Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Dan, what do I need for my Mac to look at the KMZ file?
Thanks, Mitch, but not new. My goal as safety director is to help the club operate as safely as possible. There are always new pilots joining us who may not have the knowledge that you have as a 30 year HG pilot, or me as an airline pilot and a 35 year HG pilot. These new pilots probably aren’t aware that there is a terminal arrival route directly over Crestline at altitudes that are not uncommon for us to reach. It it those pilots I am trying to reach and provide useful information to.
You have many years of valuable experience. I look forward to your help in keeping our club members safe.
What is an SF?
I know I am late to the game here, but the forum should be an extension of the LZ/club in general.
I can show great intelligence when I am working on the car or in the attic doing HVAC work, and still frequently my wife shows even greater intelligence. However, one day some time back in the LZ when she was waiting for me to land she told me that a group of pilots were having a very loud discussion about how F-ing rad the day was and how F-ing cool the conditions are and did you see my F-ing zoom coming in to land, etc, while there were multiple visitors with their kids in the LZ. She was so embarrassed for the visitors she went to the car and waited.
I tell everyone I fly with (737 flying) about hanggliding and many of them do go to the CSS website to look around, being pilots after all. If a visitor who is potentially interested in learning to HG/PG goes to the website and sees foul language and general discord it is quite possible we have lost a new participant, especially if said newbie has a wife and kids and plans to bring his wife and kids with him so they can enjoy the activity as well.
While I have no problem with intelligent people and even showing my intelligence, the forum and the LZ should be welcoming to non-members so that we work to bring in as many folks as possible to HG/PG.
January 30, 2021 at 10:09 AM in reply to: Incident Report: PG vs Bushes Below Marshall Peak Launch, January 21, 2021 #11165I agree David has done a great job. I hope the members support the new safety director with the continuation of moving the club into a safer, more professional (which I use as meaning holding a skill that garners respect of others), more enjoyable environment.
January 25, 2021 at 9:31 PM in reply to: Incident Report: PG vs Bushes Below Marshall Peak Launch, January 21, 2021 #11127Albert is exactly correct.
January 22, 2021 at 5:59 PM in reply to: Incident Report: PG vs Bushes Below Marshall Peak Launch, January 21, 2021 #11089Do we know who the instructor is? What is his explanation of his student not having either membership that is required to learn and fly at AJX?
Very interesting. Years ago, I was flying an Enstrom F28 doing tours of Wash DC and I crossed the river behind a 727 landing at National. I was banked 90 degrees instantly.
In current times, I have been violently rolled in my 737 when taking off behind an Airbus 320/321, which is not given wake turbulence separation because it “isn’t needed.” For some reason the non-heavy Airbus produces much stronger wake turbulence than the 737 or Douglas designs.
Another oddity, the east coast air traffic controllers are much more cognizant of separation when taking off behind a heavy than the west coast controllers. Don’t know why that is the case.
One more day…
Essentially the same as at Lookout Mt.
Lookout isn’t Park Service, it is private, so the owner can set the rules. You pay for a year’s membership, you get a sticker which goes on the rear keel. Visiting pilots get a different color sticker after they pay for the day/week/month pass.
When you pay for your pass you sign that you have read the rules, etc. You break the rules, you lose your flying privileges.
The problem with that plan at AJX is, Lookout has a full time staffed office at launch where you pay for your sticker. There is no office or person in charge who is available at AJX to get the sticker from for visiting pilots, and, no ability to ensure that the rules are followed.
Edit – was writing what Jérôme just explained.
I heard a comment that a particular instructor will not utilize sign offs. If that is the case perhaps not the best instructor for a given individual. Choose another instructor who will offer sign offs appropriate to skill level. Personally I agree with the concept of sign offs. As a helicopter CFI it was up to me when to solo a student. Some were skilled and safe at 8 hours. Others at 20 hours. Overall it sounds like a disagreement with an instructor, not a reason to change safety rules. If a student has not been given a sign off it may be that his instructor is erring on the side of safety until the student has shown more improvement.
David, the updated audit hasn’t been updated to change me from 4 RF 8 to 4 RF 7.
It is interesting to read this thread and consider the recent PG accident at Marshall. Every pilot is a potential mentor. The first time I flew Crestline I went to AJX and walked it and talked to a number of pilots there. Then I drove to Marshall and looked around. Then I drove to Crestline. Because not being able to see landing from launch was new to me, I set up and then started asking the folks about lift patterns, required glide ratios, bailouts, etc. One of the pilots pointed out Ken and said he was highly experienced, talk to him. I listened to Ken’s advice for about 40 minutes and at that point I decided I had enough preparation. I had a successful, enjoyable first flight. I am a H4, but I didn’t know anything about CL/AJX, why wouldn’t I put the effort into site review?
I would suggest that there were other pilots at Marshall who, if asked by the accident pilot, would have have provided the advice “you haven’t flown for a while, you don’t have a current rating, or USHPA membership, or CSS membership, perhaps your first flight back shouldn’t be in gusty summertime midday conditions and perhaps you should get your memberships in order and follow the site rules when you come back so your return to PG is safe and enjoyable.”
As far as the rules hampering safe operations, as Gary says, data would be needed to reach that conclusion. CSS has a small list of rules that if followed would go a long way to keeping everybody as safe as possible. A small group of pilots, primarily visitors and novice PG pilots, do not want to follow those rules. Would eliminating the rules make everyone safer? Without seeing evidence to the contrary I am staying in favor of having rules.
In the airlines the mantra has changed from “operating safely” to “operating at a risk level that is sufficiently low” because nothing in life is 100% safe. Is HG safe? No, but I can make the risk level acceptably low by being prepared and following rules. Following the few rules that are in place would go a long way to making the risk acceptably low for all involved.
I have a H4. I have no designs on a H5. I also have ATP helicopter/MEL. The reason I think the requirements to advance are strict is because unlike the rigid environment that we are in while achieving ATP, the environment for HG/PG is lax and unregulated, and it is appropriate to ensure that HGPG pilots are truly of the skill level that the rating indicates. If a rating allows one to fly from a site or fly a glider that they really shouldn’t then that affects us all relative to insurance issues.
The P2 pilots launching from Crestline with negative consequences is a bit of a low level example of the reasons for strict requirements for advancement.
-
AuthorPosts
