(Note: Had Josh with a 31 second delay in my previous post. That was a typo. Corrected to 21 ~2017/06/08 18:30:00 UTC.)
As a student on the first training hill I recall I was never afraid of launching un-hooked.
Neither was I. Started on the dunes at Jockey's Ridge 1980/04/02. Kitty Hawk Kites ride factory. Took me FOREVER - well into my second "instructor" stint (1982 season) to understand that only about 0.1 percent of their customers were interested in learning to fly beyond the bucket list stage.
I can't recall when it was that I first became aware of FTHI as a significant contributor to the fatality statistics but I can recall thinking at that instant, "Holy shit! If I continue in this sport this is how I will die within two years." And that realization was half or more of the solution to the problem - even though I didn't know it at the time.
There would be no consequences if I did anyway.
Embarrassment...
2-112
http://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7600/28811055456_925c8abb66_o.png
4-220
http://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8673/28811054116_21b87e3a38_o.png
6-311
http://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8691/28811052626_37e54c1f64_o.png
...works pretty well.
Much later, specially on cliff launches I was terrified of forgetting to hook in.
When I started the run I was never sure if I would just drop straight down without the glider, or fly away.
There are ZERO accounts, reports of individuals at launch position fearing they'd launch unhooked launching unhooked.
Anything else...
Luen Miller - 1994/09
The second pilot was distracted by backing off launch to get his helmet, which he had forgotten. While doing so he thought of a pilot who launched unhooked at Lookout Mountain as a result of the distraction of retrieving his helmet. Our pilot then proceeded to launch unhooked.
...is rolling dice.
But the final hook-in check procedure changed all that. (Thanks)
You have no idea how happy it makes me to get through to the 0.01 percent.
Now I feel secure on that point at least. It helps tremendously.
It'll help even more if you never feel secure until after you're solidly airborne.
But for new students, without any fear of launching un-hooked...
They need to be instilled with that fear before they ever pick up a glider. This is gun safety. You don't let anybody pick up a firearm before getting an appreciation for what can happen and some simple rules for keeping it from happening.
After my nephew:
http://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4279/35052621001_4b849d46f8_o.jpg
got a pellet gun at age ten or so we did some target shooting. After a bit I got interested in the safety procedures and he got me the instructions sheet. I read them and found that he wasn't adhering to one of the procedures. He was still pretty safe but a layer had been stripped away and there was no advantage to stripping it away - it was just a sequencing issue.
The safety procedures for that particular weapon were a lot more complex than those for putting a glider into the air via foot launch and they were still nothing that your average jerk off the street shouldn't be expected to understand and follow.
...maybe they need to learn it as a skill...
Not a SKILL. This is no more a SKILL than following the safety procedures for the pellet gun.
...and develop the muscle memory.
No argument there.
http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2095
Should we try a different way? Designwise....
Steve Corbin - 2015/09/02 22:26:04 UTC
Any un-biased observer should be able to see why wanna-be pilots find PG more attractive than HG. Standing around in the Andy Jackson Memorial International Airpark at a busy fly-in shows that a PG landing is a total non-event, while everyone stands up to watch HG's, piloted by "experts", come in to land. A good landing by a HG is greeted by cheers, an acknowledgement that landing one successfully is a demonstration not just of skill, but good luck as well.
But I can't even imagine myself starting a launch run not immediately preceded by a hook-in check.
...required to keep them safe for later. From day one.
Fer sure. One can and should do a zillion launch sequence simulations on flat ground before - and after - moving up the slope.
One should also practice pulling the glider with the harness in order to steer through weight shift alone, without using one's hands, simply by running toward one's target - the way we see Ryan's instructor Ninja Matt doing here:
069-25104
http://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1572/26142964830_289bc3f2cb_o.png
When they advance to bigger hills, they will be prepared.
Even if they never develop the fear.
I don't think we have ever seen or will ever see anyone doing hook-in checks JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH who doesn't fear launching unhooked.
And I think pretty much EVERYONE fears launching unhooked. Just look at:
- all the insane procedures, strategies, rituals people use to try to avoid doing it
- the levels of participation in discussions following serious incidents
The problem are that:
- Well over 99 percent of hang gliding participants are total morons dedicated to using insane setup and preflight procedures, strategies, rituals to satisfy themselves that they'll be safely connected well before reaching launch position and/or time
- The uber corrupt hang gliding Industry sabotages all efforts to implement the one totally solid strategy to prevent unhooked launches in order to shield itself from negligence and liability issues.
And you can CLEARLY see that going on at:
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=26996
Critique my radial ramp launch
Ryan Voight - 2012/08/28 01:06:07 UTC
Michael means to kindly recommend doing a hook-in check just prior to launching. Why he didn't just say that, I don't know.
BACK TO THE VIDEO THAT MATTERS...
Keith Skiles - 2012/08/28 04:43:23 UTC
Suppose I could do that, never hurts, but I always hang check with assistance prior to stepping on the ramp, and never leave my harness once I get in it.
michael170 - 2012/08/28 05:47:11 UTC
1. No, Michael means to kindly recommend compliance with USHPA regulations. Regulations that have been in place for thirty-one years.
2. Matters to who? Does this video matter?
Ryan Voight - 2012/08/28 06:14:06 UTC
What USHPA reg are you referencing specifically?
And no, in a thread titled "Critique my radial ramp launch" that video is also pretty much entirely off topic.
You want to discuss/debate/dictate people's pre-launch habits, great, just don't hijack someone else's thread about radial ramp technique.
Since this video starts with him on launch, we don't know if he did a hook-in check already, a hang check, a preflight, took a pee before putting his harness on, or drove a hybrid car to launch... Why are you critiquing what you don't know, didn't see, didn't ask about, and isn't what he asked for critique on??? WTF?
We might differ a little bit on this, but in the end, if anyone launching a hang glider performes the lift and tug within a few seconds prior to launch they will be safer.
We don't differ on that. Those guys WILL be safer than the guys who swallow the crap that Joe Greblo spews out far and wide in Southern California. They'll PROBABLY be safe ENOUGH to never launch unhooked. The less time, garbage between the last check and commitment the better.
Regardless of the reasons and logic behind the procedure. IMO.
BUT - "SafER" isn't good enough for me or anyone I endorse, sign off, care about.
It often takes a perfect storm of factors to trigger one of these disasters - environment at which it matters, conditions, fatigue, stress, distraction, interruption, deviation from routine, equipment issue... And these perfect storms happen at reasonably regular intervals.
And your best defense...
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.
...is FEAR. If you've got it a perfect storm will only serve to amplify it. And Brendon and Josh...
Asses wind cycle, Hook in check, Set pitch, Steady Balance! Clear!
...don't have it.
(Not easy to express oneself in a foreign language.
ENGLISH is NOT a FOREIGN language - you moron. It's all those other languages that are FOREIGN.
Maybe it turnes out as just "babble".)
Nah. My hat's really off to people who can make sense in other than their first languages. I know how lucky I am to have grown up using the difficult language that's become the default global standard. And I'm constantly having to work to do better with it.
Anyway... Staying scared until you're fully airborne and being lifted away by your glider doesn't make you safER. It makes you safEST. And that's what we want in the five or so potentially most lethal phase of what we do.
Hell, people pay big bucks to get scared totally shitless for a couple hours in perfectly safe movie theaters. Let's just run this mode for ourselves and our students from five second before commencement through three seconds after completion of launch phase. It's totally free and what's the downside?
A further thought on this issue...
THEORY...
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24846
Is this a joke ?
Jim Rooney - 2011/08/26 06:04:23 UTC
Hahahaha.
That seriously made me chuckle.
I get what you're saying Christopher.
Please understand that I'm not advocating professional infalliblity. Not really sure where I mentioned that, but I can understand where you might have drawn that assumption. None the less, I simply refer to "us" as the "professional pilots" as a term to describe the pilots that do this for a living. Yes, we're just humans... bla bla bla... my point is that we do this a whole sh*tload more than the "average pilot"... and not just a little more... a LOT.
We discuss this stuff a lot more as well. We vet more ideas. This isn't just "neat stuff" to us... it's very real and we deal with it every day.
It's not "us" that has the track record... it's our process.
We're people just like anyone else. And that's the point. THIS is how we do it... normal, fallible humans... and it bloody well works.
So I don't give much credence to something that someone doesn't agree with about what we do for some theoretical reason.
Take this weaklink nonsense.
What do I "advocate"?
I don't advocate shit... I *USE* 130 test lb, greenspun cortland braided fishing line.
It is industry standard.
It is what *WE* use.
If someone's got a problem with it... we've got over ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND TANDEM TOWS and COUNTLESS solo tows that argue otherwise. So they can politely get stuffed.
As my friend likes to say... "Sure, it works in
reality... but does it work in
theory?"
Hahahahhaa... I like that one a lot
08-19
http://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5277/30076449505_1f6ed2f804_o.png
...is EVERYTHING. It's the foundation of everything we do. Once Wilbur and Orville developed/understood aeronautical theory the designs, equipment, procedures followed easily.
The root cause of unhooked launches is failure to appreciate the danger of launching unhooked - a loaded unloaded gun - at the only time it matters. That is indisputable. If your student understands the theory regarding unhooked launches the proper procedure will follow pretty much automatically. We teach the aerodynamic theory regarding angle of attack and our students don't need much instruction about how to respond to a stall and we tend not to see them forgetting to stuff the bar when things suddenly get real quite. And I can't imagine myself forgetting to do a hook-in check within a second of commitment any more than I can imagine myself forgetting to stuff the bar when things suddenly get real quite.
And I also can't see someone who goes 21 seconds between check and commitment NOT forgetting to check in a perfect storm scenario.
This:
Regardless of the reasons and logic behind the procedure.
That's THEORY you're talking about. That's GOTTA BE the foundation upon which we operate and teach.
