The Bob Show

[Tad Eareckson]

P.P.S. Other great minds...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=14230
pro tow set-up

Jim Rooney - 2009/11/03 06:16:56 UTC

God I love the ignore list

Tad loves to have things both ways.
First weaklinks are too weak, so we MUST use stronger ones. Not doing so is reckless and dangerous.
Then they're too strong.

I have no time for such circular logic.
I had it with that crap years ago.

Doesn't read what I'm saying then makes up what I'm saying and tells the worlds largest hang gliding community how totally demented it is. You might need to get an additional alley to be able to better handle the volume, Bob.

And exactly when was it that you started needing the two of us not having the ability to post on the same forum / in the same discussion as an excuse for not responding to inconvenient points and questions?

I just reviewed what was going on in:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=818
Peter (Link Knife) Birren

I don't see how any decent human being could read your 2011/11/18 23:11:35 UTC and not feel like beating you to an unrecognizable pulp.

Hang gliding was an incompetent shit heap at its foundation and it'll be twenty times as much of a shit heap in the highly unlikely event of it ever experiencing any kind of renaissance

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/08/10 05:52:32 UTC

Take Jim Rooney, for example. Tad doesn't make suggestions for Jim to become a better or safer pilot.

You take him. Nobody else misses him or wants any more to do with him.

By the way... What happens to your forum / organization if you get hit by a truck later this morning?

[<BS>]

I don't see how any decent human being could read your 2011/11/18 23:11:35 UTC and not feel like beating you to an unrecognizable pulp.

While Bob claims he doesn't change or delete posts, he certainly misquoted you.

[Tad Eareckson]

Yeah, Bob's never gonna allow any degree of reality get in the way of any of his facts - or vice versa.

Official US Hawks Rating System and Issued Ratings
Bob Show Bob - 2015/08/15 23:42:27 UTC

And how they REALLY work...

http://www.kitestrings.org/post10683.html#p10683

Bob Kuczewski - 2017/10/26 05:10:52 UTC

Second, Bill was towing long before you, and he's continued long after you gave it up. Your credentials are zilch compared to his.

So Bill and Tad both launch standards off the beach, 1975/06/21 and 1975/06/22 respectively, connections to the control frames, boats pull us both for precisely thirty seconds, we both release and land on the floats.

Tad goes on to a couple more frame tows on a Yarnall winch then goes to the harness connection 1982/10/03. From then on he does stationary payout and powered winches, step tow, hand, fixed length, platform, scooter, tugs including Cosmos and Mountaineer trikes and Dragonfly and Flight Star conventional. Not to mention a balloon drop.

Drives for platform; develops top notch equipment for platform, aero, balloon; debunks Donnell, Dennis, Bobby, Davis, u$hPa, BHPA, HGFA...; writes AT manuals and SOPs; goes to war against u$hPa and the Flight Park Mafia; gets kicked out of the sport after his 2008/10/12 final (AT launched) flight.

On 2008/10/13 Bill breaks out his 1975/06/21 gear and does another pop off the beach for his second and final tow flight. Tad's credentials are zilch compared to his.

Funny that Bob is so willing to accept u$hPa credentials as the gold standard while none of them are based on only the first and last times one executed a Day One, Flight One skill level task. Also while we know that u$hPa ratings are:
- issued by massively incompetent ratings officials
- sold by massively corrupt ratings officials to applicants who've never qualified for them

[Tad Eareckson]

Another hopelessly long winded post you won't respond to or acknowledge 'cause doing so would immediately open you up to getting your balls torn off and shoved down your duplicitous throat.

Bob Kuczewski - 2017/10/26 05:10:52 UTC

Second, Bill was towing long before you, and he's continued long after you gave it up. Your credentials are zilch compared to his.

And show me where he's done a goddam thing to advance towing technology and/or practices, procedures to any significant degree beyond the largely lunatic rubbish Donnell Hewett handed him in the early Eighties.

http://nhgc.wikidot.com/mike-lake
Mike Lake - Norfolk Hang Gliding Club

The club purchased a static winch from Len and towing had arrived.

A meeting was arranged sometime later to discuss the way forward. It was well attended and many issues were discussed.
On the 26th September 1979 at the Fleece in Suffolk.

The club had one valuable member (Brian Barry? I can’t remember) who had studied tethered flight in some detail. He had been appointed a tow technical adviser.
His name was Brian Pattenden

During discussions he described his theory that some part of the tow force should go through THE PILOT.
You may wish to reread the above. What was being described was C of M towing. I believe this was a first, worldwide!
It was a radical suggestion at the time and was greeted with silence. However, the seeds had been sown.

Unfortunately, at the same meeting, when asked for his advice on safe towing his answer was 'DON'T DO IT'. This was not what several dozen flight starved pilots wanted to hear. His short reign as tow technical advisor came to an end.

Mike Lake - 2011/03/13 23:37:30 UTC

Brian, despite his insight and obvious knowledge never had a tow launched flight (along with nearly everyone else to be fair).
I believe he joined a commune sometime in '79-'80 and was never seen or heard from again.

Got that, Bob? A guy with a brain who had never had and never would have a single tow launched flight beat out the entire previous collective world experience with and knowledge of hang glider towing with his understanding of aeronautical theory. How do Bill's experience and credentials stack alongside that?

P.S. And he's been pretty much totally written out of history by the same mainstream motherfuckers who failed to implement the THEORY...

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

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/26 06:04:23 UTC

Troll

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

...he brought to light.

Then Donnell comes along shortly thereafter - independently and after having put a partially baked implementation of the same theory into the air...

Gil Dodgen - 1983/05

Editorial

A NOTE ON TOWING

The early days of hang gliding were marred by numerous towing accidents. During this period this aspect of our sport established a hopelessly bad reputation. And, indeed, last year, as you may have noted in Doug Hildreth's recent accident review, there was a towing fatality by a totally inexperienced Texas pilot.

Some time ago I received a series of four articles on a new towing system from Texas experimenter and inventor Donnell Hewitt. I ran the first in the series of four articles. Editors learn from experience and if I could roll back the calendar I would run all four at once in condensed form. In fact, what happened was that the first article - which made seemingly outrageous claims without outlining the actual technique or hardware - inflamed the then towing establishment. It seems that today's innovators become tomorrow's conservatives so I was bombarded with calls, some from the USHGA Board, telling me that this Mr. Hewitt was totally inexperienced, that he didn't know what he was talking about, and that I was contributing to the possible injury and death of unknown multitudes of innocent hang glider pilots.

I am not a tow pilot, and although Donnell's system made sense to me I was forced to discontinue the series. The essence of his system was a double bridle that connected to the glider and to the pilot. This system would thus pull the pilot back on line in the event that the glider was inadvertently turned off course from behind the vehicle. This would produce a self-correcting system avoiding the infamous "lockout" the factor which seemed to make towing so dangerous.

Well, it appears that Mr. Hewitt's system not only works but, as I've been told by pilots who have made literally thousands of land tows with it, it works beyond all the most optimistic expectations. One pilot told me, "It is virtually impossible to lock out even if one tries."

The possibilities are obviously incredible if a safe, standardized towing technique can be established. The sport of hang gliding at this point is essentially limited by the availability of flying sites. With land tow the entire country is opened up, and as we have seen by Willi Muller and Bruce Case's world class cross country flights over flat land, the potential is unlimited. In fact, there are certain safety advantages to flying over flat land. The turbulence created by jagged terrain is avoided and the dreaded downwind turn into the hill is eliminated.

In upcoming issues we will try to supply as much information as possible on this new aspect of the sport. Those with experience are invited to contact us about possible articles.

However, any new technique or equipment always produces unforseen problems. Towing must be approached with the most thoughtful and conservative attitude. As Garry Whitman pointed out to me recently, the only problem he has had has been with experienced pilots who won't listen to his instructions. And please remember, the equipment and methods described in this publication are based on the experience of the authors only and are not endorsed or recommended by the USHGA or Hang Gliding magazine.

With the kind permission of Donnell Hewitt we will publish the remaining three installments of his Skyting series in upcoming issues.

...and the response of all the mainstream motherfuckers with all the EXPERIENCE - the ones least likely to listen to instructions (or much of anything else) - was to immediately silence him to the best of USHGA's abilities. And I was one of the avid readers back then and was champing at the bit to see the next article and was FURIOUS when I found it absent without comment from the following month's (1981/05) issue.

And these same mainstream motherfuckers with all the EXPERIENCE were all too goddam stupid to do anything to analyze Donnell's work with respect to solid aeronautical THEORY and refine what he'd gotten rightish and bulldoze all the lethal crap.

And did you catch this nearly last part?

As Garry Whitman pointed out to me recently, the only problem he has had has been with experienced pilots who won't listen to his instructions. And please remember, the equipment and methods described in this publication are based on the experience of the authors only and are not endorsed or recommended by the USHGA or Hang Gliding magazine.

EXPERIENCE devoid of and divorced from THEORY is totally malignant.

Donnell Hewett - 1981/10

WEAK LINK

Every tension limiting device discussed up to now consists of mechanical components, has a limited range, or relies upon human operation. Every one of these tension limiting devices is subject to failure. Please correct me if I am wrong, but it is also my understanding that there are a large number of tow pilots today who are depending upon smooth air, rope stretch, boat speed, mechanical devices, and ground crews to provide the tension limitation control for their flights. Well, in the author's opinion that is just not good enough. Skyting requires the use of an infallible weak link to place an absolute upper limit to the towline tension in the unlikely event that everything else fails.

Donnell's fucking Infallible Weak Link isn't even a product of his EXPERIENCE - just his lunatic...

Well, in the author's opinion that is just not good enough.

...OPINION. And that lethal plague will be with hang and para gliding to no small degree until the end of time. And if he'd even bothered to look at what was going on with his experience he'd have chucked it 'cause his experience was his Infallible Weak Link holding him just fine through a lockout and broken arm - consistent with extremely basic aeronautical theory.

So here's Yours Truly over a quarter century later starting to win a fight for theory over bullshit opinion and carefully edited experience shortly before getting my career ended by u$hPa motherfuckers such as Tim Herr, Mark G. Forbes, Bob Kuczewski for doing too much winning.

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

Tad Eareckson - 2007/06/27 12:59:53 UTC

A doubled up weak link at the end of a one point bridle translates to a tow line tension of about 400 pounds.

Tad Eareckson - 2007/08/01 11:56:37 UTC

For all the work I've put into this stuff, a double loop of Greenspot (as I just wrote the latter Steve (Kinsley) who recently had another single pop for no reason at half a grand) ain't a bad one-size-fits-all solution.

So there's unambiguous documentation that I'm advocating a double loop of 130 pound Greenspot on a one point bridle end as a good one-size-fits-all AT weak link. And nobody's questioning my numbers. Totally behind them in fact and using them to call my theory based implementation...

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.

...ABSURD.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3600
Weak link question

Jim - Rooney - 2008/11/22 22:31:35 UTC

Nail on the head Brian!

The simple fact is this. The only reason anyone even gives Tad the time of day is that they want to believe him. Why? Because they don't like to be inconvenienced by a weaklink break. That's it.

Sure, everyone digs around for other reasons to believe, but at the heart of it, it's convenience.
No one is actually scared to fly with a standard weaklink. They may say they are, but deep down inside, they're not. BTW, this weaklink as a lifeline comment... any tow pilot that takes you over something you can't get out from should be shot. It is one of the cardinal rules of towing. Again, "I wana believe" rationalization.

Tad loves to speak of himself as a scientifically minded person. Yet he ignores a data pool that is at minimum three orders of magnitude higher than his. It is thus that I ignore him.

Yeah, I ignored a totally fake data pool of a thousand times my experience.

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

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/25 21:40:25 UTC

Tommy.
First, I sent Steve a bunch of info offline. Hopefully it clears things up a bit for him.
Unfortunately, he's stumbled onto some of Tad's old rantings and got suckered in. So most of this was just the same old story of debunking Tad's lunacy... again .

See, the thing is... "we", the people that work at and run aerotow parks, have a long track record.
This stuff isn't new, and has been slowly refined over decades.
We have done quite literally hundreds of thousands of tows.
We know what we're doing.

Sure "there's always room for improvement", but you have to realize the depth of experience you're dealing with here.
There isn't going to be some "oh gee, why didn't I think of that?" moment. The obvious answers have already been explored... at length.

Anyway...
Weaklink material... exactly what Davis said.

It's no mystery.
It's only a mystery why people choose to reinvent the wheel when we've got a proven system that works.

A decades long track record, quite literally hundreds of thousands of tows, slowly refining the time proven strategy of doing the same thing over and over and getting the same stellar results.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/skysailingtowing/message/7067
AT SOPs - proposed revisions

Subj: Re: [Tow] AT SOPs - proposed revisions
Date: 2009/05/10 02:08:52 UTC
From: cloud9sa@aol.com
To: skysailingtowing@yahoogroups.com
cc: GreggLudwig@aol.com, lisa@lisatateglass.com

Hi Tad.

I'm Tracy Tillman, on the USHPA BOD, on the Tow Committe, and I am an Aviation Safety Counselor on the FAA Safety Team (FAAST) for the Detroit FSDO area. As a rep of both the USHPA and FAA, I would like to help you, USHPA, and the FAA improve safety in flying, towing, and hang gliding.

The FAA gets a lot of letters of complaint from a lot of yahoos. For best effect, I suggest that you describe in your letter (and also post to the skysailingtowing group and share with the USHPA Tow Committee) your areas of expertise (if any) related to this issue, and list your qualifiications, logged hours, and currency in certain categories, such as:

1. hang glider pilot rating and logged hours
2. hang glider aerotow rating, logged hours, and logged number of tows
3. hang glider tug pilot rating, logged hours towing, and logged number of tows
4. hang glider aerotow administrator appointment date
5. hang glider aerotow supervisor appointment date
6. hang glider tanderm instructor rating, logged hours of aerotow tandem instruction, and logged number of instructional flights
7. airplane pilot license ratings and logged number of hours
8. airplane tow pilot endorsement date, logged number of hours towing with airplane, logged number of tows
9. sailplane tow pilot license ratings, logged number of hours, logged number of tows.
10. sailplane instructor license date, logged number of hours of instruction, logged number of instructional tows
11. any other flying or engineering-related credentials that you may have as evidence of your competence to make these claims.

(BTW, if you have an AT hang glider rating or above the you would/should have received the USHPA Aerotow Guidelines as part of your instruction from the person who taught you to aerotow and/or gave you your AT rating, and you should currently have access to them via the packet that is accessible to you on the USHPA web site, if your AT or higher AT-related ratings and appointments are current.)

It would also be good for the FAA and USHPA to know what kind of ultalight or sport plane tug and airplane you use for towing hang gliders and sailplanes with at your operation (if any), along with a general description of your towing operation or who you provide towing and instructional services for (if any).

Additionally, if you want to really present a convincing argument, you should also: (a) get other experts to co-sign your letter, such as those who have some or most of the aerotowing-related credentials listed above, who have been doing this for many years with many students, and who support your argument; and (b) present reliable data based on valid research showing that there is a significant difference in safety with the changes that you recommend. Supportive comments from aerotow experts along with convincing data can make a difference. Otherwise, it may seem as if your perception of "the sky is falling" may not be shared by most others who have a wealth of experience and who are deeply involved in aerotowing in the US.

This information would also be very helpful in convicing the USHPA and others to take your complaint seriously. Most of the individuals who serve on the USHPA Towing Committe have most of the credentials listed above, so it will be great for you to let them know about your similar credentials and depth of experience, too. If you do not have those credentials, it will be a simple matter for the USHPA Tow Committee to respond to the FAA to discount your complaint, so it will be very important for you to present this information in your letter to the FAA and to others now.

The best way to make change is to get involved, and join the Tow Committee at its meetings. That's what people who really care do to make change. Such is the nature of the great opportunities we have to make a difference in the US (although it means having to spend time, money, and effort, compared to the ease of just sitting in front of a computer.)

Good luck with your endeavor, and regards,

Dr. Tracy Tillman
USHPA Director, Region 7
FAA Detroit FSDO FAAST Aviation Safety Counselor

No credentials, no credibility. (And then one wonders why so many u$hPa douchebags got so upset.)

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

Jim Rooney - 2007/07/22 20:16:36 UTC

If you wish people to read what you write, try writing LESS.
Babbling on and on about ever little detail that happens to pop into your head is not communication... it's rambling. Something you seem quite adept at.

The volume of what's written has no bearing on the validity of what's written. A fact that seems to escape you.

You state quite clearly that your idea of a "weaklink" is anything under the structural load bearing capacity of the glider or towplane.

Everything else here is based on that erroneous concept.

BTW, I know Kevie a hell of a lot better than you do dude. Please do not assume to inform me as to his towing opinions.

And as for your cracks about me being a tug pilot (and somehow less qualified to comment on hg stuff)... HAHAHA I'm a freakin hg instructor. I towed more yesterday than you've towed all year. I use this crap on a daily basis. If anyone here's less qualified to comment... It's YOU.

Tug pilot, freakin' hang gliding instructor, towed more yesterday than I have all year. (Also used to be a tandem hang and para instructor.)

08-19
http://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5277/30076449505_1f6ed2f804_o.png


http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3035
Tad's Barrel Release and maybe an alternative

Jim Rooney - 2008/02/14 01:37:28 UTC

(3 tows/year) The crux of everything Tad says here.
He is the ultimate sideline quarterback.

Yet he is constantly insulting and condescending to anyone that doesn't agree with his assumptions and conclusions.... which are based on a horrible lack of experience.

It baffles me that people even listen to him.

Horrible lack of experience. (It baffles me that people even listen to me.)

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

Davis Straub - 2011/08/26 14:04:52 UTC

We had six weaklink breaks in a row at Zapata this year. Russell Brown (tug pilot, tug owner, Quest Air owner) said go ahead and double up (four strands of Cortland Greenspot). He knows I used his Zapata weaklink in Big Spring (pilots were asked to tell the tug pilot if they were doing that).

EXACTLY what T** at K*** S****** was clearly documented as advising over four years prior.

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

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/26 17:34:33 UTC

See, Russel knows what's up.

So Bob Very-Little-Experience-With-Towing Kuczewski has plenty enough experience with towing to pronounce Tad's towing credentials zilch compared to Bill's based solely on the time spans over which we've gotten airborne by means of ropes.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30971
Zach Marzec

Bill Cummings - 2013/02/13 20:04:07 UTC

A lot of good points are being made here.

I last aerotowed using the standard 130 lb Greenspot.

The word standard in our case is really a grasp toward middle ground.

Jim Gaar and I personally find ourselves satisfied with not finding it too strong or too weak.

Heavier pilots with heavier/bigger gliders may find the standard to be too close to the weak side of optimal.
I, like Marc Fink, seem to be on the same page that it is better to be closer to the weak side than the strong side of "standard."

Lighter pilots with lighter gliders may worry that they may be pitched into a break stall with the breaking of the too strong of a "standard" in their case.

Swift and Davis are, I think, on the same page when it comes to being able to release when the time comes. All good stuff.

If the flight parks insist on the use of a standard, each pilot still has the ability to blow the pilots weaklink with more tow force or less tow force just by increasing or decreasing the length of the shoulder to shoulder pro tow bridle.

The shorter the pro tow bridle the less tug force it will take to blow the standard weaklink.

The longer the pro tow bridle the more tug force it will take to blow the standard weaklink.

For those of you that were not aware of this or would like to either confirm or refute this claim to your own satisfaction I can direct you to a website with a moving diagram that will explain why this works far better than I can explain it here.

Send me a personal message and I will send you the link.

I'm doing it this way since I do not wish to be banned from the OZ report.

Bill Cummings - 2013/02/28 06:11:37 UTC

I looked at the video ZC and what is not obvious is the type of bridle he was using.
I'm betting the pilot was not using a bridle to the keel release and that he couldn't hold the climb rate down while the truck was towing the pilot too fast.
What is obvious to me is that the pilot was using a very strong weaklink to be able to climb so fast with the keel more than 30 degrees to the horizon (even taking into consideration the tilted earth towing scenario).
When the pilot lost the towline it had the nose too high and due to that it climbed into a stall. My weaklinks would not allow me to climb that fast and develop into a stall like that.
Summery: I believe the strong weaklink breaking caused the stall and loss of control.
Now if you are going to say that the pilot should have been using an even stronger weaklink to stay on the line after seeing that climb rate it will prove beyond any reasonable doubt that you are in fact a ------------wait for it-----
INTERNET TROLL.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31052
Poll on weaklinks

Jim Rooney - 2013/03/04 19:31:36 UTC

The accepted standards and practices changed.
...
We all play by the same rules, or we don't play.

The accepted standards and practices changed and we all play by the same rules, or we don't play. And the number went way the fuck UP to exactly what T** at K*** S****** was advocating in 2007. And after Zack Marzec there wasn't a single weak link on the planet that was dialed down the way Bill Cummings was advising. But yeah, my credentials are zilch compared to his 'cause he's been doing and saying the same things over and over for the past three dozen years, getting away with them, sabotaging efforts of Team Kite Strings to replace the experience and opinion void left by the demise of Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney with solid aeronautical theory.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=867
Tad Eareckson ...an ongoing project

Bob Kuczewski - 2019/04/17 01:25:35 UTC

Tad Eareckson ...an ongoing liar

Tad Eareckson just posted (with profanity obscured):

So here's Yours Truly over a quarter century later starting to win a fight for theory over bullsh** opinion and carefully edited experience shortly before getting my career ended by u$hPa motherf***ers such as Tim Herr, Mark G. Forbes, Bob Kuczewski for doing too much winning.

This is a classic example of why Tad has zero credibility. What, exactly, did I do to end Tad's career?

"Steve Davy" would you like to field that one?

How about you, "Brian Scharp"?

Anyone else care to explain or defend that obvious lie?

Whoa!

Bob Kuczewski - 2019/04/11 06:57:51 UTC

I fear that poor Tad may be losing his mind. He keeps addressing me by name and asking me questions on his forum ...

Maybe Tad forgot that I can't answer any of his "Hey Bob" questions ...
...because he banned me?

It seems you actually CAN respond to Tad's posts, questions, accusations whenever you feel like it. Who'da thunk?

Tad Eareckson just posted (with profanity obscured):

I so do hate it when people obscure my profanity.

This is a classic example of why Tad has zero credibility.

I have ZERO credibility?

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=31781
Another hang check lesson

http://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7916/31540774647_f71ed7cd5e_o.png

I have pretty solid credibility even at Jack's Local Coffee Shop - in flagrant violation of the Jack's Local Coffee Shop rules of conduct.

Hell, even Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney has SOME credibility - even if unintentional.

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

Jim Rooney - 2007/08/01 13:47:23 UTC

Whatever's going on back there, I can fix it by giving you the rope.

He can fix whatever's going on back there - occasionally at the expense of our lives - by giving us the rope.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7509/15659143120_a9aae8f7bd_o.jpg


That confirms for us that these stupid douchebag Dragonfly jockeys have zero need to use overload protectors as emergency releases. 'Cause Bobby Fucking-Genius Bailey designed the stuff on HIS end to keep HIS ass safe and threw us back enders whatever lethal cheap bent pin crap he had lying around the shop and some lethal flimsy precision fishing line to pretend to keep us safe. And in the entire history of Dragonfly aerotowing there's never been a single report of a release that wasn't successfully actuated the millisecond the decision was made. Also zero reports of Dragonflies being endangered by Tad-O-Links or driven down by high gliders or stalled by low gliders.

What, exactly, did I do to end Tad's career?
"Steve Davy" would you like to field that one?
How about you, "Brian Scharp"?

That's OK, I can handle it.

Instead of doing your fucking job, reading anything I was actually saying, determining whether or not any of it had any actual legitimacy, you pushed for your lying quack douchebag buddy Dennis Pagen...

http://shga.a2hosted.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=3840
[TIL] About Tad Eareckson

Bob Kuczewski - 2013/03/10 18:20:34 UTC

I first learned about Tad Eareckson when I was Regional Director and the USHPA Board circulated a letter he had written (with intention to send?) to the FAA about some dangerous practices in hang gliding.

The Board's knee-jerk response was to try to take some kind of legal action to silence Tad. I indicated that I thought we shouldn't be sending our lawyers in as our first response, and that maybe we should have someone talk with him first. So Dennis Pagen volunteered, and I believe the matter was settled without any serious damage to the sport.

...to shut me up, rein me in, harness my energy. And that was the end of my career and the u$hPa / Flight Park Mafia killing machine continued splattering its victims at unabated rates.

Anyone else care to explain or defend that obvious lie?

How 'bout you defending THIS:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/faq.php
Frequently Asked Questions

How will the US Hawks try to be different from USHPA or the HGAA?
The US Hawks will try to be more of a grass roots organization - more like the start of hang gliding. There's nothing wrong with the strong central control exhibited by other organizations, but the US Hawks will appeal to pilots who want more local control and greater personal participation in decision making. We believe that good decisions sometimes require a significant effort to dig into the facts. Sometimes arguments are heated, and that's not something to be feared or rejected. That's the process - painful or not - that leads to better decisions.

obvious lie?

[<BS>]

Did you forget you can't answer any of Bob's questions...
...because he banned you?

Jeez, Bob, just leave it right there. You can do the rest of your responses on your forum. You're testing my patience.

I'm going to respond here on my forum, Bob can respond to me on his.

Thanks Davis!! That gave me the idea for new subforums dedicated to responding to posts on other forums.

To be fair, Tad has already done something similar with topics like "The Bob Show", but that's just a list of selected posts in a single topic. It doesn't preserve multiple topics in the same way that we will here.

[Steve Davy]

I didn't know that Tad has zero credibility. Thanks, Bob, for cluing me in on the matter.

Tad, why didn't you tell me that you have zero credibility?

[Tad Eareckson]

I wanted to sucker you into killing yourself either by getting behind a Dragonfly with a Tad-O-Link and short track record release or by doing a lift and tug hook-in check to give yourself a false sense of security at a cliff launch.

All that effort now totally down the toilet. Thanks bigtime, Bob.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=867
Tad Eareckson ...an ongoing project

Bob Kuczewski - 2019/04/17 17:31:13 UTC

Tad Eareckson ...an ongoing liar

And now, the more important fact behind Tad's sad loss of credibility:

Tad cannot be trusted to correct his mistakes.

In yesterday's example, Tad blamed me for "ending his career" without any evidence (see above). His response (today) is included as screen shots below (sorry, it was so long that it took 3 shots).

Here's what actually happened in the case Tad has cited. About a decade ago, Tad had written a long manifesto to USHPA that he was threatening to send to the FAA. Several other USHPA Directors were suggesting that USHPA should take legal action (give more money to Tim Herr) to silence Tad. I spoke up and suggested that we try listening to Tad's concerns rather than trying to shut him up. The decision was made to NOT take legal action against Tad.

That's the total sum of my effort in the matter. I didn't know Tad. Tad had never contacted me. I wasn't on the towing committee. Tad was not even in my region. But I spoke up anyway because I didn't think it was right for USHPA to be using their legal guns to silence members who expressed safety concerns. Period.

Yet a decade later (yesterday), Tad lumps me in with Mark Forbes and Tim Herr as "ending Tad's career". You Tad worshipers out there (you know who you are) should take a long hard look at this. Tad's inability to admit that he's wrong is certainly annoying in hang gliding politics, but it can be deadly in hang gliding itself. Be warned.

And Tad, please take these words to heart. Everyone makes mistakes, and every mistake puts a little chip in our credibility. But everyone knows that and everyone understands that. The big hits to credibility aren't the mistakes that we acknowledge and retract, they're the mistakes that we refuse to acknowledge and refuse to retract.

With that said, here's Tad's long-winded effort at refusing to acknowledge or retract his false statement (original at Tad's web site).

Tad Eareckson ...an ongoing liar

Sure Bob, whatever you say. Your word has always been golden.

And now, the more important fact behind Tad's sad loss of credibility:

- Did I ever have credibility...

credibility
- the quality of being trusted and believed in: the government's loss of credibility.
- the quality of being convincing or believable: the book's anecdotes have scant regard for credibility.

...on any significant scale? Who gives a flying fuck? I never WANTED TO BE trusted, convincing, believed in. Hell, I don't trust me all that much. I want people to check my math, acknowledge what I got right, call me on what I got wrong. Want some motherfucker who - at least for a while - was up on the credibility scale? Try Dennis Pagen, Bobby Bailey, Jim Rooney...

But note that NOBODY is saying ANYTHING about hang glider weak links anymore. The last asshole who did promptly got his balls chopped off and handed to him.

- Don't think you can pull that bullshit tactic on me and get away with it, Bob. Neither one of us has much in the way of knowing what my credibility is. And so by stating that I've lost credibility you reveal yourself to be the liar I've accused you of being.

- Kite Strings was founded by Zack C and he didn't start engaging with me because of my credibility.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hhpa/message/9346
Just a Tad

Zack C - 2010/02/02 21:03

Just one guy on a mission. The letter was a draft written to spark a reaction and not actually sent to the FAA. It is referenced in this topic:
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=12443

All posts on the forum by Tad (if you're reeeeally bored):
http://www.hanggliding.org/search.php?search_author=AeroTow

He was eventually banned from hanggliding.org.

I think he's going about it the wrong way, but I do think he has some valid points...

He engaged because he found that what I was saying made sense and was consistent with legitimate aeronautical theory while what he'd been getting from the Industry was a total load o' crap.

Tad cannot be trusted to correct his mistakes.

- I corrected you out of Kite Strings. Letting you in was the biggest mistake I ever made with the forum.

- NOBODY should be trusted to correct his mistakes. Everybody's statements should be checked for honesty and accuracy and issues should be brought to people's attention. Then fine, see how or if the author responds.

In yesterday's example, Tad blamed me for "ending his career" without any evidence (see above).

Yeah, we got TONS of evidence, Bob - IN PRINT.

His response (today) is included as screen shots below (sorry, it was so long that it took 3 shots).

Or you could've just posted the link and/or quoted relevant text.

Here's what actually happened in the case Tad has cited. About a decade ago...

An extremely long decade ago.

Tad had written a long manifesto...

Yeah, that's how Eric Skyslime Beckman characterized what I'd written. Great company you're keeping there - as usual. Please do continue.

...to USHPA that he was threatening to send to the FAA.

- How do you know? You obviously never actually read anything I actually wrote.

- I didn't THREATEN to send shit. I submitted what I had prepared to u$hPa for them to review and respond to as the motherfuckers saw fit. And not one of those motherfuckers responded with a single punctuation mark's worth of comment on a single word of any point I'd actually made. What I got instead was a load of moronic semiliterate abusive CRAP...

http://www.kitestrings.org/post29.html#p29

...from Tracy Tillman - who later exited the tugs list group after I told him he was a fucking moron.

Several other USHPA Directors were suggesting that USHPA should take legal action (give more money to Tim Herr) to silence Tad.

- On what legal grounds?
- For what? Sending them transcripts of the crash reports from their magazine archives?

I spoke up and suggested that we try listening to Tad's concerns...

- We who? I've seen zero evidence that anyone other than Tim Herr actually read any of Tad's actual concerns.

- Catch that, people of varying ages? "WE" "SHOULD" "TRY" listening to Tad's concerns. Well, we tried. Too much trouble. Fuck him. Now let's make an example of him so everyone else will think twice about trying to damage the sport.

- It wasn't just MY concerns...

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. You're not the only one on the line. I didn't ask to be a test pilot. I can live with your inconvenience.

It was a million comp pilots who knew what a handful of fuckin' gas burners would have done to them if they started making too much noise.

...rather than trying to shut him up.

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=3840
[TIL] About Tad Eareckson

Bob Kuczewski - 2013/03/10 18:20:34 UTC

I first learned about Tad Eareckson when I was Regional Director and the USHPA Board circulated a letter he had written (with intention to send?) to the FAA about some dangerous practices in hang gliding.

The Board's knee-jerk response was to try to take some kind of legal action to silence Tad. I indicated that I thought we shouldn't be sending our lawyers in as our first response, and that maybe we should have someone talk with him first. So Dennis Pagen volunteered, and I believe the matter was settled without any serious damage to the sport.

You motherfuckers wanted to shut me up before I did any serious damage to the sport. You failed and I did some serious damage to the sport - or u$hPa's implementation of it anyway.

The decision was made to NOT take legal action against Tad.

- Pretty easy decision 'cause I'd done zilch anybody could use to take legal action against me. I just got my career ended - pretty much the same as you did a few years later.

- Whereas u$hPa was violating the crap outta the law with every Dragonfly tow they ever launched. And they goddam well...

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3600
Weak link question

Jim Rooney - 2008/11/20 22:25:38 UTC

Something to bear in mind... the tug's weaklink is three strand.
For clarity... A normal single loop weaklink would be considered two. A tandem double loop is considered four.
In the tandem setup, the "weaklink" in the system is at the tug end, not the glider.

Ya'll seem to be missing this.
Once you go beyond three strand... you're not using a weaklink. If the weaklink goes, you're getting the rope.
Paul found this out the hard way in Texas.

Theory's wonderful and all, but reality is not forgiving.
Ask yourself... are you willing to bet your life on your theory?
Dress accordingly.

Keep fighting Janni. He'll never listen to you, but it's entertaining to watch

...KNEW IT. Going after me LEGALLY was the ABSOLUTE LAST thing they wanted to do.

- And note that your old BOD buddies didn't take any LEGAL action against YOU. They just did to you officially what they'd a few years previously done to me off the record.

That's the total sum of my effort in the matter.

Yeah, that's the problem Bob. No fuckin' effort worth mentioning. If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

I didn't know Tad.

Even more so after not reading anything I was saying to see if it had any legitimacy.

Tad had never contacted me.

- You were on the Board. And I made everything I had to say available to the Board.

- And you never contacted me. Instead you went to a close friend who definately knows towing for your enlightenment. And he told you that while it might be good for USHPA to make recommendations in this area, there was still plenty of room for innovation and for that reason, he didn't think USHPA should mandate any kind of obligatory system that would stifle that innovation - whether Mr. Eareckson's or any other. And that was all the enlightenment you could handle for that particular fiscal year.

I wasn't on the towing committee.

This:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TUGS/message/1184
aerotow instruction was Re: Tug Rates

Larry Jorgensen - 2011/02/17 13:37:47 UTC

It did not come from the FAA, it came from a USHPA Towing Committee made up of three large aerotow operations that do tandems for hire.

Appalling.

towing committee?

Tad was not even in my region.

- Well then... I couldn't vote either for or against you so what did I matter?

- And the physics of flying varies to such a great deal from region to region. You had aerotowing happening in your region and you had regional members aerotowing in other regions for training, recreation, comps. And their lives were being constantly endangered by the deliberate, flagrant, uniform, totally asinine violation of FAA AT regs and u$hPa's own SOPs.

But I spoke up anyway because I didn't think it was right for USHPA to be using their legal guns to silence members who expressed safety concerns. Period.

- But you DIDN'T speak up anyway to get anything actually done in the way of enforcement of AT safety regs and SOPs.

- The way you used your extrajudicial guns to permanently silence me from The Bob Show using a fake premise regarding the safety of your nonexistent visitors of varying ages.

Yet a decade later (yesterday), Tad lumps me in with Mark Forbes and Tim Herr as "ending Tad's career".

Yep.

You Tad worshipers out there (you know who you are)...

Can you clue me in? If I knew who they were I'd probably be able to shake them down for some long overdue tithing. Maybe a human sacrifice or two.

...should take a long hard look at this. Tad's inability to admit that he's wrong...

Tad Eareckson - 2011/01/04 12:04:39 UTC

I stand corrected and enlightened and am now more inclined to believe that we are seeing adverse yaw in the video. Cool.

...is certainly annoying in hang gliding politics, but it can be deadly in hang gliding itself. Be warned.

- Terry Mason...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28211
Platform towing fatality in Leakey, Texas

NMERider - 2012/06/19 01:36:26 UTC

The pilot had a brush with fate a year earlier:
http://www.kitestrings.org/post453.html#p453
This is very sad.

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."

...comes to immediate mind.

And Tad, please take these words to heart.

Of course I will, Bob. All of your words are spoken with the utmost honesty and sincerity.

Everyone makes mistakes...

My biggest one was reading your mission statement and only seeing what you wanted me to see.

...and every mistake puts a little chip in our credibility.

- It doesn't.
- See comments above concerning credibility.

But everyone knows that and everyone understands that.

In other words it DOESN'T necessarily put chips in our credibility.

The big hits to credibility aren't the mistakes that we acknowledge and retract, they're the mistakes that we refuse to acknowledge and refuse to retract.

I totally agree. We just seem to have vastly different takes on...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1701
Complaints about Tad

Rick Masters - 2015/01/16 19:59:15 UTC

He has concerns about people trying to muck up the forum, but he has also dealt effectively with Tad.

...what mistakes are.

With that said, here's Tad's long-winded effort at refusing to acknowledge or retract his false statement (original at Tad's web site).

And here I was thinking that...

Bob Kuczewski - 2017/10/26 05:10:52 UTC

Fifth, I'm ignoring most of your long-winded crap (not reading it) explicitly because you won't honor what other people want to say (see "First of all" above). Just as towing is a negotiation between two people ... so is a forum topic. Your approach to both reflects your arrested social development ... and probably some of your other pathologies as well.

...you weren't really into reading long-winded posts/crap.

Really useful.

More to come.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=867
Tad Eareckson ...an ongoing project

Bob Kuczewski - 2019/04/17 17:31:13 UTC

Tad Eareckson ...an ongoing liar

And now, the more important fact behind Tad's sad loss of credibility:

Tad cannot be trusted to correct his mistakes.

In yesterday's example, Tad blamed me for "ending his career" without any evidence (see above).

Here's some smoking gun evidence, Bob...

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=3840
[TIL] About Tad Eareckson

Bob Kuczewski - 2013/03/10 18:20:34 UTC

I first learned about Tad Eareckson when I was Regional Director and the USHPA Board circulated a letter he had written (with intention to send?) to the FAA about some dangerous practices in hang gliding.

The Board's knee-jerk response was to try to take some kind of legal action to silence Tad. I indicated that I thought we shouldn't be sending our lawyers in as our first response, and that maybe we should have someone talk with him first. So Dennis Pagen volunteered, and I believe the matter was settled without any serious damage to the sport.

The outrageous presumptions that:

- I needed to be talked to by any of you u$hPa BOD motherfuckers - 'specially a total fucking lying sleazebag like Dennis - to prevent me from doing serious damage to the sport

- the FAA stepping in and enforcing regulations which u$hPa agreed to in order to obtain its AT exemption in 1984 and which had lumped ATed hang gliders in with ATed sailplanes twenty years later would obviously be a BAD thing

And let's not forget that while you BELIEVED the matter was settled without any serious damage to the sport it was settled without any serious damage to the sport with ENORMOUS damage to Tad. And it wasn't worth you lifting a finger to follow up and find out that Dennis hadn't done shit and that enormous damage had been done to Tad. And I'll tell ya sumpin' else... That matter will NEVER be settled and I'm gonna keep doing all the serious damage to the sport I can.

By the way... There's zero doubt from anybody now that US hang gliding has entered death spiral mode. So either you failed to prevent me from doing any serious damage to the sport or you were massively successful and it didn't matter 'cause there were greater threats - quite possibly some of the ones about which I was screaming - that you motherfuckers were totally failing to address. Pick one.

His response (today) is included as screen shots below (sorry, it was so long that it took 3 shots).

And I wasn't even trying all that hard. And how many shots do you think this one will take?

Here's what actually happened in the case Tad has cited. About a decade ago, Tad had written a long manifesto to USHPA that he was threatening to send to the FAA. Several other USHPA Directors were suggesting that USHPA should take legal action (give more money to Tim Herr) to silence Tad.

I'm pretty sure that if there were any actual legal action Tim Herr could've taken against Tad he'd have done it pro bono. But there wasn't and those motherfuckers all bend over backwards to not mention my existence 'cause they know they can't afford to do otherwise.

I spoke up and suggested that we try listening to Tad's concerns rather than trying to shut him up.

And now for something completely different.

The decision was made to NOT take legal action against Tad.

Also continuing not to take either legal or administrative action against any serial killing Flight Park Mafia aerotowing operations.

That's the total sum of my effort in the matter.

You left out the part about going to a close friend who definately knows towing for your enlightenment.

I didn't know Tad.

Ya do now.

Tad had never contacted me. I wasn't on the towing committee. Tad was not even in my region. But I spoke up anyway because I didn't think it was right for USHPA to be using their legal guns to silence members who expressed safety concerns.

Just all their regular...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=463
Davis Straub's "Oz Report" Conflict of Interest

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/02/12 07:56:36 UTC

Without naming names (I'm curious to see if they'll own up to it first), on May 10, 2009, one Director wrote:

We need to consider getting an injunction against this guy communicating with the FAA on this subject.

That same day, another Director responded:

I forwarded the letter to Tim Herr yesterday asking about this.

For those who don't know, Tim Herr is ... USHPA's lawyer!!

A third Director (who I'll call "Mr. X") chimed in that same day with this:

Perhaps a strongly worded letter from Tim will do the trick. We can't force Tad to work within the USHPA framework but we can make it unpleasant and expensive for him if he chooses to makes derogatory and false statements about USHPA to the FAA he can't back up.

...corporate monopoly guns.

Period.

Period.

Yet a decade later (yesterday), Tad lumps me in with Mark Forbes and Tim Herr as "ending Tad's career".

And pretty much everybody else in this near total shit heap of a sport. Including and especially my "FRIENDS" - like Steve Kinsley who was totally in line with everything I was saying, gave me close to zilch in the way of covering fire in the CHGA forum wars, uttered not a peep's worth of dissent when I was "suspended" from the forum for three months forever and told by now extinct little shit Adam Elchin to not bother coming back to "HIS" public airport because of the actions I'd taken by that time.

You Tad worshipers out there (you know who you are) should take a long hard look at this.

Hey Tad worshipers out there... Any thoughts?

Tad's inability to admit that he's wrong is certainly annoying in hang gliding politics, but it can be deadly in hang gliding itself. Be warned.

They have been - zillions of times by some of the best minds in the business...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=47096
Aerotow primary releases?

Swift - 2016/03/22 21:58:16 UTC

Ask here:
http://www.kitestrings.org/topic7-900.html#p9191
Releases

Jim Rooney - 2016/03/23 00:21:21 UTC

Oh dear lord... don't do that to him without warning him!

That dude is a serious nutcase.
I'm not kidding in the least.

Poison to the sport. Any thoughts on why they keep ignoring you and all your ilk?

And Tad, please take these words to heart. Everyone makes mistakes, and every mistake puts a little chip in our credibility. But everyone knows that and everyone understands that. The big hits to credibility aren't the mistakes that we acknowledge and retract, they're the mistakes that we refuse to acknowledge and refuse to retract.

Good thing I really don't give a flying fuck about my credibility then.

With that said, here's Tad's long-winded effort at refusing to acknowledge or retract his false statement (original at Tad's web site).

Can hardly wait for the next set of screen shots.