Wayne Carter wrote:
You may be pointing the way, Ben! Perhaps what is needed is just a
centrally located DATABASE (GFA?, maybe WIKI?) of known hazards. The
database could be updated by any pilot and not always with warnings,
maybe a "great feild south of the farmhouse, nice cold beer inside" or
similar. This database will grow over the years and represent a great
part of the country we may outland in! As a side, this thought came to
me with the recent release of the ATSB information of a crashed
chopper, killing all aboard. They had hit a wire, game over instantly.
We are now flying around with these wonderful gadgets capable of vast
amounts of detail, why not include more information about the ground?
Yes, I know its not a substitute for good lookout.
I have many reservations about the construction and maintenance of a
database that covers hazards, let alone out landing sites.
For the hazards, my concerns centre around to accuracy, completeness and
maintainability of the database. To be usable, the database requires a
very high integrity and even then I am not going to bet my life on it.
Adding the 'mapped' hazards (eg towers, HT power lines etc) to a
database in FLARMs would be a big enough job in terms of database
construction and maintenance. To try to add additional hazards such as
unmapped power lines right on down to SWERs would, I suggest be far too
huge a job and essential without benefit: I know that it cannot change
the way I fly or instruct, for if the DB advised me there was a hazard
in a particular paddock, that warning is not 100% accurate (as the DB
cannot ever be 100%). There might be no hazard or the hazard might be in
the next door paddock. So I cannot change my out landing checks in terms
of paddock selection nor my alertness for 'hidden' wires as I descend on
finals. It is the same if I select a paddock clear of warnings - there
still might be a hazard there.
Furthermore, the presence of a hazard in a paddock does not necessarily
make that paddock a poor choice in which to land - it may in fact be the
best paddock around, provided one lands away from the hazardous area.
This means that having the information places me in no better position
that not having it. In fact having the information could well cause a
pilot early in their out landing career to select an inappropriate
paddock over a more appropriate paddock that is tagged as 'hazardous' in
the DB.
Moving on to the discussion of adding out landing sites to a DB, it is
worth considering the discussion that was held at the GQ pilots' meeting
on this subject at the the Kingaroy State comps in 2004. Prior to that
comp, an extensive effort had been made to identify all the various
strips (ag, station etc) out on the Darling Downs and tag them with GPS
coordinates. This list was used in the preceding Easter comp. The
pilots' meeting determined that these be removed from the way point list
for all future comps as there was absolutely no guarantee that the
strips were usable. Only ERSA listed strips or active gliding sites
(such as DDSC) were to be included in the comp turn point database as
these were the only ones that could be guaranteed to offer a safe
landing site.
It is certainly useful to know of usable strips around the place - I
always check on this when visiting a site (for comps or otherwise).
However, local knowledge is critical on this issue - a station strip
that has been well maintained and used for years can deteriorate
suddenly and invisible (eg a fence across it). This is even more true
for random out landing paddocks. Whilst there's nothing to stop the
creation of an out landing site database (you can find the GQ strips way
points on the GQ comps page for example), it doesn't actually help you
select an out landing place as any of these strips might be unlandable.
Again, the danger of an out landing database is that an early out
landing pilot could be seduced away from using a nice safe paddock into
using a 'tagged' out landing site that is a far worse choice than the
paddock that would be picked by an uninfluenced out landing decision.
I realise that this all comes down to training, but time and again we
see pilots making decisions that fly in the face of their training - and
it causes accidents, injuries and even death (cf last year's accident at
Darling Downs).
Should we be providing pilots with information that may well influence
their decision in the wrong way without actually providing any real upside?
--
Robert Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+61 (0)438 385 533 http://www.hart.wattle.id.au
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
