First of all, many thanks Tad, for your kind words about my previous video. Really appreciated it.
Jonathan, very interesting video. Your blade wing with the drag chute performed just like my brick wing with the bar pulled in.
Taking the liberty to post another short landing video.
"Somewhat restricted" landing fields. Not any great flying, but hopefully the scenery makes up for that
Helping keeping this interesting thread alive, and (hopefully) giving your viewers some more entertainment.
http://vimeo.com/227551602
APPROACHES and LANDINGS
TheFjordflier - 2017/07/29 18:43 UTC
Frafjord, Norway.
dead
I find the approach and landing the most rewarding and fun part of a hang gliding flight.
'Cause maneuvers that require proficiency, skill, judgment close to the surface, obstacles, obstructions down low where you have a great perspective of depth, speed, motion and where Mother Nature is keeping score are cool, right?
This is why dune soaring at Jockey's Ridge was the most fun I ever had flying hang gliders. And dune soaring at Jockey's Ridge has little in common with beach dune soaring with the latter's long runs, even lift, infrequent turns. The soarable faces at Jockey's Ridge, while higher than the beach stuff, were short and mostly irregular and in lighter conditions demanded precise paths and perfectly executed turns and often included significant thermal factors. Physically exhausting - specially on a stiff handling Comet 165. And Mother Nature was keeping score but it was hard to get hurt piling into soft sand.
In strong conditions you could go up as much as two hundred over and park. Not as much fun, fer sure, but as difficult as it was to rack up airtime down there it was pleasant change to be able relax and enjoy the view.
Soaring the low badlands hills, buttes, cliffs of south central North Dakota in the summer of 1985 was very similar but you couldn't afford to crash. Doesn't add to the fun when there's a significant risk of getting seriously hurt.
0:42 - Need to be lower than Tree No. 2 and level with Tree No. 1 as to not risk overshooting.
0:55 - Now I'm not focusing on the landing field at all...
1:00 - Only on hitting my aiming point between the two trees.
Challenging/Hazardous landings are all about targeting the critical point(s) of the approach. In Ron's case it was just a bit outside of the SW corner of the field. And ONLY *AFTER* you've successfully executed that stage of the sequence...
1:19 - Time to focus on the landing.
...do you start worrying about the landing itself. And if you've completed Task A properly you've gotta go pretty far out of your way to fuck up B enough to seriously matter.
And for Ron the time to focus on the landing started when he sighted and selected the field and ended when he clipped the tree and absorbed all the crash impact with his head.
And notice the conspicuous absence of any of his relevant instructors or flying buddies coming forward and saying they could've done better preparing him for XC - which is entirely what instruction from Day 1, Flight 1 pretends to be about.
And now that I think about along those same lines...
I stated this at the pilot meeting. The safety committee didn't over rule the task committee. I didn't state my concerns loudly enough.
And you also, along with all the other meet heads and highly experienced and accomplished XC comp pilots, did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the way of any briefings on the ABCs of the kinds of RLF situations you were virtually certain would be required for this task.
But I have no doubt whatsoever that you had plenty of time to stroll around the launch and setup areas to make sure that everyone was safely equipped with the appropriate bridles you sell and the appropriate weak links with which you've decided you're currently happy - the appropriate stuff with which John Claytor ended his career at the ECC on 2014/06/02 and Jeff Bohl ended his life at the Quest Air Open Part 2 on 2016/05/21.
The four other accidents this year in competition were aided by competition attitudes.
The implication being that we're talking about the attitudes of the competitors rather than the attitudes of the criminally negligent total fucking douchebags running the competitions.
So all five accidents in the five US based competitions were aided by pilot decisions that were influenced by pilot desires to be competitive.
1. Stated by Davis Dead-On Straub as an indisputable fact so it certainly must be.
2. So wanna tell us about any of the other factors by which any or all of these five "accidents" were "aided", asshole? Just kidding.
Tad Eareckson wrote:'Cause maneuvers that require proficiency, skill, judgment close to the surface, obstacles, obstructions down low where you have a great perspective of depth, speed, motion and where Mother Nature is keeping score are cool, right?
On the spot. I could (ahem) not have written it better myself
In 83-84 I usually flew my Comet 2, 165 on a small 70m coastal mountain site.
Had my first two hours flight there.
Didn't know how to top land. I knew it had been done.
So I went from parked in the lift band, a quick 180, down wind, another quick 180, final, and suddenly found myself safely on ground. Very proud.
In 85 I combined the C2 with a Cosmos Dragster trike. Hardly flew it as a hang glider after that.
Never got two hours at Jockey's Ridge. 1:52 though on 1982/05/31 - my longest, rather early in my dune career, and had to land 'cause it was getting dark. One or two other times I was in duration record position but had to land to "teach" "class".
...a quick 180, down wind, another quick 180, final, and suddenly found myself safely on ground.
Notice that none of us learn any of this real world critical stuff from our instructors? I was working under and getting signed off by Mark Airey at the time.
Useless arrogant total fucking dickhead. (Wonder who Goldrunner / CF (Pennsylvania) is. I worked there late 1980 and all 1982 and must've known him.)
An actual photo...
Those ridiculous deep keel pockets 'cause the manufacturers back then were clueless about the physics of hang glider control. Real questionable as to whether or not much in the way of actual progress has been made since.
Notice that none of us learn any of this real world critical stuff from our instructors?
In a coordinated turn you will be pulling Gs thus you weigh more, thus you get more control / better response from the glider for each inch of pilot movement. The more Gs the better the control.
Tom Lyon got brainwashed during his "training" and now has almost zero chance to ever become a competent pilot. Kinda sad.
Let's make it a sixty degree (coordinated) turn to make the math easy.
I think if it's coordinated that automatically means crisp airspeed, responsiveness.
You'll be pulling 2.0 Gs so you'll weigh twice as much - which is a good thing. But your glider will also being pulling 2.0 Gs so it'll weigh twice as much which is a bad thing.
And you're not getting twice as strong under the G loading.
So I dunno - but I'll defer to someone who can get his head wrapped around the relevant physics better than I can.
On thing I feel comfortable saying though... Nobody pulling two Gs in a coordinated turn on a hang glider was ever hurting for control authority.
Tom Lyon got brainwashed during his "training" and now has almost zero chance to ever become a competent pilot. Kinda sad.
Tom Lyon never had much of a brain to wash in the first place. We reached out to him early in the game and got zilch so fuck him.
He's under the wing of Dr. Trisa Tilletti - who are both evil total douchebags.
If he:
- read that fourteen pages of shit they published in the 2012/06 issue of the magazine and thought it was OK he deserves whatever happens to him
- didn't read that fourteen pages of shit they published in the 2012/06 issue of the magazine he's not interested in looking into the quality, competence, integrity of his instructors and what they have to say he deserves whatever happens to him
Catch-22.
Even if you're in a LEGITIMATE flavor of aviation getting fed solid Wilbur and Orville stuff you need to be constantly checking the math to make sure:
- you're not looking at typos
- you actually understand the theory, math, physics
If you don't then get fucked. You're a danger to yourself and anybody else nearby and infection within the culture.
I think if it's coordinated that automatically means crisp airspeed, responsiveness.
Yes, indeed, but let's leave the beneficial airspeed thing out for a bit.
You'll be pulling 2.0 Gs so you'll weigh twice as much - which is a good thing.
Effectively more weight to shift = more control per the amount of movement shifted.
But your glider will also being pulling 2.0 Gs so it'll weigh twice as much which is a bad thing.
I am having a real hard time getting my head around this one. Intuitively it seems like the glider's moment of inertia should not change in a 2.0 G environment.
And you're not getting twice as strong under the G loading.
I figure that unless someone is on a margin the strength issue can be ignored BUT someone's fixed amount of arm movement should not to be ignored.
I am having a real hard time getting my head around this one.
Don't try too hard 'cause I don't know what I'm talking about.
I figure that unless someone is on a margin the strength...
Yeah, nonissue / never a limiting factor. Even if your arms are getting sore it’s the available range of motion that defines the wall.
I think it's difficult to understand some of this 'cause it's not a scenario in which we come up against deal breaking control limitation issues we can analyze. (Where's Dense Pages telling us how Infallible Weak Links will very clearly provide protection from excessive angles of attack, high bank turns, and the like for the speed controlled form of towing when ya really need him?)
But your glider will also being pulling 2.0 Gs so it'll weigh twice as much which is a bad thing.
I think that I have it worked out. Consider an eight foot 4X4 with a pivot at its center, or a teeter totter. Your task is to grab it near its center and rock it back and forth. You can imagine that it will take considerable effort to do that because you are having to overcome the thing's inertia. Now imagine doing the experiment in a space station at zero G or in a two G environment. It's going to be the same amount of effort, right? I am thinking that we can conclude that a glider in a two G environment has the same moment of inertia regardless of the G loading.
You'll be pulling 2.0 Gs so you'll weigh twice as much - which is a good thing.
Consider this! An object that weighs twice as much as another object still falls (accelerates) at the same rate. But an object in a two G environment falls at twice the rate as in one G.
Now think of a pendulum (read pilot). A change in the weight of the bob doesn't change its period of oscillation, but a two G environment will decrease its period of oscillation. The bob will return to center faster once released from a deflection in a two G environment.
So that has me thinking that a hang glider pilot pulling two Gs has got some interesting physics helping him out.
Flying to slow and turning to close to the hill? What can novice pilots learn from this very unfortunate accident?
Accident somewhere in South Africa
Somewhere. He tells you "Barberton" - but let's stay with "somewhere". South Africa's such a tiny country that it really doesn't matter.
Flying to slow and turning to close to the hill?
No. Flying TOO slow and turning TOO close to the hill (somewhere in South Africa).
What can novice pilots learn from this very unfortunate accident?
Exactly the same thing novice, intermediate, advanced pilots learned from the very unfortunate accident at Quest on 2013/02/02 - that it was a very unfortunate accident.
Fatal hang gliding accident from barberton South Africa on the 21 August 2010
deltaspai
what appened to this boy ? it like very serious accident
No worries. He made a full and speedy recovery from the very serious fatal hang gliding accident and is back in the game doing fine.
Andrew Eeles
Sorry to hear this and sad news and it is another loss to our sport.
Any comments about the pilots' experience level and conditions on the day?
Are any really needed? And if so, what good do you think will come of them?
It looked about 10mph on the hill and thermic. The glider appeared to encounter lift on rhs, nose lifted and the LH wing appeared to stall with a consequntial LH turn.
And the pilot was totally unable to respond to anything that was going on with his glider.
Michael Coetzee
Willem was returning to flying from a 10 year break from the sport, on recent flights witnessed by myself he's turns were getting too close to the hill and sometimes when in lift turned towards the hill and not away from it. he was warned by fellow pilots and myself to stay clear from the hill but unfortunately never took our advice to heart, paying dearly for it. All relevant equipment was checked after the accident and found to be in perfect working order. our condolences. Mike Spike
Venturino Miranda
Long time ago a friend of mine told me that when you learn to fly, is like ride a bike, you never forget...! but, according to reeflyingspike, we have seen that's is not truth, a ten years breaks from hang gliding is a very long time... Any way, wherever a hang glider or a paraglider pilot get hurt, one feel very sad... Not matter how far you are.. I feel very sorry...
Mike references recent FLIGHTS witnessed by himself. We're not talking about currency issues here.
Kobus Laubscher
It looked to me like he was flying to slow.
Ya think?
He was not properly in prone when he iniated his turn.
There's no such thing as properly in prone. Being prone is NEVER proper - which is why no responsible school or instructor ever teaches it.
He definitely stalled the inside wing when turning...
I'd say he tip stalled his port wing after he'd attained his desired heading.
...and lost allot of height in doing so.
He stalled. He lost control of his glider. And - for the purpose of the exercise - what really matters what happened as a consequence?
This is also a relatively old glider with old technology. I suppose the effect of a stall could have been more agressive comparred to a beginners glider like a falcon.
He was too slow and he stalled. Nothing else needs to be discussed.
Always fly with enough speed aspecially if you cannot afford to stall your glider.
My condolences to the family and friends. Its very sad
And kudos to his instructor, right? Notice the way the guy who's name was on the card is never a participant in any postmortem discussion?
MrFalcon195
What kind of a glider was he flying? It looked like an intermediate one to me.
Yeah, looked like it was a real tough glider to fly. The lying down action and pulling in input were obviously real bitches.
Rick Masters
Thanks, Mike, this is very instructive. My foremost rule during my hang gliding years was to always fly a little bit faster than necessary.
Yeah Rick - ALWAYS. 'Specially when you're working light ridge lift on a dune in glassy smooth air or light thermal lift thousands of feet off the deck.
And this, people of varying ages, is why we so often see experienced, competent pilots stalling in the course of typical flight activities, situations - but NEVER Rick.
If Williem could speak, I believe he'd want all hang glider pilots to see this.
And I believe if Willem could speak he'd spare no effort in getting the video pulled. (Remember what Joe Stearn did with the part of the video...
Being that John was still very new to flying in the prone position, I believe that he was likely not shifting his weight, but simply turning his body in the direction he wanted to turn.
Here's the way Greblo looks at it (or how I remember his lectures):
We take off and land upright. Therefore, all the bad stuff happens when we are upright. And close to the ground.
Therefore, learn to fly upright in the worst conceivable (and sudden hairy) conditions. (One up/ one down is "upright").
The alternative, if "more secure prone", is to go prone instantly upon take-off, and stay prone until the last possible landing moment.
In both cases, this requires a change of hand and body position in the worst conceivable conditions near the ground.
Therefore, in order never to change hand position near the ground, it is necessary to learn to face all the worst moments (thermals, gusts, sinkholes, midairs, gear failure, downwind landings and takeoffs, a lifted wing into boulders and an entire wire ground crew snagged on your jock strap) upright.
A little reflection suggests that taking off upright and flying upright until well away from the danger zone is not very different from ground handling, where you are flying standing on dirt. A good test of upright flying skills is whether you can ground handle a glider in 25 mph of laminar flow. Do you require a wire crew? Hmmm.
Greblo will not sign off a Hang 3 (US intermediate rating) who cannot ground handle with confidence at the limit of his takeoff judgment.
He's not dogmatic about this for veteran fliers, recognizing that gliders and skills and terrain are different. He just provides his analysis. You often see him flying around in violent thermals upright, just (I think) as a kind of advertisement and thought-provoker.
"Flare at the right time"? We are talking timing here. Like a golf swing. I seriously have my doubt if one can teach someone to flare at the right time. You can guide someone but it comes down to having a feel for it. Experience the answer.
LIGHT CONDITION (or no wind) Many different opinions here. I believe in come in hot and fast, stay prone as long as possible. Hands on the control bar till the bitter end - almost (4 or 5 seconds before flaring) and then BOOM...flare!
This is not the "Greblo technique". Search the forum for this method. Very popular and also a valuable tool to have in your armory of landing techniques.
We fly like that (hands on the control bar)...why not land like that?
George Stebbins - 2009/08/16 17:37:41 UTC
In no particular order, and not a complete list:
1) Because our heads hitting the ground can kill us.
2) Because crashing on our feet is unlikely to kill us.
3) Because we can run faster on our feet than on our ears. (To quote Greg DeWolf.)
4) Because crashing feet first a dozen times is better than crashing head first even one time.
5) Because doing all that stuff (getting upright, moving two hands, keeping pitch correct) all at the same time just before landing is asking for a mistake.
6) Because you should be going fast into your ground skimming, and going fast head-first near the ground is risky. Just ask Chris Muller. Oh wait, you can't: He hit head first. And he was way better than most of us.
7) Because it is inherently obvious to anyone not prejudiced against it that approaching with your landing gear down is better than putting it down at the last second, unless there is some hugely overriding reason not to do so (Space Shuttle is an example.)
8) Because your legs are the strongest bones in your body, and your neck is one of the most fragile.
9) Because I'd rather break my leg (or even arm) than my neck if things go wrong. (Wouldn't you?)
10) Because landing is the most difficult thing we typically do in a hang glider. Why increase the danger?
11) Because I have had too many friends die from head impacts, and a few become (partially) paralyzed. Your mileage may differ.
12) Because I think it is more important to be alive than to have my friends think I am cool.
13) Because dead people are no longer cool. And if in some way they still are, they can't enjoy it.
14) Because the only reason you are used to flying prone more is that you do it more. Fly upright some each flight, and you'll find you can do it quite nicely on landing too. Practice matters.
15) Because there are only three reasons we fly prone at altitude, and none of them should matter much during landing: 1) Streamlining, 2) Comfort, 3) we are used to it.
