[aus-soaring] To: aus soaring

[Harry Medlicott]

AN EASTER REGATTA AT LAKE KEEPIT
 
Following the success of our State Comps and the enthusiasm of 
members, we are, subject to numbers, proposing an Easter regatta.  All 
gliders would fly club class with handicaps.  The scoring system and 
tasking would be similar to that which was so popular at the State Comps.  
Entry fee would be a nominal amount to cover trophies and expenses.  Meals 
would not be provided but BBQ facilities and some refrigeration will be 
available.
 
The contest could be over just the holidays, 13th – 16th 
April, or include the previous week.  If it includes the previous week 
pilots could compete by flying the Easter period only and averaging their scores 
but pilots flying the whole period could drop their worst day.  Pilot pairs 
could be flown when the whole period is flown.
 
So, if you are interested in a great Easter regatta, let us 
know and also whether you would wish to fly the whole period or just the 
holidays.
 
To proceed with planning we need expressions of interest from 
at least 10 pilots.  Hoping to hear from you
 
Harry MedlicottJim Stanley[EMAIL PROTECTED]   [EMAIL PROTECTED](02) 
43653626 (02) 6769 7514
 
 

[aus-soaring] back issues of A G and Soaring

[Harry Medlicott]

I have available most issues of A G between 1983 and 1996 
and many issues of Soaring between 1988 and 1996.
 
 Available free to anyone or club 
interested.
 
Harry Medlicott

[aus-soaring] To: aus Soaring

[Harry Medlicott]

Lake Keepit Soaring Club has a Puckatek with a gas strut 
supported undercarriage. I believe a similiar gas strut is used in Blaniks and 
IS 28s. These struts periodically require regassing or other service which can 
be inconvenient and expensive. An overseas pilot said that in the U.S.A. they 
insert ice hockey pucks (made of hard rubber and circular) into the struts and 
the modified struts give excellent service, no more regassing or relacement 
of seals. Sounds like a good idea. Does anyone know about the procedure and how 
well it works?
Harry Medlicott 

[aus-soaring] Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:13:59 +1000

[Harry Medlicott]

Re the Beverly incident.
It was an aerotow retieve, the tug was a Pawnee and I was in a 
Discus. The paddock was 3000 ft., slightly downhill, short wheat stubble, a 2 kt 
headwind and clear of tall obstructions beyond, about as good as you get. After 
the glider lifted off I went into high tow as per usual but the tug was not 
accelerating as well as expected( It turned out later that the tugs brakes were 
locking on) As the gliders pitot was obstructed by the tow rings no accurate 
speed reading was available. As the end of the paddock came closer my concerns 
increased but I assumed the tug pilot had things under control and would climb 
away before the fence, nevertheless to give myself more options I gently eased 
the glider somewhar higher, about 3m above the ground but certainly not 
into an extreme position. With the glider still attached the tug hit the fence 
while still on the ground and slid to a halt 50 m further on severely 
 damaged. I managed to clear the fence and rudder the glider around to 
miss a metre high contour bank. If I had been in low tow there would have been 3 
seconds available to get the glider on the ground and do something - impossible 
- it would have been the barbed wire fence. In an accident a Pawnee has a 
substantial undercarriage, the motor is out the front ,there is a hopper and an 
impact absorbing steel tube frame and the pilot is above the wings A glider 
pilot has 2 mm of  FRP between him and the outside world, and the mass of 
the wings is behind his shoulders. I am probably able to write these notes 
by using high tow on launch.
Should I have relied on the tug pilot to have releasd me if 
the launch was doubtful? He said later he persisted as he knew that if he 
released me near the fence it would leave me in an impossible 
position. As it was no one was hurt which is what counts. Make no mistake - 
high tow does give you more options. That little bit of extra height can makea 
difference.

[aus-soaring] Tow height when launching

[Harry Medlicott]

I am somewhat disappointed, but not surprised that my 
effort( 24th April ) to contribute to safety by reporting an accident 
resulted in more nitpicking comments than useful discussion.  It 
is not pleasant referring back to incidents involving oneself but it is 
only by analysing accidents that we can learn from them.  A 
few comments on my original notes and associated replies;
 
I was in high tow, which for me meant just above the slip 
stream, but then went about 1 or 2 metres higher.  Perhaps the height above 
the ground was as much as 5 metres but as I did not have a leadline to measure 
the height and am relying on a memory of eight years ago cannot be 
precise.
 
Comments re entry of the non-manoeuvring area are either an 
example of ignorance of wishful thinking.  When winch launching, respect 
and avoidance of the n.m.a. are both possible and highly desirable, but on 
aerotow it is a different kettle of fish.  Probably at lease 10% of 
aerotows spend time in an n.m.a. and on some airfields every flight is in the 
n.m.a. for from a few seconds to upwards of a minute.  If we were to 
release when we anticipated entering the n.m.a., (not much use releasing when we 
are in it!) then imagine the consequences, not least for those who had already 
entered to n.m.a.  Except in obvious cases I believe that not many pilots 
are aware of when they are approaching a marginal situation.  Surely it is 
primarily the tug pilots responsibility to release us, depending on his 
evaluation of power available and conditions ahead.  He must have a very 
good idea of his ability to safely clear obstacles and usually has many times 
the experience of the pilot he is towing.
 
Fortunately the GFA by setting standards and providing release 
testers has largely eliminated part of the problem of premature releases.  
A new 60m length of 12mm 1400kg breaking strain poly. rope costs  $25.00 so 
please scrap and cut up tow ropes when they become frayed.
 
There are also situations when it is most prudent to stay 
close to the ground until a speed of 10 or 15kts above stall speed has been 
reached.  Certainly under windy and turbulent conditions this applies, 
unless you wish to be unceremoniously dumped back on the ground, and also with 
heavily ballasted gliders.  A tug will almost always be airborne well 
before a standard class glider ballasted to 50kg wing loading.  At this 
weight severe damage will result in stalling from 1metre.  I have seen it 
happen twice.  A heavily ballasted glider must exercise extreme care when 
launching, the tug has less acceleration, and any idea about transiting 
immediately to high tow after lift off may well have a disastrous 
result.
 
 
 

Re: [aus-soaring] Development Workshop in SA

[Harry Medlicott]

member and enter whereas our current address is
not. We have plenty of skilled computer literate members who would establish
a new web site at no charge.

Contacts - Establish a 1800 number manned by a gliding knowledgeable person
who would be renumerated on a per call basis or on a modest salary
commensurate with the workload. The GFA office could be used initially, with
after hours diversion to volunteers until the response requirements were
established.

Develop a protocol to handle enquiries including a standard form including
all details such as name, address, contact phone numbers, cost restrictions
(aerotow or winch), previous experience, etc. and where the person obtained
the contact number. All enquirers would be sent brochures including perhaps
ones from those clubs interested in training.  The appropriate clubs would
be notified and make direct contact themselves with the leads.  Some time
later a follow up call should be made to ascertain as to the enquirers
progress and how well he had been treated by the participating club.

Large highway signs - Many clubs have excellent highway sites.  A unique
opportunity to promote our sport.  Additionally we could try highway signs
near major cities.  These are expensive and their continuance would depend
on results.  All signs would feature the GFA 1800 number, web address and
local club contacts where applicable.

Car stickers - Each year include in Gliding/Skysailor adhesive signs
suitable for car bumper bars or rear windows and featuring a short message,
a stylised glider, the GFA 1800 number and our new web address.  If only
half of our 3,000 members used them we would have a huge exposure.  Some
members may have other sites where the stickers could be used such as office
notice boards, shop windows etc.

Adds in periodicals - There are magazines specialising in outdoor and
adventure activities.  Again, not cheap, and continuance would depend on
results.  As gliding is a sport in which middle age businessmen can excel
(and able to afford) magazines or periodicals circulating in this market are
worthy of consideration.  Health professionals seem to be well represented
in gliding, so perhaps their specialised periodicals are also a target.

Lake Keepit Soaring Club successfully advertises in a national model making
magazine.  The GFA 1800 number, web address and those of local clubs
throughout Australia keen to attract members could be included at little
extra cost.


Magazine exposure - Ask all members to place their used copies of
Gliding/Skysailor in the waiting rooms of professional services they visit.
Have you ever sat in a waiting room and perused the available literature?
Unless you like reading ancient copies of Womens Whatever its pretty
hopeless.  The magazine should include contact information. We believe that
the best location for these magazines is in hairdressers as most of us go
there about 6 times per year.

Lake Keepit Club is additionally placing a sticker on the cover
 "interested - check out our centrefold" and inserting a brochure which
includes telephone numbers of local members. Too early for an evaluation,
but it is an almost costless way of presenting our club to most potential
pilots in our catchment area.

Local clubs - The GFA already supports initiatives of local clubs who wish
to promote gliding but somehow or other we must enthuse them.  Perhaps
awards for clubs who have increased their membership, new membership bonuses
etc.

Lake Keepit Soaring Club is  awarding trainee scholarships to local high
school, TAFE students and Air Scout groups.  We will seek support from local
Rotary clubs and also the GFA.  Our aim is to talk about gliding at local
high schools and award about ten scholarships per year, training them at
modest cost using our winch in groups of three or four at a time.  We hope
that they will become largely self sufficient on the airfield and develop a
camaraderie.  A long term project perhaps, but very much worthwhile if it
succeeds. Could your club do something similar?

The total cost of trying these initiatives is well within the funding
capability of GFA.  As mentioned previously all responses must be identified
as to source.  Those initiatives that don't succeed should be quickly
dropped and funds concentrated on the successful ones.

Please don't just read these proposals and think to yourself "great stuff, I
hope it goes well."  Our present decline must be arrested.  It is up to all
of us to do our bit.  Dedicate a bit of time and effort - it might just be
making sure visitors to your airfield are made to feel welcome, that
trainees are well cared for or just placing used magazines as suggested.

Harry Medlicott






092001GLIDING membership proposals.doc
Description: MS-Word document

Re: [aus-soaring] Puchatek undercarriage

[Harry Medlicott]

Graham,

Lake Keepit had a similiar problem. The leg was straightened and reinforced
by a certified welder. We also have a leg which came from an earlier
Puchatek which went through the fire which destroyed our hangar. Suggest you
contact our manager Jim Stanley if you need further information,

regards,

Harry Medlicott
- Original Message -
From: "Graeme Cant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 7:10 PM
Subject: [aus-soaring] Puchatek undercarriage


> I'd prefer not to get too detailed about why (as Pooh-Bah said, "I wasn't
> even there!"), but our club Puchatek needs significant work on a bent gear
> leg.
>
> The manual says that no welding is allowed on the leg but this leg won't
be
> serviceable again without welding or complete replacement.
>
> Does anyone know:
> -  the spec for the gear leg main tube and any spec for post-welding heat
> treatment which makes welding the leg acceptable?  Alternatively,
>
> -  does anyone know where there is a serviceable spare leg for sale?
>
> Finally, has anyone contacted the Krosno factory recently and knows they
are
> actually still alive?
>
> The club would be very grateful for any help.
>
> Graeme Cant
>
>
>
> _
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>
>
> --
>   * You are subscribed to the aus-soaring mailing list.
>   * To Unsubscribe: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   * with "unsubscribe aus-soaring" in the body of the message
>   * or with "help" in the body of the message for more information.
>
>


--
  * You are subscribed to the aus-soaring mailing list.
  * To Unsubscribe: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  * with "unsubscribe aus-soaring" in the body of the message
  * or with "help" in the body of the message for more information.

[aus-soaring] To: aus Soaring

[Harry Medlicott]

Yes, there was a serious mid-air at Narromine and I was one of 
the pilots involved.
 
I have no regrets that the accident did not receive TV or news 
coverage as that usually only happens where there is a fatal, and such items 
really don't help our sport.
 
There is much to be learnt from such accidents and I hope to 
be able to make a contribution to the soon to be formed GFA Safety 
Committee.
 
In particular we need to look at accident survivability as 
well as prevention.  A sad fact is that about 1 in 12 pilots who have flown 
in the Australian multi-class nationals from 1997 on have been involved in a 
mid-air collision.There have been 5 gliders destroyed 2 pilots killed and of the 
3 who successfully deployed parachutes 2 opened them in the last few 
seconds.  Of the 3 gliders that did not crash one had an elevator damaged 
and must be considered most fortunate and another lost an outer portion of a 
wing but was still flyable as it was equipped with flaperons.  I am 
concerned that one day an accident will occur at the top of a gaggle with 
catastrophic results for the gliders underneath and the gliding movement in 
general.
 
For over a year I have been researching the NOAH system 
developed by DG which assists pilots exiting a disabled glider.  The use of 
static parachute lines also warrants consideration.  The DG company has 
completed development of the NOAH system and will be offering it to other 
manufacturers.  It is envisaged that a kit form will be available in the 
not to distant future capable of retrofitting to existing 
gliders.
 
The acident is under investigation and further information 
will be available at a later date.
 
Harry Medlicott.
 

[aus-soaring] Libelle for sale

[Harry Medlicott]

Anyone interested in a Standard Libelle for sale?
 
Frank Hudson has  VH-GSU in good condition for sale at 
$18,500.
Includes GPS and Joey.  A very reluctant 
sale.
Contact Frank on 02 67852137

Re: [aus-soaring] Astir cs parts.

[Harry Medlicott]

Lake Keepit has a horizontal tailplane available if 
you should ever need it
 
Regards,
 
Harry Medlicott

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Jenni 
  & Don Woodward 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  
  Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:02 
  AM
  Subject: [aus-soaring] Astir cs 
  parts.
  
  Hi 
  all,
   
  The Beverley 
  Soaring Society is looking for Astir parts, specifically cockpit parts like 
  bulkheads, undercarriage bits etc... If anybody has any sitting 
  around in their workshop somewhere gathering dust please give us a 
  call.
   
  Regards
  Don 
  Woodward
  0419 809 
  463.

[aus-soaring] in - cockpit visual distractions

[Harry Medlicott]

The last thing glider pilots should be doing is 
looking at their instrument panel, particularly items which cannot be scanned in 
a second such as an analogue ASI.
 
Computer type screens such as the i-paqs and palm 
navs you guys are discussing might be OK for GA but they are a dangerous 
distraction for glider pilots. We should be using audio varios exclusively and 
keeping our heads outside the cockpit, not only to scan for traffic but to look 
for thermal indications. I also wonder at the habits developed by computer games 
addicts and hope they can undergo a metamorphism when they get into a glider and 
concentrate on the real world outside rather than their instruments
 
Harry 
Medlicott   

[aus-soaring] Multi-Class Nationals: Benalla

[Harry Medlicott]

I would like to ask all pilots who intend to fly at the  
Benalla Nationals to contact Gary Brasher and let him know of your 
intentions.
This is particularly relevant to those who have 
not submitted a formal entry but do intend to fly.
It is appreciated if pilots could contact Gary Brasher by no 
later than Friday 11th January.
If contact has been made with Gary or a member of the 
organisation in the past 24hrs then please disregard this 
note
Thank you for your assistance.
Miles Gore-Brown
Chairman NCC.

[Aus-soaring] (no subject)

[Harry Medlicott]

Hi All
 
Those of you interested in the fitting of collision 
avoidance devices such as Flarm  may be interested in this article 
published in AVLINKS, the QBE newsletter, if you have not already received a 
copy. It is a victim of my inadequate OCR and scanning techniques but still 
readable. Note the prominence given to gliders. Not surprising given our 
appalling mid air accident rate compared to other forms of 
aviation.
 
Seems the insurance industry is interested in this 
technology as could be expected . 

 
The insurance industry in Switzerland helped 
finance the development of collision avoidance devices and it seems may be 
reducing premiums as these units are now virtually universal there. It could be 
that the cost of installing them in Australia is substantially covered 
by reductions in premiums.
 
Let's hope the GFA takes a lead in the development 
of these devices. As I understand it the GFA is opposing the use of ADS-B 
technology at this stage due to expense and current drain,
 
Harry 
 
 
ADS-B. The way toThe future?
 
Australia stands at the threshold of an 
opportunityto change the way we fly and share our large
 
 country's airspace for the benefit of 
all.
 
 All  aircraft  owners  
have  an  opportunity  to
 
  upgrade the way we navigate and improve 
on
 
  the Mark 1 eyeball principle of 'see and 
avoid',
 
   whether we live and fly in the 
outback, or
 
   around the busy capital cities in the 
'J curve'.
 
    Regardless of the class of 
aircraft we fly most of
 
    us have  caught up  
with  the  march  of
 
    technology since the early 90's 
and are using
 
 GPS in varying degrees. It 
can be used for
 
 guidance across 
featureless areas of the
 
 i   outback, to fly safely  
round  air traffic
 
 boundaries, or to execute 
a demanding IFR
 
 approach to a country 
airport.
 
 As air traffic management 
radars reach the
 
  end of their useful 
life, the combined ADS-B
 
  technologies of GPS 
and transponders
 
  provide a golden 
opportunity to update the
 
  nation's air traffic 
system in one stoke. This will
 
  ;    give a leg up to every 
aircraft owner and pilot
 
  in Australia 
improving their operational safety,
 
  navigation and 
efficiency,
 
  We all wish to 
reduce the cost of flying, making
 
  it more available to 
younger generations who
 
 presently play with Xboxes 
and Nintendos at
 
 home instead of hanging 
around airport
 
 fences and hangars as we 
did in our youth.
 
 The  
installation  of  appropriate  ADS-B
 
 equipment across all 
classes of aircraft and
 
    gliders will benefit all 
Australians, however the
 
    government and industry fund 
it.
 
   Why do we say that?
 
   • With the use of ADS-B, the air 
traffic system can
 
 be simpler and more cost 
effective.
 
    Past reforms in this area have 
failed due to
 
    lack of radar coverage, and the 
appropriate
 
    use of transponders in all 
aircraft at country
 
   airports where RPT aircraft 
operate.
 
• Tighter airspace boundaries can be 
drawn
 
  without relying on the flawed 'see and 
avoid'
 
  principle which needs larger margins.• 
All aircraft - even gliders - will be able to carry
 
   a small, light and power- miserly 
ADS-B unit
 
   which allows them to see and be seen. 
This
 
   could even reduce mid-air glider 
incidents
 
   through the use of simple display 
units such as
 
   PDA's coupled to an enhanced ADS-B 
unit,
 
 • All  light and  
recreational  aircraft could  be
 
   given a simple and effective 
GPS/transponder
 
   with the added navigation benefit of 
a
 
   moving map display when coupled to a 
PDA
 
   unit with minimal power 
requirements.
 
 • Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning 
Systems
 
   (EGPWS) can be added to all IFR 
aircraft at
 
   small cost to industry, lowering the 
incidence of
 
   controlled flight into terrain (CFIT), 
and its
 
   associated costs to the 
community.
 
 ADS-B will lead to better-targeted search 
and
 
 rescue operations in our more remote 
and
 
 rugged country This could save lives 
through
 
 quicker location of downed aircraft and 
faster
 
 rescue of crew and 
passengers,    (continued.)
 
I How can this be done?
 
 The government and Industry as a whole could 
seize this
 
 opportunity in a mature manner and support 
the introduction and
 
 fitting of appropriate ADSB uits to all 
aircraft including gliders and
 
 recreational aircraft. We would then lead the 
world in air traffic
 
 management, with increased safety and 
improved navigation for
 
 all users of Australian 
airspace.
 
 This will require joint funding from the 
government and to a lesser
 
 degree from GA.
 
 If   will   
also   need   a   mature   
attitude,   and   consensus   and
 
 co-operation from all sectors of the 
industry  But once we
 
 embrace ADS-B we will all see benefits in 
each sector - be it RPT or
 
 recreational aircraft - through added 
safe

[Aus-soaring] (no subject)

[Harry Medlicott]

Re NOAA and temp trace predictions

Suggest those who are interested in the value of these predicted temp traces 
obtain one for the coordinates of an Australian weather station near  their 
gliding site prior to the time of the daily balloon flight (11 am?). The 
time could be earlier by a few hours or the previous day. I don't think it 
would make much difference as the calculations would probably be based on 
the latest balloon flight and most places of interest only do them every 24 
hours now.


Then download the actual temp trace and compare with the predictions.

My own experience is that these predictions are not all that accurate and 
lack the fine detail necessary for an evaluation of gliding conditions. 
Personally I look at the latest temp traces available, the weather pattern, 
aviation and general forecasts then make a judgement myself. If you are 
really keen the best by far is an actual temp flight in the morning. At the 
NSW State Comps at Lake Keepit we used a Jabiru which kept costs to an 
acceptable minimum. If conditions are marginal or you want to get the most 
out of a day, then you can't beat an on site temp trace,


Harry Medlicott 




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.3/296 - Release Date: 3/29/2006

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality

[harry medlicott]

All the comments on the accident at Lake Keepit are informative after the event 
and assuming you all know all the details of the accident.  Perhaps you could 
show more compassion for the  deceased member, pilot and tug pilot as well as 
all the club members on the ground before running off at the mouth without 
knowing one single fact.  Enough please!

Wendy Medlicott

  - Original Message - 
  From: Ben Jones 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 6:56 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality


  I also had wondered that too . ,sure better fences and wire cutters would 
be nice but there was a chain of events which started well before their  flight 
started.


- Original Message - 
From: Geoff Kidd 
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality


The discussions of safer fence design and ground-looping techniques are 
very worthwhile, but if press and other reports are correct perhaps we should 
also discuss the merits of launching while downbursts are in the vicinity or on 
the strip.



  - Original Message - 
  From: Anthony Smith 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in 
Australia. 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 3:49 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality


  Typically it will either:

  - ride up the nose and then break through the canopy and
  then run along the canopy sides 

  - or miss the nose (because the nose is too low to collect
  the wire) and simply break through the canopy and then
  continue at through the canopy at the wires height on the
  fence posts.

  It is unfortunate that the height of the top strand (or the
  electric wire) on a typical fence is also the typical height
  of a pilots neck in a glider. 

  A simple wire cutting device mounted just inside the canopy
  would be suitable for the first type of entry. The second
  type of entry (which is probably what happened with the
  Puchatek) is a lot harder to deal with except for a steel
  tube cage inside the canopy to deflect the wires.

  The accident that I was first (bystander) on the scene of,
  the pilot was lucky and went through the fence at a sideways
  angle after a failed last second ground loop.  He caught the
  wires across his face instead, but survived to be still
  flying today.  


  > Please excuse my ignorance, but where does the wire enter
  > the glider?
  > 
  > Can it break through the perspex of the canopy?
  > Or does it slip up the nose and enter into the space
  > between the canopy  and the fuselage?
  > 
  > If the wire enters the glider through the space between
  > the canopy and  the hull, then it would only take a very
  > small cutter inside that space to  cut the wire. (Not a
  > whole 'roll cage').
  > 
  > Michael
  > 
  > 
  > > What about the devices the Kiwis use to go through
  > > electric fences? I've seen one on a Std Cirrus, the
  > > pilot said he'd needed it twice. It was a small device
  > > on top of the nose designed to catch wire and cut it. 
  > > 
  > > -Original Message-
  > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  > > 
  > > Yes in the Netherlands i is compulsory due to very small
  > > paddock size. 
  > > On 27/02/2007, at 7:41 AM, Derek Ruddock wrote: 
  > > 
  > > > I believe it has been mandatory for a number of years
  > > > in one European county (Holland?) to have wire strike
  > > > protectors fitted. These look like mini roll cages,
  > > > > with wire breakers, and fit inside the canopy I
  > > > remember seeing a glider in Australia (Paul Matthews?)
  > > > flying > with one some years ago  
  > 
  > > >> -Original Message- 
  > > >> John Parncutt Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 
  > > >> 
  > > >> In the mean time it would not be unreasonable to look
  > > > at fence  designs, if 
  > > >> only at the relatively short sections at the ends of
  > > the runway >> where 
  > > > the 
  > > >> majority of these incidents are likely to happen. 
  > > >> 
  > 
  > 
  > __
  > 
  > 
  > This electronic message and any attachments may be
  > confidential.  If you are not the intended recipient of
  > this message would you please delete the message and any
  > attachments and advise the sender. Sydney West Area Health
  > Service (SWAHS) uses virus scanning software but excludes 
  > any liability for viruses contained in any email or
  > attachment.
  > 
  > This email may contain privileged and confid

Re: [Aus-soaring] Tost wheel brakes

[harry medlicott]

Hi All,

The answers simple. Just train pilots that after extending full dive brakes, 
retract the handle slightly, 10 mm is enough.


A disc brake acuated at the end of the dive brake movement is by far the 
best metod of pulling up a glider in an emergency. The handle is already 
gripped and more force can be easily applied. If you really need to apply 
maximun braking , slide the handle forward and then pull it back sharply.


We never know when maximum braking will be needed. A child running across 
the airfield, unexpected outlanding obstacles etc. There is a trap with nose 
wheel or front skid type gliders in that when the glider goes onto its nose 
wheel or skid it is virtually impossible to steer with rudder or ground 
loop. Where you are pointing is where you will go. Good braking  is 
essential. Sooner or later someone will need effective braking. It could 
easily be you. I recently changed, at considerable expense, from drum brake 
to disc brake. No matter how well adjusted the drum brake would not supply 
sufficient braking to a glider whose landing weight was 450 Kg. Like 
insurance, hope I never need it,


Harry Medlicott




- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Borgelt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Tost wheel brakes



At 08:17 PM 28/03/2007, you wrote:



No, not a  MINOR defect.

IF IT DOES NOT WORK ACCORDING TO THE MANUFACTURER'S TYPE DATA 
CERTIFICATION SHEET THEN THE AIRCRAFT IS NOT AIRWORTHY.


The purpose of maintenance is to keep the aircraft in its certified 
condition.


The certified condition is at the root of the problem here. Obviously the 
design is such that it's too easy to land with full brake resulting in the 
glider tipping on its nose or causing high wear and short life on the 
braking system. The local fix for this was perhaps not well thought out.


If we are going to use this method of brake actuation(I have no problem 
with it as it allows much more force than the bike handle type) perhaps 
after full aerodynamic brake is applied the handle should be rotated 
slightly to allow more actuation travel to engage the wheel brake. Similar 
to the Piggott hook that DG fit nowadays to prevent takeoffs with brakes 
unlocked.


The problem with certification is that by modern production standards 
gliders are made in prototype or at best pre-production quantities. 
Certifying prototypes is a bad idea as the less than optimum solutions get 
locked in.


If gliders were invented now I don't believe that the civil aviation 
authorities would be particularly interested in them. At most there might 
be LSA type "certification" although that itself is vast overkill.


Mike


Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.20/737 - Release Date: 3/28/2007 
4:23 PM





___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Dyneema Rope

[harry medlicott]

John,

A NZ club is using it. Being tried widely in Europe as you probably know with 
excellent results. Allison Randle from the BGA has a chat page about it, also 
clubs in England were looking at cooperatively buying it to reduce costs. Wear 
under Europen conditions is OK but the concern is wear rates under Australian 
conditions with little grass on the runway. As well as allowing very high 
launch rates, a retrieve winch would probably overcome this. 

Mostly used for yachting in Australia and pretty expensive from ships 
chandleries,

Would be interested in how you proceed,

Regards

Harry Medlicott
  - Original Message - 
  From: J Hudson 
  To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net 
  Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 1:27 PM
  Subject: [Aus-soaring] Dyneema Rope


  Anyone in Oz using Dyneema Rope or know of a "local" supplier.


  John Hudson


--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.5/793 - Release Date: 5/7/2007 2:55 
PM
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Dyneema Rope

[harry medlicott]

Mark,

Self laying winches are dreadfully slow unless perhaps you have a multi drum 
winch. They are just not used to any extent so far as I know. The retrieve 
winch as well as allowing launch rates of +20 per hour must reduce rope wear 
compared to towing the rope most of the way back the airfield. The minus 
factor is the need to have a winch savvy driver at both ends of the 
airfield. Probably only appropriate for a busy winch  operation.


Europe has found  for many years that winches are ideal for training due to 
the low cost and the ability to have club members conduct the operation. In 
Australia fuel and GA costs are fast reaching a stage where a good winch, 
coupled with relatively trouble free rope, either polypropylene or Dyneema 
is starting to look a good option.  When I was at Mangrove Mountain we used 
about 2 litres of fuel per launch, including the retrieve. The low drag and 
light weight of Dyneema mean that launch heights of approximately half the 
length of the cable are not unusual. At Gulgong with a long strip and good 
land ahead options they launch single seaters with up to 100 litres of 
water,


Harry


- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Newton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Dyneema Rope



harry medlicott wrote:

Wear under Europen conditions is OK but the concern is wear rates under 
Australian conditions with little grass on the runway. As well as 
allowing very high launch rates, a retrieve winch would probably overcome 
this.


Hi Harry.

The retrieve winch suggestion sounds counter-intuitive to me.  I'd have
thought that it'd double the wear rate, because the rope would be dragged
down the runway twice per launch (once to launch the glider, once to
retrieve the rope afterwards).

Surely self-laying winches would be better for this application?

 - mark


I tried an internal modem,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82356937 -
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 
269.6.5/793 - Release Date: 5/7/2007 2:55 PM





___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Dyneema Rope

[harry medlicott]

JR, Anthony and others,

What is your turnaround time using a self laying winch? A multi drum winch 
would speed up the process and reduce rope/wire wear. A turnaround time of 6 
minutes is well and truly achievable with a single drum winch and a competent 
retrieve driver. It all depends on your needs.If you have 6 gliders on the line 
waiting for a launch a 10 minute turnaround time is too long but if your clubs 
needs are well below this then a slower turn around time is OK.

At Lake Keepit we have experience of using both 8mm poly (breaking strain 1,000 
kg. ) and 10mm poly (breaking strain 1,500kg.) The aeronautical drag of the 
10mm is much higher and results in launches 250 ft. lower than 8mm.

Both are much better than single strand steel wire with its propensity for 
tangles, taking an hour to fix. I know small clubs with highly skilled winch 
drivers get away with using it but its a different case in active training 
clubs hoping to utilise most club members. The poly rope is much safer to use 
and gives a very smooth launch, a bit like going up in an armchair. During the 
drought and the resulting airfield denuded of worthwhile ground cover, wear 
became more of a problem, hence we are using 8mm for the 2,000 ft. nearest the 
glider to reduce aeronautical drag and 10mm. for the remainder to reduce the 
effect of wear. Even if excess wear reduces the life of the poly rope it is 
better to increase the charge for the launch to cover this and give pilots a 
good launch with minimal chance of a rope break,

Harry Medlicott

PS Dyneema with its light weight and low drag enables higher launches. Clubs in 
Europe using it seem to be getting launch heights of about half the cable 
length with a modest head wind. Its light weight also make it practical to use 
very long airfields which otherwise would not give proportionally higher 
launches due to the cable weight. The amount of wear on Australian airfields 
with light grass cover is the big unanswered question. A self laying operation 
would not have this problem.  H  
  - Original Message - 
  From: JR 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in 
Australia. 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 6:55 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Dyneema Rope


  We of the Millicent club, use a mixture of stranded cable and rope, and it 
works brilliantly, and a self laying winch.
  regards JR
- Original Message - 
From: Emilis Prelgauskas 
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Dyneema Rope


On Wed, 9 May 2007 16:59:00 +1000, harry medlicott wrote:
>Self laying winches are dreadfully slow unless perhaps you have a
>multi drum
>winch. They are just not used to any extent so far as I know. 

:-) _South Oz seems to have predominantly self laying winches, using their 
advantages of minimum crew and adequate launch rate for smaller fleets.


The
>retrieve
>winch as well as allowing launch rates of +20 per hour must reduce
>rope wear
>compared to towing the rope most of the way back the airfield. 

Many Oz unique factors come into play.
Some time back a north west NSW (non GFA) operation found that while single 
wire worked fine in the fine soils there, multi strand cable dug itself into 
the ground on the initial roll by the twist rotation of the cable on pull, and 
made launch impossible.

It will be interesting to find out if plastic ropes, when there is no grass 
to sit on top of, exhibits such errant behaviour and then performs quite 
differently to European experience.





___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.6/794 - Release Date: 5/8/2007 2:23 
PM
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] Fw:

[harry medlicott]

- Original Message - 
From: harry medlicott 
To: aus Soaring 
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 12:47 PM


Hi All,

I have a surplus hangar space available at Lake Keepit Airfield. It has its own 
doors and direct access to the AF. No moving other gliders. Reasonable price. 
Not moving a glider to another site, just that  I helped the club by being 
involved in the construction of its new hangars. 

If interested call me offline at  02 43653626 or 0428439502,

Harry Medlicott

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Independent operator requirements

[harry medlicott]

Mike,

If you want really disturbing statistics, check out the fatality rate on a 
per hours flown basis for aerotow glider launching. I did a rough 
calculation a few years ago and on the available statistics it appeared the 
fatality rate for tug pilots was about ten times higher than for 
agricultural flying, on a per hours flown basis.


The GFA was not particularly interested in hearing about it and took little 
or no notice of theATSB recommendations to lessen the problem,


Harry Medlicott


- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Borgelt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2008 7:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Independent operator requirements



At 06:42 PM 7/09/2008, you wrote:

Statistically speaking, you are going to have more accidents in RAA
as you have more aircraft being flown with more hours in the air
than GA and GFA.



Here's the exact quote from the article I linked to:

"Further, while Australian Transport Safety Bureau statistics
indicate that agricultural flying is the most dangerous form of
general aviation flying in Australia, it is still nearly three times
less likely to result in a death per number of hours flown than
ultralight flying."

Note the "per hours flown"

Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.16/1650 - Release Date: 9/3/2008 
4:13 PM


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Gliding Gets a Bagging on Pprune

[harry medlicott]

Robert,

What you are saying is just not correct. You should know better than try and 
justify this charge on the basis that its being paid by people other than GFA 
members.

The price charged intro flights is inelastic - you just can't raise it by $20. 
The money comes straight out of clubs pockets. there is some justification for 
$20 when the extra days cover is utilised. Perhaps near metropolitan clubs able 
to charge +$100 can afford it. For winch launch clubs it is a charge of $120 
per hour based on 10 minute flights and is a huge disincentive for those clubs 
offering low cost intro flights hoping to win new members. The increase from $5 
for struggling clubs is obscene and will in the end be counterproductive to 
membership.

I expect clubs may well jeopardize their insurance cover by exaggerating the 
family and friends category.

The charge in respect of single flights, particularly for winch launches needs 
to be reconsidered.

My own club, Lake Keepit Soaring Club has suffered a reversal of fortunes and 
has traded at a loss for the last couple of years. It costs members from the 
coast no less than $130 for fuel alone to drive to LK.Unlike clubs fortunate 
who have a council supported airfield, we lease and maintain our site at a cost 
of over $15,000 pa. Likewise to offer a full time operation we employ a mid 
week manager. My hope is that we can attract  more members living closer but 
price will always be a problem.I am building a new powerful winch which will be 
trialling Dyneema at my own expense to reduce launch and training costs in the 
hope that this will make gliding affordable for a wider range of socio economic 
groups

I would have no problem lopping $50,000 off GFA expenditure. Might lose a few 
friends but its about time the GFA looked critically at how its discretionary 
surplus income is spent,

Harry Medlicott 
  - Original Message - 
  From: Robert Hart 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 6:44 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Gliding Gets a Bagging on Pprune


  Derek Ruddock wrote: 
The improvement I would like to see is an end to slugging clubs for $20 
every time they took an interested member of the public for a flight. This 
thinly disguised revenue raising is an abomination for all clubs, regardless of 
size.

  OK - I am on the GFA Board as GQ rep and I supported this measure. There is a 
very simple logic to the decision, which clearly has not made it back to your 
club.

  There is insufficient income being generated by our (unfortunately) shrinking 
membership to allow for the running of the organisation. There are two ways of 
raising the revenue needed - raise membership fees or find a way for people 
outside the organisation to make a contribution.

  Raising the AEF fees makes those outside the GFA contribute more to its 
running. Do you really want your membership fees to rise significantly instead?


-- 
Robert Hart  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+61 (0)438 385 533   http://www.hart.wattle.id.au



--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1725 - Release Date: 10/14/2008 
9:25 PM
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] (no subject)

[harry medlicott]

Robert,

What you are saying is just not correct. You should know better than try and 
justify this charge on the basis that its being paid by people other than GFA 
members.

The price charged intro flights is inelastic - you just can't raise it by $20. 
The money comes straight out of clubs pockets. there is some justification for 
$20 when the extra days cover is utilised. Perhaps near metropolitan clubs able 
to charge +$100 can afford it. For winch launch clubs it is a charge of $120 
per hour based on 10 minute flights and is a huge disincentive for those clubs 
offering low cost intro flights hoping to win new members. The increase from $5 
for struggling clubs is obscene and will in the end be counterproductive to 
membership.

I expect clubs may well jeopardize their insurance cover by exaggerating the 
family and friends category.

The charge in respect of single flights, particularly for winch launches needs 
to be reconsidered.

My own club, Lake Keepit Soaring Club has suffered a reversal of fortunes and 
has traded at a loss for the last couple of years. It costs members from the 
coast no less than $130 for fuel alone to drive to LK.Unlike clubs fortunate 
who have a council supported airfield, we lease and maintain our site at a cost 
of over $15,000 pa. Likewise to offer a full time operation we employ a mid 
week manager. My hope is that we can attract  more members living closer but 
price will always be a problem.I am building a new powerful winch which will be 
trialling Dyneema at my own expense to reduce launch and training costs in the 
hope that this will make gliding affordable for a wider range of socio economic 
groups

I would have no problem lopping $50,000 off GFA expenditure. Might lose a few 
friends but its about time the GFA looked critically at how its discretionary 
surplus income is spent,

Harry Medlicott 
  - Original Message - 
  From: Robert Hart 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 6:44 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Gliding Gets a Bagging on Pprune


  Derek Ruddock wrote: 
The improvement I would like to see is an end to slugging clubs for $20 
every time they took an interested member of the public for a flight. This 
thinly disguised revenue raising is an abomination for all clubs, regardless of 
size.

  OK - I am on the GFA Board as GQ rep and I supported this measure. There is a 
very simple logic to the decision, which clearly has not made it back to your 
club.

  There is insufficient income being generated by our (unfortunately) shrinking 
membership to allow for the running of the organisation. There are two ways of 
raising the revenue needed - raise membership fees or find a way for people 
outside the organisation to make a contribution.

  Raising the AEF fees makes those outside the GFA contribute more to its 
running. Do you really want your membership fees to rise significantly instead?


-- 
Robert Hart  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+61 (0)438 385 533   http://www.hart.wattle.id.au



--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring 


--



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1725 - Release Date: 10/14/2008 
9:25 PM
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] AEF Charges - $20 to GFA

[harry medlicott]

 Our experience at Lake Keepit is that with a bit of an effort on the part of 
instructors we get a quite reasonable conversion rate from AEFs. We also need 
the money. Also where would our new members come from if it wasn't through 
introductory flights? Anyone with any bright ideas? How many trainees just rock 
up at the airfield and sign up for a training course?

The previous $5 charge covered an insurance component. If there has been a 
change would be pleased to hear about it.
I hope you guys are not going to complain about $$50,000 being spent on the 1% 
of us aspiring for overseas team selection. You might as well keep quiet. Your 
fees are compulsory and you as an individual have absolutely no say in the 
election of the GFA board or its executive. It would have been a simple matter 
when the new constitution was being formulated to ensure member elected 
representation from each state. Candidates could present their CVs and policies 
for publication in Soaring Australia. You will find it hard to find another 
organisation with compulsory membership and no associated vote. If anyone knows 
of any, please give us a list. "no taxation without representation" was the 
catchcry of the American War of Independence,

Harry
  - Original Message - 
  From: Kevin McGowan 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 10:37 AM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] AEF Charges - $20 to GFA


  Lets get real here, it is a well known fact, and stated on this forum many 
times previously that AEF's result in few new members to gliding, in fact often 
they just clog up the day but we do them in the hope that maybe this one will 
join.
   
  At my club we have a fairly simple way of charging for these flights, work 
out what it will cost "worst case" for the launch, add the cost of the glider, 
add a bit for the fudge factor, add a bit for profit, then add the GFA fee 
whether it be $1 or $20. 
   
  Any club that says that the $20 GFA fee is taken from the club needs to look 
at its administration as they are not doing their job properly as an AEF should 
not cost the members but should profit them. Most people who take an  AEF do so 
for the experience only and will pay whatever is asked, I  have seen flights 
charged at $150 and the club is still kept busy doing flights.

  K




--

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 09:02:40 +1000
  Subject: [Aus-soaring] AEF Charges - $20 to GFA





  AEF’s are a main source of revenue for some clubs in both dollars and 
attracting new members.  This is a blatant grab for club dollars by GFA, taking 
revenue straight out of the clubs.



  In small clubs the cost of operating will most likely be in the red and are 
being propped up by donations from members (buying fuel for winch, food for 
fund raising BQ, etc out of their own pocket).  Now their revenue is cut more 
even more.  I thought that GFA was here to support it’s members and encourage 
gliding, not to make a profit out of our sport.



  In today’s economy every organisation has to reduce cost, yes even GFA, if we 
are to survive.



  So what is going to happen in the future?  Fees are going up, therefore 
membership will decline, cost per member will go up, thus fees go up, more 
members leave and the vicious circle has begun.



  The answer is to keep reducing costs per member to attract growth this is 
simple business logic.



  Don’t get me wrong, I think that GFA staff and board members are helpful and 
doing a job which many of us could not do (or would not do).  And a lot of it 
at their cost.



  But we still need turn around spending by GFA.  The answer is definitely not 
to keep slugging the members and clubs.



  Barry Kruyssen



--



--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.8.1/1727 - Release Date: 10/15/2008 
8:02 PM
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] (no subject)

[harry medlicott]

  - Original Message - 
  From: Robert Hart 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Cc: aus Soaring ; Robert Hart 
  Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 7:44 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] (no subject)


  harry medlicott wrote: 
Robert,

What you are saying is just not correct. You should know better than try 
and justify this charge on the basis that its being paid by people other than 
GFA members.

The price charged intro flights is inelastic - you just can't raise it by 
$20. The money comes straight out of clubs pockets. there is some justification 
for $20 when the extra days cover is utilised. Perhaps near metropolitan clubs 
able to charge +$100 can afford it. For winch launch clubs it is a charge of 
$120 per hour based on 10 minute flights and is a huge disincentive for those 
clubs offering low cost intro flights hoping to win new members. The increase 
from $5 for struggling clubs is obscene and will in the end be 
counterproductive to membership.

  Harry

  I have to disagree here. My general expierence (and this is supported by 
discussions I have had with a number of people) is that AEFs are pretty price 
insensitive. One club I am associated with raised its price considerably about 
3 years ago - and increased their sales.
  Suggest rather than just relying on discussions with a few people you 
circulate clubs and ask them their experience. The comments on this chat page 
should give you the message that many  clubs are pretty furious about this 
impost. If you don't want to do it maybe I will but can't see the GFA ,being a 
virtual dictatorship and able to impose charges as it decides, taking any 
notice. Suggesting clubs raise their charges to cover this impost dosn't change 
the fact that it is coming out of that clubs income. 

  The best way of increasing the revenue base is to increase membership and the 
GFAs score on this aspect is pretty woeful. Would you like to give members the 
cost a few years ago of employing a development officer and the results? I 
won't hold my breath. The GFA treasurer was asked at a pilots meeting in 
Kingaroy the cost of supporting overseas teams. Refused to give an answer. 
Perhaps you could give us a detailed costing. Again I won't hold my breath 
waiting for an answer but it is an not unreasonable request. 

  As an example, Lake Keeepit Soaring Club, which is under severe financial 
stress, asked the NSWGA to help fund some new highway signs. A few years ago 
they said that this would be an acceptable request. We got a refusal despite 
the NSWGA having tens of thousands of dollars in reserves. Our club members are 
levied each year to fund the NSWGA. Please don't say,- none of the GFAs 
business. Its just indicative of the mindset in the gliding bureaucracy. Money 
available to support the hobby horses of the powers that be.

  Robert, when you were elected to the GFA board we all hoped that you would 
make a difference. Seems like they have won you over,

  Harry


  Many clubs are however undercharging for AEFs - look at what is being charged 
for the parachuting equivalent and we are pretty cheap! If clubs choose to 
absorb the price increase that is entirely their decision. Sorry to be so 
unreceptive on this but I strongly believe that widening our revenue base is 
essential - and getting the casuals to pay is far better than getting the 
members to pay.


-- 
Robert Hart  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+61 (0)438 385 533   http://www.hart.wattle.id.au


--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.8.1/1727 - Release Date: 10/15/2008 
8:02 PM
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] LAKE KEEPIT EASTER REGATTA.

[harry medlicott]

Just a reminder to all NSW pilots who are unable to attend Dalby at Easter, the 
Lake Keepit Club will be holding a regatta from Good Friday 10th April to 
Saturday 18th April.   This is a friendly "competition" with mentoring and lead 
and follow for early cross country pilots as well as good tasks set for the 
more serious pilots.

If you cannot make it for the whole of the regatta let us know how long you can 
attend and we will try to accommodate you.

We only have a few places left so be quick!

Contact Wendy on wendyjmedlic...@bigpond.com.

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] democracy and the GFA

[harry medlicott]

Hi All

A countless number of sporting clubs, musical and dramatic societies and 
business groups form an important part in our social fabric. Mostly they are 
supported by volunteers and pass on to future generations their accumulated 
skills and knowledge.

The gliding movement is well served by volunteers and this has been recognised 
by many contributors to this forum.

The sticking point is that the Executive and Board of Directors are not elected 
by the popular vote of fee paying members, but by a convoluted system involving 
club committees, state associations and the Board then electing an Executive 
who may never have faced a vote of any kind.

This separation of the Executive from the general membership is pretty unique. 
I know of no other organisation whose compulsorily fee paying members do not 
have a direct vote in electing the powers-that-be.

Credulity is stretched by those who seek to justify this position. Arguments 
such as "we know best, can't trust the members to elect the right people" given 
to me by a former Executive member or "if you are interested in how things are 
run, then get yourself elected to the board" lack substance and are almost 
insulting to the general membership.

General members should have the right to directly vote for those who wish to 
represent them, preferably through an optional preferential postal voting 
system. States rights can be protected by having Board members elected on a 
state electorate basis. The cost is insignificant if voting details were 
handled through Soaring Australia. Let those who seek to control our gliding 
destiny publish their skills and objectives by means of a resume in Soaring 
Australia.

It is asking a lot for those who have gained office under the present system to 
give this up but lets hope they take this statesmanlike step.

It will be almost impossible to change the status quo unless they do.

Harry Medlicott
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] democracy and the GFA

[harry medlicott]

Hi All,

The big difference is that the judiciary interpret the laws made by parliament, 
which is democratically elected and can change the rules we live by if it 
doesn't agree with the judiciarys interpretation, ( and has done so not 
infrequently, particularly in regard to taxation,) subject to the constitution, 
which also can only be changed by an overall majority vote of electors and a 
majority of states. If we had an arrangement like that in the GFA we would all 
be happy.

Sorry, but really no comparision, you will have to find a better example,

Regards,

Harry Medlicott 
  - Original Message - 
  From: Mark Newton 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 1:35 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] democracy and the GFA




  On 28/04/2009, at 3:16 PM, harry medlicott wrote:
The sticking point is that the Executive and Board of Directors are not 
elected by the popular vote of fee paying members, but by a convoluted system 
involving club committees, state associations and the Board then electing an 
Executive who may never have faced a vote of any kind.

This separation of the Executive from the general membership is pretty 
unique. I know of no other organisation whose compulsorily fee paying members 
do not have a direct vote in electing the powers-that-be.



  I know of one:  The judiciary.


  In Australia, citizens vote for members of parliament, and those
  members form an executive which directly appoints judges.


  The processes of electing MPs and of appointing judges are
  separated.  The main benefit of the separation is that the judges
  won't be seen to have conflicts of interest when they make 
  decisions which affect citizens, because citizens have played no
  part in the hiring/firing decision.  Judges are free to draw
  whatever conclusions they see fit, secure in the knowledge that
  they'll never be held accountable by those affected by their
  decisions.


  I think there are a great many exact parallels between that process
  and GFA's governance.


  I'm not being judgmental about this.  It's entirely possible that
  the GFA (and/or GFA members) believes there is some kind
  of overwhelming benefit stemming from a management
  structure that's independent from the members.  If so, the fact
  that this issue has been a controversy for as long as I've been
  gliding would seem to suggest that they've spectacularly failed
  to communicate the attractiveness of the status quo.


- mark



  
  I tried an internal modem,new...@atdot.dotat.org
   but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
  - Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82231777 -








--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.5.329 / Virus Database: 270.12.34/2121 - Release Date: 05/18/09 
17:55:00
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Waypoint files

[harry medlicott]

Hi Colin,

The Binatone Carrera looks interesting and a reasonable way  to display XC Soar.

Would be interesed in just how you set it up. 

Would appreciate an email about it,

Thanks,

Harry Medlicott 

hw.medlic...@bigpond.com
  - Original Message - 
  From: Colin Campbell 
  To: Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 10:28 AM
  Subject: [Aus-soaring] Waypoint files


  I have purchased a Binatone Carerra in car navigation system and loaded 
xcsoar, but need a waypoint file in Cambridge format.
  I use Seeyou on my PC, which uses CUP file format.
  The options are to obtain a conversion program or if ask any kind person to 
email a copy of their cambridge waypoint list.
  Sites of interest are: Bendigo, Bacchus Marsh, Benalla, Ararat, Horsham, 
Mildura, Tocuwal, Corowa, Canberra, Temora.
  Alternatively, has anyone experience in converting the data from the 
worldwide soaring turnpoint exchange to cambridge format.
  R
  Colin C


--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.51/2151 - Release Date: 06/02/09 
17:53:00
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Harry's new winch.

[harry medlicott]

Hi Peter,

Yes, it's now running but only done a few launches so far. Having been 
getting heights up to about 2,000 feet without much headwind help . A 
powerful 454 ci Chevy motor means we should be able to safely launch heavy 
gliders to a good height. We are carefully working out procedures such as 
different throttle settings for different gliders.


I built it at my owm expense to enable our club to be able to offer low cost 
training. The cost of aerotow puts learning to glide outside the budget of 
most people. Our club is putting together a low cost package to enable AAFC 
cadets to learn to glide. Most are high school  teenagers, very decent young 
people. There are 90 cadets in the Armidale - Tamworth area. Could be the 
means of turning our clubs fortunes for the better. We certainly need new 
members as does the gliding movement. We are charging them $40 annual 
membership, half normal glider hire rates, low launching costs, help with 
transport etc. We are hoping the GFA will also assist with reduced 
membership charges for these young people.


Dyneema ceratinly gives excellent launches and is very user friendly. The 
big "if" is wear and whether we will get enough launches to cover its high 
cost. Its benefits of higher launches, ease of use and safety will mean that 
a higher per launch cost for rope use will be acceptable.


Contact me offline if you would like further details,
hw.medlic...@bigpond.com

Harry

- Original Message - 
From: 

To: 
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 3:26 PM
Subject: [Aus-soaring] Harry's new winch.


Could someone advise if Harry's new winch is up and running. I'm 
interested in the dyneema rope outcome. Any photo's appreciated.


Thanks

Peter Heath
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.90/2198 - Release Date: 06/23/09 
17:54:00


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Cambridge Connection Problem

[harry medlicott]

Hi All,

See You will only download flights from earlier model Cambridge models such as 
20 or 25. The Cambridge 302 model require Cambridge download software version 
2.5.6.0 . Attempting with See You has exactly the results described  by Adam. 
Once dowloaded by the Cambridge program the files can be read and displayed by 
See you,

Regards,

Harry Medlicott



- Original Message - 
  From: aviatrix726-soar...@yahoo.co.uk 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 11:27 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Cambridge Connection Problem


  Hi Adam
  I had the same problem with our club ones recently. It was solved by 
disabling the antivirus software on the computer.
  It depends on what antivirus program is on there - AVG does not cause a 
problem, but the one we had on the computer earlier did (can't remember what it 
was called). 

  There is normally no problem using SeeYou to download the Cambridge Loggers.

  Regards
  Jenny Ganderton

  Adam Webb wrote: 
Hi All,

I am trying to connect a Cambridge GPS-NAV to SeeYou. When I connect the 
logger to my laptop (via a USB-Serial bridge  by ATEN), seeyou finds the logger 
(in the connection wizzards first screen it appears in the "Connected to" 
section at the bottom). When I click next, the flights on the logger are 
displayed. However, on clicking "next" from here, I get a 20 or so seconds of 
nothingness (just an empty progress bar), followed by the error message above. 
I am, however, able to upload tasks and waypoints to the logger, using the same 
setup.



Does anyone have any ideas? Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Cheers,

Adam


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.81/2524 - Release Date: 11/24/09 
19:37:00
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 79, Issue 52

[harry medlicott]

Hi All,

What is cluttering up aus-soaring is not Roberts weather forecasts but all the 
rather pointless comments concerning it. Havent we all something more important 
or interesting to chat about?


Harry Medlicott
  - Original Message - 
  From: David Lawley 
  To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net 
  Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 8:59 AM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 79, Issue 52




  Its a simple concept guys, create a list for those who want to receive this 
info and use it. You will still get the info

  just from a different email. You all should know Roberts site address by now, 
why not use it?

  Why are you struggling WITH such sensible a basic concept?


  Mike wrote;


  > 
  > WTF??
  > 
  > Robert's message appears with a clear header describing it.


  Wrong Mike, for those of us who use the digest we do not see what is in the 
digest until we open it.
  > 
  > If you aren't interested don't read it.
  > 
  > Dave's just miffed that the ETS (Extra Tax Scam) has been canned. 

  Mike, there is a difference between canned and defeated by morons. 

   Until a senate with people with at least enough intelligence (Getting rid of 
Fielding for a start would double the average intelligence of the senate) to 
ignore the silly pseudo science of the self appointed "experts"(And no, a 30 
year old qualification is not relevant here) the likes of yourself spout. 

  Take a hero of your fruity loop cause, Ian Plimer, who never seems to mention 
he is on the board of several coal mining companies, and so has a direct vested 
interest in no action on man made climate change.

  An CPRS has not gone away Mike, it WILL be back and will be introduced 
eventually, despite you and the other  fruity loops. Lest hope it is not too 
late already. 

  It will be a long battle no doubt, but the real science is plain for anyone 
with an unbiased starting point to see.

  There is even an iphone app for debunking the claims of the reality deniers.


  Dave L

  > From: aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
  > Subject: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 79, Issue 52
  > To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  > Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 06:57:16 +0930
  > 
  > Send Aus-soaring mailing list submissions to
  > aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  > 
  > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
  > http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
  > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
  > aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
  > 
  > You can reach the person managing the list at
  > aus-soaring-ow...@lists.internode.on.net
  > 
  > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
  > than "Re: Contents of Aus-soaring digest..."
  > 
  > 
  > Today's Topics:
  > 
  > 1. MY weekly weather reports (Robert Hart)
  > 2. Runway surfaces Re: Winch vers. Aerotow (Peter Stephenson)
  > 3. Re: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 79, Issue 45 (Mark Newton)
  > 4. Re: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 79, Issue 45 (Mark Newton)
  > 5. QLD Weather (Mal Bruce)
  > 6. Re: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 79, Issue 45 (rolf a. buelter)
  > 
  > 
  > --
  > 
  > Message: 1
  > Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:51:27 +1000
  > From: Robert Hart 
  > Subject: [Aus-soaring] MY weekly weather reports
  > To: Soaring in Australia 
  > Message-ID: <4bd980cf.7010...@interweft.com.au>
  > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
  > 
  > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
  > URL: 
<http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/private/aus-soaring/attachments/20100429/acf26060/attachment.html>
  > 
  > --
  > 
  > Message: 2
  > Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 23:44:58 +1000
  > From: Peter Stephenson 
  > Subject: [Aus-soaring] Runway surfaces Re: Winch vers. Aerotow
  > To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
  > 
  > Message-ID: <4bd98d5a.8060...@internode.on.net>
  > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
  > 
  > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
  > URL: 
<http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/private/aus-soaring/attachments/20100429/7459824a/attachment.html>
  > 
  > --
  > 
  > Message: 3
  > Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 00:01:22 +0930
  > From: Mark Newton 
  > Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 79, Issue 45
  > To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
  > 
  > Cc: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
  > 
  > Message-ID: <03586570-a04e-4e4e-99a6-f0fdb18a1...@atdot.dotat.org>
  > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-

Re: [Aus-soaring] Skynch

[harry medlicott]

Hi Mike,

We have speed conrol from the glider right now. Its called a VHF radio with 
a press  to talk button on the control column and a boom mike. Calling down 
speeds to the winch driver is not that hard. Not perfect but we have the 
technolgy in most gliders. Just try and convince the GFA. They insist on all 
winch launch signals being given from outside the glider even though no 
problem with wing down aerotow retrieves. The word antedulvian springs to 
mind,.


Harry M.

- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Borgelt" 
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Skynch





Doesn't have to be electric.

I've long been an advocate of putting the winch throttle in the
glider pilot's hand.
Sure beats using semaphore with the glider airframe.


Mike

At 10:39 AM 27/05/2010, you wrote:

This would be interesting, but controlling a big electric winch.
Good for weekday fliers who don't have a motor glider.
They would have to be independant operators though. Would'nt they !

http://www.xcmag.com/2010/05/skynch/
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments since 
1978

phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784

email:   mborg...@borgeltinstruments.com
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2898 - Release Date: 05/27/10 
04:26:00


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Skynch and launch coord over VHF

[harry medlicott]

Hi All,

Please bring up some logical arguments.

The one that the pilot cannot see behind him just doesn't have merit. We 
regularly permit aerotows with no wing runner - a wing down takeoff. At least 
with a winch launch we have the winch driver looking in the direction of the 
launch which may not be perfect but is better than nothing. Have seen thousands 
of winch launches including well over a thousand as an instructor and many more 
driving a winch. Have yet to see a wing runner do anything useful in the event 
of anything going wrong. Usually it is someone else on a phone or radio or the 
pilot himself using his radio. Mostly it is the pilots training which saves the 
day.

The BGA with its Safe Winch Launching program have gone back 35 years examining 
and analysing accidents and incidents resulting from about 10 million winch 
launches. They keep and publish meticulous records of accidents and incidents.

We should learn a lot from their work including some of our procedures which 
for reasons of space I won't go into here. Suffice it to say that we could 
improve our overall safety by modifying some of our pratices and advice to 
pilots,

Harry Medlicott.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Dave Donald 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 9:08 AM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Skynch and launch coord over VHF


  The wing tip runner does not 'manage' the take off process - the pilot does. 
There seems to be a trend whereby pilots think that the launch process is 
something that is controlled by the wing-runner and they are a passive 
participant - this is completely wrong. The take-off process does not happen 
without the express command of the pilot. Certainly, the wing runner can stop a 
launch if they see fit - the pilot can't see behind him/her which is why the 
launch continues to proceed after the 'all clear above and behind' call is made 
to clear the airspace. The pilot has the ultimate authority in the launch - it 
s called the release knob/handle.

  Over the years I've also seen a number of methods of communicating between 
launch point and winch/autotow in terms of signals - flashing headlights, wings 
waving up and down and signal bats. The advantage with them is that there is no 
interference. 

  The great majority of gliders now have radios so the pilot is not out of the 
communications loop - they can monitor the radio calls and if there is any 
conflict, they can terminate the launch. The launch does not have to proceed 
just because the wing runner is waving 'full power' - pull the yellow handle!!

  I just wonder what is the reason for changing what we are presently doing? 
Old and dated methods - certainly!! But I haven't yet seen anyone write that it 
will make launching 'safer' which would be a prime motivator, only that we 
should use the radio because we can.


--
  From: Alan Wilson 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 

  Sent: Fri, 28 May, 2010 8:40:26 AM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Skynch and launch coord over VHF

  I agree with Harry. At glider launch we persist with [semaphore] signals
  used 50 years ago, whereby the wing tip runner [who is not in the
  communications loop] still manages the take off process.  And I have seen
  winch clubs that coordinate launches on CB radio: that puts the glider pilot
  out of that communications loop.

  In 2010 that can now be greatly improved by the use of the VHF glider radio.
  The glider pilot can be in charge and in the comms loop.

  The same thing applies to aerotowing.  The tug pilot,  the aircraft on
  downwind, and the glider on tow may have all coordinated over VHF, but the
  wing tip runner, and the forward signaler are often out of that comms loop
  and stop a safe coordinated launch.

  Let's let the glider pilot give 'take up slack' and 'all out' on VHF radio.
  [and have the pilot manage the wing tip runner.]


  Alan Wilson


  -Original Message-
  From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
  [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of harry
  medlicott
  Sent: Thursday, 27 May 2010 5:41 PM
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Skynch

  Hi Mike,

  We have speed conrol from the glider right now. Its called a VHF radio with 
  a press  to talk button on the control column and a boom mike. Calling down 
  speeds to the winch driver is not that hard. Not perfect but we have the 
  technolgy in most gliders. Just try and convince the GFA. They insist on all

  winch launch signals being given from outside the glider even though no 
  problem with wing down aerotow retrieves. The word antedulvian springs to 
  mind,.

  Harry M.

  - Original Message - 
  From: "Mike Bor

[Aus-soaring] (no subject)

[harry medlicott]

Hi All,


My own experiences re winch launching and safety be of interest. I learnt to 
fly using the winch at Warkworth. To the best of my knowledge never an accident 
using the winch in the years they were using one. Helped establish the Central 
Coast Gliding Club and was a busy instructor there. They were doing 3,000 winch 
launches per year. In the 15 years I was there and so far as I know after that 
no accidents - a time span of nearly 30 years. Moved to LKSC nearly 15 years 
ago. The club and its precursors have been using a winch, very extensively for 
mid week training for some time, again no winch launching accidents to my 
knowledge over 40 years which goes back well before I started gliding so cannot 
be certain.

As against that there have been 4 aerotow accidents involving 5 deaths where I 
have personally known the people involved. in two cases a midair during the 
launch, another was a tug wing structural failure and in another the tug pilot 
dropped the glider just before a fence.

  a.. Have been dedicated to safety for all my gliding career and carefully 
studied all aspects.The British, who perform about 300,000 winch launches per 
year and have accurate records going back 35 years have carefully analysed all 
accidents and have identified causal factors. We in Australia can learn from 
their conclusions and reccomendations. As an example in Great Britain, there is 
an accident involving injury when a glider cartwheels due to wing drop and 
catching the ground about once every 400,000 launches, Once a cartwheel starts 
it is unrecoverable and pilot injury almost certrain. The conclusion and 
advice. Keep a hand on the release during the early part of the launch - no 
time to grab it if things start to go wrong. If you cannot keep the wings level 
and a wing is about to touch the ground, release immediately. Might be an 
inconvenience and a  99% chance you would get the wing up but if all pilots 
released as advocated then that 1 in 400,000 occurence would not occur. The 
same applies to all other possible reasons for an accident. At Lake Keepit 
using Dyneema rope and a world class winch the chance of a rope break/ power 
failure is remote but can still happen. Adequate training is essential. 
Maintaining LKSCs perfect winch  safety record is my priority..

The undisputed fact is that a winch pilot can either avoid or safely handle 
every conceivable situation which might occur on a winch launch. Even if a 
winch driver deliberately tried to cause an accident, the pilot can control the 
situation. Believe that if something goes wrong it is an instruction failure 
rather than pilot error.

Safe flying,

Harry Medlicott















Harry
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Winch Launch Technique

[harry medlicott]

Hi Dion,

Your well written comments are spot on. A pilot of marginal ability is better 
off taking an aerotow or not flying at all .Proper training and maintenance of 
skills is essential.

Can't get away from the accepted fact that every adverse situation on a winch 
launch can either be avoided or handled which points to pilot ability and 
inadequate training as causal factors.

The BGA analysis of accidents and their program "Safe Winch Launching" appears 
to be reducing their accident rate, perhaps by half,  but early days yet.Their 
accident rate would be influenced by - long winter break and lack of currency - 
generally much shorter airfields than Australia, often surrounded by 
unfavourable terrain - actual pilots may vary in personal skills  betwen 
aerotow and winching - winching mostly used for training and early solos.

Rather sad that we have to look overseas for statistics. Nothing useful has 
been published on the relative accident rates of aerotow and winching in 
Australia so far as I know. In fact nothing much has been published about 
accident and incidents. Non judgemental and unidentified reports as to 
airfields or personalities published in SA , similar to that which appears in 
Sailplane and Gliding would be  a good start. Believe we all learn from such 
reports. The thought goes through ones mind - musn't let that happen to me.

One small point in your notes. The Brits, and something I insisted on myself 
when instructing, was that a hand must be actually on the release in the early 
part of the launch. No time to grope for it when things are going wrong. As in 
avoiding a cartwheel, often a second is the difference between  an incident and 
an accident. The Brits counter the argument that having a hand on the release 
may result its premature and unexpected operation by saying that by their 
records there has never been an accident following an unintended release. My 
glider has its release knob at the bottom of the instrument panel just beside 
and beyond the control column, awkward to find even when not under  pressure. 
Have fitted an extension consisting of a loop of 4mm poly rope and handle which 
goes around the release knob and allows release to be held when fully back in 
the seat When instructing at CCSC had a spare loop handy for any pilot who 
could not comfortably reach the release knob. Probably not kosher by GFA.  
Pretty unusual but I saw a wing drop and start to catch the ground. The pilot 
saved the situation by instantly releasing. 

Dion, with your skills you would make, assumimg you are not already, an 
excellent instructor,

Harry Medlicott





  - Original Message - 
  From: Dion Weston 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 9:20 AM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Winch Launch Technique


  Agree with you Harry - the winch is much maligned - but the stats Tim points 
to do seem pretty irrefutable - suggesting winching requires a skill level 
above and beyond that needed for aero-tow and that winch technique is generally 
a weakness in the training curriculum. I'd also add lack of currency checks to 
the latter.


  I learnt to fly on a high tensile single wire winch in the rough and tumble 
and abrasive red dust of Bond Springs aerodrome, up on the edge of the Tanami 
plateau north of Alice. In some ways the frequent wire breaks there were a 
godsend. The assumption on launch was that wire would break. Any launch 
completed without a break was a bonus.


  I had a wire break at 200 feet on my second solo, a wire break at 400 feet on 
my third solo and, to top it off, a winch failure (ran out of fuel) at 600 feet 
on my fifth solo. The latter was particularly interesting as the power loss was 
gradual not precipitative. The first two involved a straight in landing ahead 
and the third a modified cct. for a mid down wind entry back onto the strip.


  My view - executed correctly there is no point in a winch launch where in 
case of launch failure it is not possible to release, recover and land back on 
the active strip.


  This is definitely a learnt skill and one that does not automatically stick 
with you if not practised.


  Best technique hints that made the whole arrangement  work like a dream every 
time:
  - Centre stick pre-roll for best assessment of a two point pitch attitude.
  - Do not operate the stick in the early stages of the ground roll other than 
to adjust yaw balance and confirm or establish correct two point fore/aft 
attitude.
  - When the aircraft has sufficient speed it will decide lift off.
  - Positively identify the ASI moving upwards through 40Kts.
  - Pull back on the stick about a centimetre or at max two finger widths.
  - All things above being in order, without further stick input the aircraft 
will rotate itself to best (i.e. safest) climb attitude and stick there with 
minimal overshoot.
  - As soon as the climb attitude is established

Re: [Aus-soaring] Alex Metcalf

[harry medlicott]

Yes,

Macca asked me to do a check flight as he was the tug pilot and couldn't be in 
the tug and glider.at the same time

Told Macca the pilot was absolutely hopeless and coudn't see him coming right. 
Macca was surprised as the pilots log book indicated he was experienced. Log 
books are important but you can't beat a check flight. Usually you can tell 
within a very short time if the pilot is competent or not. Entries in  log 
books can be fabricated but not a pilots abilities.

As a matter of interest, every pilot about whom I have had strong reservations 
has susequently had an accident,

Harry
  - Original Message - 
  From: Ian Mc Phee 
  To: p...@kurstjens.com ; Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in 
Australia. 
  Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 6:20 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Alex Metcalf


  Maybe he is that bloke from WA that 20 years visited many east coast gliding 
clubs and did not have a log book but had a C certificate and could not fly at 
all - Harry Medlicott would remember him.   


  MACCA 
  PS I do not think his name was Alex but do a search on GFA web site 



  On 11 June 2010 12:25, Pam Kurstjens  wrote:

An Alex Metcalf took a launch at Darling Downs Soaring Club on 13 March 
2010. Does anyone out there know who this might be and have contact details for 
him?

Thanks

Pam Kurstjens

p...@kurstjens.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] US of A Glider Exemption

[harry medlicott]

Hi All,

I believe it is generally accepted that Flarm is not of the same value in a 
thermalling gaggle compared with free flight.


The rose of lights does not give a precise  position of the threat. The 
features of add ons such as Altair draw a line directly to the threat and 
make avoidance manoevures certain. Especially important in a head on 
situation where closing speeds are very high and the threat may be slightly 
to the left or right.


That said it is interesting that in Australia we have not had a mid air 
between Farm equipped gliders ( so far as I am aware). As competition 
gliders are mandated to use Flarms  and competitions were over represented 
in mid airs previously, this is a welcome change. The gliding movement world 
wide owe Urs Rothacher and others such as Nigel Andrews in Australia 
involved in Flarm development and improvements a debt of gratitude


Harry Medlicott.



- Original Message - 
From: "Urs Rothacher" 
To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'" 


Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] US of A Glider Exemption



Mike wrote:

I'd love to know what led up to this and the flight paths in the 30
seconds or so before the collision and I wouldn't be so rash as to
make statements about the efficacy of Flarm in this circumstance
before having that information.


The last twenty seconds of the two gliders at the US nationals and how 
FLARM

would have reacted to it are available here:
www.flarm.com/motivation/2010_US_Nationals/
right click to 'Safe as'
Better movie available by mid next week.

Movie was generated with the original IGC tracks, running on SeeYou which
generates NMEA output for both gliders. The SeeYou NMEA output is then 
used

by the FLARM's instead of the internal GPS receiver.


Also I'm aware of 2 cases of mid airs
between Flarm equipped gliders in Europe.


I am only aware of one incident, in France, where both gliders were FLARM
equipped. Unfortunately one FLARM could no be found in the wreckage (even
though reliable sources report that one was installed) so we don't know 
what

happened.

Nevertheless: FLARM cannot prevent all collision incidents and a vigilant
and effective lookout is the most essential part of any collision 
avoidance.


Would FLARM have prevented that collision at the US nationals? Almost
certainly.

Urs - FLARM

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2980 - Release Date: 07/04/10 
04:35:00


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] US of A Glider Exemption

[harry medlicott]

Pam is right. The voice alert system has value in that it enables eyes to be 
kept out of the cockpit. Having used both voice alarm and threat 
identification by a line on a display, am not sure which is best.


Interesting to be on the grid and see the line point at and precisely follow 
a landing tug when it is heading in your general direction. A voice alarm 
cannot give this precise accurate updated information but has the advantage 
of giving relative height. . Is the threat at 11.30, 12.00 or 12.30? 
Important to know in head on situations.


The line pointing to the threat bypasses the verbalisation process which 
enables an immediate automatic response without visually searching  for a 
threat. Not sure if pilots will start avoidance action just on an audio 
message before visually identifying a threat. The voice alert requires you 
to listen to the full message and then process the information but not shift 
ones view to an instrument.


Which is best? Not sure myself. Nice to have both options. A better 
investment in my book than mega dollars spent on sophisticated vario 
computers. Perhaps others have done research. It would be valuable 
information to anyone purchasing equipment if one system was superior.


Harry Medlicott

- Original Message - 
From: "Pam Kurstjens" 
To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'" 


Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 9:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] US of A Glider Exemption



I would agree with the problem in thermals, when all the lights are lit.
That is when the voice alert comes into its own. There are gliders all
around you and the voice says for example '3 o'clock low' and you are
immediately alerted to look at the glider that is the real threat.
I have it as part of the Altair / Vega setup.
Our tugs have it as the Triadis Speech Alert System, and it has proved its
worth.
Pam Kurstjens
DDSC


-Original Message-
From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of harry
medlicott
Sent: Monday, 5 July 2010 8:45 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] US of A Glider Exemption

Hi All,

I believe it is generally accepted that Flarm is not of the same value in 
a

thermalling gaggle compared with free flight.

The rose of lights does not give a precise  position of the threat. The
features of add ons such as Altair draw a line directly to the threat and
make avoidance manoevures certain. Especially important in a head on
situation where closing speeds are very high and the threat may be 
slightly

to the left or right.

That said it is interesting that in Australia we have not had a mid air
between Farm equipped gliders ( so far as I am aware). As competition
gliders are mandated to use Flarms  and competitions were over represented
in mid airs previously, this is a welcome change. The gliding movement 
world


wide owe Urs Rothacher and others such as Nigel Andrews in Australia
involved in Flarm development and improvements a debt of gratitude

Harry Medlicott.



- Original Message - 
From: "Urs Rothacher" 

To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'"

Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] US of A Glider Exemption



Mike wrote:

I'd love to know what led up to this and the flight paths in the 30
seconds or so before the collision and I wouldn't be so rash as to
make statements about the efficacy of Flarm in this circumstance
before having that information.


The last twenty seconds of the two gliders at the US nationals and how
FLARM
would have reacted to it are available here:
www.flarm.com/motivation/2010_US_Nationals/
right click to 'Safe as'
Better movie available by mid next week.

Movie was generated with the original IGC tracks, running on SeeYou which
generates NMEA output for both gliders. The SeeYou NMEA output is then
used
by the FLARM's instead of the internal GPS receiver.


Also I'm aware of 2 cases of mid airs
between Flarm equipped gliders in Europe.


I am only aware of one incident, in France, where both gliders were FLARM
equipped. Unfortunately one FLARM could no be found in the wreckage (even
though reliable sources report that one was installed) so we don't know
what
happened.

Nevertheless: FLARM cannot prevent all collision incidents and a vigilant
and effective lookout is the most essential part of any collision
avoidance.

Would FLARM have prevented that collision at the US nationals? Almost
certainly.

Urs - FLARM

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring








No virus found in

Re: [Aus-soaring] Death of a Movement

[harry medlicott]

Paul,

You are right. It is rather sad that the gliding club close to the largest city 
in Australia does not seem to convert many of its large number of its AEFs to 
gliding. Do they hand out pamplets or preferably videos etc.? It seems that 
many instructors get their flying free from the back seat of a DG 1000 and 
tugpilots gets theirs launching but do they have a real interest in converting 
AEFs to members?.

Re air cadets. LKSC has done somehing to make gliding affordable for air 
cadets. I have personally at no cost to the club built a winch powered by a 
Chevy 454 ci motor  using Dyneema rope which gives high safe launches. I have 
also just bought a Winch launch Assistant which shows the speed of the glider 
being launched on a display in the winch which will hopefully give even higher, 
safer launches. We are subsidising juniors membership to $40 which does not 
even cover the capitation fee associated with our lease, half glider hire rates 
 and membership by a generous donation of $100 pa per cadet aged 15/18 yo. 
Total of club membership and GFA is $76, which, coupled with a winch launch 
charge of $12 which gives a launch of 1,800/2'000 ft. We hope it is an offer to 
good to refuse. There are 90 AAFC cadets in our area and the hope is we will 
build up a cadre of young pilots . When AAFC cadets come to our club to fly an 
AAFC sponsored flight they tell us that aerotow etc. makes gliding unaffordable 
for them. Hopefully our initiatives will change all that.

What disturbs me is that LKSC has approached both GFA and NSWGA asking for help 
to reduce the GFA membership charge commensurate to our clubs contribution and 
so far only got a flat no. The generous donor currently subsidising junior 
membership can't be expected to continue  The future of our dying sport must be 
in attracting new members, preferably young ones, so the refusal of GFA and 
NSWGA to help is pretty dismal. 

The future of our sport is the responsibility of us all. How many writing 
emails are actually doing something really constructive? Certainly Paul Mander 
who wrote the following email but how many others,

Harry Medlicott





- Original Message - 
  From: Paul Mander 
  To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' 
  Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 8:37 AM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Death of a Movement


  There is a club near Sydney that has become so dependent on joy rides that 
they have 32 listed instructors but just 125-ish flying members, no cross 
country or competition curriculum. They run a full time operation yet cry poor. 
I may be overstating it, but not by much. Is this what you're talking about? 
What should be a worry for our sport is that they are the first point of 
contact with gliding for nearly ¼ the population of Australia.

   


--

  From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net 
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of gavin wrigley
  Sent: Friday, 27 August 2010 7:46 AM
  To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Death of a Movement

   

  I couldnt agree more, Ian.
   
  In addition to 'chivvying' those who have already evidenced some interest by 
taking a flight, lets get a bit more smart about those we pitch our market to.
  I have already revealed my disinterest in the treadmill of gift 
companies/grandpa's birthday/air experience flights. Fine, dont refuse them, 
but they wont create new members.
  Lets make it easy for other pilots to try (or re-try!) gliding. Include model 
aircraft enthusiasts, hang gliders, RAA and GA pilots. They have already 
revealed their susceptibility.
   
  And dont just plod through 'effects of controls', perhaps done by a 
relatively new instructorunless that instructor has initiative, enthusiasm, 
some soaring skills and the ability
  to demonstrate the 'Joy of Soaring'. Show what is possible after plodding 
through the 'effects of controls'...gliding IS different!
   
  For that matterwhat about schoolchildren? 
   
  If anyone wants to know more about the highly successful 'Flying' course that 
is PART OF THE SCHOOL PROGRAMME for all of the year 10 students at a school on 
Darwin then I am
  happy to give details, and a professionally produced DVD is available.
   
  Quite a number of established/confirmed/advanced glider pilots have shown 
interest in the fact that such a programme exists, and has done for ten 
consecutive years now.
  But not one, to my knowledge, even though they expressed great approval for 
the idea, has tried to introduce anything similar in their locality.
   
  Its pissing with rain here in the UK. Thats my excuse for so many posts in 
such a short time! 

   


--

  Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 08:26:50 +1000
  From: 

Re: [Aus-soaring] Death of a Movement

[harry medlicott]

Hi Dave

Yes, you are a contributor and making a genuine effort to promote gliding. It 
seems you might have had a favourable influence in your club. If we had more 
like you am sure the gliding movement would be in a far more favourable 
position. Spoke to some pilots from the Netherlands recently. About 30% of 
their pilots are under 30 you and half of these are young women. In promoting 
our sport we need to look at all possible sources of members and cater for 
their needs. We have young people happy to push gliders around all day but can 
only afford modest glider and launch costs, the time poor but affluent who want 
to have their lesson or flight and then leave the field and the empty nesters, 
their children have left home, the mortgage is paid off and they are looking 
for a new challenge.

Just at the moment am concentrating my efforts on making gliding affordable for 
AAFC cadets. The lack of support from GFA makes me wonder if it is worth the 
effort.Our clubs new manager, Ian Downes is also making an effort to attract 
official local high school support,

Harry Medlicott
  - Original Message - 
  From: Dave Boulter 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 2:26 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Death of a Movement


  Like yourself and Paul and many others I know, I do something every week and 
every day to grow gliding and get more members. I happen to be a member of said 
Sydney Club and I talk with people actively and dont just "take their money". I 
know a whole bunch of people who do similar at my Club.


  Say what you like about NSW Gliding, but we are doing stuff now and will 
continue to improve that in the future. With more arms and legs we could 
probably do even more. Sometimes you have to pick your battles, you know that.


  The Sydney Club in question has more than ten scholarships in progress at 
present and would offer more. These kids get their flying for free (yep members 
pay for it) and the kids pay launches. We would take more if more were there.


  It is good to see Clubs doing stuff at grass roots levels, as I said 
previously.


  On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 2:13 PM, harry medlicott 
 wrote:

Paul,

You are right. It is rather sad that the gliding club close to the largest 
city in Australia does not seem to convert many of its large number of its AEFs 
to gliding. Do they hand out pamplets or preferably videos etc.? It seems that 
many instructors get their flying free from the back seat of a DG 1000 and 
tugpilots gets theirs launching but do they have a real interest in converting 
AEFs to members?.

Re air cadets. LKSC has done somehing to make gliding affordable for air 
cadets. I have personally at no cost to the club built a winch powered by a 
Chevy 454 ci motor  using Dyneema rope which gives high safe launches. I have 
also just bought a Winch launch Assistant which shows the speed of the glider 
being launched on a display in the winch which will hopefully give even higher, 
safer launches. We are subsidising juniors membership to $40 which does not 
even cover the capitation fee associated with our lease, half glider hire rates 
 and membership by a generous donation of $100 pa per cadet aged 15/18 yo. 
Total of club membership and GFA is $76, which, coupled with a winch launch 
charge of $12 which gives a launch of 1,800/2'000 ft. We hope it is an offer to 
good to refuse. There are 90 AAFC cadets in our area and the hope is we will 
build up a cadre of young pilots . When AAFC cadets come to our club to fly an 
AAFC sponsored flight they tell us that aerotow etc. makes gliding unaffordable 
for them. Hopefully our initiatives will change all that.

What disturbs me is that LKSC has approached both GFA and NSWGA asking for 
help to reduce the GFA membership charge commensurate to our clubs contribution 
and so far only got a flat no. The generous donor currently subsidising junior 
membership can't be expected to continue  The future of our dying sport must be 
in attracting new members, preferably young ones, so the refusal of GFA and 
NSWGA to help is pretty dismal. 

The future of our sport is the responsibility of us all. How many writing 
emails are actually doing something really constructive? Certainly Paul Mander 
who wrote the following email but how many others,

Harry Medlicott





- Original Message - 
  From: Paul Mander 
  To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' 
  Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 8:37 AM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Death of a Movement


  There is a club near Sydney that has become so dependent on joy rides 
that they have 32 listed instructors but just 125-ish flying members, no cross 
country or competition curriculum. They run a full time operation yet cry poor. 
I may be overstating it, but not by much. Is this what you’re talking about? 
What should be a wo

Re: [Aus-soaring] Let's ban winching, let's burn a witch....

[harry medlicott]

Mike and others might be interested in the BGAs effort to make winch 
launching safer. They analysed all the accidents and incidents going back 35 
years and published "Safe Winch Launching" which itemised the risks and how 
they can be avoided. Their winch launch accident rate has been halved. 
Unfortunately the GFA doesn't seem to be terribly interested in learning 
from their experience. Every single accident scenario on a winch launch can 
either be prevented or corrected after it has occured. Unfortunately, 
similiarly to glider training generally, a significant number of accidents 
occur with an instructor on board,


Harry Medlicott


- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Borgelt" 
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Let's ban winching, let's burn a witch



At 11:53 AM 27/08/2010, you wrote:

> Yes you might even convince the Helicopter Association to have the
Regulator ban winching or otherwise restrict it. I have knowledge of
concern about the hazard from other UK airspace users.

By reductio ad absurdum then SWER lines should be banned and restricted
too (I think more chopper pilots have died/been injured at the hands of
SWER lines  than colliding with winch cables).


SWER lines have a societal value far greater than the lives of a few
helicopter pilots and anyway don't jump up out of the ground to 2000
feet or more AGL at unpredictable intervals. Any helicopter cruising
legally at 500 feet or more shouldn't hit a SWER line. On landing at
an unknown LZ maybe but that's a risk we all take.

I think the people who operate helicopters might have a little more
political influence than glider pilots have. When glider pilots bust
airspace en masse it also doesn't do their political influence much
good. Operating helicopters in crowded airspace like the UK may be a
little more difficult than Australia particularly at lowish levels in
poor visibility, with lots of airfields, towns  and restricted areas
to avoid and a fairly dense network of winch launch sites
particularly when most of them probably look  just like the next
farmer's paddock.

Banning winch launching would not be seen by other people as terribly
draconian as there is the perfectly good option of aerotow still
available and aerotow is something like 5 times as safe on a fatality
per launch basis. The regulator could argue it was doing glider
pilots a favour.

Like outlandings uninvited in farmers' fields, winch launching is
probably also living on borrowed time. Remember the foot and mouth
outbreak in the UK? No cross country gliding permitted that season
after the quarantines were in place.

Mike



Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments since 
1978

phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784

email:   mborg...@borgeltinstruments.com
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3096 - Release Date: 08/27/10 
04:34:00


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Let's ban winching, let's burn a witch....

[harry medlicott]

Hi All
I should have added a bit more to this posting particularly for the 
information of those actauly interested in winch launching.


The principal  situations  which, if mishandled, result in an winch launch 
accident, are, too fast, too slow or a rope break.


The winch which I have recently built for LKSC is equipped with Dyneema 
rope. As well as being easier and safer to handle on the ground its use 
results in far fewer rope breaks during the launch. European clubs not 
infrequently achieve 1,000 launches without a break  Many is the time I have 
spent an hour or so in the middle of a hot gliding day repairing a birds 
nest of 3.2mm range 2 spring wire. Not once since using Dyneema - good for 
safety, good for members both actual and potential.


Am intalling a Safe Launching Assistant on a trial basis at Lake Keepit. 
This consists of a small transmitter in the glider and a receiver and 
display on the winch. Used once in full climb it allows the winch driver to 
adjust the power setting to achieve the ideal speed for a particular glider. 
For instance the notes for a Grob or Twin Astir say brown weak link, 60 
knots optimum speed and 75 knots maximum.  Not only a safety initiative but 
by the pilot having the optimum speed from rotation to release, achieves 
best possible height. A transmitter costing $270 must be in the glider but 
it should be particularly useful for trainee pilots or winch drivers.


Initiatives such as these, coupled with the work of the BGA in identifying 
accident scenarios and how to avoid of handle them,  have the potential  to 
make winching safer and more effective. Anyone interested in the results of 
using a WLA is welcome to contact me.


I am forever hearing pilots say gliding is not expensive but a launch at a 
price approaching $50 coupled with glider hire and travelling expenses puts 
gliding beyond the reach of the majority of people on a wage. At LK a number 
of people have privately told me that having low cost effective winching 
makes all the difference. If we can make winching safer and more user 
friendly then perhaps it is aerotow which is going the way of the dinosaurs.


Harry Medlicott

- Original Message - 
From: "harry medlicott" 
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 6:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Let's ban winching, let's burn a witch



Mike and others might be interested in the BGAs effort to make winch
launching safer. They analysed all the accidents and incidents going back 
35
years and published "Safe Winch Launching" which itemised the risks and 
how

they can be avoided. Their winch launch accident rate has been halved.
Unfortunately the GFA doesn't seem to be terribly interested in learning
from their experience. Every single accident scenario on a winch launch 
can

either be prevented or corrected after it has occured. Unfortunately,
similiarly to glider training generally, a significant number of accidents
occur with an instructor on board,

Harry Medlicott


- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Borgelt" 

To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."

Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Let's ban winching, let's burn a witch



At 11:53 AM 27/08/2010, you wrote:

> Yes you might even convince the Helicopter Association to have the
Regulator ban winching or otherwise restrict it. I have knowledge of
concern about the hazard from other UK airspace users.

By reductio ad absurdum then SWER lines should be banned and restricted
too (I think more chopper pilots have died/been injured at the hands of
SWER lines  than colliding with winch cables).


SWER lines have a societal value far greater than the lives of a few
helicopter pilots and anyway don't jump up out of the ground to 2000
feet or more AGL at unpredictable intervals. Any helicopter cruising
legally at 500 feet or more shouldn't hit a SWER line. On landing at
an unknown LZ maybe but that's a risk we all take.

I think the people who operate helicopters might have a little more
political influence than glider pilots have. When glider pilots bust
airspace en masse it also doesn't do their political influence much
good. Operating helicopters in crowded airspace like the UK may be a
little more difficult than Australia particularly at lowish levels in
poor visibility, with lots of airfields, towns  and restricted areas
to avoid and a fairly dense network of winch launch sites
particularly when most of them probably look  just like the next
farmer's paddock.

Banning winch launching would not be seen by other people as terribly
draconian as there is the perfectly good option of aerotow still
available and aerotow is something like 5 times as safe on a fatality
per launch basis. The regulator could argue it was doing glider
pilots a favour.

Like outlandin

Re: [Aus-soaring] Rescheduled GQ Easter Comp

[harry medlicott]

Hi Mike,

Maybe so, but we have plenty of historical evidence as to how long they last 
once the El Nina phenonomen is established.


Get ready for more of the same. The Murray Darling Authority has factored in 
a 10% reduction in flows  for the Murray darling basin. Don't know which 
planet they are inhabiting but certainly not ours. Perhaps the authority is 
populated by climate change enthusiasts who only see the sign posts pointing 
one way. Global warming, which amounts to about .8 of one degree over the 
last one hundred years will slowly raise ocean temperatures. The CSIRO has 
measured one eighth of a degree increase over the last ten years . As the 
oceans warm there will be a masive increase in evaporation and consequent 
rain. It only takea about a half a degree change above or below average to 
trigger the ENSO effect. Our recent rain over the last twelve months are due 
to the Indian Ocean Dipole as much as ENSO,


Harry Medlicott

- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Borgelt" 
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Rescheduled GQ Easter Comp



At 11:21 AM 4/01/2011, you wrote:



As Dave Shorter has assured us, the La Nina will be gone by then,



As nobody knows what causes them or how to forecast them that seems
like a brave prediction.

Mike

Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments since 
1978

phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784

email:   mborg...@borgeltinstruments.com
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.872 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3357 - Release Date: 01/04/11 
06:34:00


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] perhaps a useful hint

[harry medlicott]

Hi All,

I suppose, aus-soaring being what it is, that consequent to this posting there 
will be about a hundred replies saying that the idea is anteduluvian or that 
there is a better answer.

Most pilots, following a tyre repair on a main wheel, have to be extremely 
careful not to pinch and ruin the tube by having it caught between the two 
halves of the wheel. I know that putting some air in the tube helps a bit but 
it is not easy. I solved the problem by fitting some old mylar around one half 
of the wheel using contact adhesive. About half of the mylar acted as a guide 
for the other half of the wheel. The mylar was attached with the curve 
outwards. Worked a treat,

Harry Medlicott ___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] re accident at Gympie

[harry medlicott]

Without in any way casting any aspersions on the current accident at Gympie and 
we all hope that the pilots are OK and the glider can quickly be returned to 
service, It is sad to reflect on just how many accidents to two seaters have an 
instructor on board.

One would expect instructors to have a very high skill level and to fly with a 
substantial safety margin, but the number of accidents with an instructor on 
board, both here and overseas, makes one wonder. Please don't say " you can't 
make an omelette without breaking eggs" . Other forms of aviation manage to 
train pilots without a high level of accidents.

Harry Medlicott___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Where to sit on tow?

[harry medlicott]

The BGA, who are extremely safety conscious and keep meticulous records of 
safety incidents, have recently been concerned at tug upsets and discussed 
the low tow option.
Mostly high or low tow doesn't matter but when launching on a day with very 
strong thermals, being in low tow or should it be called line astern, gives 
a higher safety margin for the tug when the tug leaves the thermal and the 
glider is still in it. Can't think of any upsets causing the death of a 
tuggie since the GFA started reccomending low tow under Australian 
conditions. Let's hope we don't have to reinvent the wheel.


Harry Medlicott

- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Newton" 
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 8:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Where to sit on tow?




On 12/04/2011, at 6:43 PM, John Parncutt wrote:


The GFA has clearly prescribed that launching will be in low tow, this
decision was made more than twenty years ago following several fatal
accidents which occurred during the transition from low to high tow prior 
to

release. All clubs should be training this.


Replace "will" with "should" and you'll be accurate.

All clubs should also be training high-tow, because that's in the
GFA syllabus too.  If you haven't done one for a while, try it or
seek training, because competence in all the syllabus items is
required for continued solo flight.

There are some gliders which "prefer" high-tow.  E.g., I'll always
take the high-tow position in a Pik 20D because it doesn't
have a nose hook, so the position of the rope is all wrong on
low-tow.

It's considered polite to inform the tuggie, although I'm yet
to meet one who appears to care.

Some years ago we discovered some pilots in our club had formed the 
opinion

that it was safer for them to transition to high tow immediately after
takeoff especially with short strips in order to give them more options 
in

the event of an early rope break.


The beginning of EVERY aerotow is in the high-tow position.

(think about it)

There's a transition to low-tow shortly after launch, once the
pilot determines that it's safe to do so.

I'd totally concur with a decision to maintain the high-tow position
for longer than usual if doing so would enhance safety -- such as when
assessing options when operating from a short strip.


This has particular hazards for the tow
pilot who now finds at low altitude he/she has to apply ever increasing 
back

stick in order to compensate for the upward load on their tail.


Is that a "hazard" or a "difference"?  Surely it's only a hazard
if the glider is far enough out of station to be approaching a
tug upset...?

As far as I know, the Australian gliding community remains the only
one in the world which prefers the low-tow position.  The first time
I flew a glider in the USA the instructor in the back had never even
heard of low-tow.

 - mark


I tried an internal modem,new...@atdot.dotat.org
but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82231777 -




___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3567 - Release Date: 04/12/11 
05:25:00


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Bonus Jet

[harry medlicott]

Some hard facts. 

Once a forest, savanah or any form of original vegetation reaches a mature 
state due to the limit of the amount of vegetation sustainable by available 
water and nutrients resulting from the degradation of non organic minerals, the 
carbon cycle is such that there is no net gain by way of a reduction in 
atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. The exception is the carboniferous materials 
which are carried out to sea and eventually converted to gasses or oils which 
we seek to extract millions of years later or laid down on land as coal or 
shale oil deposits.   

Interestingly, to the chagrin of our dedicated environmentalists, when a forest 
is harvested, the carboniferous materials such as timber are then locked away 
for perhaps a century or more and the regrowing forest then positively 
contributes to carbon dioxide abatement.

The climate change enthusiasts who have spawned a self serving industry intent 
on rubbishing anyone with a contrary view, have also got something else very 
much wrong. The warming of the oceans, which is undisbuted, will result in the 
evaporation of greatly increased amounts of water which will fall as rain 
somewhere. The drought breaking rains of the last 12 months are the result of 
slightly increased ocean temperatures, to the North West of Australia it is the 
Indian Ocean Dipole and to the East it is the Il Nina effect. None of this 
increased rainfall was predicted by the CSIRO or the various meteorological 
organisations in Australia yet for some improbable reason, the cutbacks in 
Murray Darling water allocations were based on a 10% reduction in river flows. 
The consistent drought in South Western WA is because that area derives its 
winter rainfall from the Antartic Circumpolar Current. This as yet, has not 
icreased in temperature as its heat source is the great ocean currents which 
transfer heat from the tropics to the Arctic and Antarctic waters. Without 
these currents the polar regions would be incredibly cold as the heat radiated 
to space is many times greater than the solar input.

As an example of what will happen with increased rainfall, the Simpson desert 
is green for the first time in Aboriginal memory. The Australia wide increase 
in vegetation will result in the fixing of huge amounts of carbon, concievably 
far more than all our puny abatement measures.

The down side is that gliding may not be quite as interesting,

Harry Medlicott.   
  - Original Message - 
  From: erich wittstock 
  To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 10:15 PM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bonus Jet


  ...some say oxygen is produced and carbon is "sinked" by trees. Little do 
they know that most of that cycle is done by our oceans and the little critters 
within. Thus most of our fossil fuels originate from our oceans. Let's blame 
continental drift for it ending up under our land masses. Feasible theory. Same 
for Titan.

  But how about the inefficiency of using a turbo-jet engine compared to 
turbo-fan and turbo-prop engines at low speeds? Let alone extracting and 
refining vast amounts of higher chain hydrocarbons. Why not use solar light? 
The nit-ti grit-ties of accumulating electron differentials are being improved 
as we type.

  Political monkey dance aside: the Prius is now in the third generation 
(Cameron Diaz even likes it...) and the panels on the roofs of those that 
installed them seem to work as well.

  The steam engine, micro processor and electric vario were once labelled 
"useless projects" as well. But they did help us along the way.
  Admit it, Mike, you are spending more time flying electric pushers and 
impeller types than flying jet powered models. I just witnessed one of these 
"oh so dangerous" LiPo's being crunched to mush induced by an aerobatic 
"standing 9" figure. It didn't explode nor ignite (very disappointing...)

  Voyager was another one of those "useless projects". But it did fly around 
the world in a single flight. What if Solar-impulse can do the same?

  Why didn't you listen to those that were of the opinion that electric varios 
are never going to be useful? Where is your spirit gone? Fossilised, waiting to 
be refined and burned?
  Erich





  On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 21:01, Mike Borgelt  
wrote:

At 08:39 PM 5/05/2011, you wrote:

  ..for those interested in non dinosaur fuel technology.


  <http://www.solarimpulse.com>http://www.solarimpulse.com




Depends whether you are a fan of the "dead dinosaur" theory of oil 
formation.
Problem is the vast amounts of hydrocarbons on the surface and and the 
atmosphere of Titan, largest moon of Saturn. I've heard no serious suggestions 
that it was once populated by dinosaurs. So we have an existence proof that 
vast amounts of higher chain hydrocarbons can be formed independent of life. 
Bit of a pro

Re: [Aus-soaring] No Event Fee for Narromine Airport

[harry medlicott]

The gliding movement should count itself extremely fortunate to have a 
magnificent faciity such as Narromine A/F availabe at little or no cost. At 
Lake Keepit, probably in common with other clubs, we pay a substantial annual 
lease costs and all airfield improvements and maintenace are a cost to members. 
Not sure of actual ammount, but it would be in excess of $20,000 per annum, 
even with members doing the actual mowing and numerous other tasks themselves, 
yet through hard work by our members and despite having a site 5 hours drive 
from Sydney  we have a membership of over 100 and a full time club operation. 
The complaints about a relatively small activity fee makes one wonder.  

Harry Medlicott


- Original Message - 
  From: Anne Elliott 
  To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 8:59 AM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] No Event Fee for Narromine Airport


  As a resident of Narromine I would like to set the record straight ...  up to 
July 1 Ewen held two positions with Narromine Shire Council: airport groundsman 
and shire ranger. As the latter become more and more demanding it was decided 
that he be relieved of his airport role to concentrate more on his ranger 
duties. For those of you who have enjoyed flying at Narromine and commented on 
the wonderful airport facility, it is all thanks to Ewen and his staff. One of 
his roles at the airport was to ensure all rules and regulations were adhered 
to which made him unpopular with some of the airport users who quite blatently 
felt they were a law unto themselves and could do whatever they wished. As one 
of the councillors commented at the recent budget meeting where the $55 
participant fee was discussed: "Aerodrome users should work with council not 
against them."

  Ewen is our local Fire and Rescue NSW (Fire Brigade) Station Commander; and 
was a driving force in our Apex Club for many years, serving as president and 
board member over the years. His late father, Ewie Jones, was a highly 
respected aviation figure in this part of the state and served as Narromine 
Aero Club's CFI for many years before relocating to Parkes. During my 20+ years 
in the media industry in Narromine I have had many dealings with Ewen and feel 
that he should not be ridiculed as he has  been in Ross McLean's email. ... 
Anne Elliott

   

   

   

   

   

  From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net 
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Ross McLean
  Sent: Tuesday, 5 July 2011 4:37 PM
  To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
  Subject: [Aus-soaring] No Event Fee for Narromine Airport

   

  Some very good news. The Narromine Council has voted unanimously to drop the 
proposed event fee for Narromine Airport.

  There will be no such fee imposed.

  Thank you to all who wrote directly to the Council opposing the imposition of 
this poorly thought out proposal.

  The Council has instead set up a stronger airport management committee who 
will work with the airport stakeholders towards positively promoting and 
encouraging all aviation events at Narromine Airport.

  The former airport groundsman has been reassigned to the role of dogcatcher 
(true). Those of us who knew Ewan will agree it is a role much better suited to 
his ability.

  Cheers, ROSS 



--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


--


  No virus found in this message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
  Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3744 - Release Date: 07/04/11
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Ground Clocks - a little bit of history

[harry medlicott]

Hi All,

The pilot manipulated his clock camera using a pin poked through the back of 
his camera near the recording device. He was found out by the organisers 
placing cars in certain positions around the ground clock and moving them 
regularly. When confronted with the evidience he packed up and left,


Harry M
.
- Original Message - 
From: "Ian Mc Phee" 
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 9:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Ground Clocks - a little bit of history



Worlds in Sweden in 1993 the organisers used a ground clock to nail a
person who was cheating think using a magnet on his camera clock.
Anyhow he was sent packing as even his team manager knew he was
cheating.  I forget the country.

Ian McPhee

On 9 August 2011 15:24,   wrote:
Further to Emilis's comments about the (lost?), history of the sport, one 
of
the oddities that emerged for a very brief time in the early 1980's, but 
was

subsequently overtaken by the universal acceptance of camera clocks and a
bit later GPS (thank goodness), was the Ground Clock, that was 
photographed
from the air as the pilot made a start. I think the Italians were the 
only

people to ever seriously consider its use.

Prior to the development of camera clocks (carried in the glider), all 
start
times were recorded by ground crew, from observations made from the 
ground

of the glider as it went through the start gate, which was an "imaginary"
vertical square 1000 m wide, and 1000m high, with the base being aligned 
to
say the centreline of the main runway, or perhaps a nearby boundary fence 
of

the aerodrome. Observing, controlling the start run, acknowledging the
start, and recording this information was very labour intensive - the use
of 6 (or more), people at a major comp was by no means exceptional.

The main problem with the Ground Clock as proposed by the Italians was 
that
it too, was very labour intensive, as the component elements of the 
ground

clock were necessarily large in order to be satisfactorily seen and
photographed from the air. The only thing that really changed, was how 
the

labour was distributed. The Ground Clock's only real advantage was that a
glider pilot did not have to use a camera clock, because an ordinary 
camera

(as used at the time for photographing turnpoints) would do.

Think for a moment think about how YOU might go about designing such a
device.

The actual derived design - which could indicate hours, minutes and 
seconds
- was quite ingenious, and even in part a bit quirky. {I seem to recall 
that
one design in part, called for the clearing of a circular track, close 
to,
or surrounding, the rest of the clock, upon which a bike rider rode at 
such

a speed, that it took exactly one minute to complete a circuit.The
photographed position of the bike rider on the track thus gave the time 
to

the nearest second! How would you like the job of bike rider, for say 2
hours on a stinking hot Summer's day?}

For further information, see the article by the Italian, Pierluigi 
Duranti
on the Orologio (Italian for clock), which appeared in Gliding 
International
Dec/Jan 1982-83, and the article "Ground Clock Design", by Wally 
Wallington

in Australian Gliding, April 1983.

Gary




___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1391 / Virus Database: 1520/3820 - Release Date: 08/07/11



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] AEF fees

[harry medlicott]

Hi All

There is a great deal of truth in all the AEF postings. The need for more GFA 
funds, largely due to a lack of income resulting from a decline in membership - 
 the ability to pay by mostly near city clubs who have a large customer base 
willing to pay for an adventure type flight - the lack of value on a short 
winch flight - The fact that the charge is a direct reduction an the clubs 
income as you just can't charge whatever you like - the disincentive for clubs 
particularly low charging winch launch clubs to attract members, particularly 
younger people without a substantial income to make enticing  offers to would 
be members.

My own club, Lake Keepit Soaring Club, makes a large effort to attract new 
members. We offer a three flight daily training  package with winch launching 
for $60. A generous member subsidises GFA membership for young people by $100 
and the club discounts its membership for young people to a level where it 
makes nothing after paying a per capita charge on our lease. We now have 120 
members plus a lot of debt. Who is the greatest beneficiary of our efforts? 
Rather fancy it is the GFA.

It is obvious the GFA AEF charge which has risen from $5 to $30 should not be 
one charge that fits all. It is affordable in some circumstances but a 
disincentive to the promotion of gliding in others. It surely needs fine tuning 
which may not be to the GFA financial disadvantage. There is a saying. "Better 
to have half a loaf than going hungry"

Not sure if these postings are read by the powers that be or whether they are 
just blowing in the wind. Perhaps letters to Gliding Australia or our local 
Board representatives would achieve more,

Harry Medlicott .  
  ___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Gliders - transponders - USA - new recommendation

[harry medlicott]

Hi All,

Just received an email from Andy Holmes who is heavily involved n the BGA 
Safe Winch Launching initiative. The relative portion follows.
While coordinator of the National Competition Pilots Safety Committee  my 
research showed that 3,000 ft. agl was the break even point at which 50% of 
uninjured pilots successfully deployed their parachute. A lot depends on the 
type of emergency. A control disconnect may still allow relatively level 
flying and enough time for a bailout. A serious midair, which I have 
experienced and seen another, gives very little time to bail out as the 
glider falls very quickly. My data logger showed 100 feet per second.


Harry Medlicott



We talked a bit during my visit about parachute usefulness for training. 
Yesterday in the uk someone bailed out from a 900' winch launch and has no 
injuries. The airfield is on a ridge about 600' above sea level so if they 
were launching in the right direction, then maybe he was at 1500 above 
ground not 900 when he got out. He hadn't connected the elevator. Either 
way, it reinforces my point of view that it is worth wearing a parachute for 
any glider flight. A shame though, as we had identified mis-rigs as a 
priority area and have publicised it but still these sort of accidents 
happen, particularly at the start of the season 


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[aus-soaring] statistics should be no more than our raison d'etre for improving safety

[Harry Medlicott]

My reason for quoting accident statistics was to show pilots the level of 
risk involved and convince them of the need to become actively involved in 
safety. It is insufficient to expect the GFA or your club instructors to be 
solely responsible for high levels of safety, it must come from the attitude and 
efforts of individual pilots. Remember that it is equally important that the 
pilots flying with you have a high skill level. Just being safety concious is 
not good enough, we need to have the knowledge put it into practice.
Unfortunately the National Competition Safety Committee has been abolished 
and with it my position as co-ordinator, so please accept that the following 
comments have no official status and are strictly a personal opinion.
Analysis of fatal gliding accidents over years show that they mostly fall 
into two categories – pilots sharing the same airspace as in competitions, and 
aero tow operations. Accidents due to spinning and winch operations seem no 
longer a problem due to safer gliders and an emphasis on appropriate 
training.
It is significant that in every incidence of a mid-air collision – which is 
our greatest worry – at least one pilot should have had a good view of the other 
glider. Double blind situations do not seem to figure prominately although they 
must be still guarded against.
My own view for some years has been that we do not teach lookout adequately 
and that the procedures outlined in BGK whilst suitable for G.A. flying do not 
cover the gliding situation where a major cause of accidents is a glider running 
into a semi stationary object – a turning glider. This attitude has made me 
unpopular in the upper echelons of the GFA but I am pleased to report that the 
Operations Panel has now taken a fresh approach to lookout which featured 
prominately at the recent Panel meeting. My personal views on lookout training 
were recently printed in Soaring Australia and on competition lookout in 
the NCSC safety briefing notes (attached).
A further conclusion has been that ab-initio training to solo standard does 
not adequately prepare a pilot for competition flying and we need to include 
additional safety training in coaching courses or otherwise ensure suitable 
standards before pilots fly in competitions. Lisa Trotter, our new National 
Coach, is addressing these issues.
The NCSC prepared competition safety briefing material before it was 
disbanded but had not completed its task of examining competition conditions 
with a view to improving safety. For example, competition condition changes 
which could be worthy of consideration are; applying a speed limit, subject to 
penalty, of 70 knots near start and turn points and within 1/2km of thermalling 
gliders; seeking to end the pre-start disaster waiting to happen of gliders 
milling around too close to cloud base; arrange staged starting times; ensure 
out and return situations are minimised by setting tasks which would include a 
minimum included angle between turnpoints or AAT zones. We all resist change but 
taking a fresh look at how we fly competitions is a high priority.
In the multi-class Nationals since 1997 eight pilots have been involved in 
mid-airs, two have been killed, three parachuted to safety with the chute open 
for less than 5 seconds, five gliders have been destroyed and three damaged. As 
considerably less than 100 pilots have competed over this period, it is pretty 
sobering. Suprisingly, I do not consider multi-class Nationals to be 
particularly dangerous compared with other competitions. It is a matter of sheer 
chance which incidents become accidents or fatalities. These events have had an 
extremely deleterious effect on multi-class entries. I could name 10 pilots, 
starting with Andy Pybus, an Australian champion and record holder, who do not 
fly competitions any more as a result of safety concerns. Perhaps the recent 
conference which changed multi-class to a handicaped class might have been even 
more productive if it had looked at some of these factors.
The other aspect of gliding which features in tragedies, aero tow operations, 
has also ranked highly in my concerns. I personally knew about six pilots killed 
in the last 10 years in aero tow accidents. It is 10 times more dangerous than 
aerial agriculture. Providing separation and improved situational awareness by 
use of radio has in my opinion the potential to greatly reduce aero tow 
disasters. My suggestions in summary are; The use of nominated pre-determined 
drop off zones with the tug pilot adding the proposed drop off zone to his 
rolling call; Gliders in the drop off zone to advise the tug of their position; 
Tugs upon release to give a call anouncing their position and runway intention; 
Gliders on return from cross country to invariably give a 10km inbound call and 
to avoid the drop off zone in use. Again, these are purely personal thoughts, 
not recommendations, but worthy of consideration.
Harry Medlicott

[aus-soaring] NSW State Comps at Lake Keepit

[Harry Medlicott]

IMPORTANT 
NOTICE
 
Entry fees for these comps, to be held at 
Lake Keepit between 15th and 22nd November have been set at $205 with an early 
bird $20 discount if paid early( in mail before end of this week). In an effort 
to keep costs to pilots as low as possible we have been negotiating with the 
NSWGA to be credited with a sport and recreation grant which will be used to 
reduce entry fees. We don't know  by how much yet but hope it will be quite 
significant.
 
This note is to notify anyone who has paid 
the original entry fee that they will have a refund of the 
difference.
 
Plans for the competition are well in hand 
and we are expecting a large entry. We are planning on having an unballasted 
sports class using the handicaps which have worked well in National Sports 
Class. Due to the Sports Class Nationals being in S.A. we are 
expecting this class to be well attended. Multi Class will include 
Standard, 15 metre, 18 metre and Open. Multi class will be ballasted up to the 
maximum approved but handicapping will not apply. Classes will be amalgamated to 
make up numbers when required  e.g. If there are insufficient 15m. gliders 
to make a class, then standard class would fly both standard and 15m. class to 
create a15m. class.
 
We will be having different start points and 
first direction for sports and multi class as a safety 
feature.
 
As weather man for the comps I am 
predicting and almost guaranteeing excellent weather - not too difficult as 
November is usally one of our best months. Summer storms do not usually start 
until mid December and we often get cloud bases of up to 10,000 feet. Day length 
is only slightly shorter than the summer maximum and we are allowing pilots to 
declare a lay day on the day if conditions look good for a personal best or 
record flight.
 
Due to Telstra problems our web page is 
temporarily down but further details and entry forms can be obtained from our 
President, Steve Hedley at   [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 
Looking forward to seeing you 
soon,
 
Harry Medlicott
 
 

Re: [Aus-soaring] NSW State Comps

[Harry Medlicott]

Derek,

I got it wrong. Entries are listed on our comp web page - link from GFA NSW
club page,

Harry


- Original Message -
From: "Derek Ruddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 7:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] NSW State Comps


> Harry
> is there a published list of entries?
> I couldn't find one on the web site last time I looked.
> Derek
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 28/10/03 21:50:31 >>>
> Attention All,
>
> Confirmed entries for the NSW State Comps at Lake Keepit now stand at over
30. If you are contemplating attending and have not entered please let us
know. We are not chasing your money, but there is a lot of planning involved
particularly, -  How many tugs do we organise?  We will be doing our very
best to make the comps run smoothly and knowing firm numbers is a great
help. Please contact us if you might be coming and have not completed your
entry yet,
>
> Thanks,
>
> Harry Medlicott
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] NSW State Comps

[Harry Medlicott]

Derek,

We have not published a list of confirmed entries. Most comps do not do it
as there is very often a pretty poor showing until the last moment. We have
+20 in multi class and +10 in club class. This will be the first time we
have had a state club class for some time. If you personally want to know
entrants names, then I could ask permission but would be reluctant to put it
on a public document unless individual pilots ok'd it. It might be seen as
an invasion of their privacy,

Regards,

Harry

- Original Message -
From: "Derek Ruddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 7:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] NSW State Comps


> Harry
> is there a published list of entries?
> I couldn't find one on the web site last time I looked.
> Derek
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 28/10/03 21:50:31 >>>
> Attention All,
>
> Confirmed entries for the NSW State Comps at Lake Keepit now stand at over
30. If you are contemplating attending and have not entered please let us
know. We are not chasing your money, but there is a lot of planning involved
particularly, -  How many tugs do we organise?  We will be doing our very
best to make the comps run smoothly and knowing firm numbers is a great
help. Please contact us if you might be coming and have not completed your
entry yet,
>
> Thanks,
>
> Harry Medlicott
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] NSW State Comps

[Harry Medlicott]

Nigel,

Our web page has entries listed, but they are a bit behind.

We would be glad if you take a few prizes home. It would only make up for
all the ones NSW pilots have carried back from Q'land over the years!

With on-field catering thanks to Wendy and a band of helpers plus a cool
room with plenty of capacity we are looking forward to a fantastic week.
Conditions down here have been quite good lately with some days going to
11000 ft. As this is usually a dry time of year there is an excellent chance
of it continuing. Storms are usually not common until well into December,

Best Wishes to Michelle,

Harry



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] What a day??

[Harry Medlicott]

Great flight Bernard, congratulations.

Wendy
- Original Message -
From: "B&C Eckey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 7:59 AM
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] What a day??


> Hello Leigh
>
> Yours truly did 1100km in the ASH25 but only
> made it because of a final glide climb on the
> approaching front.
>
> By the way, the cumulus clouds were more like
> 13000ft in the mid north of the state.
>
> Bernard
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leigh
> Bunting
> Sent: Tuesday, 9 December 2003 9:40 PM
> To: Soaring List
> Subject: [Aus-soaring] What a day??
>
> Hi All,
>
> It was a stinker in Melbourne and even hotter in Adelaide. From
> Melbourne there appeared to be Cu from horizon to horizon.
>
> As we climbed out of Tullamarine on the 1745 to Adelaide, we passed
> through the base of the Cu at 12000 abeam Bacchus Marsh.
>
> We were tooling along at 400kts ground speed at FL390 in the tops of the
> cirrus. Through the gaps in the cirrus, I could see the Cu continuing
> all the way to at least abeam Bordertown. Sitting on the left side, I
> couldn't see what was happening in the northern sector as we approached
> the coastal area of the Coorong. Turning towards Adelaide, we descended
> through the Cu at FL150 to FL160.
>
> Walking across the Adelaide tarmac, the Cu was still active at 1830
> local, all the way north.
>
> A day you seem to have been able to have gone anywhere in a glider. As
> it wasn't me, did anyone have the chance to use what appeared to be the
> best soaring day in years?
>
> If so, let's hear about it.
>
> Leigh Bunting
> Colonel Light Gardens
> South Australia
> 
>
>
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [aus-soaring] Buying Euro's

[Harry Medlicott]

- Original Message -
From: "Chris Woolley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 8:04 PM
Subject: [aus-soaring] Buying Euro's


> Hi,
>
> Has anybody had experience buying Euro's on-line.
> A site I have been looking at is http://www.xe.net/ucc/ which offers
on-line trading.
> The Euro rate from the bank today was 0.578 and on-line was 0.598
>
> Chris
>
>
> --
>   * You are subscribed to the aus-soaring mailing list.
>   * To Unsubscribe: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   * with "unsubscribe aus-soaring" in the body of the message
>   * or with "help" in the body of the message for more information.
>
>

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Alice's Diary for Jan 2004

[Harry Medlicott]

Dear Alice,
 
Sorry to hear about your misadventure in a paddock with 
longish grass.
 
I trust Robert and Brian taught you how to minimize the risk 
of damage in such a situation .
 
Did they advise you to select negative flap after touchdown 
which as well as helping with aeleron control reduces the drag on your wings and 
the chance of a wing catching grass and groundlooping?
 
I hope you braked strongly after landing to reduce your 
groundroll and the amount of grass you would have to go through.
 
But most important of all, did they teach you to immediately 
push your control columm fully forward so that your tail would be off the ground 
and less likely to be damaged as soon as a wing caught and a ground loop seemed 
about to happen? Opposite rudder may also have helped if you still had forward 
speed. It is far better to spin on your tummy and suffer a few 
scratches there than rip your tail off.
 
Again, Best Wishes for a speedy recovery. I am sure you will 
be back like new in no time,
 
Harry Medlicott 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Brian 
  Wade 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  
  Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 1:16 
  PM
  Subject: [Aus-soaring] Alice's Diary for 
  Jan 2004
  
  
  (For the uninitiated, Alice is Nimbus 2C GAW - other Alice stories 
  are at http://www.hart.wattle.id.au/alice/
   
  January 2004 Diary Entry
   
  Unfortunately I am back in hospital again – well actually in a 
  “pre-operation” area while a decision is made as to which hospital I will be 
  going to for my surgery.  Since I find it hard to write in my present 
  condition, I have asked Brian Wade to be my “scribe” – which is as it should 
  be as he is the cause of my current predicament! To go back a bit 
  in time, in the middle of December I took Brian on a flight from Jondaryan to 
  Watts Bridge where I re-acquainted myself with winch launching – I must say I 
  really had forgotten just how fast I am able to climb with that wire tugging 
  at my most private parts! Then I was tucked safely away in my 
  trailer and spent Christmas at Robert’s house before the long, but not 
  unpleasant drive down to Gulgong for the Multi Class National 
  Competition.  I was really looking forward to keeping company with some 
  of the upper class again; not that I have anything against the company I keep 
  at Jondaryan, but a lady does have to maintain her 
  standards. There were nineteen other gliders competing at 
  Gulgong, but just 7 others with big wings like mine.  It was an absolute 
  joy to be sharing thermals with all of them – they were so well behaved that I 
  never felt concerned for my safety when in their company.  I wouldn’t 
  normally mention this in public, but I did learn quite a bit from watching 
  some of those other “long wings” and listening to their stories as we relaxed 
  in the tie down area each evening.  On the second practice day it 
  was Brian’s turn to fly and I must confess that I was a bit annoyed to find 
  that, for the second day in a row, they filled my wing tanks with rather dirty 
  dam water – not quite the standard that I expect!  Churlish of me I know, 
  but I couldn’t resist whacking Brian on the forehead with my tailplane as he 
  went to attach the tail dolly.  This left him covered in blood, and me 
  feeling quietly smug! Robert and Brian flew with me on alternate 
  days as the competition progressed.  We had some great times together and 
  some not so great!  Soaring at 13,000 ft over the Warrumbungle's in 
  company with some quite aggressive eagles was one memorable event for 
  me.  Not so memorable were the struggles that I had to keep first Robert 
  and then Brian from putting me into a paddock far from home.  However for 
  the first five competition days I managed to get them both back safely and we 
  had a lot of fun together.  Then on Day 6 I took Brian on a 412 
  Km racing task Gulgong – Tullamore – Trundle – Gulgong.  Pre start I 
  managed to coax him up to 10,000 ft and was looking after his health thanks to 
  my nice new Mountain High Oxygen system which gave him a measured pulse of 
  oxygen at the commencement of each breath.   On the first 
  leg we stayed high for the first 30 minutes or so, but then, despite my best 
  efforts to have him keep on track and not chase “iffy” clouds (something that 
  I picked up during our evening chats), he decided to head for a cloud street 
  well to the South.  As I tried to tell him, the street had virtually 
  disappeared by the time we got to it and so we had a very slow first 
  leg.  Although I managed to get him up to 13,000 ft early on the final 
  leg, we were well behind the rest of the field, it was getting late and I 
  wasn’t particularly impressed by the look of the sky on the home 
  heading. As we passed Wellington I did my best to convince Brian 
  to land at the airfield there and get an aero tow home, but his “can do” 
  attitude prevailed and we pressed on

[Aus-soaring] 18m. record database

[Harry Medlicott]

Hi all,
 
The March meeting of the Sports Committee will 
consider as to whether Australian records should be kept for 18M class 
gliders.  The decision will be influenced by support from glider pilots for 
such an addition.
 
We have about 12 18M gliders which have been 
imported over the last few years and more are on the way.  Additionally, 
there are some slightly earlier models well able to set records, as flying on 
the right day is of far greater importance than having the latest and best 
glider (an Astir set the current out and return standard class record over 20 
years ago).
 
By comparison there has only been one new 15M 
glider, no new single seater open class and only a couple of 2 seater open class 
gliders imported in recent years.  18M is very much a class of 
the future.
 
It is uncomfortable to ask favours which could be 
of use to one personally, but I am asking pilots especially those flying 18M, to 
e-mail Rob Moore, Chairman of the Sports Committee, to support the establishment 
of 18M class Australian records.  Robs e-mail address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
If you could e-mail me a copy of your support to, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED], that 
would be a help,
 
Good gliding,  
 
Harry Medlicott
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] 18m. record database

[Harry Medlicott]

Robert,

If you feel 18 m. records should be available to Nimbus 2's etc. the I would
suggest you put a submission to that effect to Rob Moore for consideration
by the sports committee, preferably in time for their March meeting

Regards,

Harry
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Harry Medlicott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 18m. record database


> On Mon, 2004-02-02 at 21:01, Harry Medlicott wrote:
>
> >
> > The March meeting of the Sports Committee will consider as to whether
> > Australian records should be kept for 18M class gliders.  The decision
> > will be influenced by support from glider pilots for such an addition.
> >
> > We have about 12 18M gliders which have been imported over the last
> > few years and more are on the way.  Additionally, there are some
> > slightly earlier models well able to set records, as flying on the
> > right day is of far greater importance than having the latest and best
> > glider (an Astir set the current out and return standard class record
> > over 20 years ago).
>
> Harry
>
> What are the regulations (for records) regarding an aircraft such as a
> Nimbus 2c such as Alice? She is allowed to fly as an 18m glider in
> competitions, but I am not sure about records...
>
> --
> Robert Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Strategic IT & open source consulting+61 (0)438 385 533
> Brisbane, Australia http://www.interweft.com.au
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] Ventus 2cxt

[Harry Medlicott]

Dear All,
 
Pilots have asked me to comment on the latest 
version of the V2ct glider, also the Avionic trailer in which it came to 
Australia.
 
Firstly the Polish Avionic trailer is similar in 
all respects with the Cobra brand except that it is some thousands of dollars 
cheaper.  It uses the same Alko trailer hitch and wheel suspension fittings 
as the German trailers use.  The trailer was delivered on time and I can 
highly recommend it.
 
The Ventus was originally named V2cxT but the x 
seems to have been dropped from the documentation.  The main changes are in 
the outer wing panels, the tailplane and a higher maximum wing 
loading.
 
Can't tell you much about the tailplane changes 
except that it is supposed to have a slighter slimmer profile.
 
The major changes are to the 18m outer panels (the 
15m panels were not available when delivery was made).  The new outer 
panels have one less upward bend, terminate in winglets and incorporate 14lt 
water tanks.  This additional caapacity is of more importance in the 
non-motorised version.  The outer section immediately before the winglet 
has a 1.2m aileron which moves upward in negative flap and aileron deflection 
but does not go down below 0 deg.  This ingenious arrangement ensures that 
wing tip stall is not likely and probably assists with slower thermalling.  
The inner panels appear to have been beefed up as mine weighs 69 and 70 kg, 
heavier than the previous model.
 
The empty weight of the V2ct is now 350kg, add in 
may case 100kg for pilot, parachute, fuel, oxygen, drinking water etc. and the 
minimum flying weight is 450kg which is pretty heavy for a total wing area of 
less than 11sqm  It handles this pretty well but my feeling was that when 
working 1kt at less than 1000ft which happens some times when launching at 
10.00am summer time for a long flight, then the 15m LS8 with a wing only 
slightly smaller and weighing 100kg less may have an edge.
 
The flaperon design assures a good rate of roll and 
manevourability but the thin wings mean slight changes of attitude result in 
substantial speed variations.  It is as you would expect in a slippery 
glider but requires regular attention.  The trim is interconnected to the 
flap lever and is self adjusting over the speed range and does not lend itself 
to regular minor manual adjustment.  Personally I prefer a trim control 
which can be precisely set for the required speed but the arrangement is pretty 
good and means one less in flight adjustment to make.
 
The maximum wing loading for the 18m version has 
been increased to 51.5kg per sq.m from about 48.  Is this a substantial 
benefit?  It should be for pilots flying gaggles or under very strong 
conditions but my personal experience is that the previous maximum of about 
48 is plenty for most conditions and that little is gained by flying 
at max AUW, but time will tell.
 
I believe we owe a debt to the German glider 
manufacturers.  They are family operated businesses dedicated to making the 
best gliders possible and none of them appear to be making great 
profits.
 
Harry Medlicott.
 
P.S. I recently asked pilots to e-mail Rob 
Moore at [EMAIL PROTECTED]  to support the 
introduction of an 18m record class.  Very few pilots appear to have done 
so.  It would be a help if you e-mailed Rob before the March Sports 
Committee meeting. H.
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Easter Comp update

[Harry Medlicott]

Robert,

Wendy and I are committed to being out of Australia on Saturday the 17th
April. I could possibly fly up till and including the Thursday. Please
confirm that assuming I can get it all together that there would be no
penalty in declaring the Friday and Saturday lay days. I would be flying a
Ventus2ct which does noit appear to have a handicap at this stage,

Regards and best wishes for another successful Easter comp. I have only
missed a couple in the last 15 years,

Harry Medlicott


- Original Message -
From: "Robert Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Soaring in Australia." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "DDSC
chat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "cgc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 11:44 PM
Subject: [Aus-soaring] Easter Comp update


> Hi
>
> There's only five and a half weeks to go and the entries are rolling in!
>
> There are quite a few people who have said they are coming but who
> haven't yet registered. Remember, a late fee of $30 applies to
> registrations after 10 March (a week away)...
>
> Phil Benke and Alan Latemore are touring the known strips in the
> Chinchilla area on Mon 9 March in the Dimona (thanks Phil) and this will
> allow us to finalise the turn points. Look for these on the web site
> late next week.
>
> The comp web site is at
>http://www.glidingcaboolture.org.au/EasterComp/index.htm
>
> --
> Robert Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Strategic IT & open source consulting+61 (0)438 385 533
> Brisbane, Australia http://www.interweft.com.au
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Reasons NOT to spin for fun

[Harry Medlicott]

Dear All,

As part of my research into lookout and mid air collisions it turned out
that in Europe, where most of the worlds gliders are located, the incidence
of low level spins has drastically reduced. This was accounted for by the
improvements in glider design. Modern gliders from about LS4s on are far
more resistant to spinning compared with IS 29s, early Cirruses and some
even worse older designs.

Despite good training pilots will sooner or later get themselves into
unfavourable situations where they are at risk and then it is preferable
that they are in a spin resistant glider.

There are limits as to the worth of spin training. I originally instructed
at a winch launch club where once a year a tug was brought in and spin
training was conducted from 3,000 ft. Everyone was quite happy employing
standard recovery techniques. Later I instructed at a winch launch club
where aero tow was not available and sometimes conditions were not
favourable for extended periods to gain height, so after practice myself,
started spin training from the top of the launch using Blaniks, 1 turn only
and recovery by 1,000 ft. Despite very careful briefing shortly before, the
pilots response was quite different. As soon as they saw the ground directly
under them they would pull the control column fully back and for good
measure in the direction away from the downgoing wing. What chance would
they have had if the height was 500 ft., were in a vulnerable glider,
stressed, surprised and not  in current spin training practice?   A snow
flake would have a better chance in hell. Sorry about the instructors who
get their jollies spin training but we should be banning or advising against
the importation of Puckatzs. They have an appalling record for spinning in.
How much nicer to send our early pilots off in ASK 21s and those from the
Grob family that are comparatively forgiving,

Harry Medlicott

- Original Message - 
From: "Derek Ruddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 12:16 PM
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] Reasons NOT to spin for fun


> One thing you can say in the 28's favour is that 24 people have NOT been
killed spinning it.
> Unlike the Pooch...
>
>
>  -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  On Behalf Of Catherine
Conway
> Sent: Tuesday, 21 September 2004 11:58 AM
> To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
> Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] Reasons NOT to spin for fun
>
> Sounds more like a reason NOT to buy IS28's :P
>
> (ducks for cover)
>
> -Cath
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> > Of Jason Armistead
> > Sent: Tuesday, 21 September 2004 11:01 AM
> > To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
> > Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] Reasons NOT to spin for fun
> >
> >
> >
> > One reason not to spin "for the hell of it" is that in some
> > metal aircraft,
> > e.g. IS-28s, such "aerobatic" maneouvres actually reduce the
> > airframe service
> > life.  There is an AD on this issue, though I don't know its number.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Jason
> >
>
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
>
>
>
> --

> This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If
>  you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please
>  contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of
>  this communication or disclose anything about it.
>
> --

>
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] IS28 ADs (was Reasons NOT to spin for fun)

[Harry Medlicott]

John,

You are right, spins in an IS 28 can be unpleasant and not willingly
practised without a lot of air underneath you. I have not flown a Puchaz but
the statistics say it all. If anyone has precise figures, then let us all
know but I understand it is about the worst of any current training glider.
Spinning accidents don't normally happen at altitude, it is the ones close
to the ground that cause the accidents. Training at altitude undertaking a
number of turns might be fun but I doubt if it saves many lives. What is
needed is plenty of practice at instantly taking the appropriate recovery
action when a spin is developing and, yes, preferably when and if the real
thing happens, you are flying a docile glider.

Why make life harder than we need to?

Harry Medlicott

- Original Message - 
From: "John Parncutt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 6:28 PM
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] IS28 ADs (was Reasons NOT to spin for fun)


> Our club some years ago (VMFG) sold our IS28's and bought a Puchaz. Having
> gone from instructing on the 28's to the Puchaz, I can tell you the spin
> characteristics of the Puchaz are far superior to that of the 28. The 28's
> depending on C of G had an alarming (for the pupil and sometimes even
> experienced pilots) habit of tucking under in the spin giving the
impression
> of an almost inverted spin. The Puchacz is far more predictable and docile
> and in my view an excellent trainer.
> Harry's comment that we should not be importing them makes no sense to me
at
> all. Of course being an aerotow club we don't do any spinning below 1500
ft
> AGL, at a winch operation where you may only get 1200 ft AGL there is far
> less safety margin and unless I am mistaken most of the Puchaz spin
> accidents have been at winch sites.
>
> To get to the point, there is no way I would intentionally spin an IS28 at
> 1200ft AGL, and were I to be in the position of spinning at that altitude
I
> would much rather be in a Puchacz!
>
> Unfortunately the real issue with the Puchacz is its limited service life,
> and for that reason our club has spent a lot of time researching
> alternatives and have decided on the DG505
>
> John Parncutt
> VMFG
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kittel,
> Stephen W (ETSA)
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 5:49 PM
> To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
> Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] IS28 ADs (was Reasons NOT to spin for fun)
>
>
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jason Armistead
>
>
> > There ARE more than 3 ADs for IS28s.  You need to be careful
> > how you look for
> > them !
>
> Whoops, should have realised that myself.
>
> > Some are filed under "IS-28" (rather than "IS28") - another 9
> > in fact,
> > including AD 374 "Fatigue Life Limits" which I think is the
> > one that explains
> > the trade-off between aerobatic flights and lifetime, ...
>
> Thanks for that heads up on AD374. It may be of interest to some here in
SA
> with Twin Astirs (not the direct application of the AD but how it came
> about).
>
> Anyway, I note that it is a GFA extension _beyond_ the manufacturers
limits.
> You basically can't have it if you do more than 8% aerobatics (which I
would
> have thought was plenty, even for the most spin happy clubs) *OR* 500 non
> aerotow launches, which pretty much excludes this extension from being
> available to any winch clubs (I reckon 500 launches would be about a year
or
> so worth even for a small country winch club). So as far as this analysis
> goes, it would appear type of launch is far more important than any
> aerobatics a club may do.
>
> Regards
> SWK
>
> **
> This email and any file attachments are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom
> they are addressed.
> If you have received this email in error please tell us immediately
> by return email and delete the document.
> The information in this email expresses the opinion of the author
> and does not necessarily represent the views of ETSA Utilities.
> **
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] (no subject)

[Harry Medlicott]

The GFA has agreed to have Australian records for 
18 metre class.
 
 
Record attempts will need to be better than the 
existing 15 metre class records to be eligable.   As with other class 
records you must notify an official of the Sports Committee within 24 hours 
of the flight. All relevant details of the claim can be forwarded later. 
 The people to contact would be David Jansen, Beryl Hartley or myself, 
Wendy Medlicott. For further information or claims contact Wendy Medlicott 
at [EMAIL PROTECTED].
 
Please notify any 18m class pilots that you know 
that 18m record base has been established.
 
Wendy
 
 
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] 18metre records

[Harry Medlicott]

Any reference to Beryl Hartley in relation to 
claims for 18M records is to be deleted from my previous information.  
Please ensure that any details are forwarded to Wendy medlicott at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or phone 
(02)43653626.  Any claim forms are to be sent to P.O. Box 541 Terrigal. 
2260
 
Wendy.
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Accident in Barossa valley

[Harry Medlicott]

Hi All,

Fairly early in my gliding career my winch launching club bought an IS 29.

I was so concerned by what I considered its unsafe winch launching
characteristics that I bought a Pilatus B4 for the use of my son who was
very early solo.

The IS 29 has a very narrow speed range on a winch, bites very quickly and
unexpectantly, and the flap detente on the one we flew  had a nasty habit of
jumping out and going into negative. Sometime after I stopped flying it
there was an accident involving power failure or cable break with a pilot of
modest experience.

There has been one pilot killed in Australia winch launching an IS 29 and I
understand their accident record has been high. The one good thing is that
metal gliders crumple giving a higher degree of impact absorbtion than
fibreglass which shatters.

I am a great believer in all pilots flying safer gliders. We do not all have
the same skill levels and everyone's abilities deteriorate under stress. We
have to look after those of us at the lower level of acceptable skill
levels. Who of us can say we have never been caught out momentarily by an
unexpected situation?

Low level stall-spin accidents and resulting fatalities have greatly reduced
in Europe over a period of years. Credit for this has been given to the much
safer characteristics of modern gliders rather than any change in pilots
skill levels.

My personal belief is that the importation of gliders with a poor safety
record, such as the Puchaz with its history of  spin related crashes should
be discouraged or banned by the GFA. Wait a minute before replying until I
don my flame resistant suit!

Harry Medlicott


- Original Message - 
From: "Robert Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "John Ashford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Accident in Barossa valley


> On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 14:59, Peter Stephenson wrote:
> > I recommend never to fly an IS29 off the winch for the first time
without
> > experiencing a stall at height.
>
> Rubbish Peter,
>
> What about cable/rope breaks? These can happen at low level even on an
> aero tow and you need to be ready to recognise and recover from a stall
> or spin without having ever seen one!
>
> This is exactly why we train people to recognise and recover from stalls
> and spins with minimum altitude loss (and brief on stalling/spinning as
> part of he conversion process to a single seater).
>
> There is absolutely NO problem with flying an IS29 off the winch, even
> if you have never stalled it before. How do you think people manage at
> winch only sites (quite apart from the stall/spin risk of an aero tow
> rope break)?
>
> What is necessary is that the individual is properly trained and briefed
> on the aircraft...
>
> a) so that they should not stall/spin off the winch (but we're all
> human, so we have back ups in terms of recovery actions)...
>
> b) so that they recognise stalls and know the minimum altitude loss
> recovery action instinctively (and have demonstrated this)
>
> c) so that they recognise incipient and full spins and again know the
> minimum altidude loss recovery action (and again have demonstrated this)
>
> If, as an instructor, you are not convinced that someone has got this
> down pat, then they should not be going solo in ANYTHING, irrespective
> of the launch method.
>
> If you are going to be an instructor, please think these things through
> before you start spouting rubbish in public. It does not do you any
> credit and, worse, it WILL confuse students (and even some trained
> pilots) who think that instructors are never wrong.
>
> -- 
> Robert Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> +61 (0)438 385 533
> Brisbane, Australiahttp://www.hart.wattle.id.au
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Accident in Barossa valley

[Harry Medlicott]

SDF,

Sorry, but the fact remains that some gliders become involved in far more
accidents than others and some seem to have very few accidents. The record
of the Puchaz is quite poor in this respect including spin related accidents
with experienced instructors on board. One English club has spun in 2 out of
3. The total number involved is a high proportion of those built. Please
don't say they were all just careless or inexperienced pilots.  I could say
that your club has been lucky but that would be an unfair reflection on the
obvious care and skill with which you operate, but please never let your
guard down! I have no vested interest but by comparision how many ASK 21s
have spun in? A friend of mine of high experience was killed when he changed
from flying what is considered to be a forgiving glider to one which had the
reputation of biting. In aviation we want everything possible going for us,

Harry

- Original Message - 
From: "skf1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 12:40 AM
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] Accident in Barossa valley


> Harry,
>   Flame suit required.
>
> My club has had many years of safe Puchaz operations, and we plan to
> continue that way.  If a pilot flies an aircraft inside its flight
envelope,
> as trained, and inside their weather thresholds, there is a very low
> possibility there will be a problem.
>
> I would like to ask the $64,000 question - outside of private owner
groups,
> how many pilots have read, and regularly review the aircraft handbook of
the
> aircraft they fly?  My personal belief is the honest answer will be very
> few.  Is this a problem with individuals or an organisational issue? How
> readily available are club aircraft manuals in your club?
>
> Is this the aircrafts fault??
>
> SDF
>
> PS - no aircraft has ever crashed with out human assistance.
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Harry
> Medlicott
> Sent: Tuesday, 7 December 2004 9:46 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in
> Australia.
> Cc: John Ashford
> Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Accident in Barossa valley
>
> Hi All,
>
> Fairly early in my gliding career my winch launching club bought an IS 29.
>
> I was so concerned by what I considered its unsafe winch launching
> characteristics that I bought a Pilatus B4 for the use of my son who was
> very early solo.
>
> The IS 29 has a very narrow speed range on a winch, bites very quickly and
> unexpectantly, and the flap detente on the one we flew  had a nasty habit
of
> jumping out and going into negative. Sometime after I stopped flying it
> there was an accident involving power failure or cable break with a pilot
of
> modest experience.
>
> There has been one pilot killed in Australia winch launching an IS 29 and
I
> understand their accident record has been high. The one good thing is that
> metal gliders crumple giving a higher degree of impact absorbtion than
> fibreglass which shatters.
>
> I am a great believer in all pilots flying safer gliders. We do not all
have
> the same skill levels and everyone's abilities deteriorate under stress.
We
> have to look after those of us at the lower level of acceptable skill
> levels. Who of us can say we have never been caught out momentarily by an
> unexpected situation?
>
> Low level stall-spin accidents and resulting fatalities have greatly
reduced
> in Europe over a period of years. Credit for this has been given to the
much
> safer characteristics of modern gliders rather than any change in pilots
> skill levels.
>
> My personal belief is that the importation of gliders with a poor safety
> record, such as the Puchaz with its history of  spin related crashes
should
> be discouraged or banned by the GFA. Wait a minute before replying until I
> don my flame resistant suit!
>
> Harry Medlicott
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Robert Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "John Ashford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 11:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Accident in Barossa valley
>
>
> > On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 14:59, Peter Stephenson wrote:
> > > I recommend never to fly an IS29 off the winch for the first time
> without
> > > experiencing a stall at height.
> >
> > Rubbish Peter,
> >
> > What about cable/rope breaks? These can happen at low level even on an
> > aero tow and you need to be ready to recogn

Re: [Aus-soaring] my last word

[Harry Medlicott]

Paul Barts posting deserves a response.

Firstly, let me congratulate him on putting forward a reasoned, intelligent
contribution.

The reference to Puchacz jockeys was made with some misgivings as it has
always been my principle to argue the case and not seem to denigrate the
man. Yes, it was pejorative but not intended to reflect on the great
majority of pilots who are only interested in flying safely and enjoying
their sport.

Unfortunately I have come across a few pilots, mainly instructors, who seem
to take a delight in showing off to students their spinning skills to an
extent that goes beyond the need for spin training. I hope that some
postings do not reflect this attitude.

I personally tell students that they are learning spin prevention training.
We as instructors should emphasise and spend more time on stall recognition,
incipient entry and prompt recovery. Instructors who give students one or
two stalls and incipients and then proceed to full blooded multi turn spins
are perhaps being a little premature.Emphasising safe speed near the ground
and it being the height below which you would prefer not to demonstrate your
spin recovery technique is vitally important. How many instructors show by
practical demonstration at a safe height by flying  at a constant speed as
in a circuit at 1.5 V that by mishandling of the controls it is almost
impossible to induce a spin? This is true generally of gliders,  hopefully
including Puchaczs. Demonstrating these things is much better than just
saying it.

My own experience is interesting in that my first club used  winch launching
and brought in a tug once a year for spin checks. Those being checked were
quite happy using  the correct recovery procedures. My second club was winch
launch only and is was sometimes the case that it was difficult for extended
periods to gain height for spin training. After  trying the procedure myself
and satisfied as to its safety I would spin train in a Blanik from no less
than 1300 ft. and recover in no more than one turn finishing the exercise at
about 1000 ft. Despite the most careful briefing just a few minutes before,
on their first attempt the students on seeing the ground directly underneath
would instantly pull the control column  fully back and for good measure
away from the low wing. I still wonder how most of us would react to a low
level inadvertent spin.

The Puchacz is undeniably a fine strong glider but we must recognise that it
was designed with aerobatic training in mind and as such is supposed to
enter a spin very easily at all C of G  positions. If that is what you want,
then go for it but if you want  something which is designed around ab initio
training and early solos with minimum risk to the pilot then there are
better options. The comment has been made that training on a glider that
enters spins easily produces pilots more competent in spin recovery. Is
there any evidence that pilots who learnt their spin prevention techniques
in benign, hard to spin, training gliders have an inferior accident record?
If anybody can sustain this suggestion with statistics, then share the news
with the rest of us, it is worth knowing.

My interest in this matter has been solely to keep pilots out of trouble.
The number of pilots killed worldwide while spinning a Puchacz, mostly
intentionally, is to my mind a tragedy and we should do everything in our
power to prevent any similar happening here. The contributions to this chat
page will have done much to make our pilots aware of just what can happen
and hopefully increase their safety margins,

Have a safe and happy Xmas everyone,

Harry Medlicott

P.S.
Has anyone heard useful comments about the PW 6? It might be a useful
addition to the two seaters affordable for training.  H.




- Original Message - 
From: "Paul Bart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "aus Soaring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 1:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] my last word


> Harry Medlicott wrote:
>
> >Hi All,
> >
> >As the one who started the debate on the Puchaz and its safe? handling
qualities, may I say it has been very disappointing to read some of the
repsonses by Puchaz jockeys.
> >
> >
> >
> Hi All
>
> I have followed the discussion regarding Puchacz safety record,
> particularly as it pertains to spinning, both here and earlier this year
> on r.a.s.. I have a vested interest, as I am a member of a club that has
> two of them. As well, I like flying them. As a precursor I should state
> that I am a relatively new glider pilot having flown some 230 h in about
> as many starts in 9 different types over the last 3 years. So you may
> consider my opinions in that light.
>
> I have found Harryâs comments interesting in the extreme. Having read
> all posts by the âproâ 

Re: [Aus-soaring] Re: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 18, Issue 4

[Harry Medlicott]

"seppo" is a contraction of "septic tank" which was rhyming slang for yank 
and had its origins, I suspect, from the time in the second world war when 
hundreds of thousands of American servicemen where in Australia to stop us 
becoming a Japanese colony ( yank haters take note) another comment at that 
time was that the Americans were over paid over sexed and over here. As many 
of our young men were guests of the Japanese army in Changi or elsewhere, 
the local girls did not seem to mind.  2 of my cousins married americans and 
went back as war brides.

Harry Medlicott
- Original Message - 
From: " Christopher Mc Donnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 

Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Re: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 18, Issue 4


What is a "Seppo" ?
And unless I'm misunderstanding, should'nt the message refer to non
recognition of a certification issued by the Union of a portion of the
political entities in a part of the North American Continent (aka USA) by 
Oz
"Seppos".

Sheesh!!!  You can see why Canadians and Mexicans get upset.
Chris Mc Donnell


Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Thursday, 10 March 2005 6:15 PM
Subject: [Aus-soaring] Re: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 18, Issue 4


So its expensive to soar in the good 'ol USA? Surely the entrepreneurial
types of NZ and OZ are marketing there? Did you happen across many ads for
flying here, whilst in the clubhouses, Mark? What a great opportunity, 2
weeks downunder, get yourself solo'ed in the worlds greatest pastime, all
for the price of a week at Miami!! NO no, don't tell me, some
overly-officious seppo doesn't recognize the Australian certification, so 
it
would be a waste of time? oh well, perhaps the GFA is on top of it! :-)
Keep it UP! Wayne Carter, [EMAIL PROTECTED]





---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free, probably, but I wouldnt trust it 
if
I were you, as you just never know
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.806 / Virus Database: 548 - Release Date: 5/12/2004




___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.6.4 - Release Date: 3/7/2005


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.6.4 - Release Date: 3/7/2005
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

[Aus-soaring] safety and GFA

[Harry Medlicott]

Hi All,
 
Contributors concerned at the lack of detail 
relating to glider accidents should heed the professionally based advice of 
Peter Heath. The laws of liability are such that, apart from those similar to 
the meagre one liners written on behalf of the BGA, or a degree of immunity such 
as enjoyed CASA or ATSB, only those with no 
assets to risk can afford to make definitive statements about individual 
accidents.  
 
Just what those who would like to know more of the 
distressing details hope to achieve is a matter of speculation as the causes of 
glider accidents have been studied world wide, are not likely to change, and the 
remedies to reduce them to an irreducible minimum pretty well known.  To 
summarize  :- 
 
Spins and low level loss of 
control
Accidents resulting from this cause have greatly 
reduced over the years and this has been attributed to the benign stalling and 
spin characteristics of most modern gliders. Maintaining 1.5 VS at a height 
below which you are prepared to recover from an inadvertent spin avoids 
this. A major problem is that as we get closer to the ground our ability to 
identify the horizon and the gliders attitude reduces and that we must 
regularly confirm speed by scanning the ASI. Under conditions of turbulence near 
the ground once every 5 seconds is not too often.
 
Incorrect use of 
controls
Such as flaps instead of dive brake or too 
much dive brake could be almost eliminated by teaching pilots to glance at the 
wing when deploying these controls.
 
Tug- glider collisions near 
airfields 
Account for about half of glider 
related fatalities in Australia. Tug pilot fatalities per hour flown are 
far greater than aerial crop-dusting or spraying. Could be minimized by 
separation of launching operations and improved radio communications as 
recommended byATSB.
 
En-route mid air 
collisions
Apart from ridge related ones overseas, these 
regularly involve a glider already in a thermal and a cruising glider or a 
thermal joining glider. Half of the pilots involved do not survive. Below 3,000 
ft your chances are pretty slim and improve above that height. In almost 
every case one glider had a clear frontal view of the other glider. 

The conclusion must be reached that look out is 
defective. I learnt to fly and instruct at a winch site The chance of a mid-air 
was almost nil. I know I was taught lookout poorly and that as an instructor I 
did not teach others adequately. A very good rule is not to look away from your 
carefully scanned frontal straight ahead view (which encompasses a 60 degree 
field of vision) for more than 5 seconds - this includes instruments, clouds, 
other gliders, the airfield and even scanning the sky for other gliders. 
The GFA has concluded a study on lookout which deserves your careful 
attention.
 
Terrain and weather 
related   
Mostly a pilots personal choice and he knows 
he is taking a risk. A case for psychological counseling.
 
Perhaps by making these comments I am putting my 
personal assets on the line! Perhaps I should write a multi page disclaimer! As 
an instructor the greatest fear has been that I would overlook some aspect of a 
students training and he would get hurt. Consequently accidents have been 
studied with a view of them not happening to me or my students. So I suppose the 
smart ones reading this will say that much more information should be available 
about each and every accident. Not needed apart from introducing the fear 
factor. Please spend at least as much time improving safety factors in your 
own flying and at your club as you do reading and writing for 
aus-soaring,
 
Harry Medlicott
 
 
 
 
 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.5 - Release Date: 5/4/2005
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: Fw: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Harry Medlicott]

MMM manufacture a thin adhesive vinyl material with a mirror finish which 
would have a far greater light output than LEDs under sunny australian 
conditions.


I sent the following to GFA in August 2003, as yet have not had the courtesy 
of a response




Part of my research into mid-air glider accidents involved not only 
investigating effective lookout procedures but also factors involving 
conspicuity of gliders.


As it maybe possible that this work may be worth pursuing by the GFA, the 
following brief


comments may be of interest;-

 1.. World wide experience is that simple conspicuity markings such as 
dayglo or painting sections of a glider with contrasting colours is of 
marginal benefit and runs the risk of excessive heat buildup where the 
darker colours were applied, which would certainly be a factor pre launch 
under our hot Australian conditions
 2.. Strobe lights appeal as they attract attention even when gliders are 
on a converging course. However the power consumption of a reasonably bright 
strobe is well beyond the capacity of batteries used in gliders.Their major 
advantage is when gliders are out of the sunlight,i.e., under substantial 
cloud or gloomy conditions. In bright sunlight personal observation was that 
they did not aid detection to a worthwhile extent.
 3.. Reflective material. This was given attention as it seemed a logical 
way to go under our usual sunny conditions. The light available from 
reflected sunlight is many times greater than could ever be obtained from a 
strobe.
A very thin stick on reflective material has recently become available. It 
is a 3M product called mirror film. It has recently been tried on gliders in 
the UK and shows promise.


An Australian trial using it on surfaces such as controls, outside of 
winglets, leading edge and a band around the fuselage towards the tail would 
be very worth while. One of the greatest concerns is conflict between a 
turning and a cruising glider. A turning glider would be much more readily 
recognised with the sun catching its reflective surfaces. It is unlikely 
that heat buildup would be a negative factor but would be easy to check.


The use of 3D mirror film seems well worth researching and I hope the GFA 
can progress an evaluation, Regards,


Harry


From: "jorgie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: [Aus-soaring] FLARM


I too want to be safe, however, I would be somewhat concerned if we just 
decided to implement something like this without somebody providing some 
scientific results of it's use.


The issues we may have is with the large number of new "toys" that we are 
finding in the cockpits of gliders. A lot of which are taking the pilots 
attention from outside of the aircraft to the inside.


In fact it's not uncommon to find some new pilots who have never know any 
different and think that you "need" all of this technology to fly long 
distances.


Part of the problem has got to be pilots not looking out of the cockpit, 
the other part has got to be how difficult it is to see other gliders, esp 
head on. The third part is simply that we can do all things at once and 
sometimes you will simply never see the other aircraft in which case 
something along these lines would indeed save lives.


Bernard Eckey has just ordered some new tips for his 25 which he has asked 
to high intensity leds (I believe) to be fitted to see if that improves 
the ability of other pilots to see his aircraft. Bernard, perhaps you 
could enlighten us to exactly what you've done.


I'd be interested if somebody can point me towards some information 
regarding these FLARMs.


Regards

Sean






 Geoff Kidd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Mike





If this Flarm system or something better (and immediately available) is 
not


picked up and implemented this year as the system of choice for OZ, then 
the



Pilots, Owners and the umbrella organization all need to have a good hard



look at themselves.







As previously mentioned by others in this Forum, the key is that all/most



Sailplanes need to be fitted for it to be effective.







Given the reports back from Europe, the key issues for us are simply:







aIs this the best available system?



bIs something better on the horizon that is soon to supersede it?



cIs Flarm the defacto standard in Europe?



dWhat is the best way to implement it here?







All of the above seems to be an appropriate role for the GFA to take,


action, publicise and provide the necessary leadership in this key area. 
But



a long evaluation and decision making time is not warranted and in my view


it would be a travesty if this opportunity is wasted or someone here 
thinks



they should now try from somewhere near scratch to come up with a better



Aussie mousetrap.






If the Swiss Rescue Helicopters have evaluated it as being also the best 
for



them, then it might even be a no-brainer for us.






Look at what the

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Harry Medlicott]

Speaking as one who had a midair collision when commencing to thermal with a 
glider which had been following a parallel track several hundred meters 
behind and whose presence was obviously unknown to me, resulting in the 
destruction of my uninsured $100,000 glider and me surviving by landing on 
my side in a ploughed paddock 3 seconds after the chute opened

perhaps I am a bit biased. But believe me it could happen to anyone.

Several of my friends have had very near misses with other gliders in a near 
head on situation.


Surprisingly, statistics show that many mid airs occur at times of low 
traffic density when it appears that the Flarm system would be most 
effective. It would not take much to research Australian accidents and 
reasonably estimate how many could have been averted if both aircraft had 
been fitted with Flarms. On my own knowledge,at least half might have been 
avoided.


If the software of  RF Developments design can be updated, why delay?

Its about time GFA took the initiative. Order about 60, or sufficient for a 
reasonable production run. Hire them to pilots who won't buy them for about 
$60 and  make their use mandatory in nationals for a start.  The GFA has 
about one million in funds just earning interest. Pilots can spend many 
thousands on instruments that don't do much more than become visual 
distractions. State associations also have funds sitting around. Its a bit 
like asking.-  How much would you be prepared to spend to have a freshly 
packed chute as you exited an unflyable glider?


Waiting for final, uncontrovertible proof  is a no brainer. We might just 
improve the popularity of our sport even more than by some of the money we 
have wasted recently.


Harry Medlicott




- Original Message - 
From: "Brett Kettle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'" 


Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 12:11 PM
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM



Double negatives, false positives, Type II errors... Double-sigh (;-)


At that point the FLARM becomes completely useless to everybody

... and that puts us back to exactly where we are now!


We need that data to evaluate it.  The data isn't just one of those

things that's nice to have, it's absolutely essential to determine
whether FLARM is an inferior offering to what CASA has in mind for
us.
...no we don't, 'cause then the statistically pedantic amongst us would
observe that ADS-B failure rates for GA/Commercial are not likely to be 
good

indicators of FLARM failure rates in our sport, and we would be no further
down the path to continuous improvement than we are now.

I'd rather pay a grand now for a commercially-manufactured FLARM which 
will
have marginal but increasingly important benefits as take-up increases, 
and

trust that the commercially astute manufacturer will give me software
upgrades when experience allows us to tweak the algorithms for even better
reliability.  Seems to me that so long as it's a good direction to be 
going
in, we should move in that direction, even if we know there will be 
further

improvements along the way (oops, isn't that just about a definition for
continuous improvement?).

LOL

Brett Kettle

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark 
Newton

Sent: Tuesday, 5 July 2005 11:47 AM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM


On 05/07/2005, at 11:03 AM, Geoff Kidd wrote:


Double negatives aside  how do you rate the double
positive of a warning that DOES occur when you have no idea that
the other ship is aiming for you HEAD-ON.




Sigh.

There are four possible modes that a system like this can be working in.

 * True Negative (Unit is silent, no threats nearby)
   This is where the typical FLARM installation will spend almost
   all of its life;  the proverbial NULL state.  As long as you have
   some way of testing whether it's still working, this is where you
   WANT it to spend its entire life.

 * True Positive (Unit is alerting, threat is actually nearby)
   This is where the FLARM is correctly alerting you to a potential
   midair.

 * False positive (Unit is alerting, no threats are actually nearby).
   If FLARM units do this more than a handful of times, they will
   produce an extremely powerful psychological reaction in the pilot,
   who will say, "The unit is dodgy, it doesn't work, I'm turning it
   off."  At that point the FLARM becomes completely useless to
   everybody.

 * False negative (Unit silent, actual threat nearby)
   This is at least as dangerous as having no FLARM unit at all,
   possibly more so if the pilot has formed the idea that he can
   compromise his lookout if the FLARM is going to tell him about
   midairs anyway.

For a FLARM to be 100% reliable, there would need to be 0 incidences
of th

Re: Fw: [Aus-soaring] FLARM and Winpilot

[Harry Medlicott]

Peter and Mandy,

Many thanks for the web page based reports. Mountain flying is certainly a 
different skill to those which we acquire flying cross country in Australia 
and I expect success is much more highly dependent on local knowledge . What 
you have learned this time must be of inestimable value to the Australian 
team next year.


As you know, I was particularly interested in your experience with the Flarm 
system. I was in Austria a couple of weeks there and my friend Fritz Romig, 
whom you may have met at Waikerie, said that most private gliders there were 
equipped with it and pilots  believed it was very valuable in collision 
avoidance.


My concern is that what appears to be a very useful adjunct to flight safety 
may take a considerable time to filter through the GfA bureaucracy and that 
we wait unnecessarily for a final development when it appears that a very 
useful instrument is available right now. It could be made in Australia 
under license by someone like Nigel Andrews of RF developments who can also 
incorporate an ADS-B function or imported as is.


I analysed 3 mid airs with which I am very familiar, being in one and seeing 
another as well as having substantial knowledge of the one at Waikeie 
involving a tug. In mine Flarm would have almost certainly avoided an 
accident as having knowledge of  a following glider behind me would have 
made certain I did not turn unless sure he had me in view. The one at 
Horsham appeared to be caused when a glider approaching a few gliders 
thermalling collided with another glider turning between him and the small 
gaggle. If my summary is correct then there is a good chance this would also 
be avoided with help from Flarm,  but this incident is not so certain. The 
third case involving the tragic death of the young woman tug pilot would 
almost certainly been avoided if the 2 gliders and tug had been Flarm 
equipped.


The destruction of 4 gliders and the tug in these three accidents 
represented a capital loss of $300,000 and how much value can we place on 
the 3 lives lost?


$300,000 represents the capital cost of fitting Flarm units to most of our 
gliders and tugs at risk. I am sure insurance premiums would go down if we 
could convince insurers that our risk profile had been reduced so that  it 
would not be unrealistic to assume a recoupment of some of the costs over 
time.


Interestingly, most mid airs in Australia have not occurred at times of high 
traffic density and it appears that Flarm would be particularly effective in 
warning pilots of  unobserved gliders in these circumstances.


We make parachutes mandatory in competitions but only half of pilots in 
disabled gliders are able to deploy them in time. Below 3,000 ft. your 
chances are much worse and they improve above that height. The cost of a 
pararchute which only gives you a 50% chance is over $2,000 and there are 
repacking costs each year. Much better to avoid the accident in the first 
place. Approximately 10 % of our pilots who have flown multi class nationals 
from Horsham  till now have had a mid air accident.


I was hoping your overseas experience would result in a strong 
reccommendation to implement the Flarm system in Australia but understand 
you can only call it as you see it. The problems you mentioned such as being 
able to adjust sound levels would be easy of solution. If the units are 
easily upgradeable by having the software on a PROM or whatever then there 
does not appear to be any reason to delay, but I know it will take a big 
push to achieve anything in the short term,


A few questions.Does the unit give the distance betwen your glider and the 
one perceived as a threat? A second version appears to be low in height and 
wider which could be designed to fit on top of the instrument panel right in 
the pilots view, is this how it is placed? Are the units free standing in 
that they can be unplugged from a power source and easily moved between 
gliders? The low power requirement quoted of 50 ma could probably be 
adequately sourced from selfcontained rechargeable batteries.   If you had 
the option of flying in a competition either with or without the Flarm 
system, how strongly would you reccomend to organisers that Flarm be used?


Your further comments would be most welcome.

Kind Regards,

Harry Medlicott 




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.9/72 - Release Date: 8/14/2005

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: Fw: [Aus-soaring] FLARM and Winpilot

[Harry Medlicott]

 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Geoff 
  Kidd 
  To: Discussion of issues relating 
  to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 4:43 
  PM
  Subject: Re: Fw: [Aus-soaring] FLARM and 
  Winpilot
  
  Harry
   
      Do you think all of these points, 
  that you have made so well, will be discussed properly and at length as 
  part of the Seminar/Forum associated with the GFA's AGM?
   
      But as Bernard has said in a 
  recent post here on this subject . what good is it unless it is 
  widely adopted?
   
      A push thru the Insurers is the 
  best hope for a quick take-up, in my view.
   
  Regards Geoff
   
   
   
   
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
Harry 
Medlicott 
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; 
Discussion of issues 
relating to Soaring in Australia. 
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 2:20 
PM
Subject: Re: Fw: [Aus-soaring] FLARM 
and Winpilot
Peter and Mandy,Many thanks for the web page based 
reports. Mountain flying is certainly a different skill to those which 
we acquire flying cross country in Australia and I expect success is 
much more highly dependent on local knowledge . What you have learned 
this time must be of inestimable value to the Australian team next 
year.As you know, I was particularly interested in your experience 
with the Flarm system. I was in Austria a couple of weeks there and my 
friend Fritz Romig, whom you may have met at Waikerie, said that most 
private gliders there were equipped with it and pilots  believed it 
was very valuable in collision avoidance.My concern is that what 
appears to be a very useful adjunct to flight safety may take a 
considerable time to filter through the GfA bureaucracy and that we wait 
unnecessarily for a final development when it appears that a very useful 
instrument is available right now. It could be made in Australia under 
license by someone like Nigel Andrews of RF developments who can also 
incorporate an ADS-B function or imported as is.I analysed 3 mid 
airs with which I am very familiar, being in one and seeing another as 
well as having substantial knowledge of the one at Waikeie involving a 
tug. In mine Flarm would have almost certainly avoided an accident as 
having knowledge of  a following glider behind me would have made 
certain I did not turn unless sure he had me in view. The one at Horsham 
appeared to be caused when a glider approaching a few gliders 
thermalling collided with another glider turning between him and the 
small gaggle. If my summary is correct then there is a good chance this 
would also be avoided with help from Flarm,  but this incident is 
not so certain. The third case involving the tragic death of the young 
woman tug pilot would almost certainly been avoided if the 2 gliders and 
tug had been Flarm equipped.The destruction of 4 gliders and the 
tug in these three accidents represented a capital loss of $300,000 and 
how much value can we place on the 3 lives lost?$300,000 
represents the capital cost of fitting Flarm units to most of our 
gliders and tugs at risk. I am sure insurance premiums would go down if 
we could convince insurers that our risk profile had been reduced so 
that  it would not be unrealistic to assume a recoupment of some of 
the costs over time.Interestingly, most mid airs in Australia 
have not occurred at times of high traffic density and it appears that 
Flarm would be particularly effective in warning pilots of  
unobserved gliders in these circumstances.We make parachutes 
mandatory in competitions but only half of pilots in disabled gliders 
are able to deploy them in time. Below 3,000 ft. your chances are much 
worse and they improve above that height. The cost of a pararchute which 
only gives you a 50% chance is over $2,000 and there are repacking costs 
each year. Much better to avoid the accident in the first place. 
Approximately 10 % of our pilots who have flown multi class nationals 
from Horsham  till now have had a mid air accident.I was 
hoping your overseas experience would result in a strong reccommendation 
to implement the Flarm system in Australia but understand you can only 
call it as you see it. The problems you mentioned such as being able to 
adjust sound levels would be easy of solution. If the units are easily 
upgradeable by having the software on a PROM or whatever then there does 
not appear to be any reason to delay, but I know it will take a big push 
to achieve anything in the short term,A few questions.Does the unit 
give the distance betwen your glider and the one perceived as a threat? 
A second version appears to be low in height and wider which could be 
designed to fit on top of the instrument panel right in the pilots view,