SAFA Skysailor Magazine

30 SKY SAILOR July | August 2021 they have the clear confirmation to proceed from their instructor. Instructors should only give this confirmation if they are satisfied with the pilot’s capabilities, the conditions are suitable, the further boundaries are understood and acknowledged, and clear communication protocols are in place. AIRS #1288 – Attempted launch with leg loops unconnected PIC was on a PG refresher course and pre- paring to launch from Mt Tamborine under the supervision of an Apprentice Instructor (AFI). PIC had failed to clip into their leg straps when setting up and failed to notice this on their pre-flight check. This also escaped the attention of the AFI. PIC moved onto launch and lofted the wing. They felt that something was not right when the harness rode up 10 or 15cm and they immediately brought the wing down. PIC and the AFI have debriefed with the CFI. Failing to clip into leg straps can have fatal consequences. All pilots, but especially pilots with harnesses having leg straps should develop a pre-flight routine consisting of several check points where each item is looked at, vocalised and touched. That is, look at the left leg strap, say ‘Left leg strap’ and touch the buckle, move onto the right leg strap, look-vocalise-touch, moving through all attachment points and pieces of equipment. This should be performed when initially setting up, repeated when on launch and repeated again immediately prior to launching. AIRS #1301 – Beechmont out-landing A paraglider pilot was flying in a weak thermal. They failed to notice the drift was taking them away from the front of the hill. They lost the lift and did not have enough altitude to make it back to the front of the hill, instead having to land in a paddock with numerous hazards – horses, fences and powerlines. The horses were spooked, but without any injury resulting, and the wing landed over a phone line. No damage or injury to the pilot. Pilots must be aware of the rate of drift when in a weak climb and ensure they can make it back to the front of the hill before being caught behind. All pilots should be aware of the propensity for livestock, particularly horses, to be spooked by our operations, and avoid landing near them. To finish up, we’ll look at three reports with potential and real serious consequences. AIRS #1099 – Unauthorised PPG instruction A PG4 pilot was observed flying a PPG at a park in Rowville (VIC) while not qualified to do so. The PIC was observed to be doing so under the direction of a pilot who was not an instructor. PIC undertook PPG training in the week following this incident at a SAFA approved FTF. Both pilots were sent Show Cause notices by SAFA’s COO. Both expressed con- trition, have taken on leadership roles in the local club and AIRS #1239 – Top-landing accident A PG4 pilot was flying Beechmont when shortly after launching they noticed the wind strength increasing and decided to land. They decided to land as far back as possible on the west ridge of the top landing area to avoid rotor due to the wind strength. They bled off altitude and commenced final approach but encountered lift over the bowl of the top landing area. Before they could turn to avoid rotor, the wing had taken an asymmetric collapse on the left side, losing altitude. The wing re-inflated with a significant surge. At this stage, PIC was still heading east, but towards, and at the same height, as powerlines. PIC then attempted to make a turn to the right and had a right-side collapse after 90 degrees of the turn was completed, accompanied by a sudden height loss. The wing then spun, and they were swung into the ground from approximately 10m, hitting the ground in a sitting position and suffering a burst fracture of L3 vertebra. No other injuries. No permanent disability. The pilot chose to land at the top landing area in windy conditions. They possibly could have landed at the other top landing area which is further away and lower than launch, and which has a safer landing record. AIRS #1279 – Landing in incorrect field PIC was under instruction and had been ridge soaring for about 90 minutes at Beechmont. They had gained what they judged to be sufficient altitude to top-land but continued to soar to the left of launch. This area of the site is not visible from launch and the student was subsequently out of view of the instructor. The student then decided to follow three other pilots into a thermal, but which was slightly over the back of the ridge. They did not gain the lift they had ex- pected and as a result have made a top-landing at a location well away from the designated top-landing zone. They have then re-established radio contact with their instructor who drove to meet them and debrief. No damage or injury. Instructors and students must be certain that both understand the flight plan and that it is followed. Where there is the possibility at a site for visual contact to be lost, clear boundaries on the flight path must be in place and understood. Pilots should not exceed these parameters unless AIRS Safety Wrap-up Photo: Sudin