What can be learned from this "scooter" towing accident? II
Posted: Fri Feb 18, 2011 6:59 pm“What can be learned from this "scooter" towing accident?”
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22660
My (and others) right of reply.
Jim said
“This is the s*** that's annoying me.
The faulty premiss is that the UK system is better than the US system.”
I didn’t say or imply that.
I said “This fatality would not have happened in the UK” and I am prepared to support that statement.
But if the cap fits….
”But, and I'll say this slowly… He wasn't using any of the US systems.
Do I need to repeat this?
Sorry, I'm going to… It had nothing to do with the US systems… it had to do with using HIS OWN bulls*** one.
If he was using any of the US systems, this wouldn't have happened either.
So you can stop beating your damn drum dude. It had nothing to do with him not using your particular flavour of release. It had to do with him using a shitrigged release. Which is the true lesson here.”
No need to shout, speak slowly or repeat. I’m only just across the other side of the world.
The topic (from my perspective) broadened several posts ago, didn’t you notice?
“What can be learned from this "scooter" towing accident?” surely this does not stop dead at “It had to do with him using a shitrigged release.”
What about questions such as why did he not use an approved setup in the first place inline with US standards?
You do have standards, don’t you?
Why did the trained tow coach on the day not spot a cowboy setup?
You do have trained tow coaches that run the day, don’t you?
“What can be learned from this "scooter" towing accident?”
“He was using a shitrigged release” lesson learnt, next, lets move on.
”The more you drone on about the damn Kotch release, all you're doing is removing attention from the real problem… don't use made up s***!”
The topic (from my perspective) broadened several posts ago, didn’t you notice?
If you would like to point out the bits you consider as “made up sh**” I will happily make a excellent case as to why this is not so.
“removing attention from the real problem”
I think the topic lockdown did a fine job of that all by itself.
“Preview of coming attractions:
Pud Pud will tell me how wonderful his Kotch release is.
Uhg… I hate when people don't listen”
Jim
The topic (from my perspective) broadened several posts ago, didn’t you notice?
Nice touch referring to me as a third party, a kind of rallying call.
A bit silly in the context of a dead pilot.
From: Elektra Tow Systems
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 11:36 AM
“OK, one more point, or rather a restatement of some ideas others have mentioned and implied and perhaps we can call it a day…..
I am going to argue that the factors of cost, availability and installation simplicity have a bigger effect on overall population safety than the differences in the functional reliability for the release systems we have been discussing. Even if we could (or arguably have) designed the nearly full proof system and set it as the industry standard, getting your average free flight pilot to use it is required and is part of the safety/saving lives equation. Consider the following two real world alternatives for a traveling pilot arriving at Quest Air at noon to fly today: 1) Telling the pilot that he needs the industry standard release system that costs a lot of money ($25 for a tow is a lot to many visiting pilots) and requires a bit of engineering to mount to his harness (or even worse, might not look cool or is bulky) is likely followed with argument, unhappiness and no flying - or worse, bandito towing somewhere with the locals!! 2) Tying a couple pieces of “string” together for free, letting the pilot borrow a barrel release we have lying around and setting it up on his harness before he is done going to the restroom, is followed with happiness and pretty darn safe flying – at least safer than his drive home.
I’m not implying that spectra, barrels and biners are the most functionally reliable release systems available. Nor should we neglect the fact that a root cause in this recent fatality involved using these “simple” and available release system components improperly (i.e. no biner and poor weak link location). I am emphasizing the point that improving real world safety includes getting people to use the stuff. The 99.9% safe system that only 30% of the population uses does not help as many people as the 90+% safe solution that 80% of the population uses. Argue the percentage numbers if you like, but the at the level of functional reliability we have achieved with the release systems we are talking about, the significant driver is the percentage of people we can get using the stuff. Cheap, available and simple carry the day in this regard and with a bit of continuing education on how such components can be safely used, life can get better.
And with that, I’d love to continue the discussion with you all at Quest over a post flying beer …. Mitch”
An interesting point of view but I don’t buy it.
By the time a pilot has got a glider, harness, chute, instruments, boots etc. etc.Then spent money on lessons, travel, beer and so on and so on I can’t believe they would then stop short and call it a day for want of a one time purchase of a release.
This also does not account for the regular tow guys in the US.
They don’t just turn up but have a regular flying setup with permanent kit.
I would guess many might be more than happy to buy that extra 9.9%
People use what is available because that is what is available.
The US tow faction has morphed in one direction and other parts of the world in another. Equipment, availability, support all evolve to accommodate.
I don’t agree with the above post by Mitch, but I do appreciate the constructive point of view put forward.
Actually I’m not trying to promote anything.
I have listed the good AND bad points of the ground tow system I use and have invited others to list the good and bad points of the ground tow systems they use.
Any takers?
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22660
My (and others) right of reply.
Jim said
“This is the s*** that's annoying me.
The faulty premiss is that the UK system is better than the US system.”
I didn’t say or imply that.
I said “This fatality would not have happened in the UK” and I am prepared to support that statement.
But if the cap fits….
”But, and I'll say this slowly… He wasn't using any of the US systems.
Do I need to repeat this?
Sorry, I'm going to… It had nothing to do with the US systems… it had to do with using HIS OWN bulls*** one.
If he was using any of the US systems, this wouldn't have happened either.
So you can stop beating your damn drum dude. It had nothing to do with him not using your particular flavour of release. It had to do with him using a shitrigged release. Which is the true lesson here.”
No need to shout, speak slowly or repeat. I’m only just across the other side of the world.
The topic (from my perspective) broadened several posts ago, didn’t you notice?
“What can be learned from this "scooter" towing accident?” surely this does not stop dead at “It had to do with him using a shitrigged release.”
What about questions such as why did he not use an approved setup in the first place inline with US standards?
You do have standards, don’t you?
Why did the trained tow coach on the day not spot a cowboy setup?
You do have trained tow coaches that run the day, don’t you?
“What can be learned from this "scooter" towing accident?”
“He was using a shitrigged release” lesson learnt, next, lets move on.
”The more you drone on about the damn Kotch release, all you're doing is removing attention from the real problem… don't use made up s***!”
The topic (from my perspective) broadened several posts ago, didn’t you notice?
If you would like to point out the bits you consider as “made up sh**” I will happily make a excellent case as to why this is not so.
“removing attention from the real problem”
I think the topic lockdown did a fine job of that all by itself.
“Preview of coming attractions:
Pud Pud will tell me how wonderful his Kotch release is.
Uhg… I hate when people don't listen”
Jim
The topic (from my perspective) broadened several posts ago, didn’t you notice?
Nice touch referring to me as a third party, a kind of rallying call.
A bit silly in the context of a dead pilot.
From: Elektra Tow Systems
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 11:36 AM
“OK, one more point, or rather a restatement of some ideas others have mentioned and implied and perhaps we can call it a day…..
I am going to argue that the factors of cost, availability and installation simplicity have a bigger effect on overall population safety than the differences in the functional reliability for the release systems we have been discussing. Even if we could (or arguably have) designed the nearly full proof system and set it as the industry standard, getting your average free flight pilot to use it is required and is part of the safety/saving lives equation. Consider the following two real world alternatives for a traveling pilot arriving at Quest Air at noon to fly today: 1) Telling the pilot that he needs the industry standard release system that costs a lot of money ($25 for a tow is a lot to many visiting pilots) and requires a bit of engineering to mount to his harness (or even worse, might not look cool or is bulky) is likely followed with argument, unhappiness and no flying - or worse, bandito towing somewhere with the locals!! 2) Tying a couple pieces of “string” together for free, letting the pilot borrow a barrel release we have lying around and setting it up on his harness before he is done going to the restroom, is followed with happiness and pretty darn safe flying – at least safer than his drive home.
I’m not implying that spectra, barrels and biners are the most functionally reliable release systems available. Nor should we neglect the fact that a root cause in this recent fatality involved using these “simple” and available release system components improperly (i.e. no biner and poor weak link location). I am emphasizing the point that improving real world safety includes getting people to use the stuff. The 99.9% safe system that only 30% of the population uses does not help as many people as the 90+% safe solution that 80% of the population uses. Argue the percentage numbers if you like, but the at the level of functional reliability we have achieved with the release systems we are talking about, the significant driver is the percentage of people we can get using the stuff. Cheap, available and simple carry the day in this regard and with a bit of continuing education on how such components can be safely used, life can get better.
And with that, I’d love to continue the discussion with you all at Quest over a post flying beer …. Mitch”
An interesting point of view but I don’t buy it.
By the time a pilot has got a glider, harness, chute, instruments, boots etc. etc.Then spent money on lessons, travel, beer and so on and so on I can’t believe they would then stop short and call it a day for want of a one time purchase of a release.
This also does not account for the regular tow guys in the US.
They don’t just turn up but have a regular flying setup with permanent kit.
I would guess many might be more than happy to buy that extra 9.9%
People use what is available because that is what is available.
The US tow faction has morphed in one direction and other parts of the world in another. Equipment, availability, support all evolve to accommodate.
I don’t agree with the above post by Mitch, but I do appreciate the constructive point of view put forward.
Actually I’m not trying to promote anything.
I have listed the good AND bad points of the ground tow system I use and have invited others to list the good and bad points of the ground tow systems they use.
Any takers?
