Soaring Accident in Washington State

On Oct 16, 12:35*pm, 2G wrote:
On Oct 16, 6:33*am, Michael Dewitt Allen
wrote:

Florida Guy here... Commenting on the "Great North West Caper" in
Washington State

Seems like this Boggs Guy has it "Right On" again...

If the "Plan" was to do a 180... AFTER a "Launch"
on a tooo short rope...
on a tooo short Runway...

The *Genius that had suggested a "180 degree Return to Runway"
Had to be smokin something serious.
This "Plan" seems to have been "Doomed to Failure" from inception.

While the "plan" seems to be seriously flawed, and contributed to the
accident, it may not be the direct cause. Photos and videos clearly
show the right airbrake extended and the left retracted. This points
to a failure of the airbrake controls, which would be consistent with
what most witnesses reported (he veered off to the right after doing a
pull-up). There is an AD out on the DG-1000 airbrake control circuit.
These controls hookup automatically, so an assembly error is not
likely.

On Oct 15, 7:49*pm, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On Oct 15, 4:34*pm, Michael Dewitt Allen
wrote:

You do not know what You have not experienced

H'okay...

Originally Posted by 2G

On Oct 16, 6:33*am, Michael Dewitt Allen
wrote:
Florida Guy here... Commenting on the "Great North West Caper" in
Washington State

Seems like this Boggs Guy has it "Right On" again...

If the "Plan" was to do a 180... AFTER a "Launch"
on a tooo short rope...
on a tooo short Runway...

The *Genius that had suggested a "180 degree Return to Runway"
Had to be smokin something serious.
This "Plan" seems to have been "Doomed to Failure" from inception.


While the "plan" seems to be seriously flawed, and contributed to the
accident, it may not be the direct cause. Photos and videos clearly
show the right airbrake extended and the left retracted. This points
to a failure of the airbrake controls, which would be consistent with
what most witnesses reported (he veered off to the right after doing a
pull-up). There is an AD out on the DG-1000 airbrake control circuit.
These controls hookup automatically, so an assembly error is not
likely.

FYI

http://www.slv.dk/Dokumenter/dsweb/G...R1-E%20COR.pdf

Colin

On Oct 16, 9:35*am, 2G wrote:
On Oct 16, 6:33*am, Michael Dewitt Allen
wrote:

Florida Guy here... Commenting on the "Great North West Caper" in
Washington State

Seems like this Boggs Guy has it "Right On" again...

If the "Plan" was to do a 180... AFTER a "Launch"
on a tooo short rope...
on a tooo short Runway...

The *Genius that had suggested a "180 degree Return to Runway"
Had to be smokin something serious.
This "Plan" seems to have been "Doomed to Failure" from inception.

While the "plan" seems to be seriously flawed, and contributed to the
accident, it may not be the direct cause. Photos and videos clearly
show the right airbrake extended and the left retracted. This points
to a failure of the airbrake controls, which would be consistent with
what most witnesses reported (he veered off to the right after doing a
pull-up). There is an AD out on the DG-1000 airbrake control circuit.
These controls hookup automatically, so an assembly error is not
likely.

One does a positive control check on this sort of stuff several times
It is my theory the spoliers popped out from the force of the accident
not prematurely as you may suggest. It is nice to blame the
manufacturer
on this sort of stuff however, I have my doubts and the sailplane
should
still be able to manuever with one open.
VI

On Oct 17, 12:41*am, Harold Katinszky wrote:
On Oct 16, 9:35*am, 2G wrote:





On Oct 16, 6:33*am, Michael Dewitt Allen
wrote:

Florida Guy here... Commenting on the "Great North West Caper" in
Washington State

Seems like this Boggs Guy has it "Right On" again...

If the "Plan" was to do a 180... AFTER a "Launch"
on a tooo short rope...
on a tooo short Runway...

The *Genius that had suggested a "180 degree Return to Runway"
Had to be smokin something serious.
This "Plan" seems to have been "Doomed to Failure" from inception.

While the "plan" seems to be seriously flawed, and contributed to the
accident, it may not be the direct cause. Photos and videos clearly
show the right airbrake extended and the left retracted. This points
to a failure of the airbrake controls, which would be consistent with
what most witnesses reported (he veered off to the right after doing a
pull-up). There is an AD out on the DG-1000 airbrake control circuit.
These controls hookup automatically, so an assembly error is not
likely.

One does a positive control check on this sort of stuff several times
It is my theory the spoliers popped out from the force of the accident
not prematurely as you may suggest. It is nice to blame the
manufacturer
on this sort of stuff however, I have my doubts and the sailplane
should
still be able to manuever with one open.
VI

Nobody is "blaming the manufacturer"; the existence of the AD is a
matter of fact, not fiction.

The wings and the portion of the fuselage aft of the cockpit are
intact, absent of any crushing. In any event, inspection of the
wreckage will confirm or deny the theory, and has probably already
been done.

The ability to fly with one airbrake out in level flight does not
imply the same in a high G pullup. The unexpected deployment of a
single airbrake in this attitude may be beyond the yaw authority of
the rudder. In any event, the pilot could have been confused long
enough that the glider got into an irrecoverable attitude before he
realized what was happening.

Tom

On Oct 17, 8:46*am, 2G wrote:
On Oct 17, 12:41*am, Harold Katinszky wrote:





On Oct 16, 9:35*am, 2G wrote:

On Oct 16, 6:33*am, Michael Dewitt Allen
wrote:

Florida Guy here... Commenting on the "Great North West Caper" in
Washington State

Seems like this Boggs Guy has it "Right On" again...

If the "Plan" was to do a 180... AFTER a "Launch"
on a tooo short rope...
on a tooo short Runway...

The *Genius that had suggested a "180 degree Return to Runway"
Had to be smokin something serious.
This "Plan" seems to have been "Doomed to Failure" from inception.

While the "plan" seems to be seriously flawed, and contributed to the
accident, it may not be the direct cause. Photos and videos clearly
show the right airbrake extended and the left retracted. This points
to a failure of the airbrake controls, which would be consistent with
what most witnesses reported (he veered off to the right after doing a
pull-up). There is an AD out on the DG-1000 airbrake control circuit.
These controls hookup automatically, so an assembly error is not
likely.

One does a positive control check on this sort of stuff several times
It is my theory the spoliers popped out from the force of the accident
not prematurely as you may suggest. It is nice to blame the
manufacturer
on this sort of stuff however, I have my doubts and the sailplane
should
still be able to manuever with one open.
VI

Nobody is "blaming the manufacturer"; the existence of the AD is a
matter of fact, not fiction.

The wings and the portion of the fuselage aft of the cockpit are
intact, absent of any crushing. In any event, inspection of the
wreckage will confirm or deny the theory, and has probably already
been done.

The ability to fly with one airbrake out in level flight does not
imply the same in a high G pullup. The unexpected deployment of a
single airbrake in this attitude may be beyond the yaw authority of
the rudder. In any event, the pilot could have been confused long
enough that the glider got into an irrecoverable attitude before he
realized what was happening.

Tom- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I wouldn't read too much into one spoiler open after the crash. The
whole structure can move several inches during the crash, then spring
back to near normal position. I can envision a side load in the wing
root area that could unlock one spoiler, then during spring back, the
push-rod bends or some other control linkage brakes and you get the
photo showing one open and the other closed. I remember the near
normal looking G-103 wing, but when I opened up the wing I found the
aileron push-rod had a 30 degree bend in it.........indicating just
how far the wing had bent before springing back.
If the DG-1000 uses the same hokey torque-tube that they used in the
DG-300 to drive the spoilers with the over-center lock mounted on a
thin root-rib, that flexed easily under load...............the one
open, one closed would be near normal situation.
Cheers,
JJ

On Oct 17, 12:05*am, Harold Katinszky wrote:
On Oct 16, 12:35*pm, 2G wrote:



On Oct 16, 6:33*am, Michael Dewitt Allen
wrote:

Florida Guy here... Commenting on the "Great North West Caper" in
Washington State

Seems like this Boggs Guy has it "Right On" again...

If the "Plan" was to do a 180... AFTER a "Launch"
on a tooo short rope...
on a tooo short Runway...

The *Genius that had suggested a "180 degree Return to Runway"
Had to be smokin something serious.
This "Plan" seems to have been "Doomed to Failure" from inception.

While the "plan" seems to be seriously flawed, and contributed to the
accident, it may not be the direct cause. Photos and videos clearly
show the right airbrake extended and the left retracted. This points
to a failure of the airbrake controls, which would be consistent with
what most witnesses reported (he veered off to the right after doing a
pull-up). There is an AD out on the DG-1000 airbrake control circuit.
These controls hookup automatically, so an assembly error is not
likely.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text

If there is in an AD that was not addressed and the bird was
flown, that would not be very good in this matter.

On Oct 17, 2:02*pm, JJ Sinclair wrote:
On Oct 17, 8:46*am, 2G wrote:





On Oct 17, 12:41*am, Harold Katinszky wrote:

On Oct 16, 9:35*am, 2G wrote:

On Oct 16, 6:33*am, Michael Dewitt Allen
wrote:

Florida Guy here... Commenting on the "Great North West Caper" in
Washington State

Seems like this Boggs Guy has it "Right On" again...

If the "Plan" was to do a 180... AFTER a "Launch"
on a tooo short rope...
on a tooo short Runway...

The *Genius that had suggested a "180 degree Return to Runway"
Had to be smokin something serious.
This "Plan" seems to have been "Doomed to Failure" from inception..

While the "plan" seems to be seriously flawed, and contributed to the
accident, it may not be the direct cause. Photos and videos clearly
show the right airbrake extended and the left retracted. This points
to a failure of the airbrake controls, which would be consistent with
what most witnesses reported (he veered off to the right after doing a
pull-up). There is an AD out on the DG-1000 airbrake control circuit.

On Oct 17, 8:46*am, 2G wrote:
On Oct 17, 12:41*am, Harold Katinszky wrote:





On Oct 16, 9:35*am, 2G wrote:

On Oct 16, 6:33*am, Michael Dewitt Allen
wrote:

Florida Guy here... Commenting on the "Great North West Caper" in
Washington State

Seems like this Boggs Guy has it "Right On" again...

If the "Plan" was to do a 180... AFTER a "Launch"
on a tooo short rope...
on a tooo short Runway...

The *Genius that had suggested a "180 degree Return to Runway"
Had to be smokin something serious.
This "Plan" seems to have been "Doomed to Failure" from inception.

While the "plan" seems to be seriously flawed, and contributed to the
accident, it may not be the direct cause. Photos and videos clearly
show the right airbrake extended and the left retracted. This points
to a failure of the airbrake controls, which would be consistent with
what most witnesses reported (he veered off to the right after doing a
pull-up). There is an AD out on the DG-1000 airbrake control circuit.
These controls hookup automatically, so an assembly error is not
likely.

One does a positive control check on this sort of stuff several times
It is my theory the spoliers popped out from the force of the accident
not prematurely as you may suggest. It is nice to blame the
manufacturer
on this sort of stuff however, I have my doubts and the sailplane
should
still be able to manuever with one open.
VI

Nobody is "blaming the manufacturer"; the existence of the AD is a
matter of fact, not fiction.

The wings and the portion of the fuselage aft of the cockpit are
intact, absent of any crushing. In any event, inspection of the
wreckage will confirm or deny the theory, and has probably already
been done.

The ability to fly with one airbrake out in level flight does not
imply the same in a high G pullup. The unexpected deployment of a
single airbrake in this attitude may be beyond the yaw authority of
the rudder. In any event, the pilot could have been confused long
enough that the glider got into an irrecoverable attitude before he
realized what was happening.

Tom- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Oct 17, 4:59*pm, Harold Katinszky wrote:

If there is in an AD that was not addressed and the bird was
flown, that would not be very good in this matter.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As JJ said, don't put too much faith in a picture that shows one dive
brake out and the other in after a crash. Lots of things flex a LONG
way and then come back to looking almost normal. Especially with a
long lens from 1000 feet away. Are you also noticing that the aileron
on the right tip is trailing edge down, and the aileron inboard of
this is not?

Condolenaces to all involved.

Steve Leonard