Woodstock?

[RedBaron]

Extracting everything from a day to achieve an epic flight is the stuff pilots like Tom are made of.

And it can't always be done without pushing the envelope, taking chances. You may not like it, you may sit in your armchair with a computer in your lap talking about the 3 P's, but boy-oh-boy, it ain't gonna distract me from whom I'd rather fly with.

[RichH]

One of my suggestions would be to offer a cross country clinic probably in the off season to go over safe practices..Its obvious to me that there appears to be a need to review skills and strategies for your over the back flights ..I would suggest that who ever is the current flight director of the club take that on as one of his tasks for this year..I believe the club has a very capable and well respected flight director who would be an excellent mentor for this topic.

[RichH]

Extracting everything from a day to achieve an epic flight is the stuff pilots like Tom are made of.

And it can't always be done without pushing the envelope, taking chances. You may not like it, you may sit in your armchair with a computer in your lap talking about the 3 P's, but boy-oh-boy, it ain't gonna distract me from whom I'd rather fly with.

Hmm, I love it ..that pilot you are referring to has a ton of experience and is a very skilled pilot! very respected by many who have been in this sport and he has accumulated more hours in flying all than you will probably ever hope to achieve my friend!! I would take his advice to the bank on this topic ..

[XCanytime]

...cavalier attitudes can become hazardous attitudes .

Bacil

I assume you're not referring to me?

marc

Marc,
A general statement, not directed at anyone in particular, but quite relevant in safety discussions. And I just so happen to be the flight director of the club . Per Rich H.'s suggestion, one could peruse my flight report from Sunday at the Pulpit, where I discuss the LZ options and the information I used to choose the final LZ. Janni, good to hear from you . Bacil

[mcgowantk]

What a discussion on xc. Rather than focus on one person's flight, maybe we should talk about decisions when flying, especially flying xc.

For me, one criteria for a good flight is to do no harm. That means staying out of airspace, not landing in crops or with horses, or making the landowner where I land angry. Sometimes that means ending a good flight early. I once left a thermal at 4000k msl to land because I could see just one field downwind where I could land and I was concerned there would be horses in that field.

Occassionally, a landowner gets upset when I land on his property and I have to admit it ruins my whole flight. I have near a highway but I set up my apprach to stay away from traffic (and the road was pretty deserted). I would not consider a highway median as an acceptable lz mainly because I wouldn't want to Accept the responsibility if I caused an accident. And let me re-assure new pilots that you don't have to be that aggresssive to have long xc flights. I had lots of options my entire 83 mile flight a couple of weeks ago.

Another short story. Going xc from Sandia a few years ago, I landed in a field that was part of the only farm (and area of potential lzs) for 10 miles. I landed half a mile from the road and carried my stuff out to the road before the rancher came by. He was spitting mad. It seeems a pilot landed near his barn a few years before and spooked his prize stallion. The horse broke a leg trying to jump a fence to get away. He asked me why I thought I could just land my glider wherever I wanted and damn the consequences. Nothing I could say would make that right and I re-committed to the do no harm rule.

I am the first to admit I am not perfect but I hope that other pilots will keep this discussion in mind when flying. And sorry for the misspellings. I am travelling and typing this on my iPhone.

Take care and fly far!

Tom McGowan
My hope is that other pilots fly safe, use good judgement and follow the do no harm rule.

[markc]

If a pilot endangers him/herself, or others, via a pattern of repeated poor judgments, then I think that
most people would say "Whoa there, you really need to take a step back and think about things!".

But at the same time, it is legitimately possible for conditions to change radically and dramatically
during a flight, putting a pilot into a situation that was not anticipated.

Can one ensure that such an event will never happen? If you believe that risks can be managed
to the point where they are zero, then I suppose so.

But is that really possible?

Don't launch in: 20mph? 15mph? 10mph? 5mph? . Don't cross a stretch of trees more than: 10 miles long?
5 miles? 1 mile? Don't try to jump streets with a crosswind of more than: 15mph? 10mph? 5mph?
Don't launch from the Pulpit pad if the winds are more cross than: 5 degrees? 20 degrees? 30 degrees?
Give up on that low save and start your approach when you are 800' AGL? 400' ? 200' ?

I try to live by the "Never be out of range of an LZ" adage. But let's face it, sometimes sh*t happens,
and sometimes we just screw up because we're human.

A good pilot is going to learn from mistakes. If not, perhaps another pilot's constructive suggestions
will help open his/her eyes.

But please, let's not pretend that everything is cut-and-dried, and if something goes wrong, then the
pilot was clearly acting recklessly. Things just aren't always that simple, IMHO.

So I would suggest that anyone with an urge to point a finger at someone else's actions first contact
the pilot in question, and learn more via an actual *gasp* conversation. Perhaps your urge will turn out
to be completely warranted.... But then again, maybe it won't be.

MarkC

[Flying Lobster]

This conversation reminds me a lot of the "Off with his head!" ranting about Kevin Carter's lack of skills and qualifications as a H3 some years back. We know how that one played out.

marc

[RichH]

It sure sounds like Im wasting my breath here..Come on guys get a clue..you can justify any unfortunate circumstance away if you want, and the situations will continue..No one wants to see some one get hurt..Maybe its time for someone to stand up and say that some of the actions that have occured recently begs us to take a look at how well prepared we are as a flying community ..Maybe we need to ramp up our clinics or our observer program?..Anyone who has flown XC enough in Va or MD knows that the area is a checker board full of potential landing sites..to say that landing in a highway median was this pilots only choice under the circumstances is really far fetched..as I mentioned earlier since coming back into the sport there appears to me to be lacking good active mentorship for upcoming pilots..Im not talking instructors here you have great ones in Rich and John to name a few but once a guy gets his 2 or 3 who's helping him/her along?? I was lucky I had great mentorship with pilots such as Woody Jones, Les King and Jerry Neilson and Ward Odenwald..Names a few of you may recognize but these guys were always there for me to ask questions and take me under their wing..I flew with them often and when I made a mistake they pointed it out..and not always in a friendly way I might add!! If you want a fun and safe flying career..you never stop learning..ever ..and you will never be a perfect pilot!! but we can minimize our exposure through continued education...Its up to you guys..continue with the shit happens banter or actually do something about it!!

[theflyingdude]

What a discussion on xc. Rather than focus on one person's flight, maybe we should talk about decisions when flying, especially flying xc.

For me, one criteria for a good flight is to do no harm. That means staying out of airspace, not landing in crops or with horses, or making the landowner where I land angry. Sometimes that means ending a good flight early. I once left a thermal at 4000k msl to land because I could see just one field downwind where I could land and I was concerned there would be horses in that field.

Occassionally, a landowner gets upset when I land on his property and I have to admit it ruins my whole flight. I have near a highway but I set up my apprach to stay away from traffic (and the road was pretty deserted). I would not consider a highway median as an acceptable lz mainly because I wouldn't want to Accept the responsibility if I caused an accident. And let me re-assure new pilots that you don't have to be that aggresssive to have long xc flights. I had lots of options my entire 83 mile flight a couple of weeks ago.

Another short story. Going xc from Sandia a few years ago, I landed in a field that was part of the only farm (and area of potential lzs) for 10 miles. I landed half a mile from the road and carried my stuff out to the road before the rancher came by. He was spitting mad. It seeems a pilot landed near his barn a few years before and spooked his prize stallion. The horse broke a leg trying to jump a fence to get away. He asked me why I thought I could just land my glider wherever I wanted and damn the consequences. Nothing I could say would make that right and I re-committed to the do no harm rule.

I am the first to admit I am not perfect but I hope that other pilots will keep this discussion in mind when flying. And sorry for the misspellings. I am travelling and typing this on my iPhone.

Take care and fly far!

Tom McGowan
My hope is that other pilots fly safe, use good judgment and follow the do no harm rule.

Good post, Tom, and it goes right to the heart of this discussion. The philosophy of "Do no harm" is sadly lacking in many of the posts on this thread. Violating airspace, choosing questionable LZ's to add a few miles to a flight, launching from sites without the necessary permits or required paperwork, disregard for landowner concerns, etc. is indicative of ego-driven and selfish attitudes that some pilots seem to display on a regular basis and can be detrimental to the flying community as a whole.

JR

[markc]

to say that landing in a highway median was this pilots only choice under the circumstances is really far fetched..

I'm not suggesting that this was the only available choice Rich; I wasn't there and so I don't know
what happened.

My point: Until one has spoken/emailed/PM'd a pilot who has made what appears to be a poor
decision, how can you, or I, or anyone, truly know what the circumstances were?

The place that all such discussion should begin is with a QUESTION: "Hey, I heard about your
flight, and that you [Insert-Event-Here]. What's up with that, what were you thinking my friend?"

I applaud efforts to encourage safety and to point out poor decisions. Heck, if you ever think
I've done something stupidly risky, then I'd want to hear from you Rich, because your experience has
weight. Feedback from flying buddies can help keep you honest with yourself!

But it's very easy for pseudo-conversations (text-based forums like these aren't true conversation)
to degenerate into flame-wars, it happens all the time. Hence my suggested "Start with a question"
approach.

MarkC

PS: To prevent good ideas from getting lost in topics like these, I also recommend creating dedicated
topics for them. So if you want to (say) encourage a more active club mentoring system, then by all
means, start a topic for it and get the ideas flowing! That would be great!

[theflyingdude]

..Anyone who has flown XC enough in Va or MD knows that the area is a checker board full of potential landing sites..to say that landing in a highway median was this pilots only choice under the circumstances is really far fetched...

C'mon Rich - everyone knows how difficult it can be to find suitable LZ's in our area, particularly when you're flying something like a paraglider, are an expert pilot, and have more airtime and x-c miles than all the other pilots in the region combined (or something like that).

I will add one more thought and then I'm done with this discussion. Shit happens and anyone can find themselves in a situation where the best laid plans of mice and men have gone awry. We have to accept that as a necessary evil in the world of chance in which we operate. I have been in situations where the field I was choosing as an LZ suddenly became unacceptable for various reasons (power lines, fences, horses, etc) and have had to go with a Plan B or Plan C. Then it becomes more of a matter of safety and survival, than one of convenience or personal glory, but we can usually minimize and mitigate those situations by planning ahead, flying responsibly and considering the ramifications of our actions. I take no issue with pilots who choose to push the envelope for the"epic flight", as long as the risks they choose to accept effect only them and don't have a potentially detrimental impact to the flying community, at-large.

And to RichH, Tom McGowan, Bacil and Dave - thanks for showing that there is some light shining in the darkness!

JR

JR

[XCanytime]

From Tom M. - "I would not consider a highway median as an acceptable lz mainly because I wouldn't want to accept the responsibility if I caused an accident. And let me reassure new pilots that you don't have to be that aggresssive to have long xc flights". Spot on. This discussion is not personal, it's business. This discussion is very valuable to any prospective XC pilot listening in, and also a refresher for experienced pilots. It's not a flame war, it's an objective and logical discussion (so far ). Bacil

[mcgowantk]

By the way, I agree an xc clinic would be fun. I am always willing to help new xc pilots too. I try to post when I am going out flying and would welcome others to join me. Like Rich I had great mentors and would like to pass their knowledge on.

I am heading to the Big Spring meet but other than that hope to fly after the next cold front (if it ever comes).

Tom McGowan

[RichH]

Good comments Tom and good luck at Big Spring!!

[Flying Lobster]

This thread has bugged me so much that I just gotta unload.

It has been a classic display of ignorance, hypocrisy and holier-than-thou-my-shit-don't-stink pontificating.

You guys ASSUME you know all the circumstances of the incident.
You guys ASSUME you know the "laws" violated.
You guys ASSUME you know how you would have done better.

The safest, most predictable xc flight is the one you never take!

I'm sure nobody on this thread has had to make a sketchy landing while going xc.
And while we're on the subject of safety and the law, I'm sure none of the people on this thread have, say, flown to cloudbase (a very clearly defined FAA law governing far 103 aircraft as opposed to a vague "over crowds") or launched a low-performance wing into very strong conditions.

Yes, we're all so perfect.

Bullshit.

marc

[theflyingdude]

This thread has bugged me so much that I just gotta unload.

It has been a classic display of ignorance, hypocrisy and holier-than-thou-my-shit-don't-stink pontificating.

You guys ASSUME you know all the circumstances of the incident.
You guys ASSUME you know the "laws" violated.
You guys ASSUME you know how you would have done better.

The safest, most predictable xc flight is the one you never take!

I'm sure nobody on this thread has had to make a sketchy landing while going xc.
And while we're on the subject of safety and the law, I'm sure none of the people on this thread have, say, flown to cloudbase (a very clearly defined FAA law governing far 103 aircraft as opposed to a vague "over crowds") or launched a low-performance wing into very strong conditions.

Yes, we're all so perfect.

Bullshit.

marc

You missed the whole point of this thread. No one is claiming perfection and by the same token, I'm willing to bet you any amount you want to choose, that no one on this thread had ever landed on an interstate median, much less one as busy as I-66. There is simply no reasonable comparison between putting yourself at risk and putting others at risk, not to mention the very high profile way in which it was done. You may consider me sanctimonious, but it's safe to say that most of us wouldn't consider landing on the median of a busy interstate any more than we would land in school yard filled with children. It's simply not a suitable option, but if you (or anyone) has more information about the circumstances of this incident that you feel somehow justifies the pilot's actions, then by all means, please share them with us.

JR

[Flying Lobster]

Good point.
We must assume guilt and the burden is on the accused to prove innocence in the court of pinheads.

Tom C did send me an e-mail stating that on his initial approach into his selected lz it became apparent that it was not safe. He was, however, in reach of the median which was 3 glider spans wide, endlessly long, and clear. He landed uneventfully. Cops were there. They said it was OK.

Now I have a question for you: how many automobile accidents/fatalities are you aware of as a result of a glider executing a safe landing in a highway median? Don't twist my words and make it sound like advocate landing in a median--I don't.

marc

[Flying Lobster]

Here's an interesting link which is very apropos

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/po ... &th&emc=th

marc

[theflyingdude]

Good point.
We must assume guilt and the burden is on the accused to prove innocence in the court of pinheads.

Tom C did send me an e-mail stating that on his initial approach into his selected lz it became apparent that it was not safe. He was, however, in reach of the median which was 3 glider spans wide, endlessly long, and clear. He landed uneventfully. Cops were there. They said it was OK.

Now I have a question for you: how many automobile accidents/fatalities are you aware of as a result of a glider executing a safe landing in a highway median? Don't twist my words and make it sound like advocate landing in a median--I don't.

marc

I'm unaware of anyone else ever landing on an interstate median so there isn't much of a sample to draw from. Let me turn this around and ask you a question - do you think the wake from a passing tractor-trailer driving down the interstate at 70 mph could cause control issues for a paraglider on final approach?

JR

[Flying Lobster]

Good point.
We must assume guilt and the burden is on the accused to prove innocence in the court of pinheads.

Tom C did send me an e-mail stating that on his initial approach into his selected lz it became apparent that it was not safe. He was, however, in reach of the median which was 3 glider spans wide, endlessly long, and clear. He landed uneventfully. Cops were there. They said it was OK.

Now I have a question for you: how many automobile accidents/fatalities are you aware of as a result of a glider executing a safe landing in a highway median? Don't twist my words and make it sound like advocate landing in a median--I don't.

marc

I'm unaware of anyone else ever landing on an interstate median so there isn't much of a sample to draw from. Let me turn this around and ask you a question - do you think the wake from a passing tractor-trailer driving down the interstate at 70 mph could cause control issues for a paraglider on final approach?

JR

Maybe--so would a surface to air missile, a meteorite or lightning strike, or a mattress detaching and flying off of Bubba's pick-up. All hazards that a pilot might, though unlikely, encounter on any flight. What's your point?

marc

[theflyingdude]

Good point.
We must assume guilt and the burden is on the accused to prove innocence in the court of pinheads.

Tom C did send me an e-mail stating that on his initial approach into his selected lz it became apparent that it was not safe. He was, however, in reach of the median which was 3 glider spans wide, endlessly long, and clear. He landed uneventfully. Cops were there. They said it was OK.

Now I have a question for you: how many automobile accidents/fatalities are you aware of as a result of a glider executing a safe landing in a highway median? Don't twist my words and make it sound like advocate landing in a median--I don't.

marc

I'm unaware of anyone else ever landing on an interstate median so there isn't much of a sample to draw from. Let me turn this around and ask you a question - do you think the wake from a passing tractor-trailer driving down the interstate at 70 mph could cause control issues for a paraglider on final approach?

JR

Maybe--so would a surface to air missile, a meteorite or lightning strike, or a mattress detaching and flying off of Bubba's pick-up. All hazards that a pilot might, though unlikely, encounter on any flight. What's your point?

marc

My point is, was, and will always be that the pilot's decision to land on the median of a busy interstate put. not only himself at risk (which is fine), but also the general public at risk. Legalities aside, can you not imagine a scenario where the pilot gets waked by passing vehicles while on final approach over a narrow median, loses control, and ends up in the travel lanes? What do you suppose the consequences of that might be? Or do you really believe that's just as unlikely as the examples you used, none of which involve hazards to anyone but the pilot? In my 30+ years of flying, I've never really considered a mattress flying off of Bubba's pick-up as a real threat (and I fly in West Virginia), but I'll be sure to keep a look out from now on, assuming a meteorite doesn't get me first.

And, yes, you clearly are trying to defend the pilot's actions despite the obvious knucklehead nature of his decision. Me thinks thou doth protest a bit too much - perhaps you were that certain pilot who went over the back on a long x-c from Cumberland many moons ago and landed on the median of a certain highway.

[Flying Lobster]

Again--you are ASSUMING about the nature of this incident.
Do you know what time of day it was--where it was--or what the traffic actually was? I've been on 66 many times when there wasn't a vehicle in sight in either direction.Your position makes sense if the pilot clearly made a choice that put others at risk for the sake of mere convenience. But that was not the case--the pilot felt he was in clear jeopardy and made a decision to make a SAFE approach into a median. I would do the same without hesitation if I felt that the odds were good that I could do so with overall less risk--even if it was possible that Elvira driving down the road might see me, think aliens were invading, and crash.

marc

[Flying Lobster]

Maybe you should track down pilots of those planes--even airliners--that sometimes do forced landings ON a highway. Talk about total irresponsibility!

marc

[theflyingdude]

Maybe you should track down pilots of those planes--even airliners--that sometimes do forced landings ON a highway. Talk about total irresponsibility!

marc

Another great comparison, since we all know that paragliders, like airplanes and airliners, need an adequate runway on which to land, not to mention the fact that they hardly ever have to anticipate out-landings when flying away from their point of origin.

You're right about one thing, we don't know exactly where this occurred, but if he was more than about ten miles east of the Blue Ridge, then he may have also busted Dulles airspace or was close to doing so. Of course, that probably wouldn't matter since it might impinge on the quest for an epic flight.

Say what you will or provide whatever lame rationalizations and/or off-the-wall comparisons you choose, landing on the median of I-66 was a dangerously stupid decision that could have had serious consequences. The fact that it worked out for the pilot in this instance doesn't change that.

We're clearly not going to agree and there seems little point in continuing this debate. You know what they say about arguing with fools.

JR

[Flying Lobster]

Be careful--accusing people of things you're not sure about or have the facts to back up can end up getting you into trouble one day.

marc