Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
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 confidential information intended only for the use of the addressees named above. If you
RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
From: Derek Ruddock [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 Yes. It is Holland. The Nimbus2 GEL has one fitted. just two 15-18mm tubes about 150mm apart running from front to back of the canopy. GC -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Parncutt Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 11:10 PM To: 'Peter Creswick'; 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Yes I agree that wirecutters as installed on Pawnee's for instance would offer a significant safety improvement, but it is the glider manufacturers that would need to be persuaded to incorporate this in their designs. Good Luck! 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. Bear in mind that it is often the gliding clubs that end up maintaining these sections of fencing anyway, since its their tugs that probably cause the most wear and tear! John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Creswick Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 10:31 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality And who is going to design them, install them, pay for them, maintain them ? What if the farmer / whoever refuses ? Are you going to force the issue legally and have them mandated somehow ? Good luck. Even if you did, what about the case of an outlanding, with an old, hidden, partial fence, with a few strands, in the middle of a field, in the middle of nowhere ? It is the glider that has to be equipped to deal with the wire, not the wire being equipped / configured to deal with the glider. What is required is a wire cutter arrangement like cropdusters have, which would be far - far better. They have been needed for years, but everyone refuses to consider them. Why ? - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal with the aftermath of this accident. Mitch. On 25/02/2007, at 9:05 PM, Ron Sanders wrote: Even if you have only got five feet to run before the fence YOU MUST initiate a ground loop. ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http
RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal with the aftermath of this accident. Mitch. On 25/02/2007, at 9:05 PM, Ron Sanders wrote: Even if you have only got five feet to run before the fence YOU MUST initiate a ground loop. ___ 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 ___ 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
And who is going to design them, install them, pay for them, maintain them ? What if the farmer / whoever refuses ? Are you going to force the issue legally and have them mandated somehow ? Good luck. Even if you did, what about the case of an outlanding, with an old, hidden, partial fence, with a few strands, in the middle of a field, in the middle of nowhere ? It is the glider that has to be equipped to deal with the wire, not the wire being equipped / configured to deal with the glider. What is required is a wire cutter arrangement like cropdusters have, which would be far - far better. They have been needed for years, but everyone refuses to consider them. Why ? - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal with the aftermath of this accident. Mitch. On 25/02/2007, at 9:05 PM, Ron Sanders wrote: Even if you have only got five feet to run before the fence YOU MUST initiate a ground loop. ___ 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 ___ 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: 268.18.4/702 - Release Date: 25/02/2007 3:16 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] RE: Another fatality
Yes I agree that wirecutters as installed on Pawnee's for instance would offer a significant safety improvement, but it is the glider manufacturers that would need to be persuaded to incorporate this in their designs. Good Luck! 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. Bear in mind that it is often the gliding clubs that end up maintaining these sections of fencing anyway, since its their tugs that probably cause the most wear and tear! John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Creswick Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 10:31 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality And who is going to design them, install them, pay for them, maintain them ? What if the farmer / whoever refuses ? Are you going to force the issue legally and have them mandated somehow ? Good luck. Even if you did, what about the case of an outlanding, with an old, hidden, partial fence, with a few strands, in the middle of a field, in the middle of nowhere ? It is the glider that has to be equipped to deal with the wire, not the wire being equipped / configured to deal with the glider. What is required is a wire cutter arrangement like cropdusters have, which would be far - far better. They have been needed for years, but everyone refuses to consider them. Why ? - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal with the aftermath of this accident. Mitch. On 25/02/2007, at 9:05 PM, Ron Sanders wrote: Even if you have only got five feet to run before the fence YOU MUST initiate a ground loop. ___ 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 ___ 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: 268.18.4/702 - Release Date: 25/02/2007 3:16 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] RE: Another fatality
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- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Parncutt Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 11:10 PM To: 'Peter Creswick'; 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Yes I agree that wirecutters as installed on Pawnee's for instance would offer a significant safety improvement, but it is the glider manufacturers that would need to be persuaded to incorporate this in their designs. Good Luck! 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. Bear in mind that it is often the gliding clubs that end up maintaining these sections of fencing anyway, since its their tugs that probably cause the most wear and tear! John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Creswick Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 10:31 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality And who is going to design them, install them, pay for them, maintain them ? What if the farmer / whoever refuses ? Are you going to force the issue legally and have them mandated somehow ? Good luck. Even if you did, what about the case of an outlanding, with an old, hidden, partial fence, with a few strands, in the middle of a field, in the middle of nowhere ? It is the glider that has to be equipped to deal with the wire, not the wire being equipped / configured to deal with the glider. What is required is a wire cutter arrangement like cropdusters have, which would be far - far better. They have been needed for years, but everyone refuses to consider them. Why ? - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal with the aftermath of this accident. Mitch. On 25/02/2007, at 9:05 PM, Ron Sanders wrote: Even if you have only got five feet to run before the fence YOU MUST initiate a ground loop. ___ 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
Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
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] To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 8:07 AM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality 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- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Parncutt Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 11:10 PM To: 'Peter Creswick'; 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Yes I agree that wirecutters as installed on Pawnee's for instance would offer a significant safety improvement, but it is the glider manufacturers that would need to be persuaded to incorporate this in their designs. Good Luck! 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. Bear in mind that it is often the gliding clubs that end up maintaining these sections of fencing anyway, since its their tugs that probably cause the most wear and tear! John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Creswick Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 10:31 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality And who is going to design them, install them, pay for them, maintain them ? What if the farmer / whoever refuses ? Are you going to force the issue legally and have them mandated somehow ? Good luck. Even if you did, what about the case of an outlanding, with an old, hidden, partial fence, with a few strands, in the middle of a field, in the middle of nowhere ? It is the glider that has to be equipped to deal with the wire, not the wire being equipped / configured to deal with the glider. What is required is a wire cutter arrangement like cropdusters have, which would be far - far better. They have been needed for years, but everyone refuses to consider them. Why ? - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends
Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
I am not sure but believe there are certain nose wheel gliders that are difficult to ground loop (KRO3A just goes straight when nose wheel is on ground and no way can you steer it). Perhaps as such aircraft come into the country they could be fitted with the dutch wire lifting bar to inside of canopy as part of MAR1 at import (like pull up seat belts etc). The dutch have done engineering and ALL dutch gliders have same. I do know Paul Mathews had same fitted to one of his gliders when flying around Gulcong and said it is easy to get to use. Just a thought...Ian McPhee - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal with the aftermath of this accident. Mitch. On 25/02/2007, at 9:05 PM, Ron Sanders wrote: Even if you have only got five feet to run before the fence YOU MUST initiate a ground loop. ___ 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 ___ 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: 268.18.4/703 - Release Date: 2/26/2007 2:56 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] RE: Another fatality
It is the second time a glider has hit the same fence - Bergfalke just hit the post head (intentional) on and brought the wire down and under and a month later bergfalke with a few new tubes it was flying again. The new farmer neighbour is a active member of club and well known motorbike person but it is dept of lands ground. Ian M - Original Message - From: Peter Creswick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 10:30 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality What if the farmer / whoever refuses ? Are you going to force the issue legally and have them mandated somehow ? Good luck. Even if you did, what about the case of an outlanding, with an old, hidden, partial fence, with a few strands, in the middle of a field, in the middle of nowhere ? It is the glider that has to be equipped to deal with the wire, not the wire being equipped / configured to deal with the glider. What is required is a wire cutter arrangement like cropdusters have, which would be far - far better. They have been needed for years, but everyone refuses to consider them. Why ? - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal with the aftermath of this accident. Mitch. On 25/02/2007, at 9:05 PM, Ron Sanders wrote: Even if you have only got five feet to run before the fence YOU MUST initiate a ground loop. ___ 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 ___ 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: 268.18.4/702 - Release Date: 25/02/2007 3:16 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 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.4/703 - Release Date: 2/26/2007 2:56 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] RE: Another fatality
Hi Ian Good point. No one has experimented to establish at what speed a Puchatek (and perhaps many other nose-wheel gliders) lose elevator rudder authority. John Viney agrees we should do this experiment. If the LKSC Puchatek is written off it would be a good opportunity to do this test - I have passed on the idea to the committee. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian McPhee Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 9:56 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality I am not sure but believe there are certain nose wheel gliders that are difficult to ground loop (KRO3A just goes straight when nose wheel is on ground and no way can you steer it). Perhaps as such aircraft come into the country they could be fitted with the dutch wire lifting bar to inside of canopy as part of MAR1 at import (like pull up seat belts etc). The dutch have done engineering and ALL dutch gliders have same. I do know Paul Mathews had same fitted to one of his gliders when flying around Gulcong and said it is easy to get to use. Just a thought...Ian McPhee - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal with the aftermath of this accident. Mitch. On 25/02/2007, at 9:05 PM, Ron Sanders wrote: Even if you have only got five feet to run before the fence YOU MUST initiate a ground loop. ___ 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 ___ 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: 268.18.4/703 - Release Date: 2/26/2007 2:56 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 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
Is perhaps the groundloop technique of pushing forward on the stick and applying full rudder inappropriate for a nosewheeel glider? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 10:17 AM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Hi Ian Good point. No one has experimented to establish at what speed a Puchatek (and perhaps many other nose-wheel gliders) lose elevator rudder authority. John Viney agrees we should do this experiment. If the LKSC Puchatek is written off it would be a good opportunity to do this test - I have passed on the idea to the committee. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian McPhee Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 9:56 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality I am not sure but believe there are certain nose wheel gliders that are difficult to ground loop (KRO3A just goes straight when nose wheel is on ground and no way can you steer it). Perhaps as such aircraft come into the country they could be fitted with the dutch wire lifting bar to inside of canopy as part of MAR1 at import (like pull up seat belts etc). The dutch have done engineering and ALL dutch gliders have same. I do know Paul Mathews had same fitted to one of his gliders when flying around Gulcong and said it is easy to get to use. Just a thought...Ian McPhee - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal with the aftermath of this accident. Mitch. On 25/02/2007, at 9:05 PM, Ron Sanders wrote: Even if you have only got five feet to run before the fence YOU MUST initiate a ground loop. ___ 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 ___ 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: 268.18.4/703 - Release Date: 2/26/2007 2:56 PM ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus
RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
I guess the descision has to be made early in a nosewheel aircraft whether or not to apply the wheel brake. The Puchatek in particular, in my experience, is a particularly nose heavy nose dragger. With both cockpits empty it will sit on either the nose or tail depending on what you want. With some other types it requires some force or a pilot sitting in the front seat to get it to go on the nosewheel. Condolences to all at Keepit. Regards, Nick Gilbert Lotus Notes Administrator - Hardy Wines Michael Shirley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 27/02/2007 10:55 AM Please respond to Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net cc Subject RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Hi Derek Pushing forward on the stick only increases the nose wheel weight and lessens the likelihood of a change of direction. It must be full back stick, full aileron and full rudder in the direction of the down-wing. What I do not know (regretfully, have been instructing in nose-wheel 2-seaters for 12 years so I should have discovered this by now) is the speed below which the elevator becomes useless. We do teach full back stick 2 pointer touch down and to hold the stick there for the rest of the ground roll - to reduce the vibration damage from the nose wheel on our rough airfield and maximise drag. At some lower speed (after landing) initiating a ground loop becomes problematic. I wish I knew that speed as it delineates decision time to initiate a ground loop. Cheers Michael -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek Ruddock Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 11:07 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Is perhaps the groundloop technique of pushing forward on the stick and applying full rudder inappropriate for a nosewheeel glider? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 10:17 AM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Hi Ian Good point. No one has experimented to establish at what speed a Puchatek (and perhaps many other nose-wheel gliders) lose elevator rudder authority. John Viney agrees we should do this experiment. If the LKSC Puchatek is written off it would be a good opportunity to do this test - I have passed on the idea to the committee. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian McPhee Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 9:56 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality I am not sure but believe there are certain nose wheel gliders that are difficult to ground loop (KRO3A just goes straight when nose wheel is on ground and no way can you steer it). Perhaps as such aircraft come into the country they could be fitted with the dutch wire lifting bar to inside of canopy as part of MAR1 at import (like pull up seat belts etc). The dutch have done engineering and ALL dutch gliders have same. I do know Paul Mathews had same fitted to one of his gliders when flying around Gulcong and said it is easy to get to use. Just a thought...Ian McPhee - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere
RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
Hi Nick And the weight of the front seat pilot has significant elevator authority consequences. Cheers Michael -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 11:31 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality I guess the descision has to be made early in a nosewheel aircraft whether or not to apply the wheel brake. The Puchatek in particular, in my experience, is a particularly nose heavy nose dragger. With both cockpits empty it will sit on either the nose or tail depending on what you want. With some other types it requires some force or a pilot sitting in the front seat to get it to go on the nosewheel. Condolences to all at Keepit. Regards, Nick Gilbert Lotus Notes Administrator - Hardy Wines Michael Shirley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 27/02/2007 10:55 AM Please respond to Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net cc Subject RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Hi Derek Pushing forward on the stick only increases the nose wheel weight and lessens the likelihood of a change of direction. It must be full back stick, full aileron and full rudder in the direction of the down-wing. What I do not know (regretfully, have been instructing in nose-wheel 2-seaters for 12 years so I should have discovered this by now) is the speed below which the elevator becomes useless. We do teach full back stick 2 pointer touch down and to hold the stick there for the rest of the ground roll - to reduce the vibration damage from the nose wheel on our rough airfield and maximise drag. At some lower speed (after landing) initiating a ground loop becomes problematic. I wish I knew that speed as it delineates decision time to initiate a ground loop. Cheers Michael -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek Ruddock Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 11:07 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Is perhaps the groundloop technique of pushing forward on the stick and applying full rudder inappropriate for a nosewheeel glider? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 10:17 AM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Hi Ian Good point. No one has experimented to establish at what speed a Puchatek (and perhaps many other nose-wheel gliders) lose elevator rudder authority. John Viney agrees we should do this experiment. If the LKSC Puchatek is written off it would be a good opportunity to do this test - I have passed on the idea to the committee. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian McPhee Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 9:56 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality I am not sure but believe there are certain nose wheel gliders that are difficult to ground loop (KRO3A just goes straight when nose wheel is on ground and no way can you steer it). Perhaps as such aircraft come into the country they could be fitted with the dutch wire lifting bar to inside of canopy as part of MAR1 at import (like pull up seat belts etc). The dutch have done engineering and ALL dutch gliders have same. I do know Paul Mathews had same fitted to one of his gliders when flying around Gulcong and said it is easy to get to use. Just a thought...Ian McPhee - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch
Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
I have put in a strip at home for landing only. Wire fence at the end. I have not done this yet, but I have the engineering specifications for kitty litter which will haul a mono wheel glider to a stop very fast. Just another alternative. CMcD - Original Message - From: David and Justine Olsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 8:37 AM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality 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- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Parncutt Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 11:10 PM To: 'Peter Creswick'; 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Yes I agree that wirecutters as installed on Pawnee's for instance would offer a significant safety improvement, but it is the glider manufacturers that would need to be persuaded to incorporate this in their designs. Good Luck! 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. Bear in mind that it is often the gliding clubs that end up maintaining these sections of fencing anyway, since its their tugs that probably cause the most wear and tear! John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Creswick Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 10:31 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality And who is going to design them, install them, pay for them, maintain them ? What if the farmer / whoever refuses ? Are you going to force the issue legally and have them mandated somehow ? Good luck. Even if you did, what about the case of an outlanding, with an old, hidden, partial fence, with a few strands, in the middle of a field, in the middle of nowhere ? It is the glider that has to be equipped to deal with the wire, not the wire being equipped / configured to deal with the glider. What is required is a wire cutter arrangement like cropdusters have, which would be far - far better. They have been needed for years, but everyone refuses to consider them. Why ? - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal
Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
Reading flight manual for Grob103c III in emergency section and it says brake off, stick full back and start ground loop 30m before fence. Ian M - Original Message - From: Derek Ruddock [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 11:06 AM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Is perhaps the groundloop technique of pushing forward on the stick and applying full rudder inappropriate for a nosewheeel glider? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 10:17 AM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Hi Ian Good point. No one has experimented to establish at what speed a Puchatek (and perhaps many other nose-wheel gliders) lose elevator rudder authority. John Viney agrees we should do this experiment. If the LKSC Puchatek is written off it would be a good opportunity to do this test - I have passed on the idea to the committee. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian McPhee Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 9:56 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality I am not sure but believe there are certain nose wheel gliders that are difficult to ground loop (KRO3A just goes straight when nose wheel is on ground and no way can you steer it). Perhaps as such aircraft come into the country they could be fitted with the dutch wire lifting bar to inside of canopy as part of MAR1 at import (like pull up seat belts etc). The dutch have done engineering and ALL dutch gliders have same. I do know Paul Mathews had same fitted to one of his gliders when flying around Gulcong and said it is easy to get to use. Just a thought...Ian McPhee - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal with the aftermath of this accident. Mitch. On 25/02/2007, at 9:05 PM, Ron Sanders wrote: Even if you have only got five feet to run before the fence YOU MUST initiate a ground loop. ___ 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 ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription
RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
Hi Ian This assumes full back stick still has an effect! If the aircraft has an airbrake operated main-wheel brake, locking the wheel (as you can in ASK21) may assist a ground loop as the CofG (and skidding main-wheel) is now swinging around the nose wheel firmly attached to the ground. Thus closing the brake might not help. The Puchatek has an ineffective hand operated main-wheel brake and the handle is hard to find below the seat, so would not provide this assistance. Cheers Michael -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian McPhee Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 2:39 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Reading flight manual for Grob103c III in emergency section and it says brake off, stick full back and start ground loop 30m before fence. Ian M - Original Message - From: Derek Ruddock [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 11:06 AM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Is perhaps the groundloop technique of pushing forward on the stick and applying full rudder inappropriate for a nosewheeel glider? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 10:17 AM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Hi Ian Good point. No one has experimented to establish at what speed a Puchatek (and perhaps many other nose-wheel gliders) lose elevator rudder authority. John Viney agrees we should do this experiment. If the LKSC Puchatek is written off it would be a good opportunity to do this test - I have passed on the idea to the committee. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian McPhee Sent: Tuesday, 27 February 2007 9:56 AM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality I am not sure but believe there are certain nose wheel gliders that are difficult to ground loop (KRO3A just goes straight when nose wheel is on ground and no way can you steer it). Perhaps as such aircraft come into the country they could be fitted with the dutch wire lifting bar to inside of canopy as part of MAR1 at import (like pull up seat belts etc). The dutch have done engineering and ALL dutch gliders have same. I do know Paul Mathews had same fitted to one of his gliders when flying around Gulcong and said it is easy to get to use. Just a thought...Ian McPhee - Original Message - From: John Parncutt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Given the amount of incidents which have occurred with aerodrome perimeter fences especially in gliding, perhaps thought should be given to changing the design of these fences to make them more forgiving. Possibilities may include some sort of weak link system in each wire or perhaps sprung sections which may allow the canopy to deflect the wire. I'm sure there is enough ingenuity within the gliding movement to come up with some ideas to make these fences safer whilst still performing their function. John Parncutt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Taylor Sent: Monday, 26 February 2007 8:24 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Good call, Mitch. The only addition I would like to make is that it seems the pilot/instructor had very few options... he was released at low altitude without enough energy to clear the fence, and (thinking through the evidence I have heard) with a downburst happening somewhere behind him. This leaves him with an increasing tailwind, and if he was touching down somewhere near the stall, he is approaching the fence with no control response, in a nosewheel-equipped glider. He DID try to groundloop, with no response. Very tough for all, especially the instructor. BT. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality Fair comment, Ron, however in this case we should perhaps refrain from any judgement (deliberate or otherwise) until a more suitable time. I would like to offer my condolences to the family of the student and let my good friends at LKSC know that they are in my thoughts as they deal
Re: [Aus-soaring] RE: Another fatality
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 confidential information intended only for the use of the addressees named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this email is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify SWAHS immediately. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender except where the sender expressly and with authority states them to be the views of SWAHS. ___ 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
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 confidential information intended only for the use of the addressees named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination , distribution, or reproduction of this email is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify SWAHS immediately. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender except where the sender expressly and with authority states them to be the views of SWAHS. ___ 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___ 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
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 confidential information intended only for the use of the addressees named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination , distribution, or reproduction of this email is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify SWAHS immediately. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender except where the sender expressly and with authority states them to be the views of SWAHS. ___ 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
