Winch Launch Fatality

As an instructor myself, I am very aware that it is my duty to protect both
the hardware (glider and launching equipment) and the software (student
pilot and myself).

In this case the student was a very experienced professional helicopter
pilot, but was having a trial flight with a view to taking up gliding as a
hobby (as I understand it). In view of his background it is fairly unlikely
that the the P2 would have panicked or interfered with the controls. .

Derek Copeland

At 13:00 22 June 2009, Jonathon May wrote:
We are speculating which is wrong.It could be a very experienced P2
reacting inapropiately and P1 not able to take over in time.The more
experienced "bloggs" the clever the traps they create for the
instructor.I think it unlikely that they made a basic land ahead/pattern
mistake, ,more likely failed to take over in time because P2 was nearly
right.Lets not insult the guys they paid a terrible price in the name of
a
sport we all love.

At 12:20 22 June 2009, John Smith wrote:
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but
too

low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.

The crucial point is a thorough departure briefing.

The only G103 Twin III I've flown was the SL version, this was the
ACRO version. I found the front seat distinctly different from the
Twin I's and II's I've flown. With parachutes on, it was close
quarters to say the least. Nevertheless, I was able to remain clear
of the controls on take off and climb out. Someone less familiar may
have inadvertantly interfered, but that's all spec. I know of one
case where a normal pattern in a ride glider resulted in a fatal spin
due to a hiking boot becoming lodged between the rudder pedal and the
side of the glider. Different glider make and model though.

Frank Whiteley

On Jun 22, 11:15*am, Del C wrote:
As an instructor myself, I am very aware that it is my duty to protect both
the hardware (glider and launching equipment) and the software (student
pilot and myself).

In this case the student was a very experienced professional helicopter
pilot, but was having a trial flight with a view to taking up gliding as a
hobby (as I understand it). In view of his background it is fairly unlikely
that the the P2 would have panicked or interfered with the controls. .

Derek Copeland

At 13:00 22 June 2009, Jonathon May wrote:

We are speculating which is wrong.It could be a very experienced P2
reacting inapropiately and P1 not able to take over in time.The more
experienced "bloggs" the clever the traps they create for the
instructor.I think it unlikely that they made a basic land ahead/pattern
mistake, ,more likely failed to take over in time because P2 was nearly
right.Lets not insult the guys they paid a terrible price in the name of
a
sport we all love.

At 12:20 22 June 2009, John Smith wrote:
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) *to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but
too

low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.

The crucial point is a thorough departure briefing.

On Jun 22, 11:57*am, Frank Whiteley wrote:
The only G103 Twin III I've flown was the SL version, this was the
ACRO version. *I found the front seat distinctly different from the
Twin I's and II's I've flown. *With parachutes on, it was close
quarters to say the least. *Nevertheless, I was able to remain clear
of the controls on take off and climb out. *Someone less familiar may
have inadvertantly interfered, but that's all spec. *I know of one
case where a normal pattern in a ride glider resulted in a fatal spin
due to a hiking boot becoming lodged between the rudder pedal and the
side of the glider. *Different glider make and model though.

Frank Whiteley

On Jun 22, 11:15*am, Del C wrote:

As an instructor myself, I am very aware that it is my duty to protect both
the hardware (glider and launching equipment) and the software (student
pilot and myself).

In this case the student was a very experienced professional helicopter
pilot, but was having a trial flight with a view to taking up gliding as a
hobby (as I understand it). In view of his background it is fairly unlikely
that the the P2 would have panicked or interfered with the controls. .

Derek Copeland

At 13:00 22 June 2009, Jonathon May wrote:

We are speculating which is wrong.It could be a very experienced P2
reacting inapropiately and P1 not able to take over in time.The more
experienced "bloggs" the clever the traps they create for the
instructor.I think it unlikely that they made a basic land ahead/pattern
mistake, ,more likely failed to take over in time because P2 was nearly
right.Lets not insult the guys they paid a terrible price in the name of
a
sport we all love.

At 12:20 22 June 2009, John Smith wrote:
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) *to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but
too

low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.

The crucial point is a thorough departure briefing.

The MHG has a Twin III Acro. I've given hundreds of rides in it.
There is nothing special about the front seat that would cause
concern. It's really a nice glider for rides with big comfortable
seats.

Like any glider, if you put a really big person with long legs in the
front seat with the pedals cranked all the way aft you might have a
control interference problem but that's a cockpit preparation issue
that should be detected by moving the controls to their limits as part
of the cockpit checklist if not when seating your passenger.

Gosh, two postings in a row when I actually agree with Bill Daniels!

Lasham had a Grob G103 Twin Acro (the cranked wing version) up to a couple
of years ago, when it was sold and replaced with a DG1000T. It had nice
roomy and very comfortable cockpits and generally docile handling, but
with the proviso that it was capable of spinning if flown close to the
stall, unlike the earlier straight winged version which could only be made
to spin for training purposes if you fitted special little canard fins to
the nose (made it look a bit like a hammer head shark). We had one of
those as well prior to the above glider, but it got written off by a very
heavy PIO landing, probably not helped by its rather snatchy airbrakes.

Derek Copeland


At 18:18 22 June 2009, bildan wrote:

The MHG has a Twin III Acro. I've given hundreds of rides in it.
There is nothing special about the front seat that would cause
concern. It's really a nice glider for rides with big comfortable
seats.

Like any glider, if you put a really big person with long legs in the
front seat with the pedals cranked all the way aft you might have a
control interference problem but that's a cockpit preparation issue
that should be detected by moving the controls to their limits as part
of the cockpit checklist if not when seating your passenger.

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 07:26:52 -0700, Frank Whiteley wrote:


Google Earth
42.4417017 / -84.0666186
for the layout. The winch run, ~3300ft, should be fairly clear.

Thanks. That field looks pretty conventional.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

"Martin Gregorie" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:45:02 +0000, Del C wrote:

Generally it is OK to make 180 or 360 degree turns in a modern gliders,
as long as you start at at least 300ft and keep the airspeed up to a
safe manoeuvring speed. The failure to do the latter seems to have been
the probably cause of this accident.

I'm really curious about the field layout: I've never flown a winch
launch from a flat land field where it wasn't possible to land ahead from
a low break or to fly an abbreviated circuit from a higher one, but then
again I've never flown from a site where the winch was positioned off the
end of the runway.


http://www.sandhillsoaring.org/

Some photo's of the site and their dual drum Tost winch


--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

On Jun 22, 12:18*pm, bildan wrote:
On Jun 22, 11:57*am, Frank Whiteley wrote:



The only G103 Twin III I've flown was the SL version, this was the
ACRO version. *I found the front seat distinctly different from the
Twin I's and II's I've flown. *With parachutes on, it was close
quarters to say the least. *Nevertheless, I was able to remain clear
of the controls on take off and climb out. *Someone less familiar may
have inadvertantly interfered, but that's all spec. *I know of one
case where a normal pattern in a ride glider resulted in a fatal spin
due to a hiking boot becoming lodged between the rudder pedal and the
side of the glider. *Different glider make and model though.

Frank Whiteley

On Jun 22, 11:15*am, Del C wrote:

As an instructor myself, I am very aware that it is my duty to protect both
the hardware (glider and launching equipment) and the software (student
pilot and myself).

In this case the student was a very experienced professional helicopter
pilot, but was having a trial flight with a view to taking up gliding as a
hobby (as I understand it). In view of his background it is fairly unlikely
that the the P2 would have panicked or interfered with the controls. ..

Derek Copeland

At 13:00 22 June 2009, Jonathon May wrote:

We are speculating which is wrong.It could be a very experienced P2
reacting inapropiately and P1 not able to take over in time.The more
experienced "bloggs" the clever the traps they create for the
instructor.I think it unlikely that they made a basic land ahead/pattern
mistake, ,more likely failed to take over in time because P2 was nearly
right.Lets not insult the guys they paid a terrible price in the name of
a
sport we all love.

At 12:20 22 June 2009, John Smith wrote:
Andreas Maurer wrote:

Completely wrong for a winch launch.
In case of a rope-break, you are either able to land straight-on on
the airfield, or you have sufficient altitude(300 ft+) *to fly a
*safe* pattern.

Or, at some places, when you are too high for a straight landing but
too

low for a complete circuit, you do a safe 180 and make a safe downwind
landing.

The crucial point is a thorough departure briefing.

The MHG has a Twin III Acro. *I've given hundreds of rides in it.
There is nothing special about the front seat that would cause
concern. *It's really a nice glider for rides with big comfortable
seats.

Like any glider, if you put a really big person with long legs in the
front seat with the pedals cranked all the way aft you might have a
control interference problem but that's a cockpit preparation issue
that should be detected by moving the controls to their limits as part
of the cockpit checklist if not when seating your passenger.

Much has been said and written about winch launch failures and here is my
"Guide to Surviving a launch failure"

Launch fails

1 Pitch the nose down, at least approach attitude, Is speed approach
speed? Only when the answer to this is YES do you move to 2.
2 Is there sufficient room to land ahead? YES - DO IT. NO or NOT SURE
turn DOWNWIND and move to 3.
3 Do I have sufficient height to continue turning? YES continue turn into
wind or longest run. NO roll wings level and land straight ahead. (If at
any time space is available to land straight ahead of you DO IT)
4 Repeat 3 until into wind or land area is available, whichever comes
soonest.

A Grob 103 has excellent airbrakes and will land straight ahead from a
height which many other gliders would be forced to turn at. Apart from the
decision making and carrying out the decided procedure, the other vital
thing is to maintain approach attitude/speed.







At 14:45 22 June 2009, bildan wrote:
On Jun 22, 7:43=A0am, "vaughn"
wrote:
"John Smith" wrote in message

. ..

Where does this downwind landing taboo originate?

What downwind landing taboo? =A0Here in the US, the 180 degree "rope
brea=
k"
downwind landing is part of the standard pre-solo curriculum.

Vaughn

Since many critical facts are still unknown, it's impossible to
comment on this particular crash except to offer our deepest sympathy
and condolences to all concerned - especially the pilot. One can only
imagine the burden he carries.

But, speaking generally about winch launch failures, if you are high
enough that landing straight ahead is impossible, then you will have
plenty of altitude for a closely linked pair of 180 turns which will
end with the gilder lined up with the runway for an into-the-wind
landing. The last 180 to final approach should never be below 200
feet AGL which is comparable to the 200' 180 turn to a downwind
landing taught aero tow students.

Even on short runways, the straight ahead option and the circle to
land option overlap by several hundred feet, depending on things like
spoiler effectiveness and wind speed, making the decision not
particularly critical. Nonetheless, a pilot is encouraged to estimate
a "critical altitude" above which a straight ahead landing would be
problematical before beginning the launch. This mental preparation
makes it easier to decide which way to go.

What IS critical is getting the nose down without the slightest delay.
Push the nose as far below the horizon as it was above it at the point
of failure then WAIT until you see a safe airspeed with an increasing
trend before deciding on which option to execute. The top priority is
always the same - FLY THE GLIDER!

If the decision is circle to land, just as with the aero tow 180 turn
at 200', the glider must be flown with precise airspeed and
coordination control. The intent is NOT to stop at the launch point -
just to make a safe landing anywhere on the airfield.

Managing a winch launch failure is neither difficult nor unsafe but it
does require some training and forethought. Launch failures have
been managed safely many millions of times just using basic glider
instrumentation. However, I think significantly fewer accidents would
have happened if angle of attack indicators were universally installed.

On Jun 22, 6:15*pm, Don Johnstone wrote:
Much has been said and written about winch launch failures and here is my
"Guide to Surviving a launch failure"

Launch fails

1 Pitch the nose down, at least approach attitude - snip

I have to take issue since anyone following this advice might/will get
hurt.

If you stop the pitch down at 'approach attitude' from an initial
attitude of 30 - 45 degrees nose up, you will be stalled - the nose
must be pushed far below 'approach attitude" to achieve prompt
airspeed recovery.

This is easy to demonstrate without a winch. At an altitude that
allows safe spin recovery, zoom up at a 45 degree nose-up attitude.
When the airspeed drops to 65 knots, pretend you have a rope break and
push over to 'approach attitude' and stop the pitch down there. Note
the airspeed - it will be around 20 knots. If you turn you will
spin. This is a classic killer on a winch.

An excellent "rule of thumb" that works under any condition is to push
the nose as far below the horizon as it was above it at the rope
break. If it was up 45 degrees, then push it 45 degrees below the
horizon - and WAIT for 3 - 5 seconds for a safe airspeed with an
increasing trend. If it was up only 5 degrees, then go down 5
degrees. This way you won't dive into the runway if the break happens
low and you will get prompt airspeed recovery at greater height.

Pilots not expressly trained to do so will resist pushing the nose
down far enough for airspeed recovery when near the ground. They may
complain this is "throwing away altitude". If you are low enough that
it matters, you will be landing straight ahead anyway and you WANT to
get down. If you're high, you can convert most of any excess airspeed
back into height so it doesn't matter much.

Also, there is absolutely no reason to land anywhere except into the
wind on the departure runway. You can do this with huge safety
margins - even greater margins than with a 200' aero tow rope break.
All it takes is proper training.

If anyone wants to practice this, get a copy of Condor Competition
Flight Simulator, set 'Notams' to winch launch and set the rope break
probability to 100%. You can practice random rope breaks all day at
zero risk.

At 00:15 23 June 2009, Don Johnstone wrote: