48.4 hours !?

I remember that glider on the beach posting shortly after it happened..

I do have some very limited time in the 2-32... the one I flew I felt it was
very honest.. giving plenty of warning before the stall with rumbling and
stick shaking..

one report that came from our local witness.. that is not addressed in the
preliminary report... and taken with a few grains of salt or sand...is that
the passengers reported that the stick was full back the entire time when
the spin started... no forward movement to stop the spin..

In less than one month.. this individual went from Student Pilot certificate
issue.. to Private Pilot to Commercial Pilot... and crashed. No mention is
made of his experience prior to receiving his student pilot certificate. But
based on the documentation provided, one can expect that he had worked up to
pre-solo before getting his student certificate and quickly completed two
written exams and check rides. Not a good position to put an insurance
company in.

BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
I don't disagree, but there are other possibilities.

2-32 gives zippo spin warning, it tends to flick over the top from a tight
turn.

I thought the local operators were a bit more discriminating, requiring
some
referral. However, as I told my young friend, break one and drop in the
ocean, the next week it would be old news there and the rides would
continue.

Different operator, same location
http://www.soarcsa.org/glider_on_the_beach.htm

FWIW one suggestion was the 'extreme return'. Vertical speed limiting
dive
to the numbers, rotate to landing. My young friend thought this would be
a
big seller. But parachutes would cut down on useful load. Shoe-horning
them in was the order of the day.

Frank





BTIZ wrote:

based on a witness report.. that is now flying here...
minimum experience.. lack of spin training...

I'd go with the lack of Airmanship..
BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
Ramy wrote:

As usual, the NTSB report is useless. Doesn't even attempt to analyze
the cause for the accident.

One of my younger soaring friends hauled rides there for a couple of
stints.
He clocked over 100 hours a month in 2-32's which we reckoned may have
20,000 to 40,000 hours on them in all that salt air. Airmanship or lack
of
it may have had nothing to do with this sad incident.

I don't disagree that this was a real rookie and from the initial
description it wasn't airframe.

Frank

BTIZ wrote:

I remember that glider on the beach posting shortly after it happened..

I do have some very limited time in the 2-32... the one I flew I felt it
was very honest.. giving plenty of warning before the stall with rumbling
and stick shaking..

one report that came from our local witness.. that is not addressed in the
preliminary report... and taken with a few grains of salt or sand...is
that the passengers reported that the stick was full back the entire time
when the spin started... no forward movement to stop the spin..

In less than one month.. this individual went from Student Pilot
certificate
issue.. to Private Pilot to Commercial Pilot... and crashed. No mention
is made of his experience prior to receiving his student pilot
certificate. But based on the documentation provided, one can expect that
he had worked up to pre-solo before getting his student certificate and
quickly completed two written exams and check rides. Not a good position
to put an insurance company in.

BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
I don't disagree, but there are other possibilities.

2-32 gives zippo spin warning, it tends to flick over the top from a
tight turn.

I thought the local operators were a bit more discriminating, requiring
some
referral. However, as I told my young friend, break one and drop in the
ocean, the next week it would be old news there and the rides would
continue.

Different operator, same location
http://www.soarcsa.org/glider_on_the_beach.htm

FWIW one suggestion was the 'extreme return'. Vertical speed limiting
dive
to the numbers, rotate to landing. My young friend thought this would be
a
big seller. But parachutes would cut down on useful load. Shoe-horning
them in was the order of the day.

Frank





BTIZ wrote:

based on a witness report.. that is now flying here...
minimum experience.. lack of spin training...

I'd go with the lack of Airmanship..
BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
Ramy wrote:

As usual, the NTSB report is useless. Doesn't even attempt to analyze
the cause for the accident.

One of my younger soaring friends hauled rides there for a couple of
stints.
He clocked over 100 hours a month in 2-32's which we reckoned may have
20,000 to 40,000 hours on them in all that salt air. Airmanship or
lack of
it may have had nothing to do with this sad incident.

A few points.

It's unlikely that the pax knew where the stick was since it's SOP to remove
the rear stick when flying with two pax. You can't see the front stick from
the back.

Most 2-32's will give easily recognizable pre-stall buffet but not all of
them. There was variation in SN to SN. As would be expected, two pax in
the rear seat will put the CG forward quite a bit and that tends to tame the
2-32's stall/spin behavior.

Should an incipient spin departure develop, prompt anti-spin control inputs
will stop the spin.

I agree that the US commercial glider pilot experience requirements are a
joke. I hope that glider ride operations everywhere take this accident as a
warning to demand far higher experience from prospective ride pilots.

Bill Daniels
2-32 driver

"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:YL_9e.16042$%c1.5975@fed1read05...
I remember that glider on the beach posting shortly after it happened..

I do have some very limited time in the 2-32... the one I flew I felt it
was
very honest.. giving plenty of warning before the stall with rumbling and
stick shaking..

one report that came from our local witness.. that is not addressed in the
preliminary report... and taken with a few grains of salt or sand...is
that
the passengers reported that the stick was full back the entire time when
the spin started... no forward movement to stop the spin..

In less than one month.. this individual went from Student Pilot
certificate
issue.. to Private Pilot to Commercial Pilot... and crashed. No mention
is
made of his experience prior to receiving his student pilot certificate.
But
based on the documentation provided, one can expect that he had worked up
to
pre-solo before getting his student certificate and quickly completed two
written exams and check rides. Not a good position to put an insurance
company in.

BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
I don't disagree, but there are other possibilities.

2-32 gives zippo spin warning, it tends to flick over the top from a
tight
turn.

I thought the local operators were a bit more discriminating, requiring
some
referral. However, as I told my young friend, break one and drop in the
ocean, the next week it would be old news there and the rides would
continue.

Different operator, same location
http://www.soarcsa.org/glider_on_the_beach.htm

FWIW one suggestion was the 'extreme return'. Vertical speed limiting
dive
to the numbers, rotate to landing. My young friend thought this would
be
a
big seller. But parachutes would cut down on useful load. Shoe-horning
them in was the order of the day.

Frank





BTIZ wrote:

based on a witness report.. that is now flying here...
minimum experience.. lack of spin training...

I'd go with the lack of Airmanship..
BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
Ramy wrote:

As usual, the NTSB report is useless. Doesn't even attempt to analyze
the cause for the accident.

One of my younger soaring friends hauled rides there for a couple of
stints.
He clocked over 100 hours a month in 2-32's which we reckoned may have
20,000 to 40,000 hours on them in all that salt air. Airmanship or
lack
of
it may have had nothing to do with this sad incident.

....and not a lot of experience to be taking PAX on the lee side of a ridge
where there's no place to land. If you go to on the lee side and get below
the ridge line you have no nice options.
Obviously none of us know what happened, but it smells to me like a strong
lee downdraft.


"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:YL_9e.16042$%c1.5975@fed1read05...
I remember that glider on the beach posting shortly after it happened..

I do have some very limited time in the 2-32... the one I flew I felt it
was
very honest.. giving plenty of warning before the stall with rumbling and
stick shaking..

one report that came from our local witness.. that is not addressed in the
preliminary report... and taken with a few grains of salt or sand...is
that
the passengers reported that the stick was full back the entire time when
the spin started... no forward movement to stop the spin..

In less than one month.. this individual went from Student Pilot
certificate
issue.. to Private Pilot to Commercial Pilot... and crashed. No mention
is
made of his experience prior to receiving his student pilot certificate.
But
based on the documentation provided, one can expect that he had worked up
to
pre-solo before getting his student certificate and quickly completed two
written exams and check rides. Not a good position to put an insurance
company in.

BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
I don't disagree, but there are other possibilities.

2-32 gives zippo spin warning, it tends to flick over the top from a
tight
turn.

I thought the local operators were a bit more discriminating, requiring
some
referral. However, as I told my young friend, break one and drop in the
ocean, the next week it would be old news there and the rides would
continue.

Different operator, same location
http://www.soarcsa.org/glider_on_the_beach.htm

FWIW one suggestion was the 'extreme return'. Vertical speed limiting
dive
to the numbers, rotate to landing. My young friend thought this would
be
a
big seller. But parachutes would cut down on useful load. Shoe-horning
them in was the order of the day.

Frank





BTIZ wrote:

based on a witness report.. that is now flying here...
minimum experience.. lack of spin training...

I'd go with the lack of Airmanship..
BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
Ramy wrote:

As usual, the NTSB report is useless. Doesn't even attempt to analyze
the cause for the accident.

One of my younger soaring friends hauled rides there for a couple of
stints.
He clocked over 100 hours a month in 2-32's which we reckoned may have
20,000 to 40,000 hours on them in all that salt air. Airmanship or
lack
of
it may have had nothing to do with this sad incident.