Another EXTREMELY low thermal save

[[email protected]]

I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.

https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8

[[email protected]]

His response was that in 1800hrs he’s never had an unintended spin. No one ever does...until they do.

[Dan Marotta]

Anyone who would watch this video and then try it for himself is simply
stupid.Â* And you can't fix stupid.Â* A Darwin award is in the making...

On 5/26/2019 2:16 PM, wrote:
> I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
>
> https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8

--
Dan, 5J

[Tom BravoMike]

On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 7:56:56 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Anyone who would watch this video and then try it for himself is simply
> stupid.Â* And you can't fix stupid.Â* A Darwin award is in the making...
>
> On 5/26/2019 2:16 PM, wrote:
> > I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
> >
> > https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8
>
> --
> Dan, 5J

I think it's a matter of the level of training in specific situations (number of hours flown does not say it all). You may get experienced in thermalling very low over a safe landing site. I wouldn't call it stupid without knowing specific circumstances. In the US we are taught to make a 180 degrees turn from half the alt in the video, i.e. from at least 200 feet = 60 meters (!) to land downwind after a rope break. And we don't call it stupid. We actually train for it. In some Eu countries the minimum is 100 meters = 330 ft. I once tried to save the day in a PW-5 from 100 m over a huge empty runway. Didn't succeed and landed, and it was just like turning the final from the base. Or doing the final from S-turns. Extreme caution and concentration - yes. Watch the speed and keep the string in the center. Stefan clearly informs his viewers that there's a 'landing option on the field below'. Risky? To some extent, yes. Each time we turn the final we risk, but again, that risk is reduced with training. Just MHO, intentionally opposing the harsh judgments above.

[Bruce Hoult]

On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
>
> https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8

I'm not quite sure what glider that is. It's certainly neither his current ASG29, nor the Std Libelle he owned before that.

It's old enough to have a turnpoint camera mount! I'm going to go with Std Cirrus. Looks roomy, and the curves of the instrument panel and vent look right.

He never went below 90 km/h (48.6 knots), which seems absolutely fine for a glider like that in that situation. In a 30 degree turn the stall speed should be around 36 knots, so that's a pretty good margin.

[krasw]

On Monday, 27 May 2019 05:31:32 UTC+3, Tom BravoMike wrote:
> On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 7:56:56 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> > Anyone who would watch this video and then try it for himself is simply
> > stupid.Â* And you can't fix stupid.Â* A Darwin award is in the making...
> >
> > On 5/26/2019 2:16 PM, @gmail.com wrote:
> > > I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
> > >
> > > https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8
> >
> > --
> > Dan, 5J
>
> I think it's a matter of the level of training in specific situations (number of hours flown does not say it all). You may get experienced in thermalling very low over a safe landing site. I wouldn't call it stupid without knowing specific circumstances. In the US we are taught to make a 180 degrees turn from half the alt in the video, i.e. from at least 200 feet = 60 meters (!) to land downwind after a rope break. And we don't call it stupid.. We actually train for it. In some Eu countries the minimum is 100 meters = 330 ft. I once tried to save the day in a PW-5 from 100 m over a huge empty runway. Didn't succeed and landed, and it was just like turning the final from the base. Or doing the final from S-turns. Extreme caution and concentration - yes. Watch the speed and keep the string in the center. Stefan clearly informs his viewers that there's a 'landing option on the field below'. Risky? To some extent, yes. Each time we turn the final we risk, but again, that risk is reduced with training. Just MHO, intentionally opposing the harsh judgments above.

There is a huge different to do something because you have absolutely no other options to save your ass, or to do it because you take sporting risk in competition.

I have had low saves in competitions. None of those I feel particularly proud or satisfied of. I believe that in the video risk was small, but it was there. There is no reason for a glider to fly at 100-150m AGL anywhere else than short final to well-planned landing.

[Dan Marotta]

There's a big difference between a descending turn with the intention of
landing than trying to climb away from a very low altitude.Â* I'm not
being harsh, only practical.Â* Having a safe landing underneath or nearby
is good, and it's likely OK to thermal away from that low altitude, but
it only takes one mistake to have a completely different outcome.Â* I've
seen the bodies and it ain't pretty.

On 5/26/2019 8:31 PM, Tom BravoMike wrote:
> On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 7:56:56 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> Anyone who would watch this video and then try it for himself is simply
>> stupid.Â* And you can't fix stupid.Â* A Darwin award is in the making...
>>
>> On 5/26/2019 2:16 PM, wrote:
>>> I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
>>>
>>> https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8
>> --
>> Dan, 5J
> I think it's a matter of the level of training in specific situations (number of hours flown does not say it all). You may get experienced in thermalling very low over a safe landing site. I wouldn't call it stupid without knowing specific circumstances. In the US we are taught to make a 180 degrees turn from half the alt in the video, i.e. from at least 200 feet = 60 meters (!) to land downwind after a rope break. And we don't call it stupid. We actually train for it. In some Eu countries the minimum is 100 meters = 330 ft. I once tried to save the day in a PW-5 from 100 m over a huge empty runway. Didn't succeed and landed, and it was just like turning the final from the base. Or doing the final from S-turns. Extreme caution and concentration - yes. Watch the speed and keep the string in the center. Stefan clearly informs his viewers that there's a 'landing option on the field below'. Risky? To some extent, yes. Each time we turn the final we risk, but again, that risk is reduced with training. Just MHO, intentionally opposing the harsh judgments above.

--
Dan, 5J

[Paul B[_2_]]

The interesting bit is the complete luck of lookout in all phases of that flight.

cheers

Paul

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Mon, 27 May 2019 09:50:48 -0700, Paul B wrote:

> The interesting bit is the complete luck of lookout in all phases of
> that flight.
>
.... and I couldn't work out what strategy he was using to re-centre that
thermal either.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[john firth]

On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 4:16:06 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
>
> https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8

Interesting to see constant twitching of the stick, to no purpose.
Bad habit!

John F

[ripacheco1967]

These videos show only a small part of what the pilot can see. Just like a dash cam makes your driving look faster, more daring that it really is.
All that said the need to have video views and new subscribers can make these YouTuber personalities push the envelope too much.
Hopefully they keep their senses ... do t wanna ser their name on the news right?

[Scott Manley[_3_]]

And keep in mind that those who would further restrict/regulate general aviation and those who determine the price and availability of aircraft insurance also have access to YouTube.

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 4:16:06 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
>
> https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8

You all sound like a bunch of old church ladies talking about a young woman whose dress may be a little too high above the knees.

[[email protected]]

And you sound like someone who knows a lot about little old ladies, but nothing about aerodynamics or the hazards of low level thermaling.

[Paul Kaye]

On Sunday, 26 May 2019 21:16:06 UTC+1, wrote:
> I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
>
> https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8

It's easy to point out all the risks, but OTOH, as anyone who has flown in the French Alps or similar mountainous areas will know, thermalling close to terrain is not uncommon in some circumstances. I've personally found myself circling within a hundred metres or so of the ground frequently. Of course there are risks, but as a pilot you need to manage them. It's important to fly accurately and to have escape options if things don't go to plan.

In this case, the terrain was flat, there was little wind (as witnessed by the lack of drift) and there was a landable field within easy reach. The pilot's flying looked very accurate and speed control was excellent. Maybe a little more lookout might have been in order, but I suspect the likelihood of conflicting traffic was very low. Overall, this isn't something you'd want to recommend to inexperienced pilots, but I don't think this guy was taking excessive risks.

[rudolph stutzmann]

While all pilots have their own "Envelopes" they can comfortably and safely fly within, thermalling at that altitude leaves minimal to no margin if something doesn't go as planned. Another complicating factor I think is the gear handle on the right side. Lowering the gear will take a momentary switching of hands on the control stick. Not a difficult task, but just an additional task to perform in a pressured situation.

[Jim White[_3_]]

At 22:42 30 May 2019, rudolph stutzmann wrote:
>While all pilots have their own "Envelopes" they can comfortably and
>safely=
> fly within, thermalling at that altitude leaves minimal to no margin if
>so=
>mething doesn't go as planned. Another complicating factor I think is
the
>=
>gear handle on the right side. Lowering the gear will take a momentary
>swi=
>tching of hands on the control stick. Not a difficult task, but just an
>ad=
>ditional task to perform in a pressured situation.
>
If you don't have time to operate the landing gear, you land wheels up and
walk away.

[Gary Wayland]

On Sunday, May 26, 2019, at 4:16:06 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
>
> https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8

After looking at the video, and the ground underneath, what is the issue?

What am I thinking as he's turning? Well, what is my landing point on a base to final approach? I already have that point picked out on each turn, and it is continually changing as I move with the thermal.

It's clear; he has many landing options.

Next, how much am I going to try to stay in the air based on the bank I have to achieve? As I get lower, I think less bank angle in my turns, and speed, speed, speed. Do not get too slow! If I can't stay up because of purposely putting in less bank angle, then make my final landing because I won't try to stay in the tighter thermal. But as always, I have a point that I keep in my head that is a base to landing point that makes me think I'm at my local gliderport making an uneventful landing.

Well, this is all fine and good if my EGO doesn't overload my good sense!

Gary

"SQ"

[Gary Wayland]

On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 4:39:24 PM UTC-4, Paul Kaye wrote:
> On Sunday, 26 May 2019 21:16:06 UTC+1, wrote:
> > I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
> >
> > https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8
>
> It's easy to point out all the risks, but OTOH, as anyone who has flown in the French Alps or similar mountainous areas will know, thermalling close to terrain is not uncommon in some circumstances. I've personally found myself circling within a hundred metres or so of the ground frequently. Of course there are risks, but as a pilot you need to manage them. It's important to fly accurately and to have escape options if things don't go to plan.
>
> In this case, the terrain was flat, there was little wind (as witnessed by the lack of drift) and there was a landable field within easy reach. The pilot's flying looked very accurate and speed control was excellent. Maybe a little more lookout might have been in order, but I suspect the likelihood of conflicting traffic was very low. Overall, this isn't something you'd want to recommend to inexperienced pilots, but I don't think this guy was taking excessive risks.

Good Post. Totally agree with your assessment. No way I'm going to second guess this pilot. That looks like an average day in the eastern US as I scratched with my Libelle! And boy, could she scratch!

[Gary Wayland]

On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 4:39:24 PM UTC-4, Paul Kaye wrote:
> On Sunday, 26 May 2019 21:16:06 UTC+1, wrote:
> > I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
> >
> > https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8
>
> It's easy to point out all the risks, but OTOH, as anyone who has flown in the French Alps or similar mountainous areas will know, thermalling close to terrain is not uncommon in some circumstances. I've personally found myself circling within a hundred metres or so of the ground frequently. Of course there are risks, but as a pilot you need to manage them. It's important to fly accurately and to have escape options if things don't go to plan.
>
> In this case, the terrain was flat, there was little wind (as witnessed by the lack of drift) and there was a landable field within easy reach. The pilot's flying looked very accurate and speed control was excellent. Maybe a little more lookout might have been in order, but I suspect the likelihood of conflicting traffic was very low. Overall, this isn't something you'd want to recommend to inexperienced pilots, but I don't think this guy was taking excessive risks.



On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 4:39:24 PM UTC-4, Paul Kaye wrote:
> On Sunday, 26 May 2019 21:16:06 UTC+1, wrote:
> > I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
> >
> > https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8
>
> It's easy to point out all the risks, but OTOH, as anyone who has flown in the French Alps or similar mountainous areas will know, thermalling close to terrain is not uncommon in some circumstances. I've personally found myself circling within a hundred metres or so of the ground frequently. Of course there are risks, but as a pilot you need to manage them. It's important to fly accurately and to have escape options if things don't go to plan.
>
> In this case, the terrain was flat, there was little wind (as witnessed by the lack of drift) and there was a landable field within easy reach. The pilot's flying looked very accurate and speed control was excellent. Maybe a little more lookout might have been in order, but I suspect the likelihood of conflicting traffic was very low. Overall, this isn't something you'd want to recommend to inexperienced pilots, but I don't think this guy was taking excessive risks.

- show quoted text -
Good Post. Totally agree with your assessment. No way I'm going to second guess this pilot. That looks like an average day in the eastern US as I scratched with my Libelle! And boy, could she scratch!

[Joel Flamenbaum[_2_]]

On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
>
> https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8

I can make several comments- but keeping it positive - awesome coordination and concentration. viewing the yaw string and the horizon - neither varied by more than a degree or two and knowing EXACTLY what was needed to get home.
Yes, I agree that newbies or stupid pilots should not use this as a training video

[ripacheco1967]

It be nice to see a wider camera angle ... sometimes these cameras don’t tell the whole story due to the field of view (as compared with human eyes and a moving head)

[[email protected]]

"As I get lower, I think less bank angle in my turns"
Why do you think that less bank is safer ? You can't slow a glider so it stalls/spin at 45 degrees bank, but certainly can at a less angle.
Maybe you mean protection against gusts ?
Dan

On Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 3:18:43 AM UTC-4, Gary Wayland wrote:
> On Sunday, May 26, 2019, at 4:16:06 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > I’m afraid video may be making pilots take these risks.
> >
> > https://youtu.be/PlXeHeR5Ma8
>
> After looking at the video, and the ground underneath, what is the issue?
>
> What am I thinking as he's turning? Well, what is my landing point on a base to final approach? I already have that point picked out on each turn, and it is continually changing as I move with the thermal.
>
> It's clear; he has many landing options.
>
> Next, how much am I going to try to stay in the air based on the bank I have to achieve? As I get lower, I think less bank angle in my turns, and speed, speed, speed. Do not get too slow! If I can't stay up because of purposely putting in less bank angle, then make my final landing because I won't try to stay in the tighter thermal. But as always, I have a point that I keep in my head that is a base to landing point that makes me think I'm at my local gliderport making an uneventful landing.
>
> Well, this is all fine and good if my EGO doesn't overload my good sense!
>
> Gary
>
> "SQ"

[John Foster]

On Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 8:39:51 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> "As I get lower, I think less bank angle in my turns"
> Why do you think that less bank is safer ? You can't slow a glider so it stalls/spin at 45 degrees bank, but certainly can at a less angle.
> Maybe you mean protection against gusts ?
> Dan
>
The steeper the bank angle, the smaller the vertical lift vector component becomes and the greater the horizontal vector becomes. This means that you need a higher speed to generate the same amount of lift. Thus, a slower speed or the same speed could result in a higher sink rate, which could change the apparent wind angle (angle of attack) over the wing and result in a spin/stall. That's the theory at least.

[George Haeh]

Derek Piggott wrote that in a steep turn the elevator doesn't have enough authority to stall the glider because of the airflow at said elevator.

Works in many gliders. The Puchaz however can spin out of a 45° turn.

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

Over decades, I have done things that others thought poor.
Then again, I have seen others do things that even I consider poor.

Don't do stupid things.
Doing stupid things at least once does NOT mean you can do it again.
Pride be damned.....listen to others.....reflect...maybe change choices....be aware you will likely be judged harshly on RAS and other sites if things don't work out.
Think about others, mostly family....then friends, local peeps......insurance companies.....etc......
You have no say then, but others will have to deal with YOUR decision.....think about it......

[Gary Wayland]

On Wednesday, June 12, 2019 at 12:53:40 AM UTC-4, John Foster wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 8:39:51 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> > "As I get lower, I think less bank angle in my turns"
> > Why do you think that less bank is safer ? You can't slow a glider so it stalls/spin at 45 degrees bank, but certainly can at a less angle.
> > Maybe you mean protection against gusts ?
> > Dan
> >
> The steeper the bank angle, the smaller the vertical lift vector component becomes and the greater the horizontal vector becomes. This means that you need a higher speed to generate the same amount of lift. Thus, a slower speed or the same speed could result in a higher sink rate, which could change the apparent wind angle (angle of attack) over the wing and result in a spin/stall. That's the theory at least.

Hi John,

Bank angle; meaning, I'm not going to pull a 45/60-degree bank at two hundred plus feet trying to make a low save. If the thermal is that strong that I could pull 45 degrees in a normal condition, then I should be able to flatten out the glider and 'float' my way back out of the hole I just got in. The lower I go, the less bank angle I give myself to save from land out. I start thinking that way under 500' Also note, I talk about speed, speed, speed. "Don't get slow" and drive that in your head in this condition! Also, you better be looking at that yaw string! It has to be in this equation to minimize risk. It's about risk/reward. How much you want to get home based on how much you want to take a higher risk. My chances of falling out are greater with less bank angle but my risks have been reduced based on slow speed (pilot induced), stall/spin high bank angles... I've had some low saves at 250 feet, so this has worked for me.

Question; When do you know you probably should land and not try a save?

Answer; When you have your hand on the gear and jamming it in and out as you find that bit a lift you think is going to save you!



Note; Note the small amount of bank the pilot is putting into the turns. And, he had a bird marker which makes it a lot easier... He was always in control with multiple opportunities to land on the ground. I say, great job!



Regards,

Gary

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 02:41:26 -0700, Gary Wayland wrote:

> Answer; When you have your hand on the gear and jamming it in and out as
> you find that bit a lift you think is going to save you!
>
Disagree. You should be concentrating on flying accurately and paying
attention to what your gluteus maximus and the vario are telling you
about the air, not playing with the u/c lever. That only moves once when
you decide "I'm not finding anything and I'm being blown away from that
landable field, so I AM going to land. Gear down NOW."


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[James Metcalfe]

At 11:12 13 June 2019, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 02:41:26 -0700, Gary Wayland wrote:
>
>> Answer; When you have your hand on the gear and jamming it in and
out as
>> you find that bit a lift you think is going to save you!
>>
>Disagree. You should be concentrating on flying accurately and paying
>attention to what your gluteus maximus and the vario are telling you
>about the air, not playing with the u/c lever. That only moves once when
>you decide "I'm not finding anything and I'm being blown away from that
>landable field, so I AM going to land. Gear down NOW."
>
>
>--
>Martin | martin at
>Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Well said, Martin!
J.

James | MetcalfeIJ at
Metcalfe | gmail dot com

[Bruce Hoult]

On Thursday, June 13, 2019 at 2:41:28 AM UTC-7, Gary Wayland wrote:
> Bank angle; meaning, I'm not going to pull a 45/60-degree bank at two hundred plus feet trying to make a low save. If the thermal is that strong that I could pull 45 degrees in a normal condition, then I should be able to flatten out the glider and 'float' my way back out of the hole I just got in.. The lower I go, the less bank angle I give myself to save from land out. I start thinking that way under 500'

That turns out to be completely wrong. Often, thermals down low are very narrow and you need to really core them with minimum radius. Faster and steeper gives smaller radius, better control, harder to stall, less likely to depart if you do stall, and faster and easier recovery.

All of that applies even more so if you want to add some safety speed "for Mom".

Here are numbers for a glider with 40 knot stall, doing the tightest turn theoretically possible (on the edge of stall):

Speed kts Radius m Bank
========= ======== ====
41.0 141.1 17.9
42.0 102.7 24.9
43.0 86.3 30.1
44.0 76.8 34.3
45.0 70.6 37.8
46.0 66.1 40.9
47.0 62.7 43.6
48.0 60.1 46.0
49.0 58.0 48.2
50.0 56.3 50.2
51.0 54.9 52.0
52.0 53.7 53.7
53.0 52.6 55.3
54.0 51.7 56.7
55.0 51.0 58.1
56.0 50.3 59.3
57.0 49.7 60.5

But that's not very safe. Let's add 5 knots for Mom, keeping the bank angle and G appropriate to the speed 5 knots slower:

Speed kts Radius m Bank
========= ======== ====
46.0 177.6 17.9
47.0 128.7 24.9
48.0 107.6 30.1
49.0 95.3 34.3
50.0 87.1 37.8
51.0 81.3 40.9
52.0 76.8 43.6
53.0 73.3 46.0
54.0 70.5 48.2
55.0 68.1 50.2
56.0 66.2 52.0
57.0 64.5 53.7
58.0 63.0 55.3
59.0 61.8 56.7
60.0 60.7 58.1
61.0 59.7 59.3
62.0 58.8 60.5

Compared to pulling unsafely hard you're adding 36.5m turn radius with 18 degrees of bank, 21.3m with 30 degrees, and only 8.9m at 60 degrees of bank.

But more than that, using 60 degrees of bank is giving a 2 to 3 times smaller turn radius than using 18 to 30 degrees -- and with a better safety margin too.

Yes, you're going to have a higher sink rate. But if it puts you in the core instead of circling outside it then it's well worth it.

[Paul T[_4_]]

Most 'impressive' save I ever saw was a climb away from a 150ft rope
break in a Kestrel 22.