landing

[Tad Eareckson]

Care provide some links that would back up this declaration?

Personal observation.

1. Watched about a decade's worth of landings at Ridgely where the solos ALL go upright and attempt to land on their feet and the tandems ALL stay prone and roll in.

2. There were shitloads worth of solo bonks and whacks and a few serious crashes.

3. There were zero tandem landing incidents.

4. Shitloads plus a few over zero equals twenty. EVERYBODY knows that!!! What's your problem?

The pilot is now a passenger on an unguided missile.

Shoot. A fella could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff.

Quick Quiz...

Tad Eareckson - 2012/01/19 20:50:02 UTC

Again... If contact is imminent you're no longer flying/controlling the glider. It no longer has a Pilot In Command. It, instead, has a Crash Victim. Do - or try to do - whatever the hell you think is gonna have the least number and degree of negative consequences. Then come back here and tell us how things went.

I COULDN'T CARE (MUCH) LESS.

1. That quiz is a about HOW TO BEST *CRASH* A GLIDER.

2. This TOPIC is about HOW TO BEST *LAND* A GLIDER. Note the title.

3. If you wanna talk about how best to crash you're more than welcome to start a "crashing" thread.

4. And I'd probably agree with EVERYTHING you'd say on the issue.

5. And I've got TONS of experience in that area. I'm a freakin' Hang Five crasher at least three times over. If you don't believe me ask few Region 9 old-timers.

6. But I'm not much more interested in discussing how to crash than I am what to do after you launch unhooked.

As an aside, I cleaned up a glider and put it away after a pilot flew into a tree prone.

1. I dissected a Formula 144 which had locked out on scooter and killed the pilot. Same control frame pattern 'cept the basetube was slightly bent. The rest of the airframe was pretty trashed though.

2. I'm also not interested in talking about how best to deal with a low level lockout when you hafta reach for a release actuator 'cause if you get into a low level lockout your outlook ain't all that great even if you don't hafta reach for release actuator.

I watched the video, not on youtube, of another pilot who stalled and flew into some low trees. His injuries were very severe.

Yeah? And?

Crashing prone is no panacea.

1. Quote me advising anyone to crash prone.

2. Quote me advising anyone to crash.

2. Quote me advising anyone HOW to crash - beyond saying that if you have your hands on the downtubes when you do you're probably gonna break an arm or two.

4. I imagine that crashing prone IS no panacea. Probably no spleen as well. Sometimes no pulse.

5. So why did he stall? 'Cause he was flying prone on the basetube? (That's the part I'M interested in.)

AHHHHHHHH, to always land on a putting green, with the Bud lite girls to help put the glider away.

Ya know...

1. I keep HEARING about how you always need to come in upright with your hands on the downtubes so you can safely land in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place and fields filled with seven foot high corn.

2. But whenever I read reports and/or see the videos of the crashes, injuries, and fatalities they all seem to happen for the following reasons...

- landing in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place

- landing in fields filled with seven foot high corn

- landing on putting greens upright with their hands on the downtubes demonstrating the superiority of their narrow rocky dry riverbed and seven foot high corn landing techniques for the Bud Light girls who are gonna help them put their gliders away.

3. John Simon, Lauren, Linda Salamone, Allen, Andy, and Davis were landing on putting greens.

This has given me a great idea. A head first paraglider harness. Those poor guys have been doing it wrong all these years.

1. Who's dying at faster rates?

2. Yeah, a big part of the reason is because they collapse.

3. But they've also got shit in the way of speed range relative to hang gliders (and anything else you can think of).

4. And upright hang gliders have shit in the way of speed range relative to prone hang gliders.

5. If paragliders could double their speed ranges with head first harnesses pretty much all paragliders would be flying head first harnesses and there would be a lot fewer of them stalling and crashing.

6. Pancaking in on your spine isn't necessarily a lot more fun than pancaking in prone. You might wanna spend some time helping Chris Starbuck setting up his glider and pushing him around in his wheelchair to get a feel for the issue.

7. Tandem hang glider pilots can land any way they feel like but they always come in prone.

8. If you don't crash it's not terribly important whether or not you lead with your head and I don't think that we need to accept crashes as inevitable and routine events quite to the extent we do. (Ditto for weak link failures and the crashes they precipitate.)

[miguel]

Care provide some links that would back up this declaration?

Personal observation.

1. Watched about a decade's worth of landings at Ridgely where the solos ALL go upright and attempt to land on their feet and the tandems ALL stay prone and roll in.

2. There were shitloads worth of solo bonks and whacks and a few serious crashes.

3. There were zero tandem landing incidents.

4. Shitloads plus a few over zero equals twenty. EVERYBODY knows that!!! What's your problem?

Whoa dude, you do have serious talent with numbers. You should consider working with one of the political parties as an operative. Or one of the media networks as an analist.

Again... If contact is imminent you're no longer flying/controlling the glider. It no longer has a Pilot In Command. It, instead, has a Crash Victim. Do - or try to do - whatever the hell you think is gonna have the least number and degree of negative consequences. Then come back here and tell us how things went.

I COULDN'T CARE (MUCH) LESS.

Tad, this is a direct quote from your previous post.

1. That quiz is a about HOW TO BEST *CRASH* A GLIDER.

2. This TOPIC is about HOW TO BEST *LAND* A GLIDER. Note the title.

The questions are in regard to YOUR last post. The quiz does concern landing gliders. These are uncontrolled, premature landings

I watched the video, not on youtube, of another pilot who stalled and flew into some low trees. His injuries were very severe.

Yeah, And?

This pilot was low and prone. If he had been upright, his injuries would not have been so severe. He went head first into the ground.
Does that answer your question?

5. So why did he stall? 'Cause he was flying prone on the basetube? (That's the part I'M interested in.)

Flying too slow and one wing got popped stalling it.

AHHHHHHHH, to always land on a putting green, with the Bud lite girls to help put the glider away.

Ya know...

1. I keep HEARING about how you always need to come in upright with your hands on the downtubes so you can safely land in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place and fields filled with seven foot high corn.

2. But whenever I read reports and/or see the videos of the crashes, injuries, and fatalities they all seem to happen for the following reasons...

- landing in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place

- landing in fields filled with seven foot high corn

- landing on putting greens upright with their hands on the downtubes demonstrating the superiority of their narrow rocky dry riverbed and seven foot high corn landing techniques for the Bud Light girls who are gonna help them put their gliders away.

3. John Simon, Lauren, Linda Salamone, Allen, Andy, and Davis were landing on putting greens.

Try to understand.
1. Everyone does not have access to a putting green lz with the Bud Light Girls.
2. Some lzs are such that a wheel landing might cause a serious injury
3. Some pilots do not reach the lz and have to land safely wherever. Most of the time, these lzs are not wheel friendly.

Therefore, if one wants to land somewhere other than Happy Acres LZ, one ought to develope foot landing skills.

Given that transitioning to upright at low altitudes can cause difficulties, transitioning upright early is safer in lzs other than the Happy Acres LZ.

Got it?

Good job, I knew you could!

[Tad Eareckson]

You should consider working with one of the political parties as an operative. Or one of the media networks as an analist.

What makes you think I don't?

These are uncontrolled, premature landings

Name one other branch of aviation in which uncontrolled, premature contact with the surface is thought of and/or referred to as a "landing".

Bonus question...

Name one other branch of aviation in which a device which causes abrupt, total, unpredictable, and frequent losses of thrust on takeoff is deliberately installed in the power transmission system to increase the safety of airport operations.

If he had been upright, his injuries would not have been so severe.

Probably not. Hell, you saw the video, I didn't, I'll defer to your call and agree that, no, his injuries would not have been so severe if he had been upright.

Does that answer your question?

Not really.

Flying too slow...

Stop right there. After those three words I'm not much interested.

- He wasn't flying too slow because he was prone with his hands on the downtubes.

- There was absolutely no reason he should have been or needed or was incentivized to be flying slow.

- He was low.

- There's never been a misunderstanding, disagreement, controversy, spread of opinions about the advisability of flying low and slow - even in this idiot sport.

- I already know how to avoid that situation - there's nothing to be learned here.

- It's a real good bet that he was doing everything humanly possible to mitigate the outcome of his situation AFTER he lost control of the plane but that not landing on his head wasn't an option.

Try to understand.

Try to understand that I actually DO understand.

Everyone does not have access to a putting green lz with the Bud Light Girls.

1. From everything in my own experience, am reading in the accounts and reports, and am seeing on the videos and Google Earth - everyone DOES.

2. People say they don't to try to impress the Bud Light Girls but they do.
- The LZ at Lookout Mountain in Golden Colorado is a putting green.
- The touchdown strip at McClure is a putting green.
- At Kagel they approach over a narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place but they land on a putting green.
- I've flown over fifty sites in my career and they've all had putting greens for LZs.

3. Name someone - preferably without an interesting set of X-rays - who flies and doesn't have access to a putting green LZ.

4. The testosterone poisoning cases who run this sport are always rubbing everyone's noses in how they got up to fifteen grand on an overcast day and had to land in a narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place.

5. Someone who from two grand can't find a putting green with Bud Light Girls to help put the glider away is too stupid even to be flying hang gliders.

6. And if you're below two grand you probably shouldn't be leaving the putting green you had when you took off anyway.

Some lzs are such that a wheel landing might cause a serious injury

1. Then they're not LZs - they're fields (maybe).
2. If you regularly land people in fields in which a wheel landing might cause a serious injury people WILL BE seriously injured as a consequence.

Some pilots do not reach the lz and have to land safely wherever.

1. If it's an LZ and the pilot can't reach it to land safely then he did something stupid either by:
- taking off; or
- getting out of range.

2. And at a lot of flying sites there are a lot of local land owners who got tired of people bailing out in their fields twenty years ago so the people who do not reach the LZ are often not thought of fondly by the people who do.

Most of the time, these lzs are not wheel friendly.

1. Again - poor judgment.
2. Again - somebody's gonna get hurt.

Therefore, if one wants to land somewhere other than Happy Acres LZ, one ought to develope foot landing skills.

01. I don't want to land somewhere other than the Happy Acres LZ.
- I used to push my luck a lot, was pretty damn good, and got away with it just about all the time.
- But if/WHEN you fuck up just a little just one time all the other times instantly weren't worth it - BIG TIME.

02. Just because one develops foot landing skills doesn't mean he should put himself in a situation in which he NEEDS them.

03. Kinda like just 'cause you fly with a parachute and know how to deploy it...

04. Go to any LZ in no wind when a large mixed flock of Hang Twos, Threes, Fours, and Fives are raining down and tell me your estimate for how much longer it's gonna take for us - as a hang gliding culture - to become as proficient at foot landing skills as the Cessna and ultralight crowds are at wheel landing skills.

05. We don't operate such that someone who WANTS TO land somewhere other than the Happy Acres LZ can ELECT to develop foot landing skills. We FORCE *ALL* STUDENTS - from Day 1, Flight 1 to foot land EVERY flight from that point on through their flying careers and all their rating advancements at a HUGE cost of broken arms and torn up shoulders - not to mention the bent and broken downtubes.

06. Lotsa these asshole instructors (Matt Taber comes immediately to mind) FORCE students to fly every second of every foot launch flight in foot landing configuration until AFTER their Twos have been signed and they've completed a couple of high altitude mountain flights.

07. Got any thoughts on asshole instructors who force students to fly nonstop upright until after they've logged a couple of high altitude mountain flights - even though there's never been anything remotely resembling that protocol in any of the rating requirements - while NEVER for ANY flight EVER teaching or requiring ANY slight pretense of a hook-in check - even though that's a REQUIREMENT for ALL flights for ALL ratings?

08. Of the Day 1, Flight 1 students we force to develop foot landing skills only a very small fraction will ever land anywhere other than the Happy Acres putting green.

09. Of the fraction which chooses to get up and leave Happy Acres the vast majority will always be able to find putting greens comparable to or vastly superior to the one at Happy Acres.

10. A lot of people who come into those comparable and superior putting greens end up in crumpled heaps because they use those occasions to hone their narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place landing skills and most of these comparable and superior putting greens aren't equipped with windsocks.

11. The very small fraction of people who choose to leave Happy Acres contains a significant further fraction consisting of testosterone poisoned individuals who - for the sake of being able to claim an extra quarter mile for the day's competition results - will abandon a comparable or superior putting green with no windsock for a narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place and no windsock or a field filled with seven foot high corn and no windsock. Those people - sooner or later, but usually sooner - get hurt.

12. Of the piddling total of nineteen flyers currently listed on this forum at least two have sustained very serious injuries as a consequence of being upright which wouldn't have occurred had they bellied in without wheels.

- The first one was aiming for the Happy Acres putting green but missed because his asshole "instructors" put tons of emphasis on how to land in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place and fields filled with seven foot corn and no useful emphasis whatsoever on how to safely hit the Happy Acres putting green.

- The second one WAS LANDING IN the Happy Acres putting green but, to hone his skills, treating it as a narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place or field filled with seven foot corn and - just to make him take his landings even more seriously - flew his Falcon without wheels.

13. The number of people who break their arms and rip their shoulders apart in Happy Acres putting greens solely because they're practicing their narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place and field filled with seven foot high corn landing techniques dwarf to insignificance the number of people who are and would be injured coming down in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place and fields filled with seven foot high corn because they hadn't adequately practiced for such occasions.

Given that transitioning to upright at low altitudes can cause difficulties...

And BEING upright at low altitudes CAN'T?

...transitioning upright early is safer in lzs other than the Happy Acres LZ.

1. Given that you take more steps walking through a minefield than you do running, entering a minefield at full tilt is safer in fields other than those cleared of mines. But those aren't necessarily the only two options available for the situation.

2. Always?

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26517
Upcoming shoulder surgery

George Stebbins - 2012/02/08 17:13:13 UTC

Yes, break a downtube to slow. Done it twice. Totally uninjured (not even a bruise). That hip just slices through the downtube and slows down the body. Of course, there are circumstances it won't work. If you don't have time to move your hand, it won't work, for example. If the "crash" takes you too much by surprise, for instance. I have seen others do this exact maneuver before, btw, and it has always worked if they managed to get both hands to the same downtube.

The one time I couldn't move my hand (too slow to realize I was gonna crash - I thought the high grass was not so high, and it grabbed my base-tube - I nearly broke both arms. Tore some stuff in both shoulders and couldn't fly for a month. In fact, while I was prostrate on the ground, I thought I had broken my arms for a few seconds. If I'd gotten my hands to the same side, I would almost certainly have been less injured. Of course, it would have cost me a downtube (or two). A reasonable trade.

(And yes, the crash was 100% my own fault. I was trying too hard to get back up and not paying enough attention to the XC Landing Area, and misjudged the slope and depth of the vegetation. Lesson learned.)

Jayne DePanfilis - 2004/11

Landing on wheels in tall grass can be done without incident if the pilot understands that the glider must quickly roll to a stop and not turn or spin 180 degrees. If the glider turns or spins after the landing, it was landed with too much airspeed. This is unacceptable if you need to land in tall grass.

Even in fields other than the Happy Acres LZ is it ever safer to just never go upright at all?

Got it?

Nah. I'm an EXTREMELY slow learner. You'll probably have much better luck with Jason Boehm or Ryan Voight.

P.S. In Item 3 at the beginning of my previous post I said "solo" when I meant "tandem". I edited the fix in my post and your quote of it.

[miguel]

Name one other branch of aviation in which uncontrolled, premature contact with the surface is thought of and/or referred to as a "landing".

Naval Aviation, ask any Air Force pilot

Bonus question...

Name one other branch of aviation in which a device which causes abrupt, total, unpredictable, and frequent losses of thrust on takeoff is deliberately installed in the power transmission system to increase the safety of airport operations.

Too easy, towing of hang gliders

Where is my kewpie doll?

[Tad Eareckson]

Naval Aviation, ask any Air Force pilot

They're uncontrolled when they slam into the deck but they're not premature. The premature ones eat stern.

Too easy, towing of hang gliders

One OTHER branch of aviation.
You're not anywhere CLOSE to getting the doll.

[miguel]

Naval Aviation, ask any Air Force pilot

They're uncontrolled when they slam into the deck but they're not premature. The premature ones eat stern.

Now, now now, when the deck pitches up as the aircraft is descending, the contact is a tad premature.

Too easy, towing of hang gliders

One OTHER branch of aviation.

You're not anywhere CLOSE to getting the doll.

Towing a hang glider meets all of your specifications and then some.

Kewpie doll, please

[Tad Eareckson]

...when the deck pitches up as the aircraft is descending, the contact is a tad premature.

Yes, but...

- That would DEFINITELY be an example of premature contact and VERY PROBABLY occur at an instant during which the pilot had very diminished control of his plane.

- But the result would be neither thought of nor referred to as a landing.

- And the assignment was to:

Name one other branch of aviation in which uncontrolled, premature contact with the surface is thought of and/or referred to as a "landing".

- New assignment...

On one day record with a video camera as many bonks, whacks, and crashes resulting in damage severe enough to require addressing before the plane can be flown again and/or injury to the pilot.

Do you spend it on:
- a pitching, rolling carrier deck; or
- the Ridgely or Lookout LZ in calm conditions?

Towing a hang glider meets all of your specifications and then some.

Yes. It DOES. But the REASON it does is because that's the model for which I was asking for something analogous.

For example, if I asked:
---
Name a flight school owner/operator as much of an evil, sleazy, two-faced, lying scumbag as the one at Lockout Mountain Flight Park.
---
then "Matt Taber" would not be an acceptable answer.

Neither would "Tracy Tillman" 'cause - even though the effect is pretty much the same - he's just an incompetent halfwit.

Too easy, towing of hang gliders

Lotsa times when one finds completion of a task "too easy" one should make sure one has properly understood the assignment.

The Bailey Release was the result of a request to Bobby from some of the flight park guys to come up with a shoulder mounted secondary release lighter and less bulky than the panic snap jobs they were using. So he just grabbed a bent parachute pin lying on the next table, stitched a loop of webbing through its eye, and slid on a short piece of aluminum cut from a broken tip strut in the bin.

Too easy. No testing or thinking involved. And the result has been hundreds of thousands of flights on a piece of equipment which won't work under load.

But hey, what do I know?

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24846
Is this a joke ?

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/26 08:24:31 UTC

Bobby's a fucking genius when it comes to this shit.

Bobby's a fucking genius when it comes to this shit.

[miguel]

...when the deck pitches up as the aircraft is descending, the contact is a tad premature.

Yes, but...

1. That would DEFINITELY be an example of premature contact and VERY PROBABLY occur at an instant during which the pilot had very diminished control of his plane.

2. But the result would be neither thought of nor referred to as a landing.

Tad, please, they 'land' like this 24/7 X 365. That's why they are Naval Aviators and not simply pilots.

3. And the assignment was to:

Name one other branch of aviation in which uncontrolled, premature contact with the surface is thought of and/or referred to as a "landing".

The given answer answers the question quite well. Your question lacked specificity.

4. New assignment...

On one day, record with a video camera, as many bonks, whacks, and crashes resulting in damage severe enough to require addressing, before the plane can be flown again, and/or injury to the pilot.

FIFA, added commas in an effort to make the sentance make sense. An english teacher would have run out of red ink.

Do you spend it on:

-a) a pitching, rolling carrier deck; or

Nope, because those guys proffesionals and the aircraft are designed to land as they do. There are plenty of youtube carrier mishaps.

-b) the Ridgely or Lookout LZ in calm conditions?

Yes, as these guys are amateurs, their aircraft fragile and their egos large.

Towing a hang glider meets all of your specifications and then some.

Yes. It DOES. But the REASON it does is because that's the model for which I was asking for something analogous.

As above, your question was lacking in specificity.

I am still waiting for my kewpie doll.



Off topic attacks deleted.

[Tad Eareckson]

Tad, please, they 'land' like this 24/7 X 365.

1. With respect to the quoted text to which this is a response, what's your point?
2. No, they don't.

I just googled "career carrier landings" and this came up as Number 2 and the first relevant result:

Admiral James Lair, who flew more than 200 combat missions and made 1400 career carrier landings, stood to salute all veterans.

I had that (second) figure beat well over twenty years ago - and I'm nothing to write home about.

That's why they are Naval Aviators and not simply pilots.

Neither of those designations particularly impresses me. It doesn't take much in the way of brains to attain either. But - even so - I'm usually very guarded in my use of the term "pilot" and there are very few people I know in this sport who are deserving of that title.

The given answer answers the question quite well.

It most assuredly DOES NOT. When a plane eats carrier stern nobody thinks of and/or refers to the event as a landing. It's thought of and referred to as a fatal crash.

Your question lacked specificity.

There was nothing wrong with my question and it was perfectly clear.
Wanna give it another shot?

Name one other branch of aviation in which uncontrolled, premature contact with the surface is thought of and/or referred to as a "landing".

Try meeting all the specifications this time.

FIFA, added commas in an effort to make the sentance make sense.

1. Can you add something to "FIFA" so IT makes sense? Neither I nor Acronym Finder seem to have the slightest clue what that is in that context.
2. No, the sentence works as it is and your commas don't. But it could/should have been written more clearly like this:

On one day record with a video camera as many:
- bonks;
- whacks; and
- crashes resulting in:
-- damage severe enough to require addressing before the plane can be flown again; and/or
-- injury to the pilot.

An english teacher would have run out of red ink.

Yeah.

Nope, because those guys proffesionals and the aircraft are designed to land as they do.

Right.

Nope...

Great. We're in TOTAL agreement that if you wanna see crashes your odds are WAY better watching people coming into the virtually unlimited Happy Acres putting green in totally calm air on 275 pound planes with zilch in the way of moving parts which land at twenty miles per hour at a descent rate of near zero feet per minute than they are watching people using tailhooks during seven hundred feet per minute controlled crashes to snatch cables at the near end of a thousand foot, moving, pitching, rolling carrier deck on fifteen ton planes with zillions of moving parts at a 150 mile per hour airspeed.

I find that relative state of affairs so stunningly insane that I don't even know where to begin. How 'bout you?

On 1980/04/02, the very first time I ever piloted a hang glider or any other plane (unless you wanna count a few hops on a Para-Commander parachute) and with no tandem training I landed - on the wheels - as safely, solidly, flawlessly as I would ever land over the course of my entire hang gliding career. And as an instructor I had MANY students - especially the ones who totally ignored my instructions for foot landing - do just as well.

How many people do you think there are whose first experience in a plane of any kind was a solo which terminated with a flawless carrier landing?

...because those guys proffesionals...

1. Hang gliding's got plenty of professional pilots. I used to be one myself.

2. I've known a fair number of professional hang glider pilots who've had traumatic life altering and ending experiences flying hang gliders. You fly a lot you have the opportunity to get really good - but you also have lotsa opportunities to really fuck up.

...and the aircraft are designed to land as they do.

Funny you should mention that point.
You go to Page 3 of the Wills Wing owner's manual and it says:

Flight operation of the Sport 2 should be limited to non-aerobatic maneuvers; those in which the pitch angle will not exceed 30 degrees nose up or nose down from the horizon, and the bank angle will not exceed 60 degrees.

But then you go to the "Landing the Sport 2" section and on Page 30 it illustrates that the proper way to handle the most critical and dangerous part of the flight is to shove the nose up to 55 degrees.

MOST confusing. It's like the aircraft really isn't designed to land as it does.

And then you've got this statement:

Gil Dodgen - 1995/01

All of this reminds me of a comment Mike Meier made when he was learning to fly sailplanes. He mentioned how easy it was to land a sailplane (with spoilers for glide-path control and wheels), and then said, "If other aircraft were as difficult to land as hang gliders no one would fly them."

from Wills Wing's Technical Support guy.

I dunno, seems as though there's some kind of pattern to all this.

If only there were some way a Sport 2 could be landed without exceeding the crap out of the placarded operating limitations. Seems like that could solve a lot of problems and make it as safe to land at the Happy Acres putting green as slamming an F-18 down at 150 miles per hour on a pitching rolling carrier deck.

There are plenty of youtube carrier mishaps.

1. I'll bet there aren't many showing the plane planting its nose on the deck as a consequence of not pitching up 55 degrees at precisely the right moment.

2. So what? The FACT - as you and I agree - remains that you've got an ASTRONOMICALLY better chance of getting an "America's Funniest Home Videos" submission accepted by spending the day at Happy Acres than you do on the carrier deck.

Yes, as these guys are amateurs...

1. Not all of them.

2. And a lot of the amateurs have a lot more Happy Acres putting green landings in their logbooks than the professional Naval Aviators have carrier landings.

...their aircraft fragile...

1. Their aircraft are certified to a minimum of six Gs. How strong do they need to be to withstand a halfway competent landing?
2. How hard to you hafta plant the nose of a carrier jet to take it out of service for a day or two?

...and their egos large.

Are the majority of broken downtubes and arms at Happy Acres the results of:
- large egos; or
- being programmed to perform insanely difficult, critical, and dangerous landing techniques?

Apologies to those who've heard this song a couple dozen times before but...

The assholes at Ridgely - the very same assholes who made Jim Rooney the man he is today - took a professional Naval Aviator and trained him how to tow up on a loop of 130 pound Greenspot then judge his altitude and angles and times to go upright and blast his flare so he could stop dead on his feet dead center in his spot at the dead center of the Happy Acres putting green every time.

And it wasn't long before our professional Naval Aviator flew 109.8 miles (2007/05/23) for the Ridgely site record.

And it wasn't long after that that our professional Naval Aviator flew into a taxiway sign (2008/04/11) which jumped up between him and his precious fucking spot at which he was gonna do his precious fucking foot landing no matter what and smashed up his brand new topless and broke both his arms.

And it wasn't long after that that our professional Naval Aviator - with the help of our professional Air Force Aviator USHGA Accident Review Committee Chairman - published an unbelievably idiotic report and analysis of the pooch screw in the idiotic magazine (2009/01) of the idiotic national organization.

I don't give a rat's ass how many carrier landings he's done, MiGs he's shot down, site records he's set, or no step spot landings he's nailed. I'm a better hang glider pilot than he is because I've always known how not to fly into a taxiway sign and trash my glider and break two arms at the Happy Acres putting green. And in hang gliding that counts for WAY more than all the other crap combined.

And I'm also a way better hang glider pilot than he is 'cause I knew immediately everything he had done wrong and he still doesn't have a freakin' clue.

And furthermore... I'm pretty confident that I could take the kind of jerk off the street we'd get for Kitty Hawk Kites classes and - if he had reasonable aptitude (which most did) - teach him enough in a dozen dune flights enough to never in a thousand flights hit the sign and/or bend bruise, or break anything coming in on John Simon's approach in those conditions from the twenty foot AGL point or back.

If you're coming into the Happy Acres putting green in Happy Acres conditions and have wheels you don't hafta do much more than stay prone on the basetube, point the glider in the general direction of the wind but not at the sign, and stay trim and level and the glider will pretty much land itself. Hell, if you drop dead from a heart attack at thirty feet when you're trim and level and pointed in the right direction there's a pretty good chance you'll have a great landing.

As above, your question was lacking in specificity.

Lemme try the question again...

Name one other branch of aviation in which a device which causes abrupt, total, unpredictable, and frequent losses of thrust on takeoff is deliberately installed in the power transmission system to increase the safety of airport operations.

If "towing of hang gliders" is a correct answer, to what branch of aviation was I referring when I asked for a second example?
Hell, I'll make it easier than that. About what branch of aviation were you considering a first example when you provided your second example?

I am still waiting for my kewpie doll.

And I am still waiting for an NAA Safety Award from USHGA like the ones they awarded Donnell Hewett and Peter Birren. And I don't have anywhere NEAR the number of legitimate reasons not to be holding my breath that you do.

Off topic attacks deleted.

Damn. Life is so boring without off topic attacks. Where's Bob when you really need him?

P.S. 28697 - That's a code number to which I will refer in a future post.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26379
Landings

Mikey - 2012/02/11 16:39:48 UTC

Hi Jim,

Here is, I hope, a better translation of my article on wikidelta:

The final flare:

When the effort to pull get canceled, [at your trim speed], (if you open your hands, palms facing forward, you are sure not to pull any more), the time to flare is not very far.

It depends on your trim speed: wait zero, one, or two seconds and FLARE.

Please feel free to make a better translation.

I agree with all your landing techniques, except the moonwalk with a high trim speed and old pilot!

Mircea

Yeah, you might trip and tear the crap out of your shoulder - like Davis did trying to stop on an airstrip. But you should be fine with all those other techniques you're attributing to Jim.

Jim Rooney - 2012/02/11 17:02:08 UTC

Thanks Mircea
I loved your article... even while badly translated by google.
It is far more thorough than the stuff that I write.

Yeah, the moonwalk does require a "stock" trim just as the Trim+1 does. Good point.
I tend not to get into the nuances of adjusting for fast or slow trims.

And if you land like all other fixed wing aircraft do, there pretty much aren't any nuances.

Which suits me just fine. I'm not a big fan of nuances at critical phases of flights. I've got better things to worry about.

Serge Lamarche - 2012/02/11 21:23:04 UTC
Golden, British Columbia

Here is a full translation:

The final flare:

When the effort to pull vanishes (opening the hands toward the front at time, we're sure not to pull), the time to flare is not far.

According to the neutral setting of each, there are zero, one, or two seconds to the final flare.

With your personal gear (wing and harness), a centering well adjusted, an upright position well mastered, it is possible to note the optimal moment to flare by using the arms position relative to the body. Memorize the position at which a good landing was accomplished. When the moment of the flare has arrived, whatever impression of speed you get from the ground, you push energetically in an arc of a circle on the upright tubes and upward (if the wind if weak of course!), while staying straight and upright to receive yourself on the feet.

While not bad, I find Jim's descriptions here much more colorful and complete. So I have reprinted and translated them in French as well so that it is available to more people. I fly in Golden and the field here is large.

Yeah, large enough in which to park several aircraft carriers, about as flat, and maintained like a putting green.

In spite of it, it is rather common to see noses dunking in, if not worse.

No merde? Who'da thunk!

Does "worse" ever include bent and broken downtubes and arms that would've been fine if the glider had been wheel landed?

I also find landing always more difficult in the heat of summer when the wind is lighter and the air is warmer, when there are the most visitors.

And even you find them "difficult" at the best times to fly.

Jim Rooney - 2012/01/21 04:49:59 UTC

It's fun as hell. Up hill, down hill, into wind, with the wind, cross wind... who cares? You're on wheels. Over and over and over.

How difficult? Do any of these difficulties ever result in expensive consequences?

The descriptions provided by Jim will surely help.

Oh, sans doute!

I can't help but predict that this coming season bonks and whacks and bent and broken downtubes and arms will be such freakish rarities as to hardly merit discussion, virtually all no wind landings will become such expressions of beauty that they'll need to be seen to be believed, and we'll all be able to permanently consign our wheels to the closet and forever bask in the resultant performance gains. I think I'll try to sell mine before all the implications of these revelatory writings fully dawn on the hang gliding public.

I have no doubt whatsoever that the Rooney flare techniques will do for landing what Rooney hang checks have done for unhooked launch prevention at the other end of the flight and Rooney weak links have done for lockout and stall prevention in aerotowing.

And, to think... He hasn't even been in the sport ten years yet! It's really hard to imagine what wonders the next decade will hold for us! And what a tragedy it's been for those of us who began flying when he was in diapers and thus had to muddle through for decades without benefit of his all his wisdom and insight.