Troubling story and some questions

On Jan 8, 8:15*am, wrote:
On Jan 2, 10:10*am, J a c k wrote:

...the best course of action involves doing the right pilot-thing NOW,
declaring an emergency as soon as possible, and filing an ASRS report
promptly after the flight.

I would add a few points to amplify this basically sound logic:

1) Fly the airplane
2) Fly the airplane
3) Fly the airplane

If you need to go into controlled airspace without permission to
prevent destruction of your airplane and yourself, do not hesitate. Do
what you need to do to get back to a safe flying condition. If you get
back down bellow 18k promptly it might make sense to call ATC, but I'm
not sure what real purpose it serves other than meeting some FAR on
reporting youself appropriately and that need might be better served
through some other means than a radio call. Secondly, I'm not sure why
you'd hang out above 18k long enough to make the call before decending
via spoilers, but I guess it could happen. I think I'd be too busy
flying the airplane.

The airmanship point bears repeating in this case and in general.
Whenever you are flying near a limit (controlled airspace, Vne, severe
weather, terrain!) you need to exercise extra caution and presume that
conditions outside your control (lift, sink, gusts) could conspire
against you in the least favorable possible ways. I have seen many
people fly under these circumstances assuming that those conditions
will remain within (or close to) the ranges they have personally
experienced - I think it is prudent to assume something much less
favorable and keep margins appropriate to those assumptions. This
applies as much to assumptions about expected sink on final glide and
it does to assumptions about lift near 18,000'. One needs to be very
cautious about watching climb rate when above 17,000', particularly if
carrying any significant energy in the form of airspeed.

9B


What part of the word "mid-air" don't you understand?

Following your logic the other principals of airmanship a

5. Don't navigate.
6. Don't communicate.

This guy was already stabilized, in control and in no immediate danger
of breaking up. Although he was, in my opinion, foolish to be flying
at Vne to begin with. He could have easily contacted Reno Approach w/o
compromising his safety. I just don't get your guy's logic; apparently
it is "We don't talk to controllers under any circumstances".

Let me be very clear: entering controlled airspace w/o clearance
endangers other people's lives. PERIOD. To think that this is just
some FAR technicality that you do if you feel like it is beyond me. If
you don't think you are willing or able to follow FARs you should STAY
ON THE GROUND! Remember, this is a priviledge that can be revoked.

Tom Seim

On Jan 8, 2:26*pm, wrote:
On Jan 8, 8:15*am, wrote:





On Jan 2, 10:10*am, J a c k wrote:

...the best course of action involves doing the right pilot-thing NOW,
declaring an emergency as soon as possible, and filing an ASRS report
promptly after the flight.

I would add a few points to amplify this basically sound logic:

1) Fly the airplane
2) Fly the airplane
3) Fly the airplane

If you need to go into controlled airspace without permission to
prevent destruction of your airplane and yourself, do not hesitate. Do
what you need to do to get back to a safe flying condition. If you get
back down bellow 18k promptly it might make sense to call ATC, but I'm
not sure what real purpose it serves other than meeting some FAR on
reporting youself appropriately and that need might be better served
through some other means than a radio call. Secondly, I'm not sure why
you'd hang out above 18k long enough to make the call before decending
via spoilers, but I guess it could happen. I think I'd be too busy
flying the airplane.

The airmanship point bears repeating in this case and in general.
Whenever you are flying near a limit (controlled airspace, Vne, severe
weather, terrain!) you need to exercise extra caution and presume that
conditions outside your control (lift, sink, gusts) could conspire
against you in the least favorable possible ways. I have seen many
people fly under these circumstances assuming that those conditions
will remain within (or close to) the ranges they have personally
experienced - I think it is prudent to assume something much less
favorable and keep margins appropriate to those assumptions. This
applies as much to assumptions about expected sink on final glide and
it does to assumptions about lift near 18,000'. One needs to be very
cautious about watching climb rate when above 17,000', particularly if
carrying any significant energy in the form of airspeed.

9B

What part of the word "mid-air" don't you understand?

Following your logic the other principals of airmanship a

5. Don't navigate.
6. Don't communicate.

This guy was already stabilized, in control and in no immediate danger
of breaking up. Although he was, in my opinion, foolish to be flying
at Vne to begin with. He could have easily contacted Reno Approach w/o
compromising his safety. I just don't get your guy's logic; apparently
it is "We don't talk to controllers under any circumstances".

Let me be very clear: entering controlled airspace w/o clearance
endangers other people's lives. PERIOD. To think that this is just
some FAR technicality that you do if you feel like it is beyond me. If
you don't think you are willing or able to follow FARs you should STAY
ON THE GROUND! Remember, this is a priviledge that can be revoked.

Tom Seim- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Oh Tom - you are such a grumpy fellow.

I've got nothing against navigating and communicating - I do it all
the time. I think most of the people on this thread feel the same way.
I just think they are irrelevant if you don't fly the airplane first
which it the number one risk factor in Dave's scenario. It's not like
18,000 is broken to overcast with aluminum even around Reno.

Secondly, if you do the math, a pullup from Vne to spoiler speed and
back down takes aboiut a minute, unless you fart around before you pop
the boards. If I'm at Vne and rising at altitude with an uncertain
flutter margin the last thing I want to do is get my chart out, find
the ATC freq, call them up, go back and forth as they sort out who I
am and, if I have a trasponder, give me and ident code so they can
find me and give me traffic advisories. I'm in all likelihood back
below 18,000' before they even can figure it all out and do anything
to help me. Simple.

Now, if you are already talking to them for some other reason or have
a transponder, then they already know where you are and have already
routed trafffic to avoid you. Believe it or not, the controllers don't
make a sport out of seeing how close the can fly traffic together, so
they'll give gliders a pretty good clearance form traffic.BUT, if you
are already talking to them it makes sense to let them know if you are
doing something unexpected. I'd just fly the airplane first because
the risk of breaking the airplane in my judgement far exceeds the risk
of a midair.

I am prepared for your next personal attack.

9B

On Jan 8, 5:40*pm, wrote:
On Jan 8, 2:26*pm, wrote:





On Jan 8, 8:15*am, wrote:

On Jan 2, 10:10*am, J a c k wrote:

...the best course of action involves doing the right pilot-thing NOW,
declaring an emergency as soon as possible, and filing an ASRS report
promptly after the flight.

I would add a few points to amplify this basically sound logic:

1) Fly the airplane
2) Fly the airplane
3) Fly the airplane

If you need to go into controlled airspace without permission to
prevent destruction of your airplane and yourself, do not hesitate. Do
what you need to do to get back to a safe flying condition. If you get
back down bellow 18k promptly it might make sense to call ATC, but I'm
not sure what real purpose it serves other than meeting some FAR on
reporting youself appropriately and that need might be better served
through some other means than a radio call. Secondly, I'm not sure why
you'd hang out above 18k long enough to make the call before decending
via spoilers, but I guess it could happen. I think I'd be too busy
flying the airplane.

The airmanship point bears repeating in this case and in general.
Whenever you are flying near a limit (controlled airspace, Vne, severe
weather, terrain!) you need to exercise extra caution and presume that
conditions outside your control (lift, sink, gusts) could conspire
against you in the least favorable possible ways. I have seen many
people fly under these circumstances assuming that those conditions
will remain within (or close to) the ranges they have personally
experienced - I think it is prudent to assume something much less
favorable and keep margins appropriate to those assumptions. This
applies as much to assumptions about expected sink on final glide and
it does to assumptions about lift near 18,000'. One needs to be very
cautious about watching climb rate when above 17,000', particularly if
carrying any significant energy in the form of airspeed.

9B

What part of the word "mid-air" don't you understand?

Following your logic the other principals of airmanship a

5. Don't navigate.
6. Don't communicate.

This guy was already stabilized, in control and in no immediate danger
of breaking up. Although he was, in my opinion, foolish to be flying
at Vne to begin with. He could have easily contacted Reno Approach w/o
compromising his safety. I just don't get your guy's logic; apparently
it is "We don't talk to controllers under any circumstances".

Let me be very clear: entering controlled airspace w/o clearance
endangers other people's lives. PERIOD. To think that this is just
some FAR technicality that you do if you feel like it is beyond me. If
you don't think you are willing or able to follow FARs you should STAY
ON THE GROUND! Remember, this is a priviledge that can be revoked.

Tom Seim- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Oh Tom - you are such a grumpy fellow.

I've got nothing against navigating and communicating - I do it all
the time. I think most of the people on this thread feel the same way.
I just think they are irrelevant if you don't fly the airplane first
which it the number one risk factor in Dave's scenario. It's not like
18,000 is broken to overcast with aluminum even around Reno.

Secondly, if you do the math, a pullup from Vne to spoiler speed and
back down takes aboiut a minute, unless you fart around before you pop
the boards. If I'm at Vne and rising at altitude with an uncertain
flutter margin the last thing I want to do is get my chart out, find
the ATC freq, call them up, go back and forth as they sort out who I
am and, if I have a trasponder, give me and ident code so they can
find me and give me traffic advisories. I'm in all likelihood back
below 18,000' before they even can figure it all out and do anything
to help me. Simple.

Now, if you are already talking to them for some other reason or have
a transponder, then they already know where you are and have already
routed trafffic to avoid you. Believe it or not, the controllers don't
make a sport out of seeing how close the can fly traffic together, so
they'll give gliders a pretty good clearance form traffic.BUT, if you
are already talking to them it makes sense to let them know if you are
doing something unexpected. I'd just fly the airplane first because
the risk of breaking the airplane in my judgement far exceeds the risk
of a midair.

I am prepared for your next personal attack.

9B- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It was you who removed the navigate and communicate from the
aforementioned list, not me. This certainly does imply you have
something against communicating. Busting class A by 1K ft is a BIG
deal - you have NO IDEA where the other a/c are around you.

What is distressing to me is the whole issue could be made moot by a
simple - a short - communication with ATC. Yet all I got from you and
your ilk is how much of a drag it is to talk to those guys.

This IS endangering other people - your trying to minimize that fact
will NOT change it.

Now, go ahead, tell me how safe it is to fly around class A w/o
authorization - I am ready!

Tom

On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 17:40:06 -0800 (PST), wrote:



Secondly, if you do the math, a pullup from Vne to spoiler speed and
back down takes aboiut a minute,

Just a technical question:
In all the gliders I've flown so far Vne is identical to spoiler speed
(read: You can extend the spoilers up to Vne).

Do there really gliders exist where the spoilers cannot be operated up
to Vne?


Bye
Andreas

Andreas Maurer wrote:

Just a technical question:
In all the gliders I've flown so far Vne is identical to spoiler speed
(read: You can extend the spoilers up to Vne).

Do there really gliders exist where the spoilers cannot be operated up
to Vne?

I wouldn't say 'cannot', but on my DG1000 the brakes are hard to get on
and off the overcenter lock at high speed. Due to wing flex I expect. Hard
enough that I have done a high speed final glide holding the brakes closed
because I couldn't get them locked. 'High speed' would be something over
100 knots.

I noticed the same thing in a Libelle 201 when I tried using the brakes
at high speed.

--
Philip Plane _____
|
---------------( )---------------
Glider pilots have no visible means of support

Philip Plane wrote:

I noticed the same thing in a Libelle 201 when I tried using the brakes
at high speed.

Out of curiosity, do you remember the speed at which you tried that?

The fastest I've opened them to date was 70 kts. Mine's a 201 (not B
series). They opened as easily as usual (mine has a pretty fierce over
center even when stationary) but the deceleration was immediately
noticeable - I thought that wasn't bad at all for a glider thats famous
for having weak brakes!


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

Martin Gregorie wrote:

I noticed the same thing in a Libelle 201 when I tried using the brakes
at high speed.

Out of curiosity, do you remember the speed at which you tried that?

The fastest I've opened them to date was 70 kts. Mine's a 201 (not B
series). They opened as easily as usual (mine has a pretty fierce over
center even when stationary) but the deceleration was immediately
noticeable - I thought that wasn't bad at all for a glider thats famous
for having weak brakes!

I tried at 80 and 100 knots. 80 was OK, but 100 was stiff enough to
require a serious pull that made it difficult to not snatch the brakes
open. I didn't try any faster.

On the opposite side, I like Duo Discus brakes. They can be operated
at high speed with a little care.

--
Philip Plane _____
|
---------------( )---------------
Glider pilots have no visible means of support

Philip Plane wrote:
Martin Gregorie wrote:

I noticed the same thing in a Libelle 201 when I tried using the brakes
at high speed.

Out of curiosity, do you remember the speed at which you tried that?

The fastest I've opened them to date was 70 kts. Mine's a 201 (not B
series). They opened as easily as usual (mine has a pretty fierce over
center even when stationary) but the deceleration was immediately
noticeable - I thought that wasn't bad at all for a glider thats famous
for having weak brakes!

I tried at 80 and 100 knots. 80 was OK, but 100 was stiff enough to
require a serious pull that made it difficult to not snatch the brakes
open. I didn't try any faster.

Thanks for the information.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

Philip Plane wrote:

I wouldn't say 'cannot', but on my DG1000 the brakes are hard to get on
and off the overcenter lock at high speed. Due to wing flex I expect. Hard
enough that I have done a high speed final glide holding the brakes closed
because I couldn't get them locked. 'High speed' would be something over
100 knots.

I noticed the same thing in a Libelle 201 when I tried using the brakes
at high speed.


So all of that begs the question, "Did you reduce the load on the wings
momentarily in order to reduce the flex, and therefor lighten the force
necessary to change your configuration?"

This stuff _may_ be rocket science, I wouldn't know--never having been
in a rocket.


Jack

J a c k wrote:

So all of that begs the question, "Did you reduce the load on the wings
momentarily in order to reduce the flex, and therefor lighten the force
necessary to change your configuration?"

This stuff _may_ be rocket science, I wouldn't know--never having been
in a rocket.

When I played around to test the loads I flew straight and steady in
smoothish conditions.

When I descended the DG1000 from the wave through the rotor and low
level turbulence the wings flexed both ways. It didn't make it any
easier to lock the brakes.

--
Philip Plane _____
|
---------------( )---------------
Glider pilots have no visible means of support