On May 7, 10:40*pm, BobW wrote:
On 5/7/2012 9:23 AM, Jonathon May wrote:





At 14:47 07 May 2012, Frank Whiteley wrote:
On Monday, May 7, 2012 8:35:23 AM UTC-6, Frank Whiteley wrote:
On Monday, May 7, 2012 7:06:22 AM UTC-6, Sean F2 wrote:
What happened in TN?

http://www.t-g.com/story/1845882.html

Pilot surname is Miller, erroneously reported as Smith.

I see they've now corrected the name in the report. *The new Google
Groups
remains pretty yucky8^p

Thanks for the update I hoped you were wrong,on the plus side there has not

been a lot of publicity ,but I do find the endless fatalities upsetting..
Jon

Jon,

You're not alone in finding 'the endless fatalities upsetting.' If you're like
me - and probably like a whole lot of other gliderpilots - you probably find
the endless *accident* litany upsetting, too, whether minor or major.

There's nothing any of us can do about past accidents, but I submit there
*ARE* things each of us can (and should) do to help prevent future ones.

Risking upsetting some readers by using the most recent USA accident of which
I'm aware as a discussional point of departure...

http://www.t-g.com/story/1845882.html

...I give the crashed glider's co-owner credit for positing what he thought
might have gone wrong. If we assume the quotes are accurate as reported, and
further assume the observations in them are accurate, this 'immediately'
becomes a pilot-induced (and therefore quite preventable) accident. In any
event, this particular pilot is luckier than most in that he at least gets the
chance of a 'do-over' should he decide to continue with the sport. Most pilots
in the pattern-stall-spin scenario die.

Here's my point about what this pilot could (should?) have done differently
had he ever vaguely suspected beforehand that he might one day set him up for
a low, slow pattern (and thus heighten his chances for a whole host of
possibilities associated with an inadvertent stall-spin to insinuate
themselves into his pattern)...
1) Don't do it!!! (Don't make a low pattern entry.)
2) Don't do it!!! (Don't lower your pattern speeds; if anything increase 'em.)
3) Work extra hard on your coordination!!!
4) Never - EVER - depart controlled flight in the pattern.

All 'Duh!' stuff, right? Except people continue to make these sorts of
depressing (to everyone), easily preventable errors. I submit that if pilots
really and truly thought beforehand (and here I mean while sipping a beer on
the patio, not just as they're sinking inexorably toward a
low-pattern-entry-point) they might just possibly some day crash their
sailplane in a particular way (e.g. departure from controlled flight in the
pattern), then they might work that much harder to NOT do precisely that.

Where pilots 'need to be' when it comes to predictable, 'stupid pilot tricks',
is in the place where the Navy pilot was when he responded to an ignorant
reporter's amazed question/statement after he ejected during a low-energy
catapult shot. The question/statement was to the effect: "Wow! How amazing you
could make that sort of decision so quickly!" The response was: "That was a
decision made long ago."

I submit that many (most?) 'stupid pilot tricks' come about precisely because
Joe Pilot - for whatever reason(s)...ignorance, mis-placed superhero attitude,
whatever - has NOT pre-decided to 'actively work' to avoid them.

Is this a harsh view? If anyone thinks so, then it is. But it's the view I've
long had in my own flying, and (so far) it has worked for me. I can honestly
say I've never had an insurance claim resulting from one of my own 'stupid
pilot tricks.' Knock on wood...

As the co-owner of the TN glider now knows too well, sometimes it's not always
'some other guy' (whom you don't know) who has the accident. Pilots who crash
are from our little, highly interconnected community. If you think it's
upsetting when strangers crash (even from 'chance' or from some previously
undetectable airframe defect), it's an order of magnitude worse when it's
someone you know...or worst yet, yourself.

Flying inherently contains sufficient kinetic energy that to indulge in it
without *actively* respecting the twin facts: a) gravity never quits, and b)
Mother Nature doesn't care *what* Joe Pilot's experience is, is setting
oneself up for higher chances of committing a stupid pilot trick.

Respectfully,
Bob W.

P.S. Earlier this year there was a fatal private charter approach crash in
western CO. Some survived, but not the 70,000+ hour pilot (not a
typo!)/(active-)glider pilot. They hit the ground, apparently under control,
apparently in a localized snow shower, in daylight, at an airport not
constricted by nearby mountains. Why? I don't know, but you'll have to look a
ways to find a more experienced pilot dying at the controls. Mother Nature and
physics are a relentless, powerful combination demanding ceaseless respect
from all pilots. To presume every pilot who pulls a 'stupid pilot trick'
suffered (for example) medical incapacitation would be an example of
ostrichian thinking in my view, maybe even denial. Compared to light twins
(the plane in this particular accident), gliders are simple airplanes, flown
entirely (in the USA) in VFR conditions. The NTSB database (and personal
observation) strongly suggests (to me, anyway) the loosest nut in the whole
glider is likely to be the one holding the top of the stick.

It's interesting how sporty it is to speculate on an accident, the
individuals in question...until it's your home field and your own club
members. My only suggestion is we all keep it in our minds who reads
these boards, and how silly we can look playing armchair quarterback,
when we don't even have the playbook.

Jordan
ASW20 E