Initial Report on BC Canada Mid-air

[ChrisVJ]

Last year we lost a very experienced local pilot when his powered glider was in a mid air with a Cessna about 10 further up our valley.

The valley there is about 500M wide with steep cliffs and hills on both sides varying from, maybe, 1,000 ft to 2,000 feet above the valley floor. It is also a recognised low level route as well as the most direct route between our local airfields and a couple of very busy helicopter bases.

Rudy, the pilot, had run a gliding school and sightseeing in Pemberton for maybe twenty years.

I think the initial report makes interesting reading. There was little skilled observation reported at the time so it is, I suspect, to a degree speculative.

I know we all want our aircraft to look beautiful but it occurs to me we might choose (and some do) colour schemes that are easier to see, eg. Yellow black stripes on leading edges. Obviously white aircraft are more difficult to see against white clouds.

Here is how the report is noted in the Vancouver Sun.

Quote:

THE CANADIAN PRESS September 18, 2014 2:23 PM

Blind spots partly caused mid-air crash over Pemberton that killed 4 people: report


VANCOUVER — The Transportation Safety Board says the pilots of a glider and a Cessna likely didn't see each other because of blind spots and other visual problems, setting off a mid-air crash that left four people dead.

The crash and fire that followed happened on June 29, 2013, just above a provincial campground west of Pemberton.

No one on the ground was hurt, but glider pilot Rudy Rozsypalek and his passenger Mohnish Paul died and Terence Gale, his wife Rita Turnbull and their dog were killed in the Cessna.

The TSB report says the glider was descending into the path of the Cessna, and because the glider pilot sits in a semi-reclined position behind the nose of the craft, visibility would have been limited.

The report says the white glider, with thin profile wings and white cumulus clouds in the background, would have been difficult for the Cessna pilot to see until it was too late to avoid a crash.

There's no requirement for Canadian private aircraft to be equipped with collision avoidance systems, and the report says that poses several risks including a limited field of vision and blinds spots.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Witness+describes+horror+collision+near+Pemberton+that+left+ four+dead+with+video/8598268/story.html#ixzz3Di2JK2dD

[OpenCirrus619]

Anyone who thinks that the "semi-reclined position behind the nose of the craft" results in poor visibility from a glider has obviously never flown one :(

OC619

[ChrisVJ]

It was one of those MOTOR Gliders with engine and retractable prop in the nose. While a lot better than some tail draggerss on the ground the view below the nose is severely restricted in flight. Full bubble style canopy though, view above and around much better than high wing Cessna's etc.

[India Four Two]

The report can be viewed here:

Aviation Investigation Report A13P0127 - Transportation Safety Board of Canada (http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/2013/A13P0127/A13P0127.asp)

The Stemme S10 motor glider has side-by-side seating, so the view for the PIC is much better than when flying a tandem two-seater, where the PIC usually flies from the back-seat on sight-seeing flights.

The semi-reclining seating comment is a red-herring in my opinion. All aircraft have a restricted view forwards and downwards, but the Cessna 150's is much worse than the Stemme's.

I think this is a very poor TSB report. It discusses in detail the various kinds of collision avoidance equipment available, but since neither aircraft had this equipment, the discussion is completely irrelevant. What is missing from the report is an analysis of the fields of view from each aircraft. That would have been much more useful.

I suspect that the Stemme's rate of descent would have been relatively low - 100-300 fpm - so this was basically a head-on, essentially level-flight collision, and probably each aircraft would have been visible to the other.

This accident was just an unfortunate failure of the "big-sky" theory and is a risk in all VFR flights. If the heights or positions had been slightly different, it would have been one of those "Whew, that was close!" moments, which most pilots have experienced.

What I did find useful in the report was the section on Collision Avoidance Manoeuvres, where it states that within 10 s of a collision, altitude change is the best avoidance manoeuvre.

[mary meagher]

Glider descending. Cessna level or climbing a bit. Nose to nose,and true enough that each was in the blind spot of the other aircraft. Cessna high wings, and the pilot WEARING A BASEBALL CAP WITH SUN VISOR? folks, if you are wearing a baseball cap while flying, please wear it BACKWARDS.

So it doesn't block your field of vision.

[ChrisVJ]

While flying through this valley, which I have done maybe forty or fifty times, I always stuck well over to the starboard side. Not much use though if others don't do it.

I must say I occasionally feel the Canadian TSB reports are of doubtful quality. Inevitably there is going to be some level of speculation in GA reports where information is limited, however phrases such as "The aircraft may have been close to overloaded," (Which I have actually read in a TSB report!) are worryingly worded and imply guilt where none is established.

[India Four Two]

I always stuck well over to the starboard side. Not much use though if others don't do it.

ChrisVJ,

That's a good point, but in this case, it looks like the Stemme pilot was tracking towards the airport. Also, glider pilots tend to think in terms of the sunny side and/or the upwind side of a valley, rather than port and starboard.

[dsc810]

On a different note....
modern gliders are white due to their gel coat/GRP construction.

Application of dark colour transfer strips etc to aid ID etc have always been frowned upon as I understood it has the possibility of weakening the structure.

[India Four Two]

dsc810,

Not just frowned upon - white is mandatory for the Stemme. From the Canadian Type Certificate:

"All external portions of the powered sailplane exposed to solar radiation must be painted white."

[ChrisVJ]

It was my impression that the falls were on the starboard side going North but looking at the diagram in the report, the way the valley narrows just there it looks as though they are in the middle. I can certainly understand a sight seeing tour descending to look at them as they are very interesting even from the air.

The gliding club had been doing sightseeing tours for years but the motor glider was a fairly recent introduction. One would not expect a glider to descend just there but with a motor glider there would be no particular reason not to.

I have seen the odd 'plastic' aircraft in colours and wonder if the requirement for 'white' which I quite understand, was part of the conditions for early f/glass aircraft etc and is a left over or whether it is still required by the materials today (rather than 'required by the regs or POS.)

Obviously if one owned an aircraft in which the regs required white one would keep it white.

[RatherBeFlying]

It would surprise me if there was no recorder running in the glider. In my glider, recorders are built in on two instruments and the computer also records the flight. My guess is that TSB investigators are not talking to the glider community.

As for visibility of a white glider, white stands out very well against vegetation. The treed slopes would be an excellent contrast.

The glider path is consistent with tracking the runway heading to make a 90 degree turn to mid downwind.

Technically the glider was still outside the traffic area; so when do you switch between 123.2 and 126.7?

It's a pain to pull out the CFS in flight every time you cross an airport enroute.

It might help to have circles on the map with the frequency -- for those using one on paper.