The Bob Show

General discussion about the sport of hang gliding
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9161
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: The Bob Show

Post by Tad Eareckson »

Hey Bob, if you look at most of the idiots who fly these things...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=32166
Posting Credibility Multiplier

They have neither the brains nor inclinations to look at and check the math and science behind what they're doing. And they very obviously have ZILCH confidence in their USHGA certified instructors, publications, programs - bullshit committee products. So they're searching for INDIVIDUALS they want to be able to trust and who will tell them what to do. And, 'cause the sport of hang gliding is such a total shit heap...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=16265
weaklinks
Kinsley Sykes - 2010/03/18 19:42:19 UTC

In the old threads there was a lot of info from a guy named Tad. Tad had a very strong opinion on weak link strength and it was a lot higher than most folks care for. I'd focus carefully on what folks who tow a lot have to say. Or Jim Rooney who is an excellent tug pilot. I tow with the "park provided" weak links. I think they are 130 pound Greenspot.
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22660
What can be learned from this "scooter" towing accident?
Mitch Shipley - 2011/01/31 15:22:59 UTC

Enjoy your posts, as always, and find your comments solid, based on hundreds of hours / tows of experience and backed up by a keen intellect/knowledge of the issues when it comes to most things in general and hang gliding AT/Towing in particular. Wanted to go on record in case anyone reading wanted to know one persons comments they should give weight to.
...they pretty much always end up with crap like Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney and Ryan Instant-Hands-Free-Release Voight.

A third of a century on the 1.0 G Hewett Link pitch and lockout preventer (one rather deranged individual) and its spawn, now we're all happy with one-size-fits-all 200 pound Cortland Greenspot, twenty years from now we'll be hearing from some Rooney or Trisa clone about the hundreds of thousands of tows conducted by the brave selfless test pilots at both ends of the string who risked their lives determining its suitability.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9161
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: The Bob Show

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1629
Jailed for taking pictures at Torrey
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/12/31 06:59:00 UTC

For anyone following the trial, it's been continued again until mid January.

Two people testified today - myself and Ken Bryenton. Ken had come down from Canada, and the judge was very generous in allowing him to speak since he might not be here for the next session.

Most of the two and a half hour session was taken up by Robin's lawyer calling me to the stand. At one point, I requested that the judge watch the video so she would have a better point of reference for my testimony. The judge agreed and over-ruled Robin's lawyer's objections.
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/12/18 07:10:06 UTC

At this point, I think the video would resolve the matter completely ... however, Robin's lawyer is objecting to the introduction of the video claiming that it might have been "edited".
So this video was supposed to have been...
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/11/13

Robin Marien (Gliderport Concessionaire/Lessee) asserted that my video taping constituted grounds to have me removed from the property and he told the police to arrest me.
...the grounds for having you arrested and removed from the property but...
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/11/11 07:12:00 UTC

Eventually the police told me that I had to leave. I quoted the Gliderport Lease to them many times that "The public shall not be wholly or permanantly excluded from any portion of the premesis", and I offered to show them that quote from the lease on my cell phone. They declined. I also told them that I had a video of the incident which would clear it up, but they refused to view that as well.
...the Jebb Gang's corrupt goons in blue refused to even verify that this evidence of this absurdly bogus charge even existed. And then the Jebb Gang tries to have this clear evidence of your guilt - edited or not - excluded as evidence. So how come there don't seem to be any actions being taken to get the heads of the Jebb Gang's goons in blue up on pikes where they belong?
We took a fifteen minute recess while the judge watched it, then my testimony continued. Near the end of the session I mentioned that Ken had come from Canada to speak and he might not be available for the next session and asked if he could speak. The judge was very gracious and heard Ken's testimony.

One unusual event happened during my testimony. While I was on the witness stand, I saw Doug Poirier (sitting in the back row) take out his cell phone camera and take a picture. Photographs are prohibited in that courtroom and the prohibition is clearly posted. So while on the stand I spoke up about what I saw, and the judge sent the bailiff to ensure that Doug Poirier deleted that photo.

In a sense, this little incident was a perfect metaphor for what actually happened on November 9th. In both cases I had seen something wrong, brought it to the attention of people in charge, and as a result it was corrected.
Speaking on behalf of every US participant in the sports of hang and paragliding I'd so like to thank you for righting the first of those wrongs.
I won't go into too much more about the trial, but I am hopeful that it will conclude at the next session in mid January.
George Whitehill - 1981/05

If, just before committing to a launch, a second check is done every time and this is made a habit, this tragic mistake could be eliminated. Habit is the key word here. This practice must be subconscious on the part of the pilot.

In the new USHGA rating system, for each flight of each task "the pilot must demonstrate a method of establishing that he/she is hooked in, just prior to launch." The purpose here is obvious.
No fucking way in hell this bullshit:

Image
Image
Image
Image

complies with either the stated intent or any common sense interpretation of that regulation. And that's one that ACTUALLY MATTERS. So is it OK if I get busy with some cardboard, duct tape, rubber bands, a pair of scissors and designate my results as a helmet for the purpose of complying with the new USHPA / Bob Kuczewski Helmet Regulation?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9opdU5W1w6s/TZNOpxUd6AI/AAAAAAAAA1g/oWULqc0Dcss/s1600/helmetfinished.jpg
Image

Keep up the great work, Bob.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9161
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: The Bob Show

Post by Tad Eareckson »

Hey Bob... Guess how many other forums have so far responded to your update of your Torrey legal situation.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9161
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: The Bob Show

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1629
Jailed for taking pictures at Torrey
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/11/19 17:56:05 UTC

Tad and I disagree on many things. In fact, Tad has a topic titled "The Bob Show" where he takes every cheap shot he can at me. If you read that topic (currently containing nearly 330 of mostly Tad's posts), you'll find Tad using an unending stream of foul language directed at me and other US Hawks members.
Compare/Contrast, Bob.
http://www.hanggliding.org/wiki/HG_ORG_Mission_Statement
HangGliding.Org Rules and Policies
No posts or links about Bob K, Scott C Wise, Tad Eareckson and related people, or their material. ALL SUCH POSTS WILL BE IMMEDIATELY DELETED. These people are poison to this sport and are permanently banned from this site in every possible way imaginable.
And on The Davis Show its sociopath locks down topics and deletes posts and topics and won't even let you see what's going on.

And you get lied about on both dumps.

Here... You're not getting lied about; you get to see pretty much everything relevant to you from The Davis Show; nothing gets deleted, destructively edited, sabotaged, fragged, dumped in a basement, concealed from nonmembers; no members are prohibited or discouraged from making whatever honest comments about you they feel like; you have unrestricted access to members; everything you've wanted to say to me has been posted and addressed.

Make a case that outside of your dictatorship Kite Strings isn't the best thing you have going for you.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9161
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: The Bob Show

Post by Tad Eareckson »

Hey Bob...

Here's a guy:

20-00727
Image

about a frame and a half away from having his life destroyed as a reward for trying to help one of our wonderful hang glider pilot buddies keep his toy in one piece. Brain mushed, one nose and nine ribs broken, liver damage, critical. The video's locked down but you can see the whole stills sequence at:

http://www.kitestrings.org/post5929.html#p5929

And while USHPA insurance issues have shit to do with USHPA pilots... This one was catastrophic on that issue as well.

As he'd been on a wing...

05-00123
Image

...he couldn't have POSSIBLY have been hooked in where, had he been a USHPA member and had this incident occurred yesterday, he'd have been subject to the new USHGA / Bob Kuczewski Helmet Regulation.

A pretty good argument can be made that in that situation he'd have been WAY better off hooked in without a helmet than unhooked on the wing with a helmet. And given that this is the only incident in the history of hang gliding - please correct me if I'm wrong - in which anyone has ever been significantly injured by a glider that wasn't being flown by someone, one hundred percent of our data supports the strategy of putting a helmet on a wing guy if you're gonna put one on anyone.

And tell me that no fuckin' way would that guy would've been flattened if he'd been a thousand hour Five. And note that if you do you'll be the first to venture that opinion.

Also note that Zack Marzec, 2013/02/02, and Joe Julik, 2014/09/29, both went down in free flight incidents as consequences of invisible dust devils and neither of their helmets did them any good.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9161
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: The Bob Show

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=929
Training Manual Comments / Contribution
Terry Mason - 2012/01/05 20:06:00 UTC

Very astute observation Bill, and if Bob will place 'Post a reply' icon in the 'Training Manual' topic, I'd like to add a few things that have helped the S.W. Texas chapter.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8143/7462005802_bbc0ac66ac_o.jpg
Image
Also several of my own posts in Hang gliding General, as well as 'Forming the Hawks' could be transferded into the 'manual' topic, but only after editing out the objectional TROLL comments! I hope you are watching Bob, or I've wasted another 15min.
Pretty significant chunk of time - given that you're gonna be dead in another five and a third months.
Thanks again, Terry
Bob Kuczewski - 2012/01/06 06:18:49 UTC

Hi Bill and Terry,

I've limited that forum to just the people who want to sincerely work on building a good training manual so we don't get derailed. If either of you guys would like to participate, you'd be welcome ... as well as most other members of the forum. Are either of you interested? Just post your interest or send me a PM and I'll be happy to add you to the writing/contributing "staff".

To amplify my thinking, the work that will take place on that topic isn't best suited to a forum. It's more suited to some kind of collaboration software between people who want to work toward that common goal. But since a forum is the only "groupware" that we've got right now, I'll adapt it to that purpose. When all you've got is a hammer ... everything looks like a nail.

So that's why the forum is readable to everyone, but will only be writable by the group that's going to actually write the manual.

Is everyone OK with that?
I'm not - but my free speech doesn't count for shit on The Bob Show 'cause I might be able to communicate with people of varying ages.
Warren Narron - 2012/01/06 18:55:32 UTC

Going against the grain here, but someone has to point out that the probable best candidate to write a training manual has been banned from this site.
Steve Davy - 2012/01/07 06:17:18 UTC

Bob's not looking for the best candidate, he's looking for the most agreeable candidates.
Bob Kuczewski - 2012/01/07 17:59:55 UTC

Tad has been asked repeatedly to help with building the US Hawks and he's pretty much refused to participate. If you see something he's written that's particularly helpful, please post it.
And here we are a wee bit shy of three years later and, strangely, nobody's posted anything.
I have no problem giving attribution to Tad or his work.
But...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=802
AL's Second flight at Packsaddle how it went
Bob Kuczewski - 2011/10/23 16:29:29 UTC

As for Nobody's request for me to read a document, I haven't found the time yet. I'm sorry, but I don't have time to read everything that everyone asks me to read.
You don't have time to actually read any of Tad's work.
You can communicate with him through his forum at http://kitestrings.prophpbb.com/. I'm not trying to "erase" Tad, but I am trying to protect the US Hawks from the destructive aspects of his personality.
Without consulting anyone on the US Hawks to find out if they actually wanted to be protected from the destructive aspects of his personality.
I'm looking for people who can work together to build an on-line training manual for hang gliding. Yes, that does require a certain amount of agreeability and willingness to compromise. The only Training Manual that Tad can build is the one where he has 100% control.
You mean the way the only Training Manual Committee that Bob can form is one over which he has one hundred percent control?
I hope he does that at http://kitestrings.prophpbb.com/, and we'll be happy to reference his work.
Did you consult Sam, Terry, Charlie, Rick to ensure that they'll be as happy to have Tad's work referenced as "WE" will?
Also note that I've created the Training Manual Forum as a place for working on the Training Manual. This could have been done outside of the US Hawks forum by personal collaboration or email or by many other means. But I wanted lots of people to be able to see what we're doing and offer comments, so I decided to make it a public part of the US Hawks Forum.
Great! You'll be able to get a lot of different opinions on the towline pressure required to blow a loop of 130 pound Greenspot with the knot hidden and what people's expectations are.
On the other hand, working on a training manual will require a coordinated effort by several dedicated people.
Same deal.
The actual writing process is not helped by allowing people to derail the discussions.
With irritating comments about aeronautical theory, physics, actual test data.
So that's why the Training Manual Forum is limited to posting by people who've explicitly stated they want to work cooperatively on that project.
1. So that's why YOU'VE limited the Training Manual Forum to posting by people who've explicitly stated they want to work cooperatively on that project.

2. They don't hafta actually work cooperatively on that project, they just hafta explicitly state they will. Kinda like all your crap in your mission statement about valuing and honoring free speech.

3. Is there someplace we can go to see the explicit statements of the people posting on the Training Manual Forum who've explicitly stated they want to work cooperatively on that project with anybody but Tad and Steve?

4. So what have you got in your dusty little subforum in the way of a foundation based on cooperative work and compromise? Are lotsa people talking about it and referencing it as a valuable resource? You haven't had a post there in close to four months and that was on the highly technical and controversial issue of "Setting up a Hang Glider".
With that thought in mind, it would be good to have a topic where anyone can comment or contribute without being a member of the Training Manual Team.
How generous of you, Your Imperial Majesty.
This topic is specifically for that purpose. Please feel free to post your own (or even someone else's) comments or contributions to this forum any time.

Thanks.
Really amazing the degree and quality of cooperative work and willingness to compromise from people when you're running a dictatorship. How you manage that is totally beyond me.

Ya know Bob...

A huge portion of the really important inventions, creations, discoveries, contributions to science, mathematics, technology, medicine, arts have been from people who were notoriously crappy at working cooperatively with others and willingness to compromise - big surprise.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2467
weak links
Marc Fink - 2007/05/19 12:58:31 UTC

Tad,

The simple fact is that hundreds of thousands of tows using weaklinks in their present configuration successfully bely your contentions that we're all crazy for towing that way.

Simply put, your statements are irresponsible and are based on your personal interpretations.

I am a tow operator--as well as a "towee." I also do aerotow tandems. Using greenline or similar line, which generally tests at 125 lbs +- 50 lbs is widely accepted because it simply works well and relatively predicatably for the enormous range of conditions and applications in towing. If this weren't true, then accident rates would be much higher and these kinds of weaklinks would have been abandoned along time ago.

A 400lb load limit for a solo tow is absurd.
http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=939
Weak link breaks?
Dan Tomlinson - 2005/08/31 00:33:01 UTC

Tad's post is difficult to read but I've seen his work. His release mechanism is elegant in its simplicity and effectiveness.
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=12403
weak link table
ian9toes - 2009/06/14 15:18:37 UTC
Gold Coast, Queensland

I strongly disagree with banning the one guy who has the most knowledge about safety issues involving what I believe is the most dangerous part of our sport. I hear someone dies every year from towing. I hope SG bites his tongue in the interest of public safety.
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=16265
weaklinks
Kinsley Sykes - 2010/03/18 19:42:19 UTC

In the old threads there was a lot of info from a guy named Tad. Tad had a very strong opinion on weak link strength and it was a lot higher than most folks care for. I'd focus carefully on what folks who tow a lot have to say. Or Jim Rooney who is an excellent tug pilot. I tow with the "park provided" weak links. I think they are 130 pound Greenspot.
http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=929
Training Manual Comments / Contribution
Bill Cummings - 2012/01/10 14:04:59 UTC

Tad's procedures for aerotowing should become part of any training manual.
http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=3638
FTHI
Mike Blankenhorn - 2012/10/26 02:39:07 UTC

Wow, I never saw it put quite like that before. Great write up!
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=31781
Another hang check lesson
Alan Deikman - 2014/09/23 19:47:06 UTC

Amazing how when this topic comes up every time you see people argue the same arguments over and over again. It has been a classic (although niche) endless Internet flame topic.

I suspect that some of the parties that have posted in threads like these before are refraining now since they have learned that it is nearly (completely?) impossible to change people's minds on the topic.

For my part I will just refer you to the classic Tad Eareckson essay which I call "the gun is always loaded" which is a bit overworked but probably all you will ever need to read regarding FTHI. A lot of people will find it gores their particular sacred Ox, but I have never seen anyone point out a flaw in his logic.
Just about all that stuff exists as a consequence of my having ZERO willingness to work cooperatively with assholes with opinions and compromise.

After Bill Priday got killed Rob Kells published a magazine article addressing unhooked launches and watered down with a load of useless irrelevant crap about preflight issues. Rob's approach to and mindset regarding the issue was EXACTLY the same as mine but he was a friend to every pilot he met so legitimated the idiot procedures all his asshole friends used and never got one single flyer anywhere on the planet to start doing the job right. And the only people who reference or quote Rob on what he said that was right are the people quoting me quoting Rob on what he said that was right.

My article was killed by USHGA because it had no hint of cooperation and was totally contemptuous of compromise. But it gets referenced and quoted in places it's not allowed to be referenced and quoted and I can name you some individuals who've gotten their shit together as a result of it.

And many of us would not now be happy with absurd two hundred pound weak links through cooperative work and compromise. Many of us are now happy with absurd two hundred pound weak links 'cause the 130 killed a pro toad motherfucker.

The model you're using is designed to nip any and all signs of intelligence, competence, integrity in the bud and is a recipe for an eternal shit sandwich - and you very obviously know that and that's very obviously exactly what you want. Perfect mirror for what's been done by the USHGA and Industry powers for decades.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9161
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: The Bob Show

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=26557
Failure to hook in 6/29/12
Allen Sparks - 2012/07/13 12:41:24 UTC

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.
That's one of many reasons Allen's on this forum and you're not, Bob. Mother Nature can be one massively uncompromising bitch and we need uncompromising procedures, standards, training, leaders, instructors, pilots to be able to deal with the shit she can and will dish out.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9161
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: The Bob Show

Post by Tad Eareckson »

Bob Kuczewski - 2015/01/02 00:43 UTC

Hello Tad, this is Bob Kuczewski. Happy New Year. I'm mostly calling 'cause I don't have time to write anything. I'm just so busy.

But I think we may have a different view of what ground handling is. I was looking at... reading some of what you've written and it just may be different nomenclature that we use.

I was taught that ground handling is basically when you're standing there at launch, ready to launch and you're basically feeling the glider, feeling what it feels like and, you know, trying to decide, you know, when's the right time to launch, and to control it, keep the wings level in possibly turbulent conditions.

And that's what... And it's an exercise you can do for quite some time at either a regular launch site or a training hill, just to get used to how to, you know, maneuver the wing, bring the low wing up and forward and high wing back and out of the wind and, you know, when to stand on the base bar, to get control again if it starts to get out of control, how to back off... All that stuff is what I consider ground handling.

I'm not talking about just walking the glider from one part of the ground to the other. I'm talking about actually handling it in the wind.

And so if that's different from what you consider ground handling then that might explain our difference of opinion there. If it is what you understood as ground handling well then, then just carry on.

Anyway, feel free to call, I know you don't like to talk on the phone but you're welcome to as well.

Bye.
Hello Tad, this is Bob Kuczewski. Happy New Year.
Thanks, but I forgot what it was like to have any hope of being happy decades ago.
I'm mostly calling 'cause I don't have time to write anything. I'm just so busy.
OK, but that cost me a good chunk of transcription time, effort, pain.
But I think we may have a different view of what ground handling is.
Yeah, I'll add it to the list.
I was looking at... reading some of what you've written and it just may be different nomenclature that we use.

I was taught that...
I was taught that a single loop of 130 pound Greenspot on the end of a two point bridle translated to 520 pounds towline tension and it would be a bad idea to go with anything heavier because we were already putting a high degree of stress on the glider.

Juan Saa was taught that putting weak links on both ends of a one point bridle doubles the tension required to blow tow you'd have with just one weak link and that with that configuration you won't have a weak link that blows when it's supposed to.

Tom Galvin teaches all his students not to do hook-in checks because they give a false sense of security.

Everyone in hang gliding is taught that:
- a backup loop is the only thing standing between a hang glider pilot and certain death
- "fifteen minutes" is one of many synonyms for "just"
- you get much more effective glider control by going upright and to the downtubes
- one must:
-- never use any part of the first half a runway due to the danger of clipping a fence on the downwind end
-- always work on perfect one's flare timing because landing in a narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place is an inevitability
- it's impossible:
-- to engineer a release that will consistently work as a release
-- for:
--- any individual to design a release up to the high standards of anything sold by any commercial towing operation
--- anything bad to happen:
---- while making the easy reach to Industry Standard releases or, when those don't work, the hook knife
---- after a Quallaby Link pop unless the pilot is a total moron

So what percentage of your core beliefs and understandings of stuff in hang gliding is based on what you were taught? For me - and hopefully a good chunk of the participants on Kite Strings - it's somewhere around zero.
...ground handling is basically when you're standing there at launch, ready to launch and you're basically feeling the glider, feeling what it feels like and, you know, trying to decide, you know, when's the right time to launch, and to control it, keep the wings level in possibly turbulent conditions.
Oh. Ground handling is something that you do at launch position but a hook-in check is something you do in the staging area before not ground handling the glider to launch position. Interesting concepts.
And that's what... And it's an exercise you can do for quite some time at either a regular launch site or a training hill, just to get used to how to, you know, maneuver the wing, bring the low wing up and forward and high wing back and out of the wind and, you know, when to stand on the base bar, to get control again if it starts to get out of control, how to back off...
...how to hold the control frame on our shoulders to make sure that at all times the strap's loose and the wing's down below the deadly turbulent jet stream six inches above... We don't wanna go totally nuts here pushing the safety envelope while developing and perfecting these skills. We sure don't wanna end up like that guy at that place some time ago did. That one was so horrible we couldn't talk about in out of respect for his family, friends, instructor, work associates, cats, acquaintances, emergency response team, undertaker...
All that stuff is what I consider ground handling.
1. All stuff that's pretty much impossible to handle competently for anyone south of a Three rating.

2. And since you weren't taught that you can have somebody on wing that option is totally off the table.

3. And if you move the glider while doing any or all of that it's not considered "ground handing". It's considered "moving the glider". You need to know that for the written test.
I'm not talking about just walking the glider from one part of the ground to the other.
You mean like?:
FAA-H-8083-13A - Glider Flying Handbook
Chapter 6 - Preflight and Ground Operations

Ground Handling

Moving a glider on the ground...
I'm talking about actually handling it in the wind.
So no wind, no ground handling. Just as well. When you're flying a glider and the wind stops blowing the glider plummets out of the sky.
And so if that's different from what you...
...along with everyone in REAL aviation...
...consider ground handling then that might explain our difference of opinion there.
And in hang gliding EVERYTHING's a matter of opinion. There are no right or wrong answers, theories to explain and understand what we do, bench tests which can determine on the ground what a weak link will do in the air, dictionary definitions to determine what is actually meant in any given sentence. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and its validity is proportional to the airtime of its purveyor.
If it is what you understood as ground handling well then, then just carry on.

Anyway, feel free to call, I know you don't like to talk on the phone but you're welcome to as well.
I DO like to talk on the phone. But...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=992
Continuing Saga of Weak Link and Release Mechanism Failures
Bob Kuczewski - 2012/03/06 03:33:13 UTC

When I started the US Hawks, I made a point of specifically seeking out and finding people who'd been mistreated by USHPA or Davis or Jack because I wanted the US Hawks to be a more inclusive organization. I tried to help Tad lose some of his anger and aggression. I was patient with him for the better part of a year. I spent lots of time talking to him on the phone - often until the battery on my cell phone ran out. I believe that most of the people kicked around by USHPA, Jack, and Davis probably didn't deserve it. But I've begun thinking that Tad may be the exception.
I'm worried about taxing your patience in helping me lose some of my anger and aggression.

Here's my sacred pronouncement on what ground handling is and isn't. If you're:

- handling a glider on the ground to move it or keep it under control in the wind you're ground handling.

- in launch position controlling and trimming the glider in preparation for getting off the ground you're launching.

- practicing controlling the glider in strong air in a situation in which you can become inadvertently airborne you're a total fuckin' moron and we don't really need to define a term for the bullshit you're pulling - the generalized term "bullshit" is more than adequate.

- ground handling from inside the control frame - hooked in or not - you shouldn't be required to wear a helmet because there is zero data indicating that anybody has benefited or would have benefited from wearing a helmet.

- launching:

-- hooked in you should be required to wear a helmet because there's plenty of data indicating that they've kept brains from being turned to mush at and beyond that point in the flight.

-- unhooked you shouldn't be required to wear a helmet because you're demonstrating that - by once again refusing to do a hook-in check until just after launch - you've already got a mushed brain and you're a detriment to the sport and gene pool. (Also note that if you're launching unhooked you're not in violation of the new Bob Kuczewski helmet regulation. Pretty cool the way that works out. (One could also argue that if someone's not hooked in he really isn't launching and therefore wouldn't be in violation of the USHGA regulation mandating a hook-in check just prior to launch - not hooked in, no provable intent to assume the role of Pilot In Command and take a flight.))

Here's a bit more on ground handling from the Glider Flying Handbook and the world of REAL aviation:
Chapter 6 - Preflight and Ground Operations

Ground Handling

Moving a glider on the ground requires special handling procedures, especially during high winds. Normally, gliders are pushed or pulled by hand or towed with a vehicle. When moving a glider, ensure that all appropriate personnel have been briefed on procedures and signals.

When towing a glider, always use at least one wing walker. The wing walker and the driver of the tow vehicle function as a team, alert for obstacles, wind, and any other factor that may affect the safety of the glider. The driver should always stay alert for any signals from the wing walkers.

If it is necessary to move the glider during high winds, use two or more crewmembers placed at the wingtips and tail. Also, have a pilot in the cockpit, with the spoilers deployed, holding the controls appropriately to reduce lift on the glider. Strong winds and gusts can cause damage to the glider during ground handling, so exercise care during these conditions. Another method of towing uses specially designed towing gear similar to a trailer tow bar that attaches directly to a vehicle towing a trailer. The tow bar makes guiding the glider much easier and allows the wing walkers to concentrate on ensuring wingtip clearances.
Note that for ACTUAL ground handling, in which the only significant danger is to the glider itself, it's assumed that assistants will be available and active in the process. And in hang gliding - as you were taught it - at launch and in circumstances in which many pilots have been totaled along with their gliders, it's assumed that there WON'T BE assistants available and active.

Guess we're just a lot more manly than those fiberglass faggots are. Or maybe it's just that our gliders and lives are only worth small fractions of theirs.

P.S. Nothing about helmets for anyone involved. Maybe you should write a letter to the FAA. I'd be more than happy to help you with a draft.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9161
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: The Bob Show

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1658
Criminal Harassment on OZ Forum - Victim Banned
Bob Kuczewski - 2015/01/06 04:58:07 UTC

I won't address the hate crime issue because that's a legal matter, and I'm not a lawyer.
And you won't address the Zack Marzec issue 'cause you're not a pilot or engineer. And you won't address the Terry Mason issue 'cause you really don't give a flying fuck.
However, I do believe that both Jack and Davis allow - and to a certain extent encourage - people to beat up on others they don't like.
So do I. I don't like Jack, Davis, you, Pagen, Rooney, Trisa, Rodie, Weghorst... so I beat up on them at every opportunity and encourage and support others in doing so. Hang gliding is majorly infested by evil people who really need to be beat up on without mercy.
When that crosses various laws, I think the people wronged have a right to seek remedy.

The whole purpose of the US Hawks is to develop a national hang gliding association with a forum where pilots...
Other than Tad and Steve who are both smart enough to be able to see what you're doing.
...can participate based on their membership...
Which is a sole function of the permission of Bob.
...rather than by permission of Jack or Davis. Almost every good-sized hang gliding or paragliding club has a forum of some sort for use by their members.
The members the power centers of the clubs want.
Why doesn't USHPA provide one at the national level?
Why doesn't USHPA have an accident reporting system and any interest in enforcing its own regulations?
The answer is that the USHPA leadership is scared to death of pilots actually being able to ask public questions of their own Regional Directors ... and expecting answers.
That's ridiculous. All you need to do is just not answer questions you don't wanna answer. Right...
Bob Kuczewski - 2014/12/28 06:21:51 UTC

Silence is not consent. It's just silence.
...Bob?
Merlin - 2015/01/06 14:58:59 UTC

Most clubs are very "flat" organizations. Forums work well with those generally. Once you get a top down hierarchy in place, it will naturally defend its own structure. And the bottom up nature of a forum can be very corrosive to those top down elements. This is also evident with the "benevolent dictator" model we've seen with Jack and Davis.
What the fuck do you think you're seeing with Bob - 'specially with the quotation marks?
Power defends itself ... when threatened, big emotional crackdowns ensue.
No shit. There's a pretty good argument that Bob's even more insidious than Jack and Davis. At least they aren't doing much pretending that they're anything other than dictators.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9161
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: The Bob Show

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1690
US Hawks Board of Directors Testing in 2015
Bob Kuczewski - 2015/01/08 09:20:41 UTC

Hello Fellow US Hawks!!!
Define "Fellow US Hawks". Incompetent douchebags who play nicely with the other incompetent douchebags Lord Bob encourages to participate in his phony free speech cult?
It's taken a few years to get this new organization off the ground...
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8143/7462005802_bbc0ac66ac_o.jpg
Image
...but I think we're starting to make some pretty solid training hill "flights" in our forum.
Yeah?

- What do you think went wrong...

Image

...with that one? What were the lessons learned? If I'm the parent of a person of a varying age what assurances do I have that The Bob Show will be a safe place for him to visit? Or...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28211
Platform towing fatality in Leakey, Texas
Gregg Ludwig - 2012/06/23 20:15:21 UTC

What is that saying?... "He does the same thing over and over but expects different results." Poor guy was misguided and didn't have a chance.
...are ya just continuing to do the same thing over and over and hoping for better results?

- Based on what?
I think we're ready to start practicing for the next phase of our growth ... a US Hawks Board of Directors.

Fortunately (or maybe unfortunately) many of us have seen what happened to the HGAA. We created - out of thin air - a "Transition Team" that was supposed to work together for about a month...
About a month... Now where have I heard that particular time frame before? Oh yeah...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=877
Discuss Tad here
Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/09 21:58:14 UTC

Starting today (December 9th, 2011), I've restricted Tad to only posting in the "Free Speech Zone". I plan to continue that restriction for about a month to see if that helps or hurts general participation in the rest of the forum. This restriction is not intended to be any judgement on Tad or on the value of his posts. Instead, it's intended to simply answer the question as to whether Tad's presence is helping or hurting the growth of the US Hawks and the US Hawks forum (a question he posed himself). At the end of the month, I'll review the results of this restriction to see if our forum participation (measured in posting rates) has increased or not.
Fuck you, Bob.
...to found the new organization. I think that failed for two reasons. First, we really weren't used to working with each other, and we felt a lot of pressure to make something happen in an unreasonably short period of time. Second, I believe that some of the people on that "Transition Team" really didn't want the HGAA to succeed anyway. So they threw their own "monkey wrenches" into the works, and it crashed badly.
Third, you entrusted someone much like yourself with the power to totally control the battlefield.
So having learned those lessons, I'd like to wade much more slowly into our own US Hawks Board of Directors.
REALLY slowly.
I'd like to propose that we form a Board and we have the Board work together for most of 2015 making decisions.
Like what? What you're gonna use for a Bob Show safety mascot? Better stall recovery training to totally eliminate any residual fear of stalls? Clarifying that three hours qualifies as an acceptable period in which to verify hook-in status prior to launch?
But those decisions will only be advisory.
So the Board will only be able to ADVISE you to go fuck yourself? That doesn't sound like much fun.
I will still reserve the right to over-rule those decisions based on what I believe is best for the US Hawks.
Big fuckin' surprise...
Tad Eareckson - 2014/12/13 16:55:37 UTC

I won't be holding my breath waiting but IF Bob ever allows US Hawks to lapse into something resembling a democracy it will be under the control of individuals drawn from a deck we will have very carefully pruned and stacked and immediately become Little USHGA 2.
Damn, it's easy being right all the time when dealing with Bob.
As time goes on...
How much time? About a year?
I'm hoping that I won't ever feel the need to use that "veto" power...
1. You mean a veto to negate the will of a majority?

2. So you've already appointed yourself President. You're not gonna be on the Board yourself - that's just for handpicked agreeable douchebags you wanna keep under your personal control.
...and by the end of 2015 we'll hopefully be making all of our decisions by the US Hawks Board of Directors.
And if that doesn't work out all that well we'll be making the decisions Bob wants by the US Hawks Board of Directors and the decisions by the US Hawks Board of Directors that Bob doesn't want will be replaced by whatever Bob wants. In other words, nothing will have substantively changed. And we'll run that little experiment in democracy for about five years.
So, at this time, I'd like to ask for volunteers to experiment with this "Training Board" to see how it works.
I volunteer! :) Where do I sign up? Steve? Can we count you in as well?
Please don't be shy.
Not in the least.
I'm hoping it will be a growth experience for all of us, and I'd like to get as much participation as possible.
Pick me! Pick me! Pick me! Pick me! Pick me!
And since this Board is only advisory, please feel free to volunteer even if you're not sure you'd have the time to make a commitment to an actual Board.
I'm sure! Really! Trust me!
Any thoughts?
Are you sure you want people capable of THINKING on your fake board?
Better yet ... any volunteers?
How 'bout you? I think you'd make an excellent Bob Show Board member. That would probably help reduce the need for you to use your veto pen.

P.S. Let the record show that T** at K*** S****** was the first to volunteer for the Bob Show Board of Directors.
Post Reply