Winch launch procedure and accidents

On 4 Sep, 15:59, Andrew Warbrick
<REMOVE_TO_REPLY.awarbr...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> This is mostly an attempt to rename a thread which
> now has NO connection whatsoever with 925's crash on
> Sunday.
>
> As I understand it, the British system was changed
> after accidents where pilots accepted a cable without
> being ready to go and were winched off as a result
> of, for example, scratching their noses.

That was the claim. In reality, I think it was changed because Lasham
had a new CFI who wanted to make an impact on the gliding scene.

I'm all in favour of changing systems from time to time. When people
have to think about what they are doing they are less likely to make
accidents from unwarranted assumptions. I still don't like losing that
degree of control of the launch, though.

Ian

On 4 Sep, 17:31, Rory O'Conor
<REMOVE_TO_REPLY.rory.oco...@.uk> wrote:
> I learnt to glide after the new system was introduced.
> I have two hands and at the start of a winch launch I want one hand on the =
> release and the other on the joystick,

"On" the release? Eeek. People have had nasty accidents that way!

Ian

Depends on your definition of 'on'. I have my fingers
'on' the release at the start of a winch lauch. By
that I mean that I rest two straight fingers on the
top of the release knob, either side of the cable.
What I don't do is curl my fingers round it unless
I need to pull it.

At 19:01 04 September 2007, Ian wrote:
>On 4 Sep, 17:31, Rory O'Conor
> wrote:
>> I learnt to glide after the new system was introduced.
>> I have two hands and at the start of a winch launch
>>I want one hand on the =
>> release and the other on the joystick,
>
>'On' the release? Eeek. People have had nasty accidents
>that way!
>
>Ian
>
>

FYI, quote from the BGA "SUPPLEMENT TO BGA ‘SAFE WINCH LAUNCHING’ LEAFLET" notes
for instructors:

"If the wing drops on the ground the glider may rotate about the wing tip and
cartwheel. If the wing drops in every hundredth launch, there will be one wing
drop accident in 800 wing drop incidents. This is a recipe for complacency and
indeed it is experienced pilots who have the majority of wing drop accidents.
After the wing has dropped the cartwheel can be so rapid that no recovery by
releasing or other means is possible. This hazard must be anticipated and
pre-empted by conducting the launch with the left hand on the release, and
releasing immediately if it is not possible to keep the wings level.

Andrew Warbrick wrote:
> Depends on your definition of 'on'. I have my fingers
> 'on' the release at the start of a winch lauch. By
> that I mean that I rest two straight fingers on the
> top of the release knob, either side of the cable.
> What I don't do is curl my fingers round it unless
> I need to pull it.
>
> At 19:01 04 September 2007, Ian wrote:
>> On 4 Sep, 17:31, Rory O'Conor
>> wrote:
>>> I learnt to glide after the new system was introduced.
>>> I have two hands and at the start of a winch launch
>>> I want one hand on the =
>>> release and the other on the joystick,
>> 'On' the release? Eeek. People have had nasty accidents
>> that way!
>>
>> Ian
>>
>>
>
>
>

On Sep 5, 8:03 am, Ian <ian.gro...@> wrote:
> On 5 Sep, 01:31, Dan G <...@> wrote:
>
> > You do not attach a cable to the glider until it is ready to fly. All
> > checks complete, nothing left to do.

Yes, precisely. I don't see any problems with that. I'll go further
and
state that I would need to be convinced that anything else was safer.

> Which is fine in an ideal world. But it doesn't always work like that.
> Sometimes there are delays, and a safe system will take account of
> that possibility.

Er, what's the problem with releasing the cable if there's a delay?
In what way isn't that a "safe system"?


> > You
> > have one hand on the stick and the other holds the release. You will
> > not have time to go feeling for the release if you need it.

That's my opinion, too. As an early solo neophyte who recently
experienced
my first low-level winch failure, heads down while groping for the
cable
release would have been too high a workload. In addition, there is a
significant chance I would have grabbed the airbrake instead of the
release.


> > It's hard to see how you could screw up if you follow these simple
> > procedures. I don't give a toss who invented them or why - they're
> > safe, and that's all that matters to me.

I'm interested in
1) if I follow those standard rules, what are the remaining
potential
problems and avoidance procedures

2) what's the relative probability and severity of problems with/
without
hand on the release

I suspect the (2) is the reason for the BGA selecting the current
rules.

The onus is firmly on anybody challenging the current rules to
convince others that the rules should be changed.


> It's when people start thinking that the rules will keep them safe
> that accidents happen.

True, but of course that has only tangential relevance to whether
or not the rules are good.

On 5 Sep, 10:37, Tom Gardner <tgg...@> wrote:
> On Sep 5, 8:03 am, Ian <ian.gro...@> wrote:
>
> > On 5 Sep, 01:31, Dan G <...@> wrote:
>
> > > You do not attach a cable to the glider until it is ready to fly. All
> > > checks complete, nothing left to do.
>
> Yes, precisely. I don't see any problems with that. I'll go further
> and
> state that I would need to be convinced that anything else was safer.

Agreed - as long as the ground crew (signaller, driver, anyone else
involved at the site in question) are also ready to go.

> > Which is fine in an ideal world. But it doesn't always work like that.
> > Sometimes there are delays, and a safe system will take account of
> > that possibility.

> Er, what's the problem with releasing the cable if there's a delay?
> In what way isn't that a "safe system"?

How long a delay? Ten seconds? Twenty? A minute? What if the ground is
muddy and the pilot doesn;t want to make someone grovel in the mud
again to reattach? What if an impatient instructor (I have seen this)
is saying "Don't drop the cable, this won't take long".

Yes, in an ideal world we could hook up and go. I just think the final
word on whether to start the launch should rest with the pilot in
charge ... and in a world where occasional delays between hook-up and
launch are inevitable, that means the pilot should initiate the launch
after the hook-up.

My reasons for liking the "Up slack" and "All out" signals from the
pilot are because too many signallers are rotten at deciding when to
do the transition (although most are fine). I have in the past pulled
off because the signaller was giving "All out" too soon, and I'll do
it again if I have to ...

> > It's when people start thinking that the rules will keep them safe
> > that accidents happen.
>
> True, but of course that has only tangential relevance to whether
> or not the rules are good.

I don't agree. No rules which are followed mindlessly are good.

Ian

On 5 Sep, 09:41, Rory O'Conor
<REMOVE_TO_REPLY.rory.oco...@.uk> wrote:

> I do take my hand off the release towards the end of
> the ground run.

Why.

> Please could you expand as to what nasty accident might
> result due to me having my hand ON the release at the
> beginning of the ground run.

Glider hits a bump in a field. You pull the release.

Ian

On Sep 5, 2:40 pm, Ian <ian.gro...@> wrote:
> On 5 Sep, 10:37, Tom Gardner <tgg...@> wrote:
> > On Sep 5, 8:03 am, Ian <ian.gro...@> wrote:
> > > On 5 Sep, 01:31, Dan G <...@> wrote:
> > > > You do not attach a cable to the glider until it is ready to fly. All
> > > > checks complete, nothing left to do.
>
> > Yes, precisely. I don't see any problems with that. I'll go further
> > and
> > state that I would need to be convinced that anything else was safer.
>
> Agreed - as long as the ground crew (signaller, driver, anyone else
> involved at the site in question) are also ready to go.

If anyone isn't ready to go, then the launch doesn't start.
If anyone thinks there's a problem, they can stop the launch.
I don't see any difficulty in that, and I can't conceive of
anything else being appropriate.


> > > Which is fine in an ideal world. But it doesn't always work like that.
> > > Sometimes there are delays, and a safe system will take account of
> > > that possibility.
> > Er, what's the problem with releasing the cable if there's a delay?
> > In what way isn't that a "safe system"?
>
> How long a delay? Ten seconds? Twenty? A minute?

Reasonable question. I would have thought that there was
no single correct answer and doesn't need to be;
judgement is required from everybody.

My only rule of thumb is that if people's attention might
wander away from thinking about the launch and/or
"eventualities", then drop the cable. Thus a minute is
probably usually OK, whereas 5 minutes isn't.

Other opinions welcome, of course.

> What if the ground is muddy and the pilot doesn't
> want to make someone grovel in the mud
> again to reattach?

The pilot is a twit if they let that sway a safety decision.

> What if an impatient instructor (I have seen this)
> is saying "Don't drop the cable, this won't take long".

It depends on what "this" is, and I'd apply my "attention
test", as above.

> Yes, in an ideal world we could hook up and go. I just think the final
> word on whether to start the launch should rest with the pilot in
> charge ...

Nope, it rests with everybody involved in the launch, in that all
must be happy before proceeding. In particular, the pilot can't
adequately see "all clear above and behind", nor the cow that
has just wandered onto the strip, just over that little hump
halfway down the strip :)

> and in a world where occasional delays between hook-up and
> launch are inevitable, that means the pilot should initiate the launch
> after the hook-up.

See above.

> My reasons for liking the "Up slack" and "All out" signals from the
> pilot are because too many signallers are rotten at deciding when to
> do the transition (although most are fine). I have in the past pulled
> off because the signaller was giving "All out" too soon, and I'll do
> it again if I have to ...

I've never seen that, but if I did then I'd follow your action
(hopefully
without hesitation :)


> > > It's when people start thinking that the rules will keep them safe
> > > that accidents happen.
> > True, but of course that has only tangential relevance to whether
> > or not the rules are good.
>
> I don't agree. No rules which are followed mindlessly are good.

The rule can be good even if it is mindlessly followed. Most
of the time I mindlessly follow the rule to drive on the left side
of the road :)

But both of us think the reason for the rule should be understood
before it is mindlessly followed!

On Sep 5, 2:43 pm, Ian <ian.gro...@> wrote:
> On 5 Sep, 09:41, Rory O'Conor
>
> <REMOVE_TO_REPLY.rory.oco...@.uk> wrote:
> > I do take my hand off the release towards the end of
> > the ground run.
>
> Why.
>
> > Please could you expand as to what nasty accident might
> > result due to me having my hand ON the release at the
> > beginning of the ground run.
>
> Glider hits a bump in a field. You pull the release.

Embarrassing, possibly, but that wouldn't worry me.
I'd appreciate examples of *nasty* consequences.

On Sep 5, 10:05 am, Tom Gardner <tgg...@> wrote:
> On Sep 5, 2:43 pm, Ian <ian.gro...@> wrote:
>
> > On 5 Sep, 09:41, Rory O'Conor
>
> > <REMOVE_TO_REPLY.rory.oco...@.uk> wrote:
> > > I do take my hand off the release towards the end of
> > > the ground run.
>
> > Why.
>
> > > Please could you expand as to what nasty accident might
> > > result due to me having my hand ON the release at the
> > > beginning of the ground run.
>
> > Glider hits a bump in a field. You pull the release.
>
> Embarrassing, possibly, but that wouldn't worry me.
> I'd appreciate examples of *nasty* consequences.

The only nasty consequences I can think of happen if you pull the
release at 0-300 feet altitude. There is one less Discus (pilot was
OK) in the world because of this just recently. So start the ground
run with the hand on release, but remove it at liftoff.

Todd