Good post Simon.
I have a bit of trouble using ERC low charts because they
are to a different scale from WAC or Planning charts, so
can't be just overlaid to show you exactly where the
skydiving, gliding or balloon sites are in relation to the
ground features.  ERC charts are mainly for controlled
traffic, as they depict standard routes etc, with very few
geographic references, apart from the occasional large town.
I would like it if the VNC chart series was expanded to
cover a bit more of Australia. These charts show everything
of interest to glider and GA pilots in an easily understood
format.
Cheers,  John G.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon Hackett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: [aus-soaring] Accident in the UK


| Andrew Horton said:
|
| >  Not all power pilots necessarily know that
| >gliders may not monitor the area frequency.
|
| I'd postulate that -most- glider pilots either aren't on
the area
| frequency, and/or don't have a radio turned on anyway -
because they
| aren't required to!
|
| (and I don't disagree with this, by the way. A simpler
life while
| learning to fly - and while flying - is one of the
appealing, and
| positive, things about gliding in my view)
|
| In a way, this may present a higher risk to the power
pilots than to
| the glider pilots, in that at least the glider pilot
is -expecting-
| (I hope!) to see other aircraft in the sky without prior
warning. A
| power pilot, as a natural human thing, can't help but
develop an
| unconscious semi-reliance on the radio warning him to haul
his eyes
| out of the cockpit.
|
| There are other factors in this mix as well in the
dynamics of flying
| in power. Buzzing along the same heading for hours at a
time can
| create a mental form of tunnel vision, and turn the
exercise into one
| of optimising your flying as an exercise in optimising use
of the
| dials in front of you.
|
| This is one of the reasons why I welcome the new breed of
powered
| aircraft that use modern engines and have half the number
of dials,
| and (shock, horror) include innovations like electronic
ignitions and
| similar improvements that allow the pilot to spend more
time looking
| out of the window and less time making up for the
shortcomings of 30
| year old engine design by being a human
mixture-control-feedback-loop
| with that engine.
|
| One thing we -know- as glider pilots is that there is a
direct
| correlation between time spent looking out of the window
(not at the
| dashboard) and decreased collision risk. Not that this is
worth a
| damn if a skydiver comes at you from the one place you
aren't looking
| - directly up.
|
| An 'interesting' (in a macabre sense) statistic to
understand would
| be whether there is any significant incidence of collision
between
| skydivers and powered aircraft.
|
| Since those powered aircraft -are- required to carry (and
consult)
| charts that warn of the presence of skydiving clubs,
and -are-
| required to use (and monitor) the relevant radio
frequency, one would
| suspect that the probability of such accidents would enter
the 'freak
| accident' category.
|
| Postulating for a moment that less powered aircraft find
themselves
| breaking the fall of a skydiver (in the worst possible
sense), what
| we wind up with, in those occasional accidents between
skydivers and
| gliders, is a sense of the price we pay for our simpler
lives. Its a
| very small price in global statistical terms, but its
obviously a
| nonzero price, and we aren't the only ones paying it.
|
| Of course there are plenty of other flying things in the
air at the
| same time as a skydiver too. Ultralights (but I'm sure
they -do- have
| all the 'right' charts). Hang-gliders (but their lower X/C
range
| means their local club operations probably include a
briefing about
| the local skydiving clubs, and there aren't any remote
ones to reach
| in this context), etc etc.
|
| >These charts don't cost all that much and can be obtained
from pilot's shops
| >or from AirServices.
|
| Indeed - but in my gliding training, I don't recall this
being
| pointed out to me at all. I (personally) think it should
have been. I
| (personally) have all of these happy charts because I've
gained a
| motor glider touring rating and they're necessary for me
as I'm
| effectively the GFA version of a day-VFR rated pilot. So
I'm very
| much aware of them.
|
| What I was trying to point out with the comment about
skydiving clubs
| not being marked on a WAC chart, earlier, was not that
these aren't
| marked on other charts (they usually are), but that I'd
assert that
| most glider pilots on a cross country are carrying only a
WAC chart
| because that is all the GFA system has trained them to
expect to
| carry/need. I wonder what proportion of cross country
rated (and
| active) glider pilots have ever SEEN an ERC Low chart.
|
| Which brings us back to how such a horrible accident could
be
| possible in the first place. The answer is that its
entirely
| possible, and probably about the only thing protecting us
from the
| same outcome in Australia *is* the 'big sky' effect. i.e.
its not so
| much 'protecting' us at all, its just lowering the
probability of
| that outcome (substantially - we really don't have a lot
of aviation
| traffic compared to the size of our land mass)
|
| So. Every day, the dice still gets spun when aviation gets
committed
| in uncontrolled airspace.  I don't disagree with this - I
think
| 'uncontrolled airspace' is a tremendously good thing in
the world.
| But (as with everything in gliding), 'uncontrolled'
airspace does
| carry its own form of risks.
|
| I suppose what we, the readers of this list, can take away
from this
| is the notion that cross country planning would be -safer-
if it
| included reference to the ERC low and (where available)
VNC charts.
| There is (in my personal view) a very very good argument
for
| upgrading the level of training that is required for X/C
ratings to
| include a working knowledge of the use of these charts.
|
| My idle speculation is that glider pilots (supervised by
the GFA
| system) may just be the only regular users of this
airspace that are
| -not- necessarily trained in the use of -all- of the
applicable
| charts.
|
| Maybe in the end the reason why I never had this issue
drummed into
| me when I was doing my initial training and then my X/C
training was
| because my training club is nowhere near a skydiving club.
Or
| anything much else, other than another gliding club.
|
| As I said earlier, the club I mostly fly from today, in
Monarto, is
| near multiple skydiving clubs, and all the pilots who
operate from
| Monarto are well aware of them. Being well aware of them,
the notions
| of changing radio monitoring practices etc are less of an
issue -for
| us- (though I still do it) - we just give the skydiving
areas a wide
| berth (at all times, radio equipped or not).
|
| Again the risk factor has to do with the person on that
once in a
| lifetime 1000 km cross country, whose planning includes
reference to
| a WAC chart and nothing else. And the risk factor, lets
face it, is
| -exceptionally low-. But it isn't zero.
|
| As a -reducable- risk, the advice to try to use those
other charts,
| even if not mandatory, is surely sensible. Just as is the
advice to
| try to use the radio, again despite not being mandatory,
because the
| additional information might just help to save your life.
|
| I'm acutely aware that I'm on the edge of stepping on toes
here, in
| being on the edge of stepping on that holy principle that
'we shalt
| not support additional regulation of our sport'.
|
| In so many areas, I agree with this.  But in terms of
adding a little
| bit of -education- into the GFA training processes
about -all- of the
| available aviation charts (not just the WAC chart), I
can't see this
| as a bad thing.
|
| Also, I'm not suggesting more regulation here. Just a bit
more training.
|
| Because regulation might not save your life. A little more
training just might.
|
| Maybe that training onus is already in the MOSP. I don't
know, I'm
| not an instructor, and I haven't read it. Maybe someone
that has
| might comment on what it -does- say about the use of all
available
| aviation charts while planning a cross country flight.
|
| Cheers,
| Simon
| --
|
| ---
| Simon Hackett, Technical Director, Internode Systems Pty
Ltd
| 31 York St [PO Box 284, Rundle Mall], Adelaide, SA 5000
Australia
| Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Web: http://www.on.net
| Phone: +61-8-8223-2999          Fax: +61-8-8223-1777
|
|
| --
|   * You are subscribed to the aus-soaring mailing list.
|   * To Unsubscribe: send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|   * with "unsubscribe aus-soaring" in the body of the
message
|   * or with "help" in the body of the message for more
information.
|
|


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

Reply via email to