2 recent incidents

On Jun 27, 8:31*am, jb92563 wrote:
On Jun 25, 4:17*pm, Ramy wrote:

Two recent incidents which all sounds too familiar and we can all
learn from them:

1 - Another spoilers out/rudder waggle resulting in premature release
- How many more of those we need till we conclude that the rudder
waggle does NOT work? What happened to radio communication?http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?e...03X00777&key=1

2 - Another restricted control due to unsecured item. I bet this
caused more accidents then we know of.http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?e...06X00809&key=1

Ramy

With all the options available I just think that releasing on a wrong
signal is due to stress, loss of concentration and wanting to react by
rote instead of reasoning out the situation and problem that may
exist.

As we know taking a little time to figure out what is going on is OK
since the TOW plane can likely release you at will if things get
critical for him.

Even when I see a wing rock I quickly evaluate if there is a problem
before deciding to release, ie airspeed, climb rate, hazards, spoilers
etc so I can decide for myself if it was turbulence or truly a wing
rock.

The tow pilots have all confirmed that if they had a serious issue
they would release me even without a wing rock if they needed to.

I think using all options on hand to communicate is a great idea and
the radio is a pretty good way to transmit a message, then of course
you should use what ever you have at your disposal.

Again I simply state that if a rudder wag meaning can be forgotten
then so can any other kind of signal so what could you use in its
place that people could more easily remember?

I suppose a scrolling LED sign like a billboard perhaps but that just
does not seem practical ;-)

Ray

I think it is pretty obvious why pilots keep making this mistake: The
tow plane is climbing poorly or not climbing at all. If the pilot
suspects something is wrong with his glider, he will surely look at
the spoiler and correct the mistake, then no rudder waggle is needed.
However rudder waggles happen when the glider pilot did not notice his
mistake by himself, which means he is sure that something is wrong
with the tow plane since the tow plane is not climbing as expected,
and as such is anticipating to be waved off, and releases instictively
the moment he sees the rudder waggle... This type of premature release
is much worse then a rope break, since the spoiler are extended and
200 feet wouldn't be anought to trun around or even make it to any
landable place!
I think the only solution is mandatory operating radios in both glider
and tow plane and always make a radio check before take off. Even if
the frequency is busy at the moment, I think there is a good chance
the transmission will be heard due to the close proximity of the tow
plane and glider.

Ramy

At 20:49 27 June 2008, Bill Daniels wrote:
Yes, glider pilots SHOULD know the rudder wag signal by heart but....

Typical training scenario: Instructor has arranged with tuggie to wag
rudder at a safe altitude so the student can actually see it happen.
Instructor then asks student to describe towplane signals which he does
accurately. At 1500'AGL the tug rudder wags as requested and the
student
releases instead of checking glider.

Instructor: Why did you do that? What were you supposed to do?
Student *%&^$$$

Repeat above approximately three times.

Bill D



"ZZ" wrote in message
om...
Ramy wrote:
On Jun 26, 5:47 pm, ZZ wrote:
Ramy wrote:
Two recent incidents which all sounds too familiar and we can all
learn from them:
1 - Another spoilers out/rudder waggle resulting in premature
release
- How many more of those we need till we conclude that the rudder
waggle does NOT work? What happened to radio communication?
http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?e...03X00777&key=1
2 - Another restricted control due to unsecured item. I bet this
caused more accidents then we know of.
http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?e...06X00809&key=1
Ramy
I favor the rudder waggle because it works IF the pilot is and
remains
properly
trained.
I was not involved in this pilot's training and I did not witness
the accident but I spoke to the involved pilot within 2 hours of the
event. This pilot, with a Commercial Glider certificate, admitted
that

he
misinterpreted the rudder waggle (confused it with the rock off).
This
seems to be a common
mistake in our sport. It is likely that on the day that he received
his
Commercial Glider rating he would not have made this error but
subsequent training, the Flight Review, plus his own personal
endeavors
to remain current, if any, clearly failed.

The only mandatory review of these procedures is the flight review.
I
have begun a personal vendetta against this problem not only in
training
new glider pilots but during all Flight Reviews. I urge all CFIGs to
emphasize this problem and I offer a couple of suggestions...

1. During the oral, instead of discussing the check glider
signal and
the rock off separately, I treat them as a pair of similar signals
which must be considered together to appreciate the distinction
between
them.
2. Just as we tell our students that a rope break or rock off

can
happen on any flight, I stress that a check glider signal
can also
occur on any flight and to be ready for all three on every launch.
3. Show the student both signals on the same flight. I
instruct
the tow
pilot to show the check glider signal at a safe altitude so if
the
student releases by mistake, the recovery is not difficult. Then on
the
same flight, the tow pilot rocks the glider off just below the
planned
release altitude. Feedback from the students and pilots in for a BFR
has
been positive, most stating that seeing both on the
same
flight really
underscored the difference for them.

These simple ideas are not revolutionary and you fellow CFIGS are
probably doing this routinely now. I think if we all work a little
harder on this one, I suspect we can make a serious contribution in
lowering the incidence of this problem.

Cheers,

Paul Corbett
ZZ

Since you know the details of this incident, any ideas if there was
an
attempt to use the radio first and if it was neccessary to waggle the
rudder at low altitude? Or are we just going to continue blame pilots
who missinterpret the signal?


Ramy

Ramy:

Good question. There was no radio in the glider. It was a warm
afternoon

at 4200 feet with light winds. The Pawnee had just been refueled. The
tow
plane was achieving less than 50 F/M into slightly rising terrain when
he
used the Check Glider signal.

Regarding blaming the glider pilot who misinterprets the signal...WHO
else
should be blamed? Both signals were establish in advance for a reason.
You
can bet that any tow pilot who values his skin knows the TWO signals
which
may save his life. Isn't it reasonable to expect that the glider pilot

should also know and retain these signals as well? There are only TWO.
I

applaud this tow pilot for having the cool for using the signal when he

did...he could have fed the glider pilot the rope. To be clear, I am
not

siding with tow pilots here nor am I trying to hammer this glider
pilot.
I
really want to focus on the training and especially the recurrent
training.

That why I advocate that if glider pilots see both often enough, they
are
less likely to confuse them.

Is every 24 calendar months often enough?

(Caps used for emphasis here.. I'm really not yelling.)

Regards,

Paul
ZZ

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:17:18 -0700, Ramy wrote:

There is more to be learnt from the other incident:

2 - Another restricted control due to unsecured item. I bet this caused
more accidents then we know of.
http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?e...06X00809&key=1

quote
The glider pilot stated that he "could not push the stick all the way
forward to lower the nose" and the glider continued to climb out of tow
position ... The pilot selected full nose down trim, in response to his
limited pitch control.
/quote

On gliders with a tab trimmer on the elevator, like the K13 in this
incident, full NOSE UP trim will actually give you more "elevator down"
authority, nose down trim will make things worse.

The trim tab moves down when you trim nose up. With the elevator as far
down as the obstruction would let it go, nose up trim up would make the
trim tab go down a little further.

A more common use of this phenomenon is when you are doing spin training
with a heavy pilot in the front seat. If you trim full forward you a
little more elevator up authority which makes it a little easier to get
the glider to enter a spin.

Ian

I always warn the tug pilot that I will open the airbrakes at an agreed
height. When the P2 notices the handle moving and the brakes coming out, I
tell him to watch the tug & stay in position.

When the tug gives the rudder signal, the pilot knows the airbrakes are
open and learns to associate the signal with the (likely) problem. He also
learns the need to close the brakes gradually rather than slam them shut.

I also ask the tug to wave us off at 100' lower than than the P2's
expected release height and I expect the student to release immediately.

I do this on every annual check that I'm asked to give. Failure to
recognise and act appropriately to a signal is reason for further
training. I've never had to fly more than two flights with anyone.

Edward

At 20:49 27 June 2008, Bill Daniels wrote:
Yes, glider pilots SHOULD know the rudder wag signal by heart but....

Typical training scenario: Instructor has arranged with tuggie to wag
rudder at a safe altitude so the student can actually see it happen.
Instructor then asks student to describe towplane signals which he does
accurately. At 1500'AGL the tug rudder wags as requested and the
student
releases instead of checking glider.

Instructor: Why did you do that? What were you supposed to do?
Student *%&^$$$

Repeat above approximately three times.

Bill D



"ZZ" wrote in message
om...
Ramy wrote:
On Jun 26, 5:47 pm, ZZ wrote:
Ramy wrote:
Two recent incidents which all sounds too familiar and we can all
learn from them:
1 - Another spoilers out/rudder waggle resulting in premature
release
- How many more of those we need till we conclude that the rudder
waggle does NOT work? What happened to radio communication?
http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?e...03X00777&key=1
2 - Another restricted control due to unsecured item. I bet this
caused more accidents then we know of.
http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?e...06X00809&key=1
Ramy
I favor the rudder waggle because it works IF the pilot is and
remains
properly
trained.
I was not involved in this pilot's training and I did not witness
the accident but I spoke to the involved pilot within 2 hours of the
event. This pilot, with a Commercial Glider certificate, admitted
that

he
misinterpreted the rudder waggle (confused it with the rock off).
This
seems to be a common
mistake in our sport. It is likely that on the day that he received
his
Commercial Glider rating he would not have made this error but
subsequent training, the Flight Review, plus his own personal
endeavors
to remain current, if any, clearly failed.

The only mandatory review of these procedures is the flight review.
I
have begun a personal vendetta against this problem not only in
training
new glider pilots but during all Flight Reviews. I urge all CFIGs to
emphasize this problem and I offer a couple of suggestions...

1. During the oral, instead of discussing the check glider
signal and
the rock off separately, I treat them as a pair of similar signals
which must be considered together to appreciate the distinction
between
them.
2. Just as we tell our students that a rope break or rock off

can
happen on any flight, I stress that a check glider signal
can also
occur on any flight and to be ready for all three on every launch.
3. Show the student both signals on the same flight. I
instruct
the tow
pilot to show the check glider signal at a safe altitude so if
the
student releases by mistake, the recovery is not difficult. Then on
the
same flight, the tow pilot rocks the glider off just below the
planned
release altitude. Feedback from the students and pilots in for a BFR
has
been positive, most stating that seeing both on the
same
flight really
underscored the difference for them.

These simple ideas are not revolutionary and you fellow CFIGS are
probably doing this routinely now. I think if we all work a little
harder on this one, I suspect we can make a serious contribution in
lowering the incidence of this problem.

Cheers,

Paul Corbett
ZZ

Since you know the details of this incident, any ideas if there was
an
attempt to use the radio first and if it was neccessary to waggle the
rudder at low altitude? Or are we just going to continue blame pilots
who missinterpret the signal?


Ramy

Ramy:

Good question. There was no radio in the glider. It was a warm
afternoon

at 4200 feet with light winds. The Pawnee had just been refueled. The
tow
plane was achieving less than 50 F/M into slightly rising terrain when
he
used the Check Glider signal.

Regarding blaming the glider pilot who misinterprets the signal...WHO
else
should be blamed? Both signals were establish in advance for a reason.
You
can bet that any tow pilot who values his skin knows the TWO signals
which
may save his life. Isn't it reasonable to expect that the glider pilot

should also know and retain these signals as well? There are only TWO.
I

applaud this tow pilot for having the cool for using the signal when he

did...he could have fed the glider pilot the rope. To be clear, I am
not

siding with tow pilots here nor am I trying to hammer this glider
pilot.
I
really want to focus on the training and especially the recurrent
training.

That why I advocate that if glider pilots see both often enough, they
are
less likely to confuse them.

Is every 24 calendar months often enough?

(Caps used for emphasis here.. I'm really not yelling.)

Regards,

Paul
ZZ

At 15:31 27 June 2008, jb92563 wrote:

The tow pilots have all confirmed that if they had a serious issue
they would release me even without a wing rock if they needed to.

Which is a perfectly reasonable attitude, and just what I'd
expect. It leaves me with another question, though, for
the towpilots:

Why would you *ever* rock the wings when you want the
glider off, and right away? The only reason I can guess is
to save the rope, which seems like a pretty minor item
when the going gets tough.

I've asked a few tow pilots about this. Some of them said
the hell with the wing rock, they're just going to drop the
rope. One said that if he had time, he would rock the wings
as his left hand was reaching for the rope drop lever, but
the rope was probably going to go anyway.

Other options?

Jim Beckman

At 12:27 28 June 2008, Jim Beckman wrote:
At 15:31 27 June 2008, jb92563 wrote:

The tow pilots have all confirmed that if they had a serious issue
they would release me even without a wing rock if they needed to.

Which is a perfectly reasonable attitude, and just what I'd
expect. It leaves me with another question, though, for
the towpilots:

Why would you *ever* rock the wings when you want the
glider off, and right away? The only reason I can guess is
to save the rope, which seems like a pretty minor item
when the going gets tough.

I've asked a few tow pilots about this. Some of them said
the hell with the wing rock, they're just going to drop the
rope. One said that if he had time, he would rock the wings
as his left hand was reaching for the rope drop lever, but
the rope was probably going to go anyway.

Other options?

Jim Beckman



As soon as a serious problem (engine, airframe, out-of-position, etc.)
became evident, I would expect most tug pilots to dump the rope ASAP.

If someone took a launch at our Club with their airbrakes unlocked, they
would be dumped on the ground if it was evident (we specifically check in

the mirror on the roll for this). In the air, if the tug could maintain a
safe
airspeed & rate-of-climb, the tow would continue until the glider was in a

position where it could make a straight-in to the airfield with full
airbrake. If
the tug pilot was in any doubt, the glider would be dumped.

We will 'wave off' gliders if there is time/space to do so but will
_not_ use
the 'rudder waggle' signal as it is a) easily missed/misinterpreted by a

stressed glider pilot and b) more importantly, booting the rudder around
at
low height, low airspeed and high AoA is not terribly clever.

There are complications with using the radio to warn of configuration
problems with gliders. At altitude, fine. At low level (which will
probably be
the case with brakes out), it may mean the glider pilot taking his eyes
off
the tug and looking for the lever, which will be in an unfamiliar
(deployed)
position, then applying force to close it that may result in the stick
being
pulled back a bit as a reaction...

Our procedures are based on the (continued) non-recognition of a problem
from the glider end. The tug pilots will make every reasonable attempt to

correct this but will not endanger themselves in doing so. Having watched

incidents/accidents like this from the ground and the air, I am of the
opinion that even with prompting (signals, radio calls, undercarriage
warnings, etc.) the majority are too fixated to recognise what is wrong
until
they're on the ground and the stress levels are reducing.

On Jun 25, 8:07*pm, Gary Emerson wrote:
How many more of those we need till we conclude that the rudder

waggle does NOT work?

I think this is a reasonably valid point. *There HAVE been a number of
people who have misunderstood this signal.

Perhaps something else would be better. *The question is what signal
would be a good replacement. *You could have flashing lights on the
towplane, perhaps mounted just above the towhitch. *The only thing is
you'd probably have to install two lights. *Say one yellow and one red.

Yellow means you've got a problem, but if you can get it fixed pretty
quick we'll keep going. *Red means get off now or I'm gonna dump you.

If you don't have two signals, I'd bet that we'd still have people
releasing when they didn't have to.

As I think about it, it might be best if there was a single array of
high output LEDs. *When both "colors" of the array are "on" then you
have a single visible color that means "ok" (red and blue make green in
concept, but in emitted light that combination doesn't work). *That way
the glider pilot can verify at the start that both signals "work" and
they stay "on" for the duration of the tow. *If either the "warning" or
"get off" switches are selected in the cockpit then only the
corresponding "color" is then visible to the glider pilot. *Perhaps with
the "warning" being a steady signal and "get off" being a rapid flash to
help with fast recognition and a sense of urgency.

Other thoughts?

I don't know....

Our club drillsit in to us about the signals, has safety meetings
every year, and it just so happens I was behind the tow plane in a
2-22 several years ago when the Pawnee had an engine failure. We were
at 1800' AGL but I recognized the signal to release and did so... All
turned out OK. In that instance there was not a lot of time for radio-
comm, though I always listen to traffic while on tow and while in the
pattern.

I think learning the signals AND using radios offer the best way to
fly safe.

Pete Gaveras

Ramy wrote:

I think the only solution is mandatory operating radios in both glider
and tow plane and always make a radio check before take off. Even if
the frequency is busy at the moment, I think there is a good chance
the transmission will be heard due to the close proximity of the tow
plane and glider.

I like having radios in both aircraft, but there are also other options
for some pilots:

*DG owners can install factory approved Piggot hooks that will prevent
the spoilers from opening completely.

*Pilots with Experimentally licensed gliders may be able to install a
similar device on their glider.

*Other glider owners can install a "spoiler unlocked during takeoff"
warning system. I did this using my Cambridge 302, which will sound off
if the spoilers are unlocked as the speed goes above 20 knots during the
start of the launch. This is a good choice for self-launchers, since
there won't be a tow pilot to help them notice the problem.

*Pilots buying gliders can choose one that won't deploy the spoilers,
even if they are unlocked. The ASW 27 (and later Schleicher models, I
assume) has angled spoiler caps to achieve this, and I think Mosquito
style glide path control flaps will not open unless held open.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Gary Emerson wrote:

As I think about it, it might be best if there was a single array of
high output LEDs. When both "colors" of the array are "on" then you
have a single visible color that means "ok" (red and blue make green in
concept, but in emitted light that combination doesn't work). That way
the glider pilot can verify at the start that both signals "work" and
they stay "on" for the duration of the tow. If either the "warning" or
"get off" switches are selected in the cockpit then only the
corresponding "color" is then visible to the glider pilot. Perhaps with
the "warning" being a steady signal and "get off" being a rapid flash to
help with fast recognition and a sense of urgency.


Are glider pilots required to demonstrate accurate color vision?


Jack

I have heard some really good points about the rudder waggle issue.

- Rudder Waggle at low speed, high AoA is more dangerous for the tow
plane(Stall/Spin sound familiar?)
- New signals will be just as easy to forget or get confused.
- Radio use is a good idea although both pilots will be busy enough
unless they have a stick mounted transmit button with a boom mic.
- Training the glider pilot to use a pre take-off check list is smart.
- Training the pilot to recognise signals is also a good idea.
- Having aircraft designed that don't extend spoilers by air pressure/
suction when left unlocked.
- Having Tow hooks that prevent full spoiler deployment while on tow.
(You need a little spoiler somtimes to prevent line slack)
- Use Flaps instead of spoilers on gliders.

No solutions that solve all the issues have been suggested EXCEPT
train, Train, TRAIN and RE-TRAIN the glider pilots on this issue.

I dont like the idea of changing a system for something equally as
faulted because a few incidents have occured.

Its a people problem not a technical problem that we need to solve.

Any technical solution will still rely on the pilot and is prone to
fail at that point, be it the tow pilot flicking the right switch for
the appropriate light signals, or using a radio when the glider may
have forgotten to bring it or not charged the batteries sufficiently,
or changing the signal to something else and the confusion of the
change itself.

If there was a practical alternative that was trully less inherently
faulty then I would be all for it, but the only practicle solution
suggested so far is
Training.....

Ray