Glider Safety

Brad wrote:
Speak up about the pilots that you have already identified as "an
accident waiting to happen", then look to yourself.
Why are we waiting?

I'd be somewhat careful about this comment. Ultra-conservative flag
pole sitters love to criticize pilots who go out and polish the rocks
and do things they consider "unsafe"

I would have to think those pilots, and some of them are CFIG's would
love to pull an intervention on a few of us. Question is, are they
really safer than me?

A few of us spent 2.5 hours in close proximity to rocks and trees
yesterday for a spectacular ridge/mountain flight. To my knowledge,
none of the local instructors were there, or have done anything like
that in years, if ever.

So, are you telling me they are going to tell me how to fly safe?

I get a BFR in power every year, and fly 12 months out of the year in
my sailplane; my currency and safety is something I take
responsibility for, not some part time instructor who sit's in a
Blanik every other weekend.

Brad


I agree. Burt in his post says "Go fly with a seasoned instructor for
an afternoon and get a "real" Flight Review." This statement is based
on the assumption that instructors (or at least those instructors who
are "seasoned") are better pilots than the rest of us. While that may
be true for Burt and some others, in the US instructors are just pilots
who have taken more FAA tests than the rest of us (and probably done a
lot less XC). Why would that make them better pilots?

I would bet that the typical instructor could learn more from the
typical XC pilot, than vice versa.

On Feb 23, 7:13*pm, Burt Compton - Marfa wrote:
I cannot give up that easily -- I hope to die in my sleep, like my
Uncle Ray, not screaming like his passengers.

Sincerely, I don't buy the "doing what he loved" bit. *I love life, so
I hang onto it, try to savor every minute.

Re-currrent training to a high level of proficiency (different for
every pilot) is what is needed to reverse the horrible safety trend in
glider flying (and aerotowing.).
Go fly with a seasoned instructor for an afternoon and get a "real"
Flight Review.
Beware the "he or she is an experienced pilot" excuse. *Laws of
gravity and aerodynamics are no less fatal to the "skygods."
Offer to simply ride along as copilot in a two seater with the older
pilots - don't send them to the golf course.
Try intervention with miss-behaving glider pilots and your rogue
towpilots who insist on a wingover and an aggressive dive just seconds
after you release.

Speak up about the pilots that you have already identified as "an
accident waiting to happen", then look to yourself.
Why are we waiting?

I have to agree with Burt. Intervention is the key to greater safety
- if it's by by highly experienced instructors. However, the points
that many CFIG's aren't all that experienced and some will use
'safety' as a political horse are valid.

Maybe that's an argument for higher instructor certification
standards. I've always thought that CFIG's should, at a minimum, hold
a Gold Badge and preferably a Diamond Badge. Of course, badges in
themselves, don't prove superior instructional skills - but it would
be better than what we have now.

Folks (USA),

I did not write in my previous post that the CFIG's would intervene.
My intention was to encourage pilots request a proper and complete
Flight Review in a glider to hopefully reduce the terrible glider
accident rate. You have all read about the Soaring Safety Foundation
"First Flight" program, now in the third year. This is just one of
many methods for a conscientious pilot to achieve a higher level of
proficiency. It is part of your Continuing Education, like you may
accomplish in your profession.

The intervention I was trying to describe is between you and the pilot
who you might observe as "an accident waiting to happen."
"Intervention" does not always mean grounding someone, and you
certainly do not need to be a CFIG to intervene.

WE are our brother's (and sister's) keeper. Watch out for each other,
speak up regarding safety.
Share your knowledge of soaring and the things you have learned that
keep YOU alive such as positive control checks, collision avoidance,
"low saves", ridge running, wave safety, off-airport landing
techniques, rough weather / windy day flying, energy and risk
management.

I fly in Germany most every year and note that many of their top
pilots are also club flight instructors. It seems this is how they pay-
back their club.

Then again, YOU can be a flight instructor, or simply host safety
seminars at your club, especially if you have experience in a
particular aspect of soaring, such as aerobatics, XC / Badge / OLC
soaring, or racing.

You might consult with that lowly CFIG to develop an outline so you
communicate efficiently. Just because you fly well doesn't always
mean you can verbalize and teach the lesson -- that's what good
instructors strive to do. A quiz at the end of the seminar is a
method to test both your effectiveness and whether your audience
understood what you meant to say.

So spend some time mentoring in a class format, in addition to lead-
and-follow flying.
Sharing your knowledge may help our terrible accident rate in the
USA.

According to Bernald Smith of the SSF and OSTIV, one in every 2,000
SSA members will die while participating in soaring in 2010, based on
our accident rate in the USA in 2009. That's a horrible prediction,
and it could be the reality of 2010. Whether you care to debate the
statistics or not, it is clear we all must be proactive to reduce our
fatalities and serious injuries. Tom Knauff, the SSF and others
(including your CFIG's) have offered valid suggestions on how you can
not be that one in 2,000.

On Feb 23, 6:40*pm, T8 wrote:
On Feb 23, 8:23*pm, Mike Schumann
wrote:

Personally, I'd love to live my final moments doing what I love, and
hope that all of my friends and family will share in that joy and be
thankful that I had a quick and uncomplicated end.

You ever help clean up a wreck in the woods after a fatal?

It ain't exactly a treat.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

Exactly what I was going to say - I've been at a couple of fatals and
it affects you more than you might think, especially if you were a
first responder.

Mike

On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:29:20 +0000 (UTC), Martin Gregorie
wrote:

We used to be self-certifying for solo flying but have had a 5 yearly
medical examination, administered by your GP, for a long time. It used to
be required only for passenger carrying or instructing. I don't know when
this was introduced: it pre-dates my start in gliding. The required
standard is equivalent to the professional driver's medical. I think this
is a sensible and reasonable approach.

The FAA requirements in the US are more stringent than California
Department of Motor Vehicles requirements (I have a DMV medical
certificate because I drive a vanpool to work). The DMV requirements
are reasonable.

T8 wrote:
I don't support requiring glider medicals. I took the previous
poster's comments to be a version of John Denver's "I wanna die in my
airplane". I take issue with sentiments like these. Messy, bad for
the sport. It's a sh!tty thing to wish for.
And it destroys a perfectly good glider someone else could have enjoyed
for many years. So, do your last flying in a two seater so the other
pilot can bring the glider back.

I don't think glider medicals will make much difference, and the AOPA
doesn't think the facts support medicals for the smaller GA planes, either

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)

- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

Brad wrote:
A few of us spent 2.5 hours in close proximity to rocks and trees
yesterday for a spectacular ridge/mountain flight. To my knowledge,
none of the local instructors were there, or have done anything like
that in years, if ever.

So, are you telling me they are going to tell me how to fly safe?

I get a BFR in power every year, and fly 12 months out of the year in
my sailplane; my currency and safety is something I take
responsibility for, not some part time instructor who sit's in a
Blanik every other weekend.

I think Burt's point was "find an instructor that is able and willing to
find your weak points". For an experienced pilot, that might not be the
club instructors. Maybe you have find that instructor at Air Sailing,
Minden, Cal City, or elsewhere. All great places to fly! Make an
appointment, pack up the glider and the wife, do some soaring and get
good BFR!

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)

- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

On Feb 23, 10:08*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Brad wrote:
A few of us spent 2.5 hours in close proximity to rocks and trees
yesterday for a spectacular ridge/mountain flight. To my knowledge,
none of the local instructors were there, or have done anything like
that in years, if ever.

So, are you telling me they are going to tell me how to fly safe?

SNIPPED by CB

I think Burt's point was "find an instructor that is able and willing to
find your weak points". For an experienced pilot, that might not be the
club instructors. Maybe you have find that instructor at Air Sailing,
Minden, Cal City, or elsewhere. All great places to fly! Make an
appointment, pack up the glider and the wife, do some soaring and get
good BFR!


Thank you to many who have contributed to this topic, and to Tom
for beginning it.

I agree heartily that 'more recurrent training and more taxing
recurrent
training' would be a great investment in personal safety.

I have several local and imported customers who visit for their
version
of the First Flight (annually with a CFI) concept. Usually it is many
flights,
mostly to work on landing skills and some with a focus on emergency
procedures.

I don't think that aviation medical certificates will predict future
medical
events. Most typical autopsies will conclude a glider death was
granted
by blunt force trauma, and not address anything miniscule in medical
events that might have contributed, eschemic strokes, clots, low
blood
pressure event, dehydration, arterial blockages, etc.
I think it is up to the glider peer community to continue to behave
in
a manner that precludes the FAA changing their minds, and forcing
medical certificates for glider airmen. We know that both Mike
Packard
and Dick Johnson had known cardiac conditions, and yet both flew.

We lose participation in soaring both short and long term through
exposure socially to these losses. I have had to pick up after a
loss,
and don't want to do it again.

Flying while medically unfit is GREEDY.
We lose a friend.
We lose a glider.
We lose a settlement in an insurance claim, and jeopardize the
health of the insurance business that allows us ALL to fly. Even when
that is "ONLY" a hull loss. Geez, a single seater can be easily over
a
hundred grand in a settlement. But, wasn't it great it was only in the
woods? NO.

We need to police ourselves. Singlely and collectively.
Love your buddy enough to tell him, hey, maybe you should consider
a two-seater, and I'll ride along and keep quiet.

Enough of the garbage about it being the XC guys that make the
losses, or the racers. Only two of the eight 'flyers' lost last year
were at contests.

Two were tow pilots at home fields;
one got midaired, one got kited/pitched on early launch.
Two lost were in low altitude launch screwups - one winch one aero.
One got hypoxic.
One spun.
One wasn't observed at all, but was a pretty old guy.
One probably had a heart attack. One midaired.

Out of the 2009 list, training could have helped at least three/four
glider pilots and one tow pilot. Peer counseling could have changed
the behavior of maybe the hypoxia and the heart attack pilots.

The SSF statistics tell us that the majority of accidents, about 65%
EVERY year, that are not fatals, are landings gone wrong at the
HOME airfield.
I can confirm that one popular item I stress on BFRs and dual
opportunities are spot landings. Touch after that place and halt
before that place on the airfield. I dread to report that usually,
the
private owner that tries this the first time with me, does NOT
succeed. He does NOT succeed because I use some
DIFFERENT place on the airfield than his normal spot. I allow
all systems to be used on the glider, hydraulic brake included,
and the soon-to-be-launching for XC pilot doesn't do so hot.

One pilot, after realizing his eroded skills told me, "I'd rather pay
the tow fees to you, than the repair bill to some shop after my
outlanding." I figured that was a successful training day.

Safety? You bet is it a personal choice.
And a collective choice.
Don't be passive, and don't be silent.
Get training. Talk to your friends if they worry you.
Let's all have this talk again next February.

With love,

Cindy B
www.caracole-soaring.com
Check the button for Advanced Training

Greg Arnold wrote:

I would bet that the typical instructor could learn more from the
typical XC pilot, than vice versa.

I think this rather misses the point. What you're looking for is an
external analysis of your flying, something you can't do yourself.

I've flown with many instructors who were no "better" than me as pilots
but learnt something about my flying from each of them because they can
spot idiosyncrasies that I've developed without realising it. As an
example, I tend to be heavy-footed on the rudder because most of my
flying is in an Open Cirrus. Now I'm aware of this, I can pay special
attention to it when flying a different type. I'd expect most of us have
defects in our flying which we could usefully work on, if we only knew
what they were.

Of course, flying with an instructor who is markedly a "better" pilot
(on whatever measure you're using) *and* who can analyse your own flying
is clearly the best option. But those instructors are rare everywhere.
That doesn't mean you can't benefit from observation of your flying by a
peer in terms of simple pilot ability.

I always thought that glider pilots were a pretty sharp bunch, by and
large. However, some of the comments in this discussion are
breathtaking in the level of sheer nonsense and selfishness they
display. Clearly, there is a surprisingly common underlying attitude
that contributes to our accident problem. Those who think it's okay
to put themselves, their glider, their families, and innocent others
at risk simply because they have a "right" to fly without a medical
have a bigger issue than their medical condition. While I am not in
favor of requiring a third class medical for glider flying, clearly we
need a new approach to medical qualification--if for no other reason
than the irresponsibility of these persons.

Further, the brilliant idea of requiring advanced badges for CFIGs is
sheer stupidity. The soaring community is already woefully short of
instructors--the very men and women who do the most to grow the
sport. The very idea that you can't teach soaring without a diamond
badge beggars belief. How will reducing the instructor corps to a
mere handful improve safety, much less improve the sport? Astonishing
arrogance.

The fact is that soaring has a problem with safety. Another fact is
that we as a community have failed to identify the segment of our
community most likely to be involved in an accident. At the recent
FIRC during the SSA convention, I asked why no attempt has been made
to do an in-depth analysis of the accident record to try and find
demographic data that might be relevant. There was no interest in the
idea, and I have since been told that the data would be impossible to
obtain. I don't buy that--I think it's just head in the sand
thinking. We as a community deserve an answer about the
characteristics, skills, attitudes, and experience of those most
likely to be involved in an accident. That would enable the safety
and educational agencies to focus more preventive effort on the real
causes of accidents, rather than merely telling us what happened after
the fact.