Andes accident

On Nov 29, 2:52*am, Ramy wrote:
On Nov 24, 7:09*am, jcarlyle wrote:





He was lucky! Sounds like he should consider buying a PLB, just in
case.

-John

On Nov 24, 10:02 am, Juanman wrote:

Jose Auil, a pilot flying a Discus BT out of the Vitacura airport in
Santiago, Chile, went missing over the Andes on Sunday afternoon. * An
intensive search was carried out for three days and this morning the
wreck was found in the mountains, with the cabin intact. *There was a
note saying: "I'm fine. *I'm going down river". *He has been found
this morning in good shape! *Missing Chileans, whether miners or
glider pilots are quite lucky...

http://www.latercera.com/noticia/por...ncuent....Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Glad they found the pilot well and alive. I am curious how much his
rescue cost vs the $150 cost of a Spot and who is going to pay the
bill. Not to mention the risk invloved in a rescue operation. Couple
more days and it would have been his life vs a $150 Spot. I am puzzled
that anyone still flies XC without a Spot or a PLB. Enough said.

Ramy

Just curious, how could the spot have prevented the cost of the
rescue? Wouldnt they have sent rescue crew anyway?

Thanks
Tom

On Dec 6, 12:22*pm, tstock wrote:
On Nov 29, 2:52*am, Ramy wrote:





On Nov 24, 7:09*am, jcarlyle wrote:

He was lucky! Sounds like he should consider buying a PLB, just in
case.

-John

On Nov 24, 10:02 am, Juanman wrote:

Jose Auil, a pilot flying a Discus BT out of the Vitacura airport in
Santiago, Chile, went missing over the Andes on Sunday afternoon. * An
intensive search was carried out for three days and this morning the
wreck was found in the mountains, with the cabin intact. *There was a
note saying: "I'm fine. *I'm going down river". *He has been found
this morning in good shape! *Missing Chileans, whether miners or
glider pilots are quite lucky...

http://www.latercera.com/noticia/por...cuent...quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Glad they found the pilot well and alive. I am curious how much his
rescue cost vs the $150 cost of a Spot and who is going to pay the
bill. Not to mention the risk invloved in a rescue operation. Couple
more days and it would have been his life vs a $150 Spot. I am puzzled
that anyone still flies XC without a Spot or a PLB. Enough said.

Ramy

Just curious, how could the spot have prevented the cost of the
rescue? *Wouldnt they have sent rescue crew anyway?

Thanks
Tom- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's easy. A single aircraft could have been dispatched to the exact
location. They would not have had multiple aircraft flying search
patterns. A huge savings in man-hours, equipment, fuel, etc.

On Dec 6, 11:12*am, Westbender wrote:
On Dec 6, 12:22*pm, tstock wrote:





On Nov 29, 2:52*am, Ramy wrote:

On Nov 24, 7:09*am, jcarlyle wrote:

He was lucky! Sounds like he should consider buying a PLB, just in
case.

-John

On Nov 24, 10:02 am, Juanman wrote:

Jose Auil, a pilot flying a Discus BT out of the Vitacura airport in
Santiago, Chile, went missing over the Andes on Sunday afternoon. * An
intensive search was carried out for three days and this morning the
wreck was found in the mountains, with the cabin intact. *There was a
note saying: "I'm fine. *I'm going down river". *He has been found
this morning in good shape! *Missing Chileans, whether miners or
glider pilots are quite lucky...

http://www.latercera.com/noticia/por...encuent...text -

- Show quoted text -

Glad they found the pilot well and alive. I am curious how much his
rescue cost vs the $150 cost of a Spot and who is going to pay the
bill. Not to mention the risk invloved in a rescue operation. Couple
more days and it would have been his life vs a $150 Spot. I am puzzled
that anyone still flies XC without a Spot or a PLB. Enough said.

Ramy

Just curious, how could the spot have prevented the cost of the
rescue? *Wouldnt they have sent rescue crew anyway?

Thanks
Tom- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's easy. A single aircraft could have been dispatched to the exact
location. They would not have had multiple aircraft flying search
patterns. A huge savings in man-hours, equipment, fuel, etc.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Spot also offers a form of 'rescue insurance' that covers up to
$100,000.00 for $12.95/year.

This presents an interesting question regarding survival training and being at least minimally equipped.

I am a former combat aircrewman and went thru all the USAF aircrew survival schools. Water survival, jungle survival, escape and evasion school, arctic survival and others. The parachute most of us wore had a minimal survival kit within and we wore vests with a rather substantial amount of gear, radio, medical kit, signal panels, flares, knife, gun and the like. A SPOT, a space blanket, firestarter and a few other items would make sense to have and not add much weight. Strong Parachute makes a pocket for my 303 back which can be used to carry a few necessary survival items. It's not what you have in the glider but what you have with you when you hit the ground that counts. You might be able to have a few more items in a pouch in the plane but if you bail that stuff won't be of much use.

Regarding the parachute, I wince when I see most people put on their chute. There have been some good articles in the SSA magazine about proper fit and usage, these deserve to be read and reread. Getting out of a glider out of control would be difficult at best, it's something that needs to be practiced on the ground. Canopy, belts, butt.

Even with the SPOT they might not be able to get to you right away due to weather, etc. We spend lots of time learning to fly, navigate and the like. Perhaps those among us who are serious about flying might consider attending a survival course of some type. Knowledge is the greatest asset when the ship hits the sand.

Walt

On 12/7/2010 5:30 AM, Walt Connelly wrote:
This presents an interesting question regarding survival training and

Regarding the parachute, I wince when I see most people put on their
chute. There have been some good articles in the SSA magazine about
proper fit and usage, these deserve to be read and reread. Getting
out of a glider out of control would be difficult at best, it's
something that needs to be practiced on the ground. Canopy, belts,
butt.

Even with the SPOT they might not be able to get to you right away due
to weather, etc. We spend lots of time learning to fly, navigate and the
like. Perhaps those among us who are serious about flying might
consider attending a survival course of some type. Knowledge is the
greatest asset when the ship hits the sand.

In 35 years of soaring, I can't ever remember an incident in the USA
where we stood around saying, "if only he'd had some survival gear..."

I carry about 5 lbs of stuff, but have never come close to needing it,
and I've flown all over the country. I know people that have been saved
by their parachute, but not anyone ever needing anything beyond a jacket
and lots of water after landing. Do I just have a poor memory, or is
this an infinitesimal risk?

One thing surprised me about the Andes incident: he left the aircraft. I
thought the standard cautions was "stay with the aircraft, because it's
easier to locate". Or is that just a USA thing?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)

On 12/7/2010 10:10 PM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 12/7/2010 5:30 AM, Walt Connelly wrote:
This presents an interesting question regarding survival training and

Regarding the parachute, I wince when I see most people put on their
chute. There have been some good articles in the SSA magazine about
proper fit and usage, these deserve to be read and reread. Getting
out of a glider out of control would be difficult at best, it's
something that needs to be practiced on the ground. Canopy, belts,
butt.

Even with the SPOT they might not be able to get to you right away due
to weather, etc. We spend lots of time learning to fly, navigate and the
like. Perhaps those among us who are serious about flying might
consider attending a survival course of some type. Knowledge is the
greatest asset when the ship hits the sand.

In 35 years of soaring, I can't ever remember an incident in the USA
where we stood around saying, "if only he'd had some survival gear..."

I carry about 5 lbs of stuff, but have never come close to needing it,
and I've flown all over the country. I know people that have been saved
by their parachute, but not anyone ever needing anything beyond a jacket
and lots of water after landing. Do I just have a poor memory, or is
this an infinitesimal risk?

One thing surprised me about the Andes incident: he left the aircraft. I
thought the standard cautions was "stay with the aircraft, because it's
easier to locate". Or is that just a USA thing?


He left a note with the plane indicating exactly where he was going.
That was probably not a bad plan if he was in good physical condition,
thought he knew where he could find help (downstream), and was unsure of
how long it would take for someone to find the plane.

--
Mike Schumann

On Dec 7, 8:10*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
One thing surprised me about the Andes incident: he left the aircraft. I
thought the standard cautions was "stay with the aircraft, because it's
easier to locate". Or is that just a USA thing?

White glider in snow is probably no easier to spot than a person with
contrasting color clothing but it does provide shelter. If may also
may have disposable bits that would burn making lots of smoke. One
advantage of flying a 15/18m glider. First burn the winglets, then
the outer panels, then the hozizontal. If that didn't attract
attention you'd probably want to die anyway.

Never tried it though and have no idea how hard it would be to get one
burning and keep it burning. The oxygen bottle should help.

Andy

On Dec 8, 8:03*am, Andy wrote:
On Dec 7, 8:10*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:

One thing surprised me about the Andes incident: he left the aircraft. I
thought the standard cautions was "stay with the aircraft, because it's
easier to locate". Or is that just a USA thing?

White glider in snow is probably no easier to spot than a person with
contrasting color clothing but it does provide shelter. *If may also
may have disposable bits that would burn making lots of smoke. *One
advantage of flying a 15/18m glider. *First burn the winglets, then
the outer panels, then the hozizontal. *If that didn't attract
attention you'd probably want to die anyway.

Never tried it though and have no idea how hard it would be to get one
burning and keep it burning. The oxygen bottle should help.

Andy

Great ideas, hopefully I will never need to use them...
Still, I rather pay $150 per year for spot service and press the 911/
sos button than start burning my glider...

Ramy

On Dec 8, 2:41*pm, Ramy wrote:
On Dec 8, 8:03*am, Andy wrote:





On Dec 7, 8:10*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:

One thing surprised me about the Andes incident: he left the aircraft.. I
thought the standard cautions was "stay with the aircraft, because it's
easier to locate". Or is that just a USA thing?

White glider in snow is probably no easier to spot than a person with
contrasting color clothing but it does provide shelter. *If may also
may have disposable bits that would burn making lots of smoke. *One
advantage of flying a 15/18m glider. *First burn the winglets, then
the outer panels, then the hozizontal. *If that didn't attract
attention you'd probably want to die anyway.

Never tried it though and have no idea how hard it would be to get one
burning and keep it burning. The oxygen bottle should help.

Andy

Great ideas, hopefully I will never need to use them...
Still, I rather pay $150 per year for spot service and press the 911/
sos button than start burning my glider...

Ramy- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hmmmm. If the glider is totally wrecked, then I suppose burning it
wouldn't break your hear any more than it is already. In that
case.... burning the tire will produce an enormous amount of very
black smoke. Do step away from the wreckage though, many of our
wheels are magnesium, and burn spectacularly once ignited!

On Wed, 08 Dec 2010 08:03:04 -0800, Andy wrote:

White glider in snow is probably no easier to spot than a person with
contrasting color clothing but it does provide shelter.

The glider is most likely harder to spot than a person in reasonable
colourful clothes.

I remember being in the circuit at Nympsfield in a K-13 behind a Nimbus 3
one year when there was an even 3" layer of snow on the field under a
nice blue sky and a fabulous view of the Welsh mountains. We were
following an all white Nimbus round the circuit and on the base leg the
instructor asked where I was planning to land. When I said "To the left
of the Nimbus" he replied "Good plan". The Nimbus landed as we were
turning onto finals and completely vanished as soon as it stopped
rolling. I said "I've lost the Nimbus" and a comforting "So have I" came
from the back seat, but when we too stopped we were well clear of it.

Lesson learned: white gliders are visible while they're moving but once
they stop you can't see them.


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