A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Glider crash near Reno yesterday



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 27th 18, 05:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tango Whisky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 402
Default Glider crash near Reno yesterday

This is actually quite helpful. "Loops" means up and down, not spiral dive, and paraglider pilots know the difference. Nobody does multiple loops to the point of structural failure intentionally or unintentionally. That pretty much screams elevator control failure, and somehow getting stuck in a rearwards position. It also explains why the pilots might not have been able to bail out. Yes, I'm speculating, but that's likely all we'll get.

John Cochrane


I agree. Ripping off the wings in a loop means going up to close to 10 g (5..6 g on the flight envelope, plus a demonstrated security factor of 1.75). Going close to that limit can't be done repeatedly without blacking out (I regularily do aerobatics with sailplanes between -3.5 and 6 g), so this can't have happened intentionally or unintentionally.

Bert TW
  #22  
Old September 27th 18, 05:36 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jonathan St. Cloud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,463
Default Glider crash near Reno yesterday

On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 8:45:16 AM UTC-7, John Cochrane wrote:
On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 10:12:39 PM UTC-5, Ramy wrote:
NTSB preliminary report:
https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...=HTML&IType=FA

Ramy


This is actually quite helpful. "Loops" means up and down, not spiral dive, and paraglider pilots know the difference. Nobody does multiple loops to the point of structural failure intentionally or unintentionally. That pretty much screams elevator control failure, and somehow getting stuck in a rearwards position. It also explains why the pilots might not have been able to bail out. Yes, I'm speculating, but that's likely all we'll get.

John Cochrane


If I was purchasing a new glider today, I would be getting it with a NOAH system installed.
As for the accident....I still don't have any words, I just can't believe it, just...
  #23  
Old September 27th 18, 06:53 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
krasw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 668
Default Glider crash near Reno yesterday

On Thursday, 27 September 2018 19:28:44 UTC+3, Tango Whisky wrote:
This is actually quite helpful. "Loops" means up and down, not spiral dive, and paraglider pilots know the difference. Nobody does multiple loops to the point of structural failure intentionally or unintentionally. That pretty much screams elevator control failure, and somehow getting stuck in a rearwards position. It also explains why the pilots might not have been able to bail out. Yes, I'm speculating, but that's likely all we'll get.

John Cochrane


I agree. Ripping off the wings in a loop means going up to close to 10 g (5.6 g on the flight envelope, plus a demonstrated security factor of 1.75).. Going close to that limit can't be done repeatedly without blacking out (I regularily do aerobatics with sailplanes between -3.5 and 6 g), so this can't have happened intentionally or unintentionally.

Bert TW


What if wing was weaker than intended (ref. DuoDiscus wing spar AD years back)? Ripping of wings is impossible at max. rough air speed or less as wing stalls before it breaks but I think is possible at higher speed.
  #24  
Old September 27th 18, 07:22 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bruce Hoult
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 961
Default Glider crash near Reno yesterday

On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 8:12:39 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
NTSB preliminary report:
https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...=HTML&IType=FA


2 to 3 seconds per loop? G'eeeees!!!

a = v^2/r so r = v^2/a. Based on a 40 knot stall speed, a glider would pull 9G before stalling at about 120 knots, 60 m/s. 9G is 88.2 m/s^2. So loop radius about 41m, circumference 256m, time for a loop 256/88.2 = 2.9 seconds. All neglecting gravity and speed increases and decreases.

Repeating for 10G gives 126 knots, 65 m/s, 43m radius, 4.16 seconds per loop.
Repeating for 8G gives 113 knots, 58 m/s, 43m radius, 4.7 seconds per loop.

Seems the paragliders' reports are plausible if they lost elevator control at a highish but nowhere hear Vne speed.

Ouch.
  #25  
Old September 27th 18, 08:01 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Glider crash near Reno yesterday

I agree that this appears to be an elevator failure. What pieces of the wreckage were retrieved? Was the horizontal stabilizer/elevator retrieved? Was the elevator bolt located (ripped out of the elevator, found in a side pocket, found in the trailer, etc). I have the ability to fly my Phoenix low level over the site on a suitable light east wind day and do a close search for the horizontal stab if it is missing. Finding the stab may be the key to solving this tragedy.
  #27  
Old September 27th 18, 11:48 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
waremark
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 377
Default Glider crash near Reno yesterday

The Duo stab is held on by a sprung bolt which is retained in the fin. Care can be needed to ensure the bolt is fully engaged when rigging but the bolt could not be left out. Anyway, as already said what the paragliders reported is not consistent with a lost stab.

As an Arcus owner I am disturbed by this tragedy which may involve a back end control problem on an S-H 2 seater coming sòon after the loss of Dave Nadler's Arcus. I hope for more information about the Arcus accident in due course.
  #28  
Old September 28th 18, 02:04 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bob Kuykendall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default Glider crash near Reno yesterday

On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 10:53:23 AM UTC-7, krasw wrote:
What if wing was weaker than intended...


The NTSB preliminary report makes it clear that very high load factors were applied to the wings. One witness reported the wingtips at or near vertical, another reported the wingtips almost touching. Even allowing for some exaggeration, it appears that the wings supported loads well above limit or even ultimate load rating.

I agree that this is a very distressing accident. The facts in evidence suggest some sort of pitch control malfunction. But of course there is no proof one way or the other, and the post-accident fire has likely erased the evidence. Though perhaps the cause will be revealed by interference signatures on metal parts.

--Bob K.
  #29  
Old September 28th 18, 04:58 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
James Betker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Glider crash near Reno yesterday

I've got a question - let's assume that the speculation going on here is right and that the elevator control was locked in a full nose-high station - what is the optimal thing to do if you are ever faced with this? Am I right in assuming that it is to bail as quickly as possible before you start building G-loads which would make bailing impossible? If you somehow got yourself into a scenario where you were endlessly looping the glider, would deploying full airbrakes bleed enough energy to stop the looping (and maybe induce a spin instead)?

This is certainly a nightmare scenario. My condolences go out to the friends and family of the departed.
  #30  
Old September 28th 18, 06:13 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
2G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,439
Default Glider crash near Reno yesterday

On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 8:58:23 PM UTC-7, James Betker wrote:
I've got a question - let's assume that the speculation going on here is right and that the elevator control was locked in a full nose-high station - what is the optimal thing to do if you are ever faced with this? Am I right in assuming that it is to bail as quickly as possible before you start building G-loads which would make bailing impossible? If you somehow got yourself into a scenario where you were endlessly looping the glider, would deploying full airbrakes bleed enough energy to stop the looping (and maybe induce a spin instead)?

This is certainly a nightmare scenario. My condolences go out to the friends and family of the departed.


If you are being subjected to 10 g's it would be very difficult to raise your arm to pull the handle - your 10 lb arm suddenly becomes 100 lb.

Tom
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Glider accident in Reno GM Soaring 1 April 16th 15 07:32 PM
Motor-glider talks at SSA convention in Reno Dave Nadler Soaring 10 April 21st 14 03:15 AM
Reno crash story in Reno Gazette-Journal Rich S.[_1_] Home Built 3 September 14th 07 10:27 PM
EEA crash yesterday John Szalay Aviation Photos 5 July 28th 07 08:32 PM
Glider down near Reno - pilot OK James D'Andrea Soaring 61 December 2nd 05 07:39 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.