48.4 hours !?

I don't disagree that this was a real rookie and from the initial
description it wasn't airframe.

Frank

BTIZ wrote:

I remember that glider on the beach posting shortly after it happened..

I do have some very limited time in the 2-32... the one I flew I felt it
was very honest.. giving plenty of warning before the stall with rumbling
and stick shaking..

one report that came from our local witness.. that is not addressed in the
preliminary report... and taken with a few grains of salt or sand...is
that the passengers reported that the stick was full back the entire time
when the spin started... no forward movement to stop the spin..

In less than one month.. this individual went from Student Pilot
certificate
issue.. to Private Pilot to Commercial Pilot... and crashed. No mention
is made of his experience prior to receiving his student pilot
certificate. But based on the documentation provided, one can expect that
he had worked up to pre-solo before getting his student certificate and
quickly completed two written exams and check rides. Not a good position
to put an insurance company in.

BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
I don't disagree, but there are other possibilities.

2-32 gives zippo spin warning, it tends to flick over the top from a
tight turn.

I thought the local operators were a bit more discriminating, requiring
some
referral. However, as I told my young friend, break one and drop in the
ocean, the next week it would be old news there and the rides would
continue.

Different operator, same location
http://www.soarcsa.org/glider_on_the_beach.htm

FWIW one suggestion was the 'extreme return'. Vertical speed limiting
dive
to the numbers, rotate to landing. My young friend thought this would be
a
big seller. But parachutes would cut down on useful load. Shoe-horning
them in was the order of the day.

Frank





BTIZ wrote:

based on a witness report.. that is now flying here...
minimum experience.. lack of spin training...

I'd go with the lack of Airmanship..
BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
Ramy wrote:

As usual, the NTSB report is useless. Doesn't even attempt to analyze
the cause for the accident.

One of my younger soaring friends hauled rides there for a couple of
stints.
He clocked over 100 hours a month in 2-32's which we reckoned may have
20,000 to 40,000 hours on them in all that salt air. Airmanship or
lack of
it may have had nothing to do with this sad incident.

M B wrote:

Do you think the government or the insurance company
does a better job of protecting the customer?

This was not the point. The point was that the whole idea of a
commercial rating should be to protect the costomer. A commercial rating
should be a certificate that I can trust somebody. That's the idea.

That this is not achived by the ridiculous requirements to get such a
rating (in the USA) was exactly my point.

Stefan

A few points.

It's unlikely that the pax knew where the stick was since it's SOP to remove
the rear stick when flying with two pax. You can't see the front stick from
the back.

Most 2-32's will give easily recognizable pre-stall buffet but not all of
them. There was variation in SN to SN. As would be expected, two pax in
the rear seat will put the CG forward quite a bit and that tends to tame the
2-32's stall/spin behavior.

Should an incipient spin departure develop, prompt anti-spin control inputs
will stop the spin.

I agree that the US commercial glider pilot experience requirements are a
joke. I hope that glider ride operations everywhere take this accident as a
warning to demand far higher experience from prospective ride pilots.

Bill Daniels
2-32 driver

"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:YL_9e.16042$%c1.5975@fed1read05...
I remember that glider on the beach posting shortly after it happened..

I do have some very limited time in the 2-32... the one I flew I felt it
was
very honest.. giving plenty of warning before the stall with rumbling and
stick shaking..

one report that came from our local witness.. that is not addressed in the
preliminary report... and taken with a few grains of salt or sand...is
that
the passengers reported that the stick was full back the entire time when
the spin started... no forward movement to stop the spin..

In less than one month.. this individual went from Student Pilot
certificate
issue.. to Private Pilot to Commercial Pilot... and crashed. No mention
is
made of his experience prior to receiving his student pilot certificate.
But
based on the documentation provided, one can expect that he had worked up
to
pre-solo before getting his student certificate and quickly completed two
written exams and check rides. Not a good position to put an insurance
company in.

BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
I don't disagree, but there are other possibilities.

2-32 gives zippo spin warning, it tends to flick over the top from a
tight
turn.

I thought the local operators were a bit more discriminating, requiring
some
referral. However, as I told my young friend, break one and drop in the
ocean, the next week it would be old news there and the rides would
continue.

Different operator, same location
http://www.soarcsa.org/glider_on_the_beach.htm

FWIW one suggestion was the 'extreme return'. Vertical speed limiting
dive
to the numbers, rotate to landing. My young friend thought this would
be
a
big seller. But parachutes would cut down on useful load. Shoe-horning
them in was the order of the day.

Frank





BTIZ wrote:

based on a witness report.. that is now flying here...
minimum experience.. lack of spin training...

I'd go with the lack of Airmanship..
BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
Ramy wrote:

As usual, the NTSB report is useless. Doesn't even attempt to analyze
the cause for the accident.

One of my younger soaring friends hauled rides there for a couple of
stints.
He clocked over 100 hours a month in 2-32's which we reckoned may have
20,000 to 40,000 hours on them in all that salt air. Airmanship or
lack
of
it may have had nothing to do with this sad incident.

Heresay evidence, blind assumption and lack of experience
in the glider concerned all put together is enough
for a hanging is it.
If the poor bloke was still alive you could lock him
up in Guantánamo. He may have been al-Qaida, a mass
murderer perhaps or anything else you care to pull
out of the air.

Why can you not wait for the results of the enquiry
and decide on the evidence instead of speculating about
the guilt of someone who cannot defend himself. Land
of the Free? Prove it.

At 04:30 22 April 2005, Btiz wrote:
I remember that glider on the beach posting shortly
after it happened..

I do have some very limited time in the 2-32... the
one I flew I felt it was
very honest.. giving plenty of warning before the stall
with rumbling and
stick shaking..

one report that came from our local witness.. that
is not addressed in the
preliminary report... and taken with a few grains of
salt or sand...is that
the passengers reported that the stick was full back
the entire time when
the spin started... no forward movement to stop the
spin..

In less than one month.. this individual went from
Student Pilot certificate
issue.. to Private Pilot to Commercial Pilot... and
crashed. No mention is
made of his experience prior to receiving his student
pilot certificate. But
based on the documentation provided, one can expect
that he had worked up to
pre-solo before getting his student certificate and
quickly completed two
written exams and check rides. Not a good position
to put an insurance
company in.

BT

'F.L. Whiteley' wrote in message
...
I don't disagree, but there are other possibilities.

2-32 gives zippo spin warning, it tends to flick over
the top from a tight
turn.

I thought the local operators were a bit more discriminating,
requiring
some
referral. However, as I told my young friend, break
one and drop in the
ocean, the next week it would be old news there and
the rides would
continue.

Different operator, same location
http://www.soarcsa.org/glider_on_the_beach.htm

FWIW one suggestion was the 'extreme return'. Vertical
speed limiting
dive
to the numbers, rotate to landing. My young friend
thought this would be
a
big seller. But parachutes would cut down on useful
load. Shoe-horning
them in was the order of the day.

Frank





BTIZ wrote:

based on a witness report.. that is now flying here...
minimum experience.. lack of spin training...

I'd go with the lack of Airmanship..
BT

'F.L. Whiteley' wrote in message
...
Ramy wrote:

As usual, the NTSB report is useless. Doesn't even
attempt to analyze
the cause for the accident.

One of my younger soaring friends hauled rides there
for a couple of
stints.
He clocked over 100 hours a month in 2-32's which
we reckoned may have
20,000 to 40,000 hours on them in all that salt air.
Airmanship or lack
of
it may have had nothing to do with this sad incident.

Don Johnstone wrote:

Why can you not wait for the results of the enquiry
and decide on the evidence instead of speculating about
the guilt of someone who cannot defend himself.

I agree (and always said so) that it is speculation. But *if* this
speculation is correct, then that poor young chap is the last person to
blame. He was told by the authority that he's a capble pilot to
commercial standards. The operator, supposedly an experienced pilot, let
im loose with passengers, thus implying the same. So *if* the
speculation is correct, this inexperienced pilot is not guilty, but a
victim himself!

Stefan

At 13:30 22 April 2005, Don Johnstone wrote:
Heresay evidence, blind assumption and lack of experience
in the glider concerned all put together is enough
for a hanging is it.

I don't think anyone has suggested that the pilot here
was directly at fault, rather that it was maybe unwise
(even in the absence of an accident) to send passengers
up with a relatively inexperienced pilot. In the case
of an inexperienced pilot coming to grief, you have
to look at the training he received (in this case recently)
to find out what could be done better. This is not
a world champion that pushed his/her luck too far.

If the poor bloke was still alive you could lock him
up in Guant�namo. He may have been al-Qaida, a mass
murderer perhaps or anything else you care to pull
out of the air.

.....1...2...3...4...5...

Why can you not wait for the results of the enquiry
and decide on the evidence instead of speculating about
the guilt of someone who cannot defend himself. Land
of the Free? Prove it.

I'd say open speculation (and disagreement) and the
fact that people make it is pretty much proof that
it is land of the free. Any speculation made now is
(in the reasonable persons mind) just that, speculation,
it can (and will) be revised as more evidence comes
to light and the NTSB inquiry progresses.
And as a previous poster said before, if I died in
a glider, I'd rather that the causes were gone over
and any lessons learnt, rather than my case being brushed
under the carpet. Accidents, and there causes shouldn't
be taboo, we can all learn something from them (unfortunately),
even from speculation. If we were all perfect pilots
then we could carry on as normal without looking at
these incidents (but then again there shouldn't be
any incidents then should there?).


I haven't actually expressed an opinion (intentionally
anyway) on the pilots ability and/or failings but to
shout down honest and open speculation is unwise and
possibly foolish....


Jamie



At 04:30 22 April 2005, Btiz wrote:
I remember that glider on the beach posting shortly
after it happened..

I do have some very limited time in the 2-32... the
one I flew I felt it was
very honest.. giving plenty of warning before the stall
with rumbling and
stick shaking..

one report that came from our local witness.. that
is not addressed in the
preliminary report... and taken with a few grains of
salt or sand...is that
the passengers reported that the stick was full back
the entire time when
the spin started... no forward movement to stop the
spin..

In less than one month.. this individual went from
Student Pilot certificate
issue.. to Private Pilot to Commercial Pilot... and
crashed. No mention is
made of his experience prior to receiving his student
pilot certificate. But
based on the documentation provided, one can expect
that he had worked up to
pre-solo before getting his student certificate and
quickly completed two
written exams and check rides. Not a good position
to put an insurance
company in.

BT

'F.L. Whiteley' wrote in message
...
I don't disagree, but there are other possibilities.

2-32 gives zippo spin warning, it tends to flick over
the top from a tight
turn.

I thought the local operators were a bit more discriminating,
requiring
some
referral. However, as I told my young friend, break
one and drop in the
ocean, the next week it would be old news there and
the rides would
continue.

Different operator, same location
http://www.soarcsa.org/glider_on_the_beach.htm

FWIW one suggestion was the 'extreme return'. Vertical
speed limiting
dive
to the numbers, rotate to landing. My young friend
thought this would be
a
big seller. But parachutes would cut down on useful
load. Shoe-horning
them in was the order of the day.

Frank





BTIZ wrote:

based on a witness report.. that is now flying here...
minimum experience.. lack of spin training...

I'd go with the lack of Airmanship..
BT

'F.L. Whiteley' wrote in message
...
Ramy wrote:

As usual, the NTSB report is useless. Doesn't
even
attempt to analyze
the cause for the accident.

One of my younger soaring friends hauled rides there
for a couple of
stints.
He clocked over 100 hours a month in 2-32's which
we reckoned may have
20,000 to 40,000 hours on them in all that salt air.
Airmanship or lack
of
it may have had nothing to do with this sad incident.

Don Johnstone wrote:

Heresay evidence, blind assumption and lack of experience
in the glider concerned all put together is enough
for a hanging is it.

Check the subject line, Don.

Would you have let your loved ones ride with a pilot who had a comparable
background, in those surroundings? Or even hear over the cornfields of N.
Illinois for that matter? We are all rejoicing that more were not killed.

If anyone is to be condemned out of hand, it is an organization which would
hire someone to do this sort of work who had "48.4 hours". I'm sure that all
of us have great confidence that appropriate measures will be taken via the
civil courts and in the matter of future insurance costs/availability for
the commercial glider operation responsible.

If you have a burr under your saddle concerning certain aspects of US
international policy, why not take it to another newsgroup where someone cares?


Jack

....and not a lot of experience to be taking PAX on the lee side of a ridge
where there's no place to land. If you go to on the lee side and get below
the ridge line you have no nice options.
Obviously none of us know what happened, but it smells to me like a strong
lee downdraft.


"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:YL_9e.16042$%c1.5975@fed1read05...
I remember that glider on the beach posting shortly after it happened..

I do have some very limited time in the 2-32... the one I flew I felt it
was
very honest.. giving plenty of warning before the stall with rumbling and
stick shaking..

one report that came from our local witness.. that is not addressed in the
preliminary report... and taken with a few grains of salt or sand...is
that
the passengers reported that the stick was full back the entire time when
the spin started... no forward movement to stop the spin..

In less than one month.. this individual went from Student Pilot
certificate
issue.. to Private Pilot to Commercial Pilot... and crashed. No mention
is
made of his experience prior to receiving his student pilot certificate.
But
based on the documentation provided, one can expect that he had worked up
to
pre-solo before getting his student certificate and quickly completed two
written exams and check rides. Not a good position to put an insurance
company in.

BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
I don't disagree, but there are other possibilities.

2-32 gives zippo spin warning, it tends to flick over the top from a
tight
turn.

I thought the local operators were a bit more discriminating, requiring
some
referral. However, as I told my young friend, break one and drop in the
ocean, the next week it would be old news there and the rides would
continue.

Different operator, same location
http://www.soarcsa.org/glider_on_the_beach.htm

FWIW one suggestion was the 'extreme return'. Vertical speed limiting
dive
to the numbers, rotate to landing. My young friend thought this would
be
a
big seller. But parachutes would cut down on useful load. Shoe-horning
them in was the order of the day.

Frank





BTIZ wrote:

based on a witness report.. that is now flying here...
minimum experience.. lack of spin training...

I'd go with the lack of Airmanship..
BT

"F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message
...
Ramy wrote:

As usual, the NTSB report is useless. Doesn't even attempt to analyze
the cause for the accident.

One of my younger soaring friends hauled rides there for a couple of
stints.
He clocked over 100 hours a month in 2-32's which we reckoned may have
20,000 to 40,000 hours on them in all that salt air. Airmanship or
lack
of
it may have had nothing to do with this sad incident.

I shocked, truly SHOCKED, to read such rampant speculation. I have
never before heard of such an untoward thing on RAS! In deed, we should
all wait 1-2 years for the OFFICIAL NTSB proclamation that this
accident was caused by pilot error (low PIC time a contributing
factor).

Tom

Tom, You either completly missed the point or just ignore it. Unless
you consider the pilot experience detailed in the NTSB report as
speculation. This poor fellow just soloed 3 weeks ago and was allowed
to take paid passengers for a ridge soaring ride for god's sake. Don't
you see what's wrong with this picture? The purpose of discussions like
this is to prevent similar things from hapenning again. Waiting 1-2
years for official NTSB report which will most likely be identical is a
waste of time. It will be old news by then. I rather wait for the
accident report in Soaring magazine. But again, this is not the point
of this discussion.