing when an action will put
the pilot "in over his head". It has been said gliding is like chess
- you have to think several moves ahead.

One of the key steps in making good judgements is the questions asked
of oneself before committing, "What if this doesn't work?" and "What
if it does?" The answers are different for pilots with different
experience and skills and each answer can lead to an altered plan of
action. If the questions aren't asked or there are no answers, the
pilot is in over his head.

The turn into a ridge is an example. Once committed to the turn,
there are few options other than hitting the ridge if it doesn't
work. Given it's a near certain crash if it doesn't work, some extra
safety margin is in order. One of mine is to never do a 360 in a
suspected thermal on a ridge until well above the top - high enough to
dive to the upwind side 'if it doesn't work'.

There's a story of a pilot who tried to cross Point Loma flying south
from the Torry Pines ridge and succeeding - then finding himself over
San Diego Bay with no where to land. He had a plan if the crossing
didn't work but was clueless if it did.

Good point snipped from the other thread.
I will try to "do the favor" for the pilot who tops my personal list of people who will die in a glider, next time I see him... That is if he bothers to use the conventional radio frequencies while doing aerobatics near other aircraft.
Jim

On Monday, May 21, 2012 1:20:37 PM UTC-7, S. Murry wrote:

> <<snip>>
> However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
> predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said participant
> a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why that
> thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...
>
> Bob W.

I'm curious whether or not there are any statistics about accident rates of RAS participants.

No doubt most of us are certain that we aren't the one likely to be in the next crunch alert as we read the forums and reports. But is the fact that usually it is this group that is acknowledging the reality that we might join that club any indicator that we might be a little less likely to join it? Are we all just preaching to the choir?

Morgan

On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 12:33:24 PM UTC-7, JS wrote:
> Good point snipped from the other thread.
> I will try to "do the favor" for the pilot who tops my personal list of people who will die in a glider, next time I see him... That is if he bothers to use the conventional radio frequencies while doing aerobatics near other aircraft.
> Jim
>
> On Monday, May 21, 2012 1:20:37 PM UTC-7, S. Murry wrote:
>
> > <<snip>>
> > However...if any reader knows of a gliding participant who feels
> > predestined to die in a sailplane, perhaps you'd be doing said participant
> > a real favor by suggesting to them some serious re-examination of why that
> > thought persists is in order. Just sayin'...
> >
> > Bob W.

On May 21, 11:03*pm, BobW > wrote:
> On 5/21/2012 7:03 PM, Brad wrote:
>
> <Major snip...>
>
>
>
> > We're all now just a bad landing or a turn into the hill away from
> > being a "statistic" here on RAS. Who will be the next topic of "Crunch
> > Alert"? and more to the point, what will it change in anyone's
> > behavior?
>
> "{W]hat will it change in anyone's behavior?" is - to my way of thinking - the
> sixty-four-thousand dollar question.
>
> I'm inclined to think that if discussions as these - and the personal thought
> that presumably is a part - does NOT change an individual's future behavior
> (because it changes their outlook/thinking which in turn has power to alter
> behavior), then so be it...but I'd ask a following question: Why not?
>
> It's a serious question. A valid answer - in my mind - for NOT changing one's
> outlook/behavior is the person is already "in the right place" mentally.
> That's a great thing! (I like to think I got myself there regarding
> inadvertent departures from controlled flight some time back in the 1980's,
> for example.) Actually, that's the ONLY valid answer I've ever been able to
> conjure up.
>
> If there's anyone out there who seriously thinks differently, it certainly
> seems a great topic for discussion!
>
> Bob W.

I'm going to ruin the continuity of this discussion to go in a
slightly different direction. This is how I see it. I always look at
the big picture first, then work backward. Prioritize safety by
looking at the accident statistics, and figure out how you will
mitigate the most prevalent dangers first. Then so on, down the
line. We are like one child growing up. How can we keep repeating
the same mistakes that seem so obvious? How can we not learn from
them, correct behavior and move to a higher level? Lazy, complacent,
unenlightened to the dangers?

I'm fairly new to soaring, and I'm very engaged. I read a lot, study a
lot, practice on a sim, follow RAS, watch OLC, read accident
statistics, read a lot about general aviation safety issues and human
factors. I'm very excited about venturing out on cross countries.
I'm sort of mystified at the low percentage of our club members that
seem to be engaged to my level. Very few seem interested in silver
badges and up. Hardly anyone has an iPaq or uses the club flight
recorder, knows about IGC files, tasks and such.

Maybe there is something to be said for the French method of continued
education. Maybe there is a sub set of pilots that tend to shut down
after getting their ticket.

Sorry for the disorganized rambling. ...Aaron

No one seems interested in this topic, but it seems to me that
competition flying increases risk substantially. From the outside
lookin in, it honestly looks pretty scary.

On May 22, 7:38*pm, akiley > wrote:
> On May 21, 11:03*pm, BobW > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 5/21/2012 7:03 PM, Brad wrote:
>
> > <Major snip...>
>
> > > We're all now just a bad landing or a turn into the hill away from
> > > being a "statistic" here on RAS. Who will be the next topic of "Crunch
> > > Alert"? and more to the point, what will it change in anyone's
> > > behavior?
>
> > "{W]hat will it change in anyone's behavior?" is - to my way of thinking - the
> > sixty-four-thousand dollar question.
>
> > I'm inclined to think that if discussions as these - and the personal thought
> > that presumably is a part - does NOT change an individual's future behavior
> > (because it changes their outlook/thinking which in turn has power to alter
> > behavior), then so be it...but I'd ask a following question: Why not?
>
> > It's a serious question. A valid answer - in my mind - for NOT changing one's
> > outlook/behavior is the person is already "in the right place" mentally..
> > That's a great thing! (I like to think I got myself there regarding
> > inadvertent departures from controlled flight some time back in the 1980's,
> > for example.) Actually, that's the ONLY valid answer I've ever been able to
> > conjure up.
>
> > If there's anyone out there who seriously thinks differently, it certainly
> > seems a great topic for discussion!
>
> > Bob W.
>
> I'm going to ruin the continuity of this discussion to go in a
> slightly different direction. *This is how I see it. *I always look at
> the big picture first, then work backward. *Prioritize safety by
> looking at the accident statistics, and figure out how you will
> mitigate the most prevalent dangers first. *Then so on, down the
> line. *We are like one child growing up. *How can we keep repeating
> the same mistakes that seem so obvious? How can we not learn from
> them, correct behavior and move to a higher level? *Lazy, complacent,
> unenlightened to the dangers?
>
> I'm fairly new to soaring, and I'm very engaged. I read a lot, study a
> lot, practice on a sim, follow RAS, watch OLC, read accident
> statistics, read a lot about general aviation safety issues and human
> factors. * I'm very excited about venturing out on cross countries.
> I'm sort of mystified at the low percentage of our club members that
> seem to be engaged to my level. *Very few seem interested in silver
> badges and up. *Hardly anyone has an iPaq or uses the club flight
> recorder, knows about IGC files, tasks and such.
>
> Maybe there is something to be said for the French method of continued
> education. *Maybe there is a sub set of pilots that tend to shut down
> after getting their ticket.
>
> Sorry for the disorganized rambling. * ...Aaron
>
> No one seems interested in this topic, but it seems to me that
> competition flying increases risk substantially. *From the outside
> lookin in, it honestly looks pretty scary.

Aaron, keep that attitude, stay engaged, and I predict a long an happy
flying career.

In all flying - you get the opportunity to set your own risk thresholds.

So - from the outside racing may look dangerous.
From the inside it sometimes looks/is dangerous.

The question is - what do you DO.

I am not particularly serious racing pilot - but have competed in a few
regional contests. My observation is that - things that people do
regularly, and without injury or harm may appear dangerous to the
uninitiated or uninformed. Once you have developed the skill and
experience - one has a more objective view of the risk. Some things are
inherently more dangerous, but in general a well informed and skilled
racing flight is seldom deliberately dangerous. It is hard to win a
contest with a broken glider. So - Racing certainly raises your skill
level, if you do it right. It will also lower your risk of injury etc.
by exposing you to an intense learning environment, some of the best
pilots and lots of motivation to push your own skills development.

What better environment for developing XC skills - there is a competent
daily weather forecast, task planning for the best use if the
conditions, retrieve and Search and Rescue is laid on and alert. Lots of
willing help if you land out. Objective information on how good your
decisions are in comparison to the other pilots.

There is nothing to compare with seeing a task on the briefing board
that is a full 50% further than you have ever flown XC, and completing
it safely... Conversely, watching a world champion go past 500 feet
above you when you thought you had a safe final glide is a learning
experience too. (I will give you a clue - it was not him who outlanded
4km short)

Sure - it may take a while before you and the rest of the gaggle is
comfortable. But it is not intrinsically dangerous. If everyone is
flying proficiently there is no higher risk than the twirly birding over
the field on a lazy afternoon.



--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771

On 5/22/2012 9:36 PM, Bill D wrote:
> On May 22, 7:38 pm, > wrote:

<Major snip...>

>> I'm going to ruin the continuity of this discussion to go in a
>> slightly different direction. This is how I see it. I always look at
>> the big picture first, then work backward. Prioritize safety by
>> looking at the accident statistics, and figure out how you will
>> mitigate the most prevalent dangers first. Then so on, down the
>> line. We are like one child growing up. How can we keep repeating
>> the same mistakes that seem so obvious? How can we not learn from
>> them, correct behavior and move to a higher level? Lazy, complacent,
>> unenlightened to the dangers?
>>
>> I'm fairly new to soaring, and I'm very engaged. I read a lot, study a
>> lot, practice on a sim, follow RAS, watch OLC, read accident
>> statistics, read a lot about general aviation safety issues and human
>> factors. I'm very excited about venturing out on cross countries.
>> I'm sort of mystified at the low percentage of our club members that
>> seem to be engaged to my level. Very few seem interested in silver
>> badges and up. Hardly anyone has an iPaq or uses the club flight
>> recorder, knows about IGC files, tasks and such.
>>
>> Maybe there is something to be said for the French method of continued
>> education. Maybe there is a sub set of pilots that tend to shut down
>> after getting their ticket.
>>
>> Sorry for the disorganized rambling. ...Aaron
>>
>><Snip...>


> Aaron, keep that attitude, stay engaged, and I predict a long and happy
> flying career.

"What Bill said."

Bob W.

I personally at the beginning of every flight figure I will futz up in at least a couple of ways and consciously try not to stack too many of those in row.....

On 5/24/2012 8:14 PM, wrote:
> I personally at the beginning of every flight figure I will futz up in at
> least a couple of ways and consciously try not to stack too many of those
> in row.....

Another example of good thinking, in my book...

Kinda-sorta related...as Bill D. has recently pointed out several times,
there're some piloting actions of negative consequences so catastrophic
"stacking" isn't an option. I got away with one of those once. Off the top of
my head, it probably ties for the nearest I've come to self-induced heart
stoppage.

On my home turf, on my "usual" pre-evening delayed slide toward the pattern, I
decided it would be fun to whoosh across the last ridge before the Great
Plains begin, zoom up into the usual gentle ridge lift typically to be found
there-n-then, and rack around into a 270 to whiz along the ridge top, burning
off altitude. Surely any late-hiking ridge toppers would appreciate the visual
treat. (You can rationalize anything, if you try hard enough.)

All went as planned until about 120-degrees into the approach reversal as I'm
looking back over my shoulder to pick up sight of the ridge top (which I'd
crossed at an obtuse angle) so's to fine-tune the bank angle to ease on around
and roll out parallel, close abeam the ridge top. The heart-stopping moment
was realizing the ridge top wasn't the expected several hundred feet below the
glider, but WAS SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET *ABOVE* THE GLIDER!!!"

I'd "pulled up" into sink, of course. (Guess I shoulda considered that
possibility beforehand, huh?)

So "there I wuz", descending from a chandelle turn, simultaneously sinking
like a rock toward the rocks, hundreds of feet lower than "planned", directly
above the lumpies of the *much* wider lower ridge, still "an angular ways"
from heading directly toward the ridge. The compelling question of the moment
was would I smash into the rocks I could *feel* below, or smash into those I
could see, ahead? Compounding the terror was the need to *DO* something if I
was to have any hope of avoiding either undoubtedly fatal consequence. I
needed to "instantly" decide whether chances were improved by reversing or
tightening my turn. The former tempted by seemingly shortening the time at
which horizontal clearance from horizontally distant rocks could possibly
begin increasing...but those weren't rocks I could possibly hit. The latter
meant I'd continue curving TOWARD the ridge...not an inviting prospect.
Hobson's choice.

Reversing probably maximized chances of hitting rocks below; tightening, those
more or less ahead (assuming I didn't induce an accelerated stall). You'd
probably have to know the ridge for my attempted description to make sense,
but rest assured, it was ugly.

I opted-for/got-away-with tightening the turn. Once definitely clear, I
promptly slunk off toward the home field (hoping to not die of embarrassment),
settled myself down as best I could, then landed...so thoroughly ashamed of
and embarrassed/angry at my complacent stupidity that I've never told anyone
about the incident. Until now. It remains one of those life situations that
gives me the shakes each time I relive it.

Kids, never forget the "luxury of stacking" *may* not be an option!!!

Knowledge beforehand in conjunction with pre-answering the question, "What's
my 'out' if this doesn't go as planned?" is Joe Pilot's life insurance policy
against "non-stackers." Some of those 0'beer-thirty stories contain "insurance
lessons" worth identifying/heeding...even if told only for laughs.

Bob - nuthin' funny about this one - W.

On Fri, 25 May 2012 00:16:12 -0600, Bob Whelan wrote:

> I opted-for/got-away-with tightening the turn. Once definitely clear, I
> promptly slunk off toward the home field (hoping to not die of
> embarrassment),
> settled myself down as best I could, then landed...so thoroughly ashamed
> of and embarrassed/angry at my complacent stupidity that I've never told
> anyone about the incident. Until now. It remains one of those life
> situations that gives me the shakes each time I relive it.
>
> Kids, never forget the "luxury of stacking" *may* not be an option!!!
>
> Knowledge beforehand in conjunction with pre-answering the question,
> "What's my 'out' if this doesn't go as planned?" is Joe Pilot's life
> insurance policy against "non-stackers." Some of those 0'beer-thirty
> stories contain "insurance lessons" worth identifying/heeding...even if
> told only for laughs.
>
Thanks for sharing that one.

I'm (hopefully) innoculated against that one, thanks to my only flight
from Omarama. I'd told my instructor that "I'm so ignorant of mountain
flying that I don't know what I don't know: I'd like an introduction."
and that was a good move: I learnt heaps during the next three hours as a
direct result. My innoculation was being taught "never turn toward the
hill unless the vario says 'up' continuously in the outermost part of the
turn".

Makes a lot of sense when you think about it.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On 5/25/2012 5:58 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2012 00:16:12 -0600, Bob Whelan wrote:
>
>> I opted-for/got-away-with tightening the turn. Once definitely clear, I
>> promptly slunk off toward the home field (hoping to not die of
>> embarrassment),
>> settled myself down as best I could, then landed...so thoroughly ashamed
>> of and embarrassed/angry at my complacent stupidity that I've never told
>> anyone about the incident. Until now. It remains one of those life
>> situations that gives me the shakes each time I relive it.
>>
>> Kids, never forget the "luxury of stacking" *may* not be an option!!!
>>
>> Knowledge beforehand in conjunction with pre-answering the question,
>> "What's my 'out' if this doesn't go as planned?" is Joe Pilot's life
>> insurance policy against "non-stackers." Some of those 0'beer-thirty
>> stories contain "insurance lessons" worth identifying/heeding...even if
>> told only for laughs.
>>
> Thanks for sharing that one.
>
> I'm (hopefully) innoculated against that one, thanks to my only flight
> from Omarama. I'd told my instructor that "I'm so ignorant of mountain
> flying that I don't know what I don't know: I'd like an introduction."
> and that was a good move: I learnt heaps during the next three hours as a
> direct result. My innoculation was being taught "never turn toward the
> hill unless the vario says 'up' continuously in the outermost part of the
> turn".
>
> Makes a lot of sense when you think about it.
>
>

Indeed it does.

As to the "light of idiocy" your "inoculatory nostrum" shines on my
coulda-easily-been-fatal move, obviously I'd not looked at my (excellent/netto
TE display) for a single moment after crossing the ridge line. (What an idiot!
What WAS he THINKing?!?) Nor was it the first time I'd attempted the maneuver.
(Can't use inexperience as an excuse.)

I also neglected to mention this particular bout of idiocy almost certainly
occurred sometime between '85 and '95 (when I'd ~1,000 glider hours, roughly
60% of which originated from the field to which I slunk). Point being that
I've had a *long* time to bury the memories. Not that I ever tried to, and not
that I recall ever obsessing over it beyond ensuring I extracted some useful
lessons about it, but very little dimming of the sheer terror and vast
stupidity demonstrated has occurred.

Bob W.