At the morning pilot briefing of the Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta October 10, 1979, a local experienced balloonist and adventurer asked to speak to the crowd. Wednesday had come to be viewed as the unofficial totally voluntary "fly the crest" day.
This balloonist, who had flown the crest many times, explained the problems and vagaries of this particular flight, which was often turbulent, particularly at the 12,000 foot level, and afforded few landing spots on the east side of the mountains unless one could fly to the open plains past the foothills on the other side. In his explanation of his several flights, at one point he said something to the affect that if the throat closed up due to wind shears, burning through the throat fabric was an option.
Case Presentation
On the afternoon of Wednesday, October 10, 1979, several balloonists arrived at
the western base of the Sandia mountain foothills with the idea of overflying the
mountains. This was not an official part of the Albuquerque International Balloon
Fiesta, but over the years had become a non-sanctioned event for people who wanted
a little extra thrill. Despite adverse weather conditions (the wind was blowing steadily
from west to east at 10-15 knots, with gusts of 25 knots), approximately a dozen and a
half balloons launched for the flyover. The visibility was several miles, with sunny skies
and a frontal system approaching. The temperature was about 65 F.
The balloon in question was a Raven S-55A AX-7 built in December, 1974. Total logged time was 291 hours. Several repairs had been made which had apparently not been entered in the aircraft logbook. Material used to replace the deflation cap and the top one-third of the envelope appeared to be different material than standard balloon fabric. The deflation cap was not sewn to the envelope at any point, contrary to type design. When this balloon was less than a year old, it had made an ocean landing between the Bahamas and Florida, and had undergone a cleaning process to clean an oil slick acquired at the time of this ocean dip. The pilot was a 31 year old private balloon pilot from California who had received his certificate May 29, 1979 and had logged 41:25 hours as of September 30, 1979, just prior to the Fiesta. An eyewitness to this incident (a professional balloonist and balloon repairman) had helped reinstall the deflation cap a few days earlier and had noted that the hook and pile fastener was well below the strength of new Velcro(tm) and was less than what he considered satisfactory.
As the inflation proceeded, two people noted three 8 to 14 inch horizontal tears in the fabric in the upper part of the envelope on the vent side. The pilot was reported to have known about these tears. The elevation of the launch site, in the Juan Tabo Recreation Area, was 6940 feet MSL; launch time was 17:25 MDT. Ascent rate was estimated at 1200 feet per minute. At an elevation of about 8200 feet MSL (1300 feet AGL) and one minute ten seconds elapsed time, the balloon was hit by extreme wind turbulence: rotors, downdrafts and circular shears. Two other balloons in the immediate area experienced similar problems at about the same time and altitude, with their hook and pile fasteners opening in one or another place. [One of these balloons landed hurriedly on the side of the foothill and the other flew over the crest of the mountain very low with part of the top open.] The balloon in question became contorted, the throat closed, the burner was utilized cautiously and the balloon began to descend. By one minute forty-six seconds elapsed time, the balloon was descending at about 700 fpm. After this, the throat closed firmly. At one minute forty-six seconds, the pilot burned for eight seconds, destroying the bottom portion of one side of the envelope. The balloon was descending 900-1100 fpm. At two minutes twenty-five seconds elapsed time and 450 feet AGL, gores 24 through 49 peeled free inside the load tapes and streamed upward and out behind the rest of the envelope. The balloon then fell freely at about 4800 fpm to impact on an asphalt road at the 7000 foot contour line.
At impact, a hose separated from a tube; raw propane escaped, was ignited probably by the pilot light, and a large fire ensued. Both stainless steel tanks survived the impact and fire.
The pilot was autopsied; this exam revealed severe blunt trauma to the chest, extremities and head with rupture of the right atrium of the heart. The passenger had an external exam only, which showed similar blunt trauma to chest and extremities. Carbon Monoxide was zero in the pilot and eight percent in the passenger, which means within normal limits; no inhalation of smoke occurred. No alcohol or drugs were found by toxicologic exam in either person.
Causative factors in this case include equipment (particularly the envelope),
weather, pilot training and experience, and pilot judgement. A pilot's psychologic state
is difficult to separate from other factors of behavior and ability. Attitude
is important (being macho has no place in flight planning or flight
execution; "it can't happen to me" is also a dangerous canon;
negativism toward your flying can be as damaging to your actions as
cockiness). Mood must be stable and consistent. Self-assurance
but not "know-it-all" helps in making decisions (the balloon pilot must
be sure the decision made is correct, but the pilot must also take the position that,
although there are risks in making a decision, there are more risks in not making a
decision). The pilot's panic limit must be set so high as to be unreachable
in any circumstance that might be encountered. Let's concentrate on two issues not
often discussed, that are critical and elemental to the creation of an accident such as
the one at the foothills: persuasibility (suggestibility) and crowd
behavior.
A crowd of people who were interested in the mountain flyover gathered in spite of high
winds and severe turbulence next to the foothills. Some came to fly, some came to see
for themselves how good or bad the conditions were, some came to watch, some came
to help. Many were persuaded not to fly by the turbulent wind conditions or the late
hour; several did elect to fly. At least one person attempted to inflate and gave up after
severe buffeting by ground winds. Others moved farther up the canyon to avoid the
ground winds.
In a discussion of the relation of personality to persuasibility, two psychologists summarized their findings as follows:
Self-Esteem: Feelings of social inferiority and self-inadequacy, at least in male subjects, are related to high persuasibility. Persons of low self-esteem are characterized by "expressive defenses," which sensitize them to environmental influences (cries of "chicken" or teasing by racial or sex references, or suggestion of impotency or weakness may cause a person to do something he or she ordinarily wouldn't do), whereas people with high self-esteem reject or ignore new data or challenging information arising from their environment. Even though the environment that day was sending strong signals not to fly, some peoples' minds were made up to fly ["don't bother me with facts, my mind's made up!"]
Hostility and Aggressiveness: Hostility, aggressiveness and rebelliousness are found to correlate with low persuasibility.
Perceptual Dependence: Individuals who depend on internal cues rather than on the surrounding physical environment are less persuasible.
Submissiveness: People who are submissive tend to be persuasible.
Other-Directedness: Low self-identity correlates with persuasibility. These people tend to accept ideas from outside, from others more easily, and thus they more easily comply with pressures from peers as well as authority figures.
Social Isolation: The need to find social acceptance favors persuasibility in males. The degree of separation from peers is related to persuasibility.
Richness of Fantasy: Individuals with more extensive day-dreaming, imagination and fantasy are believed to be more sensitive to the anticipation of rewards and punishments conveyed by the communication, and therefore, more persuasible. This relationship is tenable in men but not in women.
Intelligence: There are no significant differences between general intelligence level and persuasibility.
Sex: A few studies have shown women to be more persuasible than men, but these studies are probably suspect due to differences in socialization pressures between men and women (emphasis on acquiescence in the socialization of girls).
When someone tries to persuade us, or when things are happening which we are interested in doing, there are three dimensions we may adopt: acceptance of the idea, rejection or noncommitment (neutral). We are likely to have a wider latitude of options about issues in which we are less ego-involved. In other words, people are more open- minded about issues in which their own adequacies are not being questioned, and less open-minded about issues that they perceive bring into question their own man- or woman-hood or self-perceptions. Ego-involved attitudes are especially difficult to change. If someone had their mind made up to overfly the mountain that afternoon, it would have been difficult for them to back down, especially in the light of believing that their peers would think less of their manhood if they did back down. Similarly, if someone went to the mountain uncommitted about flying, peer pressure could have caused them to become committed on the spot, especially if ego were involved. This commitment might have been either to fly or not to fly, equally strongly. From these social data, we could say that, theoretically, for the pilots who held their own ideas in high esteem, who were aggressive, rebellious, secure, self-reliant, non-isolated and unimaginative, these persons would not be about to change their mind. If they had decided not to fly, they could not be convinced to fly, and if they had decided to fly, they similarly could not be talked out of it.
Crowd Behavior:
Most social scientists distinguish between an audience and a crowd.
An audience is a highly structured group, with a fairly definite
educational or recreational purpose. Its members are oriented toward the speaker,
performers, or event and only incidentally toward each other. The audience is usually
not participating in the event, or very little. A crowd is less
clearly organized, although the crowd members are in intimate contact. A crowd is a
congregate group of individuals who have temporarily identified themselves with
common values and who are experiencing similar emotions. One psychologist noted
that crowds are marked by increased suggestibility and loss of restraint. A collective
mind is formed via almost hypnotic contagion; intellectual aptitudes and moral ideas are
blurred. Another behavior expert suggested that, "the individual in the crowd behaves
just as he would behave alone, only more so." Often a leader emerges to lead the
crowd in some behavior that may be extreme. This leader focuses and expresses the
sentiments of the group and may harangue his followers to action. If the leader goes
first, some, if not many, individuals in the crowd will mimic the leader's actions. Three
interrelated influences may explain crowd behavior:
General Atmosphere or Setting: A social event has occurred or is about to occur. The hype about the event may be more important than the event itself. The way it is reported determines the way the situation is perceived and interpreted-this provides the psychologic atmosphere.
Dynamic Tendencies: Depending on how the situation is perceived, motives, emotions and sentiment become important. These may be hostile or fearful sentiments, or they may be heroic or generous, according to the perception of the event.
Conformity and Suggestibility: through interstimulation between the leader and followers, and among the members of the crowd, individuals become suggestible and they begin to identify with the activity in progress. Conformity or solidarity emerges. Critical abilities are lost or diminished; people tend to imitate what the leader or another individual does. Another theory suggests that crowds tend to be made up of people who have similar predispositions, who will naturally respond to the stimuli in common ways and who will want to perform similar activities.
One researcher points toward three approaches to collective or crowd behavior: contagion emphasizes feelings, attitudes and behaviors that are "communicated rapidly and accepted uncritically." This is the historical theory of crowd behavior, explained by the concepts of suggestion, imitation and instinct. Convergence theory focuses on group influence and the gathering of people who have similar predispositions. The emergent norm theory turns to social norms as they arise in the crowd situation, underlining the lack of unanimity in many crowd situations. Convergence theory stresses the continuity between normal individual behavior and crowd behavior, emergent norm theory stresses the continuity between normal group behavior and crowd behavior.
Mass behavior refers to standardized or similar patterns of social behavior that are transitory in nature and due to suggestion. Fads resemble short-term fashions, and may be of the cult or the sporadic type. Ballooning is a sport and a recreational activity which some may equate with a group activity with its own unique social pressures and rewards. A successful fad, which could define ballooning, the crest, is characterized by novelty, consistency with the times, and harmony with widespread interests and needs. With the addition of a leader (this was the person who lived in the Sandia foothills, had flown the crest many times, had commercial interest in promoting both the Sandia foothills and crest, and was known as an adventurer), who encouraged flying the crest, a leader who was admired by many balloonists who wanted to add this unique adventure to their personal list of accomplishments, all the elements of crowd behavior were present on that windy day in October of 1979.
Remedies
How does one avoid being "sucked in" to a situation where they are in over their
head? In the discussion above we see how persuasion and crowd behavior can
influence events that might otherwise have a different outcome. Assessing your own
behavior and making independent judgements is an important part of pilot decision
making. Below are recommendations that will allow you to understand your limits and
make better decisions.
Self-Assess: In order to do this so it is useful, use the same rules as for
feedback, below. Do it after every flight. Be honest with yourself. Self-assessment must
be substantive, honest, concise, descriptive, useful to you, as objective as possible,
balanced and must include strategies for changing behavior you think you need to
change. In the military, the process of self-assessment is called debriefing.
Descriptive rather than judgmental.
Both positive and negative (balanced).
Specific rather than general.
Takes into account the needs of both the giver and the receiver.
Directed at behavior the receiver can do something about.
Solicited rather than imposed.
Checked to insure clear communication.
Directed primarily at the person's performance or behavior rather than at the person
him/herself.
Given immediately.
Seek out feedback and genuinely listen to it. Don't argue. Maybe the giver is right,
maybe wrong. You decide as objectively as possible. Do not punch them in the
nose.
Strategies for Change: Do you need further training or experience? Do you need more self control? More self-discipline? Make a checklist? You decide.
Make a written list of do's and don'ts regarding when you should fly and when you should not. Include physical and emotional status, training and experience, your personal fitness and focus just prior to flight. Include weather, equipment, people resources and your past history.
Then think about what will happen if you don't fly.
Table of Contents