This post is from an email conversation between myself (TA), my teammate John Mittell (BZ) and John Cochrane (BB). It started when I emailed BB a link to my analysis of the recently concluded 2013 Seniors contest at Seminole Lake Gliderport in Florida (https://soaringcafe.com/2013/03/team-flying-at-the-2013-seniors/), and BB responded with about a million questions. I have made some small editorial changes to protect the innocent and/or the guilty (including some changes designed to keep me from going back on the SSA hit list!).
There is a fair bit of duplication as you read down from top to bottom – but my hope is this way you can get the sense of the conversation (and it saved me some work, too!)
BLUE = John Cochrane (BB)
RED = John Mittell (BZ)
BLACK = Frank Paynter (TA)
Enjoy ;-).
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Cochrane, John H. <john.cochrane@chicagobooth.edu> wrote:
Excellent. As you know, learning is not just doing, it’s focused practice followed by careful examination.
A few random comments
The idea that the US team’s main fault is team flying is, I think, a bit overdone. Many have won worlds on their own. The poles weren’t really flying together. As I look at it, the US team’s main faults were not understanding the tactics needed to fly under world rules; The start time, gaggle, etc. tactics are quite different.
But good team flying surely can’t hurt!
It seems you learned from experience what also took experience for Al and I to learn. You stick together, even though it costs a bit in good times, so that you’re both there in the bad times. It is so very hard to see that doing your own thing – wandering off as you mention – will cost team cohesion and a lot more later.
One mental rule I have is to ask, “suppose he hits a good thermal right now. Would I go over to join him, or would I think ‘nah, that’s too far, I’ll keep going.’” If there is any doubt you’re too far away.
I presume (something worth stressing in your writing) that you two have developed strategies to stay far away from each other that you’re not distracted by collision risks.
I would wish for a lot more detail on your strategies. When cruising are you trying to fly side by side?
One in front and one in back? When do you pick which strategy? What is your routine for radio calls in joining thermals, recentering, deciding to leave?
I find that learning to follow is by far the hardest part. We’re all good at “I’ll go here, just follow me.” We’re all terrible at following, nay leeching to catch up.
What are you working on? What was your practice strategy? I’m sure you guys didn’t just dial up and say “let’s go fly.” Like all parts of training, you have a detailed list of objectives, weak points to work on, strategies you’re trying, and then you go practice them. So… what is all this? You’re probably the most experienced team pair in the US right now. So what is the checklist? Where are the big problems?
Same, I enjoyed the story, and evaluation of results. But I only picked up one really good rule. When you’re low, and struggling, it is especially important to stick together. This is the time when you will be especially tempted to do something different. I will remember this lesson when I’m out there struggling at 1500’! What other concrete lessons did you learn?
Other than failing to stick together, what else did you see from team pickup? Why did they fail to stay together? Are there any good success stories from your practice? An instance in which you would have split up before, but after practice were able to stay together? Are there stories of how team flying benefited you? You mostly focus the article on your ability to stay together. Good, but let us know where it paid off!
Separate, I’m curious at your comment that you’re not very good. What do you feel are your weak points? What are you working on to improve? We all get better only by following a practice plan, I’m curious what yours is.
This is great. A few comments.
US team, etc. No real controversy. We need to learn team flying. I hope the opportunity to team fly in regionals and eventually nationals continues. All of us who are fans need to make sure the non-die-hard XC pilot has fun too.
There are also a lot of other things the US team needs to work on. One of the biggest: Our contests are too small. It’s too easy, believe it or not, and a furball of top pilots does not develop. Alas we are heading in the direction of 10 classes with 5 gliders each, as everyone howls at the prospect of handicapped racing in fairly wide chunks. An issue for another day.
I think a good way to summarize lessons for our selves, and pass them on, is to describe and then mentally visualize scenarios, and then practice the strategy to follow in each simplified scenario and the thought pattern. The “it’s weak, we’re getting low, how do we search and stay together” scenario is a good one.
Yep – and we work on that every minute of every flight, and we still have problems. We also have experienced the opposite problem “what if my partner pulls up into a crappy thermal – do I stop, even though its a sub-par climb, or keep going?”.
GREAT! These are just the kinds of scenarios that we need to pre plan. Seriously, with about 50 of these scenarios described, pre planned actions, pre planned patter, then we’re ready to learn!
How do you know the thermal is crappy? If he pulled up in it, don’t you trust him that he thinks it’s good? Why is he accepting sub par climb?
My guess is the answer should be this. You’re side to side. Partner on right says turning, and wangs into a thermal. You turn gently – 45 degrees maybe – in his direction. We always make a decision at 90 degrees – full turn or roll out. At that point the partner announces his decision “no good, rolling out,” in which case you turn quickly and are now slightly in the lead (you’ll probably return the favor soon). If he says “good, rolling in” then you do have to go over to where he was. At the first 360, or when it is time for you to make the commitment he either says, “no good bail out.” Or “taking another turn.” If it’s worth him to take another turn, it’s worth you joining him. If you don’t like what you see you say “this is no good, let’s press on.” He says “no, core at 4 knots here” or “yes, let’s leave.”
Or, even worse – its the trail partner that does this – so the lead guy has the choice of back-tracking just for the pleasure of a sub-par climb, or continue, knowing that the lead-trail distance has just gotten larger?
Trail is harder. I would say it depends on energy. If the trail is low and behind, if he finds a really good climb, and if it’s time to climb, he has to take it. Then he has to make the decision for lead whether to turn around. Lead can’t see him, can’t tell how strong the thermal is. Trail says “this is good, you need to come back now” or he says “I’m stopping to regain energy, not good enough for you to turn around”
Al Tyler once pulled me back from about half a mile to 6-8 knots. Excellent call!
If trail has energy, if the pair is not desperate to climb, and if the climb is not super good, yes, it’s better to bump it and press on.
I would wish for a lot more detail on your strategies. When cruising are you trying to fly side by side?
Flying on the 3o’clock or 9 o’clock is the normal condition; we tried slightly further aft and it was a bit easier on the wingman but the lead could not see the wingman. We tried .1nm but that required too much “station keeping” as you suggest. .2 nm is better on that point but still close enough to turn on a thermal. The 3/9 o’clock is good for blue days as well as traveling without markers in front. This allows us to explore more air while looking for a thermal and to exploit more fully clouds that are too big for one glider to cover. We often turn opposite directions on entering and the one in the weaker area converts to the strong side with a figure 8 turn.
JC: My view: 3/9 is ideal but a LOT more work. You spend lots more energy on the other guy, and less on looking out in front. You have to monitor him all the time. If he pulls and sniffs left, you have to do that too, or you’ll be too far out front when he turns.
I think beginner should mostly have “lead and wingman” formation. Lead will more often miss the wingman’s thermal, but they will distract each other far less. The most important thing, they will be together when it gets tough! If you agree, pass on this advice. A lot of beginners trying to fly wing on wing formation will not be good!
I’ve found opposite directions is not that great an idea. If the guy on R finds it and turns R, then if L turns L, you’re further apart, and usually centering sink!
Also – important consideration. If you have followers and you split directions which way do they go? True story. Szeged. I’ve decided I’m going to master this gaggling stuff (lost Al again, alas) so I’m following the French team dutifully, along with about 10 other guys. On and on we go into the gloom. They hit a thermal, a perfect pair, one guy goes left, the other goes right… and the gaggle hits them as they’re at the 180 position. Half go left, half go right, what chaos.
That’s the gaggle’s problem – not the team’s ;-)
I find that learning to follow is by far the hardest part. We’re all good at “I’ll go here, just follow me.” We’re all terrible at following, nay leeching to catch up.
Being a good wingman is the first requirement to be a good lead.
Put that carved in stone as lesson number one in your upcoming team flying book!
The key thing is to establish the rules for changing the lead and making sure both pilots know who has the lead. it is the wingman’s responsibility to stay with the lead. it is the lead’s responsibility to make sure the wingman has enough altitude to find a safe place to land. As long as the lead changes are clear there is usually no problem until “survival thinking” sets in. We have not fully mastered that part in RL.
More good mottoes. Knowing what is expected is important.
Another motto: vertical separation is better than horizontal separation.
What are you working on?
I don’t think we had a specific practice strategy -… If flight time is essentially unlimited, then training inefficiencies don’t really matter. I know that is a bit flippant, but the point is still valid.
I have a somewhat different philosophy. You’ve each driven 500 hours a year for 30 years. Yet you’re no closer to winning the indy 500 than 20 years ago. My view: there is “reaserch flying,” where you try different things and learn what works. Only important when (like you) you’re on the frontier of knowledge. Most flying should be “practice flying.” You know exactly what you’re trying to work on when on the ground, then you’re trying to execute in the air. In any case, focused practice is the key to getting better. But focused on what…??!
Think of it a bit differently; we haven’t just driven 500 hours a year – we have driven 500 hours per year IN RACES against the best in the (Condor) world. The racing environment provides a very hard-nosed objective metric for practice results.
I think we have learned that we really have to be honest with ourselves and our partner at all times.
Another great motto. WE need to talk about thought patterns, communication patterns, and relations.
Let me add one. You’re there to be your team mate’s coach. If you sense discouragement, stress, or other bad mental habits, snap him out of it.
Struggling at 1500′ is still a BIG problem for us, and more so because we understand (on an objective basis, but apparently not yet on an emotional one) that this situation is exactly where a team can do much better than as individuals.
One or two successful saves together may help. That was a jesus moment for me and al. Big cirrus shadow, 1500 feet all alone, and we got out together where others landed. (TA note – I was one of the ones who landed out that day!)
We started out with an implicit understanding that I was the more experienced pilot/instructor and BZ was the less experienced pilot/student. We are now working on transitioning the relationship to more one of equals. The ‘mentor/mentee’ relationship may actually have helped to smooth our progress in the beginning, but now it may be starting to hinder it.
Another great point. For beginners, it may help a lot to have a “leader wingman” relationship. That lowers the committee meeting aspect of strategic decision making in flight.
It may also be useful to have that relationship change hands officially too in flight, as you pass “leader” and “follower” responsibilities. Usually the “leader” is the one making strategic decisions, but not necessarily
Other than failing to stick together, what else did you see from team pickup?…
The payoff from team flying is in better on-course decision making, the benefits of two brains and two sets of eyes, and the ability to more efficiently core a thermal. I also personally noticed that I was more objective and less subjective about decisions, as I knew I had to provide objective reasons for what I was doing, out loud, to my partner ;-).
Great point.
Separate, I’m curious at your comment that you’re not very good. What do you feel are your weak points? What are you working on to improve? We all get better only by following a practice plan, I’m curious what yours is.
My practice plan is to keep flying as much as humanly possible, in every possible racing venue, while trying my damnedest to identify and suppress thought patterns and behaviors that slow me down. I am convinced that most pilots understand the theory and principles necessary to fly fast – but have difficulty implementing them under real-life conditions due to various psychological impediments. I am also convinced that a large part of the difference between top pilots and also-rans is the quality of their experience base – their experience-based toolbox. If a pilot has never before experienced/exploited a convergence line, he/she will be at a distinct disadvantage if one becomes significant on a racing day. With respect to team flying, if *either* partner has the relevant experience, then the other partner gets it ‘for free’.
At first it was difficult to stay together because I had trouble climbing and would slowly fall into trail. As I gained experience, that difficulty faded. Communication is continually under revision. We have been concentrating on providing clear and unambiguous data, meaning numbers rather than qualitative descriptions, “good air + 3” is better than “getting some help here”. Most of the communication issues were worked out in Condor but we are still alert to identify those areas that are not helpful. We have had good results from having the high guy announce ‘one turn to go’ before needing to leave and the low guy depart when next coming to the outbound heading. The high guy should be .1 to .5 in trail and can use his altitude advantage to establish the proper position abeam. This tactic tends to normalize minor differences in altitude. Should they become too large the low guy can elect to stay with a good thermal to get well and then leach to pull back into a supporting position.
We are probably lacking in a practice plan.
Last suggestion. Write! This is too much to keep in your heads at once. The act of writing will force you to clarify the strategies, and reviewing the writing will help to cement it in spring when things get rusty.
PS: How would you guys (BB & BZ) feel about putting this entire ‘conversation’ on Soaring Cafe so others can benefit from it? While I love any chance to ‘hear my own voice’, it seems a shame to limit this conversation to just the three of us ;-).
One good way to organize the writing aspect for sure. Keep the posts though, and keep winnowing down and organizing in to book length form.
1 comment for “Team Flying Conversation with John Cochrane (BB), John Mittell (BZ) and Frank Paynter (TA)”