MSL vs. AGL (Again)

On Jul 14, 10:20*pm, N11rdbird wrote:
The MSL/AGL issue has come before the Caesar Creek Soaring Club Board
once again. Not only has the Club been thrown into turmoil again, this
time it has specifically affected our instructors and how to most
effectively teach our students. I am curious if there are other Clubs
or organizations that teach using AGL.
Rolf Hegele
Member of the Board

Rolf, I was blown away yesterday when I read the newsletter.....Allow
me just a short rant.

To me it's a matter of "Back in my day" mentality...what was "good
enough when I learned to fly." Well as somebody who joined the club
the first time in 1974, I couldn't disagree with the decision more.
The group that pushed that are wrestling with the change in flying
style and purpose that is taking place in the club. They are kicking
and screaming about letting go of the 1-26, 2-33 way of thermal
sitting above the field. We are now more of a cross-country, race
oriented club. OLC over badges, just look each month in Soaring Mag
and you will rarely see any badge work being reported or done by our
club. Most of us now have finished our early quests. My 1980 500k
flight was the first flown by a club member of CCSC (although not
flown at the field) after the switch from SSD. Now they happen quite
often from the field, At that time very few of us flew from other
fields. Now, quite often.
We, as you know, have 2 groups in the club. One has never grasped that
gliding and soaring are two different sports or see no reason to break
those strings and accept what that means in to items of concern
such as MSL. Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with that if
that' what you want from the sport. They will never use gps, fly
contests, explore other sites or push their personal skills..........

Further....how fricking hard is it to do some quick mental math from
our field? Our field elevation is 940'msl (hmmmm, for ****s and
giggles let's round it to 1000' giving us a margin of safety of
60'.........grown people operating an aircraft that requires skill and
knowledge and you can't re-adjust your brain for a little problem like
this? How the heck do you pass your flight review every other year???

My fiance just started taking lessons at the field this week. I'm damn
sure she'll learn msl vs agl. After all she swears at some point she's
going to fly my ASW-20!

Rolf, this fight isn't over.
Gary Adams GA2
CCSC member

On Jul 14, 8:20*pm, N11rdbird wrote:
The MSL/AGL issue has come before the Caesar Creek Soaring Club Board
once again. Not only has the Club been thrown into turmoil again, this
time it has specifically affected our instructors and how to most
effectively teach our students. I am curious if there are other Clubs
or organizations that teach using AGL.
Rolf Hegele
Member of the Board

Let me guess, those advocating AGL have no XC experience.

Yet another reason to require instructors to have at least minimal XC
experience. I've been pleased to hear some clubs are requiring their
instructors to have at least a Silver Badge.

Bill Daniels

On Jul 15, 11:45*am, Bill D wrote:
On Jul 14, 8:20*pm, N11rdbird wrote:

The MSL/AGL issue has come before the Caesar Creek Soaring Club Board
once again. Not only has the Club been thrown into turmoil again, this
time it has specifically affected our instructors and how to most
effectively teach our students. I am curious if there are other Clubs
or organizations that teach using AGL.
Rolf Hegele
Member of the Board

Let me guess, those advocating AGL have no XC experience.

Yet another reason to require instructors to have at least minimal XC
experience. *I've been pleased to hear some clubs are requiring their
instructors to have at least a Silver Badge.

Bill Daniels

Bill, not entirely the case....we have excellant instuctors, some with
x-c experience. One is John Lubon JL, a familiar face on the contest
scene.....but sadly many don't. Oddly a number of instructors are
retired professional pilots either in the military and commercial
world.

Gary Adams GA2
CCSC member

On Jul 15, 9:52*am, Gary wrote:
On Jul 15, 11:45*am, Bill D wrote:









On Jul 14, 8:20*pm, N11rdbird wrote:

The MSL/AGL issue has come before the Caesar Creek Soaring Club Board
once again. Not only has the Club been thrown into turmoil again, this
time it has specifically affected our instructors and how to most
effectively teach our students. I am curious if there are other Clubs
or organizations that teach using AGL.
Rolf Hegele
Member of the Board

Let me guess, those advocating AGL have no XC experience.

Yet another reason to require instructors to have at least minimal XC
experience. *I've been pleased to hear some clubs are requiring their
instructors to have at least a Silver Badge.

Bill Daniels

Bill, not entirely the case....we have excellant instuctors, some with
x-c experience. One is John Lubon JL, a familiar face on the contest
scene.....but sadly many don't. Oddly a number of instructors are
retired professional pilots either in the military and commercial
world.

Gary Adams GA2
CCSC member

It's sometimes the case that career airplane pilots don't take gliders
seriously enough.

If you want to see them sweat bullets, take one who is seeking to add
a -G to their CFI certificate out of gliding range of the home field
and ask, "Exactly how much altitude do we need to get back".
Suddenly, a correctly set altimeter becomes a big deal. I had to
remind one CFI who seemed not to be handling the situation well that
he could listen to AWOS to get a current altimeter setting.

Another situation where a difference in attitude shows up is the
simple question, "How far away would you be willing to fly right
now." This is asked at about 1200' AGL near the pattern IP. They
often indicate a point 4 or 5 miles away. (8-10 mile round trip)
Airplane pilots tend to be far more comfortable gliding away from the
runway at low altitudes than I am. I think this lack of concern leads
to at least some landing accidents.

I haven't done it yet. (I'm thinking about it.) If the candidate
points in a direction where there is a known-safe land-out field, I
may say, "Let's go - show me". Nothing like an unplanned land-out to
bring the altimeter setting (and altitude) issue into sharp focus.

On Jul 14, 10:20*pm, N11rdbird wrote:
The MSL/AGL issue has come before the Caesar Creek Soaring Club Board
once again. Not only has the Club been thrown into turmoil again, this
time it has specifically affected our instructors and how to most
effectively teach our students. I am curious if there are other Clubs
or organizations that teach using AGL.
Rolf Hegele
Member of the Board

Is there even *one* good argument for setting the altimeter to zero on
the runway?

Post Mills Soaring Club is all QNH, all the time.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

T8 wrote:
Is there even *one* good argument for setting the altimeter to zero on
the runway?

Aerobatics. ;-)

Other than that: no.

On Jul 15, 10:11*am, Bill D wrote:
If you want to see them sweat bullets, take one who is seeking to add
a -G to their CFI certificate out of gliding range of the home field
and ask, "Exactly how much altitude do we need to get back".

If you are out of gliding range the answer doesn't matter until you
find lift and then want to know when to leave it. Up to then the
correct response may be "You have control".

Suddenly, a correctly set altimeter becomes a big deal.

Correctly set yes, but the problem can be solved whether it is set to
the correct QFE or set to the correct QNH. It's actually easier in
this case to use QFE since if the altitude needed is less that the
indicated altitude then you have a glide solution. No need to worry
about the value of field elevation. In the above I'm assuming that
altitude needed is the altitude expected to lost in making the glide
plus the arrival margin, not the absolute altitude. That, after all,
is what has to be determined first.

I'm not arguing for using QFE, just pointing out you have selected a
poor reason for not doing so.

Andy

Not this again!

Our club (http://skysoaring.com) asked people to fly MSL about 6 years
ago and then mandated it about 4 years ago in all club ships. We
marked the altimer "MSL ONLY Club Rules". If you are flying your own
ship, you are PIC and can do most anything you want, and suffer the
consequences too.

The reasons for MSL are simple;

1) The FARs require it.
2) Unless you are living in a dead flat area, the airport you launch
from and the airport you might land at will be at different
altitudes.
3) If you launch at an airport above 3,000ft or so you probably can't
set your altimeter to AGL in the first place.
4) If you desire to fly anything beyond gliders, you had better use
MSL as your instructor will kick you out of the airplane otherwise.
5) Go for a check ride with an examiner, fly AGL, and see what
happens.

Rule of primacy rules - the first thing you are taught should be the
right thing as whatever is taught is going to be doubly difficult to
be un-taught. MSL it is!

- John DeRosa

On Jul 15, 2:57*pm, Andy wrote:
On Jul 15, 10:11*am, Bill D wrote:

If you want to see them sweat bullets, take one who is seeking to add
a -G to their CFI certificate out of gliding range of the home field
and ask, "Exactly how much altitude do we need to get back".

If you are out of gliding range the answer doesn't matter until you
find lift and then want to know when to leave it. *Up to then the
correct response may be "You have control".

Suddenly, a correctly set altimeter becomes a big deal.

Correctly set yes, but the problem can be solved whether it is set to
the correct QFE or set to the correct QNH. *It's actually easier in
this case to use QFE since if the altitude needed is less that the
indicated altitude then you have a glide solution. No need to worry
about the value of field elevation. *In the above I'm assuming that
altitude needed is the altitude expected to lost in making the glide
plus the arrival margin, not the absolute altitude. *That, after all,
is what has to be determined first.

I'm not arguing for using QFE, just pointing out you have selected a
poor reason for not doing so.

Andy

Your objection only holds true if you manage to return to the
departure airfield. "Out of gliding range" implies the flight may end
somewhere else.

Two other thoughts;

1) I might agree that for a brand new pilot that AGL may be easier to
learn, but that doesn't make it right, nor make sense in the long
run. Primacy, primacy, primacy.

2) Once you convert, go all the way - don't make it optional - half
measures can cause problems. Here is a scenario that happened to me
while we were in the "optional" mode. I flew a club ship and used MSL
(888ft). I land and another pilot jumps in and thinks, "Heck, the air
pressure must have changed so all I need to do is tweak the big hand
back to zero". So he reset the altimeter to AGL by turning the hands
CLOCKWISE. See where this is going? What he did was move the
altimeter setting by +112ft, not -888ft. So now the altimeter is at
1,000AGL, not zero AGL, but he doesn't notice. The other pilot gets
off tow at 2,000ft AGL (thinking he is at 3,000ft AGL). The tow pilot
notices the other pilot getting off 1,000ft early but doesn't think
much about it (until later). At some point the glider pilot thinks
something like, "Wow, things sure look big", promptly lands out and
dings the glider. A CFIG comes up to me afterwards and says, "You
should have reset the altimeter back to 0 AGL after your flight."
Huh? My comment was, "Who exactly is in command of the glider? Me
standing on the ground or the guy in the cockpit?" End of
conversation.

Name withheld for fear of bringing up bad memories in others....