You are NEVER hooked in.

[Steve Davy]

http://www.rmhpa.org/messageboard/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4258

Tom Galvin - 2012/10/31 22:17:21 UTC

I teach hook-in checks. I don't teach lift and tug, as it gives a false sense of security.

Seeing any red flags here, Paul?

[Tad Eareckson]

Gawd I hope so. That one can real easily get a lot more than a nose rearranged.

[miguel]

No. I'd pick up the phone, push three numbers on the pad, the guys with the guns would show up, and the guy with the black robe would make your life miserable and make you get my window fixed.

There is hope for you yet.

Then, with you out of the picture, I'd continue to piss all over your turn and learn approach to satisfying the hook-in check requirement.

Lift and tug does not work well with a CG1000 harness. The slider and all. More like pissing into a stiff breeze while I wonder what you are doing.

(I SO wish we had a system like that in hang gliding 'cause it would be really cool to see assholes like Rooney, Adam, Sam, Matt, Davis, and Steve Wendt behind bars where they belong - and permanently out of hang gliding.)

You make it so easy for them to marginalize you.

But anyway...

What the hell does that have to do with my delivery of the message that THIS:

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

is a goddam REGULATION - not a goddam request, suggestion, option, or opinion

Nothing wrong with the above. It is the rest of the delivery that marginalizes the message.

as the scum that controls this sport is trying so desperately to portray it.

The Hang 0s and 1s are the ones that need to see and hear the message. Chances are that any that make it here will be scared away.

The pdf is good. Winnow it down, sharpen it up and submit it to U*. They are always looking for good hg material.

[Steve Davy]

Too many notes, Miguel?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoY0Qa0zU0A

[Tad Eareckson]

There is hope for you yet.

Not really.

Lift and tug does not work well with a CG1000 harness...

Doesn't work for lotsa people/harness/glider combos. So you do the best you can.

- Modify and/or amend the equipment so it works well.

- Use wind or crew to lift the glider.

- Run a string from the carabiner, put the other end in your teeth when the carabiner's engaged, never take a step unless the string is in your teeth. If you're flying tandem make sure Lenami's string is in your teeth too.

- Get confirmation from an observer.

But whatever you do you MUST...

- Maintain an assumption that you are NOT hooked in until you're airborne.

- Omit preflight checks from the hook-in check procedure to make the latter as fast and effortless as possible. (The more of a hassle a check is (think stupid fucking hang check) the less likely it is to be done or repeated just prior to launch.)

- Minimize the time between the hook-in check and commitment as much as possible. (If you did a hook-in check ten seconds prior to launch and you could've done a hook-in check three seconds prior to launch then you didn't to a hook-in check.)

You make it so easy for them to marginalize you.

I am - by definition - marginalized. There's NOTHING that's EVER gonna change that. So I use that to my advantage. Marginalized people are dangerous 'cause they have nothing to lose. And the establishment IS afraid of me. Reread Dr. Trisa Tilletti's moronic article on weak links if you doubt that (and can stomach it a second time).

It is the rest of the delivery that marginalizes the message.

The industry has been marginalizing the good messages since the Seventies and gets more effective at it with each passing year.

Aviation is dangerous and weight shift controlled foot launched and landed aviation is EXTREMELY dangerous. And add a string to weight shift controlled aviation and start multiplying.

The industry desperately wants to sell the messages to its participants, potential participants, and the public that hang gliding:

- is safe

- can be taught and learned in a couple of weekends by total morons totally clueless with regard to theory

- landings can be safely executed in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place and fields filled with seven foot high corn after one has perfected his standup spot no-steppers

- towing can be safely conducted using the shoddiest of cheap shit equipment as long as you use a little loop of fishing line that'll breaking at the drop of a hat, a polypro bridle that'll keep the little loop of fishing line from break at the drop of a hat, and a razor-sharp cutting tool that can slash through lines in an instant

In stark contrast the way to make hang gliding as safe as possible is to:

- teach from Day One on that it's extremely dangerous

- eliminate total morons from instructor and student pools

- spend three times as much time teaching theory as is done in conventional aviation

- wheel launch on tows

- land only on Happy Acres putting greens using wheels

- spend as much on a tow system - which is used every flight - as is spent on a helmet - which is typically used only on the last flights of the careers of people who equipped themselves with simple Industry Standard equipment that cost a third of a helmet

The Hang 0s and 1s are the ones that need to see and hear the message.

That will NEVER happen.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=16265
weaklinks

Kinsley Sykes - 2010/03/18 19:42:19 UTC

In the old threads there was a lot of info from a guy named Tad. Tad had a very strong opinion on weak link strength and it was a lot higher than most folks care for. I'd focus carefully on what folks who tow a lot have to say. Or Jim Rooney who is an excellent tug pilot. I tow with the "park provided" weak links. I think they are 130 pound Greenspot.

When somebody wants to learn to fly these things he gets on the web, finds Quallaby, Kitty Hawk, Lockout, Manquin, Ridgely, Cloud 9, Cowboy Up, Wings Over Wasatch, or Greblo Enterprises, and starts paying some total moron to tell him what he wants to hear.

Then he finds a big welcoming intellectually castrated Jack Show caliber COMMUNITY with its scores of total morons telling him how to perfect his flare timing and use his standard aerotow weak link as an instant hands free release.

Chances are that any that make it here will be scared away.

Goddam right they will. 'Cause what they're gonna hear at this place is the polar opposite of what they've been paying stupid pigfuckers like Tom, Ryan, and Rooney to teach them at the hills and runways the past six months.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hhpa/message/11400
Question

Zack C - 2010/11/07 05:40:14 UTC

So even the people you want me to listen to you don't agree with 100%. Is there /anyone/ that agrees with you completely? Do you realize how difficult what you're asking me to do is? You're asking me, a not particularly experienced H3, to discard most of what I've been taught about weak links and the convention that has been accepted at pretty much all aerotow flight parks and competitions and trade it for a practice that very few are endorsing. It's very hard for me to believe that the convention is the convention only because everyone following it is an idiot. I'm going to try to get the other side of the story from those who advocate the 130 lb loops. Everyone here seems to use them only because they've been told to (myself included).

But if they've got the brains and balls to stick it out...

Zack C - 2010/12/09 04:21:04 UTC

I think you've got me checkmated. No matter what I say you have a response and at this point I've got nothing left...I have no choice but to accept your position. I've seen so much fallacy from the people that push the universal 130 lb loop that I no longer doubt there isn't a good reason we use them. My hope for weaker links was aborting lockouts in the event of a release failure, but my thinking now is that if a lockout occurs low enough to end in a ground impact, it's likely this will occur before tension increases enough to break a 130 lb loop, and 130 lb loops are at risk of breaking at dangerous times. So yeah, having a better release is a much better idea.

...then they've got excellent prospects for becoming PILOTS - which includes learning...

Zack C - 2010/12/13 04:58:15 UTC

I had a very different mindset too back then and trusted the people that made my equipment. Since then I've realized (largely due to this discussion) that while I can certainly consider the advice of others, I can't trust anyone in this sport but myself (and maybe the people at Wills Wing).

...not to trust anyone in this sport - including the people at Wills Wing and Yours Truly - but themselves.

Winnow it down...

Nope. It's an important enough topic to merit a book. It IS winnowed down.

...sharpen it up...

There are a few things I've learned in since writing it and a few bits that could use some editing - but it still holds up pretty well.

...and submit it to U*.

FUCK U* (not to be confused with "you"). I submitted it to those motherfuckers over three years ago.

Subj: FTHI
Date: 2009/10/13 16:03:35
From: nick.greece@ushpa.aero
To--: TadErcksn at aol dot com

Hi there,

Sorry it has taken me a bit to reply. Your ideas are being considered at the committee chair level. I sent your article to Joe Gregor, the safety chair, for comment and he will get back to you shortly.

Thanks and let me know if you have any questions!

Nick

Little would make me happier than to see that sewer of an organization burned to the ground.

They are always looking for good hg material.

Goddam right they are - and ways to most effectively neutralize it.

The BEST hang gliding material is crash reports...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25321
Stop the Stupids at the USHPA BOD meeting

Mark G. Forbes - 2011/09/30 23:21:56 UTC

Here's how it really works:

- Member submits an accident report. Could be the pilot who had the accident, or some other witness.

- Accident report is sent to Tim to maintain legal privilege. Tim reviews the report and determines whether there's significant legal risk associated with it. He may redact certain parts (personally identifiable information, etc.) if in his opinion exposure of that information poses a risk to us. If the report is very risky, he may decide that it can't be shared further, and will notify the Executive Director about it.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1081
Platform towing /risk mitigation / accident

Sam Kellner - 2012/07/03 02:25:58 UTC UTC

No, you don't get an accident report.

My hook-in check article was the best thing ever written on the unhooked launch issue. USHGA recognized it as the liability threat that it was and countered with THIS:

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

crap to bury the hook-in check message.

I wrote THIS:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=929
Training Manual Comments / Contribution

Bill Cummings - 2012/01/10 14:04:59 UTC UTC

Tad's procedures for aerotowing should become part of any training manual.
Tad must have put hour upon hour of gathering together his written procedure.

USHGA countered with THIS:

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

and THIS:

http://www.kitestrings.org/post2230.html#p2230

Mike Lake - 2012/06/09 00:25:14 UTC

Cone of safety, flying with a fin is better for your weak-link, too many other examples from the last few pages.
What a load of shit.
Who are these people?

I don't know what cave you've been living in for the past couple of decades but it must've been really deep and the oxygen levels must've been really low. You've gotta start recognizing that...

- This sport is a massively incompetent spinoff from REAL aviation run at every level by massively incompetent assholes and sleazebags.

- Competence is the primary threat to said assholes and sleazebags.

- Said assholes and sleazebags combat competence by:

-- attacking, marginalizing, ostracizing, silencing people who have it

-- selling brain rot books by Dennis Pagen and publishing brain rot articles by Jerry Forburger and Dr. Trisa Tilletti which shave five or ten IQ points off of anyone who reads them without Grade 10 bullshit filters

-- bestowing accolades and awards on dangerous morons like Peter Birren

-- using such vague and ambiguous language in writing standards and SOPs as to make them completely meaningless

-- painting the people who get killed due to failure to provide and/or enforce sane safety standards as accidents waiting to happen who made no effort to actuate their Wallaby, Lockout, and Bailey releases, pushed out hard enough to release, and used stronglinks

The PDF was excellent.

The message is spot on...

The Hang 0s and 1s are the ones that need to see and hear the message.

If you think that the PDF is excellent, the message is spot on, and the Zeroes and Ones need to hear the message and care about doing something positive for hang gliding and it's participants I'm having a real hard time understanding why you're wasting your time trying to get me to modify my delivery - which ain't never gonna happen - and not getting on the forums and delivering it yourself. You could've registered on the Rocky Mountain pigfuckers' forum and given me - or at least the message - the covering fire I didn't get from Allen.

You could've said, "Tad's a real asshole but his message is spot on." You can still do that. Something like that can make a BIG difference.

If one of those assholes plummets from his glider this weekend in front of his screaming kids I'm gonna be able to say, "Sorry dude, I did EVERYTHING I could to get through to you but I couldn't make you drink. Maybe it'll sink in for your kids. If not... gene pool."

You gonna be OK with the extent of your efforts?

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.rmhpa.org/messageboard/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4258
HG accident in Vancouver

Steve Davy - 2012/11/04 01:20 UTC

Tom Galvin - 2012/10/31 22:17:21 UTC

I teach hook-in checks. I don't teach lift and tug, as it gives a false sense of security.

Tom,

Pat Denevan teaches lift and tug. What do you know about the issue that he doesn't?

Good one.
(And don't you DARE not answer that question the way you didn't answer mine, asshole.)

[Tad Eareckson]

Hey miguel,

Lemme do a bit with this:

If I were to drive up to your house, then step out and toss a cinderblock through your front window. Would you step out on the front lawn and debate me on the pros and cons of turn and learn?

analogy.

The Rocky Mountain forum is not a house. It's a discussion group controlled by one of the Colorado hang gliding cults which has never heard of its blanket organization's hook-in check or the FAA's weak link regulations. And, without brushing up on my hacking skills, I'm incapable of doing any physical damage to it and Rocky Mountain is quite capable of deleting anything I post on it.

Note that there are no rules whatsoever stated for this particular discussion group.

(Compare/Contrast with a couple of the Jack Show...

Please treat the admin as a regular user. As long as you follow the rules, there is NO CHANCE you will banned because you disagree with the admin. The admin would like to be part of this community too without having to walk on egg shells because people think his word holds more weight for whatever reason. It does not. But the admin will do his job as moderator when he has to. But please follow the rules and don't make him do it, he doesn't enjoy that part.

No posts or links about Bob K, Scott C Wise, Tad Eareckson and related people, or their material. ALL SUCH POSTS WILL BE IMMEDIATELY DELETED. These people are poison to this sport and are permanently banned from this site in every possible way imaginable.

...stated rules.)

When I got approved for posting privileges and submitted my first one - at the time never having set foot in Colorado outside of Denver International - that discussion group was no less my "house" than it was that of some "moderator" asshole who'd flown in Colorado every weekend for the past thirty years and posted five times a day over the course of the bit shy of five year history of the forum.

This:

Tad Eareckson - 2012/05/22 04:09:56 UTC

When I stumbled upon the original article a couple weeks ago I had chills going down my spine.

Time machine. 2010/10/11, Woodside, ten seconds before launch. Are you gonna do anything different from what you did on the first take?

(in response to Dave Stitz) was my first post. It's a bit of a stretch to characterize that as tossing a cinderblock through the front window of someone's house.

And there's a pretty good argument to be made that that one unanswered question is worth ten times more than everything that's ever been posted at that useless cud chewing dump combined.

And I can think of a lot of scenarios in which one could do the owner of a house a big favor by tossing a cinderblock through his front window...
- cobra under sofa
- knife wielding psychopath in shower
- Gestapo on its way after being tipped off by collaborator
- high carbon monoxide level
- natural gas leak
- lava flow within minutes of cutting off escape route
- storm surge prediction on schedule
- levee on verge of collapse
- mudslide imminent
- tsunami on the horizon

Furthermore...

If the house is serving as a crystal meth lab there's a real good argument that you'd be doing the owner, neighbors, town, and environment a big favor by driving a bulldozer through the front window and out the back door.

And that's a pretty good analogy of what Rocky Mountain, Lockout, Windsports, USHGA, Wills Wing, and hang gliding worldwide is doing - they're manufacturing, distributing, selling, pushing crystal meth and telling everyone, age five...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h1uyn_zTlo
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h1uyn_zTlo[/video]

...and up, that it's totally wonderful and completely harmless.

The weakness in the analogy is that - even when practiced incompetently over the course of an entire flying career - hang gliding won't necessarily fuck you up and may very well give you a longer, healthier, fuller, happier life. But that's balanced out a fair bit by the fact that when some stupid pusher asshole who doesn't do or teach lift and tug because it gives a false sense of security takes a mark out for a first time introductory hop the results can EASILY be a zillion times more devastating and irreversible than a good many crystal meth sessions - as was conclusively demonstrate (again) on 2012/04/28 at Mount Woodside.

And I'll tell ya in no uncertain terms that nobody who can't be bothered to check that he's connected to his glider five seconds before every attempt to use it has the slightest goddam business dabbling around with this drug. And I have no problem whatsoever with driving a bulldozer through the front window and out the back door of any user, enabler, pusher, manufacturer, or cartel of a different persuasion and hold that to not do so is unethical and immoral.

Hang gliding is an extremely dangerous addictive drug and if we're gonna do it our understanding of it needs to be 100.000 percent spot on and our execution needs to be at least 100.0 percent. And we're not there and...

Zack C - 2012/06/02 02:20:45 UTC

I just cannot fathom how our sport can be so screwed up.

...we're not on a favorable trajectory.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.rmhpa.org/messageboard/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4258

Tom Galvin - 2012/11/05 01:05

Re: HG accident in Vancouver

I step through and look at the biner before picking up the glider to ensure that my harness, chute and both straps are connected to it with a locked gate, except at the shore where I do not lock the gate. If conditions are not right, and I set the glider down, then I repeat it when I pick up again. Lift and tug can give a false positive if you are hooked in to something other than your hang strap, or in a situation like this...

01. The REGULATION says:

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

The REGULATION does NOT say:

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

02. The purpose of the regulation is NOT to ensure that your harness and parachute are connected to the carabiner with a locked gate. The purpose of the regulation is to ensure that you - or people worth saving anyway - are connected to the fucking glider.

03. Compare the number of times per flying day that your carabiner is connected to and disconnected from your glider to the number of times per flying day that your parachute is connected to and disconnected from your carabiner.

04. From the entire history of hang gliding can you cite a single incident of someone who had preflighted his parachute connection in the setup area but found it disconnected at launch?

05. What are the odds that:
- your parachute bridle won't be connected to your carabiner when you arrive at the setup area;
- you'll:
-- miss the problem at preflight;
-- NEED your parachute on that particular flight; AND
-- be high enough for it to do you any good?

06. Fuck your goddam parachute.

07. Please explain to me the rationale behind using two straps but just one carabiner.

08. Fuck your goddam backup loop.

09. Why is it important to have a locked gate inland but not at the shore?

10. Fuck your goddam locking carabiner.

11. If you're gonna leave your stupid fucking locking mechanism disabled at the shore wouldn't it make equal sense to remove your stupid fucking backup loop?

12. What is it on your glider that you could hook into other than your suspension and why haven't you removed it?

13. Anybody who needs to repeatedly check that he has a fully closed and, if he's at an inland site, locked gate, two suspension loops, and an engaged parachute bridle at launch position is a total moron.

14. Note that:
- you haven't said anything about leg loops
- the stupid fucking preflight procedure you're using as an excuse to omit a hook-in check does NOTHING to catch missed leg loops

15. Compare the number of people who've been fucked up 'cause:
- they didn't catch both suspension loops
- their parachute bridles weren't connected to their carabiners
to the number of people who've been fucked up 'cause they didn't have their leg loops.

16. When you see someone - possibly one of your students - standing on the ramp with his glider on his shoulders are you assuming that he:
- is connected to it because you always go through your idiot procedure every time before you pick up a glider in preparation to launch?
- has his leg loops because you've never (yet) needed to verify yours?

17. Please explain to me how following the fucking USHGA regulation requiring a verification of hook-in status JUST PRIOR TO *LAUNCH* by doing a lift and tug would give more of a false sense of security than all the stupid preflight crap you do on the ramp.

18. Doesn't all the stupid preflight crap you do on the ramp give you a false sense of security regarding the condition of your sidewires?

19. But I guess as long as you keep rechecking that your harness, parachute, and main and backup straps are connected to your carabiner and (except at the shore) the gate is locked that it doesn't really matter what shape your sidewires are in.

20. Here's a list of people who use lift and tug to give themselves a false sense of security:

Norm Boessler
Steve Davy
Pat Denevan
Tad Eareckson
Brad Gryder
Doug Hildreth
Eric Hinrichs
Rob Kells
Steve Kinsley
Mike Lake
Judy McCarty
Helen McKerral
Dennis Pagen
Jason Rogers
Jim Rowan
Antoine Saraf
Allen Sparks
Chris Valley

Here's a list of a couple of Greblo victims taught your idiot approach of preflighting the connection and skipping the hook-in check:

Phill Bloom
Greg Jones
George Stebbins

Compare/Contrast their unhooked launch records.

21. From the entire history of hang gliding cite a single incident of a lift and tugger falling from his glider.

22. I got news for ya, asshole... People who lift and tug - JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH - *NEVER* have false senses of security about their status.

Rob Kells - 2005/12

Always lift the glider vertically and feel the tug on the leg straps when the harness mains go tight, just before you start your launch run. I always use this test.

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.

They do it 'cause they're SCARED.

23. And a lift and tugger isn't just scared about not being hooked in or having missed his leg loops. He's also scared that he's just partially hooked in and that his hang loop is damaged. And that makes him think about whether or not he's checked that he was fully hooked in and preflighted his hang loop.

24. And that's all it takes. Nobody who's thought about a partial hook-in or critically damaged hang loop has ever launched partially hooked in or with a critically damaged hang loop.

25. Any chance that when you're doing and teaching people to do and repeat a bunch of useless bullshit preflight checks that someone will get seriously fucked up...

Luen Miller - 1994/11

After a short flight the pilot carried his glider back up a slope to relaunch. The wind was "about 10 mph 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 60' 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."

...as a sole consequence of a useless bullshit preflight check?
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13132
Unhooked Death Again - Change our Methods Now?

Jesse Benson - 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.

Too bad you're too fucking stupid to understand the difference between:
- hook-in and preflight checks;
- what's critical to your survival five second before launch and what's distractive rubbish; and
- just prior to the goddam launch and just prior to picking up the goddam glider.

[miguel]

Too many notes, Miguel?

Not really, but it needs more 'right' notes

Now's the Time - Charlie Parker
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHobIUQMlSw
arc3391 - 2009/111/13
dead

[miguel]

Checkmate!