Letter to the FAA

[Walt Connelly]

Before I send my letter to the FAA I'd like to ask if anyone has ever
attempted to get them to see the light and end the use of Schweizer
hooks on tow planes here in the land of the free and the home of the
brave. It is a well known fact and clearly stated in the SSA/SSF and
FAA circulars and literature that under certain conditions (the exact
condition that the tow pilot will need to release) that it can be near
impossible to release the glider. Tow planes have crashed, lives have
been lost and at the same time everyone knows that this is a dangerous
situation.

Along with the conversion to Tost hooks I'd like to see it made
mandatory that the release handles be up high, near the throttle and
quickly available to the tow pilot with adequate mechanical advantage. I
can assure you that one does not have the time to go ducking and
reaching and feeling for a handle down on the floor of a Pawnee while
the glider kites in back of you.

The idea of requiring nose hooks on all gliders does not seem to be
feasible although it has been brought up to me as something that needs
to be addressed. My understanding is that the CG hook is meant for
ground/winch launch operations, however I have probably done thousands
of CG hook aero tows with no problem. For the most part these are ships
being flown by the best and most aware pilots. I'd like more input from
experience pilots on this point.

I currently have a number of highly experienced pilots from all levels
of aviation in agreement with me and willing to help me in this cause.


If one life is saved as a result of this endeavor then it will be well
worth it.

Walt Connelly




--
Walt Connelly

[gregg...@gmail.com]

My mom is going to write the FAA asking that all gliding activity be ended here in the land of the free and the home of the not so
brave. If one child's life is saved as a result of this endeavor then it will be well worth it.

[markm...@gmail.com]

Gregg- Thank God for your Mom!

Of course, I would willingly give up my freedom if ONE CHILD'S life could be saved.

For those of you that don't know me, YES. That was sarcasm.

But I do agree that Schweizer releases are prone to failure.

Walt- If you want to get them banned, tell the FAA that they are being installed on (gasp!) DRONES! That's about all the FAA is concerned with right now.

[2G]

Walt,

I know of at least one fatality (Ephrata) involving exactly this scenario - if the FAA were going to take action they already would have done so. Invariably, there is some other precursor that led to the accident that they find fault with. You may get some sympathy from an investigator, but probably no action. It just impacts so few pilots.

Tom

[Burt Compton - Marfa Gliders, west Texas]

Walt,

Please don't write a letter to the FAA.
I understand your good intentions and valid points but asking the FAA to condemn Schweizer releases and make Tost tow release installations mandatory may ground 90% of our towplanes if and when the design and installation engineering is approved for our many different towplanes.

Not all towplanes are Pawnees. For example, moving the tow release handle in my Cessna 182 towplane up by the throttle would be problematic if not impossible.

What is needed to be emphasized is proper and RECURRENT training of glider pilots to stay just a bit above the wake on tow (which places the glider pilots' sight picture of the towplane above the horizon, higher than most pilots would think until they try it) to prevent many "kiting" incidents.

Since 1967 I have done thousands of tows in various towplanes and have only had one kiting incident in which I was able to react quickly and release using a Schweizer hook. (The glider pilot also released just after I did and we never found the rope, a small price to pay thanks to our training and prompt reactions to the situation.) Training to fly a proper tow position is essential for the glider pilot.

Please don't write that letter to the FAA.
They would likely over-react and ground my towplanes for a year!

Hopefully they will ask you to document the number of crashes and lives lost due to the Schweizer hook against the number of aerotows made with a Schweizer hook since the 1950's.

What if we eliminated canopies and just fly open-cockpit so we won't have that distraction of making sure the canopy is locked, often resulting in loss of control by the glider pilot, early on takeoff. After all, there is no "standard" locking mechanism on canopies on the various types of gliders. Must we alert the FAA to that?

We could ask the FAA to ban the use of tail dollies while moving gliders on the ground so the dollies could never be left attached for takeoff.

We could ask the FAA to ground all gliders that do not have "automatic control hookups" (which are not fool-proof.)

While we're at it, let's require medical certification for all glider pilots as there are many documented fatalities related to medical incapacitation. Some foreign countries require medicals as well as wearing parachutes on every flight.

Instead of to the FAA, send your letter to the SSA Government Liaison committee headed by Steve Northcraft. Find his contact info on the SSA website. Again, you will need to document the number of crashes due to the Schweizer hook on towplanes. Show him the numbers.

You stated that we live "in the land of the free", so let's remain free of sweeping mandates and discuss a sensible solution within the worldwide glider community, the smart folks who understand, and live with, the problem.

Please consider not sending that letter to the FAA.

Burt
Marfa, Texas and elsewhere.
(I am speaking for myself and not for the Soaring Safety Foundation.)

[Mike C]

Mark,

FYI a modeler took the FAA to court and the drone/model registration rule has been struck down. No more FAA model registration requirements and some of the garbage that it included.

http://www.wolfenstock.com/TaylorvFAA/TaylorFAAOpinion.pdf

Mike

[uncl...@ix.netcom.com]

I completely agree with Burt.
UH

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

Agreed, government is in our lives enough.

Also, what about any site that uses the inverted mount Schweitzer hook? Currently looks like the mount change "fixes" the kiting issue regarding release, but the letter may force those installations to spend money for no good reason.

I think I understand the original though Walt wants to fix, but there are better ways to fix it.

Heck, writing a letter saying that low tow may be better in general since there is a bigger window to recognize the problem and fix it before there is a safety issue. Most glider training books even recommend low tow for long tows, like aero retrieves. I already know how that discussion will go on RAS.

Yes, I do most of my flying at a site that uses low tow for the majority of aerotows, have been since the early 70's.

[Andrew Ainslie]

The "We just need to train better" mantra doesn't always work. Every single one of us knows of a couple of people at our own airfield with dodgy skills, and it's always hard to just boot someone from a club, or ground them. Plus, the gliders most likely to kite are exactly the ones flown by the least experienced pilots - old crappy club ships.

My personal takeaway after reading these threads is simple - I personally will NEVER fly a schweitzer towhook plane with a C of G glider on tow unless I know that glider pilot very, very well and trust them deeply. Just not worth it. Maybe having tow-pilots vote with their feet is a good way to get clubs and private operations to do the right thing here.

And that might be a better cure than getting the FAA involved. Not that they're likely to listen anyway.

[BobW]

> The "We just need to train better" mantra doesn't always work.

Indeed...by definition, nothing involving humans *can* be.

> Every single
> one of us knows of a couple of people at our own airfield with dodgy
> skills, and it's always hard to just boot someone from a club, or ground
> them. Plus, the gliders most likely to kite are exactly the ones flown by
> the least experienced pilots - old crappy club ships.

No general disagreement with any of the above from me.

> My personal takeaway after reading these threads is simple - I personally

> will NEVER fly a Schweizer towhook[ed tow]plane with a C of G glider on tow

> unless I know that glider pilot very, very well and trust them deeply. Just
> not worth it. Maybe having tow-pilots vote with their feet is a good way to
> get clubs and private operations to do the right thing here.

Aha! What a concept...applying/depending-upon individual judgment, I mean.
Occasionally even our government (not generally known for addressing
gummint-identified problems with anything other than the subtlety of swatting
flies with sledgehammers) is sufficiently sensible to turn a blind eye to some
of those imperfections...which (IMO) the kiting issue is.

> And that might be a better cure than getting the FAA involved. Not that
> they're likely to listen anyway.

I'll second that. Where's the polling place?

Bob W.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[pgs]

I completely agree with gregg...

[got...@gmail.com]

Have to agree with Burt here. Please don't write that letter.

[Sean Fidler]

Walt, don't do it.

[Dan Daly]

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 6:34:10 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Walt, don't do it.

I believe the FES (Discus 2, Lak-17B, Lak-19, Ventus 2 and 3) gliders only have C of G hooks, and they take tows... It would be a pity to exclude them from the sport in the US; they are a stepping-stone to electric self-launch for us all once the batteries get better.

[son_of_flubber]

On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 8:43:10 PM UTC-4, Walt Connelly wrote:

> I currently have a number of highly experienced pilots from all levels
> of aviation in agreement with me and willing to help me in this cause.

Write the letter that presents your case with evidence. Get your supporters to sign it. Send it to everyone who aerotows gliders in the USA (both tug pilots and club officers). Ask them to add their names to the letter for a second mailing. Follow up with a phone call to determine who is still using Schweitzer tug hooks.

We have everything to gain when the USA Soaring Community steps up and self-regulates. We have a lot to lose if the FAA decides to step up regulation of soaring.

It is ultimately the Tug Pilot's responsibility to determine the suitability and airworthiness of their plane and tow hook. Tug pilots should decline to tow if they're not happy with the equipment or the pilot on either end of the tow rope.

[wilburwri...@gmail.com]

Isn't there a tow hook available that releases the glider automatically if the angle goes over a certain degree when a glider gets well out of position? Makes sense to me that if the glider pilot cannot control their ship to the point where the tow pilot has run out of elevator control, that they are then immediately disconnected.

Perhaps this would be a better alternative than trying to create more rules.

If you do write the letter, I'd also like to add an earmark to this letter, that towplanes be IFR rated with turbine engines, Heads up Displays, Garmin G-1000's, autopilots, and smoke systems (to allow other aircraft to see them easily when they are descending back to the gliderport), .......🙄 This should be MANDATORY!!

Or maybe just start winch launching and auto launching like the rest of the world does!

[John Godfrey (QT)]

On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 8:43:10 PM UTC-4, Walt Connelly wrote:

I also agree with Burt.

[WB]

On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 10:28:04 PM UTC-5, Burt Compton - Marfa Gliders, west Texas wrote:
> Walt,
>
> Please don't write a letter to the FAA.
> I understand your good intentions and valid points but asking the FAA to condemn Schweizer releases and make Tost tow release installations mandatory may ground 90% of our towplanes if and when the design and installation engineering is approved for our many different towplanes.
>

I have been arguing with my club leadership for a while now that we should install a Tost hook on our Pawnee. That said, I absolutely agree with Burt on this. We already have enough mandates and plenty of people both outside and inside aviation who want ever more regulation. The "straw that broke the camel's back" and the "death of a thousand cuts" are real things. Please don't ask for more regulation! Education and rational persuasion are how things are (should be) done in a free society.

Sincerely,

Wallace Berry
WB

[us...@example.net]

Self-regulation is a really good idea. So, Wallace and Burt (and the
others), how many of your tugs have Schweizer releases? What plans do
you have for replacing them with Tost - or, at least, inverting them?

In your own time, without FAA mandates, without bureaucratic
interference, without your tugs being grounded, during the slack season,
of your own 'self-regulating' free will?

No dates even pencilled in? Better write that letter, Walt.
--
GC

[markm...@gmail.com]

What a lot of people obviously do not realize is that there are some applications where ONLY a Schweizer (not "Schweitzer") release is FAA approved. Getting authorization for a Tost may not be so easy.

And, yes, asking the FAA for advice can have very negative results. The owners Centrair Pegase 101 gliders were hit with an AD that limited them to a 3,000 hour life because of a "question" posed by a potential buyer. It took nine years of effort to get that resolved. (Sort of resolved, anyway.)

[Tony]

Yep you want to really make things better, start getting STCs for Tost hook installations. Then people don't have to shop mechanics and fsdo's to get 337's approved.

[Tango Eight]

Who's compiled the list of all the "kiting" accidents in the US? I want to see it.

In the meanwhile, I'm all-in with Burt.

************************************************************************

Here are some other things you can do that will have a greater impact on safety at much smaller cost:

1. Get on your pre-takeoff checklist discipline. Drill, baby, drill.

2. Quit fooling around with vents, switches and knobs below 500'. Fly the damned glider.

3. Practice (with an instructor) take off emergency scenarios.

4. Know the difference between rudder fan and wing rock signals.

A "zero attention" (something that can be turned on/off with one button and requires no further attention) cockpit video recorder is very revealing. Identify your bad habits, then eliminate them.

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

Make the numbers matter, do a world list, I wonder if we would even break a dozen broken ships even worldwide.....let alone fatalities.

Open canopies probably break more gliders.

[Dan Marotta]

...Or those who don't want to fly without another FAA regulation could
simply quit flying and let the rest of us make our own decisions.

And, in anticipation of the most often argument I've heard, no tow pilot
is forced to fly a plane that he's not comfortable with.

Dan

On 5/25/2017 7:09 AM, us...@example.net wrote:
> Self-regulation is a really good idea. So, Wallace and Burt (and the
> others), how many of your tugs have Schweizer releases? What plans do
> you have for replacing them with Tost - or, at least, inverting them?
>
> In your own time, without FAA mandates, without bureaucratic
> interference, without your tugs being grounded, during the slack
> season, of your own 'self-regulating' free will?
>
> No dates even pencilled in? Better write that letter, Walt.

--

Dan, 5J

[kirk.stant]

If you get the Tost Tow Reel mod (that IS approved for Pawnees) you get a standard Tost release thrown in for free!

We have one Pawnee with the Tost Reel and one with the old Schweizer release. Guess which one is used more.

Guess which one is scheduled to have it's tow system upgraded (parts already in hand).

Kirk
66

St Louis Soaring Assn.

[Paul Agnew]

https://members.gliding.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/05/Formatted-Final-online.pdf

The British Gliding Association keeps tabs on tow upsets, but here in the US we tend to sweep these events under the rug lest we find ourselves being scrutinized by the FAA. The SSA should be taking on the role that the BGA has, but once again, nobody wants to upset the apple cart. I'd love to see an SSA ASAP system for reporting safety events for review without putting anyone in jeopardy for self-disclosure.

Walt has a legitimate concern based on events that were potentially fatal to him, the tow pilot. In reality, there are very few options to get anything done about it. He lost his job over his concerns for his and other tow pilots' safety. Think about that for a few minutes. He had two major tow upsets, one at very low altitude, and is now compelled to investigate and report the failings in our current systems and practices. Will it amount to much from the FAA? I doubt it. Why? The NTSB only cares if there is blood on the ground. The FAA only cares if someone can make a name for him/herself for taking a noticable action against an operator (in my opinion.) The NASA ASRS reporting system is a nice, feel-good program that accomplishes nothing. Scares and almost-accidents do not get much attention unless it makes the news.

The fear of the FAA reading one report and suddenly deciding this is the issue of the year to be resolved is naive. Until there is a pattern of fatalies, it will not get much attention. It's our responsibility to periodically re-evaluate how we do things and make the changes ahead of the FAA, not in response to the FAA.

I would think the Soaring Safety Foundation would be interested in a comprehensive dialog about this issue. I'm perplexed that the proposed solution to a mechanical design flaw is just "more training". Let's shed the emotion and take a serious look at the facts in these events and properly investigate whether it is a significant safety issue or not.

Paul Agnew

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

I, and likely others, understand that there is a potential here for problems.
Yes, there are fixes, some cheaper/easier than others.
Yes, being on the wrong end during an upset can make a person more adamant about fix. You ARE the PIC, so you have a say in every flight. If it's wrong for you, then don't do it.

Maybe SSA or SSF need to do a blind survey (similar to a NASA report) to find out how many "close ones" there were along with actual incidents, fatal or not.
Then you have some numbers to work with.
You would also have some ammo to at least "strongly suggest" at least inverting a "poor hitch" to lessen the issue.

To get the FAA involved, regardless of intent, I feel is wrong. There are times to get them going, I don't think this is one of them.

.

[Rich Owen]

Paul Agnew,

Paul, please email me at stil...@aol.com or contact me at 407-325-6500 regarding Walt's termination. Your post has incorrect information and I do not feel it is appropriate to share my answer to everyone on Rec Soaring. Walt is a friend and was a loyal employee at Seminole Lake for nearly 3 years. He deserves his privacy in this matter.

Best Regards,
Rich Owen
Vice President
Seminole Flying & Soaring

[wilburwri...@gmail.com]

In other words, your saying, let's not talk about Seminole Lake Gliderport terminating poor Walt for bringing up safety concerns after 2 near accidents. That's clearly a deflection to avoid embarrassment.

If you want to deflect the conversation, then let's talk about how contestants violate airspace regulations and get penalized 1,060 points. What lessons can we learn from that too??

Perhaps a letter to the SSA is in order to block contest sanctioning to gliderports that have a know history of disregarding legitimate safety concerns. Maybe there are safer operations available that can host the 18M nationals?

[Rich Owen]

We don't know your name and I'm sure you won't email me to find the real story. When Walt brought up the issue we researched all factors and then made the decision to switch to Tost release systems on our towplanes. The safety of all the pilots that operate out of Seminole Lake, which includes our employees and staff, is our number one concern. Walt made a good case and we thought he was right. The Tost hooks are on back order but we expect to have them our ships within 4 weeks. We have spoken to our instructors and reviewed our procedures for losing sight of the towplanes/out of position on tow. We had the same conversation with our tow pilots. The staff here are professionals and take there job very seriously. They also read Rec Aviation Soaring and are getting frustrated that a small number of anonymous posters make comments that sully their reputation. I hope you do write the SSA so you will finally be out in the open. Our employees would like an opportunity to discuss the good we do for the sport.

Rich Owen

[Tom Kelley #711]

Wilbur, no one violated FAA airspace per the penalty you speak of. Its a SSA contest overfly penalty. The lesson learned is once again you speak with your head in the darkness of your ass.

Best. #711.

[Don Johnstone]

That might not help much. I have seen a schweizer hook on a tug in
the UK but not lately, I have seen lots of TOST hooks.
The other part of this was ensuring that the release in the tug is as
close as possible to the throttle, in the UK this is mandatory, mainly as
the result of a tug upset in which a good friend of mine is killed.

If there are people in gliding who are more concerned with commercial
concerns than the safety of pilots, that is a real problem. If the
problem cannot be solved voluntarily what is left.

If this is the case then goon on yer Walt, make them have it!
>

[SF]

The potential for very bad unintended consequences resulting from your well meaning contact with the FAA is large enough to ask you to re-think contacting them.

[Tom]

SF and Burt are right - there is not a lot of knowledge on the FAA regulatory side about soaring so the opportunity for unintended consequences is large.

Let's fix the problem internally. Let's demand and expect higher proficiency on areotow, up our game as a sport with a focus on safety overall, provide clear expectations for pilot performance, provide high quality instruction, manage the risk through evidence based interventions/procedures and educate/empower/protect our tow-pilots rather than treating them as expendable or a necessary evil.

Checklists - canopies, spoilers!

If you fly a single place ship and only fly with a CFI-G the minimum amount "required" - go fly with an instructor, box the wake and so on - get some objective perspective on your flying and work on the fundamentals.

Ask Burt to do a site visit and seriously consider his input.

Question the "that's the way we've always done it" or the "back in the old days" mentality.

I'd never tow with anything other than a Tost hook, btw.

Fly safe!

Tom

[WB]

Did you read what I wrote? I am actively trying to get my club to install a Tost hook. I think it's the right thing to do. However, there are many other things competing for our limited funds and time. Some of those things may actually yield a greater gain in safety than a Tost hook. I am not omniscient, are you? Do you know, with certainty, that what you want is the best thing for everyone else? How about working to persuade rather than advocate for the use of government force?

[Dan Marotta]

How can anyone be taken seriously who doesn't know the difference
between "your" and "you're"? Or "its" and "It's", or used double (and
more) punctuation marks? Or uses "their" instead of "his" (except when
the gender is known to be feminine) in the singular case? And all the
while using an alias to hide his identity?

Didn't listen to your English teacher?

And yes, I know several of the above are sentence fragments.

--
Dan, 5J

[Karl Kunz]

There are reports of "unexpected release" and "failure to release" for the Tost release as well, how do the two compare? Anything mechanical is prone to failure so to say the Schweizer is worse than any other release without some type of statistical analysis is kind of meaningless.

[Kevin Christner]

Rich,

Wilbur Wright is another Sean alias.

I'll be interested to know if he's willing to deny his aliases to your face.

2C

[Duster]

On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 11:57:40 AM UTC-5, Karl Kunz wrote:
> There are reports of "unexpected release" and "failure to release" for the Tost release as well, how do the two compare? Anything mechanical is prone to failure so to say the Schweizer is worse than any other release without some type of statistical analysis is kind of meaningless.

Isn't this a purview of the SSF? Burt Compton has responded to this thread and serves on its board. While he specifically stated he did not represent the SSF in this matter, perhaps you could request the Foundation look into the history of this problem to get those stats?
Mike

[Walt Connelly]

Burt Compton - Marfa Gliders, west Texas;946985 Wrote:
> Walt,
>
> Please don't write a letter to the FAA.
> I understand your good intentions and valid points but asking the FAA to
> condemn Schweizer releases and make Tost tow release installations
> mandatory may ground 90% of our towplanes if and when the design and
> installation engineering is approved for our many different towplanes.
>
>

> Not all towplanes are Pawnees. For example, moving the tow release
> handle in my Cessna 182 towplane up by the throttle would be problematic
> if not impossible.
>
> What is needed to be emphasized is proper and RECURRENT training of
> glider pilots to stay just a bit above the wake on tow (which places the
> glider pilots' sight picture of the towplane above the horizon, higher
> than most pilots would think until they try it) to prevent many "kiting"
> incidents.
>
> Since 1967 I have done thousands of tows in various towplanes and have
> only had one kiting incident in which I was able to react quickly and
> release using a Schweizer hook. (The glider pilot also released just
> after I did and we never found the rope, a small price to pay thanks to
> our training and prompt reactions to the situation.) Training to fly a
> proper tow position is essential for the glider pilot.
>
> Please don't write that letter to the FAA.
> They would likely over-react and ground my towplanes for a year!
>
> Hopefully they will ask you to document the number of crashes and lives
> lost due to the Schweizer hook against the number of aerotows made with
> a Schweizer hook since the 1950's.
>
> What if we eliminated canopies and just fly open-cockpit so we won't
> have that distraction of making sure the canopy is locked, often
> resulting in loss of control by the glider pilot, early on takeoff.
> After all, there is no "standard" locking mechanism on canopies on the
> various types of gliders. Must we alert the FAA to that?
>
> We could ask the FAA to ban the use of tail dollies while moving gliders
> on the ground so the dollies could never be left attached for takeoff.
>
>
> We could ask the FAA to ground all gliders that do not have "automatic
> control hookups" (which are not fool-proof.)
>
> While we're at it, let's require medical certification for all glider
> pilots as there are many documented fatalities related to medical
> incapacitation.. Some foreign countries require medicals as well as
> wearing parachutes on every flight.
>
> Instead of to the FAA, send your letter to the SSA Government Liaison
> committee headed by Steve Northcraft. Find his contact info on the SSA
> website. Again, you will need to document the number of crashes due to
> the Schweizer hook on towplanes. Show him the numbers.
>
> You stated that we live "in the land of the free", so let's remain free
> of sweeping mandates and discuss a sensible solution within the
> worldwide glider community, the smart folks who understand, and live
> with, the problem.
>
> Please consider not sending that letter to the FAA.
>
> Burt
> Marfa, Texas and elsewhere.
> (I am speaking for myself and not for the Soaring Safety Foundation.)

Burt, consider the following:

Page 9, Soaring Safety Foundation, Tow Pilot Training. The following is
in RED:

DEPENDING ON THE INSTALLATION OF THE TOW HITCH, IT MAY BE POSSIBLE
FOR THE RELEASE MECHANISM TO BECOME JAMMED DUE TO THE EXCESSIVELY HIGH
POSITION OF THE GLIDER. (AMERICAN STYLE HOOK)

In addition the Advisory Circular, Date 3/3/08, AC No 43.13-2B,
page 76 says:

WHEN THE GLIDER UNDER TOW OPERATES ABOVE A CERTAIN ANGLE TO THE TOW
PLANE, THE RING MAY SLIDE UPWARDS ON THE HOOK CAUSING EXCESSIVE LOAD ON
THE HOOK AND DIFFICULTY IN RELEASING THE TOW ROPE RING.

This confirms that the industry is well aware of the problems with
this device and as one who has experienced it first hand I can attest
and concur. Why is this known to this degree and has little to nothing
been done. In short, the industry is not as self regulating as perhaps
it should be.

I found myself 300 feet in the air, pointed at the ground, attached
to a student pilot who was not reacting and I was unable to release for
more reasons than just the Schweizer hook. Had the rope not broken
this conversation would not be taking place. I would have been a
statistic and a glider port would be facing my lawyer brother.

Recurrent training would have not been helpful with a 15 year old
student on her 3rd solo. Low tow is not helpful when the towplane is
just a few feet off the ground over the runway. Do you deny that there
have been fatalities in this country due to this mechanism at a critical
point?

I found some of your commets to be condescending. Canopies, tail
dollys, medical certificates. These do not address the problem I have
outlined and only serve to confuse the issue.

I take flying very seriously, I flew almost 7000 tows in 2 years and 8
months without scratching the paint or putting a wheel wrong. I enjoyed
my time at SLGP and wish them nothing but the safest and best going
forward.

Walt




--
Walt Connelly

[Walt Connelly]

'Don Johnstone[_4_ Wrote:
> ;947161']At 14:09 25 May 2017, Charlie M. UH & 002 owner/pilot wrote:-
> Make the numbers matter, do a world list, I wonder if we would even -
> break a-

> dozen broken ships even worldwide.....let alone fatalities.
>

> Open canopies probably break more gliders.-

>
> That might not help much. I have seen a schweizer hook on a tug in
> the UK but not lately, I have seen lots of TOST hooks.
> The other part of this was ensuring that the release in the tug is as
> close as possible to the throttle, in the UK this is mandatory, mainly
> as
> the result of a tug upset in which a good friend of mine is killed.
>
> If there are people in gliding who are more concerned with commercial
> concerns than the safety of pilots, that is a real problem. If the
> problem cannot be solved voluntarily what is left.
>

> If this is the case then goon on yer Walt, make them have it!-
> -

Mr Johnstone,

I agree completely, to some there is more concern with maintaining
a profitable commercial operation and little to none with tug pilot
safety. Would it matter if there was one or one hundred tug pilot
fatalities due to the current use of a system which is documented as
prone to failure in SSA, SSF and FAA documents? I find it telling that
Burt Compton didn't not respond when i pointed out verbatim the comments
on the SSF website. I'm willing to engage in a dialogue.

The BGA seems to have teeth and uses them. The SSF and SSA
obviously have no teeth nor a willingness to use whatever influence it
has to correct this potentially deadly situation.

I have much research left to do but what I have so far supports my
position.
There also is a question as to the use of the CG hook for aero tow. I
see where New Zealand has recommended aero tow not be done with other
than a nose hook and Germany had required special training for pilots
flying CG hooks on aerotow. I am not advocating the restriction of the
CG hook, this was not a contributing factor in my case but certainly
seems to have been in others.

Walt




--
Walt Connelly

[Sean Fidler]

Hey Kevin. You and I need to have a face to face talk and sort your fantasy out.

Rich and I are fine, trust me.

We all know that Wilbur is your fantasy and that you have no life other than writing posts as Wilbur. You are obsessed with me, have been for a long time and are complete loser. You are creepy. You are also entirely irrelevant to all of these competition conversations. Yet you inject yourself into them constantly.

I honestly feel sorry for you.

If you disagree I am happy to talk about it. Just name the time and place. I will be there. Enough playing around.

Sean Fidler

[Renny]

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 5:03:38 PM UTC-6, Dan Daly wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 6:34:10 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > Walt, don't do it.
>
> I believe the FES (Discus 2, Lak-17B, Lak-19, Ventus 2 and 3) gliders only have C of G hooks, and they take tows... It would be a pity to exclude them from the sport in the US; they are a stepping-stone to electric self-launch for us all once the batteries get better.

One clarification on this subject...When the the LAK-17B is modified with the FES the nose hook is replaced with a hook that is quite far forward (and just back from the FES nose cone). It is definitely not a CG hook...I believe Schempp-Hirth is also building their FES equipped gliders with a similar positioning of the tow hook. Thx - Renny

[Dan Daly]

I stand corrected.

Dan

[Tango Eight]

Awesome. When the three of you get together and compare catheter sizes, be sure and let us all know how it worked out, 'kay?

T8

[Andreas Maurer]

On Tue, 30 May 2017 14:24:11 +0100, Walt Connelly
<Walt.Connel...@aviationbanter.com> wrote:

> and Germany had required special training for pilots
>flying CG hooks on aerotow.

... which isn't required anymore.

Regards from Germany
Andreas

[kevi...@gmail.com]

At least on my DG400, my first CG hook glider, which I self launch most of the time, when I do take tows, mostly at contest, trim full forward for tow (as per the manual), makes it a no brainer.

Even at Mifflin at the Sports Class Nationals where we had some very sporty wind on a couple of the days, it was no harder than a nose hook, and even had some advantages because you were able to crab into the wind and not drag the tail of the town plane around on crosswind days.

Kevin
92

[Walt Connelly]

Andreas Maurer;947904 Wrote:
> On Tue, 30 May 2017 14:24:11 +0100, Walt Connelly
> Walt.Connel...@aviationbanter.com wrote:

> -

> and Germany had required special training for pilots

> flying CG hooks on aerotow. -
>
> .... which isn't required anymore.
>
> Regards from Germany
> Andreas

Thank you Andreas, I do believe I used the past tense "had."

That being said I understand from some highly reliable sources that the
intended use of the CG hook was for ground launches. If you think of
where a string is attached to a KITE, it is not attached to the nose, it
is attached where it is attached for a reason. However it is not my
intention to cause any problems for the CG hook glider pilots out
there....rather to give a fighting chance to the tow pilot to release
quickly and effectively when the need arises. I have heard from tow
pilots who will not tow a CG hook glider with a Schweizer on the tow
plane.

I may be "Persona Non Grata" in the soaring world but I feel compelled
to move forward in this endeavor. I have much work left to do.

Walt




--
Walt Connelly

[drguya...@gmail.com]

Nice discussion but.....
you are not considering the tow planes that have a winch system for tows.
There is a winch inside the fuselage that retracts the tow line after each tow.
At Williams they have a guillotine sytem to cut the tow line if needed.
For a dedicated tow plane this seems to be the most logical solution. Really saves wear on the tow rope and provides a very predictable way to "cut the cord" when needed.

[Soarin Again]

Likewise is there any data regarding inverted Schweizer tow hooks?
We operated a commercial soaring operation using a 182 with an
inverted Schweizer hook for over 25 years. None of our tow pilots
ever had a problem releasing a kiting glider. There are undoubtedly
other operations that also used an inverted Schweizer hook.

We did also encourage tow pilots, that if the glider started to get high
to put their hand on the release handle (located on the floor between
the seats) and if the yoke touched the aft stop to immediately release.

Also is there any data regarding the Schweizer style hook with the roller
sold by Mcfarlan?

M Eiler

[Tango Eight]

Well, you could do something positive then. For instance set up a means to share information on existing STCs or field approvals that others might find useful (anyone have a field approved Tost installation for an L-19? I'd be interested in that) or figure out how to get some engineering work done to support new applications, perhaps supported by a GoFundMe campaign or similar. I can think of many options. You know as well as the rest of us what form direct "help" from the FAA will take.


best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

[Dan Marotta]

Of the 5 pure sailplanes I've owned, all but one had a CG releases
*ONLY*. To my mind, that does not imply that a CG hook is only for
ground launching because that would reduce the number of prospective
purchasers by a bunch.

As others have stated - please don't wake the sleeping giant (FAA). It
is for those tow pilots who have concerns on the matter to decline to
tow a CG release-equipped glider with a Schweizer-equipped tug. To put
it into blunter terms, it is not for you or the FAA to tell me what I
can or cannot fly based upon your concerns.

More freedom, less regulation.

Dan

Dan, 5J

[Walt Connelly]

Tango Eight;947940 Wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 8:43:09 PM UTC-4, Walt Connelly wrote:-
> Andreas Maurer;947904 Wrote: -

> On Tue, 30 May 2017 14:24:11 +0100, Walt Connelly
> Walt.Connel...@aviationbanter.com wrote:
> -
> and Germany had required special training for pilots
> flying CG hooks on aerotow. -
>
> .... which isn't required anymore.
>
> Regards from Germany

> Andreas-

>
> Thank you Andreas, I do believe I used the past tense "had."
>
> That being said I understand from some highly reliable sources that
> the
> intended use of the CG hook was for ground launches. If you think of
> where a string is attached to a KITE, it is not attached to the nose,
> it
> is attached where it is attached for a reason. However it is not my
> intention to cause any problems for the CG hook glider pilots out
> there....rather to give a fighting chance to the tow pilot to release
> quickly and effectively when the need arises. I have heard from tow
> pilots who will not tow a CG hook glider with a Schweizer on the tow
> plane.
>
> I may be "Persona Non Grata" in the soaring world but I feel compelled
> to move forward in this endeavor. I have much work left to do.
>

> Walt-

>
> Well, you could do something positive then. For instance set up a means
> to share information on existing STCs or field approvals that others
> might find useful (anyone have a field approved Tost installation for an
> L-19? I'd be interested in that) or figure out how to get some
> engineering work done to support new applications, perhaps supported by
> a GoFundMe campaign or similar. I can think of many options. You know
> as well as the rest of us what form direct "help" from the FAA will
> take.
>
>
> best,
> Evan Ludeman / T8

I am doing something positive. I am attempting to save the life of the
next tow pilot who experiences a sudden (ln about the wink of an eye)
kiting event down low. As I have stated, this problem is well known and
documented in the SSA, SSF and FAA literature. At a MINIMUM all
Schweizer hooks should be inverted AND the release handle needs to be
IMMEDIATELY available to the tow pilot, NOT out of sight, down on the
floor and in some cases modified (was this done with proper notification
of the FAA) reducing the mechanical advantage necessary to actuate the
release.

Walt




--
Walt Connelly

[gregg...@gmail.com]

You can keep terminally ill patients from dying of their disease by shooting them in the head. Works every time.

[ND]

I, along with many others, agree with burt on this one walt. go through steve northcraft if you choose to pursue this further.

[markm...@gmail.com]

Walt-

Before you go off with velocity but no direction, please supply the names and incidences of all these dead tow pilots. You see a problem because it happened to you. I agree that perhaps the Schweizer release is susceptible to failures when the towed glider is wildly out of position, and that there is likely a remedy through either inverting the release or hoping for better training.

Asking for a ban on these release mechanisms nationwide is likely to cause a large number of glider operations to halt operations since the Schweizer release is the ONLY mechanism accepted for a particular tow plane. Banning the Schweizer release is likely to shut down an active club or commercial operator.

The FAA will issue a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) prior to proposing an Airworthiness Directive that would ban the use of the Schweizer release. They will have to justify this by citing the "Unsafe conditions" that the AD is supposed to correct. You will have to supply the evidence that this is, in fact, a valid concern. Be prepared with solid evidence of fatalities, accidents incidents and testimony from affected parties. Your word and your singular experiences will not be enough.

Commercial operators and clubs faced with a significant monetary outlay to change release systems are encouraged to document the hundreds of thousands of successful aerotows using the Schweizer release with no incidents or accidents (or tow pilot fatalities).

You don't like Schweizer releases because of your particularly terrifying experience, and I can heartily agree and accept that. Glad you are still around. But, how many tows have you done with the same system that went off without a hitch?

I have fallen off a bicycle several times. (Also motorcycles, hang gliders, horses etc., etc.) but I don't see the need to stop other participants when the vast majority of operations are carried out successfully..

Or, as one of my more colorfully necked acquaintances recently said,

"Y'all don't need ta' NUKE the gopher!"

[2G]

You apparently did not read my post - go back and read it this time.

Tom

[youngbl...@gmail.com]

There is no substitute for safety and this is what this is all about. Walt, you should not have to send the letter, but if so compelled, do so. The owner, manager or chief tow pilot should have made sure that those hooks were changed long ago. Now after the fact they are being changed!

[Don Johnstone]

At 20:36 31 May 2017, Walt Connelly wrote:
>
>Andreas Maurer;947904 Wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 May 2017 14:24:11 +0100, Walt Connelly
>> Walt.Connel...@aviationbanter.com wrote:
>> -
>> and Germany had required special training for pilots
>> flying CG hooks on aerotow. -
>>
>> .... which isn't required anymore.
>>
>> Regards from Germany
>> Andreas
>
>Thank you Andreas, I do believe I used the past tense "had."
>
>That being said I understand from some highly reliable sources
that th

>intended use of the CG hook was for ground launches. If you
think o

>where a string is attached to a KITE, it is not attached to the nose,
i

>is attached where it is attached for a reason. However it is not m

>intention to cause any problems for the CG hook glider pilots ou

>there....rather to give a fighting chance to the tow pilot to releas

>quickly and effectively when the need arises. I have heard from to

>pilots who will not tow a CG hook glider with a Schweizer on the to

>plane.
>
>I may be "Persona Non Grata" in the soaring world but I feel
compelle

>to move forward in this endeavor. I have much work left to do.

>--
>Walt Connelly

You are right Walt. Back in the day when wooden gliders were the
norm they were fitted with so called "compromise" hooks. Not as far
back as a GoG hook but not on the nose either. I remember flying a
Slingsby T21 with a compromise hook on a cross country tow. I was
the trim, both hands and a foot holding the stick forward to stop the
nose pitching up. Many gliders were refitted with CoG hooks to gain
more height on a winch launch, little thought was given to
aerotowing.
On the subject of glider tow hooks, I have not seen a Pawnee in the
UK with anything other than a Tost release or a retracting towline.
Obviously the drawings exist to fit a Tost to a Pawnee. The
doomsayers alleging that this would be too difficult are being
somewhat disingenuous.

[Walt Connelly]

ND;948042 Wrote:
> I, along with many others, agree with burt on this one walt. go through
> steve northcraft if you choose to pursue this further.
>

> On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 8:43:10 PM UTC-4, Walt Connelly wrote:-

> Walt Connelly-

Who is Steve Northcraft and what authority does he have to affect the
situation?

Walt




--
Walt Connelly

[JS]

He's just the chair of the SSA Government Liaison Committee.
Other than that Mrs Kennedy, how was Dallas?
Jim

[Frank Whiteley]

Tried to PM Walt at an AOL address with Steve's contact info. SSA committees and member information are only visible when logged into the SSA web site.

Frank Whiteley

[Walt Connelly]

Frank Whiteley;948185 Wrote:
> On Sunday, June 4, 2017 at 9:32:03 PM UTC-6, JS wrote:-
> On Sunday, June 4, 2017 at 5:43:09 PM UTC-7, Walt Connelly wrote:-
> ND;948042 Wrote: -

> Walt Connelly--

>
> Who is Steve Northcraft and what authority does he have to affect the
> situation?
>
> Walt
>
>
>
>
> --

> Walt Connelly-

>
> He's just the chair of the SSA Government Liaison Committee.
> Other than that Mrs Kennedy, how was Dallas?

> Jim-

>
> Tried to PM Walt at an AOL address with Steve's contact info. SSA
> committees and member information are only visible when logged into the
> SSA web site.
>
> Frank Whiteley

Frank,

I am in receipt of your email with Steve Northcraft's contact
information. What exactly would you have me do? Submit my report to him
for presentation to the FAA?

My problem is that I have found accidents as far back as 1999 which
acknowledged that the tow hook release mechanism revealed the potential
for binding of the release latch when the aircraft being towed moved
significantly above the normal horizon position. (NTSB SEA99FA080)
This among others and the acknowledgement in SSA, SFF (page 9 SSF Tow
pilot training course and FAA Advisory Circular, Date 3/3/08 AC #
43.13.2B) that the release might fail to operate AT THE VERY MOMENT WHEN
IT MIGHT SAVE THE TOW PILOT'S LIFE.

I can attest to the fact that these things can occur in the wink of
an eye and at certain altitudes they will be potentially fatal
regardless of the type of hook or release handle availability. That
does NOT negate the fact that the tow pilot deserves a fighting chance
to survive and should not be held captive to an antiquated system when
that system is known to be prone to failure when needed the most. Been
there, done that.

A Canadian soaring club 30 years ago recognized this problem as a
result of an accident, they now have Tost hooks and a release up near
the throttle as per Dave Springford.

The BGA recognized this problem and now it is mandated that the
release handle be located close to the throttle and I am informed by
reliable sources that Tost hooks are the norm.

So where is the SSA, SFF in this regard? What actions have they
taken to recognize and correct this? I would be happy to put this in
Steve's lap if I thought it would be properly addressed and acted on.

It is NOT my intention to inhibit in any way the soaring world here
in the USA. My sole intention is to save the life of the next tow pilot
who finds his or herself in a sudden kiting situation while down low
with a Schweizer hook and an ineffective release handle.

[gregg...@gmail.com]

If aerotowing didn't have a half century plus history it would be impossible to start aerotowing in 2017. We should get with the times and switch completely to self launching or horse stretched bungees. The idea of tying two aircraft together and going flying is old tyme recklessness. We don't fly biplanes into barns or set up head on locomotive collisions for a laugh anymore. Likewise we shouldn't fly aircraft tied together. No towing means no towing fatalities. Perfect safety through abstinence is what the modern world demands.

[Dan Marotta]

So practice that abstinence and stop flying.

And screw the modern world and its demands. We live in a free country. ;-)

On 6/6/2017 2:25 PM, gregg...@gmail.com wrote:
> If aerotowing didn't have a half century plus history it would be impossible to start aerotowing in 2017. We should get with the times and switch completely to self launching or horse stretched bungees. The idea of tying two aircraft together and going flying is old tyme recklessness. We don't fly biplanes into barns or set up head on locomotive collisions for a laugh anymore. Likewise we shouldn't fly aircraft tied together. No towing means no towing fatalities. Perfect safety through abstinence is what the modern world demands.

--
Dan, 5J

[gregg...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017 at 6:18:49 PM UTC-4, Dan Marotta wrote:
> So practice that abstinence and stop flying.
>

Some of us lack self control to stay on the ground, we need Walt's letter to save us ;)

[ddblan...@gmail.com]

Reading some of the comments on here are disgusting and immature. We have a gentlemen here who has raised concerns after losing his job as a tow pilot from a near fatal accident all while he is taking the high road by avoiding to speak negative of anyone. If you are unable to see that the motivation for this letter, it is for your own benefit. For the people here who are balking at an effort to improve safety, you are the ones who are a massive lead weight to the sport of soaring, this sport would be better off without you. I've first hand seen too many soaring accidents that are quickly covered up and not talked about which leads to no change and then history repeating itself again for no good excuse.

For the ones on here who want freedom, I ask you these question: If your automobile had a recall that was for your safety, would you not do it? If a taxi cab service had the freedom to disregard a recall for a faulty tire that explodes, would you want them to exercise their freedom to not replace the faulty dangerous tire?



Look at the improvements made with spectra ropes. These kind of ropes seldom fail and that's why everyone has switched to them. Can anyone say that this was a poor decision to switch to a more reliable system?

It appears that the Soaring Safety Foundation has become ineffective despite their claims for great success and this is why a pilot is going straight to the FAA. To publicly run down a tow pilot after they lost their job when they are trying to help make advancements for the sport is extremely distasteful. Perhaps a better approach would be to join forces to help find the best solution, which some of you are doing.

I'm shocked that some insurance companies will still cover a towplane that has a defective tow hook much like this discussed. Why would anyone not want to upgrade to a safer system is beyond my comprehension for reasonable thinking except for those who wish to live on the edge and have no regard for their own life.

[gregg...@gmail.com]

I see your point. If we had just a bit more safety regarding tug releases all the rest of the risk involved in soaring would be justifiable. Til then we need a nationwide soaring standdown(self launchers too, out of solidarity for your poor brothers.)

[Tom]

I don't like the flippant responses either. My argument was that a letter to the FAA was not going to have the effect desired and in fact could have draconian and unintended consequences.

As a tow pilot (and a CFI-G) with many tows under my belt and having been in some dire situations (all with Tost hooks) I understand that this is a fundamentally risky endeavor, on both ends of the rope. I/we work very hard to manage that risk and we have to continue.

My point is that we as a sport (or industry) need to work everyday to manage risk, identify the issues, analyze/understand what's happening and work hard to remediate the hazards. We really can't expect the FAA to do this from their perspective without causing more problems.

The callous and flippant remarks are truly the sign of hazardous attitudes and or immaturity. Having been yanked around to the point of losing control of the tow plane and or looking back in my mirror and seeing the complete underside of a glider while I'm in a level attitude after the glider pilot lost control (the rope broke and we made it home) - it's a very hopeless and terrible feeling. It makes sense that it provokes a reaction on the part of the tow pilot. That should be respected. The "rugged independence" and individualism of sailplane flying is only true after you get off tow - until then it's a team sport.

I just don't see the FAA reaction or "fix" as viable or appropriate.

And as I said before, I'd never tow with anything other than the Tost setup.

I hardly ever post here - mostly lurk. I do find it very interesting and illuminating to read these long and contentious subjects - it reveals a lot.

Tom

[ND]

as a PIC, you always have the option to decide that the risk is not within acceptable limits it's no different than the wind being to strong for you. no one is using a cattle prod to jockey you into the towplane. you can refuse to fly, and if you aren't comfortable, i hope you have refused.

has your club/operation switched to a TOST release? if not, why? you could refuse to tow until they switch, both because it makes you uncomfortable, and as a means of getting your point across. we all have the option of staying on the ground regardless of what the regs say. maybe you've already done that. lobby your clubs leadership to switch releases. if they don't want to pay for it and you're so passionate, talk to people, take up a collection amongst them, and pay some for the release yourself. have you done these things?

[Walt Connelly]

Scott Williams;948274 Wrote:
> Walt,
> Convince me,
> Please list at least the dates and locations of fatal tow accidents
> since, say, 1950 which were caused by failure of a tow release on the
> tug initiated by a "kiting' glider. Of course, Schweizer releases
> mounted non inverted.
> Thank you.

Scott,

I am currently doing as complete an analysis of the situation as I
can to support my position and this will take some time but I'm curious.
How many fatal accidents attributable to a Schweizer hook failure to
release in a kiting situation would it take to have you on my side?
One? Two? Five? Come back with a specific number and I will share
with you what I have.

I CAN tell you the date, place and the name of the pilot who last
found himself 1 second from being on that list. It was 4-20-17 at SLGP
and the pilots name was Walt Connelly. Had the rope not broken....

Walt




--
Walt Connelly

[Frank Whiteley]

At least discuss your proposal with Steve. There may be history with the FAA on this issue.

Frank Whiteley

[gregg...@gmail.com]

> How many fatal accidents attributable to a Schweizer hook failure to
> release in a kiting situation would it take to have you on my side?
> One? Two? Five?

If that is your logic recreational flight is not defensible. We average half dozen glider pilot fatalities in the US per year. Are you going to write a letter about that? Being a tow pilot, even with an Elmira Death Hook, is safer than being a glider pilot. If it is worth it to get the FAA involved to save towpilots it would be hypocritical and morally wrong not to get the FAA involved in saving glider pilots.

[Dan Marotta]

Nice reply - still chuckling. Glad some of us can keep our sense of humor.

--
Dan, 5J

[Scott Williams]

Even one is a tragedy,

Please Share,
Scott

[Don Johnstone]

At 16:39 07 June 2017, Scott Williams wrote:

It is interesting to note that no one denies that the Schweizer hook has
an inherent design fault that can lead to failure to release.
It is clear that most people agree that the TOST release is safer and
does not suffer from the same fault.
It is obvious that a release control mounted near the throttle in a tow
plane provides more opportunity to release quickly in the event of an
upset.
It is well proven that if release is required in these circumstances it is

imperative that it happens quickly.
All these things have been "known" for some time, and for whatever
reason, some have ignored the common sense solution of fitting TOST
releases and mounting the release knob near the throttle.
Given that the people responsible for safety within the US soaring
community appear to have, and continue to, ignore the obvious danger
what other action could Walt possibly take?
As an outside observer from a part of the world where the fitting of the
release knob close to the throttle is mandated, as the result of one fatal

accident, (one that led to the death of a very good friend) I would have
to conclude that Walt really does have no alternative. No one else
appears to have the courage to take any action.
US soaring has had more than enough time to put it's house in order,
when self regulation fails there is only one other alternative.
That accident that I describe by the way, occurred 39 years ago, how
long does it take you to learn?

[Don Johnstone]

After considering my last post a thought came to me. There is no need
for Walt to send a letter to the FAA, unless they are blind deaf and
stupid, they already know. I find it hard to believe that they would not
be aware of what has been said in this thread.
Given that the USA has the reputation of being the home of the most
litigious people on the planet I find it hard to believe that knowing
there is a problem, and failing to act might not be the wisest course of
action. I am sure that the FAA are a far more lucrative target to sue, in
the event of an accident, than the SAA or an individual club or glider
operation.
Surely Pandora's Box is already open and the clock is ticking.

[Brian]

The problem with a letter the FAA as already noted is that while you have an outcome of the letter in mind the outcome may be significantly different than you expect. But writing a letter is quick, cheap, and easy.
Bad Regulations are often the result of Good intentions.
Better plan, ….
Start Identifying operations that should upgrade their equipment to safer equipment. i.e. Tost Hooks, moving Releasing handles. Insure there actually are options to upgrade i.e. 337’s available or better yet STC’s for doing so for the aircraft they are using.
IF 337’s or STC’s are not available assist in developing them.
Award a Safety Rating/award to operations that have made these improvements.
Contact manufacturers such as American Champion that still sell Schweitzer releases and encourage them to offer Tost Releases and improve the location of these factory release handles.
Contact Cessna and encourage them to offer Tost Releases as a factory option with appropriate release handles.
Start a Fund to help subsidize operations upgrades or to develop STC’s.
Contact the SSA and Volunteer to become a SSF volunteer to educate and develop all the above.
Of course, this is a lot more work than just writing a letter that will likely have limited positive effect and had the potential for negative consequences. But then is saving one life only worth just a letter to the FAA, or is it worth you paying to upgrade one or more towplanes for an operation, or spending a few days a year evaluating and educating soaring operations, raising funds, and developing the actual paperwork to do the upgrades?
Brian
CFIIG

[kirk.stant]

On Wednesday, June 7, 2017 at 5:45:08 PM UTC-5, Don Johnstone wrote:
I am sure that the FAA are a far more lucrative target to sue, in
> the event of an accident, than the SAA or an individual club or glider
> operation.

OMG! That is hilarious - better even than the "Elmira Death Hook"!

Seriously - you really can't sue the FAA - it's the government and they WILL win. But a glider operation with some liquid assets?

Not to belittle Walt's plight - and as a fellow tow pilot who has also had an upset (although minor) in a Schweizer-equipped Pawnee - I am completely in the camp that all the Elmira Death Hooks (giggle) should be trashed and replaced with Tost release. 33.3 percent done on our towplanes, should be 66.6 by the end of the year, perhaps higher if we sell the last Schweizer equipped death trap (Anyone seriously interested in a 180 SuperCub?).

And while you are at it, trash the Gollywhompers that at bolted to the Elmira Death Hooks!

(Thanks Pez D Spencer!)

Kirk
66

[karengei...@gmail.com]

You can sue the FAA and win. I know someone personally who did, rather his estate did.

[Walt Connelly]

At least discuss your proposal with Steve. There may be history with
the FAA on this issue.

Frank Whiteley

Frank, the following Email was sent to the email address you provided for
Steve Northcraft.

Mr Northcraft,

In case you haven't heard about my letter to the FAA, to save the
both of us time I would ask that you go to AviationBanter or RecAviation
Soaring and read my comments under "Letter to the FAA" and perhaps "Tow
Plane Upsets" which will give you some insight into my intentions.

To make a long story short I experienced two very sudden kiting
incidents within one weeks time. One at 2000 feet and one starting at
about 350 feet. In both cases I made an attempt to release the glider and
in both cases I found the release virtually frozen. In the incident that
happened at 350 feet, had the rope not broken or had it broken a second or
so later you would have been reading about my death. I was flying a Piper
Pawnee with a Schweizer hook and a release handle located down on and
parallel to the floor.

The post "Tow Plane Upsets" was meant to explain what happened to me
and to hear from other tow pilots of their experiences. I had heard about
the difficulty releasing a glider with the Schweizer hook as have most tow
pilots, to have experienced it drives home the reality of the situation. I
was made aware of at least two deaths in the USA as a result of a failure
of the Schweizer release. I understand one of these deaths resulted in
the STC for the Inverted Schweizer hook. These mechanisms are meant to
allow the tow pilot to release the glider when it becomes critically
necessary. I can tell you that at that moment it didn't work for me.

I found it telling that many other tow pilots say they will NOT tow
with anything but a Tost hook. I learned that a Canadian glider pilot/tow
pilot well known to me noted that 30 years ago their club went to the Tost
hook and a release handle up near the throttle as a result of a low kiting
accident. In addition, the British Gliding Association has mandated the
release be up near the throttle and I am told that the Schweizer hook is
virtually non existent in their system. The BGA obvioiusly stepped
forward and corrected the situation. Where is the SSA/SFF in this
regard?

What I find astounding is that this has been known for quite some
time. In both FAA Advisory Circular, Date 3/3/08, AC no 43.13-2B, page 76
and in Soaring Safety Foundation, Tow Pilot Training, page 9 (in red no
less) it is clearly stated that when the glider under tow operates above a
certain angle to the tow plane, the ring may slide upwards on the hook
causing excessive load on the hook and difficulty in releasing the tow
rope ring.

In addition to the failure of the Schweizer hook to open, I question
the sanity of putting a release handle down on and "parallel" to the floor
of the Pawnee requiring an olympic level of calesthenics to reach and
actuate. While this may have been approved by the FAA, this poor design
was easily a factor in my inability to release the glider in both cases.
On page 78 of the above mentioned FAA Advisory Circular there is a
drawing, Figure 8-3. Typical Tow Hitch Release Handle showing a handle
extending more vertically, perhaps 30 degrees from fully vertical. I have
seen such a handle installation on other Pawnees with a handle long enough
so as to be immediately available to the pilot. It would make sense that
this should be the standard for handle design and installation.

I am a reasonable person. It is NOT my intention to do anything to
inhibit the gliding, soaring community. It is my intention to save a life
so I am communicating with you as per the request of Frank Whiteley. Is
there a history with the FAA regarding this issue? I realize that if I
approach the FAA that an over reaction might happen. I would be willing
to put this ball in your court to see if a reasonable accomodation could
be made.

Please Advise.

Respectfully

[Paul Agnew]

Link for the Advisory Circular mentioned. Start at page 72.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%2043.13-2B.pdf

[Walt Connelly]

karengei...@gmail.com;948379 Wrote:
> You can sue the FAA and win. I know someone personally who did, rather
> his estate did.

There are many common misconceptions concerning lawsuits, one of which
is that you can't sue a goverment agency. Not so. "The Federal Tort
Claims Act waives the historic concept of “sovereign immunity” inherited
from English law. It is possible to sue a federal employee who commits a
tortuous act (negligence) within the scope of employment. An example
would be a pilot complying with an ATC IFR clearance that causes him to
fly into a mountain."

That being said if you want to go after a goverment agency you better
have a strong, willing lawyer on your side and deep pockets. It's
gonna cost you.

Walt




--
Walt Connelly

[karengei...@gmail.com]

It did!

[Walt Connelly]

I am in receipt of an email from the SSA Government Liason
representative Mr Northcutt. I am truly amazed at being told that
since I am NOT a current member of the Soaring Society of America he is
unwilling to discuss my concerns.
He did go on to make three bullet points which make me think he did not
read my email.

To say that perhaps the facility at which I worked need to address their
training is a bit presumptative. One pilot was not from this field, but
one of the many who come down to this facility due to the weather. The
second was a 15 year old solo student on her third pull. For those of
you familiar with the USAFA accident where the cadet instructor noted
she was above the tow plane with a "taught" rope and decided to increase
pitch to slow up and allow the tow pilot to get back in position I would
ask, "how can we expect a 15 year old student to understand the
importance of releasing in such a position if a USAFA student and CFI-G
doesn't understand and react properly?

I am well aware of the FAA requirements for PIC. The airplanes I was
flying were not unsafe to fly and the Schweizer hook system is approved
by the FAA. My concern is one that has been expressed by other pilots
and which has directly contributed to the death of more than one tow
pilot here and in other countries.

My investigation of the available information continues, it will take
some time but I will try to be as thorough as possible.

Walt




--
Walt Connelly

[gregg...@gmail.com]

Do you even fly bro?

[Tom BravoMike]

I would think that any institution we deal with, FAA, SSA, EAA, AOPA etc,. etc. should take with highest level of seriousness any remark concerning safety made by a pilot and based on his/her life-threatening experience in flight, member or not.

Several years ago when flying their LS-4 at Soar Minden I was in a situation after landing where the wheel brake, activated by pushing both rudder pedals, seemingly didn't work on a roll-out. I was happy I didn't hit any one on the tarmac. I quickly found out that you have to push with your HEELS, and not FEET. I reported my observation to their instructor with a reference to a possible wrong translation in the glider's Flight Manual, which I had studied before the flight. Some time later checking their web site I was pleased and grateful to see they had reacted and put a proper remark in the manual. The German original reads: "wird mit den Absätzen bedient". I just found the English manual for the LS-4A on-line, and it reads correctly now: "Press rudder pedals with heels to activate wheel brake" - so it must have been amended officially.

Just an example of a proper concern instead of a denial.

Tom BravoMike

[youngbl...@gmail.com]

> Walt Connelly
>
>
>
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

Sounds to me as if Mr. Northcutt needs to find another job where he could be a bit more effective and concerned about the overall safety issues involved. Walt, go straight to OK, City, I can assure you that the response will be different.

[gregg...@gmail.com]

Why should the SSA engage with a nonmember who seeks to increase government regulation of soaring? Keeping the government out of soaring is the SSA's job. Walt is no different than a farmer mcnastyneighbor trying to shut down a gliderport. I know the response, save your safety talk for your wives. Walt ain't about safety. Walt is about bitterness and revenge via bureaucracy warfare.

[Walt Connelly]

I would think the same Tom but apparently the SSA is less concerned with
safety and more concerned with who is and who is not a member of the
club. But for that matter every club and commercial operation out there
still flying with Schweizer hooks and release handles not immediately
accessable by the tow pilot are not concerned with safety either.

Walt




--
Walt Connelly

[Tango Eight]

On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 2:43:07 PM UTC-4, Walt Connelly wrote:

> I would think the same Tom but apparently the SSA is less concerned with
> safety and more concerned with who is and who is not a member of the
> club. But for that matter every club and commercial operation out there
> still flying with Schweizer hooks and release handles not immediately
> accessable by the tow pilot are not concerned with safety either.
>
> Walt

So you weren't concerned with safety, either, until very recently?

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

[mark...@aol.com]

There are treatments for PTSD that don't involve the FAA.

The odds of anything rational and positive coming from involving .GOV is really poor.

[Don Johnstone]

At 04:21 11 June 2017, mark...@aol.com wrote:
>There are treatments for PTSD that don't involve the FAA.
>
>The odds of anything rational and positive coming from involving

GOV is
>really poor.
>
So put your own house in order and it will be unecessary

[Walt Connelly]

'mark...@aol.com[_1_ Wrote:
> ;948656']There are treatments for PTSD that don't involve the FAA.

>
> The odds of anything rational and positive coming from involving .GOV is
> really poor.

Please tell me what treatment is available to a dead tow pilot who tried
to release a glider with a Schweizer hook and died as a result of a well
documented flaw of that release?

Walt




--
Walt Connelly

[Don Johnstone]

From another thread it has been confirmed that in Australia low tow
is the standard position behind the tug.
Does using low tow offer a solution to the ring jam with a Schweizer
hook given that there is almost no chance of glider getting too high
behind the tug?
Tug upsets should be almost unknown in Australia, are they? If they
are it would seen that we could easily increase tug safety at no cost
whatsoever and do away with the need for expensive modification to
tugs.
Is there a cogent argument against using low tow? The only
difference that I can see, from a tuggies point of view is that he will
find it more difficult to see the glider. Is that important?
Of course the reverse applies, the glider can always see the tug.