Glider Crash in Shirley, NY

[[email protected]]

Sad news here. Does anyone have any info on this fatal crash? The info I have read says it was a Schweizer 2-32.
Thanks - Renny

http://online.wsj.com/article/AP3ee419df15e643e584188fa43ef5955b.html?mod=google news_wsj

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 12:02:47 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> Sad news here. Does anyone have any info on this fatal crash? The info I have read says it was a Schweizer 2-32.
>
> Thanks - Renny
>
>
>
> http://online.wsj.com/article/AP3ee419df15e643e584188fa43ef5955b.html?mod=google news_wsj

More here:

http://www.longisland.com/news/04-30-13/fatal-li-glider-crash-under-investigation.html

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, May 2, 2013 9:20:52 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 12:02:47 AM UTC-4, wrote:
>
> > Sad news here. Does anyone have any info on this fatal crash? The info I have read says it was a Schweizer 2-32.
>
> >
>
> > Thanks - Renny
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > http://online.wsj.com/article/AP3ee419df15e643e584188fa43ef5955b.html?mod=google news_wsj
>
>
>
> More here:
>
>
>
> http://www.longisland.com/news/04-30-13/fatal-li-glider-crash-under-investigation.html

The preliminary NTSB report has been released.

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20130427X24846&key=1

[WAVEGURU]

I'm so sorry for the loss to family and friends.

It appears that another SGS 2-32 spins in? This Schweizer is pretty unforgiving...

Boggs

[kirk.stant]

On Friday, May 3, 2013 8:21:53 AM UTC-7, Waveguru wrote:

> It appears that another SGS 2-32 spins in? This Schweizer is pretty unforgiving...

Only if your training was in 2-33s and didn't include spin training. The 2-32 will spin, but it gives you a little warning (not much), and recovers nicely once it departs. Kinda like a T-6, considered one of the best trainers ever built.

Sad that we keep rediscovering our training flaws, assuming this was a spin-in. Which of course, it may not have been.

Sad, regardless.

Kirk
66

[[email protected]]

Hand held radio, if unsecured can be a factor.

[Chris Rollings[_2_]]

Any reason to think that was so in this case?

At 18:42 03 May 2013, wrote:
>Hand held radio, if unsecured can be a factor.
>

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, May 4, 2013 8:31:58 AM UTC-5, Chris Rollings wrote:
> Any reason to think that was so in this case?


No. I just noticed mention of the handheld in the NTSP report and know that fiddling with a handheld on approach can be problematic.

Matt Michael

[[email protected]]

On Friday, May 3, 2013 11:03:29 AM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:
> On Friday, May 3, 2013 8:21:53 AM UTC-7, Waveguru wrote:
>
>recovers nicely once it departs.

Agreed but the 32s I've flown required positive forceful control inputs to initiate recovery. Virtually every other glider I've flown will begin to recover merely by relaxing back pressure and applying a touch of opposite rudder. The 32 is one of my favorite machines to fly but it's spin characteristics and recovery are somewhat unique. Whatever the causal factors in this accident it's terrible to lose yet another of our comrades.

[Chris Rollings[_2_]]

At 14:55 04 May 2013, wrote:
>On Friday, May 3, 2013 11:03:29 AM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:
>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 8:21:53 AM UTC-7, Waveguru wrote:
>>=20
>>recovers nicely once it departs.
>
>Agreed but the 32s I've flown required positive forceful control inputs
to
>=
>initiate recovery. Virtually every other glider I've flown will begin to
>r=
>ecover merely by relaxing back pressure and applying a touch of opposite
>ru=
>dder. The 32 is one of my favorite machines to fly but it's spin
>characteri=
>stics and recovery are somewhat unique. Whatever the causal factors in
>thi=
>s accident it's terrible to lose yet another of our comrades.
>
A fairly large number of German single-place glass gliders have similar
characteristics, albeit with somewhat lower control forces but the same
deflections required, particulary with the C of G in the aft part of the
range.

[[email protected]]

It's a privilege to continue to learn from you Chris. :-)
MM

[Jim White[_3_]]

At 19:05 04 May 2013, Chris Rollings wrote:
>At 14:55 04 May 2013, wrote:
>>On Friday, May 3, 2013 11:03:29 AM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:
>>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 8:21:53 AM UTC-7, Waveguru wrote:
>>>=20
>>>recovers nicely once it departs.
>>
>>Agreed but the 32s I've flown required positive forceful control inputs
>to
>>=
>>initiate recovery. Virtually every other glider I've flown will begin
to
>>r=
>>ecover merely by relaxing back pressure and applying a touch of opposite
>>ru=
>>dder. The 32 is one of my favorite machines to fly but it's spin
>>characteri=
>>stics and recovery are somewhat unique. Whatever the causal factors in
>>thi=
>>s accident it's terrible to lose yet another of our comrades.
>>
>A fairly large number of German single-place glass gliders have similar
>characteristics, albeit with somewhat lower control forces but the same
>deflections required, particulary with the C of G in the aft part of the
>range.
>
>
Which ones Chris? Both gliders I have owned come out just by thinking about
it. Discus B and ASW27.

Jim

[Chris Rollings[_2_]]

At 06:32 05 May 2013, Jim White wrote:
>At 19:05 04 May 2013, Chris Rollings wrote:
>>At 14:55 04 May 2013, wrote:
>>>On Friday, May 3, 2013 11:03:29 AM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:
>>>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 8:21:53 AM UTC-7, Waveguru wrote:
>>>>=20
>>>>recovers nicely once it departs.
>>>
>>>Agreed but the 32s I've flown required positive forceful control inputs
>>to
>>>=
>>>initiate recovery. Virtually every other glider I've flown will begin
>to
>>>r=
>>>ecover merely by relaxing back pressure and applying a touch of
opposite
>>>ru=
>>>dder. The 32 is one of my favorite machines to fly but it's spin
>>>characteri=
>>>stics and recovery are somewhat unique. Whatever the causal factors in
>>>thi=
>>>s accident it's terrible to lose yet another of our comrades.
>>>
>>A fairly large number of German single-place glass gliders have similar
>>characteristics, albeit with somewhat lower control forces but the same
>>deflections required, particulary with the C of G in the aft part of the
>>range.
>>
>>
>Which ones Chris? Both gliders I have owned come out just by thinking
about
>it. Discus B and ASW27.
>
>Jim
>
>

LS7, Ventus B & C (couldn't fit in the A so never tried it), ASW20 and
ASW24 (only at aft C of G), lots of others.

[Dan Marotta]

I flew my LAK-17a yesterday with 2 gallons of water in the tail tank, none
in the wings. The feel was definitely different on takeoff but not
difficult. At altitude, I lowered landing flaps and slowed to 40 KIAS
before the glider gently dropped the nose. A little release of back
pressure and I was flying again.

Spins are prohibited per the flight manual so I kept the rudder neutral.


"Chris Rollings" > wrote in message
...
> At 06:32 05 May 2013, Jim White wrote:
>>At 19:05 04 May 2013, Chris Rollings wrote:
>>>At 14:55 04 May 2013, wrote:
>>>>On Friday, May 3, 2013 11:03:29 AM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 8:21:53 AM UTC-7, Waveguru wrote:
>>>>>=20
>>>>>recovers nicely once it departs.
>>>>
>>>>Agreed but the 32s I've flown required positive forceful control inputs
>>>to
>>>>=
>>>>initiate recovery. Virtually every other glider I've flown will begin
>>to
>>>>r=
>>>>ecover merely by relaxing back pressure and applying a touch of
> opposite
>>>>ru=
>>>>dder. The 32 is one of my favorite machines to fly but it's spin
>>>>characteri=
>>>>stics and recovery are somewhat unique. Whatever the causal factors in
>>>>thi=
>>>>s accident it's terrible to lose yet another of our comrades.
>>>>
>>>A fairly large number of German single-place glass gliders have similar
>>>characteristics, albeit with somewhat lower control forces but the same
>>>deflections required, particulary with the C of G in the aft part of the
>>>range.
>>>
>>>
>>Which ones Chris? Both gliders I have owned come out just by thinking
> about
>>it. Discus B and ASW27.
>>
>>Jim
>>
>>
>
> LS7, Ventus B & C (couldn't fit in the A so never tried it), ASW20 and
> ASW24 (only at aft C of G), lots of others.
>

[[email protected]]

I have only had a couple flights in a 2-32. My instructor specifically warned me about the spoilers (dive brakes). Unlike spoilers on most modern gliders, these things actually do brake or slow down the airspeed when applied. It takes a conscious effort to maintain proper airspeed when using the spoilers on approach. My instructor also warned me about the tendency of the 2-32 to drop a wing and spin when pushed beyond its limits. The impression I got was that while it seems easy to fly, the 2-32 is not forgiving.

[[email protected]]

As part of an aerobatics course, we used a 2-32 for all the spin training and really wrung it out trying all kinds of things to screw it up and recover. The 2-32 does do some weird things. For example, if you put the control inputs in to recover in the wrong order, it may not recover. You have to go back to the full spin position (rudder in direction of spin and stick full back) and start over. Sometimes the spin would stop and it would immediately spin the other way. In training we could get quite a few turns in, trying to accelerate the spin, slow it down, mess it up on purpose and recover, but we had plenty of height to work with. I've had flights where the instructor would just say, " that was interesting, never saw it do that before." One experienced instructor (now and aerobatics instructor) referred to a spin in a 2-32 as a "come to Jesus" moment. Anyone wanting to really learn all about spins should get some specialized training in a 2-32 before the last of them is unfortunately destroyed and people flying them recreationally should make sure they are truly proficient and comfortable with spins. There's a reason NASA bought one and outfitted it with equipment to try to better understand what happens in a spin.