Stall, spin fatality today in Arizona.

[Waveguru]

Lost one of my best friends....

Boggs

[Paul Agnew]

Condolences to you and his family. Tough to hear of another loss.

Paul A.

[Renny[_2_]]

On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 4:52:48 PM UTC-6, Waveguru wrote:
> Lost one of my best friends....
>
> Boggs

Gary - This is absolutely sad and very terrible news that is coming on the heels of the recent tragic news from the Grand Teton NP crash. Can you tell us were in Arizona this accident occurred?

Condolences go out to all....

Renny

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 4:52:48 PM UTC-6, Waveguru wrote:
> Lost one of my best friends....
>
> Boggs

Gary - This is absolutely sad and very terrible news that is coming on the heels of the recent tragic news from the Grand Teton NP crash. Can you tell us where in Arizona this accident occurred?

Condolences go out to all....

Renny

[Waveguru]

28AZ. West central Arizona.

[Waveguru]

My buddy was on a great base leg and tried to catch a thermal at around 400’ and spun in.

Boggs

[George Haeh]

It may appear to some that he tried to catch a thermal.

There may be a different story in the IGC files.

The atmosphere has a bag full of nasty tricks.

[Waveguru]

He was on base, made several circles and climbed a little, and then broke into a spin. The standard cirus did about 2 revolutions before it hit the ground. This was no freak atmospheric event, except that the air is more turbulent near the ground. Don’t f*#~k around down low...

Boggs

[Karl Striedieck[_2_]]

Pilots should be thoroughly familiar with the slow speed turning behavior of their ships. Take a new ship to altitude and put it in a thermal type turn and then "abuse" the controls with skids, slips and too much back stick to see what it is going to do. Repeat this occasionally to remind you of the warning signs of incipient spins.

The Standard Cirrus wing twist (washout) was increased in 1972. Although earlier birds responded promptly to wing drop/spin they were (are) less tolerant of less-than-ideal pilotage than today's ships like the Duo Discus.

KS








On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 6:52:48 PM UTC-4, Waveguru wrote:
> Lost one of my best friends....
>
> Boggs

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

On Sunday, June 24, 2018 at 7:37:34 AM UTC-7, Karl Striedieck wrote:
> Pilots should be thoroughly familiar with the slow speed turning behavior of their ships. Take a new ship to altitude and put it in a thermal type turn and then "abuse" the controls with skids, slips and too much back stick to see what it is going to do. Repeat this occasionally to remind you of the warning signs of incipient spins.
>
> The Standard Cirrus wing twist (washout) was increased in 1972. Although earlier birds responded promptly to wing drop/spin they were (are) less tolerant of less-than-ideal pilotage than today's ships like the Duo Discus.
>
> KS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 6:52:48 PM UTC-4, Waveguru wrote:
> > Lost one of my best friends....
> >
> > Boggs

Here is the best "Avoiding the Spin" video I have seen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeI2LlEzOT4

[glidergeek]

Who was it Gary?

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, June 24, 2018 at 3:37:34 PM UTC+1, Karl Striedieck wrote:
> Pilots should be thoroughly familiar with the slow speed turning behavior of their ships. Take a new ship to altitude and put it in a thermal type turn and then "abuse" the controls with skids, slips and too much back stick to see what it is going to do. Repeat this occasionally to remind you of the warning signs of incipient spins.
>
> The Standard Cirrus wing twist (washout) was increased in 1972. Although earlier birds responded promptly to wing drop/spin they were (are) less tolerant of less-than-ideal pilotage than today's ships like the Duo Discus.
>
> KS

I had an early Std Cirrus with the lesser washout in the early 80s and it was very prone to dropping a wing on take off and spun easily with wing drop.. Many years later a friend and I flew that same glider for a season and my friend fitted a top and bottom surface mylar aileron seal kit (from Glasfaser). Normally the top surface hinged ailerons only have top surface Tessa tape seals. I was doubtful whether it was going to be worth it but it turned out that the low speed handling was transformed for the better on take off and near the stall.

[Waveguru]

The family has been notified now. It was Andy Richenberger.

Boggs

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, June 24, 2018 at 8:28:17 AM UTC-4, Waveguru wrote:
> He was on base, made several circles and climbed a little, and then broke into a spin. The standard cirus did about 2 revolutions before it hit the ground. This was no freak atmospheric event, except that the air is more turbulent near the ground. Don’t f*#~k around down low...
>
> Boggs

A few years ago a friend of mine, flying at a contest, spun at low altitude and died as a result of the crash. I wasn't there.
I resolved that, If I saw such low thermaling I would call the pilot and say "you are scaring me, please land and I'll buy you another tow". To date , I've bought 2 tows. Money well spent.
Maybe someone else could save a friend if they have the chance and make that call.
Sadly
UH

[James Betker]

On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 8:14:44 AM UTC-7, wrote:
> On Sunday, June 24, 2018 at 8:28:17 AM UTC-4, Waveguru wrote:
> > He was on base, made several circles and climbed a little, and then broke into a spin. The standard cirus did about 2 revolutions before it hit the ground. This was no freak atmospheric event, except that the air is more turbulent near the ground. Don’t f*#~k around down low...
> >
> > Boggs
>
> A few years ago a friend of mine, flying at a contest, spun at low altitude and died as a result of the crash. I wasn't there.
> I resolved that, If I saw such low thermaling I would call the pilot and say "you are scaring me, please land and I'll buy you another tow". To date , I've bought 2 tows. Money well spent.
> Maybe someone else could save a friend if they have the chance and make that call.
> Sadly
> UH

That's actually a really great idea - thanks!

[Roy B.]

"To date , I've bought 2 tows. Money well spent".


It is a good idea - except I doubt that long term you could save the two jerks who took your money instead of just saying to you, "thanks for the heads up".
ROY

[[email protected]]

Yep, you can’t fix stupid.

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

While that may true, if you don't try to be a part of the solution, maybe you are part of the problem.
If someone ignores all the help in the world to help them, their family and friends, if you tried and failed....at least you tried.
Yes, no matter the level of help, some just seem to be destined to run for a Darwin award.

No, this is NOT a comment on the pilot or his friends in this thread.
This is a suggestion in general to maybe help someone else. I am supporting the "real UH" in this thread. Even the biggest butthead is worth at least $50 or so to save his butt.

[Paul Agnew]

What's the general culture out there? Do guys sit around hangar flying and bragging about their latest low saves? Could his decision to try a low save have been influenced by seeing others do so or getting lucky enough times in the past, himself? Something made him think it was a good decision to try to get a low save. If he had been successful, would the local crowd have applauded his skill and derring-do, or would they have quietly pulled him aside counseled him about it?

I believe the glorification of low saves in the pattern and other dubious behaviors adds a subconcious level of confidence that could influence a pilot's decisions. The inner voice whispers,"Those guys do it, I can, too!" Or, "I did it before and it worked, so I can do it again." I've been around a cadre of glider pilots that routinely climb away after entering the downwind and announcing their intent to land, then catching some lift and trying to dig out. Some brag about how low they released on tow, managing to climb away, and then egg each other on to get off lower. The new pilots sit and soak it all up in wonder.

It's tough to hold your ground and not try to emulate the old guard when they have so much more experience, but most of us do.

[Steve Koerner]

My understanding (I wasn't there) was that they were auto towing on a 3500 ft runway getting to 800 ft. I'm guessing that to be a possible factor in as much as all things are relative and 400 ft might not seemed quite as low to Andy starting from 800 ft as compared to how it might seem gliding down from the more usual aerotow start at 2000 ft. From 800 ft one has little opportunity to find lift before you must commit to landing. It's easy to see how he might have gotten a sense of accomodation to the lower altitudes and became willing to push lower on the tries.

Andy was one hell of a nice guy. He always wore a smile and was always willing to help. He was as easy going as anybody could be. Since I'm at the uptight end of the scale, I especially admired his ways. Andy will be seriously missed around here.

[Waveguru]

I checked Andy out on our winch with a tow to about 800’ in the 2-33. On that flight I talked to him about not circling low. We then sat down and talked about the differences winching in a high performance ship with a CG hook, and again, I told him not to circle low. He then took a tow in his Cirrus and got to at least 1000’ maybe 1100’ To try and blame his death on the winch launch is really stupid Steve. You have my number, rather than making this **** up, why don’t you call me and find out the facts first.

Boggs

[Steve Koerner]

On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 9:21:38 PM UTC-7, Waveguru wrote:
> I checked Andy out on our winch with a tow to about 800’ in the 2-33. On that flight I talked to him about not circling low. We then sat down and talked about the differences winching in a high performance ship with a CG hook, and again, I told him not to circle low. He then took a tow in his Cirrus and got to at least 1000’ maybe 1100’ To try and blame his death on the winch launch is really stupid Steve. You have my number, rather than making this **** up, why don’t you call me and find out the facts first.
>
> Boggs

Gary: I am definitely not blaming you or the tow. You misread. What I said was that there is an altitude perception issue that I can visualize contributing to the pilot's judgement error. I am just searching for a way to understand what might have caused him to circle so damn low. If he towed to 1000 feet then my point gets weakened a little bit (An email someone sent me had said 800 feet; but I trust what you observed more than that email).

[Waveguru]

Sometimes it’s more fun to talk **** behind someone’s back that to make a couple of phone calls and find out the truth, eh?

Boggs
602-284-9977

[Tom[_21_]]

Once again the portion of RAS that makes me want to throw my phone or throw up my hands in disgust or just plain throw up rears up again. Terms being thrown around that are base at best, second guessing from the armchair and a blatant disrespect for the victim, family, friends, witnesses and others that have to deal with this.

It's not everyone for sure but the inflated egos, the insensitivity, the need to be right at all costs and the lack of humility from a few folks is pretty damn sad.

Gary - I'm so sorry. All one should say publicly right now is we are all so sorry.

For those on their soapboxes with no apparent social skills or filter - please think before you type. Practice empathy. I've read if one doesn't have empathy pretending actually works well and leads in some cases actual empathy.

There but for the grace of god goes I - I could screw up at anytime, anywhere, anyhow.

Regards Tom

[Waveguru]

Thank you very much Tom. This has been very hard for me and the other pilots that were here that day. Andy was one of my best friends, we talked several times a week. We have gotten many supportive emails and texts from glider pilots from all over the country and beyond. It really helps. Sadly, the local soaring community here in Arizona has not been supportive. I have not gotten any emails or calls from any of the many Arizona glider pilots, aside from my personal friends. I’ve been pretty occupied with the FAA, NTSB, the insurance company, and Andy’s family taking care of the the things you have to take care of after an accident like this. I feel frustrated that Steve and others are emailing each other with false assumptions. What I would like is for them to call me with their questions and support, and to make sure they have the facts straight. Or just come out, take a tow, and hang out after soaring to raise a glass in Andy’s memory. Andy would like that.... His family would like that... Andy believed in what I’m trying to do here at Sampleys.

Boggs

[John Godfrey (QT)[_2_]]

On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 8:07:39 AM UTC-4, Tom wrote:
> Once again the portion of RAS that makes me want to throw my phone or throw up my hands in disgust or just plain throw up rears up again. Terms being thrown around that are base at best, second guessing from the armchair and a blatant disrespect for the victim, family, friends, witnesses and others that have to deal with this.
>
> It's not everyone for sure but the inflated egos, the insensitivity, the need to be right at all costs and the lack of humility from a few folks is pretty damn sad.
>
> Gary - I'm so sorry. All one should say publicly right now is we are all so sorry.
>
> For those on their soapboxes with no apparent social skills or filter - please think before you type. Practice empathy. I've read if one doesn't have empathy pretending actually works well and leads in some cases actual empathy.
>
> There but for the grace of god goes I - I could screw up at anytime, anywhere, anyhow.
>
> Regards Tom

Well said Tom. I think it is unfortunate that someone's statement of mourning ("Lost one of my best friends today.") is met publicly with anything but empathy.

[gkemp]

> Well said Tom. I think it is unfortunate that someone's statement of mourning ("Lost one of my best friends today.") is met publicly with anything but empathy.

Gary: Love you guy! Haven't responded sooner with my condolences as I have been through this too many times in my soaring life. When I retired, I set down and compiled a list of all my friends who were no longer with us. After 38 years in the sport there were 15. I was CD when on three occasions pilots didn't return at the end of the day. My heart is broken over the loss we all feel and sympathy we feel for you. I did too many stupid things to remember over the years and but for the grace of God there go I.

Gary Kemp "NK"

[[email protected]]

I hesitate to jump into the fray because I know none of the people involved.. But...I didn't think Steve's initial email was especially incendiary. I would have said "I wonder if" instead of "I'm guessing" and changed a few other words to soften what is just a theory. But the theory could have validity: most times I've ever circled that low came after an extended period of circling at 800' to 1200' or so. Sometimes we get used to something that would ordinarily alarm us just because, well, we get used to it. Anyone who has scraped up from 800' on a cross-country flight knows how comfortable 1500' feels by comparison. No one knows what really happened here but reminding people that we can get complacent is not a bad thing, although we should be sensitive about it.

I actually thought Boggs's responses were more uncalled for. But he just lost one of his best friends so I'm willing to cut him some slack. A lot of slack, actually. I know only too well how that feels. My own number (of friends and acquaintances who have been killed in soaring) is also 15.

To the general subject of how much to say in the aftermath of an accident: it depends. To say nothing when we have some information ignores the possibility that someone somewhere might benefit from being more cautious. To say too much, especially when speculating, has a lot of problems, too.

Dave Nadler's recent Arcus incident is a good example. No one really knows what happened. Yet there seems to be some indication of a possible rudder problem. Whether that turns out to be true or not, if I were an Arcus owner, I would want to know so that I could be especially vigilant in checking. The subsequent comments about what can happen when a rudder cable snaps were particularly enlightening (thanks, JJ!!).

Obviously I'm ignoring the potential legal implications in our overly litigious society. I can say with certainty, however, that the feds read this newsgroup so whatever we say is likely to come to their attention. Many of them are pretty smart, too; that's why they do investigations, hope for multiple eyewitness statements (which often disagree), and try to get the facts.

Final note: I like UH's approach. It's not about getting a free tow. It's the message that someone cares enough to do more than criticize (and I use that term reluctantly) about a potential problem. I approached a pilot many years ago who had just made a low pattern on a practice day and done a scary 180 degree onto final where the wings came level and the wheel touched almost simultaneously. He was obviously in complete control, but it made me nervous. He good naturedly fended me off in mock horror, laughing and raising his hands, and admitting that he'd already been called to account by others, and promised never to do it again. A few days later, in the contest, he turned low final into a field and stuck his wing down between some trees in the turn and caught a wire, cartwheeling him into the ground. He avoided becoming my fatality #16, but barely. Would he have done anything different if I had offered to buy him a tow? I have no idea. But perhaps my message might have meant more if I had. Bravo, UH; if you ever express that kind of concern about my flying, you can bet I will take it seriously.

Chip Bearden

[AS]

On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 6:07:39 AM UTC-6, Tom wrote:
> Once again the portion of RAS that makes me want to throw my phone or throw up my hands in disgust or just plain throw up rears up again. Terms being thrown around that are base at best, second guessing from the armchair and a blatant disrespect for the victim, family, friends, witnesses and others that have to deal with this.
>
> It's not everyone for sure but the inflated egos, the insensitivity, the need to be right at all costs and the lack of humility from a few folks is pretty damn sad.
>
> Gary - I'm so sorry. All one should say publicly right now is we are all so sorry.
>
> For those on their soapboxes with no apparent social skills or filter - please think before you type. Practice empathy. I've read if one doesn't have empathy pretending actually works well and leads in some cases actual empathy.
>
> There but for the grace of god goes I - I could screw up at anytime, anywhere, anyhow.
>
> Regards Tom

Well said, Tom. You hit it squarely on the head - thank you!
Uli
'AS'

[Waveguru]

Steve called me this morning and we worked it out. Sometimes the printed word is easy to misunderstand, and yes, I'm a little tender right now. Thank you for all the support for all of us involved. It does help.

Boggs

[Steve Koerner]

On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 9:32:03 AM UTC-7, AS wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 6:07:39 AM UTC-6, Tom wrote:
> > Once again the portion of RAS that makes me want to throw my phone or throw up my hands in disgust or just plain throw up rears up again. Terms being thrown around that are base at best, second guessing from the armchair and a blatant disrespect for the victim, family, friends, witnesses and others that have to deal with this.
> >
> > It's not everyone for sure but the inflated egos, the insensitivity, the need to be right at all costs and the lack of humility from a few folks is pretty damn sad.
> >
> > Gary - I'm so sorry. All one should say publicly right now is we are all so sorry.
> >
> > For those on their soapboxes with no apparent social skills or filter - please think before you type. Practice empathy. I've read if one doesn't have empathy pretending actually works well and leads in some cases actual empathy.
> >
> > There but for the grace of god goes I - I could screw up at anytime, anywhere, anyhow.
> >
> > Regards Tom
>
> Well said, Tom. You hit it squarely on the head - thank you!
> Uli
> 'AS'

Hey wise asses on RAS... You are effing wrong. When I got the news about Andy's demise from my wife (who was messaged from another wife) I sat and cried for my own personal loss as well as Andy's close friends including Gary. There ain't no lack of empathy here. I have now spoken with Gary, for what its worth. We talked about the pain and awfulness of it and we talked about Andy and the things that may have been factors in the accident. Gary is a man who does truly care about what might have been causes and how the same circumstance might be avoided in the future. If he was hair-trigger in his response online, he's hurting and I don't fault him. Only time heals this.

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

Sorry to hear that.
Watching it is even worse if you knew them.

Sucky for Soaring in the US the last month or so.

I left a voicemail a bit ago, condolences to you, the pilot, his family and anyone that knew him.
Sad day, regardless of the "why it happened".

[Waveguru]

If you’d like to see a video of Andy’s last launch, I posted it on my Facebook page. It’s all “public� so you don’t have to be a Facebook user to see it. Hit the like button and send me a friend request.

https://m.facebook.com/gary.boggs.54?ref=bookmarks

Boggs

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

Not public, wants a log in......

[[email protected]]

Watched it. Sad.

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

Still no way in for me. Thanks for the call.

Maybe my iPad using Safari.

I have no Facebook account.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 11:10:18 PM UTC-4, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> Still no way in for me. Thanks for the call.
>
> Maybe my iPad using Safari.
>
> I have no Facebook account.

Same here on a Windows PC, even if I change "m." to "www." which has helped in some other cases.

[Frank Whiteley]

On Wednesday, June 27, 2018 at 8:55:40 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 11:10:18 PM UTC-4, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> > Still no way in for me. Thanks for the call.
> >
> > Maybe my iPad using Safari.
> >
> > I have no Facebook account.
>
> Same here on a Windows PC, even if I change "m." to "www." which has helped in some other cases.

https://www.facebook.com/gary.boggs.54/videos/10216865685024137/

[Waveguru]

Here’s the info for Andy’s funeral services:

The Visitation: Whitney and Murphy Funeral Home
4800 E. Indian School Road
Phoenix, AZ 85018
Friday June 29, 2018
6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.

Funeral Mass: Saint Francis Xavier Catholic Church
4715 North Central Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Saturday June 30, 2018
3:00 p.m.

[Charlie Quebec]

My deepest condolences to the pilot and his friends.
I do have a question, does the video show a normal US preflight procedure? It seemed very casual to me.

[Dan Marotta]

Things may have changed since I last flew in Australia back in the
mid-80s.Â* I was surprised when I said I would preflight my ship and was
told that I was not authorized to do that!Â* Only the "engineer" could
perform a preflight.Â* I've heard similar about the BGA, though I've
never been there.Â* And I'd suspect that process was only meant for club,
not private, ships.

In the US it's the pilot's responsibility to ensure that his ship is
airworthy.Â* During and after rigging the pilot determines the safe
condition of the ship which includes visual inspection, verification
that all controls are hooked up, and a positive control check. Since I
keep my ship in my own hangar where nobody has access to it and no
vehicles can bump into it, my preflight, while thorough, would appear
almost casual to the uninformed viewer.

I would suspect the same with the accident ship, a last quick look
before climbing in, but a much closer look before coming to the launch
position.Â* From what we've read here, I don't believe there was a
mechanical fault with the ship.

My deepest condolences to friends and family of the unfortunate pilot.

On 6/28/2018 8:40 PM, Charlie Quebec wrote:
> My deepest condolences to the pilot and his friends.
> I do have a question, does the video show a normal US preflight procedure? It seemed very casual to me.

--
Dan, 5J

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:33:55 -0600, Dan Marotta wrote:

> Things may have changed since I last flew in Australia back in the
> mid-80s.Â* I was surprised when I said I would preflight my ship and was
> told that I was not authorized to do that!Â* Only the "engineer" could
> perform a preflight.Â* I've heard similar about the BGA, though I've
> never been there.Â* And I'd suspect that process was only meant for club,
> not private, ships.
>
This applies to all gliders in BGA clubs. All have DI books which are
signed every day the glider is flown to show that known deferrable faults
have been fixed or deferred and visual inspection and positive control
checks have been done and the glider is passed as serviceable. My Libelle
is currently pegged down in its covers and will still get the same
preflight checks before its next flight that it got when it was rigged
yesterday.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[[email protected]]

Is a British Airways first officer allowed to preflight his own 777 carrying 300 passengers or does that require a higher level signature?

[James Thomson[_2_]]

At 14:33 29 June 2018, Dan Marotta wrote:
>Things may have changed since I last flew in Australia back in the
>mid-80s.Â* I was surprised when I said I would preflight my ship and
was
>told that I was not authorized to do that!Â* Only the "engineer" could
>perform a preflight.Â* I've heard similar about the BGA, though I've
>never been there.Â* And I'd suspect that process was only meant for
club,
>not private, ships.
>
>In the US it's the pilot's responsibility to ensure that his ship is
>airworthy.Â* During and after rigging the pilot determines the safe
>condition of the ship which includes visual inspection, verification
>that all controls are hooked up, and a positive control check. Since I
>keep my ship in my own hangar where nobody has access to it and no
>vehicles can bump into it, my preflight, while thorough, would appear
>almost casual to the uninformed viewer.
>
>I would suspect the same with the accident ship, a last quick look
>before climbing in, but a much closer look before coming to the launch
>position.Â* From what we've read here, I don't believe there was a
>mechanical fault with the ship.
>
>My deepest condolences to friends and family of the unfortunate pilot.
>
>On 6/28/2018 8:40 PM, Charlie Quebec wrote:
>> My deepest condolences to the pilot and his friends.
>> I do have a question, does the video show a normal US preflight
>procedure? It seemed very casual to me.
>

The BGA requirement is
"Inspection Before Flight. All gliders operated from BGA club sites shall
be inspected before flying on each day. Club gliders shall be inspected by

club approved persons who must sign that the glider is serviceable
before it is flown on that day."

The inspection is normally conducted by a qualified pilot - there is no
special requirement for an engineer. The record of the work is the Daily

Inspection (DI) book carried in the glider.

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 10:27:45 -0700, victoriallake08 wrote:

> Is a British Airways first officer allowed to preflight his own 777
> carrying 300 passengers or does that require a higher level signature?

Pass - I was talking about BGA gliders only - and you must be a solo
pilot to preflight any BGA glider (club or private).

BGA gliders are a distinct subset of CAA registered UK aircraft.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[Bruce Hoult]

On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 8:41:51 AM UTC-7, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:33:55 -0600, Dan Marotta wrote:
>
> > Things may have changed since I last flew in Australia back in the
> > mid-80s.Â* I was surprised when I said I would preflight my ship and was
> > told that I was not authorized to do that!Â* Only the "engineer" could
> > perform a preflight.Â* I've heard similar about the BGA, though I've
> > never been there.Â* And I'd suspect that process was only meant for club,
> > not private, ships.
> >
> This applies to all gliders in BGA clubs. All have DI books which are
> signed every day the glider is flown to show that known deferrable faults
> have been fixed or deferred and visual inspection and positive control
> checks have been done and the glider is passed as serviceable. My Libelle
> is currently pegged down in its covers and will still get the same
> preflight checks before its next flight that it got when it was rigged
> yesterday.

Only an engineer can preflight a BGA glider? Seriously?

In New Zealand it is normal practice for any solo-rated pilot to perform the DI and sign the DI book.

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 13:40:41 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

> On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 8:41:51 AM UTC-7, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:33:55 -0600, Dan Marotta wrote:
>>
>> > Things may have changed since I last flew in Australia back in the
>> > mid-80s.Â* I was surprised when I said I would preflight my ship and
>> > was told that I was not authorized to do that!Â* Only the "engineer"
>> > could perform a preflight.Â* I've heard similar about the BGA, though
>> > I've never been there.Â* And I'd suspect that process was only meant
>> > for club,
>> > not private, ships.
>> >
>> This applies to all gliders in BGA clubs. All have DI books which are
>> signed every day the glider is flown to show that known deferrable
>> faults have been fixed or deferred and visual inspection and positive
>> control checks have been done and the glider is passed as serviceable.
>> My Libelle is currently pegged down in its covers and will still get
>> the same preflight checks before its next flight that it got when it
>> was rigged yesterday.
>
> Only an engineer can preflight a BGA glider? Seriously?
>
I was answering the last line of Dan's comment. All BGA gliders carry a DI
book which has an entry for each day a glider was flown that records the
results of inspection and PCCs and the signature of the person doing it.
Any solo pilot can carry out the DI.

> In New Zealand it is normal practice for any solo-rated pilot to perform
> the DI and sign the DI book.
>
In general there's a very close correspondance between BGA practised and
those in NZ, though the BGA's approach has gotten a little more
bureaucratic since EASA was invented. Read that as more paper rather than
anything else and, speaking as a private owner, I think the main changes
have been to annual inspections and workshop practises rather than day to
day operations.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[Frank Whiteley]

On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 2:53:12 PM UTC-6, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 13:40:41 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:
>
> > On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 8:41:51 AM UTC-7, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> >> On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:33:55 -0600, Dan Marotta wrote:
> >>
> >> > Things may have changed since I last flew in Australia back in the
> >> > mid-80s.Â* I was surprised when I said I would preflight my ship and
> >> > was told that I was not authorized to do that!Â* Only the "engineer"
> >> > could perform a preflight.Â* I've heard similar about the BGA, though
> >> > I've never been there.Â* And I'd suspect that process was only meant
> >> > for club,
> >> > not private, ships.
> >> >
> >> This applies to all gliders in BGA clubs. All have DI books which are
> >> signed every day the glider is flown to show that known deferrable
> >> faults have been fixed or deferred and visual inspection and positive
> >> control checks have been done and the glider is passed as serviceable.
> >> My Libelle is currently pegged down in its covers and will still get
> >> the same preflight checks before its next flight that it got when it
> >> was rigged yesterday.
> >
> > Only an engineer can preflight a BGA glider? Seriously?
> >
> I was answering the last line of Dan's comment. All BGA gliders carry a DI
> book which has an entry for each day a glider was flown that records the
> results of inspection and PCCs and the signature of the person doing it.
> Any solo pilot can carry out the DI.
>
> > In New Zealand it is normal practice for any solo-rated pilot to perform
> > the DI and sign the DI book.
> >
> In general there's a very close correspondance between BGA practised and
> those in NZ, though the BGA's approach has gotten a little more
> bureaucratic since EASA was invented. Read that as more paper rather than
> anything else and, speaking as a private owner, I think the main changes
> have been to annual inspections and workshop practises rather than day to
> day operations.
>
>
> --
> Martin | martin at
> Gregorie | gregorie dot org

I found the DI Book to quit a good idea and I still have one in the pocket of my Kestrel. FWIW, I did find an unsecured castellated nut on a primary flight control on the club's K-7 during one morning pre-flight (1978). As I had previously pre-flighted the K-7, it was always a bit of a mystery to me how it came to be missing. I've always presumed someone had done an annual and missed replacing it. Otherwise, only minor notes made in the books of the various BGA reg gliders I've flown.

Frank Whiteley

[waremark]

BGA rules nowadays require the DI to be carried out by a pilot who has bronze or above. The requirement was upgraded from any solo pilot a few years ago.

[Dan Marotta]

But can you inspect your own glider and sign it off or must some
appointed person do it?

In the US many years ago the FAA required a logbook entry with each
assembly of a glider.Â* The Soaring Society convinced the FAA that it was
routine to assemble and dismantle gliders before and after flight.Â*
Thankfully the requirement was removed.

On 6/29/2018 9:41 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:33:55 -0600, Dan Marotta wrote:
>
>> Things may have changed since I last flew in Australia back in the
>> mid-80s.Â* I was surprised when I said I would preflight my ship and was
>> told that I was not authorized to do that!Â* Only the "engineer" could
>> perform a preflight.Â* I've heard similar about the BGA, though I've
>> never been there.Â* And I'd suspect that process was only meant for club,
>> not private, ships.
>>
> This applies to all gliders in BGA clubs. All have DI books which are
> signed every day the glider is flown to show that known deferrable faults
> have been fixed or deferred and visual inspection and positive control
> checks have been done and the glider is passed as serviceable. My Libelle
> is currently pegged down in its covers and will still get the same
> preflight checks before its next flight that it got when it was rigged
> yesterday.
>
>

--
Dan, 5J

[Dan Marotta]

Sorry, I should have read the whole thread before asking another
question.Â* It was answered later.

On 6/29/2018 3:36 PM, Dan Marotta wrote:
> But can you inspect your own glider and sign it off or must some
> appointed person do it?
>
> In the US many years ago the FAA required a logbook entry with each
> assembly of a glider.Â* The Soaring Society convinced the FAA that it
> was routine to assemble and dismantle gliders before and after
> flight.Â* Thankfully the requirement was removed.
>
> On 6/29/2018 9:41 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:33:55 -0600, Dan Marotta wrote:
>>
>>> Things may have changed since I last flew in Australia back in the
>>> mid-80s.Â* I was surprised when I said I would preflight my ship and was
>>> told that I was not authorized to do that!Â* Only the "engineer" could
>>> perform a preflight.Â* I've heard similar about the BGA, though I've
>>> never been there.Â* And I'd suspect that process was only meant for
>>> club,
>>> not private, ships.
>>>
>> This applies to all gliders in BGA clubs. All have DI books which are
>> signed every day the glider is flown to show that known deferrable
>> faults
>> have been fixed or deferred and visual inspection and positive control
>> checks have been done and the glider is passed as serviceable. My
>> Libelle
>> is currently pegged down in its covers and will still get the same
>> preflight checks before its next flight that it got when it was rigged
>> yesterday.
>>
>

--
Dan, 5J

[[email protected]]

Or you could respect the original post about a man grieving after watching his friend die. Who gives a **** about preflight inspections in the UK?

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 2:52:58 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> Or you could respect the original post about a man grieving after watching his friend die. Who gives a **** about preflight inspections in the UK?

Thanks for the well deserved "slap" back to a tragic event. I was just pondering aloud how we must have gotten de-sensitized to death, spins, sudden finality, the masses move on, passage of time remains ever present, clocks that bind will be left to rust. Tick tock, tick tock..... Squirrel

Watching Andy's last departure was heart wrenching.

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, June 28, 2018 at 10:40:57 PM UTC-4, Charlie Quebec wrote:
> My deepest condolences to the pilot and his friends.
> I do have a question, does the video show a normal US preflight procedure? It seemed very casual to me.

I agree we should respect the OP's intent. That said, sometimes there are things we can learn in these digressions. I'm hoping the above post reflects confusion about terminology rather than the criticism that's implied. One can infer very little from what we refer to as a preflight procedure from the video. As someone pointed out, there has not been even a suggestion that a glider malfunction caused this tragic death. In the video, the pilot is already in the cockpit with the towline connected. Yes, there are some final checks to be done (e.g., canopy secured) or repeated (e.g., altimeter set), but the bulk of what we refer to as a "preflight" (i.e., daily inspection) would have been performed by the pilot prior to getting in the takeoff queue, much less getting into the cockpit.

For example, I have four different written checklists that I manually mark off before I even get in the cockpit (Assembly, Launch Grid, Task--contests only, and Pre-Takeoff), plus the in-cockpit final checklist. I don't have a daily inspection book, per se. I do, however, check off each item on the checklist with a pen or pencil for two reasons: to make certain I don't forget anything, especially if I have to skip an item and then come back later and clear it. And the second, fairly minor reason is so that if something bad does happen, there will be a written record of what I inspected, not just the items that didn't meet standards but everything I looked at. Just my way of making it easier for the NTSB! Years ago I just let my thumb slide down the list as I walked around. As I've gotten older and the number of things I check has increased (it's up to about 85 items, now), I nearly always record the results. But that's just a personal practice; it's not mandatory.

In this country, it is the pilot's responsibility to do a preflight inspection to his/her satisfaction. What is appropriate for a metal glider that is kept assembled in a locked hangar might be somewhat different than for a composite glider that is rigged from the trailer every day, though it would still be quite comprehensive.

We do have one preflight inspection enforcement mechanism for SSA-sanctioned contests in the form of the "critical assembly check"--i.e., a subset of items from the checklist that are critical for flight (including the main pins, control hookups, etc.). The line crew will not launch a glider unless there are initials on the left wing root tape indicating that a critical assembly check was performed.

I was on the SSA board for the debate over whether to mandate this, with opinions strong on both sides. IIRC, the primary issue was, unfortunately, one of legal liability. Specifically, by mandating this check, were we opening the SSA or the organizers up to liability if it turned out that something on the critical list went wrong (in other words, did we become responsible for verifying the validity of the checks?--it's a strange legal world we live in). Also, and perhaps more important, would the person who assisted the pilot to do the check and signed the tape be liable in a similar situation? We resolved this with some legal disclaimers and also by agreeing that we would not seek to validate who actually did the critical assembly check or signed the tape. That means many pilots do enlist others to assist them and sign the tape. Others seek assistance but then sign the tape themselves. And still others do the check and sign the tape themselves.

Many commercial and club operations will not tow a glider unless the pilot confirms he/she has done a positive control check, which is part of the critical assembly check anyway.

Regulations and practices vary by country. Here in the U.S., we like to think we have the flexibility to survey what others are doing and then adopt their best practices, modifying and enhancing them as makes sense for our operating environment. As with most things in life, there is often not a single perfect or right way of doing things. What works for us would not necessarily work in other countries, but we have the satisfaction, I suppose, of knowing that certain things developed or popularized here have been adopted elsewhere: e.g., some of the original turnpoint photography processes, start gates, tasking concepts, daily safety briefings at contests, etc. We're always seeking ways to make soaring safer while recognizing that preserving the freedom to fly the way we want is also important and must be balanced against that.

Chip Bearden

[Charlie Quebec]

I was referring to the pre flight cockpit check, or total lack of, not the daily inspection.
In our world, CHAOTIC check.
Controls
Harness
Airbrakes
Outside
Trim
Canopy
Controls
Cart.

[Charlie Quebec]

Regarding daily inspections, the GFA Has a series of training videos on YouTube. A pilot must complete the training before being
allowed to sign out a glider for a days flying. Usually a half day practical training course. An example below.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AmEnZBg8heE

[danlj]

On Sunday, June 24, 2018 at 7:28:17 AM UTC-5, Waveguru wrote:
> He was on base, made several circles and climbed a little, and then broke into a spin. The standard cirus did about 2 revolutions before it hit the ground. This was no freak atmospheric event, except that the air is more turbulent near the ground. Don’t f*#~k around down low...
>
> Boggs

Thanks for this note. I've been thinking about this accident all week.
Obviously, whenever the airplane does something unplanned, there are 3 categories of adverse influences:
- something wrong with the aircraft
- something wrong with the pilot
- something wrong with the air.
A big problem is that air is invisible. Yet it sometimes takes on small transient wrinkles that cause aircraft to move awkwardly.
I noticed in the video the bushes tossing and the pilots' clothing fluttering, and that it was sunny. This means that there were big and little wrinkles in the air.

Back when I thought I had to keep the yaw-string straight in a turn, thermal turbulence induced incipient spins more often than I could count.

On windy days, the vertical or horizontal torque in the air can be pretty strong. When thermaling low, all it takes is a momentary backwards-moving gust to stall a wing and induce a spin.

Can't see it, can't prove it, but I've felt it often.

My condolences. This is a risky sport.

Danl J