Air Cadets grounded?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cats,
The BGA regime in my time, and I have little reason to suspect it has changed, was that a valid CofA issued by a BGA approved inspector was all the proof they needed to accept that a glider was fit to fly. I was never asked to produce the CofA for any of our club gliders in all my time as TO. I expect they would have asked to see it if there had been an accident in which the integrity of the airframe was a potential cause. If the CofA was out of date then I expect BIG trouble for the club concerned would have ensued. Again, in all my time there were few accidents which were caused by structural failure of the glider concerned. There was one at Portmoak where a glider was not rigged correctly (main spar pins not engaged fully) and the wings folded up during a winch launch having withstood several dozen aerotows in the configuration in which it failed. Apart from that one I cannot recall any other episodes, others may know better.
My own glider was of course insured, and a condition was that a valid CofA was in force. Again I was never asked to produce the evidence but if I had been asked following a prang, and it was not forthcoming, my insurance would have been declared invalid.
Now the ATC AFAIK is not insured in the usual way or maybe not at all, it being a department of the government. This automatically removes the vital requirement mentioned above.
Are ATC gliders subject to Cof A or the RAF equivalent?
Maybe this is the hole through which all these gliders now on the ground have fallen. Comments?
The BGA regime in my time, and I have little reason to suspect it has changed, was that a valid CofA issued by a BGA approved inspector was all the proof they needed to accept that a glider was fit to fly. I was never asked to produce the CofA for any of our club gliders in all my time as TO. I expect they would have asked to see it if there had been an accident in which the integrity of the airframe was a potential cause. If the CofA was out of date then I expect BIG trouble for the club concerned would have ensued. Again, in all my time there were few accidents which were caused by structural failure of the glider concerned. There was one at Portmoak where a glider was not rigged correctly (main spar pins not engaged fully) and the wings folded up during a winch launch having withstood several dozen aerotows in the configuration in which it failed. Apart from that one I cannot recall any other episodes, others may know better.
My own glider was of course insured, and a condition was that a valid CofA was in force. Again I was never asked to produce the evidence but if I had been asked following a prang, and it was not forthcoming, my insurance would have been declared invalid.
Now the ATC AFAIK is not insured in the usual way or maybe not at all, it being a department of the government. This automatically removes the vital requirement mentioned above.
Are ATC gliders subject to Cof A or the RAF equivalent?
Maybe this is the hole through which all these gliders now on the ground have fallen. Comments?
The fundamental problem is that a training glider is not a military aircraft, it is a civilian aircraft and so trying to use a Military Airworthiness system to attain and maintain glider airworthiness is just using a huge hammer to try to smash the round peg into the square hole.
The Canadian AIr Cadet gliders and tow planes are all civilian registered and the Cadets get a Transport Canada civilian glider pilot license at the end of the course. A typical year will see about new 300 GPL’s issued,
The main RCAF involvement is providing the resources of the Air Force flight safety program and personnel to enhance safety
I would suggest that as long as the RAF keeps trying to run the UK Air Cadet program there will never be any significant Air Cadet gliding available for the Air Cadets of today or tomorrow.
The Canadian AIr Cadet gliders and tow planes are all civilian registered and the Cadets get a Transport Canada civilian glider pilot license at the end of the course. A typical year will see about new 300 GPL’s issued,
The main RCAF involvement is providing the resources of the Air Force flight safety program and personnel to enhance safety
I would suggest that as long as the RAF keeps trying to run the UK Air Cadet program there will never be any significant Air Cadet gliding available for the Air Cadets of today or tomorrow.
Pistons, I think you misunderstand the current UK system. There is no requirement to operate to military airworthiness rather than civil.
Airworthiness is airworthiness and the UK military system recognises the civil system in its entirety. As a result we have military fleets run in accordance with civilian standards and overseen by the civilian regulators. This includes any supporting elements including civilian training and licences for military maintenance personnel.
Adopting civilian airworthiness systems is seen by the UK MoD as cheaper and lower risk. Pure military airworthiness systems are only used when no relevant or appropriate civilian system exists.
Airworthiness is airworthiness and the UK military system recognises the civil system in its entirety. As a result we have military fleets run in accordance with civilian standards and overseen by the civilian regulators. This includes any supporting elements including civilian training and licences for military maintenance personnel.
Adopting civilian airworthiness systems is seen by the UK MoD as cheaper and lower risk. Pure military airworthiness systems are only used when no relevant or appropriate civilian system exists.
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You keep referencing ‘your time’ and it leads me to believe it was a long time ago indeed. You may have missed the fact that in 2008 all non-Annex II Sailplanes transitioned onto the G-Register, with all the associated EASA paperwork. If you’ve ever issued an ARC you will know that it requires the signatory to declare that the aircraft has been maintained to the letter or the law, with all maintenance, repairs or modifications fully documented and approved.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just this once
While I would agree with you in theory in practice the military gold plate the EASA airworthiness system, then employ another part of the military to gold plate the bits it has already gold plated until it can’t see the original objective for all the gold plate. The whole system is process driven with the objective of defining issues in books and manuals that can’t be for practical purposes be defined.
Those working in the pure civil sector are product driven and much less obsessed by the process and aim their attention to the quality of the product and the practical flight safety.
To put it more simply counting the paint brushes in the stores does not make an aircraft safe, making sure that one of these paint brushes is not in a control run when the aircraft leave the hangar does........... the civil side of aviation focuses on the later while the military focus on the former.
Those working in the pure civil sector are product driven and much less obsessed by the process and aim their attention to the quality of the product and the practical flight safety.
To put it more simply counting the paint brushes in the stores does not make an aircraft safe, making sure that one of these paint brushes is not in a control run when the aircraft leave the hangar does........... the civil side of aviation focuses on the later while the military focus on the former.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even before the non-annex 2 gliders transitioned to the G register (mostly in 2007/2008) the paperwork had to be in order, and that was more than just a CoA.
ADs had to be complied with and recorded in the log book, all repairs had to be recorded, changing tyres had to be recorded, in short anything other than the DI, cleaning, pumping up tyres, rigging etc. had to be in the log book and the those had to be in the DI book.
Part of transitioning was checking all the ADs were complied with and any that weren't in the log book had to be done. We also now record SBs.
AFAIK a Viking is another name for a Grob 103, there is a big list of ADs for those - the other 103 list and the 102 list are almost as big, the 104 list is a bit shorter:
G 103 AD & SB - Fiberglas-Technik Rudolf Lindner - Wir machen Ihr Flugzeug fit für Saison und Wettbewerb
You refer to a fatal accident at PMK. Are you sure it wasn't a PMK glider at another club? If you are thinking of the one I am the details are wrong as well.
A glider with the same horrific main pin arrangement (it's not possible to visually check it's correctly installed) in the US lost it's wings, on aerotow, after several earlier aerotows.
The glider I'm thinking of had it's wings fold during the second WINCH launch of the day.
Both accidents were fatal, and the pilot of the second accident was a friend of mine.
Merry Xmas all.
The last few posts have reminded me that in April 2001, at an interview in Abbey Wood, I was asked by the Directorate of Personnel, Resources and Development lady chairing the panel what I would do if someone consciously made false record in aircraft documentation. Standard answer....in a disciplinary sense, it's potentially a dismissable offence. Also, one must check back through the offender's previous work, and so on. I was shut down very quickly. I was wrong. That would upset the 'offender', making me the offender. No action should be taken. One is always told never to argue at interview, but I told her she was barking.
My prospective boss, a Brigadier (who was allowed to be present, but not to speak), stood up, took me outside and offered me the job. His parting shot to her was 'he's talking about aircraft that I fly in'. But her boss (DPRD) later ruled she was perfectly correct. THAT, I'm afraid, is where MoD has gone wrong. (I still got the job).
The last few posts have reminded me that in April 2001, at an interview in Abbey Wood, I was asked by the Directorate of Personnel, Resources and Development lady chairing the panel what I would do if someone consciously made false record in aircraft documentation. Standard answer....in a disciplinary sense, it's potentially a dismissable offence. Also, one must check back through the offender's previous work, and so on. I was shut down very quickly. I was wrong. That would upset the 'offender', making me the offender. No action should be taken. One is always told never to argue at interview, but I told her she was barking.
My prospective boss, a Brigadier (who was allowed to be present, but not to speak), stood up, took me outside and offered me the job. His parting shot to her was 'he's talking about aircraft that I fly in'. But her boss (DPRD) later ruled she was perfectly correct. THAT, I'm afraid, is where MoD has gone wrong. (I still got the job).
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cats5,
If you read my post 3790 you will realise that I am a very old (never bold) glider pilot. My last flying in gliders was in 2007 (at Portmoak oddly enough) so I missed all this stuff about gliders going on the register. I was merely trying to point out how simple things were in days of yore before the pen-pushers got their hands on gliding. The accident rate has not improved over recent times so what has been the point of introducing more paperwork?
If you read my post 3790 you will realise that I am a very old (never bold) glider pilot. My last flying in gliders was in 2007 (at Portmoak oddly enough) so I missed all this stuff about gliders going on the register. I was merely trying to point out how simple things were in days of yore before the pen-pushers got their hands on gliding. The accident rate has not improved over recent times so what has been the point of introducing more paperwork?
Last edited by Olympia 463; 26th Dec 2017 at 09:25.
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cats%,
If you read my post 3790 you will realise that I am a very old (never bold) glider pilot. My last flying in gliders was in 2007 (at Portmoak oddly enough) so I missed all this stuff about gliders going on the register. I was merely trying to point out how simple things were in days of yore before the pen-pushers got their hands on gliding. The accident rate has not improved over recent times so what has been the point of introducing more paperwork?
If you read my post 3790 you will realise that I am a very old (never bold) glider pilot. My last flying in gliders was in 2007 (at Portmoak oddly enough) so I missed all this stuff about gliders going on the register. I was merely trying to point out how simple things were in days of yore before the pen-pushers got their hands on gliding. The accident rate has not improved over recent times so what has been the point of introducing more paperwork?
Rightly or wrongly gliding is now more regulated than it once was, but the paperwork burden is hardly onerous. In fact the latest Pilot-Owner Maintenance and CS-STAN creations by EASA give a surprisingly large field to play on in terms of working on one’s own aircraft and making minor modifications.
Of course the Viking fleet is not subject to any of this, but the fact of the matter still stands that the lack of proper paperwork would have seen them grounded under any airworthiness system. You simply can’t fix aeroplanes and not write it down.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<snip>
The accident rate very definitely has improved. Whether this is to do with flying standards, aircraft safety or increased regulation I wouldn’t want to say. But gliding is now safer than it was.
<snip>
Of course the Viking fleet is not subject to any of this, but the fact of the matter still stands that the lack of proper paperwork would have seen them grounded under any airworthiness system. You simply can’t fix aeroplanes and not write it down.
The accident rate very definitely has improved. Whether this is to do with flying standards, aircraft safety or increased regulation I wouldn’t want to say. But gliding is now safer than it was.
<snip>
Of course the Viking fleet is not subject to any of this, but the fact of the matter still stands that the lack of proper paperwork would have seen them grounded under any airworthiness system. You simply can’t fix aeroplanes and not write it down.
https://members.gliding.co.uk/bga-safety-management/
It struck me at the time that some of the things some forumites were saying they had done were done by young men (I suspect) who thought they were immortal.
As to the paperwork, exactly. I'm sure the same would have happened whatever the ATC were flying.
Ah Hem
As I recall; when a Cadet completed the three solo's not only was this a real ATC qualification but also the ability to apply for the BGA A&B Cert. So it seems that the BGA and ATC actually go back some time. In fact one could wear the little enamel badge on the uniform, and upgrade to the 3 Gull version after the 'soaring' trips on an advanced course.
My goodness they really did chuck so much away, and do not deserve to be part of the future. Time for break chaps; don't let the donkeys get their way (no disrespect to donkeys)
My goodness they really did chuck so much away, and do not deserve to be part of the future. Time for break chaps; don't let the donkeys get their way (no disrespect to donkeys)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some clubs seem to have retained it as a local thing - or their websites are out of date!
Guest
Posts: n/a
92125 (PS are you a railway enthusiast?)
The accident rate affected by 'certification' is that relating to structural or control system failures. I maintain that this rate has not reduced (it was never high) since my time.
The biggies were always winching accidents and cross country flying. The winching accidents have been reduced somewhat due to the very active intervention of the BGA. How did the ATC handle these accidents?
In thirty odd years of gliding I never saw an accident which could be attributed to structural failure. Plenty messed up winch launches though.
I have still got my 'B' badge. The first awarded in the Staffordshire Gliding Club.
The accident rate affected by 'certification' is that relating to structural or control system failures. I maintain that this rate has not reduced (it was never high) since my time.
The biggies were always winching accidents and cross country flying. The winching accidents have been reduced somewhat due to the very active intervention of the BGA. How did the ATC handle these accidents?
In thirty odd years of gliding I never saw an accident which could be attributed to structural failure. Plenty messed up winch launches though.
I have still got my 'B' badge. The first awarded in the Staffordshire Gliding Club.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Changing standards over the years have made rigging failure accidents on modern less likely. Modern single seat gliders are self-connecting, and the sort of main pin arrangement involved in my friend's fatal accident has long since been replaced by arrangements where if it looks like it's properly rigged, it is.
They have also improved crash-worthiness, though I was impressed with the integrity of the cockpit on a Bocian that 'arrived' across a stone wall. This aspect alone is enough IMHO to warrant the ATC changing from T21/T31 gliders to the Vikings.
The BGA continues to be vigilant about winch launch accidents, but also about aerotow upsets where the tug pilot is far more likely to be hurt than the glider pilot, and rigging issues.
Additionally it notifies those glider owners who have provided an email address about ADs, which is getting to the sort of area where the ATC and their maintenance organisation failed.
Out of interest I looked at the Slingsby ADs, and they exist for the T31 and the T21.
https://members.gliding.co.uk/librar...ness/slingsby/
Don't you want to be sure that each and every glider flown (regardless of they type and who the owner is) has been inspected and where necessary repaired to comply with each and every relevant AD, and any necessary repairs have been done correctly? How is that compliance going to be demonstrated other than through complete and up-to-date paperwork?
Why all the resistance to correct paperwork from a number of forumites? If as much effort had gone into willingly understanding what was required as has gone into resisting it I suspect the problem either wouldn't exist, or would be considerably smaller.
And of course you still have your B badge, they don't expire even if they are no longer awarded. I will have my Silver C until I draw my last breath.
They have also improved crash-worthiness, though I was impressed with the integrity of the cockpit on a Bocian that 'arrived' across a stone wall. This aspect alone is enough IMHO to warrant the ATC changing from T21/T31 gliders to the Vikings.
The BGA continues to be vigilant about winch launch accidents, but also about aerotow upsets where the tug pilot is far more likely to be hurt than the glider pilot, and rigging issues.
Additionally it notifies those glider owners who have provided an email address about ADs, which is getting to the sort of area where the ATC and their maintenance organisation failed.
Out of interest I looked at the Slingsby ADs, and they exist for the T31 and the T21.
https://members.gliding.co.uk/librar...ness/slingsby/
Don't you want to be sure that each and every glider flown (regardless of they type and who the owner is) has been inspected and where necessary repaired to comply with each and every relevant AD, and any necessary repairs have been done correctly? How is that compliance going to be demonstrated other than through complete and up-to-date paperwork?
Why all the resistance to correct paperwork from a number of forumites? If as much effort had gone into willingly understanding what was required as has gone into resisting it I suspect the problem either wouldn't exist, or would be considerably smaller.
And of course you still have your B badge, they don't expire even if they are no longer awarded. I will have my Silver C until I draw my last breath.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We don't worry that a typical modern car used by driving schools is better performing than those of 30 years ago, why the fuss (or is it concern?) that a Viking performs better than a T31?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Talking about aerotow upsets, the worst I ever saw, which took place before neither plane had really left the ground, was at the World Championships at South Cerney in June 1965. All the towing was by Chippys provided by the RAF as the airfield being used belonged to them. There was this American pilot (of some fame as far as cross countries went) who right after the 'all out' on his tow must have thought he was having a winch launch as he hauled back on the stick (we could see his elevator full up) and lifted the towplane's tail right off the deck while he was still accelerating. The tuggy did his best to combat this, but our intrepid Yank continued hauling back, and eventually broke the back of the Chipmunk! Never heard who paid for that.
I did 733 aerotows, all but 7 as P1 and I never had any trouble myself, nor did anyone else in three clubs I flew in. Aerotowing was the gentleman's way to get airborne.
I too still have my Silver 'C' badge and wear it with pride whenever it is appropriate and, like you, would never part with it - Number 4769 it is, though I had the 5hr leg done very early in my career and had I got on with it, would have been in the late 2000's. Too much instructing.
I did 733 aerotows, all but 7 as P1 and I never had any trouble myself, nor did anyone else in three clubs I flew in. Aerotowing was the gentleman's way to get airborne.
I too still have my Silver 'C' badge and wear it with pride whenever it is appropriate and, like you, would never part with it - Number 4769 it is, though I had the 5hr leg done very early in my career and had I got on with it, would have been in the late 2000's. Too much instructing.
Last edited by Olympia 463; 27th Dec 2017 at 09:11.
Talking about aerotow upsets, the worst I ever saw, which took place before neither plane had really left the ground, was at the World Championships at South Cerney in June 1965. All the towing was by Chippys provided by the RAF as the airfield being used belonged to them. There was this American pilot (of some fame as far as cross countries went) who right after the 'all out' on his tow must have thought he was having a winch launch as he hauled back on the stick (we could see his elevator full up) and lifted to towplane's tail right off the deck while he was still accelerating. The tuggy did his best to combat this, but our intrepid Yank continued hauling back, and eventually broke the back of the Chipmunk! Never heard who paid for that.
Last edited by chevvron; 27th Dec 2017 at 16:50.
Who said 'never let the facts get in the way of a good story'.
The glider pilot was Swiss Marcus Ritzi. He brought his own Elfe S3, and one highly modified by the designer, which he flew in the practice week, and it had a 'compromise'release under the instrument panel. Marcus reverted to his own for he competition, as he felt more at home and the other seemed no better. His glider had a nose aerotow release, and a C of G winch one. In the hurry to launch, his crew attached the wrong one, and full down elevator (which most of us at the launch point saw) didn't overcome the pitch up moment. Both pilots released, but the Chipmunk was too low, and too nose down to avoid a 'heavy landing'. BeBe Sharman, the tug pilot, presented Marcus with a souvenir photo.
There were many other good stories from South Cerney; the Operational Orders which the typist wrote as ' The glider and tug pilot must have not fewer than ten toes between them' which gave rise to speculation on what other physical or mental handicaps they might have; the Indian pilot who arrived with a lady assumed to be his wife until the real one turned up....
Probably suitable for a different thread elsewhere.
Talking about aerotow upsets, the worst I ever saw, which took place before neither plane had really left the ground, was at the World Championships at South Cerney in June 1965. All the towing was by Chippys provided by the RAF as the airfield being used belonged to them. There was this American pilot (of some fame as far as cross countries went) who right after the 'all out' on his tow must have thought he was having a winch launch as he hauled back on the stick (we could see his elevator full up) and lifted to towplane's tail right off the deck while he was still accelerating. The tuggy did his best to combat this, but our intrepid Yank continued hauling back, and eventually broke the back of the Chipmunk! Never heard who paid for that.
There were many other good stories from South Cerney; the Operational Orders which the typist wrote as ' The glider and tug pilot must have not fewer than ten toes between them' which gave rise to speculation on what other physical or mental handicaps they might have; the Indian pilot who arrived with a lady assumed to be his wife until the real one turned up....
Probably suitable for a different thread elsewhere.