Re: Winch Signals

At 08:45 17 April 2009, Tom Gardner wrote:
On Apr 16, 10:50=A0pm, The Real Doctor
wrote:

There are problems with this nanny-knows-best approach. First of all,
it's all very well to say that "BGA recommendations are distilled
wisdom and best practice" ... so what about the previous BGA
recommendation to have pilot signals?

If new evidence is presented, I am prepared to change my mind.
Would you refuse to change your mind?

Was that not distilled wisdom
and best practice? And if that was wrong, how can we be sure that the
current method is right?

I very much doubt it is "right" in all circumstances :) But that's
not
the point.

I think the evidence exists to show that neither system is unsafe and that
the solution dictated (launch marshalls) did nothing to improve matters.
I agree there was/is a problem with people releasing early enough when
there is a winch launch problem, and to a lesser extent aerotwow. I
suggest that the problem is not one of procedure but of training and
awareness. How often do we see a wing touch the ground and the launch
continue and become normal. Everyone heaves a sigh of relief and goes back
to what they are doing. The accident didn't happen, but if it had, the
cause would be nothing to do with were the pilot happened to have his
hand, but with his possibly TIBBIN state. The introduction of launch
marshalls was never ever going to solve the real problem, in fact it could
only make it worse, and we lost out again by circumventing a percieved
problem instead of tackling the real one.
The main objection to the launch marshall system is that it introduced to
UK gliding one of the most dangerous practices known, that of negative
consent. Something will happen as the result of third party action unless
first party action is taken to stop it. One can only wonder at the
towering intellect and distilled wisdom that considered introducing
negative consent to a safety critical procedure. The statistics are now
showing that we did not solve the original problem at all, just masked it
and yet we fail to learn. There are no easy solutions, knee jerk reactions
seldom work. To solve problems you first have to identify the problem, then
find a solution that is not worse than the problem we already have. In this
case the solution was in my view.
1. More effective education and instruction of the dangers of failing to
make an early release. Ensuring that pilots were thinking about what they
were doing. (Prior to the change the hand had to be near the release when
not actually signalling, you had to think what you we doing, now you
don't, as long as your hand is on the release you are safe, Yeah
right!!!!!!!)
2. Moving the position of the release to ensure that it is close to hand
and not hidden away in the dark recesses of the cockpit. (This was
mandated for tugs following the fatal tug accident at Aboyne)

Apart from the faulty processess in problem solving my main concern
remains, NEGATIVE CONSENT has no place in a launch procedure.

.