Another stall spin

I had an incipient departure just the other day. I fly an Apis M. In
deconstructing the event, I saw the nose dropping and not responding
to back pressure so I put the stick forward and it was all over in a
second. I think when the aircraft doesn't do what it should for the
input, there should be a reflex alternative action. Either flaps or
stick forward is probably ok. The stick feels more like it has more
authority to me.

In a fully established spin, flaps have to come off as you will likely
exceed the white arc in recovery.

The dicey scenarios are the ones where you have to think out what is
going on before acting. The whole thinking thing is easily derailed.

Mark

Regarding practice, how many people own gliders that are certificated for spins? The last two I have owned (ASH26E & Duo Discus) intentional spins are prohibited. That doesn't prevent you from practicing departures, and may be a result of conservative attorneys rather than any real issue, nevertheless that's what the manufacturer said and your insurer would probably agree.

On 9/13/2012 8:52 AM, Mark Jardini wrote:
I had an incipient departure just the other day. I fly an Apis M. In
deconstructing the event, I saw the nose dropping and not responding
to back pressure so I put the stick forward and it was all over in a
second.

Your response is "the universal ticket for departure control"...works
(rapidly/"instantly") in any glider, regardless of wing appurtenances.

I found this true even with "so notorious a departer" as the two 2-32's my
club has had over the years, one of which "always" departed enthusiastically
left wing low if Joe Pilot insisted on ignoring prior aerodynamic warnings.
Merely relaxing aft pressure completely eliminated its "departure thrills", to
the point that a marginally aware accompanying pilot might never even be aware
what had transpired.

Another good reason to be primed to "relax back pressure" is gust-induced
"significant separation" absolutely halted upward progress in my 15-meter
unballasted ship when it occurred - for ~30 seconds, as measured by altimeter
and sweep second hand. (Gravity never stops!) A "calibrated butt" could easily
feel this effect, while a calibrated ear could actually hear it as well. And,
of course, it could be felt throughout the plane's control system. Awesome way
to depress your average climb rate!

Maybe pilots in the intermountain west get more unbidden opportunites to
practice "the stick bump" while thermalling, simply because in my experience
on the downwind side of the Continental Divide, gust-induced incipient stalls
are "the norm" during routine thermalling on days with any significant
westerly (which is to say most of them!).
- - - - - -

I think when the aircraft doesn't do what it should for the
input, there should be a reflex alternative action. Either flaps or
stick forward is probably ok. The stick feels more like it has more
authority to me.

In a fully established spin, flaps have to come off as you will likely
exceed the white arc in recovery.

The dicey scenarios are the ones where you have to think out what is
going on before acting. The whole thinking thing is easily derailed.

Mark


Good thinking!

Regards,
Bob W.

Around me (The Netherlands) a lot of people seem to follow "the 7-5-3 rule":
- Find landable terrain at 700m, but continue searching for thermals.
- Start picking a field for landing at 500m, continue searching for thermals but stay around the field picked.
- Initiate the landing at 300m, ignore thermals. Congratulate yourself on a nice flight and focus on getting the glider down in one piece.

Roel

On Aug 27, 8:38*pm, 2G wrote:

Everybody likes to get back and tell their story about a low save; everybody OOHs and AWHs. Nobody says "You DUMB ****, YOU COULD HAVE KILLED YOURSELF!"

So in my first contest, there was a tough day trying to work our way
back uphill to higher terrain (and home). I ended up making 3 low
saves in a row, each only about 300' AGL. I could have soared out to
lower terrain if needed each time, but I was making thermalling turns
only a couple of hundred feet off the ground. When I got home, I was
chuffed that only Gary Ittner and I made it home (everyone else landed
out). Upon reviewing the traces it appears that he and I did
virtually the same thing, making low-save after low-save at almost
identical points on the route home (though I was 15-20 minutes behind
him).

Just a few weeks later I was at another contest, proudly relaying this
story to Tom Kelly ("711"). He basically said exactly the same thing
- that I was an idiot and could have killed myself quite easily, and
to get the hell away from him.

At first I was very hurt, and then I was really ****ed off. Wasn't
Gary a legend in the sport? Wasn't I "smart" to have figured this out
and emulated him (even if unintentionally)? Wasn't I skilled to have
pulled it off and gotten home? Here I was, a budding contest pilot,
doing well on a tough day and hanging (sorta) with one of the best
pilots around! Why the hell should I be raked over the coals for my
accomplishment??

Over time, I've come to the realization that Tom's attitude is a lot
closer to the right attitude. A lot of good, skilled, experienced
pilots do dumb things. Even if I am the hottest pilot in the universe
(breaking news: I'm not), it isn't always smart to mirror the behavior
of top pilots. Following someone else's lead into a trap is just
dumb. I'll admit that I still sometimes take moderate risks in my
contest flying; but I'm far more cognizant of them and I don't simply
use other pilots as a measuring-stick for safety or what's "right" to
do.

--Noel

On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 12:20:10 PM UTC-7, noel.wade wrote:
On Aug 27, 8:38*pm, 2G wrote:



Everybody likes to get back and tell their story about a low save; everybody OOHs and AWHs. Nobody says "You DUMB ****, YOU COULD HAVE KILLED YOURSELF!"



So in my first contest, there was a tough day trying to work our way

back uphill to higher terrain (and home). I ended up making 3 low

saves in a row, each only about 300' AGL. I could have soared out to

lower terrain if needed each time, but I was making thermalling turns

only a couple of hundred feet off the ground. When I got home, I was

chuffed that only Gary Ittner and I made it home (everyone else landed

out). Upon reviewing the traces it appears that he and I did

virtually the same thing, making low-save after low-save at almost

identical points on the route home (though I was 15-20 minutes behind

him).



Just a few weeks later I was at another contest, proudly relaying this

story to Tom Kelly ("711"). He basically said exactly the same thing

- that I was an idiot and could have killed myself quite easily, and

to get the hell away from him.



At first I was very hurt, and then I was really ****ed off. Wasn't

Gary a legend in the sport? Wasn't I "smart" to have figured this out

and emulated him (even if unintentionally)? Wasn't I skilled to have

pulled it off and gotten home? Here I was, a budding contest pilot,

doing well on a tough day and hanging (sorta) with one of the best

pilots around! Why the hell should I be raked over the coals for my

accomplishment??



Over time, I've come to the realization that Tom's attitude is a lot

closer to the right attitude. A lot of good, skilled, experienced

pilots do dumb things. Even if I am the hottest pilot in the universe

(breaking news: I'm not), it isn't always smart to mirror the behavior

of top pilots. Following someone else's lead into a trap is just

dumb. I'll admit that I still sometimes take moderate risks in my

contest flying; but I'm far more cognizant of them and I don't simply

use other pilots as a measuring-stick for safety or what's "right" to

do.



--Noel

This is exactly why those kind of discussions on RAS are so important. You will hear opinions that you will normally wouldn't hear elsewhere or face to face. I will definitely think twice next time before deciding to thermal below 500 ft AGL.
Sad news but great discussion.

Ramy

On Aug 28, 12:33*pm, Ramy wrote:
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 12:20:10 PM UTC-7, noel.wade wrote:
On Aug 27, 8:38*pm, 2G wrote:

Everybody likes to get back and tell their story about a low save; everybody OOHs and AWHs. Nobody says "You DUMB ****, YOU COULD HAVE KILLED YOURSELF!"

So in my first contest, there was a tough day trying to work our way

back uphill to higher terrain (and home). *I ended up making 3 low

saves in a row, each only about 300' AGL. *I could have soared out to

lower terrain if needed each time, but I was making thermalling turns

only a couple of hundred feet off the ground. *When I got home, I was

chuffed that only Gary Ittner and I made it home (everyone else landed

out). *Upon reviewing the traces it appears that he and I did

virtually the same thing, making low-save after low-save at almost

identical points on the route home (though I was 15-20 minutes behind

him).

Just a few weeks later I was at another contest, proudly relaying this

story to Tom Kelly ("711"). *He basically said exactly the same thing

- that I was an idiot and could have killed myself quite easily, and

to get the hell away from him.

At first I was very hurt, and then I was really ****ed off. *Wasn't

Gary a legend in the sport? *Wasn't I "smart" to have figured this out

and emulated him (even if unintentionally)? *Wasn't I skilled to have

pulled it off and gotten home? *Here I was, a budding contest pilot,

doing well on a tough day and hanging (sorta) with one of the best

pilots around! *Why the hell should I be raked over the coals for my

accomplishment??

Over time, I've come to the realization that Tom's attitude is a lot

closer to the right attitude. *A lot of good, skilled, experienced

pilots do dumb things. *Even if I am the hottest pilot in the universe

(breaking news: I'm not), it isn't always smart to mirror the behavior

of top pilots. *Following someone else's lead into a trap is just

dumb. I'll admit that I still sometimes take moderate risks in my

contest flying; but I'm far more cognizant of them and I don't simply

use other pilots as a measuring-stick for safety or what's "right" to

do.

--Noel

This is exactly why those kind of discussions on RAS are so important. You will hear opinions that you will normally wouldn't hear elsewhere or face to face. I will definitely think twice next time before deciding to thermal below 500 ft AGL.
Sad news but great discussion.

Ramy

I agree. John C's description of low altitude dynamics and perception
was an eye opener.

I have a hard deck limit on thermalling, but it is different dependent
on terrain.

Brad

On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 12:33:36 -0700, Ramy wrote:


This is exactly why those kind of discussions on RAS are so important.
You will hear opinions that you will normally wouldn't hear elsewhere or
face to face. I will definitely think twice next time before deciding to
thermal below 500 ft AGL.
Sad news but great discussion.

I think 500 ft is pretty much a minimum safety height. Here's a data
point for that. When an ASW-20 departs in a thermalling turn using zero
flap (position #3), if you react immediately its easy enough to be back
in level flight after a total of 90 degrees of rotation, but you will
have lost 300 ft and have around 80 kts on the clock.

FWIW I never set my LK8000/XCSoar safety height to less than 1000 ft.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 12:33:37 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 12:20:10 PM UTC-7, noel.wade wrote:

On Aug 27, 8:38*pm, 2G wrote:







Everybody likes to get back and tell their story about a low save; everybody OOHs and AWHs. Nobody says "You DUMB ****, YOU COULD HAVE KILLED YOURSELF!"







So in my first contest, there was a tough day trying to work our way



back uphill to higher terrain (and home). I ended up making 3 low



saves in a row, each only about 300' AGL. I could have soared out to



lower terrain if needed each time, but I was making thermalling turns



only a couple of hundred feet off the ground. When I got home, I was



chuffed that only Gary Ittner and I made it home (everyone else landed



out). Upon reviewing the traces it appears that he and I did



virtually the same thing, making low-save after low-save at almost



identical points on the route home (though I was 15-20 minutes behind



him).







Just a few weeks later I was at another contest, proudly relaying this



story to Tom Kelly ("711"). He basically said exactly the same thing



- that I was an idiot and could have killed myself quite easily, and



to get the hell away from him.







At first I was very hurt, and then I was really ****ed off. Wasn't



Gary a legend in the sport? Wasn't I "smart" to have figured this out



and emulated him (even if unintentionally)? Wasn't I skilled to have



pulled it off and gotten home? Here I was, a budding contest pilot,



doing well on a tough day and hanging (sorta) with one of the best



pilots around! Why the hell should I be raked over the coals for my



accomplishment??







Over time, I've come to the realization that Tom's attitude is a lot



closer to the right attitude. A lot of good, skilled, experienced



pilots do dumb things. Even if I am the hottest pilot in the universe



(breaking news: I'm not), it isn't always smart to mirror the behavior



of top pilots. Following someone else's lead into a trap is just



dumb. I'll admit that I still sometimes take moderate risks in my



contest flying; but I'm far more cognizant of them and I don't simply



use other pilots as a measuring-stick for safety or what's "right" to



do.







--Noel



This is exactly why those kind of discussions on RAS are so important. You will hear opinions that you will normally wouldn't hear elsewhere or face to face. I will definitely think twice next time before deciding to thermal below 500 ft AGL.

Sad news but great discussion.



Ramy


THANK YOU for admitting you were wrong; I feel like I made some sort of impression. I feel that it will take this kind of CRITICAL self and group appraisal to have any serious impact on the current accident rate.

Frankly, the current approach by the Soaring Safety Foundation is completely ineffective: "There is no acceptable accident rate." What the hell does that mean and how can that mentality be used to reduce the accident rate? Then they categorize accidents by phase of flight (takeoff, in-flight, landing, etc.). Accidents are caused by pilots making DUMB DECISIONS (baring the relative few mechanical failures), pure and simple. WHY do pilots make dumb decisions? The possibilities a
1. They freeze and stop flying the glider.
2. They don't want to land back and wait in line for a relight.
3. They don't want to go thru the hassle of a retrieve (and may not have anyone available to retrieve them).
4. They have never landed in a field and are afraid.
5. They are trying to win a contest.
6. They are trying to set a record.
7. They have some sort of commitment and must get back to the field.
8. They are tired and/or dehydrated and are not thinking properly.
9. They don't want to scratch their expensive glider.
10. They want to impress their fellow pilots.

I am sure there are others. Honestly, the first one is a killer and I don't have a solution for it; some people simply can't handle stress and shouldn't be pilots. One guy wrote two long articles in soaring describing exactly this reaction and was congratulated for being honest: nobody told him to take up a different sport!

The others can be dealt with. One day, I casually told another pilot in a little difficulty not to worry, I will come and get you if you land out (he didn't). The next day he sent me an email thanking me for that comment, and that it greatly reduced his stress level at the time.

The bottom line is we have to be openly critical of our fellow pilots who are making obviously dumb decisions. That may not have any effect, but it certainly won't if we remain silent.

Tom
2G

I believe that thinking in terms of "what exact altitude do I stop thermalling" is bound to get you into trouble. Accidents seem always to be a chain of events, any link of which could have prevented the accident. They are rarely exclusively the cause of a single, sudden event. Focusing on a single event in an accident frequently ignores several other things that would have changed the outcome, even if the single event still occurred.

I think of safety in terms of my margin for error. This is affected by a great many things: first and foremost my appetite for risk, then in no obvious order pilot skill and currency, terrain, familiarity with terrain and aircraft, physical state of fitness at the moment, weather conditions, distracting concurrent events, mental state of mind, and many other factors.

I have picked my desired margin for error (it is higher than many pilots I know) and try to stay above it. If it is late in the day, turbulent, with terrain I will give up for landing very high. If I am fresh, have 5000 AGL, no other gliders around I might circle at 1 knot above stall/spin speed. These have a similar margin for error. Circling at 400 ft over a flat desert on a calm day has a greater margin for error than circling at 1500 ft in gusty conditions over terrain with two other gliders. A hard altitude number for circling is meaningless in isolation.

I have met pilots (who later died) who were skilled, but frequently flew with a very low margin for error. Most of the time they pulled it off, but one time, they didn't: the statistics of error probability exceeded the margin they allowed. I have met pilots (who later died) who were skilled, and even careful, but did not recognize the reduction in margin of error caused by some of their actions.

Of course most pilots instinctively or subconsciously try to balance the margin for error to some extent, and in any case it is not a number you can quantify. But if you think of it specifically as a quantity, and study even for a few moments what affects it, and keep it in mind as you fly, you are likely to change how you fly in some circumstances. Circling at 400 ft has already reduced your margin for error substantially in several dimensions. You can never predict or control all of the things that are going to happen: now even a slight distraction or small gust might exceed the margin you have allowed, and you become a statistic.