Video of midair with tow rope

Michael Ash wrote:

And of course, while we do unpowered landings routinely, it's truly an
unexpected and unwelcome emergency for a power pilot. After experiencing
the shock of a mid-air he was faced with a choice of going ahead with an
unfamiliar procedure or hitting the parachute, and I can't blame him for
going with the devil he knew.

How many times had he pulled the parachute? And don't these power boys
practice engine-off landings?

On the bright side, the video should make useful evidence in a
prosecution: failing to spot a glider and tug was completely
inexcusable and I hope they throw the livre at him.

Ian

Jack wrote:

However, as we are well aware, an operating engine is not necessary to
continue controlled flight. So the question remains: why was it
necessary to use the parachute? Was the terrain unlandable, or was the
pilot more conscious of the parachute's capabilities than the aircraft's?

This is what worries me about ballistic parachutes: they turn a
possible crash into a guaranteed one. He doesn't seem to have spent any
time at all trying to work out whether his plane was flyable, and
although he walked away from the crash in an orchard, he mightt have
been so lucky. One you've pulled the handle you have no choice about
where you land ... Railway line? Road? Electricity substation? Market
place?

Ian

nimbusgb wrote:
Has anyone asked him who was holding the video camera of his incident?
He was!

Damned fool.

I was wondering the same thing. And the title of the bit sounds
like it was the tow planes fault.
But what can one expect from the "media" now-a-days. :-(
...lew...

Has anyone asked him who was holding the video camera of his incident?
He was!

Damned fool.

Dear Damned Fool,
According to the people who manufacture the kit for the airplane he was
flying, the camera was mounted in the plane.

K Urban

I seem to remember from the discussion on the French forum
www.planeur.net (the forum is down at the moment, so I cannot check)
that the microlight pilot was following another ultralight while
videotaping it. You can see another aircraft slightly left of center if
you look closely. He was probably concentrating on that, rather than on
looking out properly, even if he didn't hold the camera.

As far as I know, the tug and glider were not hit, so this incident
made no victims.

Stéphane Vander Veken

KM a écrit :

Has anyone asked him who was holding the video camera of his incident?
He was!

Damned fool.

Dear Damned Fool,
According to the people who manufacture the kit for the airplane he was
flying, the camera was mounted in the plane.

K Urban

stephanevdv schrieb:

I seem to remember from the discussion on the French forum
www.planeur.net (the forum is down at the moment, so I cannot check)

The server is not down, only some links are broken. You can access the
thread directly: http://planeur.phpnet.org/ivb//index.php?showtopic=5336


Excerpt:

L'attelage venait de décoller et était en montée initiale a une vitesse
comprise entre 110 et 130 kmh : vitesse normale de montée avec un
Duo-Discus en remorquage, D'après le témoin au sol l'ulm et l'avion
volaient sensiblement à la meme vitesse avec des trajectoires convergentes.
....

L'avion remorqueur venait bien de la droite mais ne lui coupait pas la
route : comme on le voit bien sur le film le pilote de l'ULM occupé a
filmer l'autre ULM n'a absolument pas réagi pour éviter l'accident :
aucune manoeuvre d'évitement n'est visible sur le film. Ceci m'a été
confirmé par le témoin au sol : l'ULM n'as pas bougé pour éviter le
remorqueur.

L'avion remorqueur, un DR400, s'est mis en virage "sur la tranche" à
droite (on voit le dessous de l'avion sur le film) pour ne pas prendre
de plein fouet l'ULM, je suis pilote remorqueur et je puis vous assurer
qu'on vire rarement au dela de 30 degrés avec un planeur en remorquage.
D'autre part le pilote remorqueur a largué le cable avant mème d'avoir
ressenti le contact avec l'ULM, l'accident aurait pu etre plus grave si
il ne l'avait pas fait !)

Le pilote du planeur à lui mème manoeuvré pour éviter l'ULM désemparé,
ensuite son altitude lui a permi un retour au terrain avec une partie du
cable de remorquage passant par dessus son aile gauche et trainant
derriere le planeur.

Heureusement l'usage du parachute global de l'ULM à prouvé son
indéniable intéret comme on peut le voir aussi sur l'autre vidéo
concernant les essais de vrille du MCR 01.


Autres commentaires :

Je confirme, les pilotes des deux ULM sont allemands..

Le pilote n'était même pas sur la fréquence, il se contentait de suivre son
copain, et de le filmer. Quand on connait le trafic de Tallard (entre 80 et
90.000 mouvements à l'année), ça fait peur. Ou bien le gars n'avait pas
étudié sa nav, ou alors ses neurones n'étaient pas tous cablés.

Following is a translation of the French text posted regarding this
incident:

"The team (tow plane & glider) had just taken off and was in its
initial climb at speed between 110 & 130 kmh (68 - 81 mph), a normal
climb speed with a Duo-discuss on tow. A witness on the ground
confirmed that the ultralight and the towplane flew pretty much at the
same speed with converging tracks. The towplane did come from the
right but did not cross his path. As can be seen on the film, the
pilot of the ultralight, busy with filming the other
ultralightabsolutely did not react to avoid the accident. No avoidance
maneuver is seen on the film. This was confirmed to me by the witness
on the ground. The ultralight did not move to avoid the tow plane.
The tow plane, a DR400, turned knife-edge to the right (one sees the
belly of the plane on the film) in order not to take the full brunt of
the ultralight. I am a tow pilot and can assure you that one very
seldom banks over 30 degrees with a glider on tow. Furthermore the tow
pilot released the rope even before he felt the contact with the
ultralight. The accident would have been much worse if he had not done
so. The glider pilot also maneuvered to avoid the out-of-control
ultralight. His altitude allowed him to return to his field with part
of the cable below his port wing and trailing behind the glider.

Luckily the use of the ballistic parachute on the ultralight proved its
undeniable advantage as can be seen on the other video of the spin
tests of the MCR 01.

Other comments:

I confirm that the two ultralight pilots are Germans. The pilot was
not on the correct frequency, he merely followed his pal and filmed
him. When one knows the volume of traffic at Tallard (between 80,000
and 90,000 flights per year), that's frightening. Either that guy had
not studied navigation or his neurons were not all connected."

Cheers, Charles

On the bright side, the video should make useful evidence in a
prosecution: failing to spot a glider and tug was completely
inexcusable and I hope they throw the livre at him.


See and be seen means just that. If indeed this was a tug and glider
there were at least two other sets of eyes that were supposed to be
looking!! Let us not be too quick to cast stones. This is another in
a long list of incidents we should be aware of and learn from.
Thankfully this one ended well.

Fly SAFE--

Skip Guimond

after years on the road motorcycling, gliding was supposed to be a "safe" sport.

I used to ride with the firm knowledge that everyone else on the road was a d**head trying to kill me. The days end was a bonus when they didnt get away with it.

The video illustrates well that there are folks out there with no lookout skills.

If you fly with the theory that you are the only one looking out, you will lookout a whole heap harder!

The attitude of the tug seems to show him banking up and away from Mr Ballistic, perhaps he saw the threat, they are still all lucky to be alive


bagger

wrote:
On the bright side, the video should make useful evidence in a
prosecution: failing to spot a glider and tug was completely
inexcusable and I hope they throw the livre at him.


See and be seen means just that. If indeed this was a tug and glider
there were at least two other sets of eyes that were supposed to be
looking!!

.... in a combination whch had right of way over our hero.

Thankfully this one ended well.

Inasmuch has he is a) alive and b) deprived of his aircraft, yes, I
think we can count it a happy ending.

Ian