Texas Tragedy Info?

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

On Jun 19, 1:13*pm, wrote:
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

We once had a rental pilot take off with the tail dolly on a Genesis.
Another pilot landed saying he thought he saw the G2 with the dolly on
it. Then we had to make a decision - make a radio call or not. We
decided not to make the call so as not to panic the pilot and because
we didn't think the dolly would hit the ground on landing anyway.

The pilot landed without incident and, as I had been elected to talk
with him, I sauntered out to the glider with the pilot still sitting
in it. "How was your flight?", I asked. "Outstanding", he answered,
"the glider handled better than ever". "Well", I said, "we told you
it would handle better with the CG further aft but we'd prefer you did
it with the internal weights not the tail dolly." It took a few
seconds for that to soak in then his face went grey.

I've see the Lark being flown with the tail dolly on before
had one of our club members (a commercial pilot) do this with passengers on
board
He would have never even known this "Daaa"if I hadn't been there to greet
him when it returned........
tim



wrote in message
...
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

My real simple way to keep the dolly from being missed;

If I didn't remove it myself, or see a ground person carry it away, I
always ask the wing runner "Is the tail dolly removed?", before I
close the canopy.