During the last incident I met the emergency responce at the gate. I instucted the fire turck to the closest location to the injured person. Time was of the essence, and the upper H4 lz area was the quickest foot access. The ambulence was directed to the wash ramp rear the south of the propety.
Our LZ is huge, all members can land in the northern wash section if needed. The bothersome walk up the ramp which is tolleraated by H2s can be tollerated by H4s in an emergency situation.
The key is quickest access to the injured party. All other concerns come second. Let's modify rule 18 to better fit our situation.
dissent in part of rule #18
Really? Lessening the chance of requiring a second emergency response isn't paramount? I grant that most pilots of any caliber familiar with our LZ could land without incident with a paramedic truck parked on the bull's eye. I just don't understand why you wouldn't want to avoid that drama.The key is quickest access to the injured party. All other concerns come second.
I was in the air when this latest incident occurred and it was very disconcerting because I knew my friend was probably hurt badly (thanks to those who had to radio it was a side-wire). The last time (Jonathan's episode), I was a turn away from my downwind leg when the paramedics and the hook and ladder crossed the strip. The time before that, I was coming out to land and heard about Cabbagehead (yes, I heard on the radio that he was dead).
Seeing obstructions in the normal path (I've had slow pilots, horses, crowds betting on me to break, or not, a down tube) is bad enough. After an accident, unless it's on the runway, I think it's totally unnecessary and dangerous. The time to reach an injured pilot won't be increased much because the paramedics have to walk another 100 feet.
I support the rule as written.
Remember that the new guideline is exactly that, a guideline, not a rule. The point of the new guideline is that someone should make a decision FOR the emergency responders rather than have them just drive onto the LZ becuase they have no clue where the injured person is.
If the person that meets the resopnders at the gates decides that driving onto the LZ is the BEST way to help the injured person, then so be it. But driving out to the edge of a wash and then hiking down a steep embankment does not seem like the best access into the wash in most cases. Please consider those still in the air when making the decision as to how the responders should gain access to the injured person.
If the person that meets the resopnders at the gates decides that driving onto the LZ is the BEST way to help the injured person, then so be it. But driving out to the edge of a wash and then hiking down a steep embankment does not seem like the best access into the wash in most cases. Please consider those still in the air when making the decision as to how the responders should gain access to the injured person.
Sorry OP, But I'm w/ Jim and the current guidelines. My own incident would have been entirely avoided had one of the many bystanders with their thumbs up their asses simply advised the operator of the club's tractor that I was setting up my landing approach. Instead they did nothing and allowed it to drive right down the middle of the entire landing strip in the middle of a massive thermal break off which cost me my opportunity to land between cycles rather than running up $73,000 in medical and ambulance bills.Jim wrote:...Really? Lessening the chance of requiring a second emergency response isn't paramount?...The key is quickest access to the injured party. All other concerns come second.
...The last time (Jonathan's episode), I was a turn away from my downwind leg when the paramedics and the hook and ladder crossed the strip....
No heavy equipment should ever be allowed to block any part of our limited landing strip when pilot(s) are staging their landings. The glider you fly (Sport 2 155 & soft harness) can be landed in less than 1/2 the space required for a T2C 144 and heavy race harness. This is a major aspect of the reason there is less XC flying from Sylmar now than in the old days. The equipment that many of us fly requires a lot more room to land safely.
I'm arguing with people who have much more experience than me. I could easily be wrong...
You all have framed the situation correctly. Better than my original post. We agree it is a balancing test. Which is better in the situation: Direct access to the injured pereson VS. safety of those still in the air.
How should we balance these things? Should we error on one side on the test or the other?
I agree this is a guideline that should consider the situation and not be an absolute rule. But I think we should strongly bias our consideration on one side of the test than the other.
I want to attack both sides of the balance argument in opposition:
1. Direct access to the injured person isn't that important.
2. Landing in a restricting club LZ is dangerous.
1. In the last case we had a serious injury. We had blood around the eye socket and mouth and difficulty breathing. All at the scene assumed a spinal injury. Professional immobilization of the injured person was required. If the injured person stopped breathing... every second would have been critical.
When the first truck stopped on the bulls eye they could see the distance, and the terrain they would have to cross. They made decisions on which gear to bring, which spinal board to bring, which medial tackle box would be appropriate to cover that distance. Forcing them to walk across the LZ and judge, then return for their gear was not an option.
2. There are many reasons why the LZ may be suddenly restricted without notice. If one cannot land within half of the LZ, you may need to consider flying a lower performance glider and have supervised approaches by radio like a new H2 does.
If another pilot in front of you has a bad landing and needs assistance, you will need to alter your landing configuration. Same as if a horse, lawn mower, or stalled vehicle is found in the LZ. Lucky for us our LZ is quite large. In an extreme situation if there is a full blown cluster f*ck in the lz with the fire department and helicopters landing there; you may need to land at the damn. The extreme hassle of walking from the damn is a small price to pay when an injured person could suffer a great loss.
You all have framed the situation correctly. Better than my original post. We agree it is a balancing test. Which is better in the situation: Direct access to the injured pereson VS. safety of those still in the air.
How should we balance these things? Should we error on one side on the test or the other?
I agree this is a guideline that should consider the situation and not be an absolute rule. But I think we should strongly bias our consideration on one side of the test than the other.
I want to attack both sides of the balance argument in opposition:
1. Direct access to the injured person isn't that important.
2. Landing in a restricting club LZ is dangerous.
1. In the last case we had a serious injury. We had blood around the eye socket and mouth and difficulty breathing. All at the scene assumed a spinal injury. Professional immobilization of the injured person was required. If the injured person stopped breathing... every second would have been critical.
When the first truck stopped on the bulls eye they could see the distance, and the terrain they would have to cross. They made decisions on which gear to bring, which spinal board to bring, which medial tackle box would be appropriate to cover that distance. Forcing them to walk across the LZ and judge, then return for their gear was not an option.
2. There are many reasons why the LZ may be suddenly restricted without notice. If one cannot land within half of the LZ, you may need to consider flying a lower performance glider and have supervised approaches by radio like a new H2 does.
If another pilot in front of you has a bad landing and needs assistance, you will need to alter your landing configuration. Same as if a horse, lawn mower, or stalled vehicle is found in the LZ. Lucky for us our LZ is quite large. In an extreme situation if there is a full blown cluster f*ck in the lz with the fire department and helicopters landing there; you may need to land at the damn. The extreme hassle of walking from the damn is a small price to pay when an injured person could suffer a great loss.
OP - I won't argue with any of your points. But once the emergency response people have accessed what they have to do, please ask one of them to move the truck. This is what I did during Jonathan's incident - they parked on the bull's eye, some of them went into the wash, and I asked the dude hanging around the truck to please move it. He did.
Rear Admiral Dennis Cambell invented the angled flight deck in 1944 to solve just this kind of problem.
We just smooth out the large boulders in the north part of the wash.
.."The design also allowed for concurrent launch and recovery operations"..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_dec ... light_deck
Animated gif:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... vnanim.gif
Angled Deck Aircraft Carrier - United States Navy Documentary:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8erjX84Z8xI[/youtube]
We just smooth out the large boulders in the north part of the wash.
.."The design also allowed for concurrent launch and recovery operations"..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_dec ... light_deck
Animated gif:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... vnanim.gif
Angled Deck Aircraft Carrier - United States Navy Documentary:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8erjX84Z8xI[/youtube]