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 |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
Fatal crash Arizona
At 21:18 15 June 2014, Bill D wrote:
I cannot argue against the above. From what I have read in this thread I have gained the impression that in the event of a launch failure at 200ft or above the recommended procedure is to turn back to the runway. This is completely different from what I have taught for 45 years. In the event of any launch failure the question that should be asked is "Can I land ahead" If the answer is "yes" then land ahead, height does not come into it at all. If, and only if the answer is "No" or "Not sure" should another action be considered and executed.=20 In any event I would never simulate a launch failure at 200 ft if there was not room to land ahead. I would and do simulate launch failures at 300ft and above if there is no room to land ahead and allow students to practice this, turning back as necessary. The reason is simple, while a pilot may be faced with having to turn back at 200 ft the risks in doing so are not justified in training, in the same way that we do not practice very low winch launch failures, just after lift off, or practice ground loops to avoid obstacles both of which are covered by briefings. We do set up the ultra low level launch failure situation from a normal approach but we never simulate it off the launch because of the dangers involved.=20 There will always be circumstances where the "normal" procedure is not possible but we do stress that the important part of the outcome is that the pilot has the best chance of survival, an undamaged glider is not a priority in these circumstances. What you were taught relates to winch launch only. Different rules apply t= o aero tow. With aero tow at 200' AGL on departure it is almost never poss= ible to land ahead on the runway. Either turn or land in whatever terrain = is available off the end of the runway. In many aero tow only airfields, t= hat terrain is not suitable for a safe landing. No, what I was taught and what I teach applies to ALL launch failures, winch, auto tow, and aerotow as detailed above. The first action is to select the appropriate attitude, at least approach attitude and make sure that you have a minimum of approach speed. Then ask the question, "Can I land ahead" If and ONLY if the answer is NO or NOT SURE should any other action be considered. |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
Fatal crash Arizona
While I agree that landing straight ahead is best if there is room, your
sequence of events is wrong. On an aerotow the question whether to land ahead or turn should be made on every launch! "Then ask the question" will lead to overload and grief! On tow, once you have decided you cannot land ahead then it may be a turn to an off-field landing if possible, followed by a 180 turn back to runway when safe. (That will invariably be at least 200') I repeat: after a failure is not the time to be thinking about where to go! Tom No, what I was taught and what I teach applies to ALL launch failures, winch, auto tow, and aerotow as detailed above. The first action is to select the appropriate attitude, at least approach attitude and make sure that you have a minimum of approach speed. Then ask the question, "Can I land ahead" If and ONLY if the answer is NO or NOT SURE should any other action be considered. |
#133
|
|||
|
|||
Fatal crash Arizona
On Sunday, June 15, 2014 3:11:29 PM UTC-7, Bill D wrote:
On Sunday, June 15, 2014 12:09:22 AM UTC-6, 2G wrote: PLEASE stop with the sanctimonious crap! I have done hundreds of aerotows. You need to lower the nose because you are in a climb attitude and need to transition to a glide attitude. On your next tow note where the horizon is on the canopy and compare it to where it is after release at the same airspeed. --------------------------- Raise, lower or leave the nose where it is - this is an energy management maneuver. The pilot is trying to make the most of the energy he has available when the rope breaks not follow some rote procedure. If the glider remains at the climb attitude the airspeed will be trending down which is just fine for the moment since the tow airspeed is very likely to have been well above best L/D or even pattern speed. Until safe return to the runway is assured, stabilizing the airspeed at best L/D is the target. Once return is assured, the pilot may elect to accelerate to pattern speed. The basic airmanship skill is monitoring airspeed trends while simultaneously maneuvering the glider for landing. Once stabilized at best L/D, if the airspeed is climbing, the nose is too low. If the airspeed is falling, it's too high. Come on, get REAL! If this were the case there would be no such accidents! Actual pilots, when confronted with actual emergencies, do not always respond the way they are taught. Why do pilots stall AT ALL if they did what you suggested? Your arm chair analytical review is NOT WORKING! I am strongly suggesting that there are irrational emotional factors that influence pilots to do things completely contrary to their training. I know this for a fact; disregarding this reality is to put your head into the sand. At least you have stopped denigrating my motorglider experience. Tom |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Fatal crash Arizona
May I offer a practical tip? Talk to yourself all the way up the launch to
a safe height (perhaps 500ft), deciding where you will go at every moment should the rope / tug break. Should it then happen you already have the decision made and only have to execute it well. If you, or your trainee, start to do this every launch you will be amazed at what poor decisions you would make to begin with. These get better with the doing of it. Jim At 00:18 16 June 2014, Tom Claffey wrote: While I agree that landing straight ahead is best if there is room, your sequence of events is wrong. On an aerotow the question whether to land ahead or turn should be made on every launch! "Then ask the question" will lead to overload and grief! On tow, once you have decided you cannot land ahead then it may be a turn to an off-field landing if possible, followed by a 180 turn back to runway when safe. (That will invariably be at least 200') I repeat: after a failure is not the time to be thinking about where to go! Tom No, what I was taught and what I teach applies to ALL launch failures, winch, auto tow, and aerotow as detailed above. The first action is to select the appropriate attitude, at least approach attitude and make sure that you have a minimum of approach speed. Then ask the question, "Can I land ahead" If and ONLY if the answer is NO or NOT SURE should any other action be considered. |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
Fatal crash Arizona
At 07:15 16 June 2014, Jim White wrote:
May I offer a practical tip? Talk to yourself all the way up the launch t a safe height (perhaps 500ft), deciding where you will go at every momen should the rope / tug break. Should it then happen you already have th decision made and only have to execute it well. I thought that was supposed to be part of the training! |
#136
|
|||
|
|||
Fatal crash Arizona
On 6/15/2014 8:18 PM, Tom Claffey wrote:
While I agree that landing straight ahead is best if there is room, your sequence of events is wrong. On an aerotow the question whether to land ahead or turn should be made on every launch! "Then ask the question" will lead to overload and grief! On tow, once you have decided you cannot land ahead then it may be a turn to an off-field landing if possible, followed by a 180 turn back to runway when safe. (That will invariably be at least 200') I repeat: after a failure is not the time to be thinking about where to go! Tom No, what I was taught and what I teach applies to ALL launch failures, winch, auto tow, and aerotow as detailed above. The first action is to select the appropriate attitude, at least approach attitude and make sure that you have a minimum of approach speed. Then ask the question, "Can I land ahead" If and ONLY if the answer is NO or NOT SURE should any other action be considered. That's how I was taught - first immediate action - fly the glider. Then assess. I was sent solo in a T21 at Portmoak, flying off winch from the SW end, accompanied by a sandbag in the RH seat. Two 360 degree turns and a good landing. Woohoo. Ok - now for the second solo flight - cable break at 300 feet. All I remember of my thought processes at the time was to get the nose down out of full climb immediately before speed bled off, get rid of cable and then assess - unsure about straight ahead (20/20 hindsight - full spoiler and land would have worked), too low for short circuit (maybe), so I made a 90 degree left turn to get some room, turned back to right and landed across the main onto the alternative area across from the hangars, passing in front of the winch. I explained my thought process to the instructor and we reviewed what I had done - got a slow nod and a well done lad. Good enough for me and a credit to my instructors. Was sent back up once we had towed the T21 back to the launch point. |
#137
|
|||
|
|||
Fatal crash Arizona
At 09:44 16 June 2014, Fred Bear wrote:
On 6/15/2014 8:18 PM, Tom Claffey wrote: While I agree that landing straight ahead is best if there is room, your sequence of events is wrong. On an aerotow the question whether to land ahead or turn should be made on every launch! "Then ask the question" will lead to overload and grief! On tow, once you have decided you cannot land ahead then it may be a turn to an off-field landing if possible, followed by a 180 turn back to runway when safe. (That will invariably be at least 200') I repeat: after a failure is not the time to be thinking about where to go! Tom No, what I was taught and what I teach applies to ALL launch failures, winch, auto tow, and aerotow as detailed above. The first action is to select the appropriate attitude, at least approach attitude and make sure that you have a minimum of approach speed. Then ask the question, "Can I land ahead" If and ONLY if the answer is NO or NOT SURE should any other action be considered. Spot on, run away to the south field, worked for me too That's how I was taught - first immediate action - fly the glider. Then assess. I was sent solo in a T21 at Portmoak, flying off winch from the SW end, accompanied by a sandbag in the RH seat. Two 360 degree turns and a good landing. Woohoo. Ok - now for the second solo flight - cable break at 300 feet. All I remember of my thought processes at the time was to get the nose down out of full climb immediately before speed bled off, get rid of cable and then assess - unsure about straight ahead (20/20 hindsight - full spoiler and land would have worked), too low for short circuit (maybe), so I made a 90 degree left turn to get some room, turned back to right and landed across the main onto the alternative area across from the hangars, passing in front of the winch. I explained my thought process to the instructor and we reviewed what I had done - got a slow nod and a well done lad. Good enough for me and a credit to my instructors. Was sent back up once we had towed the T21 back to the launch point. |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Fatal crash Arizona
On 6/16/2014 4:13 AM, Z Goudie wrote:
At 07:15 16 June 2014, Jim White wrote: May I offer a practical tip? Talk to yourself all the way up the launch t a safe height (perhaps 500ft), deciding where you will go at every momen should the rope / tug break. Should it then happen you already have th decision made and only have to execute it well. I thought that was supposed to be part of the training! Z - the very man who sent me solo at Portmoak all those years ago. |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
Fatal crash Arizona
At 14:44 16 June 2014, Fred Bear wrote:
On 6/16/2014 4:13 AM, Z Goudie wrote: At 07:15 16 June 2014, Jim White wrote: May I offer a practical tip? Talk to yourself all the way up the launch t a safe height (perhaps 500ft), deciding where you will go at every momen should the rope / tug break. Should it then happen you already have th decision made and only have to execute it well. I thought that was supposed to be part of the training! Z - the very man who sent me solo at Portmoak all those years ago. The thing that concerns me is the change to rotax tugs. On Sunday I watched one tow a skylark up,perfect ,but 2 fat pilots in a duo full of water and we are talking curve of the earth,assuming you can get it rolling in the first place.Historicly we had accidents and learned how to not have them. But heavier gliders,weaker tugs and steam comes from my ears when I see the launch point set up 1/3 of the way down the runway,because its easier to get passengers to the glider and you can land behind.Explain that to the family after Joe pilot coudn't land ahead because it was more convenient. Rant over,my sinsera condolances to the family of the pilot who started this at a terrible price. |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
Fatal crash Arizona
On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 4:06:19 AM UTC+12, Jonathon May wrote:
At 14:44 16 June 2014, Fred Bear wrote: But heavier gliders,weaker tugs and steam comes from my ears when I see the launch point set up 1/3 of the way down the runway,because its easier to get passengers to the glider and you can land behind. Yeah, we did that recently when we had an away weekend at a 6500 ft strip on a dairy farm instead of our usual 2000 ft strip in the middle of a town. Definitely convenient. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Parowan Fatal Crash | ContestID67[_2_] | Soaring | 30 | July 3rd 09 03:43 AM |
Rare fatal CH-801 crash | Jim Logajan | Home Built | 8 | June 22nd 09 03:24 AM |
Fatal crash in NW Washington | Rich S.[_1_] | Home Built | 1 | February 17th 08 03:38 AM |
Fatal Crash | Monty | General Aviation | 1 | December 12th 07 10:06 PM |
Fatal Crash in Fittstown, OK | GeorgeC | Piloting | 3 | March 7th 06 06:03 AM |