Region 1 Sugarbush Updates??

[Tim Hanke]

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200880617031

Two sailplanes forced down in Warren, Vermont
Pilot Rick Roelke of Bedford, N.H., looks at his sailplane in
Blueberry Lake in Warren after landed short of Sugarbush Warren
Airport on Tuesday. He and pilot John Dezzuitti of Lakeside, Conn.,
were competing in a week-long soaring competition when both pilots
landed short of the runway when heavy rain and downdrafts hit their
aircrafts. Both pilots were unhurt, but while Roelke was able to
retrieve his glider undamaged, Dezzuitti's plane was estimated by him
as a total loss.

[Mike the Strike]

On Jun 18, 5:02 am, Tim Hanke > wrote:
> http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20088061...
>
> Two sailplanes forced down in Warren, Vermont
> Pilot Rick Roelke of Bedford, N.H., looks at his sailplane in
> Blueberry Lake in Warren after landed short of Sugarbush Warren
> Airport on Tuesday. He and pilot John Dezzuitti of Lakeside, Conn.,
> were competing in a week-long soaring competition when both pilots
> landed short of the runway when heavy rain and downdrafts hit their
> aircrafts. Both pilots were unhurt, but while Roelke was able to
> retrieve his glider undamaged, Dezzuitti's plane was estimated by him
> as a total loss.

"Short of the runway" seems to be a bit of an understatement!

Mike

[Fred[_4_]]

On Jun 18, 8:32*am, Mike the Strike > wrote:
> On Jun 18, 5:02 am, Tim Hanke > wrote:
>
> >http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20088061....
>
> > Two sailplanes forced down in Warren, Vermont
> > Pilot Rick Roelke of Bedford, N.H., looks at his sailplane in
> > Blueberry Lake in Warren after landed short of Sugarbush Warren
> > Airport on Tuesday. He and pilot John Dezzuitti of Lakeside, Conn.,
> > were competing in a week-long soaring competition when both pilots
> > landed short of the runway when heavy rain and downdrafts hit their
> > aircrafts. Both pilots were unhurt, but while Roelke was able to
> > retrieve his glider undamaged, Dezzuitti's plane was estimated by him
> > as a total loss.
>
> "Short of the runway" seems to be a bit of an understatement!
>
> Mike

Where is the lake in reference to the gliderport? Want to look with
Google Earth.

[DRN]

On Jun 18, 1:35 pm, Fred > wrote:
> On Jun 18, 8:32 am, Mike the Strike > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 18, 5:02 am, Tim Hanke > wrote:
>
> > >http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20088061...
>
> > > Two sailplanes forced down in Warren, Vermont
> > > Pilot Rick Roelke of Bedford, N.H., looks at his sailplane in
> > > Blueberry Lake in Warren after landed short of Sugarbush Warren
> > > Airport on Tuesday. He and pilot John Dezzuitti of Lakeside, Conn.,
> > > were competing in a week-long soaring competition when both pilots
> > > landed short of the runway when heavy rain and downdrafts hit their
> > > aircrafts. Both pilots were unhurt, but while Roelke was able to
> > > retrieve his glider undamaged, Dezzuitti's plane was estimated by him
> > > as a total loss.
>
> > "Short of the runway" seems to be a bit of an understatement!
>
> > Mike
>
> Where is the lake in reference to the gliderport? Want to look with
> Google Earth.

south-east maybe 1.5 mile IIRC.
In any case its the closest lake to the airport (and not real big)...

[DRN]

On Jun 18, 1:35 pm, Fred > wrote:
> On Jun 18, 8:32 am, Mike the Strike > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 18, 5:02 am, Tim Hanke > wrote:
>
> > >http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20088061...
>
> > > Two sailplanes forced down in Warren, Vermont
> > > Pilot Rick Roelke of Bedford, N.H., looks at his sailplane in
> > > Blueberry Lake in Warren after landed short of Sugarbush Warren
> > > Airport on Tuesday. He and pilot John Dezzuitti of Lakeside, Conn.,
> > > were competing in a week-long soaring competition when both pilots
> > > landed short of the runway when heavy rain and downdrafts hit their
> > > aircrafts. Both pilots were unhurt, but while Roelke was able to
> > > retrieve his glider undamaged, Dezzuitti's plane was estimated by him
> > > as a total loss.
>
> > "Short of the runway" seems to be a bit of an understatement!
>
> > Mike
>
> Where is the lake in reference to the gliderport? Want to look with
> Google Earth.

Airport at top, lake at bottom of this image:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=warren,+vt&ie=UTF8&ll=44.096524,-72.824678&spn=0.041546,0.10952&t=h&z=14&iwloc=addr

[Kloudy via AviationKB.com]

Fred wrote:
>> >http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20088061...
>>
>[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>>
>> Mike
>
>Where is the lake in reference to the gliderport? Want to look with
>Google Earth.

http://www.airnav.com/airport/0B7

Looks like ~2.5sm South of the airport.
Also looks like the guy in the water was shooting for Blueberry Lake Rd on a
northern peninsula jutting into the lake.

Bummer.

Glad everyone's alive tho'

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/soaring/200806/1

[Frank[_1_]]

On Jun 18, 8:02*am, Tim Hanke > wrote:
> http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20088061....
>
> Two sailplanes forced down in Warren, Vermont
> Pilot Rick Roelke of Bedford, N.H., looks at his sailplane in
> Blueberry Lake in Warren after landed short of Sugarbush Warren
> Airport on Tuesday. He and pilot John Dezzuitti of Lakeside, Conn.,
> were competing in a week-long soaring competition when both pilots
> landed short of the runway when heavy rain and downdrafts hit their
> aircrafts. Both pilots were unhurt, but while Roelke was able to
> retrieve his glider undamaged, Dezzuitti's plane was estimated by him
> as a total loss.

Any news about what happened to John (7K)? Is he OK physically?

Frank (TA)

[John Dezzutti[_3_]]

At 02:08 19 June 2008, Frank wrote:
Any news about what happened to John (7K)? Is he OK physically?
>
>Frank (TA)

I came out of the trees with a scratch on my hand from breaking off a
piece of the canopy as I crawled out from underneath the ship. I certainly
owe a thank you to the Schleicher factory!
Thanks for your concern.
Details will follow once I am done with the FAA, NTSB< and the insurance
company.

[Frank[_1_]]

On Jun 19, 7:43*am, John Dezzutti > wrote:
> At 02:08 19 June 2008, Frank wrote:
> Any news about what happened to John (7K)? *Is he OK physically?
>
>
>
> >Frank (TA)
>
> I came out of the trees with a scratch on my hand from breaking off a
> piece of the canopy as I crawled out from underneath the ship. I certainly
> owe a thank you to the Schleicher factory!
> Thanks for your concern.
> Details will follow once I am done with the FAA, NTSB< and the insurance
> company.

John,

Thanks for the update, and thank goodness you came out OK! Gliders
can always be replaced, but soaring friends are priceless!! ;-)

Frank

[av8]

> Also looks like the guy in the water was shooting for Blueberry Lake Rd on a
> northern peninsula jutting into the lake.

That was the original plan, . But the little spit was so short, and
it would have been down wind that I opted for a safe landing on the
water into the wind. Later walking that ramp there were large
boulders behind the tall grass to keep cars from using it. An
overshoot would have been very bad.

It all worked out fine after a big splash, and did it mostly correct
(no flaps, no spoilers, gear down, but I forgot to close the vent).
After it was over the glider was floating well (as I had be briefed it
would) and I got out and swam it to the nearest downwind shore.
Secured it so it would not sink, and walked up this little path to
assess my situation. I was rather dismayed when I found I had towed
it to an island!!!

Very quickly contest personnel arrived at the far shore after a radio
call from another pilot who had seen the landing. But I explained
that I was fine, and they needed to look for John in the trees. We
finally got the glider to shore with inner tubes under the wings and
tail boom. I don’t have an electronic copy of that yet, but that is a
funny picture…

The only damage to the ship was a bent gear door. The radio was not
working after the landing but all other electronics were. After a
night at 30,000 ft in a barograph calibration vacuum chamber it was
working fine the next morning. I flew the ship by 5:00 the next
day.

While I don’t recommend practicing this (the retrieves are a bitch) it
turned out to be a good option in a bad situation…

BTW it was decided that there can only be one Admiral (Nixon) so I
have been dubbed Commodore…

RR
Commodore, Bota Blanca Yacht Club

[[email protected]]

RR....turning this event into a learning tool....why was it best to
leave the gear down? You point it out with conviction, there must be a
good reason. Also, about how far did you slide,plow,then cruise thru
the water before all ahead stop?
R

[Kloudy via AviationKB.com]

wrote:
>RR....turning this event into a learning tool....why was it best to
>leave the gear down?
I have read IIRC (asw-24 or 27 POH) that the clean, curved belly creates an
immediate low-pressure water flow which can cause a severe "submarine" effect.

The gear breaks up that flow.

If memory serves again, back in the 80's Travelers Insurance was filming a
commercial that included a glider.
The idea at the time was to film a sailplane skimming just inches over a
still lake.
One pilot skimmed a little too low and made contact with the water. The
resulting low pressure tore a strip of the fuselage off just beneath the
pilot.
A later effort with another pilot and plane proved successful and the
commercial aired for a while.
It was kinda cool.

We are so relieved you guys are O K.

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

[av8]

On Jun 20, 10:14*am, " > wrote:
> RR....turning this event into a learning tool....why was it best to
> leave the gear down? You point it out with conviction, there must be a
> good reason. Also, about how far did you slide,plow,then cruise thru
> the water before all ahead stop?
> R

I had seen a briefing at a US teem XC Camp at Perry. The briefing was
originally prepared for the contestants at the worlds in Sweden. The
procedure was gear down to avoid the suction that the belly will
cause. If you dangle a spoon by its handle and gently touch the
bottom of the spoon to water flowing from a faucet (this works even
better in an un-aerated faucet) you will see the effect the spoon will
jump towards the faucet.

Having the gear down I think will also slow you down using a part of
the structure that is designed for high drag loads.

Spoilers out are bad, they can’t take the load, I had neutral flaps
but the briefing described landing flaps, but not dive breaks.

The other thing the briefing noted was don’t worry it will float. And
indeed it did. I don’t think it would stay up all day, but for quite
a while. It was a rapid deceleration but not “impact” like. As to
whether I went under, I don’t know as I got a face full of water as I
hit (I forgot to close the vent) but when I opened my eyes I was high
and moist…

I believe we are putting up the briefing on the web and when it gets
there we will post a link.

As well as it went, don’t try this at home…

Commodore

[jcarlyle]

Hi, (Commodore) Rick,

Glad it all turned out OK for you and John. It must have been scary
for both of you on flare!

Just out of curiosity, what make and model is your radio?

-John

On Jun 19, 11:07 pm, av8 > wrote:
> The radio was not
> working after the landing but all other electronics were. After a
> night at 30,000 ft in a barograph calibration vacuum chamber it was
> working fine the next morning. I flew the ship by 5:00 the next
> day.

[Martin Gregorie[_3_]]

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:26:31 -0700, av8 wrote:

> Having the gear down I think will also slow you down using a part of
> the structure that is designed for high drag loads.
>
A NZ briefing note I saw a year or two ago mentioned that it is good to
have the wheel brake on because that improves the tyre's aquaplaning
capability. This lets the glider reach a lower speed before the wheel
finally sinks into the water.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. |
org | Zappa fan & glider pilot

[rlovinggood]

On Jun 21, 3:11 pm, Martin Gregorie
> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:26:31 -0700, av8 wrote:
> > Having the gear down I think will also slow you down using a part of
> > the structure that is designed for high drag loads.
>
> A NZ briefing note I saw a year or two ago mentioned that it is good to
> have the wheel brake on because that improves the tyre's aquaplaning
> capability. This lets the glider reach a lower speed before the wheel
> finally sinks into the water.
>
> --
> martin@ | Martin Gregorie
> gregorie. |
> org | Zappa fan & glider pilot

Martin,

How does that work with the rule on closing spoilers before touching
down, if the wheel brake is attached to the spoilers?

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

[av8]

On Jun 21, 8:10*pm, rlovinggood > wrote:
> On Jun 21, 3:11 pm, Martin Gregorie
>
> > wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:26:31 -0700, av8 wrote:
> > > Having the gear down I think will also slow you down using a part of
> > > the structure that is designed for high drag loads.
>
> > A NZ briefing note I saw a year or two ago mentioned that it is good to
> > have the wheel brake on because that improves the tyre's aquaplaning
> > capability. This lets the glider reach a lower speed before the wheel
> > finally sinks into the water.
>
> > --
> > martin@ * | Martin Gregorie
> > gregorie. |
> > org * * * | Zappa fan & glider pilot
>
> Martin,
>
> How does that work with the rule on closing spoilers before touching
> down, if the wheel brake is attached to the spoilers?
>
> Ray Lovinggood
> Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

Just my two bits, I would close the spoilers over the wheel brake. I
don't think the rolling tire would make much difference, leaving the
spoilers out will damage the spoilers for sure, and perhaps damage the
wings from the drag loads...

To answer John’s question, the radio was a Becker, I don't know
exactly which model, but the less fancy one. It was never submerged
but I could see when it was in the glider, some water had wept out of
the lower mounting holes. It was the lowest instrument in the
panel.

But as a testament of using a vacuum chamber to dry stuff out, I had
my cell phone in my pocket when I swam to shore (you don’t think about
everything). I had written if off, as it had been fully submerged.
After the radio came back to life, I figured what the hell, and asked
Dave to try it on my cell. It was Palm Treo 700p cell phone, that had
a touch screen, and as we dropped the vacuum, you could see the screen
bulge, but in that I had such little hope in its recovery, we just put
it on a hard vacuum and left it over night. Amazingly it recovered.
Now by the same token, another cell phone I had did not, but that one
cost me, literally, $10 so no real loss…

Just as a side note, Dave’s "vacuum jar" did not look like the typical
glass bell jar. I asked him what it was, he said it was a "vacuum
desiccator". I think this was its first use as it's intended
purpose...

And as the last "drying" story, the only electronics that were damaged
(don't know if it will recover yet) was the one thing that was
supposed to be water proof. I thought I had found all the water, but
there is a spot under my battery that holds my elt. I found about 1/2
in of water there yesterday. Taking the elt out, you could hear it
slosh around. The battery side was dry, but the circuit board side
was "floating"... it was an ACK EO-1. it may have had some cracking
in the case from replacing the batteries and over tightening the
screws, but it is just kind of a funny irony...

RR
Commodore, Bota Blanco Yacht Club

[Martin Gregorie[_3_]]

On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 17:10:09 -0700, rlovinggood wrote:

> How does that work with the rule on closing spoilers before touching
> down, if the wheel brake is attached to the spoilers?
>
Remarkably tunelessly would be my guess.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. |
org | Zappa fan & glider pilot

[Martin Gregorie[_3_]]

On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 04:50:14 -0700, av8 wrote:

> Just my two bits, I would close the spoilers over the wheel brake. I
> don't think the rolling tire would make much difference, leaving the
> spoilers out will damage the spoilers for sure, and perhaps damage the
> wings from the drag loads...
>
You've done it: I haven't (yet), so you know a lot more than I do about
ditching in a glider. I'm not trying to second guess you. I thought
the note contained useful info, so passed it on in case it helps somebody.

The note I saw didn't mention coupled wheel and airbrakes, but doing it on
such a glider doesn't sound too clever if the wing gets submerged before
the glider stops. Mine is non-coupled and I would put the wheel brake on
though, as its a balsa Libelle, dropping it into water means good night
glider no matter what brakes are on at the time. As it has upper and lower
surface brakes I'd certainly want them put away or the stop could be very
sudden.

However, I'm pretty certain that the speed difference between the water
and tyre surface matters quite a lot. Both bouncing bombs that I'm aware
of (Barnes Wallace's dam wrecker and Hi-ball, which was a
smaller anti-shipping design) went to a lot of trouble to spin the bombs
'backwards' to get the greatest possible water:casing speed
differential. I'm certain they wouldn't have bothered if it wasn't
important.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. |
org | Zappa fan & glider pilot

[jcarlyle]

Thanks, Rick, for the detailed description of the drying procedure and
the ditching tips. I'm glad you came through the whole experience OK!
Hopefully I'll never go through it myself, but if I do I'll be much
better prepared because you taking the time to document it all. Thanks
again.

-John

On Jun 22, 7:50 am, av8 > wrote:
> To answer John’s question, the radio was a Becker, I don't know
> exactly which model, but the less fancy one. It was never submerged
> but I could see when it was in the glider, some water had wept out of
> the lower mounting holes. It was the lowest instrument in the
> panel.
>
> But as a testament of using a vacuum chamber to dry stuff out, I had
> my cell phone in my pocket when I swam to shore (you don’t think about
> everything). I had written if off, as it had been fully submerged.
> After the radio came back to life, I figured what the hell, and asked
> Dave to try it on my cell. It was Palm Treo 700p cell phone, that had
> a touch screen, and as we dropped the vacuum, you could see the screen
> bulge, but in that I had such little hope in its recovery, we just put
> it on a hard vacuum and left it over night. Amazingly it recovered.
> Now by the same token, another cell phone I had did not, but that one
> cost me, literally, $10 so no real loss…
>
> Just as a side note, Dave’s "vacuum jar" did not look like the typical
> glass bell jar. I asked him what it was, he said it was a "vacuum
> desiccator". I think this was its first use as it's intended
> purpose...
>
> And as the last "drying" story, the only electronics that were damaged
> (don't know if it will recover yet) was the one thing that was
> supposed to be water proof. I thought I had found all the water, but
> there is a spot under my battery that holds my elt. I found about 1/2
> in of water there yesterday. Taking the elt out, you could hear it
> slosh around. The battery side was dry, but the circuit board side
> was "floating"... it was an ACK EO-1. it may have had some cracking
> in the case from replacing the batteries and over tightening the
> screws, but it is just kind of a funny irony...
>
> RR
> Commodore, Bota Blanco Yacht Club

[PMSC Member]

On Jun 21, 3:11 pm, Martin Gregorie
> wrote:

>
> A NZ briefing note I saw a year or two ago mentioned that it is good to
> have the wheel brake on because that improves the tyre's aquaplaning
> capability. This lets the glider reach a lower speed before the wheel
> finally sinks into the water.

Hydroplaning requires a water film over an impermeable surface (e.g.
roadway).

I saw RR's "baptism" from about a mile away on the ridge. It's not a
"landing". It's a "splashdown". The wheel, indeed the whole danged
airplane goes in the water, right now. Believe me when I say that
brakes or no brakes will make no difference. Having spoilers extended
can be be the difference between being airworthy the next day or
driving to the glider repair station.

-T8

[Darryl Ramm]

On Jun 25, 11:38*am, PMSC Member > wrote:
> On Jun 21, 3:11 pm, Martin Gregorie
>
> > wrote:
>
> > A NZ briefing note I saw a year or two ago mentioned that it is good to
> > have the wheel brake on because that improves the tyre's aquaplaning
> > capability. This lets the glider reach a lower speed before the wheel
> > finally sinks into the water.
>
> Hydroplaning requires a water film over an impermeable surface (e.g.
> roadway).
>
> I saw RR's "baptism" from about a mile away on the ridge. *It's not a
> "landing". *It's a "splashdown". *The wheel, indeed the whole danged
> airplane goes in the water, right now. *Believe me when I say that
> brakes or no brakes will make no difference. *Having spoilers extended
> can be be the difference between being airworthy the next day or
> driving to the glider repair station.
>
> -T8

Well hydroplanes (boats) manage to hydroplane over water, and the
tail dragger pilots who amuse themselves watersking their airplanes
(with brakes locked). Hydroplane is a perfectly good word to describe
that as far as I see. I think hydroplane (more ambitiously) and
aquaplane get used interchangeably for the wet road/tire situation. At
minimum energy speeds that gliders land I'm not brakes make much
difference, but I've also heard the suggestion to hold the brakes if
you have a separate wheel brake as in a Duo Discus, as it can help the
glider hydroplane/ski a little and help prevent the glider diving
under as much. And yes I've heard that from New Zealand. Anybody have
a spare Duo they want to test this with? Since it is unlikely to hurt
I'd be squeezing that brake handle in a Duo.

Darryl