Texas Tragedy Info?

On Jun 18, 12:35*pm, wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2012 2:13:38 PM UTC-4, Ramy wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2012 10:54:30 AM UTC-7, cuflyer wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2012 9:37:03 AM UTC-4, Linwood wrote:
Anyone have any knowledge of the three fatality glider crash in Texas?
Glider type? Situation?

Linwood

Kid on his mother's lap - ? *Affecting control - ?
This is really ugly.

1FL

It was indeed the freaking tail dolly!!!
http://blog.chron.com/newswatch/2012...ash-under-inve...

Ramy

Nope- If the tail dolly was on, glider is still flyable. Most likely speculation on may part-#1 rule broken here which is FLY THE AIRPLANE.
I have seen a few tail dolly incidents or the years, and in every case, the pilot had to be told that the tail dolly was still on.
Other bad rule broken- NO unrestrained people in the glider- ever.
Terribly sad
UH

Probably true, but I've seen some monster Lark dollies which were so
heavy one person could barely lift them. Even with the CG in the
allowable range, the Twin Lark demands respect. It might not take
much weight on the tail boom for it to turn nasty.

This accident has all the earmarks of one which will drive changes to
the FAR's. The FAA has been grumbling for years the requirements to
get a Commercial-Glider or CFI-G are way too easy to meet. I think
fair warning is in order that we may see changes to Part 61.

My deepest sympathies go to the family and friends of the mother and
daughter.

Very sad, especially so on Father's Day and with three members of the
same family.

Some other links with photos and video.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-...-glider-crash/

http://www.khou.com/home/3-family-me...=y&c=y&c=y&c=y

In image 2 of 8 at the KHOU site the (orange) tail dolly is clearly
visible in a picture taken at what might have been very soon after the
accident.

- John

On Monday, June 18, 2012 4:23:39 PM UTC-6, JohnDeRosa wrote:
Very sad, especially so on Father's Day and with three members of the
same family.

Some other links with photos and video.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-...-glider-crash/

http://www.khou.com/home/3-family-me...=y&c=y&c=y&c=y

In image 2 of 8 at the KHOU site the (orange) tail dolly is clearly
visible in a picture taken at what might have been very soon after the
accident.

- John
Report verifying that the tail dolly was on the glider.
http://www.khou.com/news/local/Cause...159501035.html

If the tail dolly was left on the angle of attack on the ground run would
be less so it wouldnt lift off till a higher speed had been reached. Could
this have had any control effects on tow?
If the toddler was sitting on his mothers lap his feet would be straight
out in an ideal place to interfere with the stick. Bad bad idea.

On Jun 19, 9:35*am, Nigel Pocock wrote:
If the tail dolly was left on the angle of attack on the ground run would
be less so it wouldnt lift off till a higher speed had been reached. Could
this have had any control effects on tow?
If the toddler was sitting on his mothers lap his feet would be straight
out in an ideal place to interfere with the stick. Bad bad idea.

The IS28b2 manual calls for +10 degree flap for aero tow takeoff and
the normal technique is to lift the tail early so the dolly probably
had no effect on liftoff speed. If the dolly was light it very likely
didn't shift the CG enough to provide a probable cause or even a
contributory factor in this accident - the Twin Lark is a big, heavy
and stable bird. Most likely the dolly is significant only in that it
provides evidence of carelessness.

If you put a small child in the cockpit of a glider, they will almost
invariably start yanking, pulling and twisting everything they can
reach making them unsafe as passengers. A child in a mother's lap
would be able to reach everything except the rudder pedals.

On Jun 19, 11:35*am, Nigel Pocock wrote:
If the tail dolly was left on the angle of attack on the ground run would
be less so it wouldnt lift off till a higher speed had been reached. Could
this have had any control effects on tow?
If the toddler was sitting on his mothers lap his feet would be straight
out in an ideal place to interfere with the stick. Bad bad idea.

Are the wing runners trained to check for extra big orange things
hanging off the glider
before takeoff? I know it is not their fault, but at the critical
launch the pilot is helpless to
see this mistake.

On 6/19/2012 11:06 AM, soartech wrote:
On Jun 19, 11:35 am, Nigel wrote:
If the tail dolly was left on the angle of attack on the ground run would
be less so it wouldnt lift off till a higher speed had been reached. Could
this have had any control effects on tow?
If the toddler was sitting on his mothers lap his feet would be straight
out in an ideal place to interfere with the stick. Bad bad idea.

Are the wing runners trained to check for extra big orange things
hanging off the glider
before takeoff? I know it is not their fault, but at the critical
launch the pilot is helpless to
see this mistake.

Making zero speculation as to root cause(s) of this tragedy, and considering
only the presence of the tail dolly at the start of aerotow, it's clear to any
informed soaring participant that this item was missed by at least one person
(PIC), and presumably two (wing runner).

I was "lucky enough" to witness a dolly-on takeoff prior to my solo (Phoebus
A; PIC's initial flight in it; it ended well), and the more experienced people
around at the time gave me a thorough exposure to all the myriad errors made
along the way to such a launch. The lessons were obvious...once they'd been
pointed out to me.

I've also begun one takeoff roll with my tail dolly attached (haste;
inexperienced wing-runner), realized ~when tuggie applied power I couldn't
remember having checked for tail dolly removal, listened (no joy one way or
the other), tried a tentative rudder input (inconclusive), pulled the plug
(listening to that little voice in my skull). There it was, on the fuselage,
in all its international orange glory. (What an idiot!)

Point being - others having already touched upon likely
CG/directional-stability issues associated with its presence - that every
reader who's hearing little voices in his/her head about the presence of the
tail dolly in this terribly sad instance ought to be actively listening to
that voice against the future day it may (will?) need to be acted upon.
Clearly, beginning a takeoff roll with the taildolly attached is an avoidable
mistake...even if in a very few designs it may be self-correcting (e.g. G-102).

Bob W.

On Tuesday, June 19, 2012 1:26:51 PM UTC-4, BobW wrote:
On 6/19/2012 11:06 AM, soartech wrote:
On Jun 19, 11:35 am, Nigel wrote:
If the tail dolly was left on the angle of attack on the ground run would
be less so it wouldnt lift off till a higher speed had been reached. Could
this have had any control effects on tow?
If the toddler was sitting on his mothers lap his feet would be straight
out in an ideal place to interfere with the stick. Bad bad idea.

Are the wing runners trained to check for extra big orange things
hanging off the glider
before takeoff? I know it is not their fault, but at the critical
launch the pilot is helpless to
see this mistake.

Making zero speculation as to root cause(s) of this tragedy, and considering
only the presence of the tail dolly at the start of aerotow, it's clear to any
informed soaring participant that this item was missed by at least one person
(PIC), and presumably two (wing runner).

I was "lucky enough" to witness a dolly-on takeoff prior to my solo (Phoebus
A; PIC's initial flight in it; it ended well), and the more experienced people
around at the time gave me a thorough exposure to all the myriad errors made
along the way to such a launch. The lessons were obvious...once they'd been
pointed out to me.

I've also begun one takeoff roll with my tail dolly attached (haste;
inexperienced wing-runner), realized ~when tuggie applied power I couldn't
remember having checked for tail dolly removal, listened (no joy one way or
the other), tried a tentative rudder input (inconclusive), pulled the plug
(listening to that little voice in my skull). There it was, on the fuselage,
in all its international orange glory. (What an idiot!)

Point being - others having already touched upon likely
CG/directional-stability issues associated with its presence - that every
reader who's hearing little voices in his/her head about the presence of the
tail dolly in this terribly sad instance ought to be actively listening to
that voice against the future day it may (will?) need to be acted upon.
Clearly, beginning a takeoff roll with the taildolly attached is an avoidable
mistake...even if in a very few designs it may be self-correcting (e.g. G-102).
Bob W

A real risk also, and I say this without speculation in this case, is for some really helpful person to start screaming right away on the radio about the tail dolly. In a situation like this, it is FAR better to let the pilot get high enough to terminate the tow reasonably, than panic him into a low premature dangerous release. This also permits him to organize his landing allowing for the almost inevitable spin around the wheel groud loop.
UH