Altercation with paraglider

[Steve Houghton 1]

In the game of slope soaring, we sometimes find ourselves having to share slope space with other users, these days it's primarily paragliders in my local area.

Our little group of fliers have had to have words with these people previously for flying right across us, just a friendly word to warn them of the dangers and to let them know how much damage it could do to them if a mouldie glider travelling at speed were to hit them. There is usually enough space for them and us to co exist quite happily on the same slope with due consideration for each other.

Well today, three of us were flying off the slope at Fochriw in S Wales when a couple of paraglider guys turned up and began setting up. The wind was very light with the occasional strong thermal coming through and my foamie Wildthing was in sink and descending so my intentions were to land in front of me, coming in from left to right as I didn't have enough height by this time to go around for a proper landing when, a paraglider had taken off from behind me and about 10 metres to my left and straight into the path of my oncoming plane. He turned to his right, losing height all the time but my plane hit him in his legs and the model fell to the slope below.

Fortunately there was no damage to my plane and, when the paraglider pilot landed moments later I asked him if he was ok. "No I'm not", he retorted and began shouting the odds and telling me he was going to report me to the CAA and that I had a duty of care etc etc. Well this made me very angry and words followed!

He gave no warning to anyone that he was about to take off, not like us model fliers who ask others already flying if it's ok to launch, and he obviously launched without looking around to see that his airspace was clear, which it wasn't. Now it isn't like my plane is camouflaged, it's very bright yellow wings with black spots so he should have seen it almost at his eye level and slightly to his left.

Fortunately there was no damage done, to man or equipment, but the situation could have been so very different.

Steve

A470Soaring.blogspot.co.uk

[ken anderson.]

hello Steve-first off write down all the facts of the matter.....in case there is any repercussions...and get any witness's to the coming together also...it sounds to me like a lack of communication from both side's.....but as long as there was no injury to either person that's the main thing..........

ken Anderson ne.1 ........ fact's dept.;

[J D 8]

Perhaps this "near miss" incident should be reported to the BMFA [ if you are a member Steve ]

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I agree that you should notify your insurer of the facts in case a claim is made against you. My feeling is that as you were carrying out an emergency landing back on your recognised operating site (a non-optional manoeuvre) and he took off (an optional manoeuvre) into your path, from an area outside your reasonable limits of observation you have little to be responsible for.

If the CAA were to be involved, I suspect that it would be the pilot who took off without ensuring he wasn't endangering your small aircraft who would be found to have been negligent.

Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 18/04/2014 19:24:23

[Rob Jones 2]

This sort of incident could cost model flyers their slope. Quite rightly, in my humble opinion.As soon as model flyers realize they could be sharing air space with real flyers they should pack up. Life is precious, more precious than a toy plane!

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Tony Richardson]

Can you define real flyer Rob? To some they may be TOY planes others see them as actual flying aircraft albeit of a rather small size.

If the circumstance had been different say a microlite making a landing and the paraglider taking off which one would have been the REAL flyer. It would seem to me Ken is right communication is the key to safety and not assumption of right of way.

[Tony Bennett]

but what do you do if you already have a model in the air and a paraglider takes off.

crash it into the ground so he is not in danger if he decides to launch without checking the air space is clear.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Steve Houghton 1]

I think Rob Jones 2 is trying to wind us up, either that or he isn't from the same planet as the rest of us.

I totally agree with MidnightKiteFlyer in this instance. It is ludicrous to think that we should just pack up and go home if a paraglider turns up.

[Tony Richardson]

I think you are right Steve he has another post **LINK** Mr negative if ever I saw it.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I hope it's just a clumsily expressed view from Rob that models should avoid clashes with people - whether in the air or on the ground. Of course human life is more important than a model but in this case, it appears that the stupidity, recklessness or negligence of the paraglider nearly caused him to suffer a nasty injury.

In my view, if paraglders are incapable of flying safely from the established model flying site it should be them that remain on the ground. Both activities are hobbies and they have no more right to the airspace and more to lose if it goes wrong!

Edited By Martin Harris on 18/04/2014 18:47:33

[Steve Houghton 1]

We regularly fly at another site and occasionally the paras turn up, so we ask them nicely, please can you keep over to the left hand side of the slope when traversing and we will keep to the right, that way we can all use the slope safely but, they rarely do, they just fly straight across us seemingly unaware of the dangers. I sometimes think that they must think we still build models only from balsa and tissue paper and that no harm would come from that. They'd soon get the picture if several pounds of glass and carbon fibre hit them at 60mph

[Alan Randall]

Someone who takes off into a crowded area based purely on his belief that his hobby is clearly superior to that of other slope users shouldn't be allowed to fly. It was his action that caused the danger. He clearly did not assess the risk to himself before taking off and take any steps to reduce the risk by consulting the other slope users who were their first. Yes life is precious; all the more reason for not deliberately placing yourself in danger in the first place. As for the comment that the model fliers should simply shut up shop when someone else comes along who believes they have a superior claim to the site, were would it end; stop flying, I want to walk my dog, ride my bike, fly my kite. In the current climate, model fliers are in danger of losing sites all over for a multitude of reasons, and unless we are just going to roll over and give up, we are going to have to fight our corner when necessary. Finally, one such a web site, I am sure I am not the only one here who resents the use of the term Toy Aeroplane. My Grandson plays with toy aeroplanes. They have to be seriously misused to kill anyone. Flying Model aircraft on the other hand can injure, maim and kill if not treated with care.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I believe the situation to be a bit complicated and our para-glider colleague is getting a little confused.

First of all I totally agree there are no "toy" and "real" aeroplanes involved - just aeroplanes, full stop. The CAA makes no distinction. All have an equal right to share the sky.

But,...in a situation where both are airborne and a collision looks likely then my personal view is that the manned aircraft has the priority - simply preservation of human life and safety requires that to be the case. As a pilot of an unmanned craft if I had a choice between stuffing it in and hitting a manned aircraft - then in it goes - every time.

But,...that was not the situation here I believe. The situation was that the manned aircraft was on the ground - the unmanned was airborne. In that situation, the unmanned aircraft has effectively the "right of way" in my view and it is beholden on the pilot of the manned aircraft to delay his take-off until it is safe for him to proceed.

Its a basic principle of airmanship - a plane in the air (of any sort) has priority over one on the ground. This is for the simple reason that the guy on ground has all the options open to him - including staying where he is. The guy in the air has far fewer options.

If this character takes his complaint to CAA believing that because he is a pilot of a manned "real" aeroplane and therefore has some sort of priority at all times - I think he is likely to be disabused of that particular fallacy!

BEB

PS Martin, in your post above I'm assuming that the second "non-optional", applying to the para-glider pilot's take off, should in fact have read "optional"?

BEB

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 18/04/2014 19:04:00

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

The dangers of cut and paste BEB - can you edit it to make sense?

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Pete B]

That's fixed, Martin. I agree with BEB -on the facts stated, it displays a lack of airmanship and self-preservation, that's for sure.

I had a browse and there's only a limited reference to model flying in an adjacent field on the local paragliding information page for that location.

If there's an RC slope group in the area, perhaps both groups should get together and hammer it out? - nicely, of course...

Pete

[Erfolg]

The problem we modelers have is once the numty launches himself into the airspace we are using,it is us that then has the obligation to avoid a collision. To me if correct an abuse of the regulations.

I am not convinced that we would avoid some blame, although, I believe that if there were justice we should.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Erfolg on 18/04/2014 19:42:36:

The problem we modelers have is once the numty launches himself into the airspace we are using,it is us that then has the obligation to avoid a collision. To me if correct an abuse of the regulations.

I am not convinced that we would avoid some blame, although, I believe that if there were justice we should.

 

Not really Erf, the onus is on all parties to fly with due regard to other users of the airspace. Taking off into the path of a small aircraft on approach from behind the model's pilot, with a silent aircraft is not the action of a competent airman - especially when he's already aware that models are operating.

This situation is akin to an aircraft flying VFR being hit from behind by a faster aircraft failing to see it - no blame at all on the aircraft being hit.

Of course, in a situation where both pilots are aware of each other then the normal rules of the air apply and common sense says to err on the side of the manned aircraft if in any doubt.

Edited By Martin Harris on 18/04/2014 19:57:08

[Erfolg]

I do not disagree, that the onus is on both parties once he launches himself into the airspace.

I can imagine, or is that Anticipate the paraglider will claim ignorance of the model.

Thereafter are we not obliged to avoid a collision, once we have the airspace entered?

I have no sympathy with the paraglider, nor do I think, that in the circumstance that we should have any blame attached. Yet I suspect it would be seen that we should do whatever is necessary to avoid the collision. I would expect the paraglider to have some blame,for not having adequately assessing the airspace for other users.

[Rob Jones 2]

I used the word toy deliberately, as that is how our models would be perceived should there be a legal dispute between a model flyer and a paraglider pilot. The reason I said pack up and leave was maybe a bit over the top, but we should certainly give the Para glider pilots priority once they are in the air, even if they were foolish in ignoring model flying going on. Get a hotline tangled in their rigging, and a death could result.

If a dispute is needed, do it on the ground when no one is in danger. But try to avoid disputes in the first place, because model flyers will come off worst.

I don't think any of the above is contentious.

Edited By Rob Jones 2 on 18/04/2014 20:38:19

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

The only bone of contention is your assertion that it was the paraglider's "right" to the airspace and model flying should stop as soon as he turned up. As the situation was described, he was in the wrong (and I would say in breach of the ANO) by failing to ensure the safety of his flight prior to take-off.

I'm sure that no-one would advocate putting any man carrying aircraft in danger while model flying whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation. It's usually possible to agree safe flying practices with other parties and is in everyone's interest to do so. Having "I had right of way" on your headstone is little compensation...

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

We had an incident with a full size heli

The CAA will not dismiss modellers out of hand, the pilot of the full size must act safely not ignore the risk because he thinks he has priority. If he goes to the CAA with it he may live to regret it .