I don't think the BGA's logic is at all at fault. What
they are pointing out is that gear warning systems
can be a double edged sword. While they may be appropriate
for private gliders flown by experienced pilots who
have worked out a plan to react to they may not be
appropriate for gliders flown by pilots with a broad
ability and experience spread.
They also push the idea that there is no substitute
for airmanship and configuring a glider for the intended
stage of flight is basic airmanship. By all means use
warning gizzmos as a backup, we all make mistakes,
but relying on them to remove or reduce the need for
proper airmanship is not the way to go. Remember that
many safety rules assume the worst case scenario and
of course mainly legislate for the less knowledgeable.
Competent pilots don't need to know there is a rule,
barring mistakes they fly sensibly anyway.

At 07:18 22 November 2005, Graeme Cant wrote:
Tony Verhulst wrote:

The point is that very, very, few flights arrive for
a landing without
opening the spoilers for the first time (when the
warning would go off)
at 10 ft off the ground. Much more often that happens
much earlier when
it's quite safe to lower the gear and still make a
safe landing.

At 10 feet, I would agree that for most pilots it
would be best to leave
the gear where it is.

I agree. It seems to me that the BGA's recommendation
is poorly thought
out. Every other sphere of aviation with a retractable
gear has made
warning systems compulsory and while gear errors still
occur the
frequency is quite low. In particular, the warning
system is not blamed
for the accident - which is the topsy-turvy logic of
the BGA's policy.

In most of aviation, accidents involving gear warnings
are (rightly)
attributed to poor pilot training or lack of familiarity/recency
on type
and something is done about the training system and
the pilot's competence.

Blaming the warning system is irrational.

Graeme Cant




Tony V.