- Oh. So coming in with altitude to burn on glassy smooth coastal conditions to a limitless flat soft sandy beach at Stanwell (34°13'44.86" S 150°59'26.97" E) is safer than slamming into rocky shallow slopes and sides of trailers using various graduations of Badass Brace For Impact techniques? Thank you, I must remember that.
- Helmet and knee pads but no wheels. So tell me when helmet's and knee pads are more likely to mitigate crash consequences than wheels are? Granted, wheels aren't likely to matter at either launch or landing at Stanwell, but that's not where you were showing us all the crashes. And how come you needed to go all the way from western Russia to coastal Australia to find us an example of a safe landing? None of your products back home were ever capable of doing one?
- I notice you also had to go to Ecuador to find a flight that was otherwise executed reasonably competently end violently. And even then no damage to the glider and not enough damage to its occupant to keep him from going right back up.
- And this is an example of a safe landing?
Gil Dodgen - 1995/01
All of this reminds me of a comment Mike Meier made when he was learning to fly sailplanes. He mentioned how easy it was to land a sailplane (with spoilers for glide-path control and wheels), and then said, "If other aircraft were as difficult to land as hang gliders no one would fly them."
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.
Yeah, at a Stanwell kind of environment you can get away with anything. But sixteen-year-olds don't pass their driver's test out on the salt flats.
Safe flying!
We've never done and hopefully never will do how to most safely crash on this forum. We just do how not to crash and that pretty much also takes care of how to best crash 'cause that's just an extension of what you were doing. But let's pretend there's some legitimacy to this video. So where are your videos on how to launch, fly, approach, land, operate safely?
Seven of them - 009-B-11612 - 013-C-13019 - 020-D-21919 - 023-E-24925 - 061-G-42718 - 084-H-50428 - 090-I-52506 - have extended keel pockets so the "crossbar" can "float" for enhanced roll control authority. I think the UP Comet, 1979, was the first glider to incorporate this lunacy - along with its pain-in-the-ass slack sidewires.
Wills Wing debunked this crap in the early Eighties yet here we are. You see an extended keel pocket on a glider you know the designer was - and almost certainly still is - substantially to totally clueless...
If you teach them how to pull the glider with the harness they'll learn to steer the glider through weight shift simply by running toward their target.
...in the hang glider aerodynamics control department. The extended keel pocket is to hang gliders a bit like what the bent parachute pin is to aerotow releases - adds weight, complexity, expense and butchers performance.
And also there's Aeros's idiot overwidth fixed low position spreader - 003-A-05819. They have no fuckin' clues as what it's supposed to do and how it's supposed to work. They just know that hot gliders are supposed to have them. Also that hot gliders aren't supposed to have keel pockets - you save them for the entry to intermediate level gliders for the easier handling characteristics (despite being able to see what Wills Wing is doing with Condors and Falcons).
And now that I think of it... We never saw a lot of gliders other than Seedwings come out with built-in fins. Maybe the sport at least had enough in the way of brains to understand that if you wanted more yaw stability you built in more sweep. Lucky for us that Dr. Trisa Tilletti had other day jobs.
In REAL aviation you start them in the classroom with aeronautical theory. In hang gliding you start them on the hill and teach them opinions - all of them on the foundation that theory is a total load o' crap. Just look at evolution and global warming ferchrisake.
Here's what I've been able to do so far with glider ID:
- 020-D-31219 - Wills Wing Falcon
- 003-A-05819 - Aeros - kingposted high performance
- 010-B-11612 - Aeros Impuls
- 014-C-13019 - Moyes GTR
- 023-D-21919 - Aeros Impuls
- 029-E-24925 - exposed cross spars - Aeros Impuls maybe
- 058-F-40626 - kingposted high performance - spreader in proper position so maybe Wills Wing
- 070-G-42718 - exposed cross spars entry level - Moyes maybe
- 094-H-50428 - exposed cross spars
- 100-I-52506 - early kingposted high performance
- 117-J-61517 - Aeros high performance - maybe topless
It would be nice/fun to fill in the blanks.
---
2019/10/27 19:00:00 UTC
Try as one might, whenever ya do big stills projects regardless of how thoroughly you try to cover everything it's pretty much inevitable that you're gonna miss a lot of biggies. And this one was a major bitch 'cause there were eleven "flights" (one of which I'm alleging was staged) and I used Andrew's source video rather that the Russian clips.
And I'm real anal about the stills collections on the hard drive and loaded onto Flickr with respect to order, catalog numbers and references, time stamps so when you need to insert something early in a sequence it can (will) be a major nightmare. And this one was multi mega nightmares.
But I added a bunch more stills, scored a little better understanding of an issue or two, got some pretty good presentations up. No earthshattering revelations but it might be worthwhile to give things a skim.
The hand on the CONTROL BAR is automatically stripped off instantly upon contact. The one on the port landing tube stays trapped in arm break position).
Flies down to Ecuador for a fly-like-a-bird flying experience, uses the site as his garbage dump, proudly features the segment on his video. Hang glider people - as a pretty good rule o' thumb - are SCUM. (Very likely Mike Robertson product.) Fear not, Andrew. I've given your visibility a little boost here.
Another launch / flying site that's gotta be nearby but I can't for the life of me locate/identify. Looks like it's on the coast but may be inland a bit.
The creative editing on this video made harvesting, organizing, cataloging the stills a royal pain in the ass and I highly recommend the mute button if you're gonna watch it.
P.S. Note the total absence of the instructor in any of the discussions regarding this fairly serious landing impact. Probably too busy writing his safety book.
Yeah, motherfucker, I am. As long as the glider's launched, flown, landed in certified and legal configuration I'm perfectly fine saying that.
Society doesn't tolerate airline pilots who make mistakes - that matter any. And we can do just as well as they can - 'specially seeing as how there's tons of technical stuff of theirs that doesn't concern us is the least.
If you're not a Superior Pilot who never makes a mistake at whatever the rating level - One or Two through Five - you shouldn't be flying 'cause mistakes can be seriously life altering or ending. AT operations can go tens of thousands of launches which even with Reliable Releases can go incident free - minus the usual Infallible Weak Link carnage.
No one is actually scared to fly with a standard weaklink. They may say they are, but deep down inside, they're not.
Yeah. They're afraid of them. They've all experienced them, felt the stalls...
Lauren Tjaden - 2003/12/14
This fall at Ridgely, I had a weak link break at maybe fifty feet. I thought I was going to have to land in the soybeans - the very tall soybeans - when I looked at my angle. But, my glider stalled quite dramatically almost instantly (hard not to stall when you have a break), and dove towards the ground (a bit disconcerting from so low).
...experienced or seen the inconvenience crashes low in the kill zone, know instinctively they'll be worth shit in a low level lockout. Also know...
Could you go into more detail about your push button truck tow release and the lanyard version you experimented with? I'm truck towing an awful lot lately and have yet to find a release that doesn't scare the heck out me.
...that their Reliable Releases won't be worth shit either.
And they instinctively don't trust their instructors who are telling them they'll be just fine 'cause they know they won't.
Peter Birren - 2011/11/29 15:02:20 UTC
In the same breath, it's also impossible for your system to fail, regardless of how the pilot screws things up, right? Yours is absolutely fool-proof in all situations... have I got that right?
Yeah, you've got that absolutely right. Amazing. It has the complexity engineered in to do the job it needs to and there's nothing for the "pilot" to screw up. Think VG and/or automobile braking systems. I do the engineering, they do the flying.
And if assholes wanna take things apart, screw them up, slap them back together wrong we don't seem to condemn the complexity of the system. When Chad's Dragonfly fell apart at four hundred feet because somebody missed the port wing strut end fitting with the bolt...
...there wasn't the slightest whisper of criticism of the Dragonfly or its designer.
Gregg Ludwig had posted from the Houston rag the account of the heavy student on the little glider nearly getting foot launch demolished at Donnell's "training" operation not long before Lemmy Lopez. That account - in my humble opinion - was five or ten times more devastating to Donnell's reputation than the fatal was. That was Al Hernandez. And we'd known that.
And while I'd never forgotten the account I'd totally forgotten that it had been Al. And Al's a registered Member and Moderator here - even though he's never posted and was last active 2011/08/28 03:58:06 UTC. Al used to phone me a lot and we'd talked for beaucoup hours.
What a small world this has turned out to be. (I've edited his name into the two relevant posts in the Lemmy Lopez material.) The mainstream is constantly bending over backwards to pretend we don't exist but that's really just confirmation that we have done, are doing, and can continue to do a lot of damage. The Bob Show has rock star status compared to Kite Strings. And Bob also bends over backwards to pretend we don't exist. Thanks bigtime for the compliment and encouragement. (Peter still holding steady at seventeen posts for the year - (All still where no one can read them.))
Frank also mis-construes the notion of ratings going away. They don't; they're not in force, once you've been out of membership over three years. To have them reinstated, you need to see a rating official and demonstrate to their satisfaction that you still have the skills and judgment appropriate for the rating. Then your rating is re-activated and you're back to where you were.
FAA requires pilots to take a refresher every two years to demonstrate currency of skills. USHPA doesn't have the legal standing to compel a pilot to do so, but we can suspend a pilot rating for many reasons...one of which is a long gap in membership. And there's a way to reactivate the ratings with minimal effort, provided the pilot still has the skills. If the pilot doesn't hold those skills any longer, through disuse or age, then it's appropriate for the rating to be reduced to the skill level that they DO hold. It's not a merit badge. It's a measure of the pilot's current flying skills. Imperfect I agree, but the best we can do as a voluntary membership association.
Frank also mis-construes the notion of ratings going away. They don't; they're not in force, once you've been out of membership over three years.
That sentence makes no sense whatsoever with the comma in it - and not much without.
To have them reinstated...
To have us reinstate them...
...you need to see a rating official and demonstrate to their satisfaction that you still have the skills and judgment appropriate for the rating.
- Quite likely some incompetent semiliterate little douchebag with a tiny fraction of your airtime; qualifications; depth, breadth, decades of experience.
- Oh. So three years is the maximum interval one can safely go before one's skills and judgment for a particular rating dissipate to an unacceptably dangerous level. If you're a Five and all you've done is aerotow at Ridgely for three years you are no longer qualified to cliff launch at Whitwell. So...
-- where can I go to see the data upon which this SOP is based?
-- who's in charge of enforcing these restrictions?
- After Zack Marzec, Kelly Harrison, Pat Denevan, Jim Rooney why the fuck are we supposed to give a rat's ass about the satisfaction of any of your idiot ratings officials?
- So you can go to a rating official at Wallaby and demonstrate to his satisfaction that you still have the skills and judgment to have your Assisted Windy Cliff Launch rating reinstated. Neat trick.
- And do make sure that you can nail that Four spot with a perfectly timed flare three times in a row.
- If you can demonstrate that you still have the skills and judgment appropriate for the rating after three or more years of not having paid u$hPa dues - and probably not having flown at all since the vast majority of useable sites are u$hPa controlled - then you've obviously debunked the premise u$hPa used to justify pulling your ratings.
- Funny we've NEVER ONCE HEARD from or about anybody who went through this bullshit process and actually needed any refresher exercises.
- Flying a hang glider is like riding a bike. The last time I hooked into a hang glider was 2008/10/12 - back in the days when a Tad-O-Link translated to certain death within twelve seconds max of coming off the cart and close to four and a half years before many of us became happy with them. I wouldn't have the slightest hesitation hooking back in a half hour from now and putting the glider through any and all of the paces I did for any of my ratings. And I haven't heard one shred of data from any of you motherfuckers to link lack of currency to increased risk of crashing. And I never will either.
Then your rating is re-activated and you're back to where you were.
- Except 150 plus the hundreds of dollars your rating official is gonna rip you off for poorer.
- Kissing u$hPa's ass so you can keep flying any site within a five hour drive of any significant population center.
FAA requires pilots to take a refresher every two years to demonstrate currency of skills.
Bullshit. The FAA requires pilots to maintain currency and document same in the logbook and keep passing the medical.
USHPA doesn't have the legal standing...
...competence, or moral authority to do shit.
...to compel a pilot to do so, but we can suspend a pilot rating for many reasons...
Primarily testifying under oath in court in a manner that reflects poorly on u$hPa while u$hPa does shit to discredit a single punctuation mark or going to the FAA in order to try to get u$hPa to adhere to it's own aerotowing SOPs.
...one of which is a long gap in membership.
- But if you put a One in way over her head at your shitrigged tow operation and kill her... No problem whatsoever. Just make sure you have your membership current and Mitch Shipley and Tim Herr will make sure your ass is covered to the maximum extent possible. Then you can still be the guy who determines whether or not lapsed Fours and Fives are qualified to resume flying at Funston.
- You motherfuckers have openly publicly stated...
There are also numerous legal issues associated with accident reports, which we're still wrestling with. It's a trade-off between informing our members so they can avoid those kinds of accidents in the future, and exposing ourselves to even more lawsuits by giving plaintiff's attorneys more ammunition to shoot at us.
Imagine a report that concludes, "If we'd had a procedure "x" in place, then it would have probably prevented this accident. And we're going to put that procedure in place at the next BOD meeting." Good info, and what we want to be able to convey. But what comes out at trial is, "Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, my client suffered injury because USHPA knew or should have known that a safety procedure was not in place, and was therefore negligent and at fault." We're constantly walking this line between full disclosure and handing out nooses at the hangmen's convention.
....that you SHRED all the most effective procedures for flying, operating, responding competently and safely but you think it's OK to pull ratings of pilots who don't pay you off frequently enough on the pretense that they're not maintaining adequate currency to be flying, operating, responding competently and safely. Keep up the great work, Mark.
And there's a way to reactivate the ratings with minimal effort, provided the pilot still has the skills.
- And a rating official within a five hour drive.
- The most keenly intellectual instructor in u$hPa's recorded history assures us...
You're 100% onto it... relying on the skill of the pilot is a numbers game that you'll lose at some point.
...that our skills will inevitably fail us. So obviously the proper strategy is to fly as little as possible - same deal as in Russian roulette.
If the pilot doesn't hold those skills any longer, through disuse or age...
...or not forking a hundred and fifty bucks over to u$hPa at a frequent enough interval...
...then it's appropriate for the rating to be reduced to the skill level that they DO hold.
And yet never once in the course of u$hPa's sordid half century history has a single individual had a rating reduced or revoked due to deterioration of a skill through disuse or age.
It's not a merit badge.
It bloody well IS a goddam merit badge. The BSA has an aviation merit badge and the kid who qualifies for it will for the rest of his life be likely to be better shape to get the Cessna back on the runway in one piece than some asshole who doesn't understand the functions of ailerons, elevator, rudder. Probably also understand the differences between releases and weak links and tension and pressure.
It's a measure of the pilot's current flying skills.
For example... A Two should have a pretty good understanding of and performance with control actions and a Three should be able to handle any reasonable high site environment. Name ONE issue for which lack of currency should be a problem and cite ONE incident to support your claim.
Imperfect I agree, but the best we can do as a voluntary membership association.
I fly my PG in morning and evening air, relatively light winds or at coastal sites with consistent, smooth air. If it's getting thermic, or particularly, thermic with wind, then I don't want to be up there. Mid-day, I pretty much don't fly in summer; I do this for fun, and I prefer the milder morning and evening conditions. Others have a higher tolerance for turbulence and risk, and skills beyond mine.
A PG Four MANDATES 25 hours of thermal. I'm gonna assume you're a Four 'cause that's the minimum you'd need to be explaining things the way you do to all us muppets. And I'm also gonna assume you haven't flown thermal in at least three years. Oh hell, fuck that. You've just STATED you don't have the skills to fly at Four level so I don't give a rat's ass about currency. Shouldn't you have either publicly demoted yourself or been demoted by a responsible rating official to a Three rating?
P.S. Notice the way the members of the worlds largest hang gliding community are letting this asshole get away with this crap?
I've been a continuous member since 1973 when I helped create the national org then known as USHGA.
Wanna hear what I know it as now?
I made the mistake of rejoining as a non-flying member for three years back around 1990 not realizing I would lose my H3 rating. If I had just paid for the insurance membership all of those years i wasn't hang gliding (36) I would have maintained my rating. Except for those three years I have maintained my full membership but that didn't get my rating back.
Stringent safety rules are stringent safety rules.
I still have my 1973 membership card which shows my intermediate rating which was later changed to H3. When i started flying again at Dockweiler i used that to qualify for that site...
Why should ANYONE have to qualify for that Hang Zero and up level site? There are plenty of way-off-the-beaten-path doable high sites which could be accessed by individuals who've picked up old gliders off of eBay. Do we actually see bullshit like that happening anywhere? Have we EVER seen it on any scale significant enough to worry about?
And I'd submit that if Tomas Banevicius and Nancy Tachibana had gone routes like that they'd both be in a lot better shape than they are now.
...but I doubt it would have let me fly any bigger controlled site around SoCal.
I'm quite sure they wouldn't.
So I had to see an instructor to get my rating back. Some will say: "that's the point". But that isn't the point. The point is that if I hadn't made the mistake of a non-flying membership for those three years i would not have had to see an instructor, I would still have a valid H# rating after 36 years of non-hang gliding.
Yeah, you wouldn't think you'd need to point out something like that. But look at where you're posting.
So now i started getting launch and lading practice at Dockweiler. But that site isn't high enough to practice major turning of the glider...
If it's high enough to soar it's plenty high enough to practice a lot more major and demanding turns than you'd ever need at a high site.
...and judging approach to the LZ.
Just don't ever turn the glider below two hundred feet. You'll be fine.
Fast forward to Point of the Mountain after 39 years of not flying off anything higher than 25 feet. The plan was to not soar the ridge but fly out over the LZ and down. I did that with precision.
Utah... Ya just can't overstress the need for precision doing approaches.
John Heiney's first words in the LZ after the flight:
"While it might be good for USHPA to make recommendations in this area, there is still plenty of room for innovation. For that reason, I don't think USHPA should mandate any kind of obligatory approaches that would stifle that innovation - whether Mr. Colver's or any other."
"That was beautiful".
"But while it might be good for USHPA to make recommendations in this area, there is still plenty of room for innovation. For that reason, I don't think USHPA should mandate any kind of obligatory approaches that would stifle that innovation - whether Mr. Colver's or any other."
I not only made good turns but i tried for the spot landing marker in the huge LZ...
Name some LZs that AREN'T huge.
...and came within 10 feet of it.
So you'll be way more than good for landing in all those thirty foot diameter LZs we have out there.
The only thing I blew was the landing itself where i didn't flare hard enough and tripped, landing on my wheels and knees (knees, because i was seated).
Well I guess you should avoid landing in narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place for the time being.
Ironic: I had plenty of landing practice at Dockweiler, I hadn't had any practice for the rest of the flight.
As soon as I launched at POM I felt like no time had passed since my last flight from a high launch (Soboba summit in 1979).
I was more tense than i would have been had i been flying POM previously. I'm sure my age of 83 at the time added some to my tenseness in gripping the bar harder than i should have.
If you teach them how to pull the glider with the harness they'll learn to steer the glider through weight shift simply by running toward their target.
Hard to emphasize too much the importance of the light touch.
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.
Those with bad judgement will lie about their ability, ratings or not.
And those with the worst judgment will inevitably be the ones issuing and renewing the ratings.
once&future - 2019/12/29 18:44:29 UTC
Frank,
Basic launch and landing may be like riding a bicycle, but Advanced skills really do atrophy.
- Bullshit.
- Name one u$hPa controlled site at which one needs advanced skills to launch, fly, approach, land safely.
- How much in the way of advanced skills would Rafi Lavin have needed on 2015/08/23 at Funston to a preflight sidewire stomp test without work hardening something or grinding something into a sharp rock?
I'm sure I'll be able to demonstrate Hang 2 skills forever, but after a 12 year layoff I found that my landing precision was very rusty.
And there's certainly nothing like a hang glider that requires landing precision. Not to mention...
Any un-biased observer should be able to see why wanna-be pilots find PG more attractive than HG. Standing around in the Andy Jackson Memorial International Airpark at a busy fly-in shows that a PG landing is a total non-event, while everyone stands up to watch HG's, piloted by "experts", come in to land. A good landing by a HG is greeted by cheers, an acknowledgement that landing one successfully is a demonstration not just of skill, but good luck as well.
...a good dose of luck.
My pride might have liked USHPA to restore my old Hang 5, but I recognized that the Hang 3 they gave me was the correct rating.
Well you should probably avoid all the Four and Five rated sites then. No telling what might happen.
So yes, though I don't like USHPA's policy of preserving the rating if you just pay up every 3 years + 364 days, I don't think the other organization's list of old ratings is good for much other than nostalgia.
I don't think any u$hPa ratings of any vintage have ever been worth shit. What do we need beyond Kelly Harrison to get that point across.
My Hang 5 is on that list, but it certainly doesn't represent my current proficiency level.
A five doesn't mean shit in the way of proficiency. All it means is that you've racked up a lot of time in a lot of different flavors of flying. You point to one single requirement for any rating at any level in which there's much of a demand on skill.
Jockey's Ridge dune soaring in certain conditions demanded a lot of skill and I was pretty damn good at it. But I needed it to stay up - not to remain safe. The penalty for a mistake was pretty much always a non event crash into soft sand or losing the lift and having to land. If it hadn't been safe nobody would've been doing it.
Watch the tape and show me where Jan's executing anything more skillful than competent Two level coordinated turns. Doesn't have shit to do with skill. It's all basic aeronautical competence and execution and that doesn't fade or degrade over time and/or for lack of currency. But all u$hPa teaches is to stay level below two hundred feet and nail the old Frisbee in the middle of the Happy Acres putting green.
Frank Colver - 2019/12/30 00:51:19 UTC
Please notice that after 39 years my landing precision was within 10 feet of the spot. The point where my wheels touched was about four feet directly to the side of the spot marker. I made a directional correction just before landing and was four feet off the line. Bummer! I'll definitely try to do better next time.
Super. And when and where have you needed and/or expect to need such skills? Or, failing that, show me a video. Of someone who isn't Jonathan anyway. (And Jonathan warns people to stay way the fuck clear of situations like those - regardless of rating, experience, currency.)
If you haven't flown in years...
given the sensitivity of sites and landowners we now have in our sue happy, paranoid, everyone one gets a trophy, life isn't fair, safe space required, you "should" see why getting a check up before getting your ratings back is required.
Is this foolproof ... no.
As stated above you could choose to pay dues and still retain your rating. Whether or not the skill level is actually still there from many years without flying.
The assumption is, if you lapse you're not flying. If you are paying dues, you are flying. (Again, not foolproof)
I personally have witnessed a handful of pilots come back after years of no flying.
The advanced rating (skill level) they had was not there to say the least.
Yes after knocking the rust, they got their ratings back.
(I asked, and none of them thought their skill level was the same as when they stopped flying)
Everyone is different, some have had a layoff and come back like it was yesterday. So whats the harm in getting checked out?
Do you want your friends and family possibly at risk if they are at a site with a pilot who possibly shouldn't be there?
Its not about taking you rating away, it's about your "current" skill level and risk management.
A rating is only as good as the skill the pilot demonstrates. I dont care what rating you have, I care how you fly.
I have seen H2's flying far better that some long time H3, H4 pilots.
If you haven't flown in years...
I haven't flown since there were two zeroes in front of the year...
But I still know what a hook-in check is and how and when to do one. And I've never seen the slightest evidence that you've ever had the slightest clue regarding what's supposed to be a Hang Zero Day One Flight One fundamental safety procedure and rule.
The harness is part of the aircraft... end of story.
(Just because it's easy to remove, does not mean it should be. Dont choose the path of least resistance)
Attach it to the wing, completing the aircraft.... then preflight the completed aircraft.
Buckle yourself into the cockpit and then your ready.
That one failed miserably out in the real world - as it always has for decades whenever real world issues start encroaching. So how are you dealing with that issue now?
Enough about what doesn't work though... what does?
Since we don't have a plug that only fits one way, we fall on lesser methods, but some are better than others...
In particular... Third Party Verification.
You won't save you, but your friends might.
Not always, but they're more reliable than you.
Why do you think that airline checklists (yes our lovely checklists) are check-verified by pilot AND copilot?
That's all I got for ya.
The other topics have been beat to death here.
If there was an answer, we'd all already be doing it.
Your friends? (You think Rooney would now have the critical mass he'd need to prevent the next one?
given the sensitivity of sites and landowners we now have in our sue happy, paranoid, everyone one gets a trophy, life isn't fair, safe space required...
You need to put a noun in after all that.
...you "should" see why getting a check up before getting your ratings back is required.
From whom? Pat Denevan, Jim Rooney, Sam Kellner, Joe Greblo, Matt Taber?
Is this foolproof ... no.
Is there the slightest shred of data to indicate that it's not way south of useless?
As stated above you could choose to pay dues and still retain your rating. Whether or not the skill level is actually still there from many years without flying.
The assumption is, if you lapse you're not flying. If you are paying dues, you are flying. (Again, not foolproof)
So a flight log is no good? The flight log you use to document the flights and thermal time for the ratings you got in the first place?
I personally have witnessed a handful of pilots come back after years of no flying.
The advanced rating (skill level) they had was not there to say the least.
Say the most. Tell us where and how their rusty performances would've gotten them in trouble. We haven't had a ghost of a legitimate example in the course of this now 51 post coffee shop discussion.
Yes after knocking the rust, they got their ratings back.
Oh. So all of them knocked off their own rust - without need of further instruction from an idiot ratings official. Funny none of them seemed to have overestimated his skill, need for safety margin, wound up in the powerlines...
...Bill Vogel? (Probably hadn't paid his u$hPa membership dues frequently enough.))
(I asked, and none of them thought their skill level was the same as when they stopped flying)
Wow! Then why on Earth do you suppose they put themselves in all those critical situations dependent upon finely honed current skill levels?
Everyone is different...
In hang gliding? Not so much in my experience. In a sport that such a major dickhead magnet just how much diversity would one expect?
...some have had a layoff and come back like it was yesterday. So whats the harm in getting checked out?
What's the use in getting checked out? We haven't heard one example of one ratings official point out anything the individual didn't already know and tell or show him anything to help get him back up to speed.
Do you want your friends and family possibly at risk if they are at a site with a pilot who possibly shouldn't be there?
Do we have any such example from anywhere in the history of the sport? How 'bout the 2011/05/20 15:10 Funston Eric Mies incident? Did he (ultimately fatally) slam into the public walkways area due to lack of currency?
Its not about taking you rating away, it's about...
...fucking you over financially so you can keep the ratings you EARNED (mostly in spite of u$hPa certified instruction).
...your "current" skill level and risk management.
Yeah. u$hPa figured out it couldn't ever be in the aeronautical competence business so risk management was a no-brainer.
A rating is only as good as the skill the pilot demonstrates. I dont care what rating you have, I care how you fly.
None of your fucking business how anybody else flies. If you hadn't leaned forward to check out your port wingtip at Parker on 2013/08/17 there's a fair chance that you wouldn't still be around here shooting off your mouth about others' responsibilities as pilots.
I have seen H2's flying far better that some long time H3, H4 pilots.
Really speaks volumes about the validity of u$hPa's Pilot Proficiency Program - don't it? Sorry... Dont it?
I've been landing poorly lately and started to read this thread from the beginning. It makes me miss Jim Rooney. A great pilot and teacher
Jim Gaar - 2019/07/08 11:48:09 UTC
Here here on missing Jim Rooney
Yeah, hear hear. Or here here. Whatever. But he doesn't seem to be missing you assholes - or anybody or anything associated with hang gliding, paragliding, tugging, ultralight, sport aviation - very much.
Up from surgery... Plates on L2 while it heals, will come out after. Feeling good.
I won't comment on my crash just yet. Maybe after the CAA investigation.
Just posting here too let people know that I'm doing well.
Leading Edge - 2016/10/01 16:44:11 UTC
Jim -
Even if we're on different continents, I'm happy to be sharing another day on the same side of the grass.
Wishing you a speedy recovery.
---It is what we do when we are tired that determines our capacity the most.--
Jim Rooney - 2016/10/01 18:29:51 UTC
Cheers mate.
Four and a half years ago. Not the slightest peep back to anyone from those cultures anywhere since. Those motherfuckers ended my career effective 2008/10/12 - twelve and a half years ago. And that was solo recreational hang gliding by the way. And I'm still maintaining ties to participants, active and former, and will address anything relevant anyone posts anywhere.
What's your evidence that he was a great pilot and teacher? If he was such a great fucking teacher then he should've had untold scores of products who would've been just as great teachers as he was. Name and/or quote one. Find me somebody with a Rooney sign-off on his card with something positive to say about him. Or...
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.
...maybe something from a comp pilot. (Comp pilots really appreciate being told to suck it up by tug pilots with their best interests in mind. Just ask one if you don't believe me.)
If he so nailed it on landings then how come yours suck now? Do people have similar issues with the foot launch at the other end of the flight? Or can they just do a couple practice sims in a soccer field to blow the rust off? (Find me an instructor who runs a landing clinic in midafternoon thermal conditions. (And please do show me the video.))
Where's a single comp record or video clip of Rooney doing anything in an aircraft of any kind exhibiting anything beyond Hang Two level proficiency on any task? Compare/Contrast with Ryan doing aerobatics, Jonathan doing XC thermal flying and boulder field spot landings, Bobby doing Dragonfly.
What are Rooney's two most notable flights - both tandem thrill rides at Coronet Peak with zero extenuating circumstances?
- 2006/02/21. Hang. Hooks in passenger but not self, dangles from control bar, dives the ride into the powerlines.
- 2016/09/29. Para. Crashes into slope for no reason in stable conditions.
Finishes both excursions in a medevac chopper and becomes permanently unemployable in both pursuits - and didn't do the slightest thing wrong on either occasion. Go figure.
How can one teach anything in aviation of the slightest value or legitimacy...
Like the rest of us, you have no idea what really happened on that tow.
We probably never will know.
Jim Rooney - 2013/02/28 01:17:55 UTC
Well said Billo
I'm a bit sick of all the armchair experts telling me how my friend died.
Ah but hg'ers get so uppity when you tell them not to speculate.
...when one hasn't the slightest clue what went wrong on a well witnessed and thoroughly documented fatal inconvenience tumble incident?
What's he doing now? Wearing a captain's uniform driving a big powered passenger plane around for sightseeing tourists. Takes off and lands on a 6.2 thousand foot paved runway sitting down.
The kinda people who really belong in hang gliding? Airline and fighter pilots who want what we have. And we've killed one of each - at Quest and Slide Mountain - within the past half decade.
The only reason Rooney was ever in this game was to boost his social standing, insinuate himself into positions of control over legitimate recreational flyers. And fuck assholes like you for helping him get away with it. And note what that dynamic has brought us to.
We always told towed pilots that the first 500 feet belonged to the tug pilot. They have enough to do to keep themselves safe.
Jim Rooney - 2008/12/11 18:45:01 UTC
Yup, the first 500ft are mine. Try to keep up. Your tugger generally REALLY wants to help you, and will do all that he can to do so, but he's got trees to stay out of as well.
We always told towed pilots that the first 500 feet belonged to the tug pilot.
- What a really good thing it was that we always did that, Rodie. Otherwise the towed pilots would've been highly inclined to do all kinds of stupid shit below five hundred with the expectations that the tug pilots would react to bail them out of their dangerous stupid shit situations. Thinking about it now I'm astounded that this isn't SOP for ALL AT operations.
By the way... Got any good videos of all the stupid shit people almost invariably start pulling once they've cleared five?
- Name some shit in hang gliding AT that DOESN'T belong to the tug pilot. These motherfuckers have appointed themselves Pilots In Command of our gliders, dictated glider equipment specifications - only the cheap bent pin crap they sell, act as if they own public airports and are doing us huge personal favors by executing the tows for which we've paid.
They have enough to do to keep themselves safe.
Yeah. Not fly into trees, parked gliders, windsock poles, hangars, trees, other planes... Make real sure the engine's adequately warmed up and you have enough gas in the tank to ensure that you don't have a catastrophic power failure / inconvenience on takeoff...
It never ceases to amaze me how proficiently these top gun tug pilots are able to keep these situations under control.
Hell I've literally shoved the control frame out in front of me to avoid a whack when it got a little ahead of me in a light DW landing, similar to when I've had to slide it in on my belly (did that once after a weaklink brake coming off a launch cart.
...all the extra takeoffs, landings, refueling they hafta do to compensate for the decisions of the focal point of our safe towing system.
Also... Why should you ever have to slide it in on your belly after a weaklink brake coming off a launch cart?
Why didn't you land on your feet with a perfectly timed flare in accordance with your training? Everyone and his dog knows that by definition a weaklink brake can be at worst an inconvenience with no possible negative effect on safety. It's only possible for it to INcrease the safety of the towing operation. Ask Rooney ferchrisake. He's right there on the other end of the phone.
Yup, the first 500ft are mine.
Name something you DON'T identify as yours - dickhead. Well, back in that era anyway. Before you seriously crashed both hang and para tandem thrill rides under zero extenuating circumstances and rendered yourself permanently unemployable in both of those fields.
Here's the thing too... we don't boost (use the turbo) you solo. It's too much power... the glider can't keep up (climbrate). I've had one pilot that could... but that was Bo
The Bo Hagewood who demolished himself and killed his just-shy-of-solo-high-flight Hang Two student (Michael Elliot) at Lockout Mountain Flight Park on 1991/12/15? I wonder how many hundreds of hours of rope time it takes to develop a level of proficiency such as his.
- So who are the glider pilots who are unable to keep up with you - while you're below five hundred feet dodging trees?
- So how come there aren't any:
-- clinics in which less magnificent pilots can learn the proper techniques for keeping up with you
-- magazine articles describing the techniques
-- relevant Special Skills certifications
Wouldn't AT ops and comps around the world all reap huge benefits? Or is it just a matter of being born as fundamentally magnificent as that total douchebag was?
- Would it be of any value for people to train on surface rigs...
...to develop some of the towing skills which would enable them to keep up with a 914 on boost?
- On one flight at Ridgely - not behind Rooney - I got into an oscillation cycle. And yeah, all oscillation cycles are pilot induced. It was never a safety issue though and I was maybe at two hundred feet but my driver was able to shift his attention from dodging trees long enough to slow down and let me get my shit back together. Then we continued the tow uneventfully to routine release altitude.
Your tugger generally REALLY wants to help you, and will do all that he can to do so...
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.
Well, I'm assuming there was some guff about the tug pilot's right of refusal?
Gee, didn't think we'd have to delve into "pilot in command"... I figured that one's pretty well understood in a flying community.
It's quite simple.
The tug is a certified aircraft... the glider is an unpowered ultralight vehicle. The tug pilot is the pilot in command. You are a passenger. You have the same rights and responsibilities as a skydiver.
It's a bitter pill I'm sure, but there you have it.
BTW, if you think I'm just spouting theory here, I've personally refused to tow a flight park owner over this very issue. I didn't want to clash, but I wasn't towing him. Yup, he wanted to tow with a doubled up weaklink. He eventually towed (behind me) with a single and sorry to disappoint any drama mongers, we're still friends. And lone gun crazy Rooney? Ten other tow pilots turned him down that day for the same reason.
We all play by the same rules, or we don't play.
The law of the land at comps was 130lb greenspot or you don't tow. Seriously. It was announced before the comp that this would be the policy. Some guys went and made their case to the safety committee and were shut down. So yeah, sorry... suck it up.
...to do everything humanly possible to benefit the glider pilots paying him to get them up to workable altitude?
Guess they're all still busy dodging trees. You find me one photo, still of a tug driver maneuvering in front of a glider to safely defuse a critical situation. And you're not gonna do much better with front end releases. From the above only the 112-043710 Peter Holloway clusterfuck - and a back end weak link would've done the job OK within another fraction of a second as the glider was rolled and climbing. And, hell, that could've been the front end weak link for all we know.
Here's about the best we have from the entire history of the sport:
As he took off his left wing was dragging. Bobby Bailey, the best tow pilot in the business, moved to the right into get further into the wind, and Rob got his left wing up and flying as he lined up behind Bobby.
And the Norwegian national comp champ still ends up...
Then Robin shifted off to the left again getting his right, upwind wing, high again. He was seen reaching for his release.
...being fatally pile-driven back into the runway. And what Bobby could've done:
Once the glider bounces off the ground, Robin is never able to get the glider lined up correctly behind Bobby Bailey and drifted continually to the left, locking out and crashing from a low altitude. If Bobby had released Robin at any time before the last two or three seconds he would likely not have crashed, at least not from a lockout.
And none of you tuggie motherfuckers has ever disputed anything about Bobby being the best tow pilot in the business, criticized him for not aborting the tow, claimed that he would've done better in that situation or has done better in a similar one.
...at least not from a lockout.
Read: He almost certainly WOULD have crashed from a STALL. Probably not as violently but at ten percent it would've probably still been fatal.
And now thinking about this one as I never have before... Robin's drifting CONTINUALLY to the left - unable to come back and line up. His control authority is being overwhelmed by misaligned towline tension. That's the definition of a lockout. Doesn't matter if things progress blindingly fast or glacially. This one's not a bad parallel to 2016/05/21 - Quest - April Mackin - Jeff Bohl. (He can't release himself and she doesn't - until a millisecond after the Tad-O-Link blows way too late to increase the safety of the towing operation.)
But of course if you read Davis...
Then Robin shifted off to the left again getting his right, upwind wing, high again.
...he paints it to look like Robin was a total moron and DELIBERATELY countered the help he'd just had from Bobby. That's undoubtedly WHY I never before recognized this incident for what it actually was. And they never made the video public so we could see for ourselves. (I did see it at Ridgely on David Glover's laptop during the ECC several months later. But that was a bit before I really started understanding what a bunch of evil motherfuckers all these assholes were.)
It's a total lie. Robin didn't:
- "SHIFT". He was SHIFTED.
- get right, upwind wing high again. He was rolled by the power of Bobby's Dragonfly into a lockout.
Also note...
He was seen reaching for his release.
Critically locked out glider passengers very rarely attempt to make the easy reach to their easily reachable releases.
Joe Gregor - 2004/09
There is no evidence that the pilot made an attempt to release from tow prior to the weak link break, the gate was found closed on the Wallaby-style tow release.
And when they DO...
Dennis Pagen - 2005/01
I pulled in all the way, but could see that I wasn't going to come down unless something changed. I hung on and resisted the tendency to roll to the side with as strong a roll input as I could, given that the bar was at my knees. I didn't want to release, because I was so close to the ground and I knew that the glider would be in a compromised attitude. In addition, there were hangars and trees on the left, which is the way the glider was tending. By the time we gained about 60 feet I could no longer hold the glider centered--I was probably at a 20-degree bank--so I quickly released before the lockout to the side progressed. The glider instantly whipped to the side in a wingover maneuver.
Imagine if you will, just coming off the cart and center punching a thermal which takes you instantly straight up while the tug is still on the ground. Know what happens? VERY high towline forces and an over-the-top lockout. You'll have both hands on the basetube pulling it well past your knees but the glider doesn't come down and still the weaklink doesn't break (.8G). So you pull whatever release you have but the one hand still on the basetube isn't enough to hold the nose down and you pop up and over into an unplanned semi-loop. Been there, done that... at maybe 200 feet agl.
...it's 'cause they have no choice and nothing to lose and they know they're in luck mode as far as survivability is concerned.
If Bobby had released Robin at any time before the last two or three seconds...
Catch that? That's also saying that if Robin had released himself successfully with both hands on the control bar with less than two or three seconds to go it wouldn't have mattered.
Ditto for a Davis Link success. And nobody's ever made a claim that there was an excessive tension (sorry - PRESSURE) issue going on while Robin was locking out and Bobby was climbing and maneuvering. Yet this was the primary catalyst for the brutal enforcement of Davis Links from that point on until Pete Lehmann sands his knee down to the bone at Zapata on 2011/08/11.
Even if they are non pilot total shitheads for going up with Infallible Weak Links and Reliable Releases they usually do have the flying skills and experience to be constantly aware of their situations and assessing their options as things are progressing south. Jeff Bohl makes a reflexive grab to secure a dangling camera, his pro toad glider begins a roll to port.
He is instantly/immediately locked out with zero option to effect and survive an easy reach to anything.
Within the next second and a half April MAY have the option of safely aborting the tow but she's gonna be tied up dodging trees for the next 490 feet. But this NEVER happens in the real world - and shouldn't. The front enders are in really crappy positions to assess what's going on with the glider in these two second critical situations and make the right call. Hell, none of them are even competent enough to understand that they need weak links either on both ends of the towline - like it's specified in the regs since the beginning of time - or on both ends of both bridles.
Towing Aloft - 1998/01
I witnessed a tug pilot descend low over trees. His towline hit the trees and caught. His weak link broke but the bridle whipped around the towline and held it fast. The pilot was saved by the fact that the towline broke!
All Jeff can do is torque over to resist the lockout as much and extend his life for as many seconds as possible. And I think that was pretty much the same situation with Robin. Resist the lockout as long as possible until you have little else to lose.
And neither of those flights should've ever left the ground in the first place anyway. They were total shit operations from the bottom up and everybody involved in running and participating in them has blood on his or her hands to some degree or other.
The culture made it all about the Tad-O-Link on the 2005/01/09 - ignoring what Bobby had on the front end and totally ignored the Tad-O-Link issue on the 2016/05/21 because the accepted standards and practices had changed.
I give 'em the rope if they drop a tip (seriously drop a tip), or take off stalled. You will NEVER be thanked for it, for often they will bend some tube.
Funny we have so few expressions of gratitude from any of the untold scores of glider pilots who've had their lives saved by dump lever happy drivers.
Whatever's going on back there, I can fix it by giving you the rope.
Jim Rooney - 2007/08/01 19:49:30 UTC
It's more of this crappy argument that being on tow is somehow safer than being off tow.
Towing Aloft - 1998/01
Pro Tip: Always thank the tug pilot for intentionally releasing you, even if you feel you could have ridden it out. He should be given a vote of confidence that he made a good decision in the interest of your safety.
And whenever we DO hear public expressions of gratitude it always seems to be for...
I came out of the cart rolled and yawed to the right with the upwind wing flying and the downwind wing stalled. It was rather dramatic. If I had released or if the weak link had broken, the downwind wing would have further stalled and I would have cartwheeled into terra firma in an unpleasant fashion. I held on tight gaining airspeed until the downwind wing began flying, got in behind the tug, and continued the flight.
Sunny later told be he was about to give me the rope and I thanked him to no end that he didn't.
Dennis Pagen - 2005/01
Analyzing my incident made me realize that had I released earlier I probably would have hit the ground at high speed at a steep angle. The result may have been similar to that of the pilot in Germany. The normal procedure for a tow pilot, when the hang glider gets too high, is to release in order to avoid the forces from the glider pulling the tug nose-down into a dangerous dive. However Neal kept me on line until I had enough ground clearance, and I believe he saved me from injury by doing so. I gave him a heart-felt thank you.
...doing the polar opposite of intentionally releasing us.
By the way... That bullshit Pro Tip of Pagen's is him accidentally telling us that we'll have zero chance of safely releasing OURSELVES using any of his Industry Standard "equipment" in any actual emergency situation. As in:
Dennis Pagen - 2005/01
By the time we gained about 60 feet I could no longer hold the glider centered--I was probably at a 20-degree bank--so I quickly released before the lockout to the side progressed. The glider instantly whipped to the side in a wingover maneuver. I cleared the buildings, but came very close to the ground at the bottom of the wingover.
Also note that in all those situations above (from Billo on down) the Standard Aerotow Weak Link was supposed to have worked before people started getting into to much trouble - and didn't.
3. How can we possibly even hope to keep up? You've said:
You will only ever need full throttle for the first fifty feet of a tandem tow. Don't ever pull a solo at full throttle... they will not be able to climb with you. You can tow them at 28 mph and you'll still leave them in the dust... they just won't be able to climb with you... weaklinks will go left and right.
This isn't a function of anything under our control. We're doing everything right but our precision Rooney Links are maintaining such a high margin of safety that we can't even climb out above dust level. And try to keep up? We were blown off back in the dust level but you're still climbing hard dodging trees through five hundred feet without us? Do you keep on going to 2.5K, level out, wave us off before descending for a rerun?
4. There's virtually NOTHING the tug driver will, can, or should do in the critical window covering the earliest stages of the tow once things have started moving. The glider's airborne with plenty enough speed and energy to lock out and kill its driver well before the tug gets off the runway - and starts dodging trees.
AT is the most dangerous flavor of towing 'cause at the most dangerous phase of the tow the power issue is pretty much on/off and the guy controlling the power is 250 feet upwind getting his own plane airborne while monitoring what's going on with the glider in a convex mirror. THIS:
Wills Wing / Blue Sky / Steve Wendt / Ryan Voight Productions - 2007/03
NEVER CUT THE POWER...
Reduce Gradually
Increase Gradually
doesn't and can't happen. It's all or instantly nothing - and the tow direction is fixed and only straight upwind if you're lucky.
Well, I'm assuming there was some guff about the tug pilot's right of refusal?
Gee, didn't think we'd have to delve into "pilot in command"... I figured that one's pretty well understood in a flying community.
It's quite simple.
The tug is a certified aircraft... the glider is an unpowered ultralight vehicle. The tug pilot is the pilot in command. You are a passenger. You have the same rights and responsibilities as a skydiver.
It's a bitter pill I'm sure, but there you have it.
...Pilot In Command of everything that's leaving the ground and going up under the power of your engine. Since when is it the job and responsibility of a passenger to keep up with the Pilot In Command?
There's a flight plan - which is always supposed to be to get the glider up to either a predetermined, agreed upon, paid for altitude or sustainable thermal lift. It's not the job of the passenger to keep up with you. And if you are unable to consistently, reliably, safely execute the flight plan with the passenger doing absolutely nothing wrong while you're busy dodging all those trees then you need to start looking for another occupation more consistent with your limited abilities and intellect. (And I note you've finally found one.) And note that in non total bullshit aviation there's effectively ZERO problem with sailplanes keeping up with tugs while their pilots are dodging all those trees.
...but he's got trees to stay out of as well.
- And he invariably needs 500 feet to safely clear the trees. Well, 450 maybe with a smooth substantial headwind at some of your less heavily forested runway facilities.
- Wow. You guys a REALLY GOOD. A 100.00 percent record on successfully staying out of trees on AT launches. For something that challenging a 95 percent success rate would still be pretty admirable. Not slamming back into the runway for no good reason...
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.
With the:
...any tow pilot that takes you over something you can't get out from should be shot.
part... Totally agreement. (Although it would be difficult to go wrong shooting any tow pilot period.) If there's the slightest possibility of trees being or becoming an issue nobody has any business hooking up a tow. (Right...
At 10:30 Eric came out to tow me to the southwest with the wind SSW. That put me right over the right side of the hangar and parking lot. This is a short section of the field but not all that bad as long as you have an exit strategy. I decided I would NOT continue to double the weak link after seeing my wife eat it a few months ago.
It broke at about ten seconds after hitting 800 fpm lift off the LZ!!! Hell of a cycle. The tug and I went up like rockets. But instantly at 200 feet it wasn't all that bad. I flew the U2 into a nice foot landing right by the cars.
Second try:
This time the wind seemed H&V (heavy and variable) and we decided to take off to the southeast. But this gave us a short runway and an orange orchard in front of us and we decided to take off with a bit more speed.
The cycle was nice, nothing out of the ordinary, but just as the tug flew over the fence line of the orchard the weak link broke. It was as if it didn't even break - Eric and I both thought it was a release malfunction. But Axo, Ralph, and I found the release and confirmed otherwise.
I was flying nice with good speed and climbing. I thought "Shit. It broke again. Damn, I don't want to land between those trees, they don't even have the keys to the gate anymore." So I turned to the right cross wind toward the RVs and campfire spot.
Rafael Castro - 2008/05/23 19:52:57 UTC
We all watched his weak link break, it was non-event something that happens all the time...
Axel Banchero - 2008/05/22 04:19:39 UTC
Doc's body wasn't moving and we were shitting our pants until he started talking confused. The first thing I saw was his eye bleeding and swollen the size of an 8 ball. There was sand and dirt inside. Looked like he lost it at first until he could open it a little bit.
...Florida Ridge?)
So you seem to be saying that all tug pilots - yourself included - should be shot. All of them everywhere in all conditions with all tugs and all payloads need five hundred feet worth of safely powered flight before anyone can start breathing easy on the trees issue. (And tons of these flights are being conducted out of General Aviation airports where we have conventional aircraft eating up three times the runway to get up to twice the takeoff speed.) Go for it. What's taking so long?
Couldn't find any trees to maneuver around so they put up some inflatable pylons instead. The Dragonfly wingspan is a bit shy of 35 feet so use that as a ruler to estimate the clearance required. (They wanted to rent the five hundred footers but the cost was prohibitive.)
And what he's doing is definitely cool but not all that fucking demanding. I've done stuff much more demanding requiring much more skill and precision with much narrower safety margins flying my Comet at Jockey's Ridge - without benefit of an engine. But a snotty little punk such as yourself can't start thinking about the reason he's making the flight in the first place before he's a tenth of mile over the runway at Ridgely.
And by the way... Good luck finding a still of a tug turning at any bank angles such as those with a glider behind him.
ACTUAL AT safety... It pretty much all happens before anything starts moving on the runway. Seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months...
Two Ridgely tug drivers - Chad Elchin and Keavy Nenninger both died with nothing in tow 'cause their 914 Dragonflies weren't preflighted. Keavy's also wasn't airworthy. Zach Woodall discovered his Dragonfly was falling apart while he was airborne but got it back on the ground in one piece.
Get things right at both ends of the string - planes, engine, tow system components, pilots... - and wind indicators around launch and everything will be fine. There's no AT incident from any time and/or place in the world history of the sport that couldn't have been nixed before the gas was stepped on. In any case anybody cares to name there will have been known and virtually always multiple issues.
...was likely our worst case scenario. Professional Pilots on both ends. The front one flies into it and elects to continue the tow. The back one can see what's gonna hit him in another 250 feet and elects to continue the tow. With a two point bridle he's definitely gonna be OK. With a Tad-O-Link he's highly likely to be OK. With a two point bridle and Tad-O-Links on both ends the tow's gonna continue just fine. Zack will have no more problem than Mark did. That's the way things are SUPPOSED to work.
Nobody's talking about 130lb weaklinks? (oh please)
Many reasons.
Couple of 'em for ya... they're manufactured, cheap and identifiable.
See, you don't get to hook up to my plane with whatever you please. Not only am I on the other end of that rope... and you have zero say in my safety margins... I have no desire what so ever to have a pilot smashing himself into the earth on my watch. So yeah, if you show up with some non-standard gear, I won't be towing you. Love it or leave it. I don't care.
- You don't own a plane. And the douchebag operation that qualified and enabled you collapsed and its operators slipped into permanent oblivion. The planes they used as tugs no longer exist as tugs. (Especially the two they totaled along with their pilots.)
- I do own a plane. I understand it and know how to equip it. And how to design and build the best quality equipment on the planet. But when I have crud such as yourself...
...on the front end it's still not safe to fly and a competent pilot won't.
- You're gonna smash yourself and your passenger into the earth - AGAIN - on 2016/09/29 and never release a single syllable's worth of explaining to all us stupid muppets how you once again did absolutely nothing wrong.
How Jim managed to maintain control of the tug is what is amazing.
Never been that far over a tug in a hang glider so I've got to wonder what it looked like and felt like from the tug pilot's perspective. Being so high on tow lifts the tugs tail and makes things interesting up front I'm sure.
I can tell you if I would be anywhere near that high on tow while in my sailplane, the tug pilot would have been in a world of hurt. More likely he would have dumped me well before then.
your safety margins ARE being cut into. Not much/enough unfortunately - but that's a shitrigged totally unprofessional tow and we're seeing a somewhat milder version of what totaled your Kool Kid buddy down at Quest exactly eight months prior to Danny's posting date. Pro toad glider way the fuck up with the bar stuffed.
And by the way...
How Jim managed to maintain control of the tug is what is amazing.
Zack hit the lift a few seconds after I did. He was high and to the right of the tug and was out of my mirror when the weak ling broke. The load on the tug was not excessive as with a lockout, but I was not surprised when the weak link broke.
- It's a totally idiot statement to begin with - what with the report we had from the guy who pulled Zack Marzec into a fatal vertical lockout recently.
- Yeah. AMAZING. His tail's being pulled UP - at not all that much of an angle and tension - so if he does NOTHING the tug just noses down and gains airspeed.
- If he wants to counter anything all he does is pull back on the stick. Just how much skill, judgment, coordination, timing does that take?
Did Jim have anything to say after that?
Couldn't be bothered to post here, could he? Reminds me a lot of...
Up from surgery... Plates on L2 while it heals, will come out after. Feeling good.
I won't comment on my crash just yet. Maybe after the CAA investigation.
...the last we ever heard from him.
There isn't a single still from a single video anywhere showing that sleazy little motherfucker doing anything the least bit noteworthy on anything. If you wanna see some impressive Dragonfly piloting then watch Bobby at:
Rooney was never gonna do any actual demanding flying 'cause he'd immediately get his sleazy little ass kicked to a bloody pulp by real world competent pilots who weren't in constant need of fifteen mile wide safety margins. And he still managed to exit both non motorized aviation sports on chopper borne stretchers after zilch conditions and situations incidents.
Rooney's amazing exactly the way Trump's amazing - getting away with years worth of moronic bullshit through appeal to the dregs of the populations. And you can count yourself amongst them Danny.
Wanna see some actual COMPETENCE being exhibited in the course of an aerotow?
I have some pride in the thought, care, work, engineering that went into that one. And please do note the positions of the hands and the angle of the towline with respect to the horizon. And fuck all you Ridgely pin benders for totally ignoring all that effort and letting it sink into near total oblivion.
ACTUAL threats to tugs:
1992/05/17
Dick Reynolds - 1992/11
Four months have passed since my crash. Fortunately, I've regained control of the old brain, and would like to take this opportunity to pass on my experience in hopes that the rest of you might avoid a similar predicament.
Lookout Mountain Flight Park had acquired a new Moyes aerotug, and I was the aero-tow tug pilot -- claiming 200 plus tows to date. At 11:00 AM on May 17, 1992, I had decided to take two more tows and then call it quits for the day.
The conditions on this particular morning were very light -- great for towing. Takeoff went smoothly, with the glider getting off, then followed by the tug lifting off, thus increasing my angle of climb. My airspeed was pegged at four mph above stall. I took my eyes off the airspeed indicator to watch the hang glider's progress when the engine abruptly seized. I can distinctly remember taking my hand off the throttle to wave the hang glider off, and it was at that point that I fully realized there was no time! I pulled the tug's rope release and pushed the stick forward.
All this occurred somewhere around 50 feet. The combination of high nose angle plus the pull exerted by the climbing hang glider on the tug rope brought the tug plane to a screeching halt, so to speak. I believe my response time was less than one second, but this left the tug plane just hanging with very little elevator authority. The aircraft nose fell through the horizon into a 30 degree below attitude, with the ground rapidly rushing toward me. I attempted a nose-up input at approximately 25 to 30 feet, with no response. My feet, butt and gear impacted simultaneously.
I consider myself fortunate in that my friends were there to immobilize me. The doctors tell me that I'll be walking in a year or so, but that I shouldn't plan on winning any foot races.
I've spent a lot of time (sometimes it seems like that's all I've got!) talking with many knowledgeable individuals about this accident. I believe that tow pilot survivability can be improved as he/she passes through the "low and slow" envelope. From takeoff to a minimum safe altitude of approximately 150 feet, the tug will have to fly five or six mph faster. This will, of course, make it more difficult for the hang glider pilot, but will allow the tug more airspeed margin, thus abiding control as well as a lower nose-up climb attitude.
At the point the tug passes 150 feet, it may then be slowed to accommodate the hang glider. During this transition up to 150 feet, the tug pilot should be predisposed to release the tow rope at the slightest indication of trouble. By initiating this release, it could provide that "fraction of a second" that will give the tow pilot the "edge." The hang glider will have ample speed, and after releasing the tow rope at his end should enjoy a safe landing.
In summary, there is a risk envelope. Get safely above it.
Maybe some negligence regarding engine maintenance. Real good bet it was a 582 Rotax. And as he says should've come off with more speed, shallower climb, dumped the glider immediately.
2012/11/04 - Frank Murphy
Similar to above but cold engine. Total pilot error.
2003/04/11 - Chad Elchin
Assembly/Preflight. And fatal ballistic chute mounting issue.
Passenger on tug, solo glider on tow, stalled on takeoff.
There's never been a threat to a hang glider tug associated with excessive towline tension but listening to Flight Park Mafia operatives one would think that a mid legal range solo weak link is the only conceivable threat to the tug. We have:
Towing Aloft - 1998/01
I witnessed a tug pilot descend low over trees. His towline hit the trees and caught. His weak link broke but the bridle whipped around the towline and held it fast. The pilot was saved by the fact that the towline broke!
solely due to the staggering level of Flight Park Mafia incompetence and still the motherfucker comes out smelling like a rose. I'm gonna call that an absolute minimum of eight hundred pounds. Let's use that on the front end. I can live with five.
Zack hit the lift a few seconds after I did. He was high and to the right of the tug and was out of my mirror when the weak ling broke. The load on the tug was not excessive as with a lockout, but I was not surprised when the weak link broke.
It's more of this crappy argument that being on tow is somehow safer than being off tow.
We don't tow in sled conditions. And being on tow going up in thermal conditions is somehow infinitely safer than popping off tow low and pulling an emergency landing in thermal conditions.
Locking out laterally and blowing a weak link at altitude is a total non issue...
It works best in a lockout situation... if you're banked away from the tug and have the bar back by your belly button... let it out. Glider will pitch up, break weaklink, and you fly away.
During a "normal" tow you could always turn away from the tug and push out to break the weaklink... but why would you?
Have you never pondered what you would do in a situation where you CAN'T LET GO to release? I'd purposefully break the weaklink, as described above. Instant hands free release
...Ryan?)
Low level lockouts terminated by Rooney Links are invariably fatal. Ditto for those terminated using easily reachable releases. (People understand that and know that they can live two or three seconds longer by not using their easily reachable releases so...)
Due to the rough conditions weak links were breaking just about every other tow and the two tugs worked hard to eventually get everyone off the ground successfully.
So if you're actually interested in maximizing safety margin widths then...
Tost Flugzeuggerätebau
We recommend that the weak link insert are replaced after 200 starts: AN INSERT EXCHANGED IN TIME IS ALWAYS SAFER AND CHEAPER THAN AN ABORTED LAUNCH.
...see if you can figure out some strategy to execute flight plans such that the planes can get the job done with just ONE launch and landing per cycle.
It saddens me to know that the rantings of the fanatic fringe mask the few people who are actually working on things.
...fanatic fringe was fighting for and the few people who were actually working on things resisted tooth and nail.
So now that all AT weak links are loops of string at either 140 or 200 pound test what are the things the few people who are actually working on things actually working on? Or is the fanatic fringe still masking them too well for anybody to be able to tell?
Zack wasn't "sitting on the couch" when a cheap piece of string made the decision to dump him at the worst possible time.
Who was betting his life on that decision?
I say, better him than you.
William Olive - 2013/02/27 20:55:06 UTC
Like the rest of us, you have no idea what really happened on that tow.
We probably never will know.
Jim Rooney - 2013/02/28 01:17:55 UTC
Well said Billo
I'm a bit sick of all the armchair experts telling me how my friend died.
Ah but hg'ers get so uppity when you tell them not to speculate.
Rubbish. We know all we really need to about how your friend died. You've said:
Yesterday was a light and variable day with expected good lift. Zach was the second tow of the afternoon. We launched to the south into a nice straight in wind. A few seconds into the tow I hit strong lift.
Zach hit it and went high and to the right. The weak link broke at around 150 feet or so and Zach stalled and dropped a wing or did a wingover, I couldn't tell. The glider tumbled too low for a deployment.
Zack hit the lift a few seconds after I did. He was high and to the right of the tug and was out of my mirror when the weak ling broke. The load on the tug was not excessive as with a lockout, but I was not surprised when the weak link broke. I was still in the thermal when I caught sight of Zack again. I did not see the entry to the tumble, but I did see two revolutions of a forward tumble before kicking the tug around to land. The thermal was still active in the area that I had just launched from so I did a go round and landed on a runway 90 degrees cross to the direction we were towing in.
Mark Frutiger - 2013/02/09 02:31:37 UTC
The turbulance level was strong, among the strongest thermal activity I've felt leaving the field. I've encountered stronger mechanical mixing, but the vertical velocity this time was very strong.
Mark knows everything he needs to about the thermal into which his passenger will be getting dragged five seconds later. And there are no surprises about the glider's response.
He has the glider in position in the mirror and observes it climbing out of the mirror high and to the right. He knows something is going on back there - as a highly experienced and skilled tug driver operating at the most active and experienced AT operation at which aerotowing has been getting perfected for twenty years.
He can fix whatever's going on back there by giving Zack the rope. He makes no effort, the thought never crosses his mind, he doesn't address the issue in retrospect with so much as a punctuation mark, nobody on the Jack and Davis Shows, other tug pilots (Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney in particular) and AT operators, anyone anywhere even suggests that that might have been an option - let alone faults him for not having exercised it.
I give 'em the rope if they drop a tip (seriously drop a tip), or take off stalled. You will NEVER be thanked for it, for often they will bend some tube.
I've seen a few given the rope by alert tug pilots, early on when things were going wrong, but way before it got really ugly. Invariably the HG pilot thinks "What the hell, I would have got that back. Now I've got a bent upright."
The next one to come up to the tuggie and say "Thanks for saving my life." will be the first.
...on that issue.
And then there's:
Towing Aloft - 1998/01
Pro Tip: Always thank the tug pilot for intentionally releasing you, even if you feel you could have ridden it out. He should be given a vote of confidence that he made a good decision in the interest of your safety.
Maybe Mark wasn't getting thanked enough by all the all the passengers he was dumping and crashing on takeoff. Decided to make an example of this guy. I'll bet people are thanking their tug pilots now. Proactively. Slipping them a few bucks before the tow by way of insurance. Editing old posts to recast them as the really stellar individuals they've been since two months before birth.
Like the rest of us, you have no idea what really happened on that tow.
Well said Billo
Who's "the rest of us" - motherfuckers? Mark's in this conversation and has reported on it. Are you saying that HE had and has no idea what really happened on that tow? The Pilot In Command...
Well, I'm assuming there was some guff about the tug pilot's right of refusal?
Gee, didn't think we'd have to delve into "pilot in command"... I figured that one's pretty well understood in a flying community.
It's quite simple.
The tug is a certified aircraft... the glider is an unpowered ultralight vehicle. The tug pilot is the pilot in command. You are a passenger. You have the same rights and responsibilities as a skydiver.
It's a bitter pill I'm sure, but there you have it.
BTW, if you think I'm just spouting theory here, I've personally refused to tow a flight park owner over this very issue. I didn't want to clash, but I wasn't towing him. Yup, he wanted to tow with a doubled up weaklink. He eventually towed (behind me) with a single and sorry to disappoint any drama mongers, we're still friends. And lone gun crazy Rooney? Ten other tow pilots turned him down that day for the same reason.
Ok, keyboard in hand.
I've got a bit of time, but I'm not going to write a dissertation... so either choose to try to understand what I'm saying, or (as is most often the case) don't.
I don't care.
Here's a little bit of bitter reality that ya'll get to understand straight off. I won't be sugar coating it, sorry.
You see, I'm on the other end of that rope.
I want neither a dead pilot on my hands or one trying to kill me.
And yes. It is my call. PERIOD.
On tow, I am the PIC.
Now, that cuts hard against every fiber of every HG pilot on the planet and I get that.
Absolutely no HG pilot likes hearing it. Not me, not no one. BUT... sorry, that's the way it is.
Accept it and move on.
Not only can you not change it, it's the law... in the very literal sense.
...of that flight was totally clueless?
Funny, I seem to have missed the part in which:
- any critical aspects were unobserved
- something unknown and/or unexpected happened
- there was the slightest disagreement or inconsistency between what Mark and the folk back at launch observed and reported
- Mark and/or any of the conspicuously unidentified ground observers are chiming in to agree with you two douchebags
Can either of you douchebags cite one other incident of any kind from the entire history of the sport in which there's been a conclusion that we have no idea what really happened, probably never will know. And, if so, is that what we're telling our ratings officials, tug drivers, students, thrill ride passengers? "There's shit out there that just can't be explained by conventional science, that we'll probably never really understand. We're all just rolling dice all the time but we usually come out OK. Now if you just initial here, here, and here and sign here we can go ahead and get this baby in the air!"
Even when somebody totally disappears XC and turns up memory wiped or dead we can look at what the local conditions had been; examine the terrain, wreckage, injuries; SPECULATE; get a pretty good idea of what happened and why. (Dick Cassetta - 1988/06/11 - is a classic example.)
And IF you motherfuckers wanna maintain this bullshit that we'll probably never have any idea as to what really happened on that tow then you can't legitimately discount any wacko hypothesis anyone feels like pulling outta his ass. Whenever one of Donnell's Infallible Weak Links failed to succeed when it was supposed to he'd suggest that his victim may have accidentally doubled it. (Also was concerned that Tost weak links might jam and strengthen 'cause he hadn't personally tested them.)
Having to push out of the cart.
Your AOA is too high or you're pulling in (or both!).
If you're having to push out when pro-towing (and your cart AOA is right), then you're allowing yourself to get pulled through the control frame. This is an easier mistake to make pro towing as YOU must transmit all the energy of the tow to the glider (through your hang strap). In three point towing, 1/2 the energy is transmitted to the glider, 1/2 to you. In pro towing, you're it.
The tug will "want" to pull you through the bar.
If you let it, you're essentially pulling in.
The rest of us who think that you split the tow pressure half and half between the pilot and glider with a three point bridle and that getting pulled through the control frame pro toad has exactly the same effect on the glider as stuffing the bar in free flight.
And too bad we don't have Ryan in on this one telling how you can roll and turn your glider to starboard by running to starboard. Also how safely and easily Zack could've gotten off tow...
It works best in a lockout situation... if you're banked away from the tug and have the bar back by your belly button... let it out. Glider will pitch up, break weaklink, and you fly away.
During a "normal" tow you could always turn away from the tug and push out to break the weaklink... but why would you?
Have you never pondered what you would do in a situation where you CAN'T LET GO to release? I'd purposefully break the weaklink, as described above. Instant hands free release
...by just letting the bar out - assuming he was holding the bar back adequately during the climb. And I rather suspect...
Funny the glider (the one he's gonna die on the day after he posted this video) doesn't seem to be diving much the way one would predict it would. Looks like he needs to keep holding it all the way back just to stay down level with the tug. Any thoughts on that?
Jim Rooney - 2013/02/28 01:17:55 UTC
Ah but hg'ers get so uppity when you tell them not to speculate.
No problem with tug pilots though - you, Billo...
Paul Tjaden - 2013/02/07 23:47:58 UTC
Beyond these facts anything else would be pure speculation.
...Paul...
Mark Frutiger - 2013/02/08 19:12:21 UTC
I would be more than happy to answer any questions pertaining to what I saw and experienced, but I prefer not to engage in speculation at this point.
...Mark.
Well, Mark not so much. He just says he'd prefer not to engage in speculation AT THIS POINT. That strongly implies a desire to speculate when the situation is safe enough to do so.
Up from surgery... Plates on L2 while it heals, will come out after. Feeling good.
I won't comment on my crash just yet. Maybe after the CAA investigation.
Been well over seven years now. I expect we'll be hearing from him any day now. (And I so do wonder how the CAA's coming along with that investigation.)
Out of respect for friends and family, I'd ask that if you have a need to more, please call me directly at 585-737-9894 or email me privately instead of posting publicly.
So obviously there's a lot more to this story than has been put on the public record. If Mark gave us the whole story then Zack's friends and family would find it disrespectful - that his assessment of Zack's competence, professionalism, performance on this flight was considerably less than stellar. If you want the REAL story contact Mark privately and if he likes you and trusts you to keep your mouth shut then maybe he'll clue you in.
...I'd ask that if you have a need to more...
Why would anyone NEED to (know) more? Do we NEED to know what kind of vario he was using or the color of the T-shirt he was wearing? If there's anything anyone would have NEEDED to know then why haven't you covered it already? Not worth your time and effort?
This is THE most important incident in the history of the sport - as far as technology and the culture are concerned. It will spawn hundreds of posts on the two largest mainstream forums - and that's with Davis locking down everything relevant. It didn't change all that much with respect to how things were done but it was The End of discussions about weak links. And you were the Pilot In Command of the flight - if you give Rooney the time of day - and you're the most important witness and the only one identified and commenting publicly. And the bare bones scant crap you've given us - totally devoid of analysis and recommendations is the best you can do?
Watsamattah? Scared shitless that somebody with half a brain or better is gonna take Rooney's Pilot In Command crap and put it into gear? I know I sure would be. While the Pilot In Command crap is total crap you had major pilot influence on that flight. You supplied and controlled the power, elected to go with the illegal cheap shit posing as equipment on the glider, chose to continue the tow into that monster thermal blast and maintain Zack on tow as he was rocketed up by it.
The load on the tug was not excessive as with a lockout, but I was not surprised when the weak link broke.
- Yeah, no surprises whatsoever.
Manned Kiting
The Basic Handbook of Tow Launched Hang Gliding
Daniel F. Poynter
1974
"A bad flyer won't hurt a pin man but a bad pin man can kill a flyer." - Bill Bennett
"Never take your hands off the bar." - Tom Peghiny
"The greatest dangers are a rope break or a premature release." - Richard Johnson
No surprises about any relevant aspect of this flight. Rerun of the damn close to fatal Dennis Pagen reported on himself in the 2005/01 magazine issue. Rob Kells, a friend to every pilot he ever met, in the very next issue (what a coincidence) publishes:
The higher the top tow point the better.
What's a good synonym for "better" in this context? And, thinking about the situation when one's totally eliminated the top tow point, what would the opposite of that be?
- Shouldn't the load on the tug HAVE been excessive?
Tost Flugzeuggerätebau
Weak links protect your aircraft against overloading.
Shouldn't we have been heading towards an overload situation at that point?
Russell quoted afterward that he'd never had his tail pulled around so violently.
Something like that? The kind of thing you get when you need to slam on the brakes when somebody runs a red? Do we complain about the nasty jolt we get...
What came next was the most painful and violent impact I have ever felt in my life, like I had been torn in half. Extreme pain instantly filled the body with the worst of it concentrated in chest and upper back. I knew I had sustained serious injury and immediately suspected my back was broken. I looked up just enough to see one of the most beautiful things, a clean circular shape of the front 1/3 of the parachute, taut, inflated and in tact. The airflow was quiet now and the earth was no longer hurtling towards me.
...despite getting half killed by the opening shock after falling four thousand feet in less than fifteen seconds with his glider gone and his pod in bullet mode.
And at the other end of that flight:
Due to the rough conditions weak links were breaking just about every other tow and the two tugs worked hard to eventually get everyone off the ground successfully.
I'll bet the loads on those tugs weren't excessive as with lockouts either. But I'll bet that the stresses on the airframes; wear and tear on the engines, transmissions, landing gear, towlines, launch carts were. And I'm betting that the guys on the tugs and gliders aren't enjoying the extra experiences all that much either. Are we absolutely certain that these Standard Aerotow Weak Links are increasing the safety of the towing operations the way they're supposed to?
Weaklinks of 140 and 200 (280 and 400 towline) pounds will be available and provided by the organizers. Weaklinks provided by the organizers must be used by the competitors.
How are we supposed to make any sense of that? Nothing about skill level, glider model, flying weight, max certified operating weight. Go with 140 for more safety margin or 200 for less inconvenience? We can't go with 170 for the sweet spot? No actual pilot is gonna accept or tolerate crap like that. And the sport is currently in a serious death spiral just as one would predict.
Just realized that I missed the fortieth anniversary of my first hang glider flight a month ago today. 1980/04/02 - solo, foot launched, proned out, wheel landed. Wow. I just piloted my own glider. If I'd known then what I know now...
