You are NEVER hooked in.

[Tad Eareckson]

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

Paul Hurless - 2012/07/13 04:47:29

NMERider - 2012/07/13 04:21:46 UTC

Either I have to stand the glider on the keel in which case it will blow over backwards or I have to grab the uprights and force it up in a way that will injure my back.

Ok, I guess that kind of makes sense. I have two herniated lumbar disks so I understand the back problem thing.

What? A few too many standup landings?

I either bend over and grasp the downtubes down low and then lift the wing or I squat down to do it, depending on how my back feels at the time.

The putting the harness down first on a clean patch of ground would be nice. I wish the local sites here had a clean patch of ground. We have to deal with asphalt with soft tar leaching out of it at our main site and rocks, dirt, and sage brush at the rest of the sites.

I have been working on changing my personal preflight to hooking my harness into the glider first and then climbing into it (the aussie method). It feels awkward getting my size 12eee hiking boots throught the leg straps while I am ducking under the wing, but it's just something I need to get used to. I still do a walk through, lean, and look back, I always try to get a hang check if someone is available, and I lift the glider up at least a couple of times to feel the tug from the strap. I believe the more ways you do it, the better off you are instead of just relying on one method. Redundancy is a good thing.

Bullshit.

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.

1. You do a preflight and hook-in check. That has absolutely nothing to do with redundancy.

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.

2. If you're using preflight checks to boost your confidence at launch - which you are - you're WORSE off.

3. If the fuckin' hooking the harness to the glider first is convenient, do it. Otherwise, don't do it. You're not supposed to be using it to confirm or reassure yourself that you're hooked in anyway.

NMERider - 2012/07/13 05:11:26 UTC

Now you're speaking my language. Not only do I like redundancy, but I also like redundancy and don't make me repeat myself. I forgot about the asphalt thing. There are a lot worse places than Sylmar to set up and connect. Did I mention I like redundancy?

You want redundancy?
- NEVER assume you're hooked in.
- ALWAYS assume you're NOT hooked in.

Rodger Hoyt - 2012/07/13 05:51:30 UTC

Makes me crazy to see guys walking around takeoff wearing their harnesses - deserves instant rating revocation!

Sarcasm recognized. But I'm totally on board with something like that for people who contend that five minutes - or ten seconds - falls within the definition of "just prior".

Rodger Hoyt - 2012/07/13 06:15:08 UTC

As usual, the long litany of sanctimonious replies whenever a failure to hook in is reported, as well as those who vehemently proclaim, "If you don't do it MY way, YOU WILL DIE!" The guys who really crack me up are those who fly one discipline, or one area, yet stubbornly insist that the so-called Aussie method is the panacea for everyone. How many of you have tried that for hooking in to an Atos with the nose tethered down in thirty mile per hour winds on a coastal bluff?

I've used my personal procedure with a 100-percent success rate for 35 years; I'm not about to change now. Maybe you "Aussie-types" should adopt MY method.

Which is what?

Christopher LeFay - 2012/07/13 09:34:39 UTC

I carry carpet and carpet remnants in the car. The carpet goes down, then the glider. Not precious, if it stays at launch, great - if not, no big loss. Of course, paraglider pilots regularly cart around enormous carpets; by comparison, a carpet for your harness (or wing tips) is incidental.

JJ Coté - 2012/07/13 11:32:45 UTC

I've done it with an Atos. I've never used any method for hooking in to a glider with the nose tethered down in thirty mile per hour winds on a coastal bluff, and probably never will. But it's not at all clear to me why it would be a problem.

zamuro - 2012/07/13 12:06:15 UTC

I've used my personal procedure with a 100-percent success rate for 35 years; I'm not about to change now.

Good for you. I have never flown an Atos so you may be right here.
However, every hook-in failure that I know off involves people walking around with their harness on.

Yeah?

Marc Fink - 1998/04/29 08:33

A line of pilots formed at launch. I had performed my usual pre-flight and self hook-in check before getting on launch behind the next pilot. Meanwhile, conditions went from questionably soarable to questionably launchable. The pilot in front of me waited for an ideal cycle to launch into, and didn't feel comfortable with the light conditions. After about tweny minutes or so of waiting I became uncomfortable and started trying to find a sit-down or kneeling position while still remaining hooked-in. Sometime during this process my radio slipped off my shoulder strap, and I had to readjust it.

Add that one to your collection.

I myself was about to do it once so I decided that perhaps trying this Aussie thing was a good idea.

Meaning you weren't ever doing hook-in checks.

So I adopted it.

Steve Kinsley - 1998/05/01 01:16

So Marc thinks the Australian method will forever ban human error and stupidity. I suspect that eighty percent of the flying community would have unhooked to fix the radio problem instead of getting out of the harness entirely. It is easier. And there you are back in the soup.

"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.

Of course you did.

Although the A. method may be less comfortably to use in some places most of the negatives that I have heard about it here are IMHO BS.

OK, lemme add stuff you HAVEN'T heard about it here.

Rob Kells - 2005/12

"Knowing" that if you are in your harness you must be hooked in, means that if something comes up that causes you to unhook for any reason, you are actually in greater danger of thinking you are hooked in when you are not. This happened to a pilot who used the Oz Method for several years and then went to the training hill for some practice flights. He unhooked from the glider to carry it up the hill. At the top, sitting under the glider with his harness on, he picked up the glider and launched unhooked.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18695
How could this accident happen?

William Olive - 2010/01/28 04:50:53 UTC

Phil Beck did this twice (or was that three times?) in a day at Hexham (Victoria) one time while foot launch aerotow testing gliders. Of course, with a swag of gliders to test fly, Phil would unclip from the glider he'd just landed, then clip into the next one to be tested.

Except, at least twice, he didn't clip in.

I have used the Aussie method in many places (some very dusty ones) with no major issues. These places include: Torry, Laguna, Horse, Blossom Valley, Horshoe meadows, Marshall, Elsinore, Otay, Ellenville, etc.

How 'bout Jockey's Ridge?

At the end use whatever method you like.

Yeah. But not in the US if you're flying as a USHGA rated pilot. Comply with the fuckin' provisions of your fuckin' rating and do the goddam hook-in check.

However if you were my family I would encourage/force you to use the Aussie method

That way you can continue the family tradition of skipping hook-in checks, always assuming you're hooked in at launch, and always assuming all others - including/especially family members - are hooked in at launch.

[miguel]

There are no incidents I know of in which someone who did a preflight check of his harness and suspension behind the ramp five minutes before arrival at launch position found himself at launch position minus leg loops, partially hooked in, or with twisted suspension.

Distractions during the setup or during the walk to the launch CAN and DO cause failure-to-hook-in.

- If this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T19GtqUnXDo

skips the fucking hang check he has a much more comfortable flight.

If Glenn had performed turn and learn, which involves holding the nose down and walking forward to stretch the suspension line, he would have caught his mistake.

- If this guy:

Luen Miller - 1994/11

After a short flight the pilot carried his glider back up a slope to relaunch. The wind was "about ten mph or so, blowing straight in." Just before launch he reached back to make sure his carabiner was locked. A "crosswind" blew through, his right wing lifted, and before he was able to react he was gusted sixty feet to the left side of launch into a pile of "nasty-looking rocks." He suffered a compound fracture (bone sticking out through the skin) of his upper right leg. "Rookie mistake cost me my job and my summer. I have a lot of medical bills and will be on crutches for about five months."

Let's replay this one with the vaunted lift and tug: Just before launch, he lifted the glider up to perform his lift and tug hook-in check. A "crosswind" blew through, the whole glider was lifted,



Nooooo!Oh Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

with the above or possibly worse results.

doesn't reach back to make sure his fucking locking carabiner is locked (à la Steve Pearson) - or, better yet, uses a nonlocking carabiner - he has a nice afternoon.

Lift and tug at the same instant guarantees the same results if not worse.

I forgot to latch the strap on the helmet.

So do I all the time. Interesting anecdote but, in a discussion about unhooked launches, the issue of chin straps still has way less than zero justification for inclusion. It's a dangerous distraction.

Nope, I have to disagree. The odd result of having a helmet forcefully removed could have been anywhere from expensive to fatal.

Turn and learn includes a check for helmet strap continuity...

1. That's what people say about hang checks. Yet people who do hang checks have fallen out of their harnesses and died. A hang check also checks for undersurface batten insertion if you care to define it that way (kinda the way Davis defines splitting the tow force between pilot and glider as three point) - but in reality these are separate checks one CHOOSES to do in the course of another.

2. And being turned does NOTHING to facilitate checking the helmet and leg loops - quite the contrary in fact.

3. If you've checked your leg loops once you generally hafta get out of your harness and put it back on - missing BOTH of them - before you can get into trouble. People can and do forget their statuses after unhooking. I know of NO ONE who's forgotten getting out of and back into a harness in the last five minutes.

That is the way things happen on your heavenly heights launch. Real life is quite different.

I have seen people get out of harnesses to do whatever and jump back into them hurriedly. The cycles are coming in, cummies a poppin' and folks are skying out. Potential for forgetting leg loops? You bet.

1. Meaning:

- you've never learned anything in the course of that procedure that you wouldn't have learned by doing the walk-through in the setup area and a lift and tug two seconds prior to launch; and

- aside from the pilot unhooking himself - which is a problem positively and easily identified by lift and tug - there has never once in the history of hang gliding been a suspension problem which developed in the course of walking the glider from the setup area to launch.

OK, I have got it! Following your logic, the Australian method of hooking the harness to the glider before entering the harness GUARANTEES a hooked in launch.

2. No. You're not following any kind of logic.

- The combination of preflight procedures completed behind the ramp and a bare bones minimal hook-in check as the beginning of the launch sequence is the most efficient and effective means of keeping one safely connected to his glider and has been so documented thousands of times over.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Hv2CF3Xedj4/TcNUG5frZiI/AAAAAAAAADI/6fl_KwzD2Vg/s1600/angelflying.jpg


Yep, where all launches are divine.

- Turning and learning on the ramp is an excellent way of doing checking continuity of the glider/pilot/ harness and gives a bit more useful information than lifting and tugging.

Fixed it for you because I am a helper.

I haven't heard you - or anybody else - tell me about anything that was ever learned by turning on the ramp which couldn't and shouldn't have been learned - responsibly - behind it.

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

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.

That's how a real pilot operates.

...you can do it all during the setup.

I do all that can and should be done during the setup and preflight - and on the ramp do what needs to be done while minimizing the bullshit, inconvenience, and time costs to others.

Why not increase your efficiency with the Australian method?

The more you harp on nothing ever happening between set up and launch, the more I think that you seriously believe in heavenly heights.

In the real world, shit can and does happen between set up and the actual launch.

I have flown with loops/knots etc in the hang strap. Those are always worth an extra look and examination.

1. How many extra looks and examinations?

Enough to figure out that I have not created a slip knot.

2. Assuming it isn't one of those insane configurations like the ones that killed Leonard Rabbitz and Tom Sapienza, what have you ever found and what are you thinking you might find?

Yep. Thats why I check. For a new glider, it takes a while of improvised hang loops to find the perfect hang height.

3. Wouldn't one good look and examination in the setup or staging area be better than half a dozen half assed ones wherever?

Memory is one of those things that does NOT improve with age.

In the real world, shit can and does happen between set up and the actual launch.

4. People have missed suspension issues on preflight and at the ramp which didn't kill them until the flight had been underway for a while. So why stop the checks just before getting airborne? Why not continue turning and learning at your loops, knots, etc. in the hang strap every five minutes or so during the flight? That would give you a chance to climb up into the control frame that you wouldn't have otherwise.

5. Is there a possibility that one or more of those extra looks and examinations would distract someone from catching an issue that actually matters?

Keep repeating until it sinks in

Memory is one of those things that does NOT improve with age.

In the real world, shit can and does happen between set up and the actual launch.

75 lbs is less than 1/10 of the supposed ultimate strength of the wire.

1. You're pushing down with 75 pounds of force on the middle of a wire secured to a control frame corner and leading edge / cross spar junction.

- What math are you using to predict that the wire will be tensioned to 75 pounds?
- I measured the tension. I got 116.

2. The breaking strength of the 3/32 inch Type 304 stainless steel 7x19 aircraft cable is 920 pounds. The test is 12.6 percent.

The figure for galvanized which has been on some of my gliders is 1000 lbs. I do not doubt that your gauge indicated 116 lbs. Show me a mathematical or vector diagram of how you put a lateral force of 75 lbs on the wire and get 116 lbs on the end of the wire. I am not seeing it.

3. The working load limit for that cable is 189. The test is 61.4 percent of that.

Visible damage to the wire should have been visible to inspection long before it fails at 75 lbs.

1. At what point should invisible damage to the wire become visible?

The only place where damage would be invisible would be inside the nico. A very unlikely area especially if there is no visible damage to the nico. Wires taken to yield strength have a different appearence than wire that has not been taken close to yield.

2. Yes. A defect SHOULD be visible before failure.

I was starting to get worried.

I once flew with just a bolt in the corner bracket.

You mean minus the nut?

I did not discover it until disassembly.

At what altitude?

I think I got to 4 or 5k agl and flew for about 2 hours. I discovered the problem in the lz when removing the control bar from the downtubes.

Wrong! Wires DO stretch a small amount over time. Take an old set of wires and compare them to a new factory set of wires. Old wires will be a tad longer.

So is it age or...

The process is called creep.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creep_(deformation)

So is it age or...

miguel - 2012/07/06 22:56:06 UTC

The flying wires are never loaded the way stepping on the wire loads the wire.

...stepping on it?

When Wills Wing takes a glider off of the truck after a positive loading test for HGMA certification are the wires a tad longer than they were before and does the glider thus have a tad more positive dihedral?

If the positive dihedral increases as a consequence of high wire loading wouldn't that somewhat delegitimize the validity of the roll response performance certification figures?

Spoken like a person who has never measured old flying wires and compared them with new. Try it once and you will see for your self.

Yes, the wires will be a "TAD" longer. There is enough slop in hg design that it will make no appreciable difference in handling

1. Gee, a little while ago it was my miniscule test that wasn't even gonna pull a totally unsecured downtube / basetube junction apart. Now it's this insane level of abuse that's gonna destroy my 920 pound wire by the time the summer's half gone.

2. So then we really shouldn't be doing sixty degree banked coordinated turns 'cause that also loads the wires up to two Gs.

The nicer you are to the wires, the longer they last.

1. You be nice to your wires by not sharply bending them during setup and breakdown and not crashing real hard.

2. Nobody's ever shortened the life of a 3/32 inch sidewire five seconds by blowing up a glider in aerobatics.

3. And pulling the three Gs it takes to do a loop, based on the assumption that 116 pounds tension translates to two Gs, stresses the wire to 174 pounds - which is still fifteen short of 189 working load limit.

Here we go again with book data as opposed to real world data. Arron Swepson, John Heiney and the rest of the big boys probably pull book numbers. Those who are less than perfect, pull much higher numbers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vV-Z1HbP4Ng

Just location then. The preflight of the suspension system that you completed on the ramp fifteen minutes ago before you started waiting for a cycle is still valid but the identical preflight you completed one minute ago fifteen yards behind the ramp must be repeated.

Repetition is good for learning foreign languages and music. Maybe it will work for you.

Memory is one of those things that does NOT improve with age.

In the real world, shit can and does happen between set up and the actual launch.

When I step up to the launch. I walk forward to stretch everything while holding the nose down. I am also watching the cycles coming up the hill. I turn, then inspect the loops, caribiner and harness main. I look down at the leg loops. I touch them with one hand then pull the chin strap. I walk back and assume the launch position.

[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

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

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 40' 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.

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

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

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

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

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

Never heard anything that good from a rating official before. The bad news is that this is what EVERYBODY was SUPPOSED to have started and kept doing over 31 years ago.

Harald Steen - 2012/07/13 13:26:44
Norway

hang check

I use the aussie method ,and squat down just prior to launch.see video

hang check
http://vimeo.com/45700467
Harald Steen - 2012/07/13 08:44
dead

You're not doing this JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH. You're doing it JUST PRIOR TO STANDING UP AND PICKING UP THE GLIDER.

Jim Gaar - 2012/07/13 13:34:23

43 seconds of brilliant!

1. "Brilliant" is an adjective.
2. Asshole.

rubixi - 2012/07/13 13:54:06
Texas

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

Very curious... what happened?

Wayne Ripley - 2012/07/13 14:01:49
Cromwell, Connecticut

Hooking in!

I have been flying since 1974 and did launch unhooked off a 650 foot cliff, broke lots of stuff which comes back to get you again later in life. After that I made it my mission not to let anyone launch unhooked if I was part of the launch crew. I know as the pilot it is my job to make sure I'm hooked in but if you helping someone get off make it part of your job as well.

How?

- What are you doing differently from what you did just prior to running off the cliff?

- If the answer is nothing you're not gonna be of as much of the value to the person you're assisting as you could be.

- Is there some reason you're limiting your mission to not letting anyone launch unhooked to people for whom you're crewing? There've been a lot of people for whom you weren't crewing mangled and killed by launching unhooked since the Seventies.

- How many people have you stopped from launching unhooked in the course of your mission?

- If you're looking at someone's suspension as he's prepping for launch you can keep him from killing himself ON THAT PARTICULAR LAUNCH.

- But if you're letting him go off without doing a hook-in check you're not doing him any good for the long haul.

- And you ARE letting him go off without doing a hook-in check because if you weren't you'd have told us you weren't.

Alex - 2012/07/13 15:00:08

The key to a successful launch is focus. Lose focus (with whatever method) and you can have some serious problems.

Don't let your buddies fly if they seem out of focus, it's not just the launch they can screw up by not paying attention.

1. THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT LAUNCHING SUCCESSFULLY. Plenty of people have launched successfully and plummeted to their deaths a few seconds later.

2. This doesn't have shit to do with FOCUS. EVERYBODY is FOCUSED when he launches a glider. People who launch unhooked are typically focused like laser beams. The problem is they're focused on launching successfully when they SHOULD BE focused on whether or not they're really ready to launch.

3. How many of your buddies have you stopped from flying because they SEEMED out of focus?

4. How many spare downtubes have you had to pull out of your ass?

5. How many of your idiot focused buddies do anything remotely resembling a hook-in check at launch position?

Allen Sparks - 2012/07/13 15:11:15

I moved to one corner of the basetube and waited for the glider (a Chandelle 18' standard rogallo, rigged for seated) to stall and turn back into the hill, then released my grip at about 12' AGL (before the wing had accelerated downwind much) and dropped into the only area devoid of rocks: a rectangular area about 3' x 5' in size. Injuries were a bruised tailbone and abrasions to the palm of my right hand.

The glider was destroyed. Just one of the many inexplicable 'lucky' incidents in my 36 year career.

kg386109 - 2012/07/13 15:25:02
Tustin, California

After two close calls with what would probably ended in death.

I use the Aussie method.

They didn't have the fuckin' Aussie Method back then.

It works every single time without fail.

Sure - if you throw out all the failure data.

Brian Horgan - 2012/07/13 15:30:20

As usual, the long litany of sanctimonious replies whenever a failure to hook in is reported, as well as those who vehemently proclaim, "If you don't do it MY way, YOU WILL DIE!"

if your going to quote me,i guess i must respond.First off its not my way.My way of hooking in almost killed me.After my almost death i took a rational look outwards and seen that the aussie method was idiot proof,yes im a idiot sometimes.As for hooking in a atos in 30mph winds,well thats just plain dumb.I have seen several people hook in to a atos with the aussie method so your argument is mute.Do you have any footage of you flying or are you just some arm chair pilot acting out your self importance?The so called aussie method makes more sense than the flawed american method.

if your going to quote me,i guess i must respond.

He didn't quote you and there's no law requiring you to continue to keep piling your single digit IQ crap into these discussions.

First off its not my way.My way of hooking in almost killed me.

1. Give it a few more shots before you reject it outright.
2. What fucking idiots signed your ratings with you establishing and verifying your connection "your way"?

After my almost death i took a rational look outwards and seen that the aussie method was idiot proof...

It isn't. And rational looks ain't your forte.

...yes im a idiot sometimes.

I'm an idiot ALL the time - whether or not I've hooked my harness to my glider before entering it.

Do you have any footage of you flying or are you just some arm chair pilot acting out your self importance?

Who gives a flying fuck? Try asking Tracy Tillman or Jim Rooney what the purpose of a weak link is and what its rating should be sometime. You'll hear quite a lot about how much flying they do but absolutely nothing that makes any sense.

The so called aussie method makes more sense than the flawed american method.

Here's the "American method":

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

Tell me what's flawed about it. Tell me how many times you employed it before you just happened to forget it the one time you weren't hooked in and almost killed your stupid ass.

Brian Horgan - 2012/07/13 17:02:57

By the way the Aussies lead us in education ranking among the world standards.YeP Im GoIng tO LisTening to Da SmaRt FellERs not my country full off mostly retards.Now a question for my Aussie friends.How many unhooked accidents have you guys had down there in the past ten years?Im going to wager very few if any.

1. Yeah. The Aussies.

http://ozreport.com/12.081
Weaklinks - the HGFA rules

Davis Straub - 2008/04/22 14:47:00

From section 3.4 of the 1999 Hang Gliding Federation of Australia Towing Manual:

Recommended breaking load of a weak link is 1g. - i.e. the combined weight of pilot, harness and glider (dependent on pilot weight - usually approximately 90 to 100 kg for solo operations; or approximately 175 kg for tandem operations).

Here is the requirement from the 2007 Worlds local rules (which I wrote) for weaklinks:

Pilots must use weaklinks provided by the meet organizers and in a manner approved by the meet organizers. All weaklinks will be checked and use of inappropriate weaklinks will require the pilot to go to the end of the launch line to change the weaklink.

Weaklinks will consist of a single loop of Cortland 130 lb Greenspot braided Dacron Tolling line and should be placed at one end of a shoulder bridle.

At the 2008 Forbes Flatlands Greenspot for the first time was used as the standard weaklink material (thanks in large part to the efforts of Bobby Bailey). We applaud these efforts to improve the safety of aerotowing by using a better weaklink material.

Real geniuses. Smart enough to know which of our geniuses they should select to tell them exactly how to do things.

2. Goddam Aussie Method is EXACTLY like the goddam Rooney Landing.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=25536
Whoops! Snapped another tip wand :-O

NMERider - 2012/03/14 15:17:14

His one-technique-fits-all attitude espoused on the Oz Report Forum has become tiresome to read. It does not work in the fucked-up world of XC landings and weary pilots.

Christopher LeFay - 2012/03/15 05:57:43

January's canonization of Rooney as the Patron Saint of Landing was maddening. He offered just what people wanted to hear: there is an ultimate, definitive answer to your landing problems, presented with absolute authority. Judgment problems? His answer is to remove judgment from the process - doggedly stripping out critical differences in gliders, loading, pilot, and conditions. This was just what people wanted - to be told a simple answer. In thanks, they deified him, carving his every utterance in Wiki-stone.

- one size fits all
- presented with absolute authority
- doesn't work in the fucked up real world of training hills, ramp approaches, and disruptions
- removes judgment from the process
- doggedly strips out problems with gliders, harnesses, pilots, high winds, gusts, rotors, dust devils
- just what people want to hear

3. Those Aussie Methodist dickheads DO undoubtedly have lower unhooked launch "accident" rates than Paul Voight, Steve Wendt, Matt Taber hang checker dickheads and Joe Greblo turn and looker dickheads. But their record - along with their "thinking" and "logic" - still SUCKS compared to MINE. They can reduce the problem - I can kill it.

Noman Shows Us the Bossie Method
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg_ixvWWtlw
TumblingHangGliders - 2012/07/13
dead

Moron.

fly n mater - 2012/07/13 18:36:05

Speaking as someone who has launched unhooked and who has suffered a major injury due to being unhooked...

My first thought is that thinking ANY method is one hundred percent foolproof is going to get you hurt.

My first thought was that I WOULD get killed this way. So if I had launched unhooked and suffered a major injury due to being unhooked my thinking wouldn't have been affected.

Treat EVERY launch as if you are unhooked...

BULL'S-EYE. Now stop talking.

...visually check to make sure you have four loops on your biner (hang strap, backup, harness and parachute).

Remove the fucking backup loop. It makes the counting twenty-five percent easier.

Then have your flying buddy do the same on launch.

That's probably a good idea - seeing as how you have no intention of doing the fucking hook-in check.

And do a full lay down check.

Why?

It's better to be safe on the ground than screwed in the air.

1. When's your last option to stay safe on the ground?
2. When's the best time to treat the launch as if you are unhooked?
3. When's the best time to verify that you're not unhooked?

Bill, lucky to have his right arm.

Is it still good enough to help the left one lift the glider up tight a couple of seconds before you run off the ramp?

Tim Dyer - 2012/07/13 20:18:58
Las Vegas

I dont attach the harness to the glider unless I'm in it. Long walks to launch, get hit by a thermal or gust, its easy to let go of the glider.On launch I hook-in, get a hang-check then run the L's, then a hook-in check. That's 4 checks on launch, right before I run. Not 100% but good enough for me.

1. Why do you need a goddam hang check?
2. What are the goddam "L's. The leg loops?
3. What's a hook-in check?
4. That's ONE check right before you run. I hope it's a good one.
5. The other crap you don't need to do on the ramp.

zamuro - 2012/07/13 20:42:36

Again, use whatever method you like but none of those reasons prevent the people that use the aussie method from using it.

So how come the fuckin' Aussie Method prevents everyone who uses it from using a hook-in check?

IMHO cliping at the launch spot for whatever reason is not a good idea.

Fer sure - if you're doing shit before you get to the launch spot to reassure yourself that you're gonna be hooked in at the instant of launch.

michael170 - 2012/07/14 00:45:14
Northern California

Many thanks for your contribution to this thread Spark.

How very odd. When I was here contributing this line to threads like this one three years ago I got banned.

Larry Howe - 2012/07/14 05:17:52
Grass Valley

I don't pre hook my harness to my wing for a very simple reason, I broke my back seven years ago and it is impossible for me to bend over and do the manuvers needed to enter a harness that is already attached to my wing.

Then you're just rolling dice every time you fly. It's just a matter of time before you end up doing the basetube dangle.

I am however anal about hang checks and do at least two, one as soon as I hook in and one right before launch.

Yeah. People who do hang checks DO tend to be really anal.

I'm not convinced one system is better than the other (just like the great tight strap loose strap argument), I am convinced though that hang checks at launch are nescessary, no matter what system a pilot decides works best for him/her.

What convinced you? Some kind of data or logic? Or did you just throw a dart?

I also agree that both methods should be explained to all new student pilots and hang checks beaten into their heads until they do them multiple times, everytime.

Yeah. And under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should anyone EVER consider adhering to the rating requirements. Just make them up and ignore them as you please.

Asshole.

[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?

How many thousands of times have I had that reaction?

I used to think that all you needed to do was write blindingly obvious two plus two equals four stuff and it would sink in. But then you realize that if these off the scale stupid motherfuckers have been totally impervious to:

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

no matter how many times it's repeated in their rating requirements and have remained so for over three decades...

Tormod Helgesen - 2012/07/14 07:21:43 UTC
Oslo

It's actually easier to put on the harness while it's attached to the glider. The reason is that the hangstrap suspends the harness above the dirt and you don't have to lift it so high. Also, since you're already in there is no snagging of wires and stuff when climbing in.

Yeah Tormod, for most people, harnesses, gliders, situations you're right.

So what the hell does that have to do with your connection status two seconds prior to launch?

[Tad Eareckson]

Distractions during the setup or during the walk to the launch CAN and DO cause failure-to-hook-in.

- Issues resulting from distractions during setup are dealt with by the preflight inspection before the plane starts taxiing out to takeoff position.

- My statement had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with failure to hook in. My statement was:

There are no incidents I know of in which someone who did a preflight check of his harness and suspension behind the ramp five minutes before arrival at launch position found himself at launch position minus leg loops, partially hooked in, or with twisted suspension.

- And I STILL know of no incidents in which someone who did a preflight check of his harness and suspension behind the ramp five minutes before arrival at launch position found himself at launch position minus leg loops, partially hooked in, or with twisted suspension.

- And, obviously, neither do you.

If Glenn had performed turn and learn, which involves holding the nose down and walking forward to stretch the suspension line, he would have caught his mistake.

And if Glenn HADN'T made the mistake of performing a way south of useless religious ritual as he was preparing to launch, there'd have been no mistake to catch. "Keep It Simple Stupid" DOES have its place when complexity is used to address nonexistent problems (backup loops, locking carabiners, Hewett bridles).

Let's replay this one with the vaunted lift and tug: Just before launch, he lifted the glider up to perform his lift and tug hook-in check. A "crosswind" blew through, the whole glider was lifted...

BULLSHIT.

Let's replay that one with the vaunted slope launch: Just before launch, he lifted the glider up to perform his launch. A "crosswind" blew through, the whole glider was lifted...

Lift and tug is THE BEGINNING OF THE LAUNCH SEQUENCE. If you're not planning on beginning the launch sequence sometime this afternoon there's not much point in being there.

That guy wasn't beginning his launch sequence. His basetube was on the ground and he was busying himself turning to learn something TOTALLY USELESS about a TOTALLY WORSE THAN USELESS complexity of the device he was using to connect himself to his glider instead of busying himself with keeping his glider under control in those conditions.

When you're launching the glider's up, trimmed, and under control. If a crosswind starts blowing through - whether or not your suspension is tight - you plant the basetube and ride it out. And there's no measurable increase in difficulty or time resulting from tight suspension.

When you're launching your glider WILL - assuming you're hooked in and have your leg loops - BE lifting and tugging on your suspension.

- You can make that happen two seconds BEFORE you move your foot to make sure you're hooked in and have your leg loops.

- Or, like the overwhelming majority of the assholes who fly these things (particularly those in the LA area), you can wait until two seconds AFTER you move your foot to find out if you're hooked in and have your leg loops.

Lift and tug at the same instant guarantees the same results if not worse.

BULLSHIT. See above.

Ever notice how the ONLY incidents attributable to lift and tug...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=822
US Hawks Hook-In Verification Poll

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/11/13 00:58:28 UTC

Look, I'm not just relying on my opinion here. I've asked some of the experts and they have advised me that performing a "lift-and-tug" in difficult conditions can introduce significant risk to the pilot's safety. Until you can PROVE otherwise, you're just voicing what I would consider to be an uneducated opinion.

...are hypothetical and totally imaginary ones cited by "some of the experts" and other assholes who've never done and never will perform one?

The odd result of having a helmet forcefully removed could have been anywhere from expensive to fatal.

The odd result of trying to kick into a cocoon boot right after launch and trying to kick out of a pod with a jammed zipper right before the LZ comes up ACTUALLY have been anywhere from expensive to fatal.

The odd result of retrieving a helmet right before launch ACTUALLY has been anywhere from expensive to fatal.

Ditto with respect to standup and spot landings.

People who prioritize trivial inconsequential shit over piloting have no fuckin' business flying gliders - and the people the people who sign them off have no fuckin' business teaching flying gliders.

That is the way things happen on your heavenly heights launch. Real life is quite different.

- That - based on the DATA - is the way things happen on ANY and EVERY launch. If you've got data to the contrary then cite it.

- How 'bout easing up a little on references to MY heavenly heights launches and MY Happy Acres putting green LZs? I'm not some fuckin' Taber rated Hang 2.3 who's never flown anywhere but the Lookout training hills, ramp, and LZ under the watchful eyes of the LMFP air, hang check, standup landing, and 130 pound Greenspot Nazis.

-- I've successfully launched and landed in circumstances that have killed some of my ol' buddies.

-- And I've committed expensive, painful, and life altering pooch screws in launch and landing circumstances that no responsible pilot had any business launching and landing in.

I have seen people get out of harnesses to do whatever and jump back into them hurriedly. The cycles are coming in, cummies a poppin' and folks are skying out.

You have too many "m"s in "cummies". This forum should be an appropriate place for people of varying ages to visit. Please be more careful in the future.

Potential for forgetting leg loops? You bet.

- Potential for MISSING leg loops? Yes.

- Potential for forgetting that you got out of your harness between preflight and the ramp? A tiny fraction of the potential for forgetting that you unhooked 'cause the time and effort involved in getting in and out of a harness is a couple of hundred times the time and effort involved in unclipping a carabiner.

- There are only two reasons to get out of a harness en route to launch.

-- You've got an equipment problem which requires or is most easily addressed by taking the harness off.
-- You need to take care of an issue which requires a lot of time and/or distance.

- I'm standing behind the ramp. I can remember that I HAVEN'T gotten out of my harness since preflight A LOT better than I can remember whether or not I've preflighted and load tested my sidewires 'cause the sidewires are routine, less time and labor intensive, and more distant actions. So if I'm gonna start second guessing myself on my preflight checklist on some issue...

- If I can't remember that I HAVEN'T gotten out of my harness since preflight I'm in no mental condition to be flying a hang glider - or bagging one and driving home.

- But go ahead and check the fucking leg loops. Do it with the glider parked just behind the ramp, just after you move the glider onto the ramp, when you lift the glider in preparation for launch, as you commence your launch, or all of the above. It's an extremely low cost / high value exercise and doesn't require you to put the glider down and/or turn.

Following your logic, the Australian method of hooking the harness to the glider before entering the harness GUARANTEES a hooked in launch.

No. It doesn't. The logic strongly indicates that it doesn't and the history and data proves that it doesn't.

- Turning and learning on the ramp is an excellent way of doing checking continuity of the glider/pilot/ harness and gives a bit more useful information than lifting and tugging.

Fixed it for you because I am a helper.

It sucks. On the ramp I want to know that I have the glider and my leg loops. For everything else - including the full engagement of the hang strap - I'm confident in my preflight checks.

If you're not confident in your preflight checks you shouldn't have gotten on the ramp. If you suddenly become concerned about one of your preflight checks on the ramp then - by all means - take a minute or two to verify. But don't make a habit of it. If you're regularly getting on the ramp minus confidence in your preflight checks you are not exhibiting competence and are an accident waiting to happen.

Why not increase your efficiency with the Australian method?

Because the Aussie Method, according to all of its priests and cult members, demands that you NEVER EVER get into your harness unless it's connected to your glider and never disconnect your harness from your glider before you're out of it, and rely on that procedure to guarantee that you're hooked in at launch - to the EXCLUSION of anything resembling a hook-in check.

(Watch this asshole:

Noman Shows Us the Bossie Method
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg_ixvWWtlw
TumblingHangGliders - 2012/07/13
dead

if you don't believe me.)

For me in most circumstances connecting my harness to my glider IS a more efficient procedure for assembling and preflighting my system and I will use it. In circumstances in which it isn't I won't. But I will NEVER do what these douchebags want me to. I will NEVER use it to derive the SLIGHTEST assurance that I'll be hooked in at launch.

The more you harp on nothing ever happening between set up and launch, the more I think that you seriously believe in heavenly heights.

I'm totally confident that shit WILL happen between setup and launch and always assume that it HAS.

In the real world, shit can and does happen between set up and the actual launch.

Hell, I'm totally confident that shit HAS happened between when I did my last lift and tug five seconds ago and now and always assume that it DID. I rely on a combination of memory checks and final equipment checks - just like you do. It's just that mine are a lot more efficient and safer than yours are.

Enough to figure out that I have not created a slip knot.

Haven't spent much time on sailboats, have you?

For a new glider, it takes a while of improvised hang loops to find the perfect hang height.

- Fine. If you've got zilch confidence in your imrovs check them out behind or - if you must - ON the ramp.

- But do you ever reach a point when you're confident in your knowledge that you got a proper strap of the proper length three years ago that you don't need to be turning and checking for slip knots any more?

Keep repeating until it sinks in

I don't need to. My brain hasn't been that trashed by Alzheimer's yet.

I know:
- where I'M vulnerable and where I'm not
- where OTHER PEOPLE vulnerable and they're I'm not
- that the dynamics are pretty much the same for everyone
- what's important and what isn't
- the difference between real and imaginary problems
- how to safely and efficiently deal with my REAL vulnerabilities

[Tad Eareckson]

Show me a mathematical or vector diagram of how you put a lateral force of 75 lbs on the wire and get 116 lbs on the end of the wire.

1. Both ends of the wire - and at any point on it.
2. It's the same deal as for figuring loads on weak links for one and two point bridles.

From my "Mousetraps" document:

Bridles, as a result of being less than infinitely long, impart a mechanical disadvantage. The resultant increase in loading of the components securing them is calculated by comparing half the tow force to that figure multiplied by the secant of half the apex angle.

- The attachment points for a one point bridle - your shoulders - are very narrowly separated and the bridle's apex angle is very acute...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aerotowrelease/8313526097/


...so the attachment points are both feeling half the towline tension plus a little bit more not really worth mentioning.

- The attachment points for a two point bridle - you and the keel - are widely separated and the bridle's apex angle is is typically around 60 degrees. Do the trig or measure the vectors and you find that the attachment points are feeling half the towline tension plus fifteen percent.

- If I'm stomping down on the middle of a sidewire 75 pounds worth and measuring 116 pounds of tension I can work backwards doing the trig (or finding a website to do the trig for me) and calculate that I'm forming an apex angle (under my foot) of 142 degrees and deflecting the wire 19 degrees from straight / what it would be in flight.



If I shorten those main cables the strain on them goes up and when the sag starts disappearing the strain starts approaching infinity. And when you're dealing with the weight of a bridge to begin with infinity is a lot.

1. At what point should invisible damage to the wire become visible?

The only place where damage would be invisible would be inside the nico.

That was meant to be a joke.

Yes. A defect SHOULD be visible before failure.

I was starting to get worried.

That was meant to be serious.

I did not discover it until disassembly.

At what altitude?

I discovered the problem in the lz when removing the control bar from the downtubes.

That was meant to be a joke.

The process is called creep.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creep_(deformation)

In materials science, creep is the tendency of a solid material to move slowly or deform permanently under the influence of stresses. It occurs as a result of long term exposure to high levels of stress that are below the yield strength of the material. Creep is more severe in materials that are subjected to heat for long periods, and near melting point. Creep always increases with temperature.

That doesn't sound like anything that happens to a sidewire that's being kept below a Working Load Limit of under 21 percent of its breaking strength.

Try it once and you will see for your self.

1. I can't.
2. I remain skeptical.
3. One of the kids of one of my cousins' is a sailboat rigger. If I can't find anything online I'm gonna run this by him.

There is enough slop in hg design that it will make no appreciable difference in handling

Agreed. But I'm still skeptical about it happening at all.

Those who are less than perfect, pull much higher numbers.

So what?
- Did the wires blow or elongate before the spars blew?
- We're talking about a preflight load test to around two Gs anyway.

Repetition is good for learning foreign languages and music. Maybe it will work for you.

I dunno. With all our instructors forcing people to do nothing but standup landings from half an hour after birth on and Rooney saturating The Davis Show with volumes of essays on how to do them right, one would think that...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=22176
Paragliding Collapses

Jim Rooney - 2011/06/12 13:57:58 UTC

Most common HG injury... spiral fracture of the humerus.

...the most common hang gliding injury would be a broken ankle.

Memory is one of those things that does NOT improve with age.

In the real world, shit can and does happen between set up and the actual launch.

Two excellent reasons to:
- focus on the shit that actually DOES happen between setup and the actual launch that actually matters; and
- stop doing distracting procedures to check for shit that never happens and wouldn't matter if it did.

I walk forward to stretch everything while holding the nose down.

I've done that already.

I turn, then inspect the loops, caribiner and harness main.

1. I've done that already.
2. Why do you need more than one loop but are OK with just one harness main, carabiner, and keel?
3. How come you don't inspect the keel? It's gonna blow long before your harness main, carabiner, and hang strap will.

I look down at the leg loops. I touch them with one hand...

I've already done that. But I'll do it again anyway if the glider's down and there's no good reason to pick it up anytime soon.

...then pull the chin strap.

I wait until I feel it fluttering a couple of minutes into launch. Then I buckle it. Never fails.

I walk back and assume the launch position.

I don't need to walk back 'cause I'm already in launch position. Then I pick up the glider and idly lift or float it to the stops every five or ten seconds while I'm waiting for a cycle.

Then when I get one I tighten my suspension and start moving. That way I don't hafta worry about...

Memory is one of those things that does NOT improve with age.

...my perennially crappy memory or...

In the real world, shit can and does happen between set up and the actual launch.

...any real world shit that's happened at any time between set up and the actual launch - including the time you've been standing there waiting for a cycle with a buckled helmet, backup loop, and assumption that you've been hooked in all that time.

And there's always a remote chance that somebody watching me might start figuring out that "JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH" actually means and is actually doable "JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH". (Just a theory though - I really doubt it's ever actually happened.)

[Tad Eareckson]

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

Grant Bond - 2012/07/14 13:38:16 UTC
Perth

When I'm not throwing another shrimp on the barbie I like to do the Aussie method. In the last four years of HGering in Oz have only ever seen one pilot who walks around in his harness and is the only one I know of that launched unhooked (he was OK, got lucky).

Since your entire idiot Aussie Methodist CULTure is based upon the proposition that there's no possible way somebody standing on launch could NOT be hooked into a glider, just how much of a surprise is this?

At the start it did seem inconvenient and was tempted to unhook because I forgot to turn the camera on or grab the sunnies from the car but that would have been from lazyness, not necessity so didn't. Pretty soon it became routine and though it can be awkward at times to pick the glider up you get to learn ways around it. Set the glider more side on to the wind, push on the front wires and pivot it on the windward corner of the A frame, gets easier the more you do it.

Thanks for admitting that it can be a pain in the ass and you need to jump through hoops to make it work in some relatively benign circumstances.

It's also drummed into us as students to always do a hang check as well, the Aussei method is no substitute for this.

Ya know...

Procedures that ACTUALLY MAKE SENSE...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hhpa/
Houston Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association

Zack C - 2010/10/15 13:25:50 UTC

Speaking of which, while I can fault Tad's approach, I can't fault his logic, nor have I seen anyone here try to refute it. You may not like the messenger, but that is no reason to reject the message. I've already stated why I'm not adopting lift-and-tug...what about the rest of you? I'm asking because it doesn't look like Tad will stop until he sees the changes he's advocating or is banned. Before the latter happens, maybe the former deserves a chance.

Sunday I performed a hang check at Pack, stepped onto the ramp, and proceeded to wait for a lull in which to launch. Due to this discussion I realized at this point how dangerous it was for me to assume I was hooked in. It's like assuming it's OK to lock your car because you remember putting your keys in your pocket a few minutes ago, only the consequences of being wrong are much worse than a call to AAA.

...don't need to be drummed into students. The ones with brains will get it and the other 99 percent can be EASILY hardwired.

All this sets a good example to the new pilots when they see the top guns doing it.

Yep. They see these morons doing ANYTHING - Aussie Methodizing, hang checking, skipping hook-in checks, protowing, stripping wheels off of basetubes, landing in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place - that's what they'll do or shoot for.

NMERider - 2012/07/14 15:52:46 UTC

Thanks Bondy.
You're the voice of calm and reason in my mind here.

What's the voice of in the mind you left back in seventh grade science class?

I'm going to see if I can change my habits to pre-attach the harness every time that it's practical to do so.

Are you gonna change your habits to float the glider up to the stops every time there's enough air coming in to make it easier to do so than to not do?

I will still do the usual checks before launch.

Yeah Jonathan. The USUAL checks - hang, Five Cs, turn and look... Anything permitted by Joe Greblo and Paul Voight. None of the UNusual checks like the one Doug Hildreth was screaming at everyone to employ for nearly a decade and a half.

The key word for me is "habit" or "routine" as you call it.

Fuck "habits" and "routines". They're setups for death by distraction and disruption.

The keyword is...

Rob Kells - 2005/12

Each of us agrees that it is not a particular method, but rather the fear of launching unhooked that makes us diligent to be sure we are hooked in every time before starting the launch run.

...FEAR.

And fear is the catalyst for following the fucking USHGA reg to, with each flight, verify that you're hooked in JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH and establish a muscle memory response which protects you from your idiot habits and routines - new and old.

Cheers, Jono

Moron.

Alan Deikman - 2012/07/14 18:14:50 UTC
Fremont, California

All the endless endless endless discussion of the aussie method has taught me to assemble the harness to the glider but not to avoid FTHI. It just turns out that is an easier way to preflight and operate a Z5 harness. So for me I learned something.

So far, so good.

Even in the limited number of sites that I fly, I have encountered conditions a number of times that made it safer to unhook the harness with me in it. I love my glider but that doesn't mean that I am going to take a punch for it. If you don't believe such conditions exist then it is pointless for me or anyone to try to describe them to you.

It's always pointless when you're going up against religion.

Hook check in the 40 seconds prior to launch: Always.

1. Yeah. ALWAYS. Never JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH. Forty seconds. Anything under that would be an admission of cowardice.

2. You're not doing a hook-in check. THIS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHWbu0su1fA


is a hook-in check. You're doing some bullshit useless preflight exercise that involves putting the glider back down and turning and learning.

I will never understand why that is considered harder to remember than the half-dozen other "must do" things before launch. Or maybe I missed something. Is there a zomg-never-fail-aussie-you-dont-do-it-this-way-youre-an-idiot method that will save the guy who insists on launching with a bad pitch or roll attitude but gets away with it a lot so he thinks it is OK?

So make up your mind -- are you a pilot or are you a glider driver?

So close.

David W. Johnson 2012/07/14 19:09:57 UTC
Huntsville, Alabama

I once got some stickers on ebay to put on the base tube in front of the pilot. They were bright yellow and said 'hook in'. I don't see the on there now. I sent them to several buddies that I wanted to look out for.

And they're all still alive so they must've worked!

Nothing is foolproof for a sufficiently talented fool.

Idiot.

[Steve Davy]

When you're launching your glider WILL - assuming you're hooked in and have your leg loops - BE lifting and tugging on your suspension.

- You can make that happen two seconds BEFORE you move your foot to make sure you're hooked in and have your leg loops.

- Or, like the overwhelming majority of the assholes who fly these things (particularly those in the LA area), you can wait until two seconds AFTER you move your foot to find out if you're hooked in and have your leg loops.

That is Gold.

[Tad Eareckson]

Even better than this?

miguel - 2012/07/13 14:44:59 UTC

Words of Wisdom

That can fail as well. I know a guy who lifted his wing on launch, felt the tug on his harness and launched.

Flew around a bit, and realized he was hanging from his pod's limiter line, and thats it. Wasnt really hooked in. Came in and landed quickly.

Very lucky.

[Tad Eareckson]

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

Adam Parer - 2012/07/15 05:01:12 UTC
Australia

Happy to know all ended up well minus a few scratches.

The aussie method may be be less comfortable when getting into the harness, and the harness may be exposed to more dust, the boot more scratch prone, over time, and if you must walk a distance to the launch then less convenientl especially if we are carrying O2 etc.

And it may be certifiably insane to use a strategy which hardwires everyone in the CULTure to assume that whenever someone is on launch he's hooked into a glider but... what the hell.

...convenientl...

And I ALWAYS follow strict procedures while I'm preparing to post so there's absolutely no point in running a spell-check just prior to posting.

It's the same mindset, Adam.

But aren't these really insignificant in comparison to the potential of launching unhooked?

Yeah sure, Adam.

- The fucking Aussie Method absolutely GUARANTEES that there's NO POTENTIAL WHATSOEVER for launching unhooked - 'cause every time one of your zombies launches unhooked you can say he wasn't using the Aussie Method.

- And there's NO POSSIBILITY WHATSOEVER that any other strategy can address the issue a tiny fraction as effectively - 'cause you zombies don't bother reading and/or acknowledging anything an infidel hook-in checker has to say.

We are militant with this sort of thing down here.

1. Of course you are. Really enjoyed that last video you released of the beheading of an infidel hook-in checker.

2. Who's "WE"?

3. Are WE militant enough to codify it in OUR regulations?

4. Like...

http://ozreport.com/12.081
Weaklinks - the HGFA rules

Davis Straub - 2008/04/22 14:47:00 UTC

Here is the requirement from the 2007 Worlds local rules (which I wrote) for weaklinks:

Pilots must use weaklinks provided by the meet organizers and in a manner approved by the meet organizers. All weaklinks will be checked and use of inappropriate weaklinks will require the pilot to go to the end of the launch line to change the weaklink.

Weaklinks will consist of a single loop of Cortland 130 lb Greenspot braided Dacron Tolling line and should be placed at one end of a shoulder bridle.

At the 2008 Forbes Flatlands Greenspot for the first time was used as the standard weaklink material (thanks in large part to the efforts of Bobby Bailey). We applaud these efforts to improve the safety of aerotowing by using a better weaklink material.

...THIS?

http://ozreport.com/13.238
Adam Parer on his tuck and tumble

Adam Parer - 2009/11/25
Airborne Gulgong Classic
New South Wales

Due to the rough conditions weak links were breaking just about every other tow and the two tugs worked hard to eventually get everyone off the ground successfully.

http://ozreport.com/9.011
2005 Worlds

Davis Straub - 2005/01/13

Tom Lanning had four launches, and two broken weaklinks and a broken base tube. He made it just outside the start circle.

5. Asshole.

Anyone seen walking around in their harness unhooked are immediately pulled up, by everyone.

I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused.

- If WE are ALL *MILITANT* with this sort of thing down here how can there POSSIBLY be any sightings of anyone walking around in his harness unhooked?

- If one infidel is seen walking around in his harness unhooked does he immediately join in the pulling up of himself to validate the statement that he's immediately pulled up by EVERYONE?

Not sure of the reaction if the justification was to keep the harness clean or scratched free, or that it was uncomfortable to bend over because there was extra weight to carry, or they have a sore back.

What do you think the reaction would be if the PILOT...

- told you that he'd been hook-in checking since before some of you brain dead motherfuckers had been born, he has a better record than you do, he hates your guts, and to stop interfering with his personal, legal, sound, and logically and statistically superior decisions, judgments, and conduct as Pilot In Command of HIS aircraft?

- pulled out his cell phone, called the cops, and reported that a vigilante mob was interfering with legal activities in a public recreation area?

It would probably be advice along the lines of 'harden the f^&k up'

Yeah.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2467
weak links

Jim Rooney - 2007/07/22 22:30:28 UTC

I've heard it a million times before from comp pilots insisting on towing with even doubled up weaklinks (some want no weaklink). I tell them the same thing I'm telling you... suck it up.

Big surprise.

If we are to decide between a confirmed connection to the glider vs the long term cleanliness of our boot... we will forgo the latter, no?

Fuck you.

http://http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=21868
Don't Forget your Hang Check!

Eric Hinrichs - 2011/05/13 21:31:06 UTC

I went to Chelan for the Nationals in '95 as a free flyer. They were requiring everyone to use the Australian method, and you were also not allowed to carry a glider without being hooked in. This was different for me, I hook in and do a full hang check just behind launch right before I go. I was also taught to do a hooked in check right before starting my run, lifting or letting the wind lift the glider to feel the tug of the leg loops.

So I used their method and I'm hooked in, carrying my glider to launch and someone yells "Dust devil!" Everyone around runs for their gliders (most of which are tied down) and I'm left standing alone in the middle of the Butte with a huge monster wandering around. I heard later that it was well over three hundred feet tall, and some saw lightning at the top. After that it was clear that no one is going to decide for me or deride me for my own safety methods, someone else's could have easily got me killed.

You don't include me in your WE and your goddam idiot vigilante mob and you and your goddam idiot Davis Links don't override MY decisions.

How many times do you launch in a day? Mostly only once. The extra effort is only for a few seconds.

I don't give a rat's ass whether it's one time at McConnellsburg or Woodstock or twenty times at Smithsburg or Jockey's Ridge. It's MY goddam decision and I don't do extra seconds of effort for ANY moronic religious ritual that has only a negative bearing on my safety.

And if you ever fly in the US under the provision of a US rating and violate this REGULATION:

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

I'll have it revoked.

Gawd I despise people so comfortable with the use of the pronoun "WE". Rooney and Bob come immediately to mind.