Glider Crash in Shirley, NY

Sad news here. Does anyone have any info on this fatal crash? The info I have read says it was a Schweizer 2-32.
Thanks - Renny

http://online.wsj.com/article/AP3ee4...ogle news_wsj

On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 12:02:47 AM UTC-4, wrote:
Sad news here. Does anyone have any info on this fatal crash? The info I have read says it was a Schweizer 2-32.

Thanks - Renny



http://online.wsj.com/article/AP3ee4...ogle news_wsj

More he

http://www.longisland.com/news/04-30...stigation.html

On Thursday, May 2, 2013 9:20:52 AM UTC-6, wrote:
On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 12:02:47 AM UTC-4, wrote:

Sad news here. Does anyone have any info on this fatal crash? The info I have read says it was a Schweizer 2-32.



Thanks - Renny







http://online.wsj.com/article/AP3ee4...ogle news_wsj



More he



http://www.longisland.com/news/04-30...stigation.html

The preliminary NTSB report has been released.

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/br...27X24846&key=1

I'm so sorry for the loss to family and friends.

It appears that another SGS 2-32 spins in? This Schweizer is pretty unforgiving...

Boggs

On Friday, May 3, 2013 8:21:53 AM UTC-7, Waveguru wrote:

It appears that another SGS 2-32 spins in? This Schweizer is pretty unforgiving...

Only if your training was in 2-33s and didn't include spin training. The 2-32 will spin, but it gives you a little warning (not much), and recovers nicely once it departs. Kinda like a T-6, considered one of the best trainers ever built.

Sad that we keep rediscovering our training flaws, assuming this was a spin-in. Which of course, it may not have been.

Sad, regardless.

Kirk
66

Hand held radio, if unsecured can be a factor.

Any reason to think that was so in this case?

At 18:42 03 May 2013, wrote:
Hand held radio, if unsecured can be a factor.

On Saturday, May 4, 2013 8:31:58 AM UTC-5, Chris Rollings wrote:
Any reason to think that was so in this case?


No. I just noticed mention of the handheld in the NTSP report and know that fiddling with a handheld on approach can be problematic.

Matt Michael

On Friday, May 3, 2013 11:03:29 AM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:
On Friday, May 3, 2013 8:21:53 AM UTC-7, Waveguru wrote:

recovers nicely once it departs.

Agreed but the 32s I've flown required positive forceful control inputs to initiate recovery. Virtually every other glider I've flown will begin to recover merely by relaxing back pressure and applying a touch of opposite rudder. The 32 is one of my favorite machines to fly but it's spin characteristics and recovery are somewhat unique. Whatever the causal factors in this accident it's terrible to lose yet another of our comrades.

At 14:55 04 May 2013, wrote:
On Friday, May 3, 2013 11:03:29 AM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:
On Friday, May 3, 2013 8:21:53 AM UTC-7, Waveguru wrote:
=20
recovers nicely once it departs.

Agreed but the 32s I've flown required positive forceful control inputs
to
=
initiate recovery. Virtually every other glider I've flown will begin to
r=
ecover merely by relaxing back pressure and applying a touch of opposite
ru=
dder. The 32 is one of my favorite machines to fly but it's spin
characteri=
stics and recovery are somewhat unique. Whatever the causal factors in
thi=
s accident it's terrible to lose yet another of our comrades.

A fairly large number of German single-place glass gliders have similar
characteristics, albeit with somewhat lower control forces but the same
deflections required, particulary with the C of G in the aft part of the
range.