Releases

[Tad Eareckson]

I do lightly stitch the eyes of the bridle during construction to fix their lengths but...

What's REALLY IMPORTANT is that the area where the two line ends butt internally - about a foot from the bottom end - be stitched.

-------------------+-+-+---+-+-+--------
-------------------+-+-+-0-+-+-+--------
-------------------+-+-+---+-+-+--------

If those ends aren't fixed they WILL shift (internally) and the bridle will be ruined and need to be reconstructed from Step One.

On your Barrel Release extensions...

Nothing critical but I like to get the port and starboard overall lengths precisely equal to precisely center the Bridle Link. You've probably done that but the thought occurs to me that it's probably a lot easier to resplice hollow braid to make adjustments than it is to restitch leechline - the way I've been doing.

Anyway, with the possible exception of the aforementioned stitching... Lookin' good.

Looking forward to seeing your Four-String.

P.S. And please continue to NOT mention my name on the mainstream media. If a connection is made Davis will start putting his lock, delete, and ban buttons into play as sure as the Questlink increases the safety of the towing operation by crashing gliders before they can get into too much trouble.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26440
"GETOFF" Primary Release

Miller Stroud - 2012/01/27 22:10:43 UTC

Now this is personal preference and nothing more but I hate strings and long cables when it comes to releases.

And of course you'd be loath to fly a Dragonfly tug with a Schweizer style release on the end of a cable about a mile behind the pilot or a sailplane with a Tost release at its nose on a cable running back to the cockpit.

All that stuff to constantly manage, the actual release out of reach in the event hell breaks loose, moving parts and cables to break, kink, or malfunction... What WERE they THINKING!!!

[Tad Eareckson]

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14903
New Lookout Release--preliminary test

Observation...

- ALL commercially available two point aerotow releases subsequent to the cheap panic snap based release that they were using on the Dragonfly promo tour in 1991 are dangerous pieces of crap.

- Well, the SteevRelease may not be dangerous but it's poorly designed.

- The Wallaby Release sucks, the Quest Release sucks even more, the spinnaker shackle based Lockout Release doesn't work, and the New and Improved Lockout Release is the most dangerous piece of crap ever deliberately put on an aircraft since Donnell's original 1980 Skyting Bridle/Release system.

- When the untested and uncertifiable Lockout 2 got publicized on The Davis Show by Marc Fink almost three years ago:

2009/02/11 13:26:35 UTC - New Lookout Release--preliminary test

it immediately moved into the Number 2 all time mania slot - right behind the Beatles and just in front of Jesus Christ.

- That thread, currently on Page 21 'cause Antoine had to make a little noise to get Matt to pretend to fix his copies, has racked up - to date - 2772 hits.

- Granted, a chunk of the interest can be attributed to bashing Yours Truly and watching Yours Truly get bashed, but still...

- Joe puts a lot of thought into things, does a really good engineering job, and puts out the best cable lanyard two point aerotow release ever.

- Antoine supplements it with a top notch bridle and secondary components and publicizes it on The Davis Show and...

- Virtually NO INTEREST whatsoever. Zilch in the way of discussion, anemic hit rate.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3659
New Lookout Release

Tad Eareckson - 2008/12/07 04:01:43 UTC

Yeah, it'll totally eliminate all the problems of spinnaker shackle releases (one of which killed Robin Strid in a totally predictable manner) - just like Tim Hinkel and I did years ago.

But since this release is coming out of:

**! LOOKOUT * MOUNTAIN * FLIGHT * PARK !**

instead of as the result of years of the work, testing, refinement, and documentation of a couple of nobody individual weekenders, it will be immediately embraced and worshipped by one and all.

Jim Rooney will speak of the engineering genius behind this new piece of miracle hardware with precisely the same fervor and total incompetence he also has demonstrated when pissing all over my stuff and the Plastic Links of Manufactured By Bob, Inc.

In this game it's all about who makes it versus how it actually performs on the bench and in the air.

If Carlos's inaccessible Wallaby or Lauren's inoperable bent pin barrels sent them into lockouts that would have no doubt whatsoever killed them had they discovered these problems at three hundred feet - what the fuck. What's important is that they're sold by flight parks, proclaimed to be immaculate, and used by EVERYBODY.

Cable based slap-on releases - compared to well designed built in stuff - are crap.

That's not to say that they can't be well engineered and perfectly safe nor that there's no place for them. But for a glider that gets airborne at the back end of a rope more than about ten percent of the time...

Do it right - like sailplanes. Build it in properly - it's too critical a piece of equipment.

Marc Fink - 2008/12/06 14:03:49 UTC

Matt also told me that plans are in the works for a down-sized pro-tow version but that strength issues remain to be addressed.

What a waste of time.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aerotowrelease/

It's already been maxed out and there are no strength issues: Steve's four-string, the eastern European bite releases, and my straight pin remote and standard barrels.

Nothing is EVER going to get better than the stuff you see in those photos.

I'll be interested to get my hands a copy of the new Lookout release. It sounds like a good assembly and I'm pretty sure I'll give it a thumbs up. But I can guarantee you it won't measure up anywhere near to what Hugh and I have on our gliders.

It's really depressing how predictably this idiot culture operates.

[Tad Eareckson]

Jim Gaar - 2012/01/29 06:49:51 UTC

I agree on the letting go to let go!

The cabled style that uses a spinnaker release also comes with a lanyard so that one does not have to let go of the basetube.

Yeah, that's the plus side.

Ralph Sickinger - 2000/08/26 22:18:20 UTC

I pulled on the release (hard), but nothing happened! After the second failed attempt to release, I thought about releasing from the secondary, but before I could move my hand the tug stalled and started to fall...

The downside is that it doesn't work.

I believe LMFP sells that style.

1. There's an absolutely astounding amount of total crap that you believe.

2. Just how hard would it have been to verify what they they actually sell before posting your belief?

3. No, they don't.

Jim Gaar - 2009/02/16 03:01:21 UTC

Tad free zone?...

I hail the new release. I see improvements over the competition. It's good to see progress in a sport rumored to be in it's golden years.

4. Why would they after so many total idiots have hailed the NEW release with all of its improvements over the competition?

5. What they DO sell is a bent pin secondary release which doesn't work under load, a bent pin primary release which doesn't work at all, and a hook knife which works but not in time to be of any more use than cutting your body free of the wreckage.

6. They only use the spinnaker shackle releases on the tandem gliders - 'cause they don't want their students to lock out and die while their own butts are also on the line.

7. And they also use the Wallaby release with the brake lever on the starboard downtube 'cause they need the extra mechanical advantage to at least be able to blow in routine tows most of the time and are OK gambling that they won't ever be in a critical situation in which they can't afford to let go to let go.

8. And anyway after the passenger or student has been briefed on control prior to the flight they've potentially got four hands available to fly the glider and blow tow - and the Wallaby and Bailey Releases only require three.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=21033
barrels release without any tension except weight of rope..

Bart Weghorst - 2011/02/25 19:06:26 UTC

I've had it once where the pin had bent inside the barrel from excessive tow force. My weaklink was still intact. The tug pilot's weaklink broke so I had the rope. I had to use two hands to get the pin out of the barrel.

No stress because I was high.

9. Well, sometimes for the Bailey you need all four - especially when you don't have any weak links on your end of the tow.

I have one lanyard release and one bicycle handle release for sale if anyone is interested. PM me...

Oh good...

- You don't aerotow any more so you'll have more time to give everyone the benefit of your expert opinions.

- Antoine announces and illustrates a bunch of top notch, safe, certifiable aerotow equipment, you make a couple of brief, lukewarm comments about it, and then use the opportunity to advertise the dangerous junk you wanna unload on some poor slobs about whom you don't give a rat's ass.

[deltaman]

ATGuideline

Two Point
A two point (pilot and glider) bridle is connected to the pilot's one point (shoulder to shoulder) bridle at the bottom and usually anchored at the carabiner, control frame apex, or keel at the top.

I'm surprised to read that a primary release anchor could be at the control frame apex as the pilot himself is often hanged to the keel forward this point ?..

[Tad Eareckson]

Yeah, I guess I'm showing my age a bit.

That statement isn't really wrong...
- On a lot of older gliders the control frame apex and hang point was the same thing.
- On, for instance, my glider - Wills Wing HPAT (158) - the apex is well fore of the kingpost on which the suspension is mounted.

(As a matter of fact, in the very first version of my aerotow system I had a spinnaker shackle anchored on the spacer over the bolt which secures the apex to the keel.)

But recently the trend has been to move the apex way back on the keel to make the gliders "easier to land"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaTu5Y4WBdY

18-3704


...and anchoring to an apex aft of a hang point would be a bad idea because it would reduce yaw stability.

I'm guessing it wouldn't be enough to CAUSE yaw INstability but there would be no excuse for rigging the system that way and degrading your margin and I'll make that clear in the next revision.

Another good catch. Really appreciate the critical read. This is exactly the kind of feedback I had asked for and hoped to get when, prior to USHGA's 2009 spring Board of Directors meeting, I put this document - along with the SOPs revision - up for public comment and discussion on Peter Birren's idiot towing forum.

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

Tad Eareckson - 2009/03/03 19:23:46 UTC

Well, it seems that I've done a PERFECT job of revising the SOPs and Guidelines 'cause I've gotten no negative feedback or alternate or supplemental suggestions whatsoever. (Of course there's also a remote possibility that nobody gives any more of a rat's ass about the proposals than the originals but... what are the odds of that.)

But none of those total assholes could be the least bit bothered - even the ones capable of reading at a third grade level in their native language.

[deltaman]

One Point

One point releases have been developed which are actuated by means of a mechanism, lanyard, or trigger line held between the teeth or loop mounted on the basetube.

(..) or loop mounted on the basetube

At which releases do you refer in 1 point AT ? (cause a lanyard mounted on the basetube hang the pilot to the glider..)

We could mount a pulley on the glove or around the wrist of one hand to guide the lanyard held in the other hand..

Actuation effort
You refered to a max actuation effort tolerated. I remember around 12kg. But what about with a bite controlled mecanism without loosing our teeth ?

Construction
I made 4-strings (ratio 60) AND remote barrel (ratio 16.8), I love them.
With the remote barrel, so simple and so light, I changed base for a braided dyneema 2,5mm which go through the barrel up or down the screw and my pin can go on the other side deeper inside the barrel (I didn't install the 3mm screw for yet, I have something thinner meanwhile.). So I imagine we could tight strings between barrel and pulley to limit the action of the tensionner and reduce as possible the length of the pin inside the barrel and so the length we need to pull for release.

[Tad Eareckson]

At which releases do you refer...

If you don't mind all the slop, you can use any cable lanyard release for one point (or platform launch) with the actuator on the basetube. (Of course if you want one that works you'll have to use Joe's.)

...cause a lanyard mounted on the basetube hang the pilot to the glider...

1. Which is why you'd need a lot of slop.
2. This is also the case when someone anchors a two point release on his carabiner - but to a much lesser and less problematic degree.
3. Good point, I hadn't really thought that through. I'll move it to the bad ideas category.

We could mount a pulley on the glove or around the wrist...

Yeah, but as you seem to have discovered...

...I love them.

...bite actuated releases are so superior to anything else that nothing else is really worth pursuing.

But what about with a bite controlled mechanism...

1. I just pulled out the fishing scale and bit down on the end of a length 5/64 inch dacron leechline tied to it. With my incisors I was able to pull 30.5 pounds. It wasn't fun but I can still eat an apple.

2. I recommend that a barrel release based on an M111S parachute pin be protected by a weak link which limits the tension it sees to 375 pounds - meaning, in a one point configuration, 750 pounds towline tension.

3. The load to actuation ratio I got for my Remote Barrel is 16.4 (and you got very slightly better).

4. So I can blow the recommended capacity of the release - 750 pounds towline - with under 23 pounds of bite pull.

5. If some idiot wants to use a bent pin to build a crappier version of the design I've already provided and break some teeth off just before he slams in I will fully support his decision - especially if his last name is Rooney or Hagewood.

With the remote barrel, so simple and so light...

Yeah. It's absolutely astounding that with something that simple, light, cheap, effective, powerful the Industry Standard one point release is still - after over twenty years - an idiot piece o' shit bent pin Bailey. I love it when people who've spent a thousand bucks on a parachute they're never gonna use and kill one day per winter going to stupid repacking and deployment clinics get killed 'cause they refuse to spend an extra twenty bucks on a release they use every time they go flying which they can make work when the shit hits the fan.

I didn't install the 3mm screw for yet, I have something thinner meanwhile.

I used the smallest diameter screw for which I could obtain a nylock nut. Thinner is better - if what you have is solid stay with it.

So I imagine we could tight strings between barrel and pulley...

The Four-String is a bit of a pain to set somebody up with but it's a better emergency release than the Remote Barrel. As you know the load to actuation ratio is so ridiculously high that high loads are essentially non issues. And the required lanyard travel is about as minimal as you can get.

However with the Remote Barrel you can very easily adjust lanyard play in flight as loads and angles change by eating and spitting out lanyard as required. And you blow it just by tilting your head back. And that gives you way more range than you're gonna need.

...to limit the action of the tensioner...

Oops. I just realized you said "tensioner". So you're talking about using the Remote Barrel as a two point / keel release?

If so...

It's good to minimize the required barrel travel but that doesn't really matter too much in any of the applications I'm using.

- The pin shaft isn't all that long so the travel couldn't be very much even if you wanted it to be.

- When you're hand pulling a shoulder mounted Barrel you'll be pulling farther back than you need to anyway and it's a total non issue.

- On a bite actuated shoulder mounted Barrel you can quickly adjust play as described above.

- On a keel mounted Barrel you have to deliberately introduce play into the system. You'll blow yourself off tow if you try to make it too hair trigger. (Ask me how I know.)

-- The release moves on and in relation to the keel fore and aft, up and down, and side to side with changes in tension and alignment with the tug.

-- Even with your hand constantly in proper position on the basetube you'll be making small adjustment as you're dealing with stuff during the tow.

And it doesn't matter much whether the play is barrel travel or lanyard slop.

Looking forward to the pictures.

[deltaman]

Thanks answering

And you blow it just by tilting your head back

surprise! My head is at its #maximum extension during flight, so I thought that the move to actuate was at the side. Am I wrong ? :

http://www.flickr.com/photos/psucvollibre/6828783915/

The load to actuation ratio I got for my Remote Barrel is 16.4 (and you got very slightly better).

no no. 16.8 is written in your mousetraps p53

I understood the better efficiency of the 4-strings, but.. I feel really more confortable with the opposite barrel as cloth as possible to my chest and the 4-strings enforce a longer length. Leaving my hand from the basebar, I naturally go backward. but not really an issue, I concede..

I just realized you said "tensioner". So you're talking about using the Remote Barrel as a two point / keel release?

sorry, I was thinking to the bungee which retains the pin inside the barrel for the emergency remote barrel. but forget my idea..

[Tad Eareckson]

Am I wrong ?

Mostly. The Remote Barrel and Four-String and its Clamcleat locking mechanism will work most efficiently if the pull is straight up.

- The Remote Barrel pulley is supposed to be mounted such that the sheave (wheel) rotates in the vertical plane and you want to keep the lanyard properly aligned with the pulley.

- The Four-String Clamcleat is supposed to be mounted on a horizontal plane such that the Trigger Line is pulled in a plane perpendicular to the mounting (up).

16.8 is written in your mousetraps p53

Must have gotten a bit sloppy transcribing. My test data average is 16.41.

I understood the better efficiency of the 4-strings

1. It's massive overkill - the Remote Barrel is plenty up to the job.
2. It comes at a cost of slack line performance - but that's easily dealt with and pretty much a nonissue in aerotowing anyway.
3. But, on the other hand, there's no possibility of it accidentally releasing as a consequence of contact with the basetube.

I feel really more comfortable with the opposite barrel as close as possible to my chest...

That will work with no reduction of efficiency - but the cost is you'll need a long bridle / Bridle Link. And that introduces a possibility of a wrap at the tow ring that was nonexistent before.

...and the 4-strings enforce a longer length.

It doesn't enforce nearly as much of a longer length as you've made it.

- The Trigger Line length dictates the overall length of the mechanism.

- So you want to make it as short as possible while allowing for a normal comfortable head position plus a little extra so you can look around a little while you're climbing through the kill zone.

- The straighter under the teeth in which you're holding the end of the Trigger Line you position the Clamcleat (through which the Trigger Line is feeding) the shorter you can make the Trigger Line.

- And while making the Four-String longer than necessary probably isn't decreasing its reliability it sure isn't increasing it.

Quick fix...

- Extend the Four-String assembly forward (as you did the Barrel Release on your left shoulder) until the Clamcleat will be positioned straight under your teeth at tow tension. (This is best / most easily determined and checked in flight).

- Feed excess Trigger Line through the Clamcleat and lock a comfortable length.

- Then, of course, you'll need to also extend the Barrel Release to keep the Bridle Link centered.

And next time...

Build the Four-String based on that Trigger Line set length and shorten everything up.

Cautions...

- I can't see your locking mechanism but I'm assuming it's a Clamcleat. Make sure it's equipped with the little bungee Guard I use. Otherwise there's a high probability of it relocking after it's triggered.

- Materials.

-- I make my Four-String out of 5/64 inch (205 pound) leechline and my Bridle Links out of 6/64 (3/32 - 350).

-- It appears that your Four-String material is of a larger diameter than your Bridle Link material.

-- It's not a good idea to (try to) feed a loop of larger diameter line through a loop of smaller diameter line. That's what got Shane Smith killed in Arizona a week shy of thirteen months ago - although it was a much more extreme case.

- So I would either increase the diameter of the Bridle Link material or decrease the diameter of the Four-String material.

- My preference would be the latter.

- I'm very happy with the 205 Dacron leechline - and I have miles of it if you want it and can't find any.

- Or... You should also be OK making the Four-String out of the same material as the Bridle Link.

sorry, I was thinking to the bungee which retains the pin inside the barrel for the emergency remote barrel.

That's alright - so was I until I remembered what a Tensioner was.

In any case, the little bungee - which I named the Keeper - is a nonissue. It only needs to exert enough tension to keep things from falling apart before the system is loaded.