PAVE is part of this process Decision Making PAVE is part of this process Pilot Aircraft enVironment External pressures

P for Pilot Knowledge level Skill Experience Currency versus provenience IMSAFE list

IMSAFE list Illness- do I have any symptoms? Meds- any drugs, prescription, OTC? Stress- problems? Personal? Job? Family? Alcohol-booze in 8 hours? 24 hours? Fatigue-how tired are you? Eating- energy level? Are you hydrated?

A for Aircraft Aircraft condition- has it been inspected? Airworthy? Equipment- NAV aids ,flight controls (flaps/spoilers) Performance- Is it a ship you have flown before? How many hours do you have with this type of glider? Have you reviewed the manual? Is this glider suitability for the type of task you are going to fly?

V for enVironment Weather- is it flyable? Meets the FAR for minimums, etc Forecast to stay adequate for the task planned Airport, landing areas, obstacles, terrain

E for External Pressure This is the interaction between the pilot, aircraft and the environment. The pilot must evaluate the 3 previous areas to decide on the desirability of going flying or continuing the flight as planned. Examples… Do I have to be home at a certain time? Do I have a crew if I land out? Is the trailer connected to the car? What about the keys? Etc…

Incidents/Accidents

NTSB Glider Reports In 2016 for the gliding community there were 16 accidents, out of those we had the following…… 8 landing accidents out of which 1 fatal 6 power glider accidents of which there were 2 fatal (in one glider) 2 take off accidents

NTSB Accidents in Scenario Base Training While being towed during the takeoff roll, the glider encountered a bump in which the pilot heard a loud bang. He reported that he was contacted by radio and informed that the aft canopy had separated from the glider. The pilot recalled that although the glider control ability was normal he communicated with the tow airplane pilot, executed one pattern and landed the glider. The glider sustained substantial damage to the aft canopy and the vertical stabilizer. The pilot reported that were no mechanical failures or anomalies with any portion of the glider that would have prevented normal flight operations.

Second Scenario The pilot released from the tow plane at 2,000 feet above ground level and turned to the south toward a ridge in search of lift. The pilot reported that he found "weak lift" in the vicinity of the ridge and when he reached the south end of the ridge, he turned back to the departure airport because he could not maintain altitude. The pilot recalled that while in route back to the airport, he encountered sink, descended below the glide path to the airport and initiated an off airport landing to a large field. The pilot reported that during approach, he over flew a set o f power lines that were perpendicular to his glide path and noticed a second set of power lines ahead that were also perpendicular to his glide path. The pilot recalled that he turned to avoid the power lines, encountered more sink, leveled the wings and landed hard in the field. The glider sustained substantial damage to the tail boom. The pilot reported that there were no mechanical malfunctions or anomalies during the flight that would have prevented normal flight operations.

Third Scenario The pilot reported that during the landing roll, near the location where he wanted to stop, he felt a "thump." He further reported that he observed a person lying on the ground on the runway and did not see the bystander previously. According to the pilot-rated passenger, who was also the airport manager, the bystander was taking photographs of the glider and had moved onto the runway surface during the landing roll. Subsequently, the bystander was struck by the left wing. He further reported that he also did not see the bystander before the collision. The airport manager reported that the airport had a sign near the runway, which stated "Caution Aircraft Operations." Post accident, the airport manager reported that he installed cones delineating the boundary of the runway and added an additional sign stating "Remain Behind Cones.“ The bystander sustained a serious injury.

Fourth Scenario The Pilot was a 16 year old with nearly 9 hours of flight time. This was the pilots second solo flight of the day. While practicing steep turns, the pilot lost consciousness. The pilot regained consciousness while approaching power lines, flew under the lines and landed in a field. During rollout the wing struck a pipe and spun the glider around. Substantial wing damages, no injuries.

Incident Report for Blanik Date of Incident was on Saturday 9/10/16. In the morning the winds were reported to be light to 5 knots coming from the South. Winds later increased to more like 8 to 15 knots with heavy cross winds as the day progressed. Tow Pilot was Cy Kastner and Instructor Linda Evenski. First flight of the morning, the decision was to take off from 32. The tow was very turbulent, at that point Cy radioed stating landing to 14, which I agreed. This flight was with a 3 flight student, so told the student that his next flight needed to be on a calmer day. The second flight was with David Vander linen. Before takeoff, I went over the conditions of the day. Instructing him I would like his final to be a little higher due to the variable winds (possible wind shear). Also stated, he would need to crab into the wind. The wind was changing to a direct crosswind from the west and to keep a little more speed, (1 ½ rule and more if needed). Landing long was okay.  

Incident Report for Blanik He handled the tow very well, (like a pro). His flying was good, only one comment I made was, “when trying to fly the ridge, need more speed. This was to do with being lower and with the high winds; flying at 45 was not a good idea”. He immediately corrected this and was handling the flight well. He started his downwind at 1700. The pattern to final was good; problem occurred on final. First call to him was to add more speed, which he did. Then Instead of crabbing into the wind he pointed the noise toward the east ridge (we were landing on 14). I then stated “crab into the wind”, when he started crabbing into the wind, he reduced the speed and with the turbulent condition, we dropped out of the sky due to the gusty winds and wind shear, hitting the ground hard. I wasn’t able to get the stick forward in time. I’m very upset with myself, in that, once Dave was crabbing in the wrong direction; I should have taken over the controls. My tendencies with students are to take the controls too soon; in this case I waited too long. I was feeling that Dave was handling things well up to that point and he would be able to recover okay. I needed to be more attentive and reacted faster.