In the days since Bill died, I've done a year's worth of thinking about responsibility for our safety. We've all said and heard the mantra that ultimately, everything is the pilot's responsibility. The buck stops with you---and nobody else.
I certainly agree that we are all responsible for our own actions and safety. But something about this bothers me. Please hear me out a moment without having kneejerk reactions.
Everyone says we are all responsible for ourselves. Yet everyone also readily admits that we aren't perfect, and that we will (not "we might") make mistakes. My dilemma is: how to reconcile the fundamental fact that ultimate responsibility lies with a flawed "system:" humans who make mistakes? Something just doesn't seem right about that.
Bill screwed up. We all know that. But in the time since his accident, I have been completely unable to ignore the fact that several people were standing around him at launch and nobody noticed he was unhooked.
In many conversations here and elsewhere online, people have poured forth with countless suggestions for preflight and launch routines. Yet there is one thing I've heard very little about: the shared responsibility of others on launch with the pilot.
If any of us ever decides to do a hang check or wire crew for a pilot on launch, we should never do it unless we are willing to accept part of the responsibility for that pilot's life. If the pilot yells "Clear!" and you hang on to that side wire for a second too long, forcing the pilot into a turn that results in a fatal crash...do we all blame the pilot and just walk away?
Likewise, if we are standing on launch with the intent of assisting a pilot---in any way---and that pilot launches unhooked---we must accept our share of the responsibility for his death.
I'm sure some people are already attempting to read between my lines and may be jumping to the conclusion that I'm trying to blame the launch crew for Bill's death. Absolutely not. I repeat: Bill screwed up bigtime! But in our post-accident discussions, we need to spend just as much time discussing the responsibility of launch crew as we do discussing pilot responsibility.
I'm certain Bill's launch crew---whoever they are---are dealing with their own pain and guilt. I don't seek to worsen that by assigning blame to them.
Everyone else can think what they want, but from now on---as long as I remain in this sport---my own personal code of responsibility will be this: When I fly, I accept full responsibility for my own actions and safety. Likewise, I will never assist or crew for any other pilot unless I'm completely comfortable knowing that I must accept a share of the responsibility for that pilot's injury or death in the event of an accident.
Ultimate responsibility---in my opinion---lies jointly with pilot and crew. Not with the pilot alone. If you don't agree, you shouldn't be helping someone launch...and you should launch alone. That's my belief.
Scott
Thoughts on responsibility...
Moderator: CHGPA BOD
-
Flying Lobster
- Posts: 1042
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 4:17 pm
Scott, I understand your desire to get some meaning out of this event--but I think you're looking at this from the wrong direction.
Simply put, the wire crew shares no responsibility in the safety of a pilot's launch. You sign a waiver specifically absolving them from any (except possibly in the case of gross negligence, but be prepared to spend some money on good lawyers). This is necessary to enable our access to foot-launch freeflight. In fact, the pilot really bears responsibility for the safety of the wire crew.
I feel pretty certain that none of the pilots at the meet will ever wire anyone again without checking a pilot's hang strap. I mentioned earlier that vigilence is key. I think it would be a good idea to adopt standards--whether personal or at club level--for wire crew techniques, but there should never be an implied shared responsibility for a pilot's readiness to fly.
We like to talk about complex fail-safe systems for preventing these kinds of accidents--but it's a strange fact that many of these accidents would have been preventable "If only we (I) had..." In other words, usually its a obvious thing that is easy to check but was somehow missed.
So here's a simple (optional) idea: how about adopting a red streamer "remove before flight" (ie attaching harness) and attaching it to the keel/hang strap like you see in GA?
marc
Simply put, the wire crew shares no responsibility in the safety of a pilot's launch. You sign a waiver specifically absolving them from any (except possibly in the case of gross negligence, but be prepared to spend some money on good lawyers). This is necessary to enable our access to foot-launch freeflight. In fact, the pilot really bears responsibility for the safety of the wire crew.
I feel pretty certain that none of the pilots at the meet will ever wire anyone again without checking a pilot's hang strap. I mentioned earlier that vigilence is key. I think it would be a good idea to adopt standards--whether personal or at club level--for wire crew techniques, but there should never be an implied shared responsibility for a pilot's readiness to fly.
We like to talk about complex fail-safe systems for preventing these kinds of accidents--but it's a strange fact that many of these accidents would have been preventable "If only we (I) had..." In other words, usually its a obvious thing that is easy to check but was somehow missed.
So here's a simple (optional) idea: how about adopting a red streamer "remove before flight" (ie attaching harness) and attaching it to the keel/hang strap like you see in GA?
marc
Great Googly-moo!
-
theflyingdude
- Posts: 356
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 11:40 pm
- Location: Cumberland, MD
I couldn't disagree more.
If I stuff a launch or forget to hook in, it's my life and my fault. If I yell "clear" and fail to confirm that you've let go of my sidewires, it's my fault and mine alone (barring some extraordinary circumstance). If I ask for help launching or offer help launching, there are no strings attached.
If I'm on someone's wire crew, I always try to confirm they're hooked in and are thru their leg loops, but they should never rely upon me or anyone else for their safety because in my opinion that's a recipe for disaster. We live in a society where people don't want to take responsibility for their actions. That's why there are so many lawyers and so few landowners wanting to risk the liability of allowing people to use their property for what they perceive are dangerous activities.
Scott, I know you're emotionally distraught over Bill's death, but I think you're shifting the responsibility (or a portion thereof) from where it belongs. Life is dangerous and flying, particularly so, but in the end no one here gets out alive. I certainly won't ask for your help launching if you feel you have a personal obligation for my safety and well-being by doing me that favor. If you need help launching, I'm more than willing to offer my assistance with the understanding that it's your life and you're ultimately the one responsible for it. I don't mean for that to sound harsh. I simply believe that to be the reality of the situation.
If I stuff a launch or forget to hook in, it's my life and my fault. If I yell "clear" and fail to confirm that you've let go of my sidewires, it's my fault and mine alone (barring some extraordinary circumstance). If I ask for help launching or offer help launching, there are no strings attached.
If I'm on someone's wire crew, I always try to confirm they're hooked in and are thru their leg loops, but they should never rely upon me or anyone else for their safety because in my opinion that's a recipe for disaster. We live in a society where people don't want to take responsibility for their actions. That's why there are so many lawyers and so few landowners wanting to risk the liability of allowing people to use their property for what they perceive are dangerous activities.
Scott, I know you're emotionally distraught over Bill's death, but I think you're shifting the responsibility (or a portion thereof) from where it belongs. Life is dangerous and flying, particularly so, but in the end no one here gets out alive. I certainly won't ask for your help launching if you feel you have a personal obligation for my safety and well-being by doing me that favor. If you need help launching, I'm more than willing to offer my assistance with the understanding that it's your life and you're ultimately the one responsible for it. I don't mean for that to sound harsh. I simply believe that to be the reality of the situation.
Thoughts on responsibility...
I've been following this thread with interest, but, I'm skeptical about
any of the proposed solutions being all that effective; when someone is
at a "comp", the conditions look good, spectators are asking questions,
etc; there will always be a series of events that can (will) undermine
the procedures. Nothing is foolproof.
The best thing that we have going for us (as a club), is that we *do*
have a safety-minded culture, especially at fly-ins, where most
everyone providing launch support will ask for safety checks,
pre-flights, double-check lines, etc. The one suggestion that I find
most reasonable though, is to try to adopt the phrase "hook-in check"
in lieu of "hang check". I can certainly see where a visiting pilot
_might_ misinterpret the question "Do you need a hang check?" as a
query regarding the length of his hang straps and his hang-height over
the basetube. The better question should be "Have you done a hook-in
check?" (Followed by visually confirming that he IS hooked in.)
Just a thought.
~Ralph
any of the proposed solutions being all that effective; when someone is
at a "comp", the conditions look good, spectators are asking questions,
etc; there will always be a series of events that can (will) undermine
the procedures. Nothing is foolproof.
The best thing that we have going for us (as a club), is that we *do*
have a safety-minded culture, especially at fly-ins, where most
everyone providing launch support will ask for safety checks,
pre-flights, double-check lines, etc. The one suggestion that I find
most reasonable though, is to try to adopt the phrase "hook-in check"
in lieu of "hang check". I can certainly see where a visiting pilot
_might_ misinterpret the question "Do you need a hang check?" as a
query regarding the length of his hang straps and his hang-height over
the basetube. The better question should be "Have you done a hook-in
check?" (Followed by visually confirming that he IS hooked in.)
Just a thought.
~Ralph
The wire crew has to live with their own actions and the results - that's a heavy enough burden without making them officially responsible. How much personal responsibility they accept is up to them, and the pilot has the right to accept or reject wire crew based on past experience.
Forcing liability on wire crew will mean you may end up with no wire crew at all. We all care and we will all try our best, but the actions of the wire crew lay with the pilot. If you were on Bill's wing, I don't think you'd like the feeling if everyone was pointing the finger at you for a single miss-step that cost his life. It was his responsibility to ask for a Hang Check...asking him to perform one is an act of friendship. As wire crew I also have the right to walk away if personally I don't like the responsibility, but I have no right to blame those who stay and perhaps make a mistake that I may have made if I stayed.
He had the air of an experienced pilot, and experienced mountain pilots would never go to launch without a hang check. I think we may have learned something crucial here, and collectively many of us who were with him as he ventured into the mountains may feel that we let him down by not instilling the proper habits in him; but if so that's our own feeling that should not be imposed upon us by the community.
Forcing liability on wire crew will mean you may end up with no wire crew at all. We all care and we will all try our best, but the actions of the wire crew lay with the pilot. If you were on Bill's wing, I don't think you'd like the feeling if everyone was pointing the finger at you for a single miss-step that cost his life. It was his responsibility to ask for a Hang Check...asking him to perform one is an act of friendship. As wire crew I also have the right to walk away if personally I don't like the responsibility, but I have no right to blame those who stay and perhaps make a mistake that I may have made if I stayed.
He had the air of an experienced pilot, and experienced mountain pilots would never go to launch without a hang check. I think we may have learned something crucial here, and collectively many of us who were with him as he ventured into the mountains may feel that we let him down by not instilling the proper habits in him; but if so that's our own feeling that should not be imposed upon us by the community.
Brian Vant-Hull
-
batmanh3
Bottom Line: As a pilot of a single pilot aircraft, you and you alone are responsible for your aircraft. Be that a jet, a helicopter or a hang glider, it is ultimately in your hands when you commit to aviation. Having a launch crew that notices something that you missed is a blessing, not an obligation. The preflight and pretakeoff checks are no one elses responsibility other than the pilot-in-charge. Some responsibility is delegated to Observers when dealing with Hang-2s, but the final decision to fly is still in the pilots hands. If you are not willing to accept 100% responsibility or 100% blame as a pilot then it is best that you walk away from flying now while you still have the ability too. That is harsh, but that is the reality of calling yourself a pilot. What we do is a huge responsibility and often I find that hang glider pilots take it much more for granted than true aviators. This isn't a game folks, you can go out and kill yourself very easily. It only takes once and there is no room for second place. I went thru this last year with my accident and I had to give great thought into making sure I was ready to get back in the saddle. This may come across in a very cold demeanor, but I have spent my entire adult life putting myself up against this test. In hang gliding, you don't have to worry about enemy fire or landing in hostile areas. You don't have to worry about a squadron of aircraft, not knowing which aircraft you're going to fly that day or what maintenance has been done during previous flights. All you have to worry about is one hang glider with usually one pilot associated to it. You can't count on someone to catch your mistakes any more than blaming your driving instructor because you backed into a pole. Take accountability for your actions and treat every flight as if your life depends on it. IT DOES!
Chris
Chris
I'm going to echo JR's sentiments here.
Launch crew have absolutely NO shared responsibility.
I'm not saying that I don't feel a sense of responsibility to my fellow pilots. I will continue to ask pilots that I see at launch: "are you hooked in?" ... or I may choose not to assist someone launch if I am not comfortable with the conditions.
As for "how to reconcile the fundamental fact that ultimate responsibility lies with a flawed 'system:' humans who make mistakes?" My answer: it is unreconcilable. We only have the choice to fly or not.
I like Marc's suggestion of using the red flagging. I also like Steve's suggestion of using a brightly colored parachute bridle sheath.
Whatever works.
Launch crew have absolutely NO shared responsibility.
I'm not saying that I don't feel a sense of responsibility to my fellow pilots. I will continue to ask pilots that I see at launch: "are you hooked in?" ... or I may choose not to assist someone launch if I am not comfortable with the conditions.
As for "how to reconcile the fundamental fact that ultimate responsibility lies with a flawed 'system:' humans who make mistakes?" My answer: it is unreconcilable. We only have the choice to fly or not.
I like Marc's suggestion of using the red flagging. I also like Steve's suggestion of using a brightly colored parachute bridle sheath.
Whatever works.
'Spark
Chris,batmanh3 wrote: ... What we do is a huge responsibility and often I find that hang glider pilots take it much more for granted than true aviators
You struck a nerve. I don't diagree with anything else you've said, but I will argue (to the death) that Hang Glider pilots are "True Aviators". Think about the history of flight, who flew first and in what form of aircraft. I would also add that paraglider pilots and powered paraglider pilots are also "true aviators".
Come on out and fly the mountains and you will see the truth of it.
'Spark
agree
I agree that it is ultimately the pilots responsibility. With that being said..one of the great things about hang gliding is the community. You have to know when you go flying that if something unforseen happens that your fellow pilots are going to respond in the correct manner. It may not be our responsibility but it is part of our community to watch out for each other.
-
batmanh3
Point taken Spark - what I meant by that was formally trained aviators. When I look at the methods of instruction ... both foot and tandem, nearly 100% of the "training" is on "HOW TO FLY." There is a VERY small portion of training formally given to Meterology, Risk Mitigation, Crew Factors, Emergency Management, etc. When I say "True Aviators", I mean the ones that are trained to do it from the bottom up. There is more to "aviation" than just how to control the aircraft. Not that it makes us any less dangerous, but the knowledge base between someone who has trained in aviation vice someone whose only flying experience is hang gliding is vast. We informally give lectures on being safe, on how to thermal, etc, but I would be willing to say that 75-80% of the knowledge I have gained from hang gliding is initiating conversation with another pilot or reading one of Pagens books. There is no mandatory training in hang gliding other than how to take off, how to land, and how to control the aircraft in between. Although I'm not advocating FAA guidelines on how to fly a hang glider, I am stating without a doubt that formally trained pilots are much safer and much more cognizant than those who have no formal training. That doesn't mean that pilots with thousands of hours don't make mistakes either. We get lax and make bonehead decisions that we regret afterwards. The problem is a lot of "hang glider only" pilots make decisions based on minimal input or minimal experience. Once we leave terra firma, all pilots are at the same risk. Its the repetitive training that is ingrained from long hours of study and flying that prepares any pilots. Hang glider pilots who have been around and doing it for years even the playing field, but the newly trained pilots are at a severe disadvantage.
Checklist
"REMOVE BEFORE FLIGHT" I have been using a checklist for years in my job. 6,800 hours of preflight, cruise and postflight. Although I work in the back of the aircraft, it takes constant monitoring and fighting complacency to keep it all together. "Happy Pilots Bring Cash" was drummed into my head by Richard Hays, and I think it is the best training I have received. Gene
Hooked In
Pitch
Balance
Clear
Hooked In
Pitch
Balance
Clear
Okay, now that I've been resoundingly vetoed by everyone...let me try again, and put it a different way.
Bill accidentally killed himself. No question about that. I agree---the pilot has ultimate responsibility. But nobody can deny that if Bill's wire crew had been more observant...if they had cared more...he might still be alive.
Bill's fatal error disturbs me deeply. The "blindness" of his wire crew also disturbs me. I want to do anything I can to not only focus awareness on the importance of the pilot's safety checks...but also do anything I can to focus awareness on the importance of the wire crew being vigilant.
In another thread, Matthew said...
From all appearances, Bill's launch crew were mindless drones. They obviously never looked for his carabiner, and they were obviously content to let Bill do their thinking for them. This is inexcusable. Am I blaming them? Yes. Am I blaming Bill? Yes. I blame them both, for they both displayed a lack of adequate care. To exonerate the wire crew under the smokescreen of "it's the pilot's responsibility" is a cop-out in my opinion. And to snivel "What good is blaming anyone?" is a cop-out too. Blame serves a valuable purpose: to strengthen the need to avoid it by being vigilant.
Wire crew members should certainly defer to the pilot's preferences regarding communication and glider handling. But when it comes to critical items like looking to see if the pilot is hooked in, it's not an "option" for the wire crew. It is essential---just as it is for the pilot.
I was talking to Holly about all this, and she pointed out that in today's ridiculously litigious atmosphere, the word "responsible" is often interpreted as "legally liable for." I do NOT mean it in that way. I do NOT believe that wire crew members should ever be prosecuted for a pilot's death.
What concerns me though is that people often assume the opposite: that "not legally liable for" means "not responsible." I may be talking semantics---but the concept is very important. The point I want to make is that wire crew members must feel that it is imperative to look out for the safety of a pilot---as imperative as if they were legally liable---even if they are not. It's that important.
I'm sorry if I seem hot under the collar about this. Yes, I'm still hurting over Bill's death. I'm mad as hell at Bill for being so terminally careless...and I'm also mad as hell at his wire crew for being so terminally careless. And if anyone says "It's all Bill's fault," I'd say "Come tell me that when one of your good friends plunges to his death."
I'm healing, and I understand the need to be positive. But in every accident like this, there is a place for anger. Telling people it's "useless" to be angry is failing to recognize a part of the normal grieving process.
Scott
Bill accidentally killed himself. No question about that. I agree---the pilot has ultimate responsibility. But nobody can deny that if Bill's wire crew had been more observant...if they had cared more...he might still be alive.
Bill's fatal error disturbs me deeply. The "blindness" of his wire crew also disturbs me. I want to do anything I can to not only focus awareness on the importance of the pilot's safety checks...but also do anything I can to focus awareness on the importance of the wire crew being vigilant.
In another thread, Matthew said...
Thank you Matthew!!! You captured my point perfectly. As wire crew members, we are not mindless drones waiting to be commanded by the pilot. We are individuals who care just as much about the safety of the pilot as we care about our own safety. We are a community, and it takes a community to ensure our collective safety. In spite of what the rugged individualists in the club may think, if you rely exclusively on yourself for your own safety, you will run into trouble someday.Yes, doing a hook-in check as well as a pre-flight is the pilot's responsibility. But if someone asks me for launch assistance (wire crew) or even asks for help moving to launch, I'm going to ask if they've done a hang check and then I'm going to look to make sure that the pilot is hooked in. I'm still going to do this even if I'm asked to grab a wire after a person has moved to launch. If I'm part of the launch crew then I feel responsible. So if you need help from me at launch, expect me to ask if you've done a hang check and for me to look to make sure you are hooked in...I hope others asked to assist in a launch will confirm a hook in of the pilot. I think that the way we watch each other's back reinforces the importance of doing a hang check and making sure that you are hooked in.
From all appearances, Bill's launch crew were mindless drones. They obviously never looked for his carabiner, and they were obviously content to let Bill do their thinking for them. This is inexcusable. Am I blaming them? Yes. Am I blaming Bill? Yes. I blame them both, for they both displayed a lack of adequate care. To exonerate the wire crew under the smokescreen of "it's the pilot's responsibility" is a cop-out in my opinion. And to snivel "What good is blaming anyone?" is a cop-out too. Blame serves a valuable purpose: to strengthen the need to avoid it by being vigilant.
Wire crew members should certainly defer to the pilot's preferences regarding communication and glider handling. But when it comes to critical items like looking to see if the pilot is hooked in, it's not an "option" for the wire crew. It is essential---just as it is for the pilot.
I was talking to Holly about all this, and she pointed out that in today's ridiculously litigious atmosphere, the word "responsible" is often interpreted as "legally liable for." I do NOT mean it in that way. I do NOT believe that wire crew members should ever be prosecuted for a pilot's death.
What concerns me though is that people often assume the opposite: that "not legally liable for" means "not responsible." I may be talking semantics---but the concept is very important. The point I want to make is that wire crew members must feel that it is imperative to look out for the safety of a pilot---as imperative as if they were legally liable---even if they are not. It's that important.
I'm sorry if I seem hot under the collar about this. Yes, I'm still hurting over Bill's death. I'm mad as hell at Bill for being so terminally careless...and I'm also mad as hell at his wire crew for being so terminally careless. And if anyone says "It's all Bill's fault," I'd say "Come tell me that when one of your good friends plunges to his death."
I'm healing, and I understand the need to be positive. But in every accident like this, there is a place for anger. Telling people it's "useless" to be angry is failing to recognize a part of the normal grieving process.
Scott
-
batmanh3
Scott -
I understand that you are upset as are all of us. But if you are going to count on your wire crew to catch your mistakes then you should not be a pilot. Flat out, cold and harsh. As I stated before, IF AND ONLY IF they are able to catch a mistake that you missed due to a lack of concentration, then you have received a blessing and been saved from your own irresponsibility. I hope that when I miss something that someone saves my ass, but I would never blame them if they missed something because I did. You are the pilot of your aircraft and that is how the game is played. Live with it or walk away. When a friend dies, it takes a piece away of each and every one of us. But the only thing you can do it grieve for the loss and learn from what happened and move forward. It is your choice how you move forward, but never lose the lesson that was given at the cost of a friend.
Chris
I understand that you are upset as are all of us. But if you are going to count on your wire crew to catch your mistakes then you should not be a pilot. Flat out, cold and harsh. As I stated before, IF AND ONLY IF they are able to catch a mistake that you missed due to a lack of concentration, then you have received a blessing and been saved from your own irresponsibility. I hope that when I miss something that someone saves my ass, but I would never blame them if they missed something because I did. You are the pilot of your aircraft and that is how the game is played. Live with it or walk away. When a friend dies, it takes a piece away of each and every one of us. But the only thing you can do it grieve for the loss and learn from what happened and move forward. It is your choice how you move forward, but never lose the lesson that was given at the cost of a friend.
Chris
Accidents happen in flying activity. We can analyze each accident and make rules to prevent a duplicate of the accident we analyze and do that thousands of times. Eventually the number of accidents goes down but the number of people who can actually fly decreases because of the rule and regulations. No matter how many rules we make We will never stop accidents from happening.
Bottom line is that if we want to enjoy the freedom of our sport we must accept the responsiblity for our own actions and not lay that responsibility on any other person. The pilot is totally responsible for his flight period.
This is not to say that as pilots we should not look out for each other when we go to fly. Just that we are the person ultimately responsible for any accident that occurs.
Joe
Bottom line is that if we want to enjoy the freedom of our sport we must accept the responsiblity for our own actions and not lay that responsibility on any other person. The pilot is totally responsible for his flight period.
This is not to say that as pilots we should not look out for each other when we go to fly. Just that we are the person ultimately responsible for any accident that occurs.
Joe
Thoughts on responsibility...
Scott,
It sounds like you are lashing out at all wire crews in generally, on
the basis of the actions of one specific crew; by posting on this
forum, you are borderline calling all the pilots in the CHGPA careless
and irresponsible, simply because we, as a group, won't allow a pilot
to shirk his own responsibilities for safety; and that's just not
fair. We *do* care about our fellow pilots, every bit as much as you
want us to; most pilots, when acting as wire crew, *will* insist on a
hang check, before allowing a pilot up on launch. I can't remember
getting up on launch (except when I tried to self-launch) that someone
didn't stop me and ask if I needed a hang-check before continuing the
launch process. And that attention doubles during fly-ins and special
events. I think that, as a group, we are *very* safety conscious, and
to imply otherwise is, as I said, incredibly unfair. The fact is, Bill
forgot to hook in at the Pulpit Fly-in, and was stopped by a CHGPA wire
crew; that _should_ have scared the heck out of him; apparently, it
didn't.
The bottom line is this: if YOU are going to run off of a cliff that is
higher than you can safely fall from, then YOU had better have a plan
to make sure that you aren't going to fall, and YOU had better make
sure that every piece of that plan is in place.
~Ralph
It sounds like you are lashing out at all wire crews in generally, on
the basis of the actions of one specific crew; by posting on this
forum, you are borderline calling all the pilots in the CHGPA careless
and irresponsible, simply because we, as a group, won't allow a pilot
to shirk his own responsibilities for safety; and that's just not
fair. We *do* care about our fellow pilots, every bit as much as you
want us to; most pilots, when acting as wire crew, *will* insist on a
hang check, before allowing a pilot up on launch. I can't remember
getting up on launch (except when I tried to self-launch) that someone
didn't stop me and ask if I needed a hang-check before continuing the
launch process. And that attention doubles during fly-ins and special
events. I think that, as a group, we are *very* safety conscious, and
to imply otherwise is, as I said, incredibly unfair. The fact is, Bill
forgot to hook in at the Pulpit Fly-in, and was stopped by a CHGPA wire
crew; that _should_ have scared the heck out of him; apparently, it
didn't.
The bottom line is this: if YOU are going to run off of a cliff that is
higher than you can safely fall from, then YOU had better have a plan
to make sure that you aren't going to fall, and YOU had better make
sure that every piece of that plan is in place.
~Ralph
[Said in the spirit of friendly discussion, not defensively. ]
Chris...I do not count on my wire crew to catch my mistakes. I do understand that I am responsible for my own safety.
My point is simply that a wire crew member should never willfully disregard the pilot's safety. While ultimate responsibility lies with the pilot, this is not a license for the wire crew member to perform their job poorly.
As I said, wire crew members are not mindless drones. Every wire crew member should clearly understand what is expected of them in ALL launches---to include backing up the pilot's own safety checks. It's called redundancy, and increases overall safety.
Some might say being sure the wire crew understands what is expected of them is the pilot's responsibility, and I agree---the pilot should effectively brief the wire crew members. But anyone who regularly wires pilots off should not need to be told to check the pilot's harness connection. This should be automatic, and not need to be said.
Scott
]Chris...I do not count on my wire crew to catch my mistakes. I do understand that I am responsible for my own safety.
My point is simply that a wire crew member should never willfully disregard the pilot's safety. While ultimate responsibility lies with the pilot, this is not a license for the wire crew member to perform their job poorly.
As I said, wire crew members are not mindless drones. Every wire crew member should clearly understand what is expected of them in ALL launches---to include backing up the pilot's own safety checks. It's called redundancy, and increases overall safety.
Some might say being sure the wire crew understands what is expected of them is the pilot's responsibility, and I agree---the pilot should effectively brief the wire crew members. But anyone who regularly wires pilots off should not need to be told to check the pilot's harness connection. This should be automatic, and not need to be said.
Scott
-
batmanh3
I don't believe any pilot willfully overlooks another pilots mistake. If he doesn't see it, or takes a pilots word that the hang check is complete than the responsibility still lies on the pilot. At the Pulpit fly-in, Bill assured Cragin & I twice that he had performed a hang check. If it hadn't been so blatantly obvious that he wasn't hooked in, I would of taken him for his word. If we are to pass any blame aside from the pilot himself then I ask first of all, why was there not a safety director/flight director at a competitive team challenge and second of all, why was a brand new 2nd time in the mountain pilot allowed to be the first pilot off? I've been hang gliding for over 4 years now and I haven't once been the wind dummy. Pilot choice or pilot error? I'm my professional opinion, a lot of balls were dropped aside from the fact that a junior pilot failed to have an ingrained preflight/pretakeoff routine which led to him being unhooked on launch twice within a month, the second time leading to his completely unnecessary death. You want to point blame? Then back your questions up LONG before he was ever on that mountain launch.
Wire Crew
Scott,
Performing a hook-in check is the pilot's responsibility. That said, you need to realize how diligent CHGPA members are at confirming hang checks when assisting pilots as wire crew at our sites since Bob Gillisese's incident years ago. If you had bothered to come out and fly the mountains more than a few times you would have seen this. If you had come out to the mountains as a hang 2 you would have been involved in hundreds of assisted launches as part of a wire crew and performed and witnessed countless hang checks. It's not like this in the rest of the country or the world. You are on your own. But I feel the experience of always asking about another pilot's hook-in status reinforces one's own diligence in doing a hook-in check. Unfortunately pilots who don't regularly fly the local mountain sites aren't subjected to this sort of anal retentiveness on hang checks and don't have experience in doing a hang check and a hook-in check. If you ever go out to the training hill, you'll be doing lots of individual step-through hook in checks. Again, tow pilots who don't fly our sites regularly and don't go out to the training hill don't have experience with hang checks and hook-in checks when carrying a glider to launch. That's another reason anyone who wants to fly the mountains as a hang three needs to come out to the mountains regularly and hit the training hill from time to time.
Matthew
Performing a hook-in check is the pilot's responsibility. That said, you need to realize how diligent CHGPA members are at confirming hang checks when assisting pilots as wire crew at our sites since Bob Gillisese's incident years ago. If you had bothered to come out and fly the mountains more than a few times you would have seen this. If you had come out to the mountains as a hang 2 you would have been involved in hundreds of assisted launches as part of a wire crew and performed and witnessed countless hang checks. It's not like this in the rest of the country or the world. You are on your own. But I feel the experience of always asking about another pilot's hook-in status reinforces one's own diligence in doing a hook-in check. Unfortunately pilots who don't regularly fly the local mountain sites aren't subjected to this sort of anal retentiveness on hang checks and don't have experience in doing a hang check and a hook-in check. If you ever go out to the training hill, you'll be doing lots of individual step-through hook in checks. Again, tow pilots who don't fly our sites regularly and don't go out to the training hill don't have experience with hang checks and hook-in checks when carrying a glider to launch. That's another reason anyone who wants to fly the mountains as a hang three needs to come out to the mountains regularly and hit the training hill from time to time.
Matthew
<sigh> This is hopeless. Expecting people to actually READ what I said is clearly unrealistic. As usual, people are making all sorts of absurd assumptions about what I said. Please---if you're going to assert I said something, do me (and everyone else) a favor, and QUOTE the word(s) from my post that you believe support your assertion.
There was absolutely nothing in any of my posts "lashing out against wire crews in general," and certainly not against anyone in CHGPA wire crews. Nowhere did I state (or imply) that CHGPA wire crews are out to lunch.
I said, "The pilot is responsible for their own safety, AND wire crews need to be vigilant."
Others interpreted this as "Scott is avoiding responsibility and lashing out at CHGPA wire crews."
WHAT???? How the hell did anyone make that quantum leap? Can folks here read English???
Is it impossible for the pilot to accept full responsibility while ALSO asking the wire crew to be vigilant and provide redundant safety checks?
Everyone---please clean your glasses, put in your contacts, turn off the TV, and/or wipe the smudges off your monitors and read this again:
I believe and agree the pilot bears ultimate responsibility for his/her own safety. AND: wire crew members should NOT need to be told by the pilot to check that the pilot is hooked in.
NOTE I did NOT say "The pilot should avoid doing his/her own safety checks, and instead should rely on the wire crew for such checks." I said BOTH the pilot and wire crew should do these checks.
Does anyone have a problem with that? Does anyone here think the wire crew should not be allowed to check the pilot's connections? Further, does anyone here think that Bill's wire crew checked his connections? Okay then. So was Bill's wire crew an excellent, top-notch wire crew?
Oh, and by the way, I'll repeat something else I said earlier (but was obviously missed): BILL SCREWED UP BIGTIME. His death was HIS OWN FAULT. AND...(Ready? here it comes again! Brace yourself!) Bill's wire crew appeared to take no initiative to check his connections on their own.
Is everyone here saying that's okay? Is your position that a wire crew that stands there mutely waiting for commands is a top-notch, safe crew? (If so, that's pathetic---and it's got nothing to do with me or any other pilot accepting responsibility for themselves.)
And whoever got the bizarre notion in their head that I'm attacking CHGPA pilots who serve on wire crews needs to take a remedial reading course. I've never said or even suggested that. I've seen and personally benefited from the excellent assistance of CHGPA pilots as wire crew. We're not talking about CHGPA here, so quit being so paranoid as to interpret every word I say as an attack on CHGPA, okay?
Scott
There was absolutely nothing in any of my posts "lashing out against wire crews in general," and certainly not against anyone in CHGPA wire crews. Nowhere did I state (or imply) that CHGPA wire crews are out to lunch.
I said, "The pilot is responsible for their own safety, AND wire crews need to be vigilant."
Others interpreted this as "Scott is avoiding responsibility and lashing out at CHGPA wire crews."
WHAT???? How the hell did anyone make that quantum leap? Can folks here read English???
Is it impossible for the pilot to accept full responsibility while ALSO asking the wire crew to be vigilant and provide redundant safety checks?
Everyone---please clean your glasses, put in your contacts, turn off the TV, and/or wipe the smudges off your monitors and read this again:
I believe and agree the pilot bears ultimate responsibility for his/her own safety. AND: wire crew members should NOT need to be told by the pilot to check that the pilot is hooked in.
NOTE I did NOT say "The pilot should avoid doing his/her own safety checks, and instead should rely on the wire crew for such checks." I said BOTH the pilot and wire crew should do these checks.
Does anyone have a problem with that? Does anyone here think the wire crew should not be allowed to check the pilot's connections? Further, does anyone here think that Bill's wire crew checked his connections? Okay then. So was Bill's wire crew an excellent, top-notch wire crew?
Oh, and by the way, I'll repeat something else I said earlier (but was obviously missed): BILL SCREWED UP BIGTIME. His death was HIS OWN FAULT. AND...(Ready? here it comes again! Brace yourself!) Bill's wire crew appeared to take no initiative to check his connections on their own.
Is everyone here saying that's okay? Is your position that a wire crew that stands there mutely waiting for commands is a top-notch, safe crew? (If so, that's pathetic---and it's got nothing to do with me or any other pilot accepting responsibility for themselves.)
And whoever got the bizarre notion in their head that I'm attacking CHGPA pilots who serve on wire crews needs to take a remedial reading course. I've never said or even suggested that. I've seen and personally benefited from the excellent assistance of CHGPA pilots as wire crew. We're not talking about CHGPA here, so quit being so paranoid as to interpret every word I say as an attack on CHGPA, okay?
Scott
Chris---thank you. I agree 100% with every word you said below! Except the following: "If it hadn't been so blatantly obvious that he [Bill] wasn't hooked in, I would of taken him for his word." Really!? You wouldn't even have glanced at his carabiner to make sure it was attached?
Scott
Except the following: "If it hadn't been so blatantly obvious that he [Bill] wasn't hooked in, I would of taken him for his word." Really!? You wouldn't even have glanced at his carabiner to make sure it was attached? Scott
batmanh3 wrote:I don't believe any pilot willfully overlooks another pilots mistake. If he doesn't see it, or takes a pilots word that the hang check is complete than the responsibility still lies on the pilot. At the Pulpit fly-in, Bill assured Cragin & I twice that he had performed a hang check. If it hadn't been so blatantly obvious that he wasn't hooked in, I would of taken him for his word. If we are to pass any blame aside from the pilot himself then I ask first of all, why was there not a safety director/flight director at a competitive team challenge and second of all, why was a brand new 2nd time in the mountain pilot allowed to be the first pilot off? I've been hang gliding for over 4 years now and I haven't once been the wind dummy. Pilot choice or pilot error? I'm my professional opinion, a lot of balls were dropped aside from the fact that a junior pilot failed to have an ingrained preflight/pretakeoff routine which led to him being unhooked on launch twice within a month, the second time leading to his completely unnecessary death. You want to point blame? Then back your questions up LONG before he was ever on that mountain launch.
Thoughts on responsibility...
One thing that can be said:? everybody has a different value system.? Here's a black and white fact:? some wire crew willfully care about the pilot's safety enough to ensure that the pilot has all the i's dotted and the t's crossed, some don't go to that level of caring.? That's just the way it is.? It is unfortunate that the latter value system came together with inexperience and possible misinterpretation and resulted in a tragedy.? You get nowhere with the blame game.? You do get somewhere by asking "what if?".? There are plenty of "what if?"s in this tragedy.? The final "what if" is at the flight line, where a hang check should have been performed.? In today's modern aircraft, redundancy is designed into systems in aircraft so that if the main system fails, the backup system kicks in to keep the aircraft operating safely.? These systems are rigorously tested on the ground to ensure that they will operate correctly in flight!? The hang check is the ground test to prove that the main system is operating safely (the pilot is hooked in and has hung freely and supported, just as if he was in flight).? If the redundancy of the hang check is not exercised, then the main system has not been tested on the ground and may not operate safely in flight.? All accidents are the result of a few events, while occurring alone won't result in an accident, but coupled together cause the accident.? This accident is no different.? The main and redundant system checks failed.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bacil
?????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bacil
?????
Thoughts on responsibility...
To move beyond what is becoming a somewhat theological discussion,
Scott (or anyone else who was actually there), I have a theory that
because Bill was the very first to launch, the crew had not had time
to set up their protocol (including asking about hang checks) and
settle into the groove. Does this comport with what actually
happened? This is not about 'shoulda, coulda, woulda' - I am just
trying to understand how it happened. - Hugh
On 4 Oct 2005, at 20:54, Scott wrote:
>
> [Said in the spirit of friendly discussion, not defensively.]
>
> Chris...I do not count on my wire crew to catch my mistakes. I do
> understand that I am responsible for my own safety.
>
> My point is simply that a wire crew member should never willfully
> disregard the pilot's safety. While ultimate responsibility lies
> with the pilot, this is not a license for the wire crew member to
> perform their job poorly.
>
> As I said, wire crew members are not mindless drones. Every wire
> crew member should clearly understand what is expected of them in
> ALL launches---to include backing up the pilot's own safety checks.
> It's called redundancy, and increases overall safety.
>
> Some might say being sure the wire crew understands what is
> expected of them is the pilot's responsibility, and I agree---the
> pilot should effectively brief the wire crew members. But anyone
> who regularly wires pilots off should not need to be told to check
> the pilot's harness connection. This should be automatic, and not
> need to be said.
>
> Scott
>
Scott (or anyone else who was actually there), I have a theory that
because Bill was the very first to launch, the crew had not had time
to set up their protocol (including asking about hang checks) and
settle into the groove. Does this comport with what actually
happened? This is not about 'shoulda, coulda, woulda' - I am just
trying to understand how it happened. - Hugh
On 4 Oct 2005, at 20:54, Scott wrote:
>
> [Said in the spirit of friendly discussion, not defensively.
]>
> Chris...I do not count on my wire crew to catch my mistakes. I do
> understand that I am responsible for my own safety.
>
> My point is simply that a wire crew member should never willfully
> disregard the pilot's safety. While ultimate responsibility lies
> with the pilot, this is not a license for the wire crew member to
> perform their job poorly.
>
> As I said, wire crew members are not mindless drones. Every wire
> crew member should clearly understand what is expected of them in
> ALL launches---to include backing up the pilot's own safety checks.
> It's called redundancy, and increases overall safety.
>
> Some might say being sure the wire crew understands what is
> expected of them is the pilot's responsibility, and I agree---the
> pilot should effectively brief the wire crew members. But anyone
> who regularly wires pilots off should not need to be told to check
> the pilot's harness connection. This should be automatic, and not
> need to be said.
>
> Scott
>
Scott
Scott,
We haven't spoken in a while. My life has taken me in a different direction for the moment. However, I can relate to what you are going through right now. Having lost many good friends to skydiving accidents I understand the blame/anger/guilt process you must be experiencing. Give me a call if you want to drink a beer and talk.
Your friend,
Rob
304-839-9493
We haven't spoken in a while. My life has taken me in a different direction for the moment. However, I can relate to what you are going through right now. Having lost many good friends to skydiving accidents I understand the blame/anger/guilt process you must be experiencing. Give me a call if you want to drink a beer and talk.
Your friend,
Rob
304-839-9493
Blue skies, Black Death
I'd like to publicly apologize for the irate tone of my last post. Yeah, I was mad, and it's never good to write with that mindset. I love this sport, this club, and everyone in it---and don't want to fight with anyone.
It's difficult and painful to accept that Bill made such a catastrophic mistake. I know the buck stops with the pilot. Please understand that my anger (which has subsided now) stemmed only from what I perceived as everyone else here refusing to admit a very simple truth:
If just one of the several people at launch had checked Bill's carabiner, he'd still be alive.
I was angry because almost everyone here interpreted that statement as me absolving Bill from any responsibility, which just isn't the case.
As much as we'd all like our "pilot takes full responsibility" rule to make everything easy and black-and-white (No problem! It's all the pilot's fault!), the reality is far different, as I've painfully discovered. There's a lot of gray in accidents like this.
Scott
It's difficult and painful to accept that Bill made such a catastrophic mistake. I know the buck stops with the pilot. Please understand that my anger (which has subsided now) stemmed only from what I perceived as everyone else here refusing to admit a very simple truth:
If just one of the several people at launch had checked Bill's carabiner, he'd still be alive.
I was angry because almost everyone here interpreted that statement as me absolving Bill from any responsibility, which just isn't the case.
As much as we'd all like our "pilot takes full responsibility" rule to make everything easy and black-and-white (No problem! It's all the pilot's fault!), the reality is far different, as I've painfully discovered. There's a lot of gray in accidents like this.
Scott
-
Flying Lobster
- Posts: 1042
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 4:17 pm
Scott--you've done a service to the entire flying community by getting this dialogue going--and we should thank you for that--even if some people (surprise) may not neccessarily agree with you.
I know I haven't offered much in the way of useful suggestions--and perhaps that's one of the frustrating aspects to this sport--you can only do so much to minimize the objective hazard level. In some of the threads there seemed to be a little of "boy did he screw up" come through, like Bill was stupid or impulsive. I've flown long enough to know that it is DAMN easy for ANYONE to make a mistake--the list of pilots having done so is long and illustrious, believe me.
marc
I know I haven't offered much in the way of useful suggestions--and perhaps that's one of the frustrating aspects to this sport--you can only do so much to minimize the objective hazard level. In some of the threads there seemed to be a little of "boy did he screw up" come through, like Bill was stupid or impulsive. I've flown long enough to know that it is DAMN easy for ANYONE to make a mistake--the list of pilots having done so is long and illustrious, believe me.
marc
Great Googly-moo!