Pilots with weakening vision - please install Powerflarm

On Friday, July 12, 2013 8:50:50 AM UTC-6, jfitch wrote:
I am surprised so far no one has noticed a serious flaw in my statistical argument. Didn't think of it myself until yesterday. There were 6 incidents of glider-to-glider mid air in the last 20 years, of 676 incidents involving gliders. That is less than 1%. However, it takes two to tango - so that accounts for 12 gliders involved in mid airs. That makes the probability for an individual glider historically greater than 1%, but a bit less than 2%, that an accident will involve a mid air with another glider. And of course the absolute probability on a particular flight nearly vanishingly small: if there are 2500 flights per reported accident (a reasonable guess), P = 8 x 10^-6.

Figure 130,000 - 150,000 glider flights per year.

On Friday, July 12, 2013 7:50:50 AM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:
And of course the absolute probability on a particular flight nearly vanishingly small: if there are 2500 flights per reported accident (a reasonable guess), P = 8 x 10^-6.


Nobody counts "near misses". Guess that's 'cause near misses are almost never fatal (assuming no one has a heart attack), they just scare the crap out of people and make fodder for hangar talk. I've had a couple over the years, just one of them in the glider. Like jfitch, I have 20-15 distance vision (with glasses) and do my best to keep my head outside the cockpit.

I don't like near misses. PowerFlarm helps prevent them.

bumper

I've had a couple over the years, just one of them in the glider.
bumper

I am curious what experienced pilots ratio of near-misses is between competition and non-competition situations. Any comments on that?

On Friday, July 12, 2013 4:06:40 AM UTC+2, Dan Marotta wrote:
Uh, Kirk, my post was before yours claiming sarcasm.



For the record, I complain bitterly about spending $2,700 for a "seat

cushion", though I paid the price. Everyone with plenty of money seems to

think that $2,000 for an inexpensive piece of electronics that, according to

what I've read, is still in development, is reasonable, but to some of us,

it's significant and can be better spent elsewhere.



I will take a position now. If someone will buy me everything needed for a

PFlarm installation, and ship it to me, I'll install it. I don't give two

****s about peer pressure so cry all you want.



Anyone who doesn't want to fly near non-PFlarm equipped gliders can simply

avoid the areas where I fly. And, to be fair, I won't fly in any contests

without renting one.

So let me get this straight: You complain bitterly about having to buy an expensive parachute but don't fly in competition - which is the only time you have to wear one in the US (unless you do acro). You strongly believe a transponder makes you safer, but think a PowerFlarm is just a bit of unreliable, overpriced electronic smoke and mirrors.

Ok, whatever...

Please keep your transponder on - that way at least I'll know you are around, even if you don't know where I am.

Cheers,

Kirk

The operating limits for my glider require that the pilot wear a chute.

Although Son of Flubber's post displayed a bit of youthful arrogance, it did start an important dialogue. I would like to share a bit of subjective data that could add to the discussion. Regarding parachutes as expensive seat cushions. I have had 5 friends and acquaintances bail out of crippled gliders and survive. Ghaham Thompson, Jim Indebro, Roy Cundiff, and Dick Johnson among those lucky souls. Regarding mid air collisions as highly unlikely events. In 1985 at a 15m nationals there were three mid air collisions, with one fatality. That represented about the same odds as Russian roulette. Graham Thompson's bail out in Minden was the result of a mid air. Gary Kemp referred to Bruno's Gantebrink's essay on sailplane safety. I had a conversation with Bruno in New Zealand and he told me that he was the only surviving member, of five, of a previous German national team. Although, as I recall, one of the germans was killed after exiting the glider on the ground by a piece of equipment. I have had two near misses (literally inches) where one of the pilots did not see the other before, during or after the near miss. I have had numerous close calls over the years, so I am not impressed with those that say collision avoidance systems are a waste of money. Statistics are easy to skew and make this sport look safer than it is. The common thread with most the pilots mentioned above is that they fly, or flew, a lot, which, of course puts them at higher risk.
I have O, none, no friends or acquaintances that have been killed in automobile accidents. I would hate to count the number of glider pilots that I have known that have been killed flying gliders. Any! procedure or device that increases sailplane safety should be taken seriously.

DLB

So I think I will go and get my eyes checked.

DLB

You got it, Kirk!

BTW, have you practiced with your 'chute? I have. I paid $2,700 for a ram
air square because it's so far superior to a round 'chute. Then I paid
another $1,000 for training jumps.

I wear a parachute because I *want* to. Likewise a helmet on my motorcycle.
Neither is required, yet I use them. That is my whole argument, choices,
yet so many of you are so full of your own fears that you refuse to hear the
logic of those who disagree with your set of priorities. And that's all it
is in the end. Priorities. Mine differ from yours and you you have
difficulty accepting it.

BTW, my transponder is always turned on before take off and turned off after
clearing the runway on landing.

Now I won't mention any names, but what do you say to the pilot who's
installed a PFlarm but refuses to install a transponder? Sure, he can see
PFlarm equipped gliders, but neither TCAS nor PCAS equipped aircraft, nor
ATC can see him. To him I say, "Fine, I respect your choice, now please
respect mine." Even though I think my choice is better.

Dan


"kirk.stant" wrote in message
...
On Friday, July 12, 2013 4:06:40 AM UTC+2, Dan Marotta wrote:
Uh, Kirk, my post was before yours claiming sarcasm.



For the record, I complain bitterly about spending $2,700 for a "seat

cushion", though I paid the price. Everyone with plenty of money seems to

think that $2,000 for an inexpensive piece of electronics that, according
to

what I've read, is still in development, is reasonable, but to some of us,

it's significant and can be better spent elsewhere.



I will take a position now. If someone will buy me everything needed for
a

PFlarm installation, and ship it to me, I'll install it. I don't give two

****s about peer pressure so cry all you want.



Anyone who doesn't want to fly near non-PFlarm equipped gliders can simply

avoid the areas where I fly. And, to be fair, I won't fly in any contests

without renting one.

So let me get this straight: You complain bitterly about having to buy an
expensive parachute but don't fly in competition - which is the only time
you have to wear one in the US (unless you do acro). You strongly believe a
transponder makes you safer, but think a PowerFlarm is just a bit of
unreliable, overpriced electronic smoke and mirrors.

Ok, whatever...

Please keep your transponder on - that way at least I'll know you are
around, even if you don't know where I am.

Cheers,

Kirk

Dan Marotta wrote, On 7/12/2013 12:14 PM:
Now I won't mention any names, but what do you say to the pilot who's
installed a PFlarm but refuses to install a transponder? Sure, he can
see PFlarm equipped gliders, but neither TCAS nor PCAS equipped
aircraft, nor ATC can see him.

His PFlarm ought to be able to detect transponder equipped aircraft,
whether they have TCAS or not. ATC often can see a glider without a
transponder, if the pilot takes the time to contact ATC. In our area,
the primary radar seems very good, or maybe it's the ATC people that are
good, but the towers seem happy to help, even alerting one glider to the
presence of another glider. Our area is not a busy area, either.

So, he's not necessarily invisible, and the % of equipped gliders is
much higher than it was 10 years ago (thanks in part to the Trig units).
Even so, I'd suggest that a pilot in an area where the towers are too
busy to help, that pilot is in a area where installing a transponder
should be a high priority.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

That'sOn Friday, July 12, 2013 12:14:11 PM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:

Now I won't mention any names, but what do you say to the pilot who's
installed a PFlarm but refuses to install a transponder? Sure, he can see
PFlarm equipped gliders, but neither TCAS nor PCAS equipped aircraft, nor
ATC can see him. To him I say, "Fine, I respect your choice, now please
respect mine." Even though I think my choice is better.

Dan

I think that's easy - the number of fatal collisions between transport-category aircraft and gliders is...drum roll...zero. So a Transponder is a less valuable choice than PF for the average glider pilot.

People are terrible at estimating low probability events - especially catastrophic ones.

9B