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
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
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.