You are NEVER hooked in.

[deltaman]

In France, we had this extraordinary story :
An old pilot cliped his carabiner on the "spreading tube" rather the hangloop.
He did 2 "preflights", used aussie method, a pilot "checked" his attachment.
The spreading tube broke at the moment he took off and crashed alive in the rocks (2 broke ankle, 1 dislocated shoulder). He stopped hanggliding.

Another one:
A french team pilot died in the end of 90's by clipping his carabiner in an another loop passed in the main one to extend the length, probably with a strange knot ..but badly. Enough to stay hooked for 50m flying before to fall suddenly...

Preflight failure ok but note that a Lift & Tug would have caused confusion ..and would not avoid death

[Tad Eareckson]

I never got the fear.

It oughta be a felony to let a Day One, Flight One student to pick up a Condor and fly down a shallow sand dune without scaring the crap out of him first.

Once I heard of the phenomenon I didn't need anyone to scare me 'cause I knew that bullet had my name on it. But it was sure nothing anyone ever impressed on me in any training - including three instructor certification clinics, two with Mike Robertson and one with Dennis Pagen.

Dennis signed me off on 1989/06/04 and on 1993/09/28 sent his glider off Morningside without him. It was then and only then that he started seeing some value in hook-in checks - though not enough for him to weigh in on the issue in any book or article of his I've read since.

I finished my career less than thirty hours shy of a Five with lotsa merit badges and nobody ever taught or required of me so much as any form of hook-in check for anything.

And I know of no program which does anything really worth mentioning in the way of instilling fear.

Rob Kells says:

Each of us agrees that it is not a particular method, but rather the fear of launching unhooked that makes us diligent to be sure we are hooked in every time before starting the launch run.

and talks about how dangerous the hang check and Aussie method are but in the Falcon 3 owner's manual:

Do a hang check immediately prior to launch.

is EVERYTHING Wills Wing has to say on the issue - then three and a half pages on the best ways to avoid the deadly wheel landing.

...while yelling "Hooked in...

And causing everyone within earshot to drop his guard.

...before every launch.

Such that it becomes normal background noise.

I was flying twice as far as I did with walk, jog, run.

So why were the students being taught to walk, jog, run launches with their downtubes resting on their shoulders? (First we're gonna teach you crappy methods of verifying your connection, launching, flying, landing then maybe in a few years if we feel like it we'll teach you how to do things right - the way WE do them.)

I'm up and he tells me to pull the hang strap tight before launching so I did.

I hope he warned you all about how this would reduce the traction on your feet you would need for yaw control and raise the wing into the deadly turbulent jet stream always present six to eight inches above on the shoulders altitude.

Today the idea of moving a foot without the hang strap pulling on my harness is unimaginable.

Go down to Torrey and spend some time with Bob. He's really good at helping people recover from their pathologies.

P.S.

I didn't even know about the fear until I found Kitestrings.

Mission Accomplished.

[Tad Eareckson]

A Baltimore area instructor who goes back to the beginning of time right after Bill Priday was killed...

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1183
Hook in training starts on day one...

Richard Hays - 2005/10/07 01:07:30 UTC

I have a drill I use with my students on their first day or two of training. I teach them how to hook in. Then how to lay down and then the walk-through. The usual stuff. But then, after they're hooked in, I'll ask them the obvious: "Are you hooked in?" They'll look me straight in the eye and say "Yes". I then ask them, "Would you bet your life on that?"

At that moment they will then turn around and visually check. Then I ask them again "Are you hooked in???" They will then turn around... look again... and then respond yes.

I then share with them the real life stories of Dennis Pagen, Pete Lehmann, Bob Gillisse, and Jim Brasher. I then tell them that one to three people a year die from forgetting to hook in. Sadly... I'll have to now include Bill.

I impress upon them that every time they prepare to launch, they are betting their lives they've prepared properly - in both preflighting their wing AND properly hooking into it and the harness.

I also recommend to them to always hook in BEFORE putting the helmet on. I really feel that full face helmets somewhat impede this visual process of hooking in.

Each story has its own dynamics. We can only hope to learn from these, and pray never to fall prey to them ourselves.

I have a drill I use with my students on their first day or two of training.

Not a "drill" you use ONCE on their first day or two of training. Something along that line you instill before they ever get near the fuckin' glider and every time they pick up the fuckin' glider anywhere near anything remotely resembling a launch.

Then how to lay down and then the walk-through. The usual stuff.

Yeah, the usual preflight stuff. And ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the way of the hook-in check that you've been required to require for the past three decades.

But then, after they're hooked in, I'll ask them the obvious: "Are you hooked in?" They'll look me straight in the eye and say "Yes".

If you'd done your job right they'd have said, "No fuckin' way! Are you nuts or sumpin'?"

At that moment they will then turn around and visually check. Then I ask them again "Are you hooked in???" They will then turn around... look again... and then respond yes.

Good job kids! Now you know you're hooked in 'cause you looked a couple of times. Now you can relax, move your glider to launch, and start focusing on cycles and traffic.

I then share with them the real life stories of Dennis Pagen, Pete Lehmann, Bob Gillisse, and Jim Brasher.

Which is the first thing you should've done in ground school.

I then tell them that one to three people a year die from forgetting to hook in.

1. It's more like one person dying once every two or three years - well, a different person dying once every two or three years.
2. NOBODY dies from forgetting to hook in. The reason people die is because they NEVER make ANY EFFORT do HOOK-IN CHECKS.

Sadly... I'll have to now include Bill.

Any comments on the asshole who signed him off on all his ratings?

I impress upon them that every time they prepare to launch, they are betting their lives they've prepared properly - in both preflighting their wing AND properly hooking into it and the harness.

1. They can't complete the preflight until they're connected and in the harness.

2. So what you're saying is that they are betting their lives they've prepared properly - in both preflighting AND preflighting.

3. Anybody who's betting that he won't plummet from a glider because of his meticulous preflight procedures is a moron.

With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.

4. What part of:

With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.

do you not understand?

I also recommend to them to always hook in BEFORE putting the helmet on. I really feel that full face helmets somewhat impede this visual process of hooking in.

1. Brilliant move...

Rescue 911-Episode 415 "Hanging Hang Glider (Part 1)"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ls2QiDtSO7c
BeatleMoe - 2008/05/14
dead

...Richard.

2. You really FEEL that full face helmets SOMEWHAT impede this visual process of hooking in? You FEEL that someone with a full face helmet who wants to look at his carabiner while hooking in will find that his full face helmet so impedes the process that he'll say fuckit and do a half-assed job? Has anyone ever reported this being an issue?

3. The issue of unhooked launches has NOTHING to do with preflight inspections. It's about hook-in checks. And hook-in checks should be done WITHOUT visual checks if at all possible.

You're doing this USELESS drill ONCE.

Then your students continue preflighting, skipping hook-in checks, and launching off the training hill with no further verification EXACTLY the way you taught them to. When they get to High Rock, McConnellsburg, or Whitwell they're gonna behave EXACTLY as they did on the training hill and look EXACTLY like Steve Wendt's students. NOBODY will be doing or looking for hook-in checks.

Each story has its own dynamics.

Two of which will ALWAYS be:
- use of a preflight procedure to confirm hook-in status; and
- zero effort ever having been made to establish a hook-in check routine.

We can only hope to learn from these, and pray never to fall prey to them ourselves.

Fuck that. Stop ignoring what Steve Kinsley's been trying to pound through everyone's terminally thick skulls and start adhering to the goddam SOPs.

[Tad Eareckson]

In France, we had this extraordinary story...

http://www.azhpa.org/azhpa_forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=2871
Kunio Checklist

Don - 2008/09/02 19:02
Long Beach

About four weeks ago we had a similar situation at Kagel - A pilot hooked into the spreader bar on his hang strap. If he had done a hang check he was have seen/felt his error. Luckily the spreader bar slipped free of the hang strap as the glider lifted off and he fell only a couple of feet - if it had held even three to five seconds his fate would have been sealed.

It's not that extraordinary.

Another one...

Doug Hildreth - 1992/01

1991/11/03
Leonard Rabbitz
55
Intermediate
Several years
UP Comet I
Elizabethville, Pennsylvania

Improper hook-in. Pilot was ready to launch into ideal conditions, did a hang check, and launched. At about thirty feet altitude, there was a loud snap, the pilot fell to the basetube and was holding on to the basetube with his armpits. The glider pitched down and descended into the trees at the top end of the launch slot. On impact, the pilot was ejected from the glider and fell forty feet to the ground. He died four hours later in the operating room of uncontrolled bleeding from his pelvic fractures.

Investigation showed that instead of the standard hang loop arrangement, both the primary and backup loops were draped over the keel. To keep the loops positioned, he had tied them together with light cord. This resulted in four loops that had to be hooked through the carabiner for the system to work.

Evidently the pilot only hooked through two of the loops, and the cord held his weight during the hang check. But with the launch pull-out, the small extra G force resulted in the cord breaking (or the loops pulling through) and the loops being no longer attached to the glider. Later inspection showed the carabiner was firmly locked to two intact hang loops.

Doug Hildreth - 1991/08

1991/05/17
Lynn Smith
37
Novice
70 flights, 11 mountain flights
Pacific Windcraft Vision
Lookout Mountain, Georgia

After two prior flights that day, the pilot returned for his twelfth flight at this site. Winds were light. The pilot hooked in and did a hang check. The straps were not straight, so he unhooked, straightened them and rehooked. Reportedly at least three different hang checks were done with at least one unhook. The pilot launched, popped the nose slightly, dove to recover, and about halfway through the pullout, after about ten seconds of flight, the pilot fell from the glider. Fall was over a hundred feet. He was killed on impact, with major head, face and chest injuries. The carabiner was found intact and functional. The gate was not locked. Both hang straps on the glider were normal.

The reporters suggest the pilot either: 1) unhooked to satisfy himself that the harness was adjusted correctly and failed to hook back in and get a final hang check; 2) hooked into something other than the hang straps, which broke during the pullout after initially holding during hang check and launch; 3) hooked into the hang strap, but with the open carabiner hooked on the strap rather than through it.

Doug Hildreth - 1992/09

1992/06/26
Philip Sidener
27
Novice
Many months
Flight Designs Lancer
Oatman Mountain, Gila Bend, Arizona

Two pilots went up for their second flights of the day. Another pilot launched first. Phil launched alone. He worked lift in the bowl "for a while." Then, while on approach to final at about 250 feet, he "disconnected" from his glider and fell to the ground. May have attempted parachute deployment. Killed on impact.

Addendum: "The highest probability seems to be that Phil hooked into the flat hang loop only, and just partially with the carabiner point pushing down on the flat portion. There was an indentation on the hang loop where the biner 'could' have been. He probably came unhooked during final as he went upright and grabbed for the downtubes."

Bill Bryden - 1999/03

The accident occurred in April of 1997 while the position of USHGA Accident Review Committee Chairman was vacant. Consequently, the important lessons were not reported in the magazine; lessons that the pilot, Tom Sapienza, would certainly have wanted others to learn, consistent with his spirit as a fine instructor. I also know that his family would like his story to be told, and I apologize for it having taken this long. This incident also has a degree of similarity with an accident I recently learned about (reported by our friends from the New Zealand Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association), which is in part why I chose to discuss it here.

Tom performed a hang check and proceeded to foot-launch his competition glider from the ramp normally. As he cleared the launch area he transitioned to a prone position and shouted a thank you to the launch assistants who turned away, and who thus failed to witness the events that followed. Details are not precisely known, but the conclusion is that Tom's harness detached from the glider. He held on to the control bar, which possibly inverted and dove the glider into tall trees well below the launch area. He fell approximately 110 feet to the ground below and died four or five hours later after a lengthy evacuation to the hospital.

The mystery is how his harness separated from the glider. The carabiner was found closed and locked, and the hang loops on the glider were intact and properly connected. A search of the launch area revealed a third intact hang strap on the ground midway between launch and crash sites. Prior to launch, Tom had to make some hang loop adjustments to accommodate the shorter straps on the harness he was using. It seems that this third strap was used to make the adjustment.

Various methods were tried to recreate likely modifications and determine the most probable cause of the failure. It would appear that the third strap was looped three times to extend the main and backup straps, and that Tom only hooked into two of the three loops. It appears that no additional backup or redundancy system was used. When recreated, this arrangement could support some weight momentarily, but the straps would eventually slip and separate.

The New Zealand accident began in a strikingly similar fashion. The pilot had acquired a new harness and adjusted hang loops on the glider to accommodate it. However, he elected to use his old harness for this flight which hung at the wrong height. The pilot attempted to address this and determined that by clipping the harness to the spreader bar (presumably it was fastened securely to the main hang strap as opposed to sliding like some designs) he'd hang at the correct height. After a hang check with some difficulty on launch, a backup carabiner was installed which likely resulted in the carabiner being put through the same strap as the first instead of the backup. Near the completion of the flight, the pilot performed a wingover prior to landing and the spreader bar failed from resultant higher G forces. He was detached from the glider but successfully deployed his parachute and landed with only minor injuries.

Preflight failure ok...

Yes.

...but note that a Lift & Tug would have caused confusion...

No.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13132
Unhooked Death Again - Change our Methods Now?

JBBenson - 2009/01/25 16:27:19 UTC

I get what Tad is saying, but it took some translation:

HANG CHECK is part of the preflight, to verify that all the harness lines etc. are straight.

HOOK-IN CHECK is to verify connection to the glider five seconds before takeoff.

They are separate actions, neither interchangeable nor meant to replace one another. They are not two ways to do the same thing.

Lift and tug tells you that you:
- have your leg loops; and
- are connected to SOMETHING that's connected to your glider.

It DOESN'T tell you:
- what you're connected to;
- how well you're connected to it;
- that your:
-- starboard downtube/basetube junction pin is in your pocket
-- port sidewire is half a G away from failing

A preflight check is used to verify the integrity of all critical components of your entire aircraft and a hook-in check is the last instant verification that your carabiner isn't dangling behind your knees and you have your leg loops.

They are separate actions, neither interchangeable nor meant to replace one another. They are not two ways to do the same thing.

There is NOTHING confusing about that.

But it starts getting EXTREMELY confusing REAL fast when people try to use preflight checks to verify that they're hooked in and hook-in checks to make sure that they've got proper clearance over the basetube, their lines aren't twisted, they're hooked into their primary suspension, their carabiners are closed and locked, their parachute pins are fully seated, and their fucking helmets are buckled.

People HAVE died from issues resulting from preflight inspection omissions and errors and will probably continue to do so. But even given that 99 percent of the assholes who fly these things refuse to load test their sidewires the serious incidents resulting from preflight issues are a drop in the bucket. The big and very easily fixed maimer/killer is the dangling carabiner launch.

So if you have to make a choice between skipping the preflight inspection and skipping the hook-in check...

[Steve Davy]

But then, after they're hooked in, I'll ask them the obvious: "Are you hooked in?" They'll look me straight in the eye and say "Yes". I then ask them, "Would you bet your life on that?"

Sounds like Richard had his heart in the right place. One could argue that he didn't receive adequate training from the instructor administrator that signed him off.

If an instructor is held accountable for a student's incompetence then shouldn't an instructor administrator be held accountable for an instructor's incompetence?

I give him some credit for at least addressing the issue.

[Tad Eareckson]

Sounds like Richard had his heart in the right place.

Yeah, but we all know what's paving the road to hell.

One could argue that he didn't receive adequate training from the instructor administrator that signed him off.

1. I'm pretty sure he's been an instructor since before there WERE any instructor administrators.

2. I had the best of the best running my clinics - Mike Robertson and Dennis Pagen. Neither one of them had ever heard of a hook-in check.

3. So yeah, it's pretty much a no brainer that he didn't receive adequate/competent training. And I'd say that it's a pretty safe bet that no one in the history of the sport ever heard mention of a hook-in check in the course of an instructor certification clinic.

4. However...

If an instructor is held accountable for a student's incompetence then shouldn't an instructor administrator be held accountable for an instructor's incompetence?

Hell yes. And the higher up in the chain of command the more deserving of a decapitation.

I give him some credit for at least addressing the issue.

He didn't address it. He made an effort.

I'll give him a wee bit of credit for making an effort. BUT...

- It isn't an effort that produces any results.

- A lot of issues in this sport are pass/fail. And this one fails.

- I view an instructor as I do a physician. They both have the power to save lives and get people killed and the responsibility to stay abreast of and employ the best procedures and equipment.

- He's gotten the same magazines I have with the same article by George Whitehill and reports and pleas from Doug Hildreth.

- He's been on the same local forums I was with the same posts by Steve Kinsley and Judy McCarty.

- He just keeps on doing things the same way he's always done them 'cause that's the way he's always done them.

[miguel]

Glad you are back.

Here is a situation where the lift and tug would have probably yielded a false positive. Turn and inspect would have caught this.

kwright from hg.org - 2012/05/04

Hook in is right!
I have a picture, from a tip mounted camera, of me flying at Lakeview, The top of the c of the caribiner is hook ON the hang loop, dead center. It was very crowded on launch and I self launched myself from above launch, with no real hang check other than stepping through and feeling a tug on my harness. I remember feeling a clunk sometime after takeoff. It was the carabiner dropping INTO the hang loop! It could of gone the other way and I would of fallen like this poor woman, I wonder if that is what happened to her.... I was terrified when I saw the photo and I'm not sure where it is, but I am sure the angels were watching my dumb ass that day! I don't believe I ever told anyone about that mistake until now.... May she rest in peace

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?p=25963

[Tad Eareckson]

Glad you are back.

(From week and a half trip out west visiting my sister's family - which is why I wasn't posting much. But I did spend a lot of insomnia time tidying up the forum's archives and making things look prettier.)

Thanks. Not that happy to be back but glad you're posting.

Here is a situation where the lift and tug would have probably yielded a false positive.

I commented on that post at:

http://www.kitestrings.org/post2079.html#p2079

Lift and tug NEVER gives a false positive. It ALWAYS does everything it's intended to - nothing more, nothing less.

It tells you that you:
- are connected to SOMETHING on the glider; and
- have your leg loops.

(Yeah, Charles Schneider figured out a way to fuck up with a lift and tug on the leg loops but it's not really worth talking about. See:

http://www.kitestrings.org/post18.html#p18

if you're interested.)

It DOESN'T tell you that:
- you're partially hooked in (been there, done that - ONCE);
- the nut on the quarter inch bolt going through your kingpost wasn't reinstalled;
- a mouse has used some of the webbing for it's nest;
- the shitrigging you did to extend your suspension wasn't the best idea you ever had;
- your port sidewire is only good for one and a half Gs.

It tells you in no uncertain terms however that you:
- forgot to hook in;
- forgot that you unhooked to adjust your camera;
- missed your leg loops.

And those are the big common killers that we're trying to stop.

Turn and inspect would have caught this.

Yes. TURN and *INSPECT* WOULD have caught this. That's why...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13132
Unhooked Death Again - Change our Methods Now?

JBBenson - 2009/01/25 16:27:19 UTC

I get what Tad is saying, but it took some translation:

HANG CHECK is part of the preflight, to verify that all the harness lines etc. are straight.

HOOK-IN CHECK is to verify connection to the glider five seconds before takeoff.

They are separate actions, neither interchangeable nor meant to replace one another. They are not two ways to do the same thing.

...one of the Hang One requirements states:

Beginner Rating - Required Witnessed Tasks

1. Set up and preflight of glider and harness, to include familiarity with owner's manual(s).

That would be a very critical component of your PREFLIGHT *INSPECTION*. You would be certifiably insane if you deliberately skipped that item.

But you would be even more certifiably insane to skip a hook-in check a couple of seconds prior to launch because you remember having turned and inspected fifteen or thirty seconds ago.

And you're also a total fucking moron if you're attempting to do preflight inspections...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=822
US Hawks Hook-In Verification Poll

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/11/09 18:34:13 UTC

Your five second time limit between hook-in check and launch is unreasonably short - especially when attached to the consequences that you've listed. This would preclude, for example, the "turn and look" hook-in check that Joe Greblo teaches because five seconds would easily elapse between that check and getting the glider back into position to launch.

Luen Miller - 1994/11

After a short flight the pilot carried his glider back up a slope to relaunch. The wind was "about ten miles per hour or so, blowing straight in." Just before launch he reached back to make sure his carabiner was locked. A "crosswind" blew through, his right wing lifted, and before he was able to react he was gusted sixty feet to the left side of launch into a pile of "nasty-looking rocks." He suffered a compound fracture (bone sticking out through the skin) of his upper right leg. "Rookie mistake cost me my job and my summer. I have a lot of medical bills and will be on crutches for about five months."

...at the beginning of your launch sequence.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1167
The way it outa be

Steve Kinsley - 2005/10/04 14:04:25 UTC

One last attempt.

We have now rounded up all the usual suspects and promised renewed vigilance, nine page checklists, hang checks every six feet, et cetera. Bob Gillisse redux.

A hang check is part of preflighting your equipment. You do it in the setup area - not on the launch or the ramp. When you get in line you are hooked in and ready to go. No going down for a hang check cum hook in check.

Turn and inspect behind the ramp, move into position with your shit as thoroughly together as you can manage, then verify and go with no more fucking around. We can teach Little Ashley to do this on Day One, Flight One better than Bob will ever be able to manage if he concentrates on nothing else for the next twenty years.

P.S. Note that neither Charles Schneider with his missed leg loops nor kwright with his partially engaged carabiner were scratched. Compare/Contrast with Bob Gillisse, Bille Floyd, Bill Priday, and Kunio Yoshimura.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=3355
Failure to hook in 6/29/12

Gregory Jones - 2012/06/30 03:51:41 UTC

I attempted to launch unhooked from the Towers today. Within a couple of steps the base bar was at my chest and I had that "Oh s&%t!" feeling. My weight below the base bar pulled the glider back down and I crashed into the bushes fifty to sixty feet below launch.

I've spent a few hours trying to pinpoint the exact breakdown or distraction which allowed to me to walk up to launch unhooked (which I typically don't do) and have concluded that all it takes is the slightest deviation from a routine to put one in that position.

I usually check again on launch, but also failed to do so. I was very lucky to come away from this incident with a few scrapes and bruises and no obvious damage to my glider. I honestly thought that I had my launch regiment dialed in and that I would never do this.

Another example of how vigilant and aware we all need to be about hooking in. You seriously cannot check too many times!

I attempted to launch unhooked from the Towers today.

Hell, you attempt to launch unhooked every time you run off a slope.

Within a couple of steps the base bar was at my chest and I had that "Oh s&%t!" feeling.

1. What if you had tried to bring the bar up to your chest JUST PRIOR to taking those first couple of steps? Just kidding.

2. I only had that "Oh s&%t!" suspension related feeling once - after landing, fortunately. It was when I went to unhook and found the carabiner open with its nose dimpled into the midpoint of the webbing.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13132
Unhooked Death Again - Change our Methods Now?

JBBenson - 2009/01/25 16:27:19 UTC

I get what Tad is saying, but it took some translation:

HANG CHECK is part of the preflight, to verify that all the harness lines etc. are straight.

HOOK-IN CHECK is to verify connection to the glider five seconds before takeoff.

They are separate actions, neither interchangeable nor meant to replace one another. They are not two ways to do the same thing.

That was the moment that really burned the understanding of the distinction between "preflight inspection" and "hook-in check" into my circuitry.

My weight below the base bar pulled the glider back down and I crashed into the bushes fifty to sixty feet below launch.

I'm assuming you mean fifty to sixty feet along the slope below launch (seeing as how you're not currently in intensive care).

I've spent a few hours trying to pinpoint the exact breakdown or distraction...

Let's make that three hours.

That's 10800 seconds.

Let's round it down to ten thousand.

Takes about a second...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHWbu0su1fA


...to do a lift and tug.

So with that three hours you WASTED trying to pinpoint the exact breakdown or distraction that hit you prior to arriving at launch you coulda done enough breakdown and distraction proof hook-in checks to last you and several of your idiot hardcore buddies the rest of some very long foot launch hang gliding careers.

Got any hours left over? You might learn something from reading some of this thread - currently clocking 289 posts and 3317 hits. Just kidding.

...which allowed to me to walk up to launch unhooked (which I typically don't do)...

Yeah dude. ALWAYS walk up to launch hooked in.

Rob Kells - 2005/12

Each of us agrees that it is not a particular method, but rather the fear of launching unhooked that makes us diligent to be sure we are hooked in every time before starting the launch run.

That increases both the likelihood and the feeling of confidence you have that you actually ARE hooked in when you get into position.

...and have concluded that all it takes is the slightest deviation from a routine to put one in that position.

1. Good thing you figured that out all on your own. (Don't read a lot of fatality reports, do ya?)

2. Yeah, that's a real bitch. But what are you gonna do? We've had the best minds in the business working on the problem for decades and... Nada.

3. So obviously you were unsuccessful at pinpointing the exact breakdown or distraction which allowed to you to walk up to launch unhooked (which you typically don't do) or you would've told us what it was. (Too bad - that woulda been fun to add to my collection.)

4. So if you HAD BEEN successful at pinpointing the exact breakdown or distraction which allowed to you to walk up to launch unhooked (which you typically don't do) of what value would that information have been to you? Is your game plan to never have a breakdown or distraction which allows to you to walk up to launch unhooked (which you typically don't do)? 'Cause if it is you are REALLY setting yourself up. (If you don't believe me, read a few of those fatality reports.)

I usually check again on launch...

1. OH! You USUALLY do a little extra check again on launch after TYPICALLY not walking up to launch unhooked? Just in case?

2. But, what the hell, you've already done your required confirmation back in the staging area. And just as long as there isn't the slightest deviation from your routine there's almost no chance that this kind of problem will become an issue - again.

I was very lucky to come away from this incident with a few scrapes and bruises and no obvious damage to my glider.

I'm glad you and your glider are OK, but... You died - bigtime.

I honestly thought that I had my launch regiment dialed in and that I would never do this.

Precisely. I always honestly thought that my launch regimens were totally useless and I would ALWAYS do this.

Rob Kells - 2005/12

Each of us agrees that it is not a particular method, but rather the fear of launching unhooked that makes us diligent to be sure we are hooked in every time before starting the launch run.

And that's why you did it and I didn't.

Another example of how vigilant and aware we all need to be about hooking in.

1. Yep. Whenever you find that a strategy you've been using to keep you alive has just gotten you killed you should always try to do more of it harder.

2. BULLSHIT. It DOESN'T MATTER whether or not YOU ALL ARE HOOKED IN. ALL that matters is that YOU ALL ASSUME YOU'RE NOT HOOKED HOOKED IN and CHECK - EVERY TIME, the INSTANT before you all commit.

3. Did you ever read your rating requirements? EVERY flight at EVERY level?

With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.

Just kidding.

4. So who all was up at launch watching you skip the hook-in check and launch unhooked? Lemme guess... A small flock of other Windsports grads?

You seriously cannot check too many times!

That depends on how you interpret the results of the check, Greg.

- After you've completed your preflight inspection of connection, if you do those checks 'cause you're bored standing in line and aren't using them to reassure yourself that you're hooked in, knock yourself out.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25550
Failure to hook in.

Steve Davy - 2011/10/24 10:27:04 UTC

OK- how many times does he need confirm that he is hooked in? And when would be the best time to make that confirmation?

Brian McMahon - 2011/10/24 21:04:17 UTC

Once, just prior to launch.

Christian Williams - 2011/10/25 03:59:58 UTC

I agree with that statement.

What's more, I believe that all hooked-in checks prior to the last one before takeoff are a waste of time, not to say dangerous, because they build a sense of security which should not be built more than one instant before commitment to flight.

- If, on the other hand, you continue to use them to reassure yourself that you're hooked in, then two is WAY too many.

Sebastian Lutges - 2012/06/30 07:43:42 UTC
Newhall

Very glad your OK

And I'm very glad you're very glad he's OK.

Alright Sea Bass, your work here is done. Carry on with whatever it was you were doing.

Gregory Jones - 2012/07/02 20:54:47 UTC

Still in disbelief that my dumb ass actually did it!

Yep. That's your main problem, Greg. I believed my dumb ass was actually gonna do it EVERY TIME I LAUNCHED. You've got WAY too high an opinion of yourself - lethal self-esteem levels. Bad news for people who fly stuff. If I were you I'd get myself checked into a good clinic tomorrow.

NMERider - 2012/07/02 23:36:49 UTC

I'm giving you my Whack Award that Phill 'Unhooked @ Towers' Bloom awarded me at the Spring Air. The fact that you and Phill both managed to survive launching unhooked with that steep hillside without having to glide away in a dive then reach for your reserve handles is amazing.

That's a REAL optimistic scenario Jonathan. It's been done - but don't count on it.

I hope you work out a system that keeps this from ever happening again.

Hey Jonathan, how 'bout something along the lines of:

With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.

If you come up with something novel that works please share it.

Hey Jonathan, how 'bout something along the lines of:

With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.

Never mind, not novel enough.

I use the walk-through and 'reach back and feel' techniques but neither one is idiot-proof.

1. Of course you do, Jonathan. You can't just lift the glider until you feel the tug within two seconds of launch. You need to put the glider down, turn around, feel the carabiner to make sure it hasn't corroded or been gnawed by porcupines in the last couple of minutes, pick it back up, move to launch position, and trim it.

2. But wait a minute, Jonathan...

Weren't you in that really wonderful USHGA / Paul Voight film:

Pre Flight Safety for Hang Gliding

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW8qZESnFvQ


dedicated in loving memory to William F. Priday, 1952 - 2005, all about how not to run off a ramp without your glider like William F. Priday, 1952 - 2005, did after graduating from Steve Instructor-of-the-Year Wendt's program?

I don't remember seeing you - or anybody else - using the walk-through or 'reach back and feel' techniques.

I don't even remember hearing you - or anybody else - talking about the walk-through, 'reach back and feel', or any technique other than the hang check, which is what William F. Priday, 1952 - 2005, was taught.

But you don't even use a hang check to verify your connection? So how come? I just naturally assumed that all the pilots involved in the production of that wonderful film were on board with and believed in its message. Seems a bit misleading, unethical, unscrupulous to me. Can you let me know what - if any - parts of that film AREN'T a load of crap? Minus - of course - the parts with Paul Voight. Those go without saying.

And what you DO use isn't idiot-proof? And you've never even fucking heard of a fucking lift and tug?

Asshole.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=822
US Hawks Hook-In Verification Poll

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/11/09 18:34:13 UTC

Your five second time limit between hook-in check and launch is unreasonably short - especially when attached to the consequences that you've listed. This would preclude, for example, the "turn and look" hook-in check that Joe Greblo teaches because five seconds would easily elapse between that check and getting the glider back into position to launch.

OH MY GOD!!! YOU'RE RIGHT!!! That would preclude, for example, the "turn and look" hook-in check that Joe Greblo teaches because five seconds would easily elapse between that check and getting the glider back into position to launch!!! I NEVER thought of that!

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=811
FTHI

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/10/25 06:28:43 UTC

Tad, Joe Greblo is a very conservative instructor, and he teaches a physical hook-in check just prior to launch.

BULLSHIT. He teaches the kind of worse than useless crap you use...

http://www.kitestrings.org/post2203.html#p2203

Preflight your connection, skip the hook-in check, launch wherever and whenever the fuck you feel like it.

He does not mandate a lift and tug. If you go to Joe's web site:

http://windsports.com/

you can find contact information for him. Joe knows far more about hang gliding than I probably ever will.

Yeah, you're both a hundred miles south of fuckin' clueless.

If you can convince him that he should be teaching "lift and tug" instead of "turn and check", then you'll get my vote of support.

Nah, that's OK...

Phill Bloom - 62456 - H4 - 1996/03/13 - Joe Greblo - AT CL TUR - OBS

Gregory Jones - 72198 - H4 - 2005/02/19 - Joe Greblo - FL AWCL CL FSL RLF TUR XC

Why mess with Joe's stellar level of success?

P.S. I wouldn't take your vote of support on a silver platter with a gun to my head. Get fucked.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=354
Greblo on Launching Unhooked, What to Do If

Christian Williams - 2006/09/20 16:04:22 UTC
Pacific Palisades

Greblo on Launching Unhooked, What to Do If

People who understand this issue do not waste time teaching "what to do if". This one is SO EASY to prevent and the consequences of NOT preventing it in environments in which it matters are such horror shows that it's totally moronic to have any "what to do if" discussions or exercises whatsoever.

Tell every fucking student on Day One, Flight One that if he doesn't do a fucking hook-in check within a couple of seconds of launch for EVERY flight from that point on through the rest of his career there's a real good chance that he's gonna find himself dangling from the basetube and good freakin' luck if/when he does 'cause he's gonna be improvising on his own.

Scare the crap out of him.

The ABSOLUTE LAST thing you wanna be doing is giving him hope in some idiot clinic that this may be a manageable situation.

"Sure kid. Cigarettes aren't all that dangerous if you keep your consumption down to a reasonable level. Surgery, chemo, radiation, transplants... Need a light?"

Fuckin' moronic.

Launching unhooked--can it happen to anybody?

It NEVER happens to anyone who ALWAYS assumes it's about to.

The latest victim is Kevin Rooke, a highly regarded NZ instructor...

I don't recall anyone asking for my take. I've got extremely low regard for "instructors" who don't do and teach hook-in checks.

...who released quickly and survived.

1. In stark contrast to the late Terry James Mason.

2. I'm not THE LEAST BIT INTERESTED in what he did in the two seconds AFTER launch. I'm ONLY interested in what he DOESN'T DO in the two seconds BEFORE *EVERY* launch. (I like that interval 'cause I always know anyway.)

Rooke was the investigator on Jim Rooney's unhooked crash last year...

1. A total moron investigating a much more total moron.
2. JIM ROONEY'S unhooked crash last year? As I recall there was a PASSENGER involved. Who gives a flying fuck about Rooney?

...and wrote the accident report.

1. "ACCIDENT" report?
2. Lemme guess... Lotsa stuff about hang checks?
3. Is there some place we can go to read it? Do we get to see the video from the wing camera?
4. Or is this like one of those "accident" reports that Sam Kellner writes up then sends to Tim Herr to get buried or shredded?

Joe Greblo gave an "unhooked" clinic at the Dockweiler dunes two weeks ago...

I already beat up on that rot at:

http://www.kitestrings.org/post1404.html#p1404

George Stebbins - 2006/09/22 18:21:41 UTC
Palmdale

Just for information to all club members.

On the very day that Joe was teaching folks what to do if you don't hook in, I was flying the Condor at the beach. Trying to soar, I let myself get distracted and started my launch run unhooked.

Meaning you never incorporated lift and tug as the beginning of your launch sequence.

Because I was letting the glider float over my shoulders, I immediately knew that I wasn't hooked in.

Ya know what, George?

- If you let the glider float over your shoulders BEFORE starting your launch run you'll know whether or not you're hooked in BEFORE starting your launch run.

- If you let the glider float over your shoulders AFTER starting your launch run you'll know whether or not you're hooked in AFTER starting your launch run.

I've always had something of a bias for the former but I understand that it's very important for us to respect each other's personal preferences in this sport. (Right Bob?)

I had only taken two steps, so I "skidded" to a stop. I didn't let go of the glider, nor did I fall down or launch unhooked. But ONLY luck, years of experience, and quick thinking saved me from an embarassing launch unhooked.

1. So, obviously, a first day fifteen year old kid on the training hill would've been totally incapable of aborting a launch the way you did. Good job, George. Righteous stuff.

2. If you had been at Lookout, Henson, Whitwell, or High Rock your ass woulda been dead. If you had been at McConnellsburg it would've been at least half dead.

The overwhelming majority of unhooked launches happen due to distractions: camera, spectators, changing your routine, unhooking and hooking back in (or not), thinking about soaring, thinking about that person you hooked up with last night (or almost hooked up with) etc.

Bullshit. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of unhooked launches happen due to people never making any effort to establish a hook-in check as the beginning of the launch sequence.
- Distractions don't have shit to do with it. Distractions ONLY affect people who substitute preflight checks for hook-in checks.
- NOBODY'S thinking about that person you hooked up with last night (or almost hooked up with) etc. on the launch ramp.

On the mountain, and under tow, I always take three seconds to take a deep breath and make sure my head is where it should be before I do my final hook-in check.

1. There's no such thing as a FINAL hook-in check. There is ONE and ONLY ONE hook-in check and it happens two to five seconds before commitment to launch. Anything that happens before that didn't happen.

2. You're not foot launching under tow. You're on a dolly or platform suspended from the glider. It's physically impossible for you to launch unhooked. So of what possible relevance is this to the conversation?

3. And when you're aerotowing you're going up with total shit for equipment so I have no freakin' clue what good you're imagining those three seconds and that deep breath are gonna do for you. If the shit hits the fan low you're gonna be just as dead as Eric Aasletten, Steve Elliot, and Mike Haas are.

On the training hill, I let myself get complacent. It's just the beach, right? I want to jump into the lift band now! The result almost was an unhooked launch.

1. You were in easy soarable beach conditions.

2. You discovered you weren't hooked in because the glider floated too high within two steps.

3. There was ABSOLUTELY NO REASON not to let the glider float to the stops before you took a step.

4. You don't do hook-in checks.

5. THIS:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=822
US Hawks Hook-In Verification Poll

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/11/09 18:34:13 UTC

Your five second time limit between hook-in check and launch is unreasonably short - especially when attached to the consequences that you've listed. This would preclude, for example, the "turn and look" hook-in check that Joe Greblo teaches because five seconds would easily elapse between that check and getting the glider back into position to launch.

is the crap you're doing and calling a hook-in check.

Make it a point to ALWAYS do your hook in check.

What's a hook-in check, George? You haven't defined it. Is it any action or set of actions anybody feels like calling a hook-in check? If I get somebody to hold my nose while I lie down under the glider and check my carabiner, clearance, chest buckles, parachute pins, and chin strap is that a hook-in check?

ALWAYS make sure your brain is in gear before you launch.

If you're a lift and tugger your brain doesn't hafta be in gear. All you need is fear and/or muscle memory. That's why I prefer it - my brain is virtually never in gear.

And ALWAYS make sure you are actually thinking about what you are doing, not about something else, even if that something else is part of the flight.

Bullshit. Don't think for a nanosecond before you commit about what you're doing. Think only about what the consequences will be if your carabiner's dangling behind your knees.

When you launch, think about the launch.

Bullshit. That's EXACTLY what everybody who's ever ended up on the rocks was thinking about - right along with everyone on his idiot crew and everyone watching. Don't think about the launch. Think about the fall.

Joe has his five Cs, five things to check before launching.

Fuck Joe's five Cs. Don't think of ANY of goddam Cs when you're on the ramp. Think about the one P. Think about the Plummet. It's a whole lot easier to remember, there's a big reminder right in front of and below you, and if you get that much everything else will fall right into place.

And if you can't remember Plummet think Priday - that might work even better.

They are, from bottom to top:

- Crotch (Leg loops buckled?)

Preflight. But do lift and tug and you've got them anyway.

- Chest (Chest buckled if your harness has one?)

Doesn't matter. Nobody ever got scratched 'cause his chest wasn't buckled.

- Chute (Is it fully installed and pins locked?)

Preflight. Take care of it before you get to the ramp. If you don't and your parachute falls out you might get beat up a little but you're not gonna get killed.

- Chin (Helmet on and buckled?)

Fuck the chin strap. Hell...

1978/08/02 - Tim Schwarzenberg - 26 - Highster - Desert Mountain - Kalispell, Montana

Forgot his helmet, unhooked to get it. Launched without hooking up again. Hung onto control bar for several minutes, fell four hundred feet. Body found four days later.

Fuck the helmet.

Launch position is not the place to be dicking around with a bunch of trivial preflight crap.

- Carabiner (Hooked in?)

You're NOT. That's why you do the lift and tug - to prove you're wrong at the last possible instant.

Allen Binder - 2006/09/24 07:11:58 UTC
El Segundo & Sylmar

Actually, I believe that what you think is 'chest' is actually 'clearance'.

1. Who gives a rat's ass? It doesn't matter. The conversation is supposed to be about not launching without the fucking glider.

2. And if you couldn't get that much right in preflight don't worry about it. Worry about your sidewires. 'Cause if you're too freakin' stupid to get clearance right it's a no brainer that you haven't looked at and tested your sidewires in the past two years.

George Stebbins - 2006/09/25 20:02:08 UTC

Perhaps it is clearance.

Great. The Sacred Five Cs and nobody can even remember what they are.

But I think of it as chest because:
a) I need to check my chest buckles too

No. You don't. They don't matter. If you forget them then buckle them in flight when you get a free moment - if it makes you happy.

b) For me, checking the chest includes checking clearance

Two things that don't matter, George. The goal here is to keep people from slamming into the rocks at sixty miles an hour - REMEMBER? So tell me how this BULLSHIT is *REMOTELY* related to that issue.

Thanks for the clarification.

This ain't CLARIFYING SHIT, George. This is all HOPELESSLY DERAILING the issue. This is an UNHOOKED LAUNCH thread getting sabotaged and hijacked by preflight junkies.

The overwhelming majority of unhooked launches happen due to distractions: camera, spectators, changing your routine, unhooking and hooking back in (or not), thinking about soaring, thinking about...

...backup loops, carabiner locks, chest buckles, clearance, parachute pins, hang checks, turning, looking, touching, and trying to remember what the Five Fucking Cs are.

Anything and everything you're doing or thinking about at launch position other than your hook-in status is a dangerous distraction.

I learned to fly long before Greblo came up with the 5 Cs, so I had to pick it up by watching others.

You also learned to fly long before the Wallaby/Quest assholes invented releases within easy reach and weak links which, if you fail to maintain the correct tow position (centered, with the wheels of the tug on the horizon), will break before you can get into too much trouble.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12512
Weak Links

George Stebbins - 2008/07/13 21:01:44 UTC

I've always been happy with the Quest Air links, and only once did one break when it annoyed me seriously, and for no apparent reason. (Just as I crossed the treeline. I had to whip a 180 before I ran out of altitude to do so. Then I had an interesting landing, not really having room to turn back into the wind...)

And you've remained equally as fuckin' clueless on those issues because you're way better at watching and imitating others than you are about actual THINKING.

The Five Fucking Cs are deadly on the ramp and useless in the setup and staging areas. Nobody needs them. All ya gotta do is slow down for five seconds, look at your equipment, and dedicate five percent of your focus to it.

I clearly mis-remembered that one item, putting in what was most critical for me...

Yeah George, in a discussion about unhooked launches chest buckles is a really critical issue - even more critical clearance.

It would probably be better to call it 6 Cs and count both chest and clearance.

Yeah George...

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1167
The way it outa be

Steve Kinsley - 2005/10/04 14:04:25 UTC

One last attempt.

We have now rounded up all the usual suspects and promised renewed vigilance, nine page checklists, hang checks every six feet, et cetera. Bob Gillisse redux.

Let's keep adding Cs.

Anybody wanna talk about using hook-in checks to prevent unhooked launches? Just kidding.