![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
At 11:12 19 July 2014, Barnard Toulson wrote:
Well said Chris. I am an ex Chief Flying Instructor and Motor Glider Instructor, at one of the larger clubs in the UK and the general rule on low cable breaks is that if it is safe to land ahead then do so and worry about the retrieve later. A "controlled crash" is usually more survivable than an uncontrolled spin in. I can think of a number of failed attempts to get back to the launch point which resulted in fatalities when a perfectly safe land ahead option was available. Theoretically, a cable break at 200 feet at, say, 70 knots SHOULD enable a 180 degree turn to be executed however, this does not allow for thinking time, option analysis and logical decision making. Add to that the instinctive tendency to "keep the nose up" rather than monitor the airspeed, the unusual attitude of a low turn creating further high stress and all the ingredients are in place for pilot overload and a dangerous situation. A golden rule is that if a "crash" is inevitable, make sure te wings are level and the speed as low as possible at impact (landing??). Barney Yep, 100% agree. I think the confusion arises in the difference between what we teach new and low hours students and what is possible with more experience pilots. There are many examples of what we teach as a basic procedure being amended by individual pilots as they gain experience. As an example I always teach the circuit pattern as outlined in the Instructor manual. When flying solo, especially with flaps I tend to make the turn from downwind to finals a constant radius turn, much more difficult to judge for a new student. I would consider a turn back from 200ft if there were no other option and expect it to be successful. What I would never do is teach that to a low hours student. It is a bit of a moot point anyway at most UK sites I have flown from with two exceptions. On my current site a launch failure at 700ft would still leave me enough room to land ahead in anything over a light breeze. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fatal crash Arizona | Waveguru | Soaring | 162 | September 14th 16 09:18 AM |
Foka 4 fatal crash | James Thomson | Soaring | 12 | May 17th 11 09:28 PM |
Fatal crash in NW Washington | Rich S.[_1_] | Home Built | 1 | February 17th 08 02:38 AM |
Fatal Crash | Monty | General Aviation | 1 | December 12th 07 09:06 PM |
Fatal crash at Fuentemillanos | ns51645 | Soaring | 0 | January 24th 04 09:45 AM |