Glider accident near Altoona... interview with pilot

[[email protected][_2_]]

PLB brings speedy rescue to pilot trapped in trees
By Mike Collins, AOPA

A Pennsylvania pilot is crediting his personal locator beacon (PLB)
with his rescue only two hours after his glider crashed in rugged
mountains near Altoona, Pa., May 9.



http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/articles/2010/100513glideraccident.html

[ContestID67[_2_]]

What seems really strange is the the rescurers didn't have a simple,
inexpensive, GPS so that they could zero in on the pilot quickly. The
narrative indicates that the pilot had to guide them in via sound.
Even cell phones now have GPS. This should be required equipment.

[Darryl Ramm]

On May 14, 4:28*pm, ContestID67 > wrote:
> What seems really strange is the the rescurers didn't have a simple,
> inexpensive, GPS so that they could zero in on the pilot quickly. *The
> narrative indicates that the pilot had to guide them in via sound.
> Even cell phones now have GPS. *This should be required equipment.

1. Did the PLB have a GPS?
2. Did the PLB have a GPS fix?

Foliage or other could mean a PLB with GPS is unable to get a fix.
That or if the PLB does not have a GPS then then SARSAT relies on
(significantly less precise) doppler location. It is also at least
plausible that an alert process can be started before a triangulation
fix established.

If the ground SAR crew had 121.1 direction finder that may also have
helped triangulate on the PLB 121.5 Mhz beacon (all 406 Mhz ELTs and
PLBs also have 121.5 Mhz homing beacons), but with heavy foliage/steep
terrain that may have been more work/slower than the airhorns.

Darryl

[[email protected]]

“Our sport, like many others, has become very technology heavy,” he
said. “With the personal devices, I made the decision that the couple
of hundred dollars that you spend could really pay off.” Dutka said he
“absolutely” felt that investment paid off Sunday.

Money well spent. Hopefully he'll spend some on recurrent training
too in order to avoid getting into the same unfortunate fix again.

[nimbus]

Poor weather conditions, close to the mountains ridges, no outlanding
fileds and still having water ballasts full of water?

Strange........

[John Godfrey (QT)[_2_]]

On May 14, 11:51*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On May 14, 4:28*pm, ContestID67 > wrote:
>
> > What seems really strange is the the rescurers didn't have a simple,
> > inexpensive, GPS so that they could zero in on the pilot quickly. *The
> > narrative indicates that the pilot had to guide them in via sound.
> > Even cell phones now have GPS. *This should be required equipment.
>
> 1. Did the PLB have a GPS?
> 2. Did the PLB have a GPS fix?
>
> Foliage or other *could mean a PLB with GPS is unable to get a fix.
> That or if the PLB does not have a GPS then then SARSAT relies on
> (significantly less precise) doppler location. It is also at least
> plausible that an alert process can be started before a triangulation
> fix established.
>
> If the ground SAR crew had 121.1 direction finder that may also have
> helped triangulate on the PLB 121.5 Mhz beacon (all 406 Mhz ELTs and
> PLBs also have 121.5 Mhz homing beacons), but with heavy foliage/steep
> terrain that may have been more work/slower than the airhorns.
>
> Darryl

Les’s comments in the AOPA web article are consistent with the
experiences with both the Peter Masak and Dale Kramer searches.
Although very high quality information (e.g. coordinates, elt signal,
knowledge of route being flown) may be available, there is a gap in
the ability of local non-aviation rescue (and even CAP) to accept and/
or use it effectively. Had Les not been able to respond to the sounds
made by the rescue team over his cellphone, it would have probably
taken much longer to find him as there is no indication that his
coordinates were either communicated to the rescue team or that they
had the capability to use them. However, I do not know whether SARSAT
actually got GPS coordinates from his PLB or they just estimated
coordinates from the PLB signal (a 406 Mhz elt signal without GPS
determines a search area of about 2 miles radius).

This reinforces the advantages of having something with you that makes
noise (elt, whistle, bike horn etc.) that is either automatically
activated or on the front of your chute.

[Dave Nadler]

On May 15, 5:11*am, nimbus > wrote:
> Poor weather conditions, close to the mountains ridges, no outlanding
> fileds and still having water ballasts full of water?
>
> Strange........

Excellent weather conditions.
Look at OLC flights for this day in the region.
At least one landing field in reach.

[jim archer]

"Poor weather conditions, close to the mountains ridges, no
outlanding
fileds and still having water ballasts full of water? " was not in
the article anywhere

Strange? Not when you consider the pilots actual comments...
"winds were pretty strong" "skies were overcast" "He said he was
ridge soaring when his glider stalled and spun into the side of a
mountain" were some of the pilots and authors comments, so I'm not
sure what people are getting at here. Sounds like he is genuinely
grateful and amazed to be alive after an admitted stall/spin.

[nimbus]

On 16 mai, 19:21, jim archer > wrote:
> "Poor weather conditions, close to the mountains ridges, no
> outlanding
> fileds and still having water ballasts full of water? " *was not in
> the article anywhere
>
> Strange? *Not when you consider the pilots actual comments...
> "winds were pretty strong" "skies were overcast" * "He said he was
> ridge soaring when his glider stalled and spun into the side of a
> mountain" *were some of the pilots and authors comments, so I'm not
> sure what people are getting at here. *Sounds like he is genuinely
> grateful and amazed to be alive after an admitted stall/spin.

Extract out of the provided link :

"He was flying lower and lower, without finding lift, and had not
dropped his water ballast—which increases stall speed. "

[brianDG303[_2_]]

On May 16, 11:42*am, nimbus > wrote:
> On 16 mai, 19:21, jim archer > wrote:
>
> > "Poor weather conditions, close to the mountains ridges, no
> > outlanding
> > fileds and still having water ballasts full of water? " *was not in
> > the article anywhere
>
> > Strange? *Not when you consider the pilots actual comments...
> > "winds were pretty strong" "skies were overcast" * "He said he was
> > ridge soaring when his glider stalled and spun into the side of a
> > mountain" *were some of the pilots and authors comments, so I'm not
> > sure what people are getting at here. *Sounds like he is genuinely
> > grateful and amazed to be alive after an admitted stall/spin.
>
> Extract out of the provided link :
>
> "He was flying lower and lower, without finding lift, and had not
> dropped his water ballast—which increases stall speed. "

The question I have about this is the effectiveness of the different
alert devices while upside down. Would the SPOT get a message out,
would the PLB? Where I fly there would be no cellphone coverage and no
way to get a fire truck with an airhorn, so it would be SPOT or PLB
and a very long wait.

Brian

[Wayne Paul]

Instead of choosing a "SPOT or PLB", why not consider a SPOT and a PLB? In aviation redundancy is good!

Wayne
http://www.soaridaho.com/

"brianDG303" > wrote in message ...

The question I have about this is the effectiveness of the different
alert devices while upside down. Would the SPOT get a message out,
would the PLB? Where I fly there would be no cellphone coverage and no
way to get a fire truck with an airhorn, so it would be SPOT or PLB
and a very long wait.

Brian

[Darryl Ramm]

On May 17, 8:15*am, brianDG303 > wrote:
> On May 16, 11:42*am, nimbus > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 16 mai, 19:21, jim archer > wrote:
>
> > > "Poor weather conditions, close to the mountains ridges, no
> > > outlanding
> > > fileds and still having water ballasts full of water? " *was not in
> > > the article anywhere
>
> > > Strange? *Not when you consider the pilots actual comments...
> > > "winds were pretty strong" "skies were overcast" * "He said he was
> > > ridge soaring when his glider stalled and spun into the side of a
> > > mountain" *were some of the pilots and authors comments, so I'm not
> > > sure what people are getting at here. *Sounds like he is genuinely
> > > grateful and amazed to be alive after an admitted stall/spin.
>
> > Extract out of the provided link :
>
> > "He was flying lower and lower, without finding lift, and had not
> > dropped his water ballast—which increases stall speed. "
>
> The question I have about this is the effectiveness of the different
> alert devices while upside down. Would the SPOT get a message out,
> would the PLB? Where I fly there would be no cellphone coverage and no
> way to get a fire truck with an airhorn, so it would be SPOT or PLB
> and a very long wait.
>
> Brian

SPOT needs to see the Globalstar satellites to get a message out. It's
a planar antenna and needs to be pointing (mostly) skyward. If you are
trapped upside down unless you can push the SPOT messenger outside the
cockpit someway the distress signal will not be seen.

SPOT will send a 911 distress even if it cannot get a GPS fix. But I
suspect it most cases if it can transmit to Gloabalstar then either
the SPOT 1 or 2 will get a GPS fix.
Although improved GPS performance was one of the claims of the SPOT 2.

406 MHz PLBs use a whip antenna, you have to be able to manually depoy
the whip antenna and get it outside say the upside son cockpit, but it
would have less sensitivity to orientation (should be held mostly
vertical).

A 406 MHz ELT with a rod or whip antenna mounted on the upper fueslage
surface like on many power aircraft would probalby not work if it
survived the crash at all.

ELTs antennas installed inside the cockpit may work extremely poorly
even in an undamaged glider sitting upright (no ground plane,
proximity of conductive surfaces/metalwork and broad shielding from
carbon fiber, etc).

I have a low confidence that ELTs will activate in significant number
of crashes that would cause injury in a glider and given all the
hassle with mounting them and trying to find a location for the
antenna that will work well (and not be destroyed in likely crash
scenarios). I think a 406 MHz PLB (on a parachute harness) is much
more likely to be useful than an ELT.

The benefit of SPOT tracking is that it has worked up until the point
that you have crashed and are upside down. With some flight path
guessing and knowledge this gives a useful area to start an aerial
search on based on the last 10 minute position report. With very
occasional delays of apparently an hour or so for SPOT back-end
processing it would take several hours for me to want to really start
worrying just based on the SPOT tracking suddenly stopping, but maybe
a good time to try tracking people down on radio, radio relay, etc.
Hopefully with improved future devices/technology this will improve
even more. e.g. ADS-B data could ultimately provide altitude and very
frequent updates, but with concern in some area for ADS-B coverage
near terrain (e.g. may be an issue for ridge runners, as in this
accident).

I fly with SPOT tracking, with the SPOT messenger mounted on my canopy
rail for good satellite visibility and a 406 MHz PLB with GPS on my
parachute harness. And I've got signal mirrors, whistles, etc. carried
in the glider and on the parachute.


Darryl

[Jim Britton]

On May 17, 9:17*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On May 17, 8:15*am, brianDG303 > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 16, 11:42*am, nimbus > wrote:
>
> > > On 16 mai, 19:21, jim archer > wrote:
>
> > > > "Poor weather conditions, close to the mountains ridges, no
> > > > outlanding
> > > > fileds and still having water ballasts full of water? " *was not in
> > > > the article anywhere
>
> > > > Strange? *Not when you consider the pilots actual comments...
> > > > "winds were pretty strong" "skies were overcast" * "He said he was
> > > > ridge soaring when his glider stalled and spun into the side of a
> > > > mountain" *were some of the pilots and authors comments, so I'm not
> > > > sure what people are getting at here. *Sounds like he is genuinely
> > > > grateful and amazed to be alive after an admitted stall/spin.
>
> > > Extract out of the provided link :
>
> > > "He was flying lower and lower, without finding lift, and had not
> > > dropped his water ballast—which increases stall speed. "
>
> > The question I have about this is the effectiveness of the different
> > alert devices while upside down. Would the SPOT get a message out,
> > would the PLB? Where I fly there would be no cellphone coverage and no
> > way to get a fire truck with an airhorn, so it would be SPOT or PLB
> > and a very long wait.
>
> > Brian
>
> SPOT needs to see the Globalstar satellites to get a message out. It's
> a planar antenna and needs to be pointing (mostly) skyward. If you are
> trapped upside down unless you can push the SPOT messenger outside the
> cockpit someway the distress signal will not be seen.
>
> SPOT will send a 911 distress even if it cannot get a GPS fix. But I
> suspect it most cases if it can transmit to Gloabalstar then either
> the SPOT 1 or 2 will get a GPS fix.
> Although improved GPS performance was one of the claims of the SPOT 2.
>
> 406 MHz PLBs use a whip antenna, you have to be able to manually depoy
> the whip antenna and get it outside say the upside son cockpit, but it
> would have less sensitivity to orientation (should be held mostly
> vertical).
>
> A 406 MHz ELT with a rod or whip antenna mounted on the upper fueslage
> surface like on many power aircraft would probalby not work if it
> survived the crash at all.
>
> ELTs antennas installed inside the cockpit may work extremely poorly
> even in an undamaged glider sitting upright (no ground plane,
> proximity of conductive surfaces/metalwork and broad shielding from
> carbon fiber, etc).
>
> I have a low confidence that ELTs will activate in significant number
> of crashes that would cause injury in a glider and given all the
> hassle with mounting them and trying to find a location for the
> antenna that will work well (and not be destroyed in likely crash
> scenarios). I think a 406 MHz PLB (on a parachute harness) is much
> more likely to be useful than an ELT.
>
> The benefit of SPOT tracking is that it has worked up until the point
> that you have crashed and are upside down. With some flight path
> guessing and knowledge this gives a useful area to start an aerial
> search on based on the last 10 minute position report. With very
> occasional delays of apparently an hour or so for SPOT back-end
> processing it would take several hours for me to want to really start
> worrying just based on the SPOT tracking suddenly stopping, but maybe
> a good time to try tracking people down on radio, radio relay, etc.
> Hopefully with improved future devices/technology this will improve
> even more. e.g. ADS-B data could ultimately provide altitude and very
> frequent updates, but with concern in some area for ADS-B coverage
> near terrain (e.g. may be an issue for ridge runners, as in this
> accident).
>
> I fly with SPOT tracking, with the SPOT messenger mounted on my canopy
> rail for good satellite visibility and a 406 MHz PLB with GPS on my
> parachute harness. And I've got signal mirrors, whistles, etc. carried
> in the glider and on the parachute.
>
> Darryl- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Only addressing the upside down SPOT question -and purely anecdotal
but my SPOT 1 unit is upside down on my patio at home and tracking
away..
So far the first and third messages got through and the second one was
lost.

YMMV

-jim

[John Cochrane]

Off PLB and spot for a moment, does anyone know what happened here?
Was this an altoona crossing that ended halfway up the ridge, not
enough to ridge soar? If so, northbound or southbound? Or was it on
the back ridge behind the Altoona gap?
John Cochrane

[Tom[_12_]]

We often note how some pilots incorrectly fly directly over the crest
of a mountain, rather than above the steeper slope which may be well
in front, and lower than the crest. The wind goes up the slope, level
over the crest, then down the back side.

There are many places where the top of a mountain is well back behind
the lower, steeper part of the ridge. Being low and slow over the
crest may place the pilot at considerable risk if it is not possibe to
glide upwind to the steeper slope.

The book, "Ridge Soaring The Bald Eagle Ridge" explains this.

Tom Knauff