Another crash - Be careful out there

http://durangoherald.com/asp-bin/art...ws040604_1.htm

Two people were injured Thursday when a glider plane crashed while
landing at the Val-Air Gliderport in the Animas Valley north of
Durango.

The pilot, Joe Dulin, was taken to Mercy Medical Center with a severe
cut to the throat, said Beverly St. Clair, whose husband owns the
glider port. Dulin was undergoing surgery at 5:55 p.m., she said. He
was later listed in fair condition.

A passenger, Virginia Gourley, was also taken to Mercy Medical Center
where she was treated and released, according to a hospital spokesman.

Copied from the ASA forum, let's all be nice to our
local ER docs and vascular surgeons.
SNIP_

An update... today I talked with several pilots who
witnessed the 'event'. Downwind leg (low pass)over
the runway was 'not fast' but Joe initiated a sharp
pull-up into a right turn that he was not able to get
out of. The Balenik's right wing hit the ground about
50 ft from the edge of the grass runway and the glider
nose slammed in, spinning the glider around on impact.
The front of the glider was ripped off, exposing the
pedals, but somehow caused no foot / leg injuries to
the gal passenger. As it turned out, her only injury
was a small (fingernail sized) forehead bump that took
2 stitches. She was immediately released from the hospital
and was on her way for the rest of her 'vacation trip.'


The wing ripped the fuselage metal, pushing it into
the pilot's area, which is what sliced into Joe's neck.
As luck would have it, the chief thorassic surgeon
in town was driving past the gliderport and witnessed
the crash. He stopped, jumped the fence, and ran to
the glider, immediately assessing the situation and
putting pressure on the torn carotid artery...which
he held in the amblance all the way to the hospital..
saving Joe's life... plus 2 hours in surgery. Not to
mention how fast the local emergency folks responded
to the call. The airport is 2 miles north of town,
4 miles from the hospital. Joe's in 'fair' condition,
doing ok, also with a broken knee cap.

The day was one of the calmest in recent weeks, so
it is doubtful that 'wind' had much of any part of
the crash. Just low and slow downwind and no bouyant
air like we get at Turf.

On a brighter note... 2 locals flew to Taos today,
dropping in on some sort of fly-in, and I tagged along
but also flew back to Durango. A bit of work at first,
then some BOOMING thermals, some to 15kts to 17k. Clouds
over the high mountains were still producing lots of
snow, so no flying that way yet. Maybe next week. Fly
safe ya'll.


Ted Grussing Start of thread: posted - 3 June 2004
22:20
------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
Just received an email from Bob Thompson - not a good
day up there, but thanks be that the events went well
this time and it appears we didn't lose anyone. Fly
safe.

'A terrible day at Val Air today... not for me, but
Joe Dulin... a recently transplanted Turf pilot. Joe
has been flying tourists for ValAir and today stalled?spun?
in in the L-13 with a passenger on the end of the runway
after a low pass and steep pull-up. The lady was taken
to the hospital with a bad head bash/cut and Joe's
main injury was a torn carottid artery... blood everywhere.
Handily, the amblance was there in 4 minutes and he
was in surgery within 1/2 hr... for over 2 hours. Amazingly,
in the amblance was a vascular surgeon, so Joe had
the best possible care fromt the onset.'
SNIP






At 23:06 04 June 2004, James wrote:
http://durangoherald.com/asp-bin/art...asp?article_ty
pe=news&article_path=/news/04/news040604_1.htm

Two people were injured Thursday when a glider plane
crashed while
landing at the Val-Air Gliderport in the Animas Valley
north of
Durango.

The pilot, Joe Dulin, was taken to Mercy Medical Center
with a severe
cut to the throat, said Beverly St. Clair, whose husband
owns the
glider port. Dulin was undergoing surgery at 5:55 p.m.,
she said. He
was later listed in fair condition.

A passenger, Virginia Gourley, was also taken to Mercy
Medical Center
where she was treated and released, according to a
hospital spokesman.

Stewart Kissel wrote in message ...

'A terrible day at Val Air today... not for me, but
Joe Dulin... a recently transplanted Turf pilot. Joe
has been flying tourists for ValAir and today stalled?spun?
in in the L-13 with a passenger on the end of the runway
after a low pass and steep pull-up.

Low passes with steep pull-ups are a blast, but as this accident
shows, entail risk. Since he was doing rides, the pilot involved was
probably highly experienced and done these many times before with no
problems.

When I was doing my motor glider transition at Livermore, the guy who
then owned the operation told me that there are certain maneuvers he
loves doing (high speed low passes among them), but doesn't do
frequently because of their danger.

One of the biggest problems with actions like low passes and tree-top
ridge flying is that you might be able to do them safely 9,999 times
out of 10,000 (or something on that order), creating a feeling of
complacency. But if you do them 1,000 times during your flying career,
you'll have roughly a 10% of an accident -- possibly fatal.

Peter Masak's recent accident that Tom Knauff wrote about in his email
newsletter sounds like it occurred during close in ridge flying. And,
when I did a Google search to try and learn more about that accident
(no luck there), what I did come up with was a 1994 post in which
Peter commented on Klaus Holighaus' fatal crash -- which also sounded
like a ridge accident.

All this is making my Livermore friend's decision sound very
reasonable. It's OK to take a chance -- but not too often.

Martin

Well if you don't do ridge flying in the Alps, I wouldn't see how to fly
there at all.

--
Bert Willing

ASW20 "TW"


"Martin Hellman" a écrit dans le message de
om...
Stewart Kissel wrote in
message ...

'A terrible day at Val Air today... not for me, but
Joe Dulin... a recently transplanted Turf pilot. Joe
has been flying tourists for ValAir and today stalled?spun?
in in the L-13 with a passenger on the end of the runway
after a low pass and steep pull-up.

Low passes with steep pull-ups are a blast, but as this accident
shows, entail risk. Since he was doing rides, the pilot involved was
probably highly experienced and done these many times before with no
problems.

When I was doing my motor glider transition at Livermore, the guy who
then owned the operation told me that there are certain maneuvers he
loves doing (high speed low passes among them), but doesn't do
frequently because of their danger.

One of the biggest problems with actions like low passes and tree-top
ridge flying is that you might be able to do them safely 9,999 times
out of 10,000 (or something on that order), creating a feeling of
complacency. But if you do them 1,000 times during your flying career,
you'll have roughly a 10% of an accident -- possibly fatal.

Peter Masak's recent accident that Tom Knauff wrote about in his email
newsletter sounds like it occurred during close in ridge flying. And,
when I did a Google search to try and learn more about that accident
(no luck there), what I did come up with was a 1994 post in which
Peter commented on Klaus Holighaus' fatal crash -- which also sounded
like a ridge accident.

All this is making my Livermore friend's decision sound very
reasonable. It's OK to take a chance -- but not too often.

Martin

Ridge flying accidents

A common misconception is that it's risky to fly so close to the ridge in
"those strong and tubulent winds". Those conditions may severely challenge a
pilot's skills on tow, and possibly also on landing, but they actually simplify
ridge flying because the glider always has plenty of energy.

I think the greatest danger lies in attempting to work ridge lift in winds that
are either too low in velocity or too far off-angle to the ridge. This puts
the glider close to the trees and -- this is the important part -- with too
little energy.

Without blaming Peter's accident on that decision per se, it must certainly
have been a factor.



Mike Yankee

(Address is munged to thwart spammers.
To reply, delete everything after "com".)

"Martin Hellman" wrote in message
om...
Stewart Kissel wrote in
message ...

'A terrible day at Val Air today... not for me, but
Joe Dulin... a recently transplanted Turf pilot. Joe
has been flying tourists for ValAir and today stalled?spun?
in in the L-13 with a passenger on the end of the runway
after a low pass and steep pull-up.

Low passes with steep pull-ups are a blast, but as this accident
shows, entail risk. Since he was doing rides, the pilot involved was
probably highly experienced and done these many times before with no
problems.

When I was doing my motor glider transition at Livermore, the guy who
then owned the operation told me that there are certain maneuvers he
loves doing (high speed low passes among them), but doesn't do
frequently because of their danger.

One of the biggest problems with actions like low passes and tree-top
ridge flying is that you might be able to do them safely 9,999 times
out of 10,000 (or something on that order), creating a feeling of
complacency. But if you do them 1,000 times during your flying career,
you'll have roughly a 10% of an accident -- possibly fatal.

Peter Masak's recent accident that Tom Knauff wrote about in his email
newsletter sounds like it occurred during close in ridge flying. And,
when I did a Google search to try and learn more about that accident
(no luck there), what I did come up with was a 1994 post in which
Peter commented on Klaus Holighaus' fatal crash -- which also sounded
like a ridge accident.

All this is making my Livermore friend's decision sound very
reasonable. It's OK to take a chance -- but not too often.

Martin

A low pass with a pull-up into a downwind is a great example of risk
management. A pilot has little margin for less than perfect flying. The
danger is greatest when they are performed on the spur of the moment in
response to a burst of exuberance yet they can be done safely with planning.

My approach is as methodical as possible. I will perform chandelles at a
safe altitude until I know exactly what a particular glider is capable of.
I note the altitude gain at the 180 degree point and any variability in that
gain. I will deliberately fly the maneuver with the yaw string out of
center to see how forgiving the glider is to sloppy flying. Only when I am
certain that I know all of the gliders behaviors related to chandelles will
I even consider doing low pass. Then I look at the particular runway and
the options to abandon the maneuver with a landing in another area than
planned. (Dry lakes are great for practicing this.)

Val air, as the name suggests, is a single runway in a beautiful, narrow,
steep sided high mountain valley. A pilot flying a low pass would have no
horizon for reference since his view would be the rocky sides of the canyon.
There are no safe landing options other than the runway. The elevation is
far higher than that at Turf so the higher TAS would create the illusion
that the glider's IAS was higher than it really was. Finally, the L-13's
ability to gain height in a zoom is less than the Grob 103's flown at Turf.
Unlike the Grobs, it will spin with only modest provocation. In short, the
margins at Val Air were far less than at Turf. It looks like the mountains
bit yet another pilot.

Bill Daniels

Martin,

This makes no sense. I believe that the more you do
something the more in practice you become and the inherent
result is that you are safer. Complacency is not an
argument against doing something!

Owain

I am glad all involved are going to be OK.


At 05:30 08 June 2004, Martin Hellman wrote:
Stewart Kissel wrote in message news:...

'A terrible day at Val Air today... not for me, but
Joe Dulin... a recently transplanted Turf pilot. Joe
has been flying tourists for ValAir and today stalled?spun?
in in the L-13 with a passenger on the end of the
runway
after a low pass and steep pull-up.

Low passes with steep pull-ups are a blast, but as
this accident
shows, entail risk. Since he was doing rides, the pilot
involved was
probably highly experienced and done these many times
before with no
problems.

When I was doing my motor glider transition at Livermore,
the guy who
then owned the operation told me that there are certain
maneuvers he
loves doing (high speed low passes among them), but
doesn't do
frequently because of their danger.

One of the biggest problems with actions like low passes
and tree-top
ridge flying is that you might be able to do them safely
9,999 times
out of 10,000 (or something on that order), creating
a feeling of
complacency. But if you do them 1,000 times during
your flying career,
you'll have roughly a 10% of an accident -- possibly
fatal.

Peter Masak's recent accident that Tom Knauff wrote
about in his email
newsletter sounds like it occurred during close in
ridge flying. And,
when I did a Google search to try and learn more about
that accident
(no luck there), what I did come up with was a 1994
post in which
Peter commented on Klaus Holighaus' fatal crash --
which also sounded
like a ridge accident.

All this is making my Livermore friend's decision sound
very
reasonable. It's OK to take a chance -- but not too
often.

Martin

Bert Willing wrote:

Well if you don't do ridge flying in the Alps, I wouldn't see how to fly
there at all.

I interpreted Martin's comments as a matter of degrees. Ridge soaring
one wingspan from the ridge is a different level of risk (and skill)
than lolling around 30 kts (50 kts?) slower and a couple hundred feet
higher.

Shawn

Bill Daniels wrote:


A low pass with a pull-up into a downwind is a great example of risk
management. A pilot has little margin for less than perfect flying. The
danger is greatest when they are performed on the spur of the moment in
response to a burst of exuberance yet they can be done safely with planning.

My approach is as methodical as possible. I will perform chandelles at a
safe altitude until I know exactly what a particular glider is capable of.
I note the altitude gain at the 180 degree point and any variability in that
gain. I will deliberately fly the maneuver with the yaw string out of
center to see how forgiving the glider is to sloppy flying. Only when I am
certain that I know all of the gliders behaviors related to chandelles will
I even consider doing low pass. Then I look at the particular runway and
the options to abandon the maneuver with a landing in another area than
planned. (Dry lakes are great for practicing this.)

Val air, as the name suggests, is a single runway in a beautiful, narrow,
steep sided high mountain valley. A pilot flying a low pass would have no
horizon for reference since his view would be the rocky sides of the canyon.
There are no safe landing options other than the runway. The elevation is
far higher than that at Turf so the higher TAS would create the illusion
that the glider's IAS was higher than it really was. Finally, the L-13's
ability to gain height in a zoom is less than the Grob 103's flown at Turf.
Unlike the Grobs, it will spin with only modest provocation. In short, the
margins at Val Air were far less than at Turf. It looks like the mountains
bit yet another pilot.

Bill Daniels

Having been to Val-Air, and with lots of L-13 time (relative to my TT)
my first reaction to reading this was "He was doing what? There? Bold!"

Shawn

Well, to get this couple of hundred feet higher, you might have to slow down
and get closer to the ridge...

--
Bert Willing

ASW20 "TW"


"Shawn Curry" a écrit dans le message de
...
Bert Willing wrote:

Well if you don't do ridge flying in the Alps, I wouldn't see how to fly
there at all.

I interpreted Martin's comments as a matter of degrees. Ridge soaring
one wingspan from the ridge is a different level of risk (and skill)
than lolling around 30 kts (50 kts?) slower and a couple hundred feet
higher.

Shawn