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 Jun 18, 10:54*am, cuflyer wrote:

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

In the course of figuring out how to design a glider, I have picked
through the wreckage of many sailplanes, including no few stall/spins.
And I don't think I've ever seen a stall/spin result in that much
forward fuselage damage. At least not in a metal glider.

Thanks, Bob K.

Controls not connected seems obvious cause.

At 21:24 18 June 2012, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On Jun 18, 10:54=A0am, cuflyer wrote:

Kid on his mother's lap - ? =A0Affecting control - ?
This is really ugly.

In the course of figuring out how to design a glider, I have picked
through the wreckage of many sailplanes, including no few
stall/spins.
And I don't think I've ever seen a stall/spin result in that much
forward fuselage damage. At least not in a metal glider.

Thanks, Bob K.

On Monday, June 18, 2012 5:12:27 PM UTC-5, Mark Dickson wrote:
Controls not connected seems obvious cause.


I looked at the local Lark after work today and I think it would be tough to swing the Horizontal/Elevator halves into place and pin them together without having the controls connected. Like any attempt at a fool-proof system I'm sure it is possible though. That doesn't discount the possibility of a problem somewhere else in the control system.

On Jun 18, 4:49*pm, Tony wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2012 5:12:27 PM UTC-5, Mark Dickson wrote:
Controls not connected seems obvious cause.

I looked at the local Lark after work today and I think it would be tough to swing the Horizontal/Elevator halves into place and pin them together without having the controls connected. *Like any attempt at a fool-proof system I'm sure it is possible though. *That doesn't discount the possibility of a problem somewhere else in the control system.

As a one-time Lark owner, I agree that it would be difficult to
assemble the tail improperly. However the trim tab is very powerful
and the two solid wires which operate it are easily damaged. More
likely is the child yanking the trim lever back and forth.

This picture from the Houston Chronicle

http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/13/60/75.../4/628x471.jpg

shows the ship being removed from the field after the crash. Note that the tail dolly is attached. While it could have been replaced post-accident, it's not likely.

I'm a member of GHSA and it's clear we need more investigative information than speculation.

Certain comments from witnesses at the field (and I WAS NOT one of them) indicate there were controllability issues seconds after rotating. The towpilot is said to have been feeling the excessive pulls on the rope increase, and was seeing the glider pitching around (in the mirror) far more than usual. One witness said he was about to release the rope at his end when it broke. Either way the glider was free of the rope at 75-100 feet AGL according to the preliminary statements of the NTSB official at the crash site.

Our Twin Lark had taken off once long ago with the tail dolly attached, and landed without incident (it's a light dolly). My "opinion" is the dolly likely didn't contribute to the instability issue, but it tells another story: the PIC didn't thoroughly preflight the glider. It will require the official investigation by NTSB to determine if anything else was not addressed prior to takeoff.

Obviously a key attention point is the child. I've heard the media comments (local TV) that the child WAS strapped in using the same belts/harness as his mother… AND he was not. Again--we have to wait for the official finding. Also not officially determined: the sitting positions of the pilot and the mother/child (who was in the front and who was in the back?). I'm in agreement with the comments that there is no way you go flying with an unrestrained passenger on board. I'm also of the opinion that it's not prudent to take someone that young up simply because the cockpits are very confining, controls are in easy reach, and children that young can be prone to instant panic and physical anguish. That, in of itself, would be a severe distraction to the PIC.

There are a number of points NTSB will have to examine:

(1) weight and balance loading
(2) aircraft condition
(3) towpilot comments
(4) ground witnesses
(5) radio calls
(6) physical condition of the pilot.

Again--the tail dolly points to inattention on the part of the PIC, but nothing more until the NTSB reports on the preceding. I know for a fact that when I was out there Saturday, there were no squawks reported on the Twin Lark, which had been flying that day.

I've known the pilot since jointing the club in 1997. He's been a senior instructor since that time and he signed me off for my transition pilot practical. I considered him an attentive and conservative pilot. I've personally never known him to have any medical conditions; he seemed in good shape when I talked to him Saturday. You have to remember: This was his daughter-in-law and grandson that he took flying, so his typical preflight routine MAY--REPEAT--MAY have been distracted by the family aspect of the moment. It's likely another club member was ground crewing and standing near the glider as they were loading, so we'll need to wait for those eyewitness comments.

For now that's all we know and we must keep the speculation down and await the NTSB's report. Fred will be greatly missed. It's tough all around since GHSA has had a pretty good safety record. We haven't had a major accident since 1999 and in that one the pilot walked away from his low-time, lack-of-judgement landing approach decisions that caused him to go off the end of the runway and total the glider.

On 6/18/2012 1:57 PM, wrote:
I'm a member of GHSA and it's clear we need more investigative information
than speculation.

Certain comments from witnesses at the field (and I WAS NOT one of them)
indicate there were controllability issues seconds after rotating. The
towpilot is said to have been feeling the excessive pulls on the rope
increase, and was seeing the glider pitching around (in the mirror) far
more than usual. One witness said he was about to release the rope at his
end when it broke. Either way the glider was free of the rope at 75-100
feet AGL according to the preliminary statements of the NTSB official at
the crash site.

Our Twin Lark had taken off once long ago with the tail dolly attached, and
landed without incident (it's a light dolly). My "opinion" is the dolly
likely didn't contribute to the instability issue, but it tells another
story: the PIC didn't thoroughly preflight the glider. It will require the
official investigation by NTSB to determine if anything else was not
addressed prior to takeoff.

Obviously a key attention point is the child. I've heard the media comments
(local TV) that the child WAS strapped in using the same belts/harness as
his mother… AND he was not. Again--we have to wait for the official
finding. Also not officially determined: the sitting positions of the pilot
and the mother/child (who was in the front and who was in the back?). I'm
in agreement with the comments that there is no way you go flying with an
unrestrained passenger on board. I'm also of the opinion that it's not
prudent to take someone that young up simply because the cockpits are very
confining, controls are in easy reach, and children that young can be prone
to instant panic and physical anguish. That, in of itself, would be a
severe distraction to the PIC.

There are a number of points NTSB will have to examine:

(1) weight and balance loading (2) aircraft condition (3) towpilot
comments (4) ground witnesses (5) radio calls (6) physical condition of the
pilot.

Again--the tail dolly points to inattention on the part of the PIC, but
nothing more until the NTSB reports on the preceding. I know for a fact
that when I was out there Saturday, there were no squawks reported on the
Twin Lark, which had been flying that day.

I've known the pilot since jointing the club in 1997. He's been a senior
instructor since that time and he signed me off for my transition pilot
practical. I considered him an attentive and conservative pilot. I've
personally never known him to have any medical conditions; he seemed in
good shape when I talked to him Saturday. You have to remember: This was
his daughter-in-law and grandson that he took flying, so his typical
preflight routine MAY--REPEAT--MAY have been distracted by the family
aspect of the moment. It's likely another club member was ground crewing
and standing near the glider as they were loading, so we'll need to wait
for those eyewitness comments.

For now that's all we know and we must keep the speculation down and await
the NTSB's report. Fred will be greatly missed. It's tough all around since
GHSA has had a pretty good safety record. We haven't had a major accident
since 1999 and in that one the pilot walked away from his low-time,
lack-of-judgement landing approach decisions that caused him to go off the
end of the runway and total the glider.

Bob,

Thanks for the above. It takes real skill to inform sensitively. Tough to do
at a time like this, I know. It's also tough for me to imagine a more horrific
loss scenario than this...for the families involved, for friends, for the
Club, for soaring. My heart goes out to everyone.

Respectfully,
Bob W.

Sorry to resurrect this thread, but the NTSB now has a preliminary
synopsis of this accident:

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/br...18X10736&key=1

One interesting aspect of the accident that I think is worthy of
discussion is this statement:

: As the tow plane and glider accelerated down the runway several
: witnesses noticed that the tail dolly remained attached to the
glider.
: The witnesses immediately advised the glider operations dispatcher,
: who in turn made the radio call “abort, abort, abort”.

Feel free to disagree, but I think that a better approach might have
been to tell the pilot exactly what is known:

"Uh, Lark One Two Three, be advised we have a report your tail dolly
is still on."

That gives the pilot the information they might not have, and leaves
the response to their initiative.

Please note that I am not criticizing. I wasn't there, and I don't
have all the facts. But I do think that this is something that is
worthy of discussion and reflection.

Also, I'm not saying that there isn't ever a situation where an abort
call is the thing to do. A good example of that would be the Clem
Bowman accident at Minden. In that case, the horizontal tailplane fell
off the aircraft right as the towplane was throttling up. In fact,
several people did make radio calls to that effect. Unfortunately, the
calls interfered with each other, and the result was an intelligible
squeal.

A tangential discussion is whether you should even make an advisory
call. I've talked to pilots who have said that they wouldn't even
advise someone that their gear was still retracted on final approach.
The thinking seems to be that the disruption caused by attending to
the gear late in the approach made things more dangerous than the gear-
up landing that would surely otherwise result. Personally, I think I
would generally choose to make that radio call, but would try to do it
in as neutral and informative fashion as possible.

Thanks, Bob K.