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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
2nd-Guessing Accidents (aka Seeking Personal Insight)
On 5/15/2012 12:04 AM, kirk.stant wrote:
I'm going to risk the wrath of the crowd (US, specifically) and make the following personal observation. Glider instruction in the US sucks. Period. It is haphazard, unstructured, and shallow. We get a new pilot to the point where they can steer a 2-33 around the field and slip it to a landing, then bless them and turn them loose. Dos anyone have a clue about the accident rate in the U.S. vs everywhere else? This would be the "acid test", I think. I have no clue - just asking. Tony "6N" |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
2nd-Guessing Accidents (aka Seeking Personal Insight)
From a UK perspective, I agree that instructors cannot possibly teach
everything. What they can, and I believe do, teach is all of the essentials to be able to take off, soar locally, return to the circuit, cope with too low, too high, or otherwise out of position, cope with launch failures, appreciate stall and spin awareness, and land safely after any or all of the above. A basic training syllabus that leaves any of the above out would be defective. Subsequently, they can and do teach field selection and good field landing practices. What I do not think is well taught is risk assessment other than as covered above. On any one flight, there should not be more than one major new thing which has risk attached to it, and/or not too many minor new things. As an example, a young, very competent, but low experience pilot from my club was visiting another. They offered him a winch launch, at what was a new site, in a new type. He would probably have coped all right, but I thought it was at least one new thing too many. I spoke to their CFI (that is, chief flying instructor, in UK terminology) and suggested that he should at least have a two seater winch launch on their winch with which he was not familiar, at their site which was also new to him, to be given a briefing on suitable emergency situations and how to cope with them. If all that went okay, and only then, should he be briefed on and be allowed to fly a new solo glider type there. A friend of mine died in his first flight on a new type, trying an aerobatic manoeuvre (rolling to inverted) which was new to him, and he then hit the ground trying to recover erect flight. I keep losing count of how many people I have known personally who died in gliding accidents, but I think it is between six and 10. It is far higher than the number I knew who have died in road accidents, for instance. Re accident rates, we have fairly good UK data. It is not perfect, because we know at least a small number of accidents that result in insurance claims do not appear in our official accidents database. I have no idea what you have in the USA. Chris N |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
2nd-Guessing Accidents (aka Seeking Personal Insight)
On May 15, 9:23*pm, Tony V wrote:
On 5/15/2012 12:04 AM, kirk.stant wrote: I'm going to risk the wrath of the crowd (US, specifically) and make the following personal observation. Glider instruction in the US sucks. Period. It is haphazard, unstructured, and shallow. *We get a new pilot to the point where they can steer a 2-33 around the field and slip it to a landing, then bless them and turn them loose. Dos anyone have a clue about the accident rate in the U.S. vs everywhere else? This would be the "acid test", I think. I have no clue - just asking. Tony "6N" A few things I've been thinking about. There are lots of stall/spin pattern accidents. Power planes do better because they can go around, or use power to overcome the situation. So we can NOT get in the situation in the first place. I feel there is no voice in our heads that automatically screams when we are close to these situations. I learned by wondering in bewilderment why one wing suddenly dropped (crash) turning final with my radio control glider. I became very aware and sensitive to that situation after is happened a few times. A host of alarms should be going off when a situation is set up that may lead to the stall/spin. These need to be hard wired into our memory so that they fire a loud alarm. Knowledge is not enough. It has to be prioritized knowledge backed up by muscle memory/fear. My god, that's going to make me spin in! Relax back pressure and fly into something under control because you are not going to live through the stall/spin. Just like race car drivers. They always say drive off the road under control and you are more likely to survive picking what you will hit head on. So how do we burn all these dangerous situations into muscle memory and have the alarms go off that let us know how badly we are about to be hurt? The airlines use simulators over and over and over again until these situations are no longer emergencies, they become more "abnormals". Real emergencies are unpreventable. I hate to pull the Condor weapon out again, but I think, even though it doesn't have failures built in, it can be very useful for the repetition that is required to burn in the muscle/memory danger awareness thing. If you set Condor to release at 200 AGL the tow will wag its wings. Have this happen on lots of tows at various altitudes and practice landing with different patterns, some with very strong winds. I guarantee a student will instantly recognize the wave off real world. With Condor, Make the student acknowledge out loud what the wave off is, also that you have to give yourself a second to access before you actually release. In Condor I would make the student talk out loud on tow all the way to maybe 500 AGL, such as. Continuously calling out where he will land if the rope breaks. I do this myself both real world and Condor. Guard the air brakes. I see gliders drifting sideways on tow before lift off. To the point where they should be releasing. Condor is fantastic at teaching the skills to keep the nose straight, balanced on the one wheel, upwind wing down slightly. Try it with full water and a huge crosswind. You should be releasing often before airborne when it gets out of hand. You will become hard wired to release. All these very dangerous situations need to be burned into memory somehow or we will keep making the same mistakes we have always made. Reading helps too. Books, newsgroups, accident statistics, good instructors, but don't be complacent. The other thing I think about is competition flying. I may be out of place, because I don't compete.. Yet. I would not dream of formation flying in a gaggle of power planes, some with very little formation flying experience. (PowerFlarm should help though) I would not have a very casual attitude about landing out in a power plane. I do not put myself in situations with power flying that gives me get home- itis. Competition flying is a monumental example of this. I could see competition flying with course lines over lots of airports with finish lines off airport, large ant at altitude which I think being implemented. I would fly that kind of competition flying. Lastly there are a lot of old glider pilots. I'm one. Face it, our memories are getting worse. Just another reason to adjust our personal minimums. Soaring puts us in a precarious situation by what it is, how we are taught, and human nature. If we don't realize this and are not pro- active, or we have one of the "hazardous attitudes". Our likelihood of not surviving goes up. There is no one on this earth that should have the attitude that they know it all. I walked out of a check ride based on this hazardous attitude. I wasn't going to fly with him. ... Aaron |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
2nd-Guessing Accidents (aka Seeking Personal Insight)
On May 15, 6:23*pm, Tony V wrote:
Dos anyone have a clue about the accident rate in the U.S. vs everywhere else? This would be the "acid test", I think. I have no clue - just asking. Tony "6N" Tony - Gliding International did a spread on this a few issues back and compared accident rates (as well as pilot population sizes so you could see "per capita" numbers). From what I recall, the US was not stellar; but also not at the top of the list for accidents, either (by comparison France was surprisingly high, IIRC). One big comment I'll make about the quality of instruction in the US: There are some really talented and dedicated CFIGs out there (and I humbly hope to join their ranks late this year). But I have also found a lot of instructors who are no longer interested in making pilots; all they want to do is get some free air-time and teach stick and rudder skills. I see these a lot in club operations, where I think we are loathe to turn away any volunteer help, regardless of its true value. The result is that you get students who either: 1) Take forever to get to their license and get frustrated (and often drop out of the club/sport). 2) Go into their Checkride unprepared, leading to them fail (and getting frustrated and possibly leaving the sport). 3) Pass their checkride, but get into trouble as they do more flying and/or encounter challenges like rough thermals, mountain conditions, long XC glides, etc - which require more knowledge and planning than pure stick-and-rudder reflexes. While I find those results distasteful, I'm also coming around to the idea that maybe these stick-and-rudder instructors aren't necessarily a bad thing - IF they are managed appropriately. I think the club (and a club's Chief CFIG) needs to keep an eye on these folks and either provide supplemental instruction or transition students AWAY from them once they master the basics. But I don't think the proper people are providing the proper oversight; or they're not willing to risk offending volunteers by exercising any control over these processes. I also see a dearth of ground instruction at some clubs (at least in my area), even with "good" instructors. I think the flight line is a HORRIBLE place to talk about theory or discuss the PTS or GFH. Yet I watch instructors fly with students, then wave goodbye and a jaunty "see you here next week!" How does the student learn about the theory and important mental aspects of our sport if we don't guide them to the knowledge by helping them figure out what reading to focus on, what topics to study, and encourage the retention of this knowledge through interaction and questioning? Students need to be self- motivated; but even enthusiastic ones "don't know what they don't know". They need a roadmap, some friendly advice, and occasionally a shove in the right direction to give them some momentum when it comes to studying on the ground. You don't get that "push" on the flight- line or in the cockpit - the student is way too busy just trying to fly the airplane and manage their stress levels! --Noel |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
2nd-Guessing Accidents (aka Seeking Personal Insight)
On May 17, 9:13*am, akiley wrote:
On May 15, 9:23*pm, Tony V wrote: On 5/15/2012 12:04 AM, kirk.stant wrote: I'm going to risk the wrath of the crowd (US, specifically) and make the following personal observation. Glider instruction in the US sucks. Period. It is haphazard, unstructured, and shallow. *We get a new pilot to the point where they can steer a 2-33 around the field and slip it to a landing, then bless them and turn them loose. Dos anyone have a clue about the accident rate in the U.S. vs everywhere else? This would be the "acid test", I think. I have no clue - just asking. Tony "6N" A few things I've been thinking about. *There are lots of stall/spin pattern accidents. Actually, while stall/spin accidents happen, most glider landing accidents are less complicated. They just involve hitting things. While seeking to avoid stalls and spins in the pattern is laudatory, it should not be overdone to the extent pilots become so fearful they carry too much airspeed into the landing flare. Trying to get rid of excess speed while "floating" down the runway can lead to collisions with objects. In most situations, a pattern airspeed of "Yellow Triangle + 1/2 the gust speed" is safe enough. Once on short final, the airspeed can be reduced to just above the yellow triangle for a short landing roll. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
2nd-Guessing Accidents (aka Seeking Personal Insight)
I searched the thread for the word "currency" and didnt see it.
It would be interesting to see if there is correlation between accidents and lack of currency in these cases. This applies to currency of basic flight operations and currency of basic XC principles(harder to measure). But to clarify, to me, its not how many hours you got, but rather "where your mind is" with recent experiences. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
2nd-Guessing Accidents (aka Seeking Personal Insight)
On Thursday, May 17, 2012 12:13:20 PM UTC-7, noel.wade wrote:
On May 15, 6:23*pm, Tony V wrote: Dos anyone have a clue about the accident rate in the U.S. vs everywhere else? This would be the "acid test", I think. I have no clue - just asking. Tony "6N" Tony - Gliding International did a spread on this a few issues back and compared accident rates (as well as pilot population sizes so you could see "per capita" numbers). From what I recall, the US was not stellar; but also not at the top of the list for accidents, either (by comparison France was surprisingly high, IIRC). One big comment I'll make about the quality of instruction in the US: There are some really talented and dedicated CFIGs out there (and I humbly hope to join their ranks late this year). But I have also found a lot of instructors who are no longer interested in making pilots; all they want to do is get some free air-time and teach stick and rudder skills. I see these a lot in club operations, where I think we are loathe to turn away any volunteer help, regardless of its true value. The result is that you get students who either: 1) Take forever to get to their license and get frustrated (and often drop out of the club/sport). 2) Go into their Checkride unprepared, leading to them fail (and getting frustrated and possibly leaving the sport). 3) Pass their checkride, but get into trouble as they do more flying and/or encounter challenges like rough thermals, mountain conditions, long XC glides, etc - which require more knowledge and planning than pure stick-and-rudder reflexes. While I find those results distasteful, I'm also coming around to the idea that maybe these stick-and-rudder instructors aren't necessarily a bad thing - IF they are managed appropriately. I think the club (and a club's Chief CFIG) needs to keep an eye on these folks and either provide supplemental instruction or transition students AWAY from them once they master the basics. But I don't think the proper people are providing the proper oversight; or they're not willing to risk offending volunteers by exercising any control over these processes. I also see a dearth of ground instruction at some clubs (at least in my area), even with "good" instructors. I think the flight line is a HORRIBLE place to talk about theory or discuss the PTS or GFH. Yet I watch instructors fly with students, then wave goodbye and a jaunty "see you here next week!" How does the student learn about the theory and important mental aspects of our sport if we don't guide them to the knowledge by helping them figure out what reading to focus on, what topics to study, and encourage the retention of this knowledge through interaction and questioning? Students need to be self- motivated; but even enthusiastic ones "don't know what they don't know". They need a roadmap, some friendly advice, and occasionally a shove in the right direction to give them some momentum when it comes to studying on the ground. You don't get that "push" on the flight- line or in the cockpit - the student is way too busy just trying to fly the airplane and manage their stress levels! --Noel Excellent points. Unfortunately, the majority of flight instructors I know never read this forum, and as such will not take notes... Ramy |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
2nd-Guessing Accidents (aka Seeking Personal Insight)
On May 17, 1:13*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
On May 15, 6:23*pm, Tony V wrote: Dos anyone have a clue about the accident rate in the U.S. vs everywhere else? This would be the "acid test", I think. I have no clue - just asking. Tony "6N" Tony - Gliding International did a spread on this a few issues back and compared accident rates (as well as pilot population sizes so you could see "per capita" numbers). *From what I recall, the US was not stellar; but also not at the top of the list for accidents, either (by comparison France was surprisingly high, IIRC). One big comment I'll make about the quality of instruction in the US: There are some really talented and dedicated CFIGs out there (and I humbly hope to join their ranks late this year). *But I have also found a lot of instructors who are no longer interested in making pilots; all they want to do is get some free air-time and teach stick and rudder skills. *I see these a lot in club operations, where I think we are loathe to turn away any volunteer help, regardless of its true value. *The result is that you get students who either: 1) Take forever to get to their license and get frustrated (and often drop out of the club/sport). 2) Go into their Checkride unprepared, leading to them fail (and getting frustrated and possibly leaving the sport). 3) Pass their checkride, but get into trouble as they do more flying and/or encounter challenges like rough thermals, mountain conditions, long XC glides, etc - which require more knowledge and planning than pure stick-and-rudder reflexes. While I find those results distasteful, I'm also coming around to the idea that maybe these stick-and-rudder instructors aren't necessarily a bad thing - IF they are managed appropriately. *I think the club (and a club's Chief CFIG) needs to keep an eye on these folks and either provide supplemental instruction or transition students AWAY from them once they master the basics. *But I don't think the proper people are providing the proper oversight; or they're not willing to risk offending volunteers by exercising any control over these processes. I also see a dearth of ground instruction at some clubs (at least in my area), even with "good" instructors. *I think the flight line is a HORRIBLE place to talk about theory or discuss the PTS or GFH. *Yet I watch instructors fly with students, then wave goodbye and a jaunty "see you here next week!" *How does the student learn about the theory and important mental aspects of our sport if we don't guide them to the knowledge by helping them figure out what reading to focus on, what topics to study, and encourage the retention of this knowledge through interaction and questioning? *Students need to be self- motivated; but even enthusiastic ones "don't know what they don't know". *They need a roadmap, some friendly advice, and occasionally a shove in the right direction to give them some momentum when it comes to studying on the ground. *You don't get that "push" on the flight- line or in the cockpit - the student is way too busy just trying to fly the airplane and manage their stress levels! --Noel Noel makes some excellent points. The flight line, and by extension the cockpit, are lousy classrooms. Classroom instruction is a critical part of learning to become a pilot. The solution, I'd humbly suggest, is not to build hundreds of classrooms and find capable instructors to teach in them, it's to use this medium - the Internet. We need on-line Private Pilot, Glider courses to teach the knowledge required for the written and oral exams. I'd think both the student and instructor should create an account as a pair. The student can do the coursework and the instructor can log in to see the student's progress. BTW, I don't think there's anything wrong with emphasizing stick and rudder skills. Without those, not much else is possible. A lot of instructors have settled on the approach of first teaching people to fly, then teaching them the rest. I've seen students become so frustrated they quit because an instructor was hammering landings when the student couldn't fly well enough to perform them. If a student can't fly a straight course in the sky, they can't be expected to fly a straight final approach. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
2nd-Guessing Accidents (aka Seeking Personal Insight)
At 23:00 17 May 2012, Bill D wrote:
On May 17, 1:13=A0pm, "noel.wade" wrote: On May 15, 6:23=A0pm, Tony V wrote: Dos anyone have a clue about the accident rate in the U.S. vs everywher= e else? This would be the "acid test", I think. I have no clue - just ask= ing. Tony "6N" Tony - Gliding International did a spread on this a few issues back and compared accident rates (as well as pilot population sizes so you could see "per capita" numbers). =A0From what I recall, the US was not stellar; but also not at the top of the list for accidents, either (by comparison France was surprisingly high, IIRC). One big comment I'll make about the quality of instruction in the US: There are some really talented and dedicated CFIGs out there (and I humbly hope to join their ranks late this year). =A0But I have also found a lot of instructors who are no longer interested in making pilots; all they want to do is get some free air-time and teach stick and rudder skills. =A0I see these a lot in club operations, where I think we are loathe to turn away any volunteer help, regardless of its true value. =A0The result is that you get students who either: 1) Take forever to get to their license and get frustrated (and often drop out of the club/sport). 2) Go into their Checkride unprepared, leading to them fail (and getting frustrated and possibly leaving the sport). 3) Pass their checkride, but get into trouble as they do more flying and/or encounter challenges like rough thermals, mountain conditions, long XC glides, etc - which require more knowledge and planning than pure stick-and-rudder reflexes. While I find those results distasteful, I'm also coming around to the idea that maybe these stick-and-rudder instructors aren't necessarily a bad thing - IF they are managed appropriately. =A0I think the club (and a club's Chief CFIG) needs to keep an eye on these folks and either provide supplemental instruction or transition students AWAY from them once they master the basics. =A0But I don't think the proper people are providing the proper oversight; or they're not willing to risk offending volunteers by exercising any control over these processes. I also see a dearth of ground instruction at some clubs (at least in my area), even with "good" instructors. =A0I think the flight line is a HORRIBLE place to talk about theory or discuss the PTS or GFH. =A0Yet I watch instructors fly with students, then wave goodbye and a jaunty "see you here next week!" =A0How does the student learn about the theory and important mental aspects of our sport if we don't guide them to the knowledge by helping them figure out what reading to focus on, what topics to study, and encourage the retention of this knowledge through interaction and questioning? =A0Students need to be self- motivated; but even enthusiastic ones "don't know what they don't know". =A0They need a roadmap, some friendly advice, and occasionally a shove in the right direction to give them some momentum when it comes to studying on the ground. =A0You don't get that "push" on the flight- line or in the cockpit - the student is way too busy just trying to fly the airplane and manage their stress levels! --Noel Noel makes some excellent points. The flight line, and by extension the cockpit, are lousy classrooms. Classroom instruction is a critical part of learning to become a pilot. The solution, I'd humbly suggest, is not to build hundreds of classrooms and find capable instructors to teach in them, it's to use this medium - the Internet. We need on-line Private Pilot, Glider courses to teach the knowledge required for the written and oral exams. I'd think both the student and instructor should create an account as a pair. The student can do the coursework and the instructor can log in to see the student's progress. BTW, I don't think there's anything wrong with emphasizing stick and rudder skills. Without those, not much else is possible. A lot of instructors have settled on the approach of first teaching people to fly, then teaching them the rest. I've seen students become so frustrated they quit because an instructor was hammering landings when the student couldn't fly well enough to perform them. If a student can't fly a straight course in the sky, they can't be expected to fly a straight final approach. If the day is less than perfect its our practice to have a general classroom sestion not too formal .Perhaps the CFI will give the job of heading it up to a 1/2 cat instructor,very informal with lots of very expreienced pilots listening in,but inexperienced ears are listening,the same as here.Hopefully out of that comes the knowlage that is so expensive if learned by breaking thing.We are all there to learn, it could be how to land ,but it equally could be which side of the cloud when the sun is here and the wind here.A pilot who knows it all is just delusional. Then the front clears through and we all go and try to get it right |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
2nd-Guessing Accidents (aka Seeking Personal Insight)
At 20:13 17 May 2012, db_sonic wrote:
I searched the thread for the word "currency" and didnt see it. It would be interesting to see if there is correlation between accidents and lack of currency in these cases. This applies to currency of basic flight operations and currency of basic XC principles(harder to measure). But to clarify, to me, its not how many hours you got, but rather "where your mind is" with recent experiences. The BGA has this useful "Currency Barometer" http://www.gliding.co.uk/bgainfo/saf...ilot-briefing- guidance.htm |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UK Air Accidents | Graham Drinkell | Soaring | 12 | June 18th 09 02:29 PM |
Airport Insight | Monty | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | October 30th 07 07:38 PM |
Accidents | Big John | Piloting | 3 | December 14th 05 01:19 PM |
Any experience with Insight True Flow 500? | Thomas Borchert | Owning | 1 | April 18th 05 06:13 PM |
Peter Carl Masak, an insight | F.L. Whiteley | Soaring | 1 | June 29th 04 05:15 PM |