RIP Matt Wright (Balleka on YouTube)

On Monday, 12 February 2018 20:33:00 UTC+2, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
Really?
I will admit I have limited experience in "newer" other brand standard ships, but I can't say I EVER had an issue with the divebrakes in a -24 (couple hundred hours flying it, numerous off airport landings, nothing broken.....).


I know couple pilots with over 1000hrs in '24, competing decades without a hitch, and trust their opinion that it has weak airbrakes. You cannot do same manouvers with '24 that you could get away with LS or Discus (of same vintage). It does not mean that it is unsafe or problematic to fly, of course..

The ASW-19 has anemic, but adequate, speed brakes. I've never heard a complaint about the -24 before.

Paul A.

At 20:17 12 February 2018, Paul Agnew wrote:
The ASW-19 has anemic, but adequate, speed brakes. I've never
heard a
complaint about the -24 before.

Paul A.

If your ASW-19 doesn't have the 2 stage dive brake mod, get
it done. If it already has it, you should have seen what it was like
before. I had one for 5 years from 1978 - 1983.

RO

Even in a G-103 you can steepen the approach by increasing airspeed with
full
spoilers. The drag increases with the square of the airspeed.

Mind you it takes a bit of time in ground effect to get rid of the airspeed
in
something with puny spoilers. But any headwind helps with the groundspeed.


The AAIB report does not discuss whether windshear might have overpowered
the ailerons or whether Matt attempted to decrease the bank.

At a 60° bank there's some 42' of height difference between the wingtips.
In
active air, that's lots of room for a shear. Landing straight ahead in such

conditions would limit the chances of getting into a bank you can't get out
of.

On Mon, 12 Feb 2018 20:55:41 +0000, Michael Opitz wrote:

If your ASW-19 doesn't have the 2 stage dive brake mod, get it done. If
it already has it, you should have seen what it was like before. I had
one for 5 years from 1978 - 1983.

I've never seen one without the double brake plate mod, let alone flown
one. How do the original brakes compare with a Std Libelle?

I had been going to say that, though I'd been warned about Libelle brakes
before I ever flew one, I initially found them to be a bit weak but not
terrible. then again, post solo I spent a year flying SZD Juniors (up to
Silver) and then another two years in a Pegase90 (both club gliders)
before I first flew a Libelle and a PW-5. Neither were problematic,
though I much preferred the Libelle.

I've owned my ASW 24 for 26 years and have about 1,500 hours, including many national and regional contests. Lots of field landings (haha). The air brakes, in my opinion, are hardly "weak". I know there are other Std. Class gliders with bigger air brakes (the LS-4 comes to mind). And I know you said "weakest" and not "weak". But your implication is unfortunate and I disagree. No Standard Class glider that I'm aware of can rival a 15M ship with landing flaps and dive brakes (e.g., ASW 20). But the '24 brakes are perfectly adequate. And if you want a much steeper approach angle, it slips beautifully, with or without full dive brakes and with or without winglets.

I wasn't there that day nor do I know the airfield or the pilot. But I agree with Mike's assessment based on the accident report that the pilot could easily have landed straight ahead with no drama. It's dangerous to speculate but I, too, thought of the convenience factor when I first read the report. It's something all of us have considered many times, occasionally unwisely.

The convenience practice that makes me cringe is watching a glider rolling out briskly towards other gliders/trailers/vehicles/structures/people in near total reliance on the wheel brake. Those fail occasionally.

Chip Bearden

To restate RO's question: Considering the pilot's experience, he should have known that the safest option was to land straight ahead. However, he chose a course of action that was less safe, so the question is what may have motivated him?

The convenience factor is the most obvious one, but there may have been one or more other factors at play, such as:

The copycat factor, which makes you inclined to copy something that you saw someone else do in a similar situation, without thinking things through. In this case the Discus pilot successfully completed an abbreviated circuit a short time before the accident. This factor was mentioned in the AAIB report.

The vanity factor, in the context of which landing straight ahead could have meant an implicit admission that the Discus pilot was more skilful.

The improvisation factor 1, whereby prior to taking off the pilot didn't consider all the relevant circumstances (including turbulence, wind shear, etc.) and didn't come up with a definite and well thought-out plan on how to handle different emergency situations, should one arise during the take-off..

The improvisation factor 2, whereby prior to taking off the pilot did consider all the relevant circumstances and did come up with a definite and well thought-out plan on how to handle different emergency situations, should one arise during the take-off, however, upon encountering the emergency situation decided to change his plan.

Branko
XYU

On Monday, December 5, 2016 at 2:54:30 AM UTC-8, Stephan van den Berg wrote:
Dreadful news coming from the UK today. Matt Wright (Balleka on YouTube) was tragically killed in a mid-air whilst flying his glider this weekend. I believe he collided with a power plane.

I'm sure we have all watched some of Matt's videos on YouTube over and over. He will be sorely missed.

RIP Balleka and the Flying Shark

I read that three cameras were in the glider. Are those videos available?

At 22:35 12 February 2018, Kiwi User wrote:
On Mon, 12 Feb 2018 20:55:41 +0000, Michael Opitz wrote:

If your ASW-19 doesn't have the 2 stage dive brake mod, get it
done. If
it already has it, you should have seen what it was like before. I
had
one for 5 years from 1978 - 1983.

I've never seen one without the double brake plate mod, let alone
flown
one. How do the original brakes compare with a Std Libelle?

I had been going to say that, though I'd been warned about Libelle
brakes
before I ever flew one, I initially found them to be a bit weak but
not
terrible. then again, post solo I spent a year flying SZD Juniors (up
to
Silver) and then another two years in a Pegase90 (both club
gliders)
before I first flew a Libelle and a PW-5. Neither were problematic,
though I much preferred the Libelle.


Martin,

Frankly I don't know because I have never flown a STD Libelle.
The original single stage ASW-19 air brakes were some-
what better than the single stage STD Cirrus airbrakes, which
were poor. I think they were also a little better than those of an
LS-1C or a DG-100, but close.

I forget the German competition pilot's name who came up with
the mod, but Schleicher started producing kits for the retrofit
pretty quickly. I think that became the basis for the ASW-19B
designation. I obtained one of those kits as soon as it became
available, and it made a pretty dramatic difference once installed
on my bird. My brother and Father bought that -19 from me when
I moved up to one of the first DG-300's. That -19 is now 40 years
old, and my brother still has it.

RO

I think the simplest factor that may have had a major effect on his decision was seeing the other glider successfully complete a circuit earlier after an early release.

The subconscious correlation between the earlier launch/return and his flight may have influenced him enough to the point where other options didn't come to mind in the heat of the moment.

In the end, he did us all a great service with his videos and helped us all even more with the sharing of our thoughts on his accident. I know my decision making and pre-planning will be sharper because of this thread.

Paul A.
Jupiter, FL
ASW-19 (basic un-modded speed brakes...for now.)