Gear Warning

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.). wrote:
"RP26. The fitting of systems that warn the pilot of a glider that the
undercarriage is not lowered during the landing approach IS NOT RECOMMENDED.
This is because if such a system is fitted and is activated then the pilot
is likely to attempt to lower the undercarriage during the final stages of
landing. This could result in mishandling the aircraft, so causing an
accident.

You guys don't routinely do a test opening of the spoilers on pattern
entry?

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.). wrote:
In the current, Fifteenth Edition of Laws and Rules for Glider Pilots of
April 2005 published by the BGA
http://www.gliding.co.uk/bgainfo/doc...ion15final.pdf
in Part 3 Recommended Practices RP26 on page 58 states: -

"UNDERCARRIAGE WARNING SYSTEMS

"RP26. The fitting of systems that warn the pilot of a glider that the
undercarriage is not lowered during the landing approach IS NOT RECOMMENDED.
This is because if such a system is fitted and is activated then the pilot
is likely to attempt to lower the undercarriage during the final stages of
landing. This could result in mishandling the aircraft, so causing an
accident.

"It is also recommended that if the glider is seen on the approach wheel-up,
no attempt is made to warn that pilot, using radio or other means, for the
same reason. The pilot should be allowed to land wheels-up."

I understand that this recommendation was made after accidents where the
warning was considered to be the cause.

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.


"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
...

Nigel Pocock wrote:


Incidentally the BGA in the UK does not recommend an
undercarriage warning buzzer.

As a pilot that has avoided 3 gear up landings because I had a warning
buzzer, I'm curious about the reasoning behind the recommendation.

snip

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA






So does the BGA recommend to use a pre-landing checklist where the
spoilers are checked? If the spoilers are checked early in the pattern
then the logic regarding gear warning systems is not very logical.

In short, No.

One of the biggest controversies in U.K. clubs is about whether to do or not
to do downwind checks. Some clubs insist, some clubs think it is rubbish.

So far as I know, none of the professional national coaches employed by the
BGA to train instructors has ever called for downwind checks.
To my certain knowledge this includes Bill Scull, Chris Rollings, Brian
Spreckley, G. Dale, many others. However, when they came across a
candidate who had been trained to use downwind checks they did not actually
insist on a change.

The BGA Instructors' Manual in Chapter 4 - CHECK LISTS is 3 pages and has
this on page 4.3: -

"Pre-landing checks.

"The use of UFSTAL, WULF and other variations on the theme is inappropriate
on the downwind leg of the circuit. The pilot is better off flying the
glider correctly, in the right place, and looking out. The use of a
pre-landing check prior to joining the circuit (a pre-circuit check as
opposed to a down-wind check) is mentioned also in chapter 14."

Chapter 14 - CIRCUIT PLANNING (PART ONE) is 6 pages of text and 4 of
illustrations and has this on page 14.6: -

Under "Before going to the high key area", 7 bullet points, with the last
one: -

"make a positive decision to join the circuit to land, and plan to arrive at
the high key area between 700ft. to 800ft.
prepare for landing by;
doing pre-circuit checks, if appropriate
making sure the straps are tight and deciding on a suitable approach
speed. In gliders so equipped, dump any water ballast and lower the
undercarriage
continuing to fly the glider at normal speed (i.e. best glide angle),
but speeding up appropriately in any sink."

On page 14-10 under "Advice to Instructors",

4th of 7 items, "Downwind",

"Don't confuse the demonstration by introducing pre-landing checks as such.
It's all there anyway, and the pre-landing checks should be carried out
before starting the circuit. Reciting a mnemonic on the downwind leg is
inappropriate, and in any case, being able to recite a check shouldn't be
confused with an ability to plan a circuit."

I understand that frequently if someone lands wheel up, when asked if they
did pre-landing checks they say "oh, yes!". The point of course is that
those who are taught pre-landing checks are flying training gliders with a
fixed wheel, and so they are used to saying the check item but doing
nothing.

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.


"Gary Emerson" wrote in message
et...


W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.). wrote:

In the current, Fifteenth Edition of Laws and Rules for Glider Pilots of
April 2005 published by the BGA
http://www.gliding.co.uk/bgainfo/doc...ion15final.pdf
in Part 3 Recommended Practices RP26 on page 58 states: -

"UNDERCARRIAGE WARNING SYSTEMS

"RP26. The fitting of systems that warn the pilot of a glider that the
undercarriage is not lowered during the landing approach IS NOT
RECOMMENDED. This is because if such a system is fitted and is
activated then the pilot is likely to attempt to lower the undercarriage
during the final stages of landing. This could result in mishandling
the aircraft, so causing an accident.

"It is also recommended that if the glider is seen on the approach
wheel-up, no attempt is made to warn that pilot, using radio or other
means, for the same reason. The pilot should be allowed to land
wheels-up."

I understand that this recommendation was made after accidents where the
warning was considered to be the cause.

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.


So does the BGA recommend to use a pre-landing checklist where the
spoilers are checked? If the spoilers are checked early in the pattern
then the logic regarding gear warning systems is not very logical.

While the BGA rule might make some sense landing on a grass runway (or
mud, as it is in Britain), I wouldn't like to see anyone land a nice
glass ship on our Arizona rock and gravel runways.

I am also not sure I would agree with their rationale. In my opinion,
it would be a particularly inept pilot who could not lower his/her gear
at all but the final stages of a landing approach and who might be
startled by a radio call so badly they lost control. The BGA procedure
also now leaves an immobile glider sitting in the middle of the runway
- another hazard!

Perhaps some BGA members could illuminate us on why their ruling body
considers them incapable of taking corrective action when landing?

Mike

Canada, not BGA....

If you are almost ready to land, nicely set up with the proper descent
rate, and hear a gear up warning, what do you do? You proceed to lower
the gear, your left hand is currently on the open spoilers, your right
on the stick... usually..... so (also usually) your gear lever is on
the right side, you need your right hand, so you switch hands, left
hand on stick, right hand on gear, then just slightly before your gear
comes down, you flop onto the ground hard enough to break your tail
since your spoilers are now full out late on final .... left hand moved
over to the stick, remember? By doing nothing you flare and land on the
belly.... likely less expensive to repair. Just a theory. Until you do
it yourself. Ouch.

How about a mechanical warning, like I use on my present glider? It's a
small spring-loaded plastic clamp that is on the gear handle when the
gear is down, then moved to the spoiler handle just before raising the
gear. The clamp location is reversed for landing.

Foolproof... almost - and I'm a better fool. It was a ridge day and the
clouds were barely above the ridge. I had to use spoilers to keep from
getting sucked into the clouds. I got used to working the spoilers with
the clamp attached. Add to that, the failure to use a proper
checklist... No damage at all as it was on grass but sooo many witnesses
:-).

I'm much better at checklists now and also have an audible gear warning.
The warning buzzer is a great idea, and suggest that the BGA
reconsider their opinion.

Tony V.

Nigel Pocock wrote:

One problem with a recorded voice is that it sounds
like background radio chatter and your brain filters
it out (or at least mine does)

If it was your voice, or your wife's voice, on the recording, do you
think you would still filter it out? The Tasman unit allows any voice
and message. Maybe a former glider instructor (or for the ex-military, a
former drill instructor)?

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
...
Nigel Pocock wrote:

One problem with a recorded voice is that it sounds
like background radio chatter and your brain filters
it out (or at least mine does)

If it was your voice, or your wife's voice, on the recording, do you
think you would still filter it out? The Tasman unit allows any voice
and message. Maybe a former glider instructor (or for the ex-military, a
former drill instructor)?

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Try: http://www.research.att.com/projects/tts/demo.html

Type in whatever message you want, choose the gender and accent of the
synthetic voice and download the .wav file. A sexy female voice gets my
attention.

As the gadget makers are now involved, I have a request. How about a small
box containing a multi-input, line-in, fixed volume, audio mixer with
amplifier and decent speaker powered by the ships battery. This box would
have an array of 3mm jacks to receive the audio from the varios, PDA, radio,
and other gadgets that output audio and play them all through the same
speaker. Maybe it should fit in a 57mm instrument hole. I think this would
simplify wiring and improve audio quality.

Bill Daniels

In article DdqdnYPHoYf1J-benZ2dnUVZ_v

Try: http://www.research.att.com/projects/tts/demo.html

Type in whatever message you want, choose the gender and accent of the
synthetic voice and download the .wav file. A sexy female voice gets my
attention.

As the gadget makers are now involved, I have a request. How about a small
box containing a multi-input, line-in, fixed volume, audio mixer with
amplifier and decent speaker powered by the ships battery. This box would
have an array of 3mm jacks to receive the audio from the varios, PDA, radio,
and other gadgets that output audio and play them all through the same
speaker. Maybe it should fit in a 57mm instrument hole. I think this would
simplify wiring and improve audio quality.

Bill Daniels

We had a little problem with our gear warning. It worked fine
with the glider in the trailer, but in flight it would sound if you
opened the airbrakes whatever the position of the gear. It certainly
made me check the wheel was down and locked.

We put in a new vario this year, the only snag was we had
nowhere to put the speaker except behind the panel. We thought we could
do with a bit more audio. I remembered our radio, a Dittel clone, has an
input for an intercom. We fed the audio from the vario into the radio,
and now we have all the volume we need.


--
Mike Lindsay

"Nigel Pocock" wrote:

One problem with a recorded voice is that it sounds
like background radio chatter and your brain filters
it out (or at least mine does)

Absolutely true. One member of my club installed a gear warning and recorded
a message on it like "If you´re going to land, lower the gear NOW". He was
the first one to ignore his own message.

On the other hand, I once flew in Hungary, and my brain filtered out all
radio messages which were mostly in Hungarian language. The airport tried to
call me (in English and German) while my workload was high, and they had no
chance to get through to me. Then they had my girlfriend call me on the
radio and got an immediate reply. It seems like somehow I´m conditioned to
listen whenever the boss is speaking ;-))

Michael