Pilots with weakening vision - please install Powerflarm

Maybe it is time to revisit Bruno Gatenbrink's essay on soaring safety, which begins
"The most dangerous part of gliding is the trip to the glider field"
is the dumbest, most ignorant saying that has found a home in our sport.

gkemp

Son,I just spoke to your dad (Flubber ) and he said " Yeah the kid stepped on his weenie, he should just own it and move on"

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 8:01:26 AM UTC-7, gkemp wrote:
Maybe it is time to revisit Bruno Gatenbrink's essay on soaring safety, which begins

"The most dangerous part of gliding is the trip to the glider field"

is the dumbest, most ignorant saying that has found a home in our sport.



gkemp

But the thread is about glider-to-glider mid air collisions. And the statistics support the idea that an auto accident on the way to the airfield is more probable than a mid air collision once there. Again, no one here is suggesting that soaring is not dangerous (certainly not me), just that mid air collisions in general and glider-to-glider mid air collisions in particular are a negligible part of that danger. 99% of the fatalities are collisions with terrain - not involving other aircraft. Flarm could eliminate the remaining 1%, but soaring will not be much safer as a result.

Hey, jfitch.

You get it. I get it. Significant money and angst being lavished on gee wiz technology that does not address the most likely risks in soaring. They don't want to hear you.


But the thread is about glider-to-glider mid air collisions. And the statistics support the idea that an auto accident on the way to the airfield is more probable than a mid air collision once there. Again, no one here is suggesting that soaring is not dangerous (certainly not me), just that mid air collisions in general and glider-to-glider mid air collisions in particular are a negligible part of that danger. 99% of the fatalities are collisions with terrain - not involving other aircraft. Flarm could eliminate the remaining 1%, but soaring will not be much safer as a result.

How about spending some time, money, and angst on an AOA instrument?



But the thread is about glider-to-glider mid air collisions. And the statistics support the idea that an auto accident on the way to the airfield is more probable than a mid air collision once there. Again, no one here is suggesting that soaring is not dangerous (certainly not me), just that mid air collisions in general and glider-to-glider mid air collisions in particular are a negligible part of that danger. 99% of the fatalities are collisions with terrain - not involving other aircraft. Flarm could eliminate the remaining 1%, but soaring will not be much safer as a result.

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 10:22:32 PM UTC+2, wrote:
How about spending some time, money, and angst on an AOA instrument?

Sure, and the same bozos who are planting their ships will continue planting them. These are the guys who don't fly all winter, then drag their gliders to the local race and have at it - gee, what a surprise when they crash!

Yes, you don't need high tech thingies to prevent most glider accidents - but you do need the will to actually go out and get current and practice stall & spins & spiral dive recoveries.

Lets face it - we have so many crashes because we are, on the whole, non-current, ****ty pilots! But we all think we are Sierra Hotel jocks who never have to crack a book about basic aerodynamics, or go out and spend a tow or two just playing with slow speed unusual attitudes, or doing some acro, or or or...

If midair are such a low risk - why do we wear parachutes? BECAUSE IF YOU NEED IT, YOU CAN'T PRACTICE LANDING WITHOUT IT! It's the same thing with Flarm - sure you probably will never actually need it (although I already doubt that, from personal experience) but when you do need it you better have it!

Cars? Have you ever really used your seat belts or airbags? So why wear them or have them?

All you non-believers really need to go up in a flarm equipped glider on a busy day sometime - it just might change your mind. It also, although statistically unlikely, also save your life.

After all, the probability of a midair is really 50% - either you have one or you don't.

Kirk
66

Do you know anyone who has been in car accident on his way to
the airport?
Do you know anyone who has been in midair collision?
We had this discussion at our club, and result was that no-one
knew anyone who has been in car accident on the way to the
airfield, but many people knew pilots who had been in mid-air
collision. Some survived, some did not.

FLARM people, please provide a low cost FLARM transmitter-only
variant for these who do not want to see other gliders nearby,
but politely would like to disclose their position and heading to
other (childish ;^) pilots using FLARM. Please, you have
something like this available for paragliders.

At 20:21 10 July 2013, wrote:
Hey, jfitch.

You get it. I get it. Significant money and angst being
lavished on gee
w=
iz technology that does not address the most likely risks in
soaring.
They=
don't want to hear you.


But the thread is about glider-to-glider mid air collisions. And
the
stat=
istics support the idea that an auto accident on the way to the
airfield
is=
more probable than a mid air collision once there. Again, no
one here is
s=
uggesting that soaring is not dangerous (certainly not me), just
that mid
a=
ir collisions in general and glider-to-glider mid air collisions in
particu=
lar are a negligible part of that danger. 99% of the fatalities are
collisi=
ons with terrain - not involving other aircraft. Flarm could
eliminate the
=
remaining 1%, but soaring will not be much safer as a result.

Do you know anyone who has been in car accident on his way to
the airport?
Do you know anyone who has been in midair collision?
We had this discussion at our club, and result was that no-one
knew anyone who has been in car accident on the way to the
airfield, but many people knew pilots who had been in mid-air
collision. Some survived, some did not.

FLARM people, please provide a low cost FLARM transmitter-only
variant for these who do not want to see other gliders nearby,
but politely would like to disclose their position and heading to
other (childish ;^) pilots using FLARM. Please, you have
something like this available for paragliders.

At 20:21 10 July 2013, wrote:
Hey, jfitch.

You get it. I get it. Significant money and angst being
lavished on gee
w=
iz technology that does not address the most likely risks in
soaring.
They=
don't want to hear you.


But the thread is about glider-to-glider mid air collisions. And
the
stat=
istics support the idea that an auto accident on the way to the
airfield
is=
more probable than a mid air collision once there. Again, no
one here is
s=
uggesting that soaring is not dangerous (certainly not me), just
that mid
a=
ir collisions in general and glider-to-glider mid air collisions in
particu=
lar are a negligible part of that danger. 99% of the fatalities are
collisi=
ons with terrain - not involving other aircraft. Flarm could
eliminate the
=
remaining 1%, but soaring will not be much safer as a result.

On Wednesday, 10 July 2013 16:26:44 UTC-6, Kimmo Hytoenen wrote:
Do you know anyone who has been in car accident on his way to

the airport?

Do you know anyone who has been in midair collision?

We had this discussion at our club, and result was that no-one

knew anyone who has been in car accident on the way to the

airfield, but many people knew pilots who had been in mid-air

collision. Some survived, some did not.



FLARM people, please provide a low cost FLARM transmitter-only

variant for these who do not want to see other gliders nearby,

but politely would like to disclose their position and heading to

other (childish ;^) pilots using FLARM. Please, you have

something like this available for paragliders.



At 20:21 10 July 2013, wrote:

Hey, jfitch.



You get it. I get it. Significant money and angst being

lavished on gee

w=

iz technology that does not address the most likely risks in

soaring.

They=

don't want to hear you.





But the thread is about glider-to-glider mid air collisions. And

the

stat=

istics support the idea that an auto accident on the way to the

airfield

is=

more probable than a mid air collision once there. Again, no

one here is

s=

uggesting that soaring is not dangerous (certainly not me), just

that mid

a=

ir collisions in general and glider-to-glider mid air collisions in

particu=

lar are a negligible part of that danger. 99% of the fatalities are

collisi=

ons with terrain - not involving other aircraft. Flarm could

eliminate the

=

remaining 1%, but soaring will not be much safer as a result.





Kimmo it is called a transponder

Kimmo it is called a transponder

Wrong!

For glider/glider interaction, the difference between a transponder -- PCAS and a PowerFlarm is the difference between a LED flashlight and a solar flare.

For myself, I don't know anyone who has had an accident on the way to the airport. I know three good friends that have had midair collisions with other gliders; one parachuted to safety, two landed a broken airplane. I've attended several contests where there's been mid-airs and I've personally had a bunch of non-contact swish-bys. The guys here that are asserting that midairs are improbably are full of crap.