Yes Kevin I agree that forgetting rules may part of the problem, perhaps we should be re-addressing this with the pilots as part of the annual check process. You raise an interesting point with a smaller club where gliders rarely share thermals and there is very little or no other traffic.
Lookout is just as important at a small club with little traffic as at a busy club like ours. Lookout proceedures are a major emphasis in our training program and a pilot will definately not be allowed to fly solo if we feel is their lookout is in any way lacking. The same emphasis in training should be placed on lookout at ANY site irrespective of size or traffic, the risk of complacency at a site with little traffic if anything places the pilot at greater risk! Even the quietest site can have other VFR traffic fly through at some time and what if the pilot visits a busy club, they will likely fly with the same learned habits and place both themselves and others at risk. The large range of different club sizes and style of operations in Australia makes it even more important that uniform and correct teaching proceedures are applied across the board. John Parncutt -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kevs Drafting Sent: Saturday, 18 June 2005 8:33 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] 200 feet separation I have been gliding for 25+ years and was always taught the 200' rule. Instructing over the past 10 years I believe I have passed on this information. Being a small club it has been extreamly rare to have 2 gliders within site of one another let alone share a thermal. This makes it hard to reinforce this rule, or demonstrate how to join a thermal with another glider. Lookout is another one that is hard to reinforce when there is 'never' any possible conflict. For this reason despite a student being taught the 200' rule over time with no cause to remember it they may well forget that they had ever learnt it. Kevin Roden John Parncutt wrote: >It does not matter whether it is "and" or "or" It is quite clear what the >intent of this regulation is, and that is the maintainance of 200ft >seperation between sailplanes IN ANY Direction. To make some argument of >ambiguity when the alternate understanding is clearly a nonsense serves no >purpose to this discusion. > >Lets take this back to basics, which is that there is an appears to be a >lack of knowledge in some elements of the the gliding community regarding >the basic rules of the air. The extent of this problem and its cause, needs >to be determined. I suspect that some clubs may not be placing sufficient >emphasis on this subject during their training process, which leads to the >question what other things could be slipping through the net. > >We have an organisation within the Gliding movement whose responsibility is >to ensure that teaching practices across all clubs in Australia follow >standards set be the GFA. Issues such as this should be addressed by the >NGS, if we can't ensure that the National training standards are adhered to, >we run the risk of having them taken out of our control. > >John Parncutt > > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ken >Dawber >Sent: Saturday, 18 June 2005 6:06 PM >To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. >Subject: [Aus-soaring] 200 feet separation > > >Unfortunately, its not always the intent of a rule that is >taken when a >rule is looked at in a court of law. What the rule actually >says is >often given more weight. > >With the current separation rule as shown below, ie. "200 feet >vertically AND horizontally" then we glider pilots are >required never to >fly at the same height as another aircraft, regardless of >horizontal >separation!!!! > >Once one aircraft is up in the air, no other aircraft can >get higher >than that aircraft without breaking this rule!! > >Shouldn't that 'and' be an 'or'. We only need to be >separated by the >vertical separation OR the horizontal separation, not by both. > >Regards > >Ken Dawber > > > >>Christopher H Thorpe wrote: >> >> >> >>>Mike's comment is correct and remains so. GFA Operational Regulations - >>>Section 9.22 states:- >>> >>>"A sailplane shall not be flown so close to another aircraft as to >>>create a >>>collision hazard. GFA requires that a separation from other >>>sailplanes, and >>>tug aircraft towing sailplanes, of at least 200 feet vertically and >>>horizontally be maintained." >>> >>> > > >_______________________________________________ >Aus-soaring mailing list >[email protected] >To check or change subscription details, visit: >http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring > > >_______________________________________________ >Aus-soaring mailing list >[email protected] >To check or change subscription details, visit: >http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring > > > > _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
