Pilots with weakening vision - please install Powerflarm

I think he should take up skate boarding with those young whipper-snappers,
get a few more body piercings and tattoos, and leave us old farts alone with
our old-fashioned airplanes without engines.


wrote in message
...
On Saturday, July 6, 2013 9:48:32 AM UTC-8, son_of_flubber wrote:
I understand that you want to fly for a few more years. Please install
Powerflarm (so that I can see you coming). You can turn the volume down.
You don't have to learn how to use it.

I'm old and I got me one of those flarm things. I just can't figure out
the circles and pointy things. Perhaps you could teach us old guys how
this new fangled stuff works. You seem really smart.

PowerFlarm saved us from a probable fatal midair at Hobbs.

Thanks to everyone who has equipped their gliders with flarm.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 9:06:07 AM UTC-7, Evan Ludeman wrote:
PowerFlarm saved us from a probable fatal midair at Hobbs.



Thanks to everyone who has equipped their gliders with flarm.



-Evan Ludeman / T8

In the last 20 years, there have been 2 fatalities reported to the NTSB in glider-to-glider collisions. One in competition, the other not (ridge flying). Most of this period is without the benefit of Flarm. In both cases had both gliders been Flarm equipped the accident probably would have been avoided. Nevertheless, it remains statistically a very rare event. If safety is your concern there is more fertile ground to plow.

Disclaimer: my glider is PFlarm equipped and I have 20/15 vision in both eyes.

On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 1:28:13 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 9:06:07 AM UTC-7, Evan Ludeman wrote:

PowerFlarm saved us from a probable fatal midair at Hobbs.







Thanks to everyone who has equipped their gliders with flarm.







-Evan Ludeman / T8



In the last 20 years, there have been 2 fatalities reported to the NTSB in glider-to-glider collisions. One in competition, the other not (ridge flying). Most of this period is without the benefit of Flarm. In both cases had both gliders been Flarm equipped the accident probably would have been avoided. Nevertheless, it remains statistically a very rare event. If safety is your concern there is more fertile ground to plow.



Disclaimer: my glider is PFlarm equipped and I have 20/15 vision in both eyes.

Cast your excellent vision on this sometime, please. It's 20 years old, unfortunately still very relevant. Bruno speaks for me on the comparison of auto and glider safety.

http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/safety-comes-first-e.html

FWIW, I agree (it's obvious to anyone that takes the time to look) that mid air risk is second order to launch phase, landing phase and terrain collision accidents.

Different types of risk respond to different risk management approaches and what works (training, judgement) for these other types of accidents just doesn't work as well for mid air avoidance. It's a sensory limitation. We don't have 4pi steradian vision and we aren't very good at picking up targets that are on a direct collision course. Happily, flarm does these things pretty well. Good on you for installing flarm.

regards,
Evan

My PF cost about as much as my AR-15, a dozen PMAGS and a locker of ammo.........I feel REALLY safe now.

Brad

snick, snick, snick...

Oh, Brother! Put on your flame suit.


"Brad" wrote in message
...
My PF cost about as much as my AR-15, a dozen PMAGS and a locker of
ammo.........I feel REALLY safe now.

Brad

On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 11:27:09 AM UTC-7, Evan Ludeman wrote:
On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 1:28:13 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:

On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 9:06:07 AM UTC-7, Evan Ludeman wrote:



PowerFlarm saved us from a probable fatal midair at Hobbs.















Thanks to everyone who has equipped their gliders with flarm.















-Evan Ludeman / T8







In the last 20 years, there have been 2 fatalities reported to the NTSB in glider-to-glider collisions. One in competition, the other not (ridge flying). Most of this period is without the benefit of Flarm. In both cases had both gliders been Flarm equipped the accident probably would have been avoided. Nevertheless, it remains statistically a very rare event. If safety is your concern there is more fertile ground to plow.







Disclaimer: my glider is PFlarm equipped and I have 20/15 vision in both eyes.



Cast your excellent vision on this sometime, please. It's 20 years old, unfortunately still very relevant. Bruno speaks for me on the comparison of auto and glider safety.



http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/safety-comes-first-e.html



FWIW, I agree (it's obvious to anyone that takes the time to look) that mid air risk is second order to launch phase, landing phase and terrain collision accidents.



Different types of risk respond to different risk management approaches and what works (training, judgement) for these other types of accidents just doesn't work as well for mid air avoidance. It's a sensory limitation. We don't have 4pi steradian vision and we aren't very good at picking up targets that are on a direct collision course. Happily, flarm does these things pretty well. Good on you for installing flarm.



regards,

Evan

That is an interesting article, but only tangentially on point.

Soaring is (compared to automobile travel) statistically dangerous. Glider-to-glider mid air collisions are a negligible part of that danger. Concentrating on them distracts from the much larger dangers. However, your point about mid air collisions being intractable to training is valid. Here is a risk that - with the mere expenditure of $2000 by every glider owner - can be largely eliminated. Just don't fool yourself into thinking you are much safer as a result.

Look at the numbers. I believe we have around 10 - 15 fatalities a year in the US in soaring. Let me pick 12 as a average for the sake of discussion. That means that in 20 years, of 240 people that died, just 2 are from glider-to-glider mid air collisions. Eliminating those you still have 238 fatalities. You are reducing your risk by less than 1%. Now I am aware that a particular misfortune that befalls me is not made more bearable by its statistic rarity. Nevertheless, those are the numbers.

I installed the PFlarm mainly for two reasons: peer pressure and as an in-flight entertainment system. Safety concerns were a distant third. I will though, turn hard right if I see you coming on my entertainment system!

On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 4:09:34 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:

Look at the numbers. I believe we have around 10 - 15 fatalities a year in the US in soaring. Let me pick 12 as a average for the sake of discussion.. That means that in 20 years, of 240 people that died, just 2 are from glider-to-glider mid air collisions. Eliminating those you still have 238 fatalities. You are reducing your risk by less than 1%.

The past 20 years are not a terribly good predictor of the next 5 years when you consider that a number of pilots are now seeing their vision deteriorate due to age. It happens gradually so the change sneaks up on you.

Take a minute to reread Vaughn's post which is very much to the point:

On Saturday, July 6, 2013 4:43:42 PM UTC-4, Vaughn wrote:
Some of you might also want to consider eye surgery. If nothing else,
do it for the sake of your fellow aviators. A while back my vision
deteriorated to something slightly better than 20/40. (Still FAA legal!)

At that point, I typically couldn't see other planes in the pattern,
and reluctantly came to the conclusion that I wouldn't want to share the
air with somebody in my condition, so therefore I shouldn't be there.
So I got surgery, even though the doctors had called my condition
"marginal".

The difference after cataract surgery was literally night and day!

On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 2:46:41 PM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 4:09:34 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:



Look at the numbers. I believe we have around 10 - 15 fatalities a year in the US in soaring. Let me pick 12 as a average for the sake of discussion. That means that in 20 years, of 240 people that died, just 2 are from glider-to-glider mid air collisions. Eliminating those you still have 238 fatalities. You are reducing your risk by less than 1%.



The past 20 years are not a terribly good predictor of the next 5 years when you consider that a number of pilots are now seeing their vision deteriorate due to age. It happens gradually so the change sneaks up on you.



Take a minute to reread Vaughn's post which is very much to the point:



On Saturday, July 6, 2013 4:43:42 PM UTC-4, Vaughn wrote:

Some of you might also want to consider eye surgery. If nothing else,

do it for the sake of your fellow aviators. A while back my vision

deteriorated to something slightly better than 20/40. (Still FAA legal!)



At that point, I typically couldn't see other planes in the pattern,

and reluctantly came to the conclusion that I wouldn't want to share the

air with somebody in my condition, so therefore I shouldn't be there.

So I got surgery, even though the doctors had called my condition

"marginal".



The difference after cataract surgery was literally night and day!

Well, A: I don't believe the demographics of glider pilots has changed much in 20 years. But please find some statistics on that, I'm interested.

B: from the descriptions of the only 2 fatalities in the NTSB database, better (or worse) eyesight would have made no difference in the outcome (though Flarm probably would).

I'm not trying to be dismissive or flippant about this issue, but I think there is a sort of hysteria about mid air collisions brought on by the sudden appearance of an elegant technical solution to what is really quite a small problem. Now everyone must have it, with a growing body who advocate legal requirement. In fact, there is every reason to believe that a stall warning buzzer would save many more glider pilots. This is old technology yet not installed in any glider that I am aware of. I do not advocate them - you really ought to just learn to fly the damn glider - but at the same time many of us are standing in a forest fretting over a particularly small tree.

By all means get a Flarm. But don't then say, "There! I fixed the glider safety problem." You are statistically just about as likely to die in a glider with it, as without it. The likelihood of dying due to being hit mid air by an aging glider pilot strictly because of his deteriorating vision is about the same as hitting the Powerball jackpot.

On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 11:43:37 AM UTC-4, Dan Marotta wrote:
I think he should take up skate boarding with those young whipper-snappers,
get a few more body piercings and tattoos, and leave us old farts alone with
our old-fashioned airplanes without engines.

I meant no disrespect when I tried to raise this issue with humor.

My smart-ass remark was prompted by a gentleman who is in need of cataract surgery and who has on two occasions flown across my bow while I was circling in a thermal. Yes, I saw him coming. He should have seen me.

If you want to take this seriously, you could encourage your pals to get their eyes fixed. It's a simple procedure and it works. There are a number of people flying who could have their vision improved.

I'm not afraid of dying, but I would like the chance to enjoy our sport for a few more years, and I don't want to be grounded prematurely by an avoidable accident.