Ok, good to know. Sadly, I don’t know how to guess how many will show except that Andrea and I will be there.

The corrective action said that “Pilot flew behind the ridge due to lack of experience about ridge sites and potential for rotor and sink conditions.” then said the corrective action was to continue with instruction.

The pilot was a student and flying under radio instruction precisely because they lacked experience and might not recognize when they are in danger.  Recognizing that kind of danger must be the instructors responsibility because the student pilot does not have adequate experience.

So, how does a student-pilot flying under instruction get into a rotor behind the mountain?

• Did the instructor see that the student pilot was behind the ridge?
• Did the instructor tell the student pilot that they were too deep and needed to fly towards the front of the mountain?
• Did the radio fail?
• Did the student pilot ignore the instructor?
• Was the student pilot so confused that they did not understand the instructors commands?

How and why did this actually happen?

Having a launch and landing clinic is a great idea. I suggest that we add a new ‘lesson’ to the standard landing clinic: we should pick an out field, put up a flag and have pilots land out in a semi controlled environment.

David, you’ve done an excellent job as safety director and creating a fantastic website. For those members who don’t know, David’s website improvements have dramatically improved our records and eliminated an overwhelming management burden on future directors.

Well done David Webb!

I agree with the other pilots that turbulence needs to be the highest priority when designing the shade structure. We should also consider the impact of the kitchen shade on the North approach. As I remember, there was no risk assessment that considered turbulence or encroachment on the North approach when we built the kitchen and when we added the shade structure over the kitchen.

• What does student pilot mean?
• What was the pilot’s rating? (H1 or H2 or something else?)
• What kind of glider was being flown?
• What launch was used?
• How long was the pilot in the air?
• How many high-altitude solo flights did the student pilot have before this flight that ended in a crash?
• Why was the pilot too high to land at the LZ?
  • Was the setup too high?
  • Should the pilot have noticed they were too high while on base leg or early in the final approach?
  • Did the pilot experience lift during base leg or final approach?
    • If so, when did that lift occur?
    • How and when could the pilot have corrected for for that lift?
  • How high was the pilot on their base leg?
  • What was the pilots altitude and position relative to the training hill when the pilot turned on final approach?

We must probe deeper into these accidents if we expect to learn something.

Rule change: not so fast

Before considering a rule change I’d like to better understand how the P1, P2 and H2 pilots are doing here at AJX/Crestline. Many of us have real concerns with novice pilots because of the perception that they do not appreciate the “power” of the weather and therefore ignore rules on safe flying conditions for their level of experience. We have the impression that novice pilots do not appreciate the performance differences between HGs and PGs and willfully ignore approach patterns.

Novice pilots are not restricted because they lack flying skills. Novice pilot are restricted because they lack the experience that is the basis for sound decision making. On any given weekend afternoon we can have 20 pilots scratching within 1/4 mile of AJX.  How many novice pilots are ready to navigate that scenario? Based on the current perceptions, they are not ready for that scenario.

Perceptions are not good enough. Our local instructors train a lot of new pilots and CSS is in a unique position to understand how well the low hour pilot community is doing and how well CSS and our instructors are managing that community. It’s time we start collecting and assessing that data so we can make informed decisions.