Hero emulation

[son_of_flubber]

I stumbled across a young 150 hour glider pilot online, who had recently seen a low pass on a Grand Prix video. He thought 'that was neat', and so he decided to 'try that at home' on his own. He landed cleanly on his first attempt.

[Dan Daly[_2_]]

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 2:07:16 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
> I stumbled across a young 150 hour glider pilot online, who had recently seen a low pass on a Grand Prix video. He thought 'that was neat', and so he decided to 'try that at home' on his own. He landed cleanly on his first attempt.

Define "cleanly"... I imagine that it may possibly be "dirtily" as well.

[Bruce Hoult]

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 11:26:22 PM UTC+3, Dan Daly wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 2:07:16 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
> > I stumbled across a young 150 hour glider pilot online, who had recently seen a low pass on a Grand Prix video. He thought 'that was neat', and so he decided to 'try that at home' on his own. He landed cleanly on his first attempt.
>
> Define "cleanly"... I imagine that it may possibly be "dirtily" as well.

I would imagine most people are self taught. How many organisations put "How to execute competition finishes" in their dual training syllabus?

They perhaps *should*.

Fortunately it's not that hard to do provided you do the pull up before the speed has decayed too much. Anyone trained on winch should be able to figure it out, and those with a ridge nearby can practice pull-ups and reversal turns to circuit speed there safely.

[son_of_flubber]

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 3:26:22 PM UTC-5, Dan Daly wrote:

> Define "cleanly"... I imagine that it may possibly be "dirtily" as well.

Clean as in, "he remembered to put the gear down".

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

As I was told by a rather wise instructor (who is on here a fair amount)...... "you will never beat the lowest finish, at best, you will tie it......".

He learned quite a bit from Steve Bennis, among the pioneers of "modern soaring", airport owner where I flew, the DE for my private and commercial glider check rides, probably found a lot of ways to break gliders over the decades, tried to make sure none of us tried to replicate his misfortunes.
Yes, he is in the SSA HoF.


While he was sorta crusty, I do miss him and was glad to know him.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 2:07:16 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
> I stumbled across a young 150 hour glider pilot online, who had recently seen a low pass on a Grand Prix video. He thought 'that was neat', and so he decided to 'try that at home' on his own. He landed cleanly on his first attempt.

Seems it's same people who don't trust teenagers to practice abstinence re: humping, expect new pilots to practice abstinence re: humping the earth. Temptation is temptation. Sex ed is taught in school, past time we teach student pilots how to fly safe and low.

[Tango Eight]

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 7:55:47 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 2:07:16 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
> > I stumbled across a young 150 hour glider pilot online, who had recently seen a low pass on a Grand Prix video. He thought 'that was neat', and so he decided to 'try that at home' on his own. He landed cleanly on his first attempt.

I hope he remembered to say "Wahoo!!" as he opened the canopy. That's the best part.

[MNLou]

Clean as in "he didn't kill himself (or anybody else)"?

[Ventus_a]

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 11:26:22 PM UTC+3, Dan Daly wrote:
On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 2:07:16 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
I stumbled across a young 150 hour glider pilot online, who had recently seen a low pass on a Grand Prix video. He thought 'that was neat', and so he decided to 'try that at home' on his own. He landed cleanly on his first attempt.

Define "cleanly"... I imagine that it may possibly be "dirtily" as well.

I would imagine most people are self taught. How many organisations put "How to execute competition finishes" in their dual training syllabus?

They perhaps *should*.

Fortunately it's not that hard to do provided you do the pull up before the speed has decayed too much. Anyone trained on winch should be able to figure it out, and those with a ridge nearby can practice pull-ups and reversal turns to circuit speed there safely.

It's part of the available training syllabus in New Zealand

http://gliding.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/MOAP-AL-26.pdf

Appendix 2-I Final Glides pg 103

:-) Colin

[Dave Nadler]

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 7:55:47 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> ...past time we teach student pilots how to fly safe and low.

Agreed. In USA we manage to kill a pilot every few years with untrained
imitation (Uvalde, Wurtsboro, etc).

A while back I talked to Scott Manley about doing video showing the
ways people usually die (slow speed and or button-hook).
Scott started but sorry I don't know if this was ever completed?

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 8:11:44 AM UTC-5, Dave Nadler wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 7:55:47 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> > ...past time we teach student pilots how to fly safe and low.
>
> Agreed. In USA we manage to kill a pilot every few years with untrained
> imitation (Uvalde, Wurtsboro, etc).
>
> A while back I talked to Scott Manley about doing video showing the
> ways people usually die (slow speed and or button-hook).
> Scott started but sorry I don't know if this was ever completed?

The Wurtsboro accident wasn't a show off speed pass based on what observers I spoke with said. It is quite likely that it was a rushed return and pattern due to a physical problem.
UH

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 8:11:44 AM UTC-5, Dave Nadler wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 7:55:47 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> > ...past time we teach student pilots how to fly safe and low.
>
> Agreed. In USA we manage to kill a pilot every few years with untrained
> imitation (Uvalde, Wurtsboro, etc).
>
> A while back I talked to Scott Manley about doing video showing the
> ways people usually die (slow speed and or button-hook).
> Scott started but sorry I don't know if this was ever completed?

One of the advantages of simulation-based flight training is the ability to experience potentially dangerous situations without the associated risk.

Individuals can learn quite a bit through self-directed trial/error. It would have been more prudent, and increased the probability of a happy ending, had the young person in question experienced the proposed maneuver lots of times in simulation before attempting it in a real aircraft.

Certainly, in cooperation with a mentor, simulation-based training of this type would be that much more effective and efficient, as it is in general.

As part of my presentation at the Reno convention next week, I am doing a segment called "Having Fun with Condor" in which I demonstrate a variety of flight situations I have experimented with in simulation, ranging from plausible to insane. In all these situations, I learned a lot about glider performance, my abilities, and how quickly some situations can turn deadly.

Scott Manley - 3167160CFI

[Dave Nadler]

On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 1:34:49 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 8:11:44 AM UTC-5, Dave Nadler wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 7:55:47 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> > > ...past time we teach student pilots how to fly safe and low.
> >
> > Agreed. In USA we manage to kill a pilot every few years with untrained
> > imitation (Uvalde, Wurtsboro, etc).
> >
> > A while back I talked to Scott Manley about doing video showing the
> > ways people usually die (slow speed and or button-hook).
> > Scott started but sorry I don't know if this was ever completed?
>
> One of the advantages of simulation-based flight training is the ability to experience potentially dangerous situations without the associated risk.
>
> Individuals can learn quite a bit through self-directed trial/error. It would have been more prudent, and increased the probability of a happy ending, had the young person in question experienced the proposed maneuver lots of times in simulation before attempting it in a real aircraft.
>
> Certainly, in cooperation with a mentor, simulation-based training of this type would be that much more effective and efficient, as it is in general..
>
> As part of my presentation at the Reno convention next week, I am doing a segment called "Having Fun with Condor" in which I demonstrate a variety of flight situations I have experimented with in simulation, ranging from plausible to insane. In all these situations, I learned a lot about glider performance, my abilities, and how quickly some situations can turn deadly.
>
> Scott Manley - 3167160CFI

Scott - Did you finish the video(s) on how not to do high speed passes for SSF?
Thanks!
Best Regards, Dave

[[email protected]]

>
> Scott - Did you finish the video(s) on how not to do high speed passes for SSF?
> Thanks!
> Best Regards, Dave

Most of the work I did for the SSF is available on their website

http://www.soaringsafety.org/

Under the links "FLIGHT TRAINING VIDEOS" and "FLIGHT SAFETY VIDEOS".

I worked with Rich Carlson and Bob Wander to produce 9 "FLIGHT SAFETY" videos each showing a situation that has been known to end badly. I also produced 1 "FLIGHT TRAINING" video demonstrating/describing "How to approach/land in a crosswind."

I remember you (Dave) contacting me, asking if Condor could be used to produce a video of a high-speed low pass gone wrong. I assured you it could, I remember doing the flying and recording a Condor Replay of a failed high-speed low pass (glider stalls and spins as it attempts the reversing turn after pulling up and losing airspeed), and I sort of remember getting back to you (Dave) with "what do you think about this?", but I don't remember the effort going any further than that. I remember the request as coming from you (Dave), not from the SSF, but you (Dave) had probably seen the other SSF videos and were suggesting that a LOW PASS GONE BAD video be adding to he mix.

I just searched my Condor folders and can't find any remnant of the Replay I claim above to have produced.

Producing these videos turns out to be quite a bit of work.
1) A perfect example of what is being demonstrated needs to be flown. This often takes dozens/scores of attempts.
2) The perfect example is stored as a Condor Replay
3) The Replay, or segments of it, need to be captured using video capture software, e.g. FRAPS to produce an actual video format, e.g. .wmv. A Condor Replay is not actually a video, it is a parameter file that Condor uses to generate video output internally. A Replay (.rpy) can only be played back using Condor)
4) The video captured by FRAPS then needs to be edited into the final product using software like Windows Movie Maker.

Anyone with a lot of time, the required software, and the requisite skills can produce a similar video. :o)

Scott Manley - 3167160CFI

[Tom[_21_]]

Can I just ask a basic question here - what is the purpose of the "low pass" and how does it further or add to the flight?

Thanks Tom

[Roy B.]

what is the purpose of the "low pass" and how does it further or add to the flight?

The honest answers are "there isn't a purpose (anymore)" and it adds "nothing" further to the flight. But it does on occasion make some really fascinating video footage: See: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xb8dcs
ROY

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 3:06:50 PM UTC-7, Tom wrote:
> Can I just ask a basic question here - what is the purpose of the "low pass" and how does it further or add to the flight?
>
> Thanks Tom

You can also ask "What is the purpose of flying XCountry?" or "What is the purpose of flying an airplane with no engine?"

My answer to your question and my two questions is "It's fun." We could stop having fun because its unsafe or teach everyone how to have fun more safely. As previous posters have mentioned, stopping people doing a low pass may not be the best way. It's like trying to teach kids abstinence. Useless.

[Waveguru]

It's very hard to see the various forms of wildlife lurking near the edges of the runway from pattern altitude. A low pass gives you a better idea what may be lurking. Also good practice for an outlanding where you can't tell the surface condition of the chosen field. It's also a great way to get the message across that you are about to land to lollygaggers on the runway who don't have their radios turned on. Other benefits are testing the possible wind gradient.

Boggs

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

In Minden it is a great way to see where the down part of the wave has set up.


On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 2:06:50 PM UTC-8, Tom wrote:
> Can I just ask a basic question here - what is the purpose of the "low pass" and how does it further or add to the flight?
>
> Thanks Tom

[[email protected][_1_]]

It is joyful, inspirational and beautiful when done well. And it feels really good. And somewhat dangerous. A Personal call.

[Richard McLean]

At 22:06 22 February 2018, Tom wrote:
>Can I just ask a basic question here - what is the purpose of the "low
>pass" and how does it further or add to the flight?
>
>Thanks Tom
>
>

Hi Tom,

Answer: nothing. Glider pilots seem to have a fascination with seeing how
close they can get to the ground .. preferably with someone watching,
either in person or more often these days online, which is a real problem

and I think pretty unprofessional & foolish. I naively thought that gliding

was more professional than this but I'm realising now that gliding has
always had it's individualistic cowboy element, and more concerning is that

today's juniors are being encouraged to emulate this .. and the internet is

going to ensure it. I'm seriously considering giving up instructing after
17
years because I'm sick & tired of the supposed "safety culture" we bang on

about endlessly here in Australia being totally undermined by this
undisciplined and unnecessary "hooning" as we call it.

[Richard McLean]

At 22:06 22 February 2018, Tom wrote:
>Can I just ask a basic question here - what is the purpose of the "low
>pass" and how does it further or add to the flight?
>
>Thanks Tom
>
>

Hi Tom,

Answer: nothing. Glider pilots seem to have a fascination with seeing how
close they can get to the ground .. preferably with someone watching,
either in person or more often these days online, which is a real problem

and I think pretty unprofessional & foolish. I naively thought that gliding

was more professional than this but I'm realising now that gliding has
always had it's individualistic cowboy element, and more concerning is that

today's juniors are being encouraged to emulate this .. and the internet is

going to ensure it. I'm seriously considering giving up instructing after
17
years because I'm sick & tired of the supposed "safety culture" we bang on

about endlessly here in Australia being totally undermined by this
undisciplined and unnecessary "hooning" as we call it.

[[email protected]]

Why low passes? Well, to have fun, of course, but also because, according to some, going into ground effect some distance before the arrival line is the most efficient way to finish a competition flight.

However, according to most "mathematical minds", the energy loss incurred by having to accelerate to VNe and keep the speed at VNe until going into ground effect, can never be compensated by that ground effect. Certainly not if you still have enough energy when crossing the arrival line to pull up and do a 360 before landing. That energy is lost for the flight. You can just have fun with it, if it doesn't scare you to death - or kills you.

Some years ago (2003-2004, IIRC), the British Juniors published a series of "smoking vid" DVD's that were sold as a fundraising source for them and showed some of the most crazy low passes you can imagine. I even seem to remember a low pass by an Astir CS where the belly of the glider actually touched the ground at full speed, going straight at the camera. Sure, it was fun....

But then, at the Junior World Gliding Championships at Husbands Bosworth, Leics, in August 2005, Neil Lawson, a well known glider photographer, was killed by the low passing glider he was photographing. No more "smoking vids" after that event. And the championship rules where amended to actively discourage low pass arrivals.

[Bruce Hoult]

On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 2:51:44 PM UTC+3, Stéphane Vander Veken wrote:
> Why low passes? Well, to have fun, of course, but also because, according to some, going into ground effect some distance before the arrival line is the most efficient way to finish a competition flight.
>
> However, according to most "mathematical minds", the energy loss incurred by having to accelerate to VNe and keep the speed at VNe until going into ground effect, can never be compensated by that ground effect. Certainly not if you still have enough energy when crossing the arrival line to pull up and do a 360 before landing. That energy is lost for the flight.

The most efficient is to climb *just* enough in the last thermal to cruise at MC=finalClimbRate and arrive at the finish line with zero altitude and land through it.

However if you misjudge that and end up short then it's a very bad day, so everyone puts an extra 500 ft or 1000 ft in the bank before starting the final glide.

Having done that (and wasted anything from one to five minutes more than you really needed to climbing), you can get a minute or more back by speeding up 20 or 30 km before the finish to again plan to arrive at the finish at zero altitude .. but with a much higher speed.

[Michael Opitz]

At 12:24 23 February 2018, Bruce Hoult wrote:

>The most efficient is to climb *just* enough in the last thermal to
cruise
>=
>at MC=3DfinalClimbRate and arrive at the finish line with zero
altitude
>and=
> land through it.
>
>However if you misjudge that and end up short then it's a very bad
day, so
>=
>everyone puts an extra 500 ft or 1000 ft in the bank before
starting the
>fi=
>nal glide.
>
>Having done that (and wasted anything from one to five minutes
more than
>yo=
>u really needed to climbing), you can get a minute or more back
by
>speeding=
> up 20 or 30 km before the finish to again plan to arrive at the
finish at
>=
>zero altitude .. but with a much higher speed.
>

Thank you Bruce for sparing me the need to spell it out for those
who have not done much competition flying. We "fudge in" extra
altitude for unexpected sink along the final glide. I was once at
120 Kts, full of water, 5 miles from the finish, at 2,000' AGL (at
Hobbs in the early 1980's), and even passed up a 10 Kt dust devil
along the way, only to run into extreme sink and headwind over
irrigated fields in the last couple of miles so that I was just barely
able to make a direct rolling finish. Other times, one runs into
unexpected lift along final glide and winds up with a lot of excess
energy, some of which can be converted to speed points by doing a
flying finish. Now, if all of the minimum finish altitudes are jacked
up, and direct rolling finishes are not allowed, that is again another
matter, but contrary to some people's opinions, there has been a
place in competition soaring for low flying finishes.

RO

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 2:06:50 PM UTC-8, Tom wrote:
> Can I just ask a basic question here - what is the purpose of the "low pass" and how does it further or add to the flight?
>
> Thanks Tom

Hi Tom: Low passes can be fun to fly and are exciting to watch. They also have potential to end up very badly. I once did a low pass 20-30 years ago at Minden and pulled up into severe down air. That was not as much fun, never done a low pass on wave day again. One must always fly within your skill set and energy is life for a glider pilot. One burns a bit of energy in a low pass so you had better know what you are doing.

[son_of_flubber]

On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 10:21:40 AM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:

>I once did a low pass 20-30 years ago at Minden and pulled up into severe down air. That was not as much fun, never done a low pass on wave day again.

This reminds me of the millions of people that have found out the hard way; that having intercourse may result in pregnancy.

[[email protected]]

> This reminds me of the millions of people that have found out the hard way; that having intercourse may result in pregnancy.

Said another way, having to explain why a pilot would do a low pass that wasn't necessary for landing is like having to explain why someone would have sex for reasons other than procreation.

It's fun. It's exciting. It feels good. So judge me. :)

Chip Bearden

[Craig Funston[_3_]]

On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 9:44:58 AM UTC-8, Chip Bearden wrote:
> > This reminds me of the millions of people that have found out the hard way; that having intercourse may result in pregnancy.
>
> Said another way, having to explain why a pilot would do a low pass that wasn't necessary for landing is like having to explain why someone would have sex for reasons other than procreation.
>
> It's fun. It's exciting. It feels good. So judge me. :)
>
> Chip Bearden

Thanks Chip. That needed to be said.

Craig
7Q

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 8:10:12 AM UTC-8, son_of_flubber wrote:

> This reminds me of the millions of people that have found out the hard way; that having intercourse may result in pregnancy.

Which is a nice lead in to always have a plan B, or don't use your real name:)

[son_of_flubber]

On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 12:44:58 PM UTC-5, Chip Bearden wrote:
> > This reminds me of the millions of people that have found out the hard way; that having intercourse may result in pregnancy.
>
> Said another way, having to explain why a pilot would do a low pass that wasn't necessary for landing is like having to explain why someone would have sex for reasons other than procreation.
>
> It's fun. It's exciting. It feels good.

I think you missed my point. I'm all for having sex or doing low passes for fun.

I just think that it is ridiculous, that people first have sex, and then afterwards learn how women get pregnant.

And likewise I think it is ridiculous, that people do low passes, then afterwards learn how sink can ruin an otherwise perfectly good low pass.

[Paul Agnew]

So, after reading all of this I'm inclined to ask if anyone actually has put together a training program on how to best evaluate conditions and safely perform a "contest finish" in such a manner that mitigates some of the perceived risks. Shooting from the hip or winging it for a new guy is the most dangerous scenario, but getting mentored and learning the do's and don'ts could help improve the results. Simply decreeing "don't" isn't helping because it still happens every weekend at many gliderports, including mine.

If you can't make it go away, make it safer.

Paul Agnew
Jupiter, FL
ASW-19

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

In my case I had not seen that type of sink where I found it on my pull. I had a hangar in Minden for years and flew out of there. The only time I had an issue was that one day. I also lost 1500 feet over the course of one mile returning to my home field one day, ended up doing downwind landing as I barely made the runway. Like Sh*t, sink happens. My point was and is for the new guy, it can go wrong, so have a plan B and be careful.

This kind of reminds me of a helicopter accident in FL where a MD600 news helicopter actually transmitted "watch this" as he tried to loop a 600 and immediately had a boom strike, end of flight, and life for two.

Hey I like these as much as the next guy, and have done a ton of NOE flying, mostly in helicopters and war birds. But be very careful and know you might get into a tighter corner than you thought.

On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 2:41:27 PM UTC-8, son_of_flubber wrote:
>
> I think you missed my point. I'm all for having sex or doing low passes for fun.
>
> I just think that it is ridiculous, that people first have sex, and then afterwards learn how women get pregnant.
>
> And likewise I think it is ridiculous, that people do low passes, then afterwards learn how sink can ruin an otherwise perfectly good low pass.

[[email protected]]

I mentored my younger brother many years ago before his first contest in glass. Moderate summer day in Ohio, not much wind. We briefed it before, did lead-follow, advised the gliderport of our intentions, kept each other in touch via radio all the way in on final glide and through pull up and landing, and debriefed afterward.

I like low finishes. Did I say they were fun? :) But even when they were commonly allowed, there were places I wouldn't do them: e.g., New Castle and Sugarbush on ridge/wave days, Fairfield on high wind days, Uvalde during a rain shower, Hobbs ahead of a gust front, Minden some days, almost anywhere near a T-storm. Because you just don't know what might be there.

Chip Bearden

[Tom[_21_]]

Fun - probably. Useful - no. Good for the sport - questionable. Good role model - ehhh. Judgement and risk management - not so great. Having to deal with the aftermath and bad publicity as the local airport and member of the community- not great and as as it's happened before, visiting glider pilot does something profanely stupid and the local folks clean up the mess.

I think I'll "pass".

Tom

[Tom[_21_]]

Oh, I forgot - there is a good argument that a low pass is not legal. That whole minimum altitude over "a congested area but “not for the purpose of takeoff or landing.� Take a look at 91.119, make your call eyes wide open. Sorry to take all the fun out of it. I know - there's many rationalizations, justifications and arguments. Not trying to pick a fight - just pointing out some issues with the practice of this maneuver.

Tom

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 12:08:29 AM UTC-5, Tom wrote:
> Oh, I forgot - there is a good argument that a low pass is not legal. That whole minimum altitude over "a congested area but “not for the purpose of takeoff or landing.� Take a look at 91.119, make your call eyes wide open. Sorry to take all the fun out of it. I know - there's many rationalizations, justifications and arguments. Not trying to pick a fight - just pointing out some issues with the practice of this maneuver.
>
> Tom
When you pull out the rule book you've already lost.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 9:08:29 PM UTC-8, Tom wrote:
> Oh, I forgot - there is a good argument that a low pass is not legal. That whole minimum altitude over "a congested area but “not for the purpose of takeoff or landing.� Take a look at 91.119, make your call eyes wide open. Sorry to take all the fun out of it. I know - there's many rationalizations, justifications and arguments. Not trying to pick a fight - just pointing out some issues with the practice of this maneuver.
>
> Tom

Not legal, cloud clearance. How many glider pilots actually know and adhere to the cloud clearance regs above 10K. I have never actually been to cloud base and I am sticking to that story.

[Bruce Hoult]

On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 8:08:29 AM UTC+3, Tom wrote:
> Oh, I forgot - there is a good argument that a low pass is not legal. That whole minimum altitude over "a congested area but “not for the purpose of takeoff or landing.� Take a look at 91.119, make your call eyes wide open. Sorry to take all the fun out of it. I know - there's many rationalizations, justifications and arguments. Not trying to pick a fight - just pointing out some issues with the practice of this maneuver.

Power pilots deliberately practice "missed approach" with no intention of landing on the first pass all the time.

[Tom[_21_]]

Hey - just saying. I know the whole both sides of the deal as I've been doing this a while.

Here's a good article worth a read: https://www.flyingmag.com/recalling-aviation-tragedy-borne-of-hubris

I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind and there are those who will continue to do low pass finishes and those that won't. I just encourage those who continue to do them -you understand and manage the risk, don't screw up and make sure that the impressionable inexperienced pilots around know this is advanced level with a high degree of risk and they shouldn't emulate the low pass without training and knowing the risks involved.

Regards, Tom

[MNLou]

"When you pull out the rule book you've already lost."

Sorry Greg - When you pull out the rule book, you are a disciplined pilot. They aren't suggestions, they are rules of flight.

Lou

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

I am a multi-engine instrument rated pilot and the only time I have done misses is during a missed instrument approach.

On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 12:52:46 AM UTC-8, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 8:08:29 AM UTC+3, Tom wrote:
> > Oh, I forgot - there is a good argument that a low pass is not legal. That whole minimum altitude over "a congested area but “not for the purpose of takeoff or landing.� Take a look at 91.119, make your call eyes wide open. Sorry to take all the fun out of it. I know - there's many rationalizations, justifications and arguments. Not trying to pick a fight - just pointing out some issues with the practice of this maneuver.
>
> Power pilots deliberately practice "missed approach" with no intention of landing on the first pass all the time.

[Burt Compton - Marfa Gliders, west Texas]

On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 7:15:44 AM UTC-6, MNLou wrote:
> "When you pull out the rule book you've already lost."
>
> Sorry Greg - When you pull out the rule book, you are a disciplined pilot. They aren't suggestions, they are rules of flight.
>
> Lou

And . . . there are Rules and Laws.

You can find loopholes in the Rules and survive but never break the Laws of physics, gravity, aerodynamics. Per my mentor: Fritz Compton, circa 1967.

[Tom[_21_]]

I'm sorry Greg, what have I "lost"? I made a number of points including the regulations and as a former accident investigator plus being a professional pilot for a long time it concerns me that your rebuttal was focused only on the regulation point. If I lose someone because I pointed out regulations then I shouldn't even bring it up?

I hate internet arguments and really try to meter my responses. I get a lot out of this forum and as one of my students read it and asked me offline about this thread I thought I'd weigh in. But, as I said, I'm not going to be able to change someone's mind that has justified and rationalized their decision. I simply hope someone who is on the fence or needs a little reinforcement or nudge to fly within their limitations thoughtfully takes in all the input and decides and acts eyes wide open.

Points to ponder:

In making a concerted decision - the rules do play a valid role. Will I be violated, will I be held criminally or civilly liable? What is my responsibility? Picture yourself on the stand being cross examined by a pit bull attorney in front of a jury of aviation ignorant "peers" - your "Few Good Men" Jack Nicholson moment.

As an instructor and or mentor, is it "do as I say and not do what I do?"

Did just I do something that has huge impacts and consequences for others?

Once the slippery slope of risk/reward decision making is headed downhill and positive reinforcement is helping in gradually letting one's standards slip - where is the tipping point?

What is my prevalent hazardous attitude and how does it effect my decision making process?

Hey - I have lot fun flying. I've had to manage a lot of risk/reward from many different perspectives and professions - I've seen some awful consequences when people have not done their due diligence or didn't know what they didn't know. I wanted to contribute in a thoughtful way about what we do, how we decide and how we manage risk. Not everyone thinks about these things - the human factors that play such an important role.

Have fun and be safe,

Tom

[Dan Marotta]

I used to do it.Â* Started at, say, 500' AGL and worked my way down on
successive flights.Â* It was a hoot!Â* I'm older now and want to get older
still, so I don't do it any more.Â* I'm still not willing to tell someone
else not to have a good time.Â* As Dirty Harry used to say, "A man's got
to know his limitations."

On 2/23/2018 9:12 PM, Tom wrote:
> Fun - probably. Useful - no. Good for the sport - questionable. Good role model - ehhh. Judgement and risk management - not so great. Having to deal with the aftermath and bad publicity as the local airport and member of the community- not great and as as it's happened before, visiting glider pilot does something profanely stupid and the local folks clean up the mess.
>
> I think I'll "pass".
>
> Tom

--
Dan, 5J

[Dan Marotta]

On 2/24/2018 7:42 AM, Tom wrote:
> I wanted to contribute in a thoughtful way about what we do, how we decide and how we manage risk. Not everyone thinks about these things - the human factors that play such an important role.
Sir, you have succeeded!
--
Dan, 5J

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

On 2/24/2018 8:32 AM, Dan Marotta wrote:
>
>
> On 2/24/2018 7:42 AM, Tom wrote:
>> I wanted to contribute in a thoughtful way about what we do, how we
>> decide and how we manage risk. Not everyone thinks about these things -
>> the human factors that play such an important role.
> Sir, you have succeeded!

+1

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[Bruce Hoult]

On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 4:42:09 PM UTC+3, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> I am a multi-engine instrument rated pilot and the only time I have done misses is during a missed instrument approach.
>
> On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 12:52:46 AM UTC-8, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 8:08:29 AM UTC+3, Tom wrote:
> > > Oh, I forgot - there is a good argument that a low pass is not legal. That whole minimum altitude over "a congested area but “not for the purpose of takeoff or landing.� Take a look at 91.119, make your call eyes wide open. Sorry to take all the fun out of it. I know - there's many rationalizations, justifications and arguments. Not trying to pick a fight - just pointing out some issues with the practice of this maneuver.
> >
> > Power pilots deliberately practice "missed approach" with no intention of landing on the first pass all the time.

How many touch-and-goes?

I don't see much difference between them in terms of an intention to land.

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 8:15:44 AM UTC-5, MNLou wrote:
> "When you pull out the rule book you've already lost."
>
> Sorry Greg - When you pull out the rule book, you are a disciplined pilot.. They aren't suggestions, they are rules of flight.
>
> Lou

Well then let's go Jihad with 91.119. The low pass is as old as the modern sailplane and is universal throughout the soaring world. Low passes are a normal approach technique for gliders, thus legal.
Now all ye disciplined safe pilots who follow the rules of flight because it is the law, and the safe thing to do. 91.119 says (b)Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

(c)Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
If you look at enforcement cases the FAA has a very broad definition of 'congested area' and a limited one of 'sparsely populated.' Of course straight up not non subjective we have 500' from a 'person, vehicle or structure.' That's 500' from a hiker on a ridge. Or a ridgetop house. Two houses and you better be 1,000' over.
Farewell and adieu ridge soaring and picking thermals off slopes.
Those are the rules, and if we are to be good and safe pilots we must follow the rules, all of them, all of the time.

[son_of_flubber]

Getting back to the topic of talented by inexperienced pilots teaching themselves to do low passes...

Here's a Soaring RX column about how human factors affects low passes http://www.danlj.org/~danlj/Soaring/SoaringRx/2011-11-Low-Pass-P18-19-20-21.pdf

Dr. Dan walks us through a pilot completing his first low pass and explains some of the human factors as they come to fore. Spoiler Alert. Like most first low passes, nobody dies.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 8:19:04 AM UTC-8, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> How many touch-and-goes?
>
> I don't see much difference between them in terms of an intention to land..

Many many, in helicopters and airplanes. But a touch-n-go is not a missed. As for the intention to land you are correct. Although on more than one occasion, on a touch-n-go I have been asked to make it a full stop, kind of late in the landing phase. The worst (while off subject) was being asked to abort a takeoff at rotation in a CE 340, I asked if I was on fire, tower said no, and I aborted takeoff anyway, barely got it stopped. Turns out they wanted to change my IFR clearance for a vastly different, non preferred route. When they said I was not on fire, I should have continued T/O.

[Tom[_21_]]

Roger - completely understand where you are coming from Greg - I 100% get what you are saying. As I've said before I know I can't change people's minds who are firmly ensconced in their mindset and I won't try. Best of luck to you Greg.

For others - please consider my multiple other points, put it in your risk/benefit analysis machine and process it yourself. Best of luck to all.

Regards,
Tom

[Roy B.]

Maybe, what we should do is accept the reality that some inexperienced pilots are still going to try a high speed low pass regardless of warnings - and so we should give them some advice on how to to mitigate the risk. Especially this seems needed with respect to hazards that are not programmed into Condor if our newbie hero thinks Condor alone will prepare him/her for the event. In my experience, here are some things that mitigate (but do not eliminate) the risks: 1) Know your glider's energy exchange performance with respect to speed and altitude (how much altitude does it take to accelerate to 90% of VNE and how much altitude will be gained (usually) on the climb back)? How is it different with water ballast? Experiment first at altitude.. 2) Secure the cockpit before starting the maneuver. Stow everything that can bounce, fly around the cockpit, or foul the landing gear handle and be ready for an expedited landing after the pass. 3) Trim the glider and set the flaps for the speed you expect parallel to the ground and change nothing during the high speed portion of the maneuver (do not change hands on the stick and if you are dumping water start that on the way down while high and early) 4) straps tight and do nothing to move your body fore or aft at high speed. Shut the vent window before starting and if you forget to - ignore it., 5) Know and respect your density altitude and TAS, 6) Double check the pattern and use the radio for your intentions 7) Use smooth stick pressure through the entire maneuver, 8) No closer to the ground than 1 wingspan until you are expert at the maneuver, 9) Expect to abort the maneuver at any time and have your landing plan/pattern worked out before you start. 10) Only on a light wind day.
ROY

[son_of_flubber]

On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 7:23:32 PM UTC-5, Roy B. wrote:
> Maybe, what we should do is accept the reality that some inexperienced pilots are still going to try a high speed low pass regardless of warnings

Some newish pilots have never heard the warnings, yet almost all new pilots have seen low passes on Youtube (or live). The bold young pilot that I stumbled across said he was motivated to try his first low pass after seeing the 'competition finishes' on the recent Chilean Grand Prix video. He got some strong feedback from his club members AFTER completing his first low pass.

[Tango Eight]

On Sunday, February 25, 2018 at 12:14:27 AM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 7:23:32 PM UTC-5, Roy B. wrote:
> > Maybe, what we should do is accept the reality that some inexperienced pilots are still going to try a high speed low pass regardless of warnings
>
> Some newish pilots have never heard the warnings, yet almost all new pilots have seen low passes on Youtube (or live). The bold young pilot that I stumbled across said he was motivated to try his first low pass after seeing the 'competition finishes' on the recent Chilean Grand Prix video. He got some strong feedback from his club members AFTER completing his first low pass.

So what's wrong with the culture of this soaring operation that the young, bold pilot (apparently) didn't seek any guidance?

[[email protected]]

Our young hero probably figured the guidance he would receive would be a finger wagging (false) rulebook thumping abstinence speech. From the sounds of it he was likely right. So how does that culture improve safety?

[MNLou]

If his club grounded him for a reflection period, that might get his attention.

Lou