You are NEVER hooked in.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=26642
100% foolproof hang loop and harness buckles

Mikkel Krogh - 2012/07/14 18:45:57 UTC

100% foolproof hang loop and harness buckles

I believe it is possible to develop a technical solution that would ensure you would never forget to click in your hang loop or the harness buckles. (I have thought a lot about this problem and have come to an idea that seems fairly simple and very practically.)

The question is though:

Would you pay for eliminating this risk completely? And if - how much? $50, $100, $200?

How many of us do you think would buy it, if the cost would be e.g. $100?

BR
Mikkel

1. The ONLY way the buckles could POSSIBLY matter would be in the event of a high speed parachute deployment. There've been zillions of people (Yours Truly included) who've launched zillions of times with unclipped buckles and ZERO resulting incidents. You've got a solution in search of a problem.

2. People who develop technical solutions to the unhooked launch issue INVARIABLY ignore and/or reject the procedural, training, mindset strategy for addressing it. You don't do hook-in checks 'cause if you did you'd have been posting on the "Failure to hook in" thread.

3. Although I appreciate your motivation and efforts on this issue I wouldn't spend a dime on or endorse the option because...

- It doesn't solve any problems I have.
- It doesn't do leg loops.
- It will inevitably add complexity and weight and probably drag as well to the system.
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25550
Failure to hook in.

Christian Williams - 2011/10/25 03:59:58 UTC

What's more, I believe that all hooked-in checks prior to the last one before takeoff are a waste of time, not to say dangerous, because they build a sense of security which should not be built more than one instant before commitment to flight.

- It will be just one more justification - along with the moronic hang and turn and look checks and the despicable Aussie Method - for the assholes who participate in this sport to continue to omit the hook-in check from their launch procedures.

Mikkel Krogh - 2012/07/14 19:20:06 UTC

I know for sure there is no money in it - the market is too small to make any real money on it. My motivation is to improve safety for our sport. But before investigating further I need to know if it will be worth the effort.

Good freaking look. In a dozen years I've been almost totally unable to get these off the scale stupid motherfuckers to switch to straight pin releases from the more expensive bent pin garbage they've been using.

Steve Seibel - 2012/07/14 21:04:28 UTC
Willamette Valley, Oregon

a simple hook-in is good

Does it work when you kite your glider up the sand dunes in strong winds, so strong that you can barely hold the nose down as you reach back and hook in at the last moment, and you are happy that you aren't wearing your other harness where you have to take that extra wrap around the caribiner? Because that's too complicated to deal with in the wind while holding the nose down? Wind so strong that your biggest concern is that you might accidentally lift into flight before the caribiner gate is correctly closed (might get snagged on the hang loop)? Wind so strong that you are hooking in with one hand only because you need to keep the other one on the down tube to hold the nose down?

Sorry Steve. That's insanely dangerous. You need to connect your harness to your glider first and then climb into it so you won't launch unhooked. Haven't you heard ANYTHING Adam Parer and his fellow brain dead thugs have been trying to tell us?

Just some thoughts. Those aren't normal conditions for me but I encountered them a few weeks ago, at the beach. I ended up flying away hooked into the main but not the backup hang strap because I didn't want to risk opening the gate a second time, didn't want to get risk getting lifted into the air with a hang strap snagged on the caribiner but the gate not correctly closed.

Hey Steve...

In the course of your aeroexperimentation, what was your conclusion about the purpose of the backup?

In other words does your system not interfere with a clean and simple hook-in?

You don't have a clean and simple system. You're using a dirty and stupid backup strap.

I once had to unhook in the surf. Would your system have interfered with that?

Any possibility your locking carabiner or backup strap could've interfered with that?

There's a lot to be said for a clean and simple hook-in arrangement. Ideally the back-up and main combined into one clean loop. Though that can be hard to cut with a hook knife.

Idiot.

Paul Hurless - 2012/07/14 21:13:37 UTC

NOTHING is fool proof.

Spoken like a true brain dead waste of space who's never had an original thought in his entire useless life - let alone actually put anything in the air.

JJ Coté - 2012/07/14 23:28:41 UTC

I'd happily pay at least $100, provided I saw the solution and had confidence in it. But I'm having difficulty imagining that you have in mind a solution that's going to substantially increasing the safety level that I have now. In particular, the more expensive it is, the more complicated it's likely to be, and the more complicated it is, the less likely it is to be foolproof. (Anything that uses electricity is just about guaranteed to be useless.)

Good points, JJ. I was recently thinking along the same lines and got rid of my battens, leading edge inserts, luff lines, VG system, parachute, and wheels and took the batteries out of my vario, GPS receiver, radio, and cell phone.

Alan Wengren - 2012/07/15 00:25:17 UTC

Nothing wrong with wishful thinking but there's still one thing that has to happen.

The pilot still has to hook *something* up (your idea) to the hang loops no matter how easy it might be.

I mean he can't just stand under his wing and something is going to connect to him automatically and lets say this is the case, it still has to be checked by the pilot so there's no mistake that your hooked in.

Pilot will still have the final look and still need a solid routine before every flight to make sure he/she is hooked and ready to fly.

Yeah Alan. A hang check behind the ramp - like they taught you at Lookout. Never a couple of seconds before launch - like I was trying to get pounded through your thick skull.

Robert Seckold - 2012/07/15 11:35:31 UTC

What ever your idea is, if it still relies on the memory of the pilot whilst standing on launch to attach himself to the glider, it is no different to what pilots who walk around in their harnesses do now.

I am sure no pilot who has launched un-hooked has done so thinking I am not hooked in but I will launch anyway, their memory tells them they are hooked in.

You are ABSOLUTELY ONE HUNDRED PERCENT CORRECT, Robert. In fact every goddam single one of them has launched quite confident of the precise opposite.

THEREFORE, it would stand to reason that if you (tell Bob to go fuck himself and) override your memory and tell yourself you are NOT hooked in - EVERY SINGLE LAUNCH - and verify that you actually ARE *IMMEDIATELY* PRIOR TO EVERY SINGLE LAUNCH your chances of launching unhooked are hundreds of times lower than they are for people doing that pain in the ass bullshit you guys are.

I am though, always open to new ideas that have the possibility of saving lives, so good luck.

Yeah, just a long as it includes an assumption of being hooked in at launch and excludes anything along the lines of a hook-in check.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=26557
Failure to hook in 6/29/12

michael170 - 2012/07/14 05:26:48 UTC

Did you even bother to read what Spark wrote?

Larry Howe - 2012/07/15 05:57:49 UTC

Well Yes, What's that got to do with my post

- Did you even bother to read that forty mile per hour speed limit sign back there?
- Well yes. What's that got to do with my eighty mile per hour cruise control setting?

michael170 - 2012/07/16 06:17:31 UTC

Let's ask Spark,

SeeHoweToFly says he does at least two hang checks, one as soon as he hooks in and another right before launch.

You going to sign him off Spark?

How 'bout asking me? I'm not just gonna not sign him off. I'm gonna revoke his current ratings.
Then he can start all over shooting for a Hang One and maybe reading some of the rating requirements this time.
That'll probably do marvels for his reading comprehension skills.
And, hell, even if it doesn't, it sure won't hurt the average of the rated flyer population any.

Hey See,

How 'bout a couple of posts on how to fly while you're dangling from the basetube to increase your glide to something better than what the slope's doing?

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=26642
100% foolproof hang loop and harness buckles

Robert Seckold - 2012/07/16 00:02:15 UTC

Keep at it Mikkel, as long as people are discussing unhooked methods people are thinking about safety and maybe saving someones life.

Luen Miller - 1994/09

The second pilot was distracted by backing off launch to get his helmet, which he had forgotten. While doing so he thought of a pilot who launched unhooked at Lookout Mountain as a result of the distraction of retrieving his helmet. Our pilot then proceeded to launch unhooked.

Bullshit.

Jerry Furnell - 2012/07/16 08:42:54 UTC
Canungra

OK, so what is so hard about a bungee strap from the hang point to base bar? Try flying with it there if you haven't hooked in.
Leg loops, simple, put your helmet on your leg loops when you pack up.

KISS guys, KISS

OK, so what is so hard about ALWAYS assuming you're NOT hooked in and ALWAYS checking to make sure you are as the beginning of your launch sequence?

Just kidding. Let's Keep It Simple by stretching bungees and clipping your helmet to your leg loops. No fuckin' ways THOSE strategies could possibly fail.

Idiot.

Robert Seckold - 2012/07/16 09:18:17 UTC

That's a nice system as long as you remember to re-attach the bungee cord if you unhook because you forgot something.

This is where ALL of these systems fall down, at the most stressful time of your launch, standing on the hill balancing your glider on your shoulders you have to remember:

1. Am I hooked in?
2. Have I done my walkthrough?
3. Have I lifted and tugged?
4. Have I done my hang check?

All of the above receive a yes... because you have actually done them... right before you unhooked because you forgot to turn on your camera, pick up your water, etc. You then run off the hill unhooked with a terrified look on your face.

I'll stop now.

1. Am I hooked in?

I am NEVER hooked in.

2. Have I done my walkthrough?

No.

3. Have I lifted and tugged?

I can't remember. I'll do another one to make sure. There, yes. No, I can't remember...

4. Have I done my hang check?

Yeah. Ten years ago I did one to check my clearance. It's been pretty much the same ever since.

All of the above receive a yes...

Not if one has a functional brain - you fucking moron.

1. Did flip the safety on? Yes.
2. Did I empty the magazine? Yes.
3. Did I check the chamber? Yes.
4. Did I point it at the ground and pull the trigger fifteen seconds ago to make sure? Yes.

OK, now I can point it at my kid's head and pull the trigger.

...because you have actually done them...

You have, I HAVEN'T - asshole. So stop assuming that everyone's gonna answer yes. The tiny percentage of people in this sport with functional brains are always gonna answer no.

...right before you unhooked because you forgot to turn on your camera, pick up your water, etc.

I KNOW that. I KNOW that because I always assume that I HAVE unhooked because I forgot to turn on my camera, pick up my water, etc.

You then run off the hill unhooked with a terrified look on your face.

No, I don't - douchebag.

- I have a terrified look on my face just BEFORE I run off the hill thinking about what's gonna happen if I'm not hooked in.

- Then at the beginning of my launch sequence I tighten my suspension to make sure I'm connected to my glider.

- But I've still got the terrified look on my face 'cause I'm not sure I did everything right on preflight.

- But after I've gotten away from the ramp a bit and find myself hanging OK and the glider holding together and flying straight I start to relax a little.

I'll stop now.

Good. I'm tired of trying to pound this concept through your terminally thick skull. So you just keep assuming you and all of your buddies are hooked in on launch 'cause of what everyone ALWAYS does in the setup area and NEVER does between there and launch.

Jerry Furnell - 2012/07/16 09:46:16 UTC

Too true.
If you unhook and are under pressure, then it is too easy to forget to rehook in.

Yeah. It is. Always assume you haven't.

Perhaps the instigator of this thread can comment if his (patent pending, cough, cough - do you know what a worldwide patent costs?) device will solve that problem?

On a slight change of subject, it is really good policy if clubs push prelaunch safety at their meetings so that on launch this translates into buddies watching out for buddies.

This issue doesn't have jack shit to do with PRELAUNCH safety. It is ENTIRELY about INSTANT OF LAUNCH safety.

See a mate getting flustered, "Ah shit, my camera/car keys/phone etc", and they unhook and rush about because everyone is pushing and want to go. Keep and eye on them if you're in the queue, "Hey, Charlie, did you hook in?

And don't drop your guard until after he's said yes.

Is your helmet done up?" Might save a life.

Yeah. Ask him about his helmet. Super way to minimize the possibility of an unhooked launch and save a life. Then ask him if his altimeter's zeroed and his radio's set to the right frequency.

Then get his home phone number so you can notify his family if anything bad happens.

JJ Coté - 2012/07/16 10:44:09 UTC

I've seen exactly one failure-to-hook-in launch. It was a failure-to-hook-back-in, as I suspect most of them are - he had been hooked in, but didn't like the wind conditions and backed off to wait a bit, and unhooked while he waited. Big mistake.

Ya know what's patently obvious about ALL unhooked launches, JJ? They all happen to people who never do hook-in checks.

But everybody looking out for him wouldn't have helped a bit, because he was the last one to launch that day, the rest of us were already in the air.

And how many of you assholes did, watched for, or insisted that people do hook-in checks?

[miguel]

I was going to answer with the line by line formatted style. It would have taken forever and a day.



So here is a quick summary:

The difference between you and I is that you assume much. I assume very little.

You are so sure of your divine preflight



that any checking after your preflight is simply superflous. Just a lift and a tug and you are good to go. I am happy for you.

Thanks, but no thanks.

I assume nothing and check those things that are important to me right before launching.

It is customary to add a smiley when joking so that folks know you are joking.

[Tad Eareckson]

The difference between you and I is that you assume much. I assume very little.

Two minutes standing on the ramp waiting for a good cycle...

- We're both ASSUMING our sidewires are in good enough shape to get us through the flight based upon our preflight checks twenty minutes earlier. You do visual and tactile and ASSUME they'll hold to what you're likely to encounter in flight, I do visual and tactile and a rough field TEST of the structural security of the sidewire loop, control frame, and cross spars to the load I'm likely to encounter in flight.

- You've done a preflight inspection of your suspension system upon arrival at the ramp, I've done a preflight inspection of my suspension system before arrival at the ramp.

- As we're waiting for the cycle you're ASSUMING that you're hooked in and ready to go and I'm ASSUMING that I'm not.

- When the cycle finally comes you run off the ramp based upon the ASSUMPTION that you verified your connection and leg loops two minutes ago, I first TEST that I have my connection and leg loops NOW.

We both do about the same QUANTITY of assuming but the QUALITY of my assumptions are a lot better than yours.

You are so sure of your divine preflight that any checking after your preflight is simply superflous. Just a lift and a tug and you are good to go. I am happy for you.

I conduct a preflight in accordance with my USHGA rating requirements and as described in the owner's manual, taxi to takeoff position, and launch in accordance with my USHGA rating requirements and - with two exceptions - as described in the owner's manual.

The exceptions...

- The owner's manual says to:

Before launching, hook in to the glider and do a careful hang check.

While hooking in to the glider is generally a good idea - especially if one hasn't already in the setup area - I don't do a careful or any other quality of hang check because, aside from the fact that it's not mentioned in my rating requirements, it serves no purpose.

- The owner's manual DOESN'T say anything about complying with the provision for all USHGA ratings which states:

With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.

and is the single most critical and brain dead easy two second operation a foot launch flyer can do in the course of a flying day - and is also, of course, the single most critical operation a foot launch flyer is most likely to skip (because he feels that that two seconds is more advantageously spent rechecking his chin strap).

Interestingly, the negligent hypocritical bastards who produce the gliders and write the owners' manuals also, like myself, don't do a careful or any other quality of hang check...

Rob Kells - 2005/12

Not one of us regularly uses either of the two most popular methods outlined above.

...because it serves no purpose and do perform a hook-in check because it does.

Thanks, but no thanks.

I assume nothing...

BULLSHIT.

You assume that the locknuts you checked in the setup area are still in place, nobody's pulled the nose cap off your keel and sawn most of the way through the bolts, the guy on your starboard wire won't lift your wing as high as possible and push it forward, and you're gonna remember what to do when you approach the primary and see the narrow end of the windsock straight back from the wide end and pointing northeast.

We all make potentially lethal assumptions all the time. But most of them are pretty safe and we can instantly put them behind us and start narrowing our focuses on the ones at the other end of the spectrum.

...and check those things that are important to me right before launching.

Everyone who's ever ended up as a lifeless heap on the rocks below the ramp was checking the things that were important to him right before launch: pitch attitude, cycles, climb rates of gliders and vultures, basetube clearance, chest buckles, helmet, camera, cousin's gear...

NOBODY who's ever ended up as a lifeless heap on the rocks below the ramp was checking the two things that ACTUALLY WERE important.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13132
Unhooked Death Again - Change our Methods Now?

JBBenson - 2009/01/25 16:27:19 UTC

I get what Tad is saying, but it took some translation:
HANG CHECK is part of the preflight, to verify that all the harness lines etc. are straight.
HOOK-IN CHECK is to verify connection to the glider five seconds before takeoff.
They are separate actions, neither interchangeable nor meant to replace one another. They are not two ways to do the same thing.

There are times and places for preflight checks and launch procedures - different ones. The setup (and/or staging) area is the place to check your spars, bolts, pins, wires, sail, battens, reflex bridle, VG, vario, GPS, radio, camera, cell phone, shoelaces, helmet, harness suspension, hang strap, and carabiner.

The ramp is the place to check the sky, crew, ribbons, trim, and traffic and - JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH - VERIFY YOUR CONNECTION. Don't INSPECT it.

Luen Miller - 1994/11

Just before launch he reached back to make sure his carabiner was locked.

VERIFY it.

Rob Kells - 2005/12

Always lift the glider vertically and feel the tug on the leg straps when the harness mains go tight, just before you start your launch run. I always use this test.

TONS of people have been mangled and killed because they've been incapable of understanding the distinction between preflight and launch procedures. Preflight procedures performed at launch are DISTRACTIONS - and distractions on launch are DEADLY.

Launch is NOT the time or place to be check or thinking about your spars, bolts, pins, wires, sail, battens, reflex bridle, VG, vario, GPS, radio, camera, cell phone, shoelaces, helmet, harness suspension, hang strap, and/or carabiner.

I think you're gonna have a hard time finding anything in a training or operator's manual from conventional aviation which blurs the distinction between preflight and takeoff as lethally as hang gliding people do.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27538
Unhooked - A Human Error Trap

Robotham - 2012/05/04 17:08:56 UTC

Christian Williams - 2012/05/03 17:58:18 UTC

I always make this argument about now.

I know your system works because I've done it for the last 28 years.

Unfortunately your procedure is too simple and logical for most people, they want elaborate procedures and endless reams of redundant equipment.

There are real good reasons for that.

It is customary to add a smiley when joking so that folks know you are joking.

1. It's CUSTOMARY to fly with backup loops, inaccessible bent pin releases, and standard aerotow weak links, whipstall gliders to land them, and do a hang check behind the ramp and run off of it five or ten minutes later on the assumption that one is hooked in.

2. I'm not crazy about corresponding with people who won't or can't read and think carefully enough to be able to tell if I'm joking or not.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=818
Peter (Link Knife) Birren

Tad Eareckson - 2011/11/29 06:48:33 UTC

It never existed. It didn't any more exist than any of those totally imaginary incidents of gliders being blown off launch because of people allowing their wings to float up into turbulent jet streams that you fabricated to justify gutting hook-in check rules.

And that's the BEST you can do? Dealing with this kinda crap I lose more brain cells through atrophy than I do guzzling my morning bottle of bourbon.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=818
Peter (Link Knife) Birren

Sam Kellner - 2011/11/29 13:29:20 UTC

We shouldn't have to listen to an admitted drunk

That's one of scores of reasons you won't see a lot of posts from Sam caliber assholes on this forum.

3. Besides, I don't think too many people have died because they considered both possibilities.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=26557
Failure to hook in 6/29/12

Larry Howe - 2012/07/17 00:25:22 UTC

I do at least 2hang checks, usually 3 sometimes 4 or more.

Yeah.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1167
The way it outa be

Steve Kinsley - 2005/10/04 14:04:25 UTC

One last attempt.

We have now rounded up all the usual suspects and promised renewed vigilance, nine page checklists, hang checks every six feet, et cetera. Bob Gillisse redux.

A hang check is part of preflighting your equipment. You do it in the setup area - not on the launch or the ramp. When you get in line you are hooked in and ready to go. No going down for a hang check cum hook in check.

Of course you do.

If you had read my comment you would have noticed I said I'm anal about it.

I read your comment. I commented on your comment. I never had the slightest doubt.

Anality is a really good thing when you're doing design, it starts getting a little iffy during preflight, and it TOTALLY SUCKS on the launch ramp and in the air.

Steve Kinsley - 1998/05/01 01:16

"With EACH flight, demonstrates method of establishing that pilot is hooked in JUST PRIOR to launch." Emphasis in original. - USHGA Beginner through Advanced requirement.

I know of only three people who actually do this. I am one of them. I am sure there are more but not a lot more. Instead we appear to favor ever more complex (and irrelevant) hang checks or schemes like Marc advocates that possibly increase rather than decrease the risk of hook in failure.

On the ramp and it the air you mostly wanna be doing threat prioritization.

On the other hand I've seen more than one pilot prehook their harness to their wing do a quick check. Jump into it and launch.

What?

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25550
Failure to hook in.

Christian Williams - 2011/10/25 03:59:58 UTC

What's more, I believe that all hooked-in checks prior to the last one before takeoff are a waste of time, not to say dangerous, because they build a sense of security which should not be built more than one instant before commitment to flight.

No two, three, four or more hang checks?

I'm fairly positive if Spark was at a site and watched me, he would sign me off...

I thought you said you read his post.

1. A HANG CHECK IS NOT A HOOK-IN CHECK.
2. A hang check does not and cannot qualify as a hook-in check.
3. It is physically impossible to perform a hang check JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH.
4. Based on what he said he would not sign you off.
5. Why don't you tell him, Allen?

...not that I need him to.

Nah, you don't need him to. But whatever negligent incompetent asshole did oughta have his certifications pulled - along with yours.

One more time I'll say it. You do what's best for you and I'll do the same.

You, like 99 percent of the people in this sport, are too fuckin' stupid to know what's best for you. Follow the goddam rules unless you can come up with a halfway intelligent reason not to.

Fly safe.

This isn't about flying. This is about making sure you have something with which to fly before you run off the ramp.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=26557
Failure to hook in 6/29/12

CAL - 2012/07/17 17:02:24 UTC
Ogden, Utah

being as tall as i am i prefer to hook in after, even then i still bump my head hooking in

i feel i can better preflight my harness before hooking in, i always hang check before launching

I always stuff my battens before launching. But that doesn't mean I'm hooked in when I launch either.

there is a lot of issues here, i don't like turning my glider around hooked in, nor do i like the harness in my way while turning the glider around, so i turn the glider have someone hang check me wait for a good cycle and launch.

Idiot.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=26557
Failure to hook in 6/29/12

Alan Deikman - 2012/07/17 17:57:38 UTC
Fremont, California

I designed a mechanism to prevent FTHI which I think would be pretty effective, probably with the same failure rate as the glider itself. I will never implement it, and if I applied for a patent it would be for the express purpose of stopping anyone else from implementing it.

If you don't understand why then I don't think you understand the central issue on this topic.

I understand EXACTLY why - as do the dozen or so other people on the planet who GET this issue.

[Steve Davy]

I thought you said you read his post.

1. A HANG CHECK IS NOT A HOOK-IN CHECK.
2. A hang check does not and cannot qualify as a hook-in check.
3. It is physically impossible to perform a hook-in check JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH.
4. Based on what he said he would not sign you off.
5. Why don't you tell him, Allen?

Check line three.

[Tad Eareckson]

Oops. I think that's the second time you've caught me doing that.

Fixed. Thanks (again).

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=26557
Failure to hook in 6/29/12

Allen Sparks - 2012/07/13 12:41:24 UTC

I've launched unhooked twice. Both times were in 1977.

Allen Sparks - 1998/04/30

Although I'm not proud to say it, I have forgotton to hook in twice. Once in '76 and once in '77.

Close enough.

One was a shallow slope launch, survivable. I sprained my ankle.

The other was a windy assisted cliff launch at Jean ridge NV - not too survivable.

Hanging from the basetube by my finger tips forty feet over jagged lava rocks was my worst nightmare come true. Miraculously, I was not seriously injured.

Hang checks, walk through, visual inspection, checking chest and leg straps, etc, are essential items in the preflight process.

Hang checks are pretty much useless or worse. A thousand times worse than useless when used as they virtually always are - to reassure and confirm that people will be hooked in at launch.

Hook-in checks are required by the USHPA SOPs (e.g. USHPA SOP 104.07 7-A-8)

http://www.johnheiney.com/HG_lessons/ushga_ratings.htm

With each flight, demonstrates method of establishing that pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.

I used to interpret 'just prior' as fifteen minutes.

1. Why?

2. Ya know what fifteen MINUTES is, Allen?
- Fifteen minutes is two and half percent of the airtime requirement for an Intermediate rating.
- Fifteen minutes is about three times as long as it takes to sled down from Woodstock.
- I had my Hang Two in under nine minutes of airtime.
- Fifteen minutes is about 150 times as long as Bill Priday had left to live once his foot started moving at Whitwell on 2005/10/01.

3. You launched unhooked in '76, damn near killed yourself, and totaled your glider. I'da thunk that that might have sparked just a wee bit of interest in stuff like the 1981/05 George Whitehill article introducing the rating requirements revision and intent - and maybe the near decade and a half following when Doug Hildreth was covering all the fatalities and pleading with the readers to implement lift and tug.

4. You were around for our local Bob Gillisse and Bill Priday disasters. Did you have Steve Kinsley and Judy McCarty on your ignore list?

5. WHEN did you figure out that fifteen minutes might not be a great fit for the definition of "just prior to launch"?
sacred Ox, but I have never seen anyone point out a flaw in his logic.[/quote]
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=18876
Hang glider Crash

Allen Sparks - 2010/09/07 01:03:18 UTC

Helen,

Thanks for the Tad 'lift and tug' reminder.

I have launched unhooked and experienced the horror of hanging by my fingers over jagged rocks ... and the surreal result - i.e. not being significantly injured.

I am a firm believer in 'lift and tug' and the mindset of assuming I am not hooked in. It is motivated by the recurring memory of my own experience ... and the tragic deaths and life-altering injuries of good friends.

That's the first indication that I have of you getting it.

I now firmly believe that it should be done immediately before launch.

And I now firmly believe that ninety flights and ten hours of solo airtime are required for a Hang Three and that when my mom told me to look both ways before crossing the street she didn't mean fifteen minutes before crossing the street.

This isn't about what anybody believes, Allen. This is about what's stated in black and white and a modicum of common sense.

It is amazing to me how many USHPA-rated pilots do not appear to do hook-in checks just prior to launch.

Do not appear? The vast majority of them are flat out telling you they don't and flat out refuse to.

There are many examples on youtube.

Try to find good examples of people deliberately doing hook-in checks. (High wind launches don't count - everybody's suspension is tight when it's crankin'.)

I am not trying to argue that a hook-in check is fool-proof.

It's not. That's why we also have requirements for preflighting aircraft.

I am saying that it is a USHPA requirement, that it is often not done, and that it should be drilled into our flight procedures.

1. Looking at launches overall, it's virtually never done. But it's not like everybody just does one once in a while. It's two groups of people - idiots, the overwhelming majority, who NEVER do them and a tiny minority of people with their shit together who ALWAYS do them. This isn't a gray area thing in which people are occasionally varying from their routines and crossing over.

2. And whenever you hear about someone leaving launch minus a glider you can bet your bottom dollar that it was someone from the former group once gain proving that Darwin was right.

3. When should it be drilled into our flight procedures? On Day One, Flight One when assholes like Matt Taber Steve Wendt start them out on training hills and scooter tows? Or five years later when their flying as Threes using the stupid bullshit that's been drilled into their flight procedures and they've found works best for them?

I do hook-in checks per SOP, multiple times before launch, including 'just prior'/'immediately before'.

1. It is logically impossible to do multiple hook-in checks per SOP - JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH.

2. It's a REALLY BAD IDEA...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25550
Failure to hook in.

Christian Williams - 2011/10/25 03:59:58 UTC

What's more, I believe that all hooked-in checks prior to the last one before takeoff are a waste of time, not to say dangerous, because they build a sense of security which should not be built more than one instant before commitment to flight.

...to call and think of as a hook-in check ANYTHING you do before a couple of seconds prior to launch.

3. The check you do "'just prior'/'immediately before'" launch isn't a repetition you just happen to "INCLUDE" at the end of a series. It's THE hook-in check. Everything prior is - at best - useless but harmless.

As an USHPA observer, I will not sign off for a USHPA rating until the pilot has demonstrated that they are doing hook-in checks consistently, just prior to launch, on every flight I observe.

1. How many USHGA ratings did you sign off when you interpreted 'just prior' as fifteen minutes?

2. Did the people who signed Bille Floyd on his ratings interpret 'just prior' as fifteen minutes?

3. Have you issued any recalls or advisories to the people you signed off using the fifteen minute interpretation?

4. As a USHPA Observer - or even as a USHGA rated pilot - don't you have an obligation to report dangerous conduct which violates the USHGA regulations under which people fly?

- Name some conduct more dangerous than people running off ramps assuming they're hooked in because of what they did - or think they did - thirty seconds to fifteen minutes ago.

- Name some conduct more reprehensible than teaching students that it's OK to run off a ramp assuming they're hooked in because of what they did - or think they did - thirty seconds to fifteen minutes ago and signing them off in blatant violation of the rating requirements.

5. Any comment on this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW8qZESnFvQ


vile, obscene crap and the vile bastards who perpetrated and aided and abetted it?