landing

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=1212
Drogue Chute - Near Disaster At Kagel LZ

NMERider - 2008/11/15 05:49:26 UTC

I recently heard about this incident first hand when riding up the Kagel just after the fires. Guess who?

Jeff Chipman?

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

Jeff Chipman - 2008/11/16 04:49:45 UTC
Sylmar

I know the glider and pilot

Unmistakable glider. If he would have pounded in he wouldn't be too far from where he lives.
Glad to see he was OK. Wonder why the glider dove the way it did?

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24846
Is this a joke ?

Jim Rooney - 2011/09/02 23:09:12 UTC

Yeah, damn those pesky safety devices!
Remember kids, always blame the equipment.

Allen Binder - 2008/11/16 08:05:11 UTC
El Segundo & Sylmar

Looks like the glider did a right turn. Maybe the chute was deployed with the left hand and the person mistakenly pulled in with the right hand without realizing it.

Just a thought.

Maybe it's a really crappy idea to be taking hands off of basetubes during critical phases of flight. Just a thought.

Jesse Benson - 2008/11/16 21:40:39 UTC

I think the deployment just stalled the glider.
The wind gradient must have been a major factor. Because of the hillside, the gradient rose up to meet him as he deployed. Bad timing.
The rising terrain may also make the dive appear more severe than it was.

Don Banas - 2008/11/18 22:41:54 UTC

That loss of altitude immediately upon deployment was unbelievable.

How 'bout now? More believable maybe?

Once he came out of the turn and back onto the base leg the chute appears to drag off the ground a couple of times.
Maybe someone that has a lot of experience with chutes can help explain what/why what happened.

This one ain't rocket science, Don.

NMERider - 2008/11/19 00:04:22 UTC

There's a fair amount of discussion here:

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13989
drogue chute lesson

including some of our very own members.

And, speaking of drag chutes:

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=30722
What happened to JD?

Sebastian Lutges - 2008/11/19 07:12:26 UTC
Newhall

Look at the video closely. The chute snags a bush first, deflates a little then scrapes the ground.

Look at the video closely. Ask yourself just how much danger there was of him overshooting the LZ.

Joe Greblo - 2008/11/19 17:30:28 UTC

It's really quite simple. The pilot was flying at a high angle of attack (near stall angle) when he deployed his drag chute. What happens next is exactly what the drag chute is designed to do; steepen the flight path. But the moment the flight path steepens, the direction of the relative wind is now coming up at a steeper angle also; thus the stall. Remember, angle of attack is the angle of the airflow to the chord line. If either the airflow direction (relative wind) or the chord line direction changes, then the angle of attack changes. The glider's not smart enough to know if the pilot pushed the nose up, or if the direction of the relative wind has changed. In the case of the video, it was the latter.

A similar event occurs when a weak link breaks when towing at high angles of attack...

Oh BULL SHIT!

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=11497
Aerotow release options?

Jack Axaopoulos - 2009/07/04 12:13:01 UTC

Bullshit.

a) only the pilot can let the angle of attack increase when you lose tension. Thats 100% on the pilot. You are simply wrong and misleading again.

b) "And if your angle of attack was way too high to begin with..." Which should never be the case or youre making a pilot error. Again, you are misleading people.

This is the problem I have with you. You attempt to fallaciously attribute pilot errors to issues of mechanical towing devices or other things.

Sorry... but if you suddenly lose power, your nose just doesnt pop

Sorry... but if you suddenly lose power, your nose just doesn't pop.

...or an ultralight's engine failure during a steep climb out after take-off.

You mean like THIS?:



So you're saying that the effect of a weak link failure on a hang glider is identical to the effect of an engine failure on a tug - even though...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24846
Is this a joke ?

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/26 02:44:10 UTC

The "purpose" of a weaklink is to increase the safety of the towing operation. PERIOD.

...the purpose of a weak link is to increase the safety of the towing operation - PERIOD?

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/13 05:55:39 UTC

I've had to deal with your profanity, your attacks on other members, your strong weak link theories, your lift and tug theories, and your hopelessly long and repetitive posts.

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

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

Joe knows far more about hang gliding than I probably ever will.

Fuck you, Bob.

The glider's trajectory suddenly changes from an ascent to a descent. This significant change in flight direction creates a sudden change in the angel of attack, often resulting in a deep stall.

Not on a weak link break...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24846
Is this a joke ?

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/26 17:34:33 UTC

Remember, a weak link improves safety.
Say it over and over and over in your head until it sinks in.

A weak link break improves safety. Say it over and over and over in your head until it sinks in. Why do you think they refer to it as the angel of attack? The bigger the better, dude.

The message is simple. Don't deploy a drag chute near the terrain at a high angle of attack.

1. How 'bout deploying a weak link near the terrain?

The United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association, Inc. - 2013/02/07
Standard Operating Procedure
12. Rating System
02. Pilot Proficiency System
12. Hang Gliding Aerotow
-A. Aerotow

05. The candidate must also demonstrate the ability to properly react to a weak link/tow rope break simulation with a tandem rated pilot, initiated by the tandem pilot at altitude, but at a lower than normal release altitude. Such demonstrations should be made in smooth air.

Surely that couldn't be dangerous. You'd probably be locking out with your release within easy reach and that would be your only hope of survival.

2. Is there some message for going up behind some total fucking asshole...

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2467
weak links

Jim Rooney - 2007/08/01 13:47:23 UTC

Whatever's going on back there, I can fix it by giving you the rope.

...who's primed to fix whatever's going on back there by giving you the rope?

Pulling the nose down just before deploying the drag chute can also cause problems. The bar pressures associated with faster flight can cause a serious turn when the pilot releases just one of the hands in order to deploy the chute.

But it's OK when a locked out pilot releases just one of his hands in order to deploy the release?

Hey Joe...
- When is it gonna be most critical for towed glider to release?
- What's: almost certainly gonna:
-- be going on with bar pressure at that time?
-- happen:
--- if/when the pilot releases just one of the hands in order to deploy the release within easy reach?
--- right after the weak link increases the safety of the towing operation?
- Where the fuck were you during the Zack Marzec postmortem discussions - or any of the other standard aerotow weak link flame wars?

I have dozens of landings with drogue chutes and find them a viable tool to remedy one of the modern hang glider's most serious flaws (the inability of the pilot to control his glide slope without significantly changing airspeed).

How 'bout we train pilots how to approach to get onto final so low that the goddam glide slope doesn't matter.

There are dangers with drag chutes as well...

...so no one should attempt to use one without careful preparation and training. I agree completely with Rob McKenzie's post on the Oz Report Forum regarding when to deploy the drag chute; essentially well before entering any segment of the approach.

1. And you obviously agree completely with Rob McKenzie's post on The Jack Show advising everyone to totally fucking ignore USHGA's hook-in check regulation.

2. So what fields requiring drag chutes are you and Rob recommending people land in?

Frederick Wagner - 2008/11/20 19:09:11 UTC
Mar Vista

Stall

Now, it seems like that's a great video of how much altitude loss there is with a stall and recovery -- something I hadn't a great sense for before.

What? Fatality reports for people like Gerry Smith, Mike Haas, Jeremiah Thompson, Arlan Birkett weren't impressive enough for you?

How 'bout this one?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFAPpz6I6WU

Sure glad he made it. I don't want to do any more memorial services.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=14312
Tow Park accidents

Jack Axaopoulos - 2009/11/12 14:49:58 UTC

One of the stated goals of this site is to promote HG. MOST views on this site are NOT from members but from visitors, they have no ignore button.

Having Tad run around every day giving the impression that there is a massive weekly slaughter of pilots at tow parks due to their horribly dangerous devices surely doesnt promote HG. Especially when the safety records are quite excellent.

Like Jim said, theyve gone a decade with no fatalities at their tow park. Pretty damn good I say.

Yet listening to Tad, you would think guys were dying all over the place
He's been nothing but misleading and negative and ignored multiple warnings from me. So He's GONE

Eric Brown - 2008/11/20 22:29:40 UTC
Los Angeles

I was thinking the same thing Freddy. I wonder, if he had done this at half the altitude and found himself in a stall recovery headed straight for the ground is there any exit from that?

Yes. Chances are he won't be in any shape to experience it though.

Is it possible to flare going uphill/downwind when in a deep stall like that? Does it depend on which part of the stall you're in?

Why are you asking this? Are you planning on getting into situations in which you can test various ideas?

Malury Silberman - 2008/11/22 05:40:30 UTC
Alhambra

WOW! That's scary. I think a stall is a stall is a stall and there is just not enough energy in the glider to flare.

That's alright. There'll be plenty enough energy to do other stuff. And the glider will stop on a dime with no risk whatsoever of overshooting the field.

Even so, after pulling in for recovery, I would flare it as hard as possible before impact. What else can you do? Land fast dude.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13989
drogue chute lesson

Fabiano Nahoum - 2008/11/15 18:14:54 UTC

I think he might have dived on purpose, but maybe he simply did not anticipate how quickly one loses altitude while dragging a drogue and diving.

I once saw a video of some British champion pilot who was looking very comfortable while he deployed on downwind leg but, much like this video here, as he made his base turn, he lost all his altitude in a few seconds, and crashed before even getting close to the landing area. (If anyone knows this video please post it here!)

Ever since watching that video, I do not make turns with the drogue. I only deploy on straight final.

I say it's better to deploy low than high, if high means making turns before landing.

Of course too low is not good but if you have a nice setup even thirty feet can be OK.

The less time you spend flying with the thing, the better!

George Stebbins - 2008/11/15 20:59:25 UTC

I disagree with deploying low. If you deploy high, you have time to figure out any issues.

Like your glide ratio is gonna go to hell? What else?

If you deploy low and have a problem you will crash.

So? If you NEED to deploy low and don't you'll overshoot and crash.

Of course, deploying mid-height is worst of all. High enough to get seriously hurt, but not high enough to recover from any issues. Kind of like the hand-transition.

Something even more unnecessary and dangerous than the drag chute.

High is OK. Low is OK. At fifty feet, you are asking for trouble.

You're asking for trouble whenever the fuck you do it. For any altitude you can name I can find you someone seriously injured or killed who'd have been totally OK if he'd stayed prone on the basetube.

Yes, I know that many people like to deploy the drag chute low. Hold in hand, let it go on final. BUT, I refuse to hold the chute in my hand after I pull it out. Too easy to get it over a wire or the basetube. If you do that, you WILL crash.

What WILL you do when you're locked out low and effect the easy reach you need to make to blow the cheap crap you use for a release?

So, I do it high. Pull it out and send it back without ever pulling it forward towards the base-tube. And the approach is just fine.

Sure. Just as long as you don't suddenly find you need to get back any of the performance you just flushed down the toilet.

The faster you fly, the more it sinks like a Falcon. Kinda cool, really.

Yeah. I've always been a huge fan of crap performance. That's why...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24534
It's a wrap

Davis Straub - 2011/07/30 19:51:54 UTC

I'm very happy with the way Quest Air (Bobby Bailey designed) does it now.

...I'm so very happy with the way Quest Air (Bobby Bailey) strings all that slap-on crap into the airflow and the manufacturers totally refuse to build release systems into their gliders.

But you DO have to remember that it will do the job for which you bought it: Increase your sink rate. Oh, and do you really want to change the flying characteristics of your aircraft in the middle of the most difficult part of any flight, right next to a hard surface?

Why not? You're going upright and putting your hands on the basetube such that you can't get any speed and don't have any roll control right before you throw the nose up to two or three times the placard limitation to whipstall it to a dead stop anyway. And that's what accounts for the vast majority of serious and career ending injuries in the sport. Hard to imagine low drag chute deployments could make things much worse.

I've done approaches (including turns) with drogue chutes many times.

How many approaches have you done where you NEEDED a drag chute? And can you tell me what fields you were using so that I can avoid them?

If you do your approach high (like a Falcon)...

I don't do high approaches. They're shoddy and stupid.

...and fast, you come down quickly, yes, but not as quickly as in the video. Note that after he does the first part of the turn, he then does another turn, a final and landing. Yet he never gets that high a sink rate again. Clearly something specific happened. What that was, I can't tell.

Who gives a flying fuck? He had a primary LZ in front of him that totally negated any necessity of using a drag chute. If you can't park it in the Kagel LZ plenty of runway to spare without the use of a drag chute you shouldn't be flying Kagel.

I'm really interested in ideas, too.

Bullshit. NOBODY who flies with 130 pound Greenspot lockout protectors is interested in much of anything.

Does anyone know who the pilot is?

Somebody who thinks he needs a drag chute to be able to hit the Kagel LZ.

Maybe he can shed some light on it.

And maybe Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney can shed some light on unhooked launch prevention.

(BTW, I just watched the video again. The site is my home site, of Kagel. Even without the obvious sudden issue that he had, he was too low at that location to make a reasonable full approach with a drogue chute. He could have pulled it off, but there wouldn't have been much margin. He needed to be higher.

Where did he need to be to hit the LZ WITHOUT the fucking drag chute?

(And obviously, if he'd been a hundred feet higher, he wouldn't have nearly hit the ground after that amazing dive.) You really do need to treat the glider like a Falcon after the chute has been deployed. Maybe it even gets a worse glide than that. But, again, that's why you bought it, right?

I have no idea why these bozos are buying these things. The idea is that you use a drag chute so that you can keep from overshooting a tight field - not that you need to come in a hundred feet higher so you can use a drag chute and not wind up a mile short of the primary. Total fuckin' lunacy.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13989
drogue chute lesson

Harald Steen - 2008/11/16 17:52:08 UTC

Used it many times but never before crossing the last obstacles.

The voice of sanity rears its ugly head on The Davis Show. Time to start thinking about locking this one down.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13989
drogue chute lesson

Fabiano Nahoum - 2008/11/16 20:21:19 UTC

Agree. Even a minor unexpected headwind increase may totally compromise your capacity to reach the LZ. When droguing you have no penetration at all, any wind will make you land like an elevator. I have seen trees becoming uncomfortably larger between me and my LZ so I like to avoid this feeling by bringing the drogue in my hands until the last obstacle is cleared, even if this sometimes means deploying low.

I do it by killing altitude over the field before going DBF and never straying outside of the treeline.

I agree that deploying low has its risks...

Yeah. So only use a drag chute when the risk of using it is greater than the risk of not using it.

...still, I feel like I trust my setup well enough that I can confidently approach with the drogue in my hand and be virtually free from the risk of it falling over the bar. This way I can try to make it without the chute and, if I screw up, I can use Davis method of dragging your own harness, and, if everything fails, well, I still have the drogue right there as a last measure.

Yeah but... You're from Norway, right? Just how often are you landing in stuff that iffy?

I just feel that there are too many unpredictable aerodynamic consequences of flying with the drogue chute...

Bullshit. They're all perfectly and easily predictable.

...and one of these seems to be dropping to the ground much faster than expected!

1. SEEMS to be?

2. After you've dropped to the ground much faster than expected once shouldn't you then be expecting to drop to the ground much faster than expected?

Scot Trueblood - 2008/11/16 20:48:56 UTC

Although I have not used my drogue since buying my Litespeed, due to its fantastic landing characteristics, I have never felt uncomfortable using it high while still making turns on approach.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31052
Poll on weaklinks

Davis Straub - 2013/03/06 18:29:05 UTC

I'm happy to have a relatively weak weaklink, and have never had a serious problem with the Greenspot 130, just an inconvenience now and then.

The beauty of a harness mounted drogue is that it exerts drag on the pilot, pulling him or her rearward. In order to maintain the same airspeed, the pilot must then pull in and the approach steepens without an increase in airspeed.

Bullshit. A rearward pull on the pilot - be it from a drag chute or a towline - will cause the glider to pitch down.

I always liked that because the feedback experienced by the pilot is a very comforting pull-in.

Well, if you use the force needed to keep the bar in the same position, yeah.

George Stebbins - 2008/11/17 04:04:56 UTC

So, neither one of you can do what any Hang 2 on a Falcon can do? That is, arrive in an LZ safely with a low-performance glider?

CAN do or IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE to do?

If that's the case, you have no business flying with a drogue chute, or perhaps even on the gliders you currently fly.

I'm gonna hazard a guess that a topless with a drag chute out and the bar stuffed goes down a lot faster than a Falcon with the bar stuffed.

Come on, guys, this isn't rocket science.

Neither are release, weak link, unhooked launch, foot versus wheel landing issues. But nevertheless, decade after decade...

Once you deploy, as far as glide slope goes, you are flying a low-end single surface glider. Surely, top-guns like yourself can handle what almost any newbie can!

If you are coming up significantly short, then you need to practice a few times and remind yourself what the glide-slope will be. And then set up the appropriate approach.

I have zero interest in or need to be doing approaches with a drag chute out. If I need a drag chute it'll be because I fucked up and got caught with only a crappy field and/or misjudged the slope and/or wind direction. Then I'll toss it on final and hope for the best.

As for deploying low, with all the extra stuff you are talking about adding, aren't you making something simple into something far more complex to solve a problem that already has a known, well documented, and safe solution? (Setting your approach up higher - like a Hang 2.)

Yeah. If you're gonna use a drag chute you should set up a high approach - so you NEED the drag chute.

There has been at least one serious crash from a drogue being accidentally dropped over the basetube, and several others from side-wires. Don't hold it in your hand! You are asking for trouble. Just pull it out, and drop it behind you right away. Do it high. And when it deploys correctly, set up your approach just like you would on a Falcon, or maybe a bit higher. No problem. Why are you worried about obstacles on the short end of the field? You shouldn't be there. Just like you wouldn't be there in a Falcon.

Right. With all our excellent instructors making sure everybody's really well checked out for flying tight approaches before the Two's signed off we really don't have issues with downwind obstacles.

John Fritsche - 2008/11/17 05:50:05 UTC

I suppose some old thread that I'm unaware of addresses this, but...

It probably does but Davis structures his forum to make sure no problems ever get focused on and dealt with.

Why are you using drogues anyway? I NEVER see anybody use them at the sites I fly, and these places do NOT have big LZs.

They don't lower stall speed, right? So do you like them because the loss of ground effect makes flare timing easier or something like that? Or is truly about not overshooting short LZs?

I guess I wouldn't mind having one for emergency situations. However, I'd hate to have to rely on a drogue on a regular basis because I'm choosing unsafe LZs or can't properly set up an approach into safe LZs.

Bull's-eye. Another dangerous solution in search of a nonexistent problem. Is this a great sport or what!

[Tad Eareckson]

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13989
drogue chute lesson

Jaco Herbst - 2008/11/17 13:00:39 UTC

I believe it's a useful tool.

Me too. I can think of a couple of times I could've REALLY used one.

For emergency situations of course.

Right. Not to CREATE emergency situations...



...practicing for emergency situations.

I land with the drogue ever so often just to give the chute some air.

I'm definitely with Fabiano on this one. I let mine out on final only. I did deploy it at a hundred meters once (see WW manual) and did not like the behavior of it especially when turning.

What's the Wills Wing manual say about using wheels in "emergency" situations?

Fabiano Nahoum - 2008/11/17 16:58:57 UTC

Landing a single surface is indeed very easy, but, IMHO, flying a topless with a drogue is actually very different from flying a single surface. I always thought this comparison was just a simplified explanation to offer for those that ask what a drogue is all about.

I think the actual glide ratio while droguing can be closer to 4:1 than 8:1...

That's about my educated guess on this issue.

...and just a little wind can lead to 1:1. And how about a 1:0 glide ratio in a stronger gust?

When you throw wind into the equation you're not talking about glider RATIO. You're talking about glide PATH.

This takes away all your ability to move forward, you don't want to lose this ability!!

Why not? The ever popular upright approaches and pro toad bridle configurations do the same thing?.

There seems to be some strange aerodynamic interference between drogue and glider...

Nah.

...that makes the glider not only glide poorer but also sink faster.

Yeah. That's what parasitic drag does. Nothing strange about it. Glider and harness manufacturers spent decades working - slowly, inefficiently, stupidly - to eliminate parasitic drag to make the glider glide better and sink more slowly.

This appears worse in turns.

Now, a faster sink is also bad when you are low, granted, but at least you are sure to be over the LZ, harness open, legs out, ready to flare.

You can't make a statement that a faster sink is bad when you are low without knowing the circumstances. A faster sink rate may be your only hope for survival.

Take a look again at the video that Pete B posted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYpOvcFc9uI

That guy is Gordon Rigg, former British champion. A much better pilot than I'll ever will be...

He wasn't a better pilot than I'll ever be in that clip.

...and he was totally surprised by the behaviour of the glider on base curve.

And he needed a drag chute for that situation why?

I could deploy the drogue high and make sucessful approaches, as I have done quite a few times.

I've made a lot of successful approaches with deploying a drag chute. I suspect a lot of other people have as well.

But now my method is:
- If the approach seems easy and under control, I won't even take the drogue out.
- If it looks like I might need it then I will take it out and hold it in my hand while flying my best so as not to have to use it.

Yes you should never use the drogue to substitute basic landing skills. But it can save your butt if you misjudge bigtime or hit a strong thermal on final that puts you way above where you originally planned!

If you hit a strong thermal on final that puts you way above where you originally planned that's very unlikely to be a big problem unless its very late on final. And if you're very late on final it's REALLY hard to get lifted by a thermal to way above where you originally planned. I know of no such incidents.

Being put way above where you originally planned is almost always a good thing for a hang glider and almost always beats the crap out of being put you way BELOW where you originally planned.

I think the drogues are a must have - they're so cheap anyway. If you never need to use it then great! You are doing fine!

Ditto for reserve parachutes, weak links, and emergency releases.

If you need it all the time you are doing something very wrong in your approaches or flying where you shouldn't be flying!

Yeah. I'll give Tasi a break on the latter issue though.

The time I really needed mine I was flying over hilly terrain and getting lower and lower, I finally committed to an otherwise easy "fly on the wall" landing on the face of a smooth grassy little hill (~150 feet high), except that, since the hill was so small, the top was a short plateau, so overshooting the upface meant possibly missing the top altogether and trouble on the other side, with trees, fences and powerlines. Sure enough I hit a little bubble on approach and started to feel like overshooting. I took my drogue out and waited until the last moment, sure enough I missed the upface and might have missed the top plateau but letting the drogue out guaranteed a smooth landing on top.

This is a very particular case but I could have never made this approach by deploying high. In fact, had I deployed high I wouldn't be able to have any idea where I was going to end up. I could have missed the very hill.

Oh, just practice using your drag chute all the time - like all these Davis Show assholes are advocating. Then you'll be able to perfectly predict where you're gonna be with your crippled aircraft at any point in time.

Very useful tool the drogue chute if you ask me!

Yes. A very useful tool for which you should almost never have a use.

Nelson PK - 2008/11/17 17:56:17 UTC

mmmm..and what would have happened if you had the drogue out and missed the fly on the wall landing, going over the top with your drogue out????

Mmmm... And what would have happened if he DIDN'T have the drag chute out and missed the fly on the wall landing and went over the top with his drag chute IN????

Idiot.

Fabiano Nahoum - 2008/11/17 18:20:53 UTC

If I had gone over the top of that plateau I have no way of knowing whether the drogue would have made a difference. I think either way I'd have been screwed.

The drogue allowed me to guarantee that I wasn't going to do that.

BTW, using the drogue during the actual fly-on-the-wall is not recommended. In fact I've also been there and done that. Result = broke my sidebar.

Downtube?

George Stebbins - 2008/11/17 22:56:09 UTC

Let's take the personalities out of it.

Harry Hotshot buys a drogue chute because he wants the same glide angle as a single surface glider at times on his topless supership.
He finds that, as advertised, he gets a glide similar to a low-end single surface glider.
He finds that he keeps landing short, sometimes by a lot.
Nathan Newbie flies a low end single surface glider.
Nathan gets similar glide angle to Harry Hotshot.
Nathan lands on or near the spot every time.

What spot is that, George? The traffic cone in the middle of the primary?

Why is Harry complaining that the chute does exactly what he bought it for? Why doesn't he notice that his buddy (who flies at his home site) has no trouble hitting the spot with similar glide characteristics? What do YOU think of Harry's attitude?

I think anybody who has no trouble hitting - or shooting for - "the spot" is an accident waiting to happen.

* Note to Fabiano - You are right. A topless with a drogue doesn't handle like a Falcon. It does, however, have similar glide characteristics. I know because I fly both a Falcon and a topless (and occasionally use a drogue). Never had the chutzpah to use the drogue with the Falcon, though.

George Stebbins - 2008/11/17 23:07:14 UTC

Yep, it is for emergencies. Going XC and that field that looked good suddenly has powerlines in it. The alternate is smaller than it appeared. You are landing now, despite not wanting to. What are your options?

It is always nice to have additional options in tight circumstances.

How 'bout...

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...)

I've had enough links break when they should to think mine is ok...

...the options to stay on and get off tow at your discretion and not have your safety in the hands of and totally dependent upon the whims of a piece of fishing line - asshole?

Yes, those circumstances should be rare, if you are exercising proper care.

They should be pretty much nonexistent. And my guess is that they are because I'm not hearing about a whole lot of accounts of people being saved by their drag chutes or dying because they didn't have them.

But they do happen. I'm all in favor of lowering the cost of my mistakes.

1. Unless it involves the option of a wheel landing.

2. Bullshit. You're totally in favor of smashing somebody back into the runway and ending his hang gliding career...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYe3YmdIQTM
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYe3YmdIQTM[/video]

...if he fails to keep his nose down low enough to manage the inconvenience of a Davis Link pop.

So I fly with the drogue.

And bullshit bent pin pro toad bridle/release systems.

I use it occasionally to be sure I still know how.

You should probably also...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=11497
Aerotow release options?

Dennis Wood - 2009/04/12 13:52:58 UTC

probably obvious to everyone, but i'll say it anyway. just as we practice locating our reserve handles and even hanging for hours in our harnesses in the garage, maybe we should also have a tow release rigged up so as to while away the hours hang waiting, so that we can find it every time, even with someone messing with you. be familiar with what you got. as for the best type release, it ain't been made yet, or people wouldn't still be trying. but remember, the release is safety equipment of the first order. treat it as such.

...spend some time practicing making the easy reach to your release actuator so's you can be totally confident...

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3391
More on Zapata and weak link

Paul Tjaden - 2008/07/22 04:32:22 UTC

I have never had a lockout situation happen so quickly and dramatically and had no chance to release as I have always thought I could do.

...in your ability to blow tow in any emergency situation.

Rob McKenzie - 2008/11/17 23:34:23 UTC

I would surely not want to try to change anyone's method for using a drogue.

If I believed I had anything useful to contribute to a conversation I'd sure as hell want to change everyone's thinking towards that position.

I think that by the time a pilot needs a drogue to reduce his or her glide, they have enough ability to think for themselves.

I'd tend to go with the precise opposite. A drogue chute is primarily a piece of emergency equipment and people who find themselves in emergency situations have almost demonstrated a failure in the ability to think for themselves.

And to the extent that they can't think, I try to make myself available to offer advice if they ask for it, and to simply be quiet and watch if they don't ask.

Hey Bob...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/faq.php
Frequently Asked Questions

Bob Kuczewski

If you see something that's not being done correctly, then it's your duty to speak out.

What do you think of your good buddy Rob and his attitude towards the sport?

In the latter case, it's win win, either I enjoy watching good piloting skills or I am treated to some entertainment.

Which may result in someone being crippled out of the sport...



...for a season or permanently and maybe spending the remainder of a lifetime in nonstop pain. Or it may result in someone just being killed instantly.

http://www.flytandem.com/aboutus.htm
About High Adventure Hang Gliding & Paragliding

Rob is proud of:

- being married to Dianne.

- having such a great team of instructors in the High Adventure Team.

- being the first pilot to earn the USHPA 5th Diamond Safe Pilot Award for 5000 consecutive safe flights as well as holding USHPA Tandem Instructor Ratings, both in Para gliding and Hang Gliding. Currently Rob has over 10,000 tandem flights logged since May 74.

- being a Wills Wing test pilot.

- being the longest running member of the Crestline Soaring Society.

- being chosen the year 2000 hang gliding "Instructor of the Year" by the US Hang Gliding Association.

- receiving the "2004 Exceptional Service Award" from the US Hang Gliding Association.

- receiving with Dianne as co-recipient, the 2006 USHPA Commendation for exceptional volunteer efforts that promoted the snorts of Hang Gliding and Paragliding.

- receiving the 2008 Presidential Citation award from the USHPA.

Fuck you, Rob.

Because this sport is run entirely by idiots, assholes, scumbags, idiot asshole scumbags it's a total fuckin' minefield. When a DECENT person - particularly in a sport that's always going on about the "self regulation" crap - sees something dangerous happening it's his DUTY to say something and get it stopped whether he's asked to or not.

For example... When I hear some total fucking asshole...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=13359
Today was a bad day!

Rob McKenzie - 2009/08/26 17:26:12 UTC

I like variety. Sometimes AUSSIE and sometimes not. It helps to bring the thought process alive. Routine leads to boredom which leads to reactive thinking which IMO is a poor facsimile of true thinking.

...spewing some total fucking bullshit to justify violating USHGA regulations for teaching, requiring, doing hook-in checks I do something about it.

I've gone way above and beyond the call of duty on that issue and been pissed all over and blacklisted out of the sport by you dickheads. I'm now ENTITLED to the entertainment of the inevitable death and destruction. You're not. You're one of the assholes RESPONSIBLE for it.

I was very much involved with the R&D of a lot of drogues when WW chose to get into it in the summer of 98.

Where you on the Wills Wing team that developed tow releases for their gliders? Stuff that that actually gets used every flight at most of the Wills Wing schools/dealerships? Stuff that a pilot who's doing everything right may need to survive an emergency situation?

How 'bout the Will Wing weak link team? Buy one of their gliders and always use an appropriate weak link with a finished length of 1.5 inches or less?

I have probably fifteen or more hours flight time with a drogue out flapping in the wind. I had many (>50) approaches and top landings at Marshall and lots of just plain old thermaling around with them out. I played with short bridles, long bridles, two drogues at the same time, retracting, redeploying, and about anything else I could think of to try.

Several flights had the drogue out for well over thirty minutes at a time. I have no problem with tossing the drogue early and flying the last couple minutes or more with it out.

Davis has no problem with...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31052
Poll on weaklinks

Davis Straub - 2013/03/06 18:29:05 UTC

I'm happy to have a relatively weak weaklink, and have never had a serious problem with the Greenspot 130, just an inconvenience now and then.

...the Davis Links he mandates everyone else - including the people they make fall off the bottom of the FAA legal range - use, just an inconvenience now and then.

Your range of experience with drag chutes is pathetic. It's one Southern Cal professional pilot with zillions of hours very probably coming into nothing but brain dead easy landing situations. No way in hell that represents what's gonna be happening with the average participant in this sport who's a recreational weekender with a Hang Three rating ha got from some idiot like Bart Weghorst.

Reminds me a lot of...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=25536
Whoops! Snapped another tip wand :-O

NMERider - 2012/03/14 15:17:14 UTC

His one-technique-fits-all attitude espoused on the Oz Report Forum has become tiresome to read. It does not work in the fucked-up world of XC landings and weary pilots.

Christopher LeFay - 2012/03/15 05:57:43 UTC

January's canonization of Rooney as the Patron Saint of Landing was maddening. He offered just what people wanted to hear: there is an ultimate, definitive answer to your landing problems, presented with absolute authority. Judgment problems? His answer is to remove judgment from the process - doggedly stripping out critical differences in gliders, loading, pilot, and conditions. This was just what people wanted - to be told a simple answer. In thanks, they deified him, carving his every utterance in Wiki-stone.

...hang gliding's Patron Saint of Landing.

I prefer early over deploying while in the last couple of turns before the landing.

Based on what experience?
- Coming into brain dead easy primaries in brain dead easy conditions in which you have zero need of a drag chute?
- Or in emergency situations or simulations in which you REALLY need a drag chute?

By tossing early I can dial in my new polar which helps tremendously when actually doing the DBF of the approach.

While out in the REAL world there's gonna be a surprise tailwind, gust, rotor, thermal breaking off, set of suddenly visible powerlines that's gonna turn your dialed in new polar calculation to total shit.

BTW a caution when doing retraction...

Fuck retractions. If you have the luxury of being able to do a retraction you weren't in an emergency situation in which you needed to have the chute out in the first place.

...by grabbing the skirt and letting it flap for extended periods with the hand on the base tube... it's possible that the loose lines will find the pull pud that zips-unzips the harness and the pud gets totally entangled in the chute lines. It will cause the chute to be unavailable and depending on whether you've unzipped yet might even lead to the need to blow out the harness via the harness zipper blowout.

Why do you NEED to blow out of the harness?

Been there done that.

1. Great, Rob. So you have any examples from your vast experience with drag chutes of one making your landing situation SAFER?

2. Wills Wing doing anything on retractable Rooney Links? I can think of a bunch of people who'd still be in the sport had that technology been available.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13989
drogue chute lesson

Rob McKenzie - 2008/11/18 02:59:42 UTC

Does it make sense that if a drogue causes a wing to have a vastly different polar and you plan on using it when it is most critical (like on your approach), you would opt to learn the characteristics of this new aircraft only when near the ground in the process of a landing?

Sure. A RESERVE parachute causes a wing to have a vastly different polar than what it had just before the toss. But people ONLY plan on using it when the situation is most critical. And, more times than not, they do OK with that strategy. And a helluva lot more OK than they'd do if they did practice tosses in controlled conditions.

Why not thermal up, deploy the drogue, play around for a while and if you descend, then retract and thermal up again, repeat as necessary. Solve problems when high.

Fuck that. It's only gonna do me any good when my glider's level and eating or about to eat up runway. It's gonna kill my glide ratio. That's all I need or want to know.

David Phillips - 2008/11/18 03:42:54 UTC

On a modern sailplane, fully deployed airbrakes result in a glide of around 8:1. That's a big reduction from the best L/D of around 40:1. The difference is, of course, that you can deploy them quickly if they are needed, and put them away just as quickly if they are not!

Without any control compromise, right?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/skysailingtowing/message/4592
Weaklinks

Tracy Tillman - 2005/02/08 19:16:10 UTC

The sailplane guys have been doing this for a long time, and there are many hang glider pilots and quite a few tug pilots who don't understand what the sailplane guys have learned over the years. It certainly would help if hang glider towing methods and training were standardized to the degree that they are in the sailplane world.

Maybe we should be doing shit to make things comparable in hang gliding.

Depending on the type, you can also modulate the drag to some extent once they are open. Even so, standard practice is not to deploy airbrakes until you are assured of clearing the last obstacle before the field.

Goddam right.

Fabiano Nahoum - 2008/11/18 15:04:13 UTC

Just to make it clear, the reason I replied to this post (and to any post really) is to exchange information, not to try and convince people that I am right.

That's OK. You had me fully convinced well before I read any of your replies.

Please understand I don't even have the credentials to claim otherwise. And just so people take my posts with the right perspective, I must have used my drogue somewhere between twenty and thirty times only. The reason I think my system is good is because it never let me down.

I'll take your experience of using a drag chute when you NEED - or at least BENEFIT FROM - a drag chute over all that bullshit Rob's doing any day of the week. And fuck Dr. Trisa Tilletti and all of his tandem weak link recovery simulations and Cone of Safety training.

Also in all those times it only failed to correctly inflate once, which I think is a great statistic...

1. That's a REALLY CRAPPY statistic.
1. That's ESPECIALLY a REALLY CRAPPY statistic if it happens when your life is dependent upon it not happening.

...because I have seen many drogue failures.

Yeah. Kinda like...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=14230
pro tow set-up

Jim Rooney - 2009/11/02 18:58:13 UTC

Oh it happens.
I have, all the guys I work with have.
(Our average is 1 in 1,000 tows)

Oh yeah... an other fun fact for ya... ya know when it's far more likely to happen? During a lockout. When we're doing lockout training, the odds go from 1 in 1,000 to over 50/50.

If a Quest (Bobby Bailey "designed") bridle wraps over half the time in emergency simulations one that only wraps a third of the time in emergency simulations is a really excellent piece of gear. May even be good enough to consider putting in the air on a regular basis despite its much shorter track record.

(The time it failed on me was because the drogue got tangled in my harness zipper lines.

That's NOT...

Wills Wing
Harness Mounted Drogue Chute
Operator1s Manual
1999/05/05 - First Edition

Before every launch, pre-flight the drogue chute to make sure it is secure in the container. Also make sure that any lines attached to the harness, such as zipper opening and closing lines, are in a proper state of maintenance so that they can be securely fixed to the harness during flight and will not come loose and become entangled with the drogue chute.

...a failure of the drag chute.

Now I carefully stick the harness zipper lines to the velcro patches before deploying so as to avoid this type of entanglement.)

See above.

Last and as a note to George: I do not "recommend" deploying low. This impression might have remained after all my posts, sorry. What I meant to say is that I prefer to deploy on straight final, and many times this happens to be low.

Anyway thanks for all the insights, this discussion may be interesting for people who still don't use drogues, and after seeing the almost crash may feel even less inclined to do so. But it remains a powerful tool if you take a little time to develop your own method.

I think we need some more flight testing. How 'bout it, Jonathan?

George Stebbins - 2008/11/18 16:30:08 UTC

As for the whole low versus high thing, I agree with Rob.

Big surprise.

I'm not trying to change anyone's flying style. I'm just trying to note that if you are deploying low because you think that a drogue messes up your ability to do a proper approach, then the issue isn't the drogue.

You don't use a drag chute to do a proper approach. You use a drag chute when a proper approach isn't an option.

(See Rob's post.)

(I did. Fuck it - and him.{

I've not done anywhere near as many as Rob...

I haven't heard that Rob's done ANY live fire exercises with a drag chute.

...but I've done enough to know that if it is installed and maintained correctly, a properly deployed drogue makes it easier to pick your spot, not harder.

So that's what you're using it for, George? Spot landing contests?

Just like on a Falcon vs a topless. If you have other reasons to deploy low, that's fine.

Like maybe NEEDING TO?

But the "I can't judge my glide" argument doesn't make any sense.

I don't worry much about judging my glide. I suck at it and Mother Nature can and will fuck the hell out of any calculations I AM able to manage. I just make goddam sure that I never put myself in a situation to have my weekend ruined because I couldn't judge my glide very well.

NMERider - 2008/11/19 00:08:09 UTC

Has anyone put spoilers on the upper surface a flex wing? Or, dive brakes on the lower surface?

Sounds like a plan, Jonathan. Maybe you should do some work in those areas. Might pay off for you in the long run.

Fabiano Nahoum - 2008/11/19 14:47:31 UTC

I realize that the OR is read by many many pilots and it's a big "display"...

Not since shortly after the Lenami Godinez-Avila fatality...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1041
"Sharing" of Hang Gliding Information ?!?

Merlin - 2012/05/26 14:22:30 UTC

I confess to previously having a bit of an Oz Report habit, but the forced login thing has turned me off permanently, and I am in fact grateful. Frankly, the site had pretty much been reduced to a few dedicated sycophants in any case.

Davis suddenly decided that he didn't really want many many pilots reading it and it to be such a big "display".

...so people may even feel ashamed to step in and risk saying something stupid.

Unless you're saying off the scale stupid shit on a regular basis...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14931
Tad's release (even more)

Freedomspyder - 2009/02/14 17:43:30 UTC

I've found your posts on both hook-in checks and releases very interesting and well thought out.
Best of luck dealing with the Oz Report forum cult and its leader.

...you're at serious risk...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=592
Linknife

Davis Straub - 2010/04/03 12:46:26 UTC

Tad is gone.

...of being permanently banned.

Christian Williams - 2008/11/19 19:40:13 UTC

Is there really any increased danger of a stall when deploying a drogue while high and fast?

Who cares? Throw it when you're skimming. Then when you stall you can call it a landing.

George Stebbins - 2008/12/17 06:07:16 UTC

I'm with Joe Greblo and Rob McKenzie on this one. Deploy high and with some extra speed. Don't change the characteristics of your aircraft right near the ground if you can avoid it.

A drag chute is for a situation you can't avoid.

And certainly don't deploy low and near stall. Unwanted excitement will ensue.

Yeah...

http://vimeo.com/4945693


You might stall.

NMERider - 2008/12/17 18:19:43 UTC

Now that I've been flying my T2 144, I really appreciate the shallow final approach glide and long ground effect. I had a long conversation with Greblo yesterday about the drogue chute topic and he loaned me one of his to try out. One additional pointer that he passed along to me was to do every other landing with the drogue chute whether you need it or not, in order to be trained and ready to use it when it's really needed.

Sounds like awesome advice to me! Go for it. What could be the possible harm?

(Good work, Joe. Keep it up.)

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=9325
Landing....

dfcclown - 2008/11/15 08:34:39 UTC
New Zealand, West Island

One must ask, was a drogue chute necessary?

How 'bout:
- foot landings
- backup loops
- locking carabiners
- hang checks
- Rooney Links

They do seem to be used unnecessarily often sometimes.

Damn near all the times.

Perhaps more landing practice is in order.

How 'bout more APPROACH practice?

Jack Barth - 2008/11/15 15:24:32 UTC

Necessary? Wind sock seems to say no.

When does the windsock NOT say no there?

Ryan Voight - 2008/11/15 16:29:45 UTC

It's better to practice with it BEFORE you actually need to use it for a tiny LZ.

1. What percentage of the people in this stupid sport are ever gonna be landing in fields so tiny that they need drag chutes?

2. If everybody practices using drag chutes what would you estimate the effect on the overall injury rate would be? The anecdotal evidence seems to be strongly indicating way the fuck up.

That said, it's better to use it on a LONG, STRAIGHT final.

Yeah. The precise opposite of what one uses to safely land in a tight field.

Deploying it too early in the approach is asking for trouble, and if you try to slip a turn onto final you're likely to meet the ground face-to-face. There was another thread with more details...

I'm glad this guy pulled this off, if that chute snagged on something that could have been REALLLLLLY bad

Since when did you start giving a flying fuck what happened to people in this sport?

Adam Parer - 2008/11/16 20:58:49 UTC

I've never used a drogue chute but it seems like many people who use them often whack-in or worse.

Yes.

I started to think these things might be overrated but Curt Warren assures me when used correctly drogue chutes can get you out of a tight pickle.

Yes. And an extension ladder can get you out of a tight pickle through a seconds story window when the house is on fire. But if people start practicing that exercise the overall safety rate is gonna take a nasty hit.

This video was scary.

Yes.

A foot or two less when the pilot bottomed out and it would have been painful.

Yes.

The LZ looks huge.

Yes.

Why did he need to use a drogue in the first place?

So he can safely get into some field he's never gonna land in.

Maybe the video doesn't show upwind obstacles?

No.

Mike Bomstad - 2008/11/17 07:51:55 UTC

Here is a vid of the proper use:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ5ow49xDAQ

Somebody find me a video of a drag chute being used where it NEEDS to be used.

THIS:

1:25
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-8oVEo8ybA


would've been a good excuse for tossing a drag chute on final. But still, if he NEEDED to conserve runway better he could've easily pulled some trick like porpoising up out of ground effect for a bit.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=30929
Doh! My worst landing ever, caught on tape.

Steve Baran - 2014/03/20 11:17:08 UTC

Your landing was scary. You lucked out. No wheels and on less smooth terrain and you'd have taken out at least one downtube and maybe a wrist to boot. Get aggressive. There will be times that you'll have to fight the glider right to the ground (mid-day thermals, changing conditions, turbulence due to windy conditions and the tree lines, landing in a different postage stamp LZ, etc.). Get those feet down and your hands on the DTs!

Yeah...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0oe5fljLcc


...get those feet down and...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1Ouu3yU1EU


...hands up on the downtubes. You certainly wouldn't wanna risk breaking a wrist.

Hang gliding can be very unforgiving.

Especially when you have absolute total idiots advising you on how to do it.

It is fun flying to be just along for the ride - but not when you're landing - lest the ground rise up and smack thee!

Yeah, you can't just let the glider settle on the wheels during a landing. You've gotta show it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-36aQ3Hg33c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46pvhPUM5-Q


...just who's really in charge of this show!

Thanks for posting. We learn a lot from our mistakes...

Yeah?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkElZMhpmp0


Cite some examples.

...and no one is perfect.

Bob is.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=821
Fatal hang gliding accident

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/11/15 02:15:47 UTC

Flying upright is not something to be feared. It's something to be mastered.

He's mastered upright flying.

So are the authors of the Wills Wing manuals. Just follow their simple foot landing instructions and there's no fuckin' way you'll ever bonk.

Dave Hopkins - 2014/03/22 14:29:37 UTC

We should set up our approach with at least three points of altitude. meaning we are not just flying to the spot on the ground.

But NEVER FORGET that THE *SPOT* is CENTRAL to EVERYTHING we do in hang gliding.

Like a DBF we have a specific altitude and position to be at on each leg. The closer to the actual spot we are the more accurate we need to be.

Yes. For the love of GOD never let up an accuracy where that spot is concerned. Do whatever it takes. There's no honor in just landing the glider safely on the wheels wherever.

Same with figure 8s. Get unzipped before starting the approach.

And, of course, getting it on your feet. But, obviously, that goes without saying.

Getting to the base to final position at the right altitude is almost as important as hitting the spot...

Well DUH! How are ya gonna hit the spot if you're not at the precise proper position when you turn onto final?

...but there is still room for lots of glide adjustment.

If it looks like you're gonna:
- overshoot nose it up and mush it down
- undershoot stretch your glide

Put our mental attention into get to this point makes the rest of the landing much easier.

Make the landing EASIER???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y9ylIiFZ6Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2Gd2kcyOes

http://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7094/13952342741_f71f343877_o.png


http://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7151/13952329131_03e535bc8b_o.png

Are you out of your FUCKING MIND?!

The final should be straight in , settled into the harness , Hands on the uprights, focused on the spot , wings level , with extra speed, let it go to TRIM!, bleed off speed , move hands up to eyes, push up and kick the keel.

And ALWAYS be prepared to use your glider as a crumple zone for the rare instance when that doesn't go quiet as well as you envisioned it.

Fighting for position with turns all the way to the ground is a fail approach. Do our fighting at altitude.

If you have speed - at altitude or all the way to the ground - getting the glider to turn isn't all that much of a fight.

We need to be a bit relaxed on final to hit the flare window.

1. Oh, yeah. As long as you're nice and relaxed thera's NO WAY you're gonna mess up on the flare window.
2. Why do we need to hit the fucking flare window?

Enjoy the spring ...

ENJOY the spring? Fuck that. Go to the training hill as much as possible to maintain the state of perfection you've achieved with respect to flare timing.

michael170 - 2014/03/23 00:50:43 UTC

Dave, you wouldn't happen to have a photo of one these "spots" would you? If so, could you post it so I can see what one looks like?

The Spot isn't so much a physical object as a state of spiritual purity. If you don't have an actual traffic cone you can project its essence into the precise center point of whatever field or narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place you happen to be coming into.

Dave Hopkins - 2014/03/23 14:41:43 UTC

These spot are hard to photograph

And even harder to spell the plural of. But just try visualize an "s" on the right end of the word. You'll be fine.

They need to be located before our approach.

Can't emphasize that enough. Without locating a spot one's attention might shift to something trivial like the last obstruction at the downwind end of the field.

That means We visualize our approach path and fly to these spots in space and position making adjustments as needed.

Yes. As NEEDED.

Having three points to fly through gives us more time to make adjustments . We have a much better chance of hitting the spot on the ground at the end of final.

And a landing such as this:

http://vimeo.com/4945693


is only possible if We have visualized our approach path and flown to our spot in space and position making adjustments as needed with three points to fly through to gives us more time to make these adjustments. Otherwise you might end up with something that looks like THIS:

1:25
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-8oVEo8ybA

michael170 - 2014/03/24 03:00:15 UTC

So what you're saying is these "spots" are imaginary. Is it possible that aiming to "hit" imaginary spots is counterproductive, and that the goal should instead be to have safe landings at the downwind area of a landing zone or field?

SAFE landings? Why would ANYONE wanna do a SAFE landing...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=27396
Scooter tow faillure... or Never Land On Your Face

Mitch Shipley - 2012/10/22 19:04:16 UTC

We engage in a sport that has risk and that is part of the attraction.

...in a sport that has risk when that risk is such a fundamental part of the attraction?

Red Howard - 2014/03/24 03:45:13 UTC

Michael,

Nope! You can use an old Frisbee (which is classic) for a landing spot. It should be located in the middle of the field...

Yeah, it's not like in REAL aviation where the FIRST half of the runway is deemed to have value.

...or maybe slightly toward the downwind end of the field for single-surfaced gliders, and slightly toward the upwind end of the field for double-surfaced gliders.

OBVIOUSLY! The higher the performance of the wing and the more danger of overshooting you're in the farther towards the far end of the runway you should be aiming. If you're flying a paraglider you should be scraping the branches of the last treetop at the downwind end of the field.

The center of the field is not an imaginary location, although it may be invisible to the non-pilot.

Like, for example...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24846
Is this a joke ?

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/25 04:55:25 UTC

Don't even get me started on Tad. That obnoxious blow hard has gotten himself banned from every flying site that he used to visit... he doesn't fly anymore... because he has no where to fly. His theories were annoying at best and downright dangerous most of the time. Good riddance.

http://www.hanggliding.org/wiki/HG_ORG_Mission_Statement
HG ORG Mission Statement - Hang Gliding Wiki

HangGliding.Org Rules and Policies

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.

...T** at K*** S******.

When you can routinely land safely, at or near the spot in a huge field, then you are ready to do that in smaller fields.

ALWAYS in the MIDDLE. NEVER even THINK about the FIRST half of the field - especially a small one when you're flying a bladewing.

Level fields are good for low-time pilots.

Uphill's not?

Downhill LZs are tricky, or even dangerous...

So it's WAY more critical that you eliminate the first halves of the fields as option. That would just make things twice as dangerous - especially with a bladewing!

...so choose good LZs as a first priority...

What if you have options of a really excellent LZ with nothing to mark the center and a really crappy LZ with an old Frisbee in the precise center?

...until your landing skills are well developed (that means both safe, and on-target).

After you've perfected your spot landings...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Guwuxyttd5w
Mike Barber - Part 4/4 (Final)

Mike Barber - 2007/12/25

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Guwuxyttd5w


Don't be afraid to walk. Land out in the open safe area. Almost everyone who crashes on landing is... for convenience. To land close - close to the road, close... They hit the wires, the trees. Whatever.

Even very good pilots. And it's almost always 'cause they didn't wanna walk. So pick larger, safe, opening areas... you know... open areas to land in. 'Cause if you don't you're gonna eventually get hurt. It WILL catch up with you.

...you'll be good for landing where-the-fuck-ever.

TiCruiser - 2014/03/24 05:49:59 UTC
Bellingham, Washington

Michael Thanks for sharing.

Go fuck yourself, Michael. How DARE you question the Sanctity of The Spot and suggest that We might be better off doing SAFE landings?

My base tube and wing came within a foot in similar low...

...slow...

...turn about a month ago. I got fixated on the spot on the ground and missed my target "spot" to turn to base. My HG instructor called these "spots" in the air gates.

Ya know what's really nice about these "spots" in the air? If you miss them as a consequence of being "too" high you get another shot at them.

A typical sequence of gates I use:

1. My entry gate crossing the field boundary.

What's the height and width of this gate?

I make a visual guess and then check my altimeter to see how close I was.

What's it matter?
- How close is your altimeter?
- Do you hafta figure wind, lift, sink into the equation? Can any of those issues change during the approach?
- What's the penalty for being way "too" high?

This lets me know how much maneuvering I need to do get to the next gate.

I come over the field high if that luxury is an option. Then I do 360s until the point I start worrying about getting to low for my pattern.

I also plan to be unzipped by this point.

Do you need to land on your feet? You're trying to do the safest landing possible, right? Is a foot landing your safest option?

2. Point I turn to downwind. Pretty much visual, I might glance at the altimeter to see if I'm accurate...

Who gives a rat's ass? How can you tell what "accurate" is - given all the variables you're gonna have in the equation in anything but dead air at the same density it was the last couple of weekends?

...but after that I'm completely visual.

Go completely visual well before that.

3. Turn to base. This is the critical one.

NOTHING's critical until you've run out of runway, altitude, and/or airspeed.

I've practiced this enough I can tell at this point if I'm gold or screwed.

The ONLY ways you can be screwed turning onto base are by being way the fuck too low, slow, and/or out of range.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-ps982Br9A


And if you bear the faintest resemblance to any of those remarks the guy who signed your Two is a major asshole.

I'm fortunate at my home field that we have some tall trees around the field boundary that really help judge altitude.

Yeah, nothing like having tall trees around the field boundary of your home field to help with the safety picture. Hold on for a minute... I need to go out and water mine.

From here I just turn to a nice long final and focus on the round out and flare.

I dive or slip it into ground effect and wait until it stops flying.

Dave is totally right...

Dave's never been totally right about anything at any point in his hang gliding career. He's extremely lucky to ever be partially right about anything.

...that if you can define and hit an early gate it makes the rest of the approach much easier since you won't be making radical maneuvers at the end to set up.

I LOVE making radical maneuvers at the end to set up. They're a BLAST. They remind me of dune flying at Jockey's Ridge which is where I learned and had the most fun of my flying career. So I always carry enough extra speed to do them and go back up if I screw anything up. If you can do safe low radical maneuvers you'll be almost bulletproof for damn near any landing situation.

This guy:



doing a nice long final and focusing on the round out and flare WILL BE FUCKED - fatally - when he gets surprised by some powerlines. Even one or two of the Jack Show assholes...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=13744
control

Jason Boehm - 2009/09/23 15:13:41 UTC

aerotow might have a point here
i thought like renmoore when i first saw that picture

...lapsed into concurring with that take before they caught themselves.

You'll just fine tune to hit the spot on the ground.

The fuck I will. Once I've blasted my way down into ground effect the only fine tuning I do is to keep things level and low. And I let my plane pick its spot - just like the guys who fly me into BWI do.

It is not LZ specific.

Then what's the point of the altimeter?

I finally got to fly a different site for the first time in months last week and I naturally set up three gates and dropped within 25 feet of the marked spot both times I landed there.

Great! Then you'll be good to fly XC with nothing but fifty foot long landing options below you - as long as they're bordered by tall trees to help you judge your altitude anyway. DO post the videos for us.
---
Edit - 2014/03/25 12:40:00 UTC

TiCruiser didn't mean "Michael Thanks for sharing." He meant "Chris Kelcourse Thanks for sharing."

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=30929
Doh! My worst landing ever, caught on tape.

Brian Scharp - 2014/03/24 16:37:39 UTC

Knowing the safest place to land and being more precise about safely flying the glider to that location is not counterproductive.

Bull fucking shit.

- If you put yourself into a situation which requires precise flying to get into a safe place to land you've already fucked up bigtime because - if for no other reason - Mother Nature can make total hash out of that game plan and dump you just a LITTLE BIT short of where you NEED to be.

- The safest place to land better the hell NOT be a fifty foot diameter circle with an old Frisbee in the center.

This could come in handy if the landing area fills up with obstacles.

What's the scenario you have in mind?

- A clear area in a junkyard that tightens up with a lot of new wrecks while you're on downwind?

- Or how 'bout a primary with a bunch of paragliders who suddenly start kiting their wings while you're on approach? Is the solution to that issue tighter spot landing rating requirements?

Show me some videos or cite me some incident reports. What a load o' crap.

THIS:

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=21088
What you wish you'd known then?

Doug Doerfler - 2011/03/02 05:24:44 UTC

Nothing creates carnage like declaring a spot landing contest.

will NEVER stop being true.

A spot landing is a stunt landing. About the only way it can be AS safe as a non spot landing is if it doesn't increase the risk of overshooting the field, the conditions are totally benign, and the pilot is wired enough to line it up perfectly from a good ways out. The second one starts making adjustments on final to hit the spot is the second that landing starts becoming compromised. And the second one starts thinking about the old Frisbee is the second one stops thinking about the safest possible landing and that old Frisbee instantly becomes a dangerous distraction during our most critical phase of flight.

2014/03/24 16:41:26 UTC - 3 thumbs up - Paul Hurless

Fuck you, Paul.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=30929
Doh! My worst landing ever, caught on tape.

michael170 - 2014/03/24 17:24:59 UTC

Red Howard - 2014/03/24 03:45:13 UTC

You can use an old Frisbee (which is classic) for a landing spot.

No, YOU can use an old Frisbee (which is classic) for a landing spot. I have no intentions of jeopardizing my future by aiming for some spot (Frisbee or imaginary) in the middle of a landing zone.

It should be located in the middle of the field, or maybe slightly toward the downwind end of the field for single-surfaced gliders, and slightly toward the upwind end of the field for double-surfaced gliders.

1. What's the logic (if any) behind locating the spot in the middle of the field, or maybe slightly toward the downwind end of the field for single-surfaced gliders, and slightly toward the upwind end of the field for double-surfaced gliders?

LOGIC? On The Jack Show?

2. Why not just locate the spot very near the upwind end of the field so as to make this exercise even more dangerous?

Don't give them any more ideas like that. They're always looking for new horizons.

When you can routinely land safely, at or near the spot in a huge field, then you are ready to do that in smaller fields.

So you're saying to aim for a spot in the middle of the smaller field in order to throw away half of the runway and effectively make the small field even smaller.

Well, yeah. The middle is the safest part of the field, right? And you've already perfected your spot landings, right? So what's your problem?

Level fields are good for low-time pilots.

But not for high-time pilots?

Of course not! High time pilots only land in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place so they can hone their skills at landing in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place.

Downhill LZs are tricky, or even dangerous, so choose good LZs as a first priority, until your landing skills are well developed (that means both safe, and on-target).

And then choose bad LZs as a first priority, after your landing skills are well developed?

How the hell else are you gonna further develop your landing skills?

Paul Hurless - 2014/03/24 17:51:24 UTC

Practicing so you're able to land where you want to instead of just floating in somewhere in a big field develops piloting skills.

Oh.

- So an old Frisbee some total fucking asshole plopped down in the middle of the primary last weekend gets to determine where it is *I* want to land as I'm setting up my approach.

- And unless you're constantly adjusting (read: compromising) your glide to hit your Old Frisbee In Command you're - by definition - just floating in somewhere in a big field. Diving or slipping it in and stopping it as close as safely possible to the upwind side of the middle of the downwind treeline isn't a permissible option.

Why would you not want to have full control of where your glider goes?

I totally do.

- And I don't want some goddam stupid Frisbee having any say whatsoever in MY decision. Just like I don't want some goddam stupid piece of Industry Standard fishing line having any say whatsoever in MY decision about whether to stay on or get off of tow.

- And I might wanna have the option of altering my decision at any point in my approach based upon new information and/or changing conditions and/or circumstances.

When flying powered aircraft you do the same thing, you choose where on the runway you want to put down.

A little short of the middle of the runway for a lower performance aircraft and a little beyond the middle of the runway for a higher performance aircraft - just like in hang gliding.

Not choosing where that happens is how you waste runway.

Shooting for a goddam stupid Frisbee in the middle of the field is how you waste runway - asshole.

This skill is something that is very useful when things change in a LZ.

Like when you're coming in for a target a little beyond the middle of a tight field on a high performance wing and a thermal breaks off and sucks you a tailwind. Then your skills are gonna be EXTREMELY useful.

They aren't always smooth, park-like fields...

Actually Paul... If you watch the videos they actually ARE all smooth, park-like fields. 'Specially when you're watching the most skilled and experienced pilots. 'Cause they all know that when you're in a crappy field and things change on you your prospects for enjoying a longer flying career start turning to crap fast.

...and that has nothing to do with choosing a bad LZ.

Right. It's cumulative. Throw more shit into the equation your chances of needing to use your glider as a crumple zone go up proportionally. Not exactly rocket science - is it?

Sometimes things change even in a big LZ and you can be faced with sudden obstructions or weather changes that affect the available area for a landing.

So what's your point, Paul? Do we throw out the first half of the field - regardless of what it is - as a landing option before we start throwing shit into the equation or not?

2014/03/24 19:24:01 UTC - 3 thumbs up - Jason Boehm

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=30929
Doh! My worst landing ever, caught on tape.

Jason Boehm - 2014/03/24 18:22:14 UTC

michael

why are you opposed to trying to land on a predetermined point?

1. Name some people who, in situations in which it MATTERS, can land on predetermined POINTS, Jason.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=25536
Whoops! Snapped another tip wand :-O

NMERider - 2012/03/14 15:17:14 UTC

Landing clinics don't help in real world XC flying. I have had the wind do 180 degree 15 mph switches during my final legs. What landing clinic have you ever attended that's going to help? I saved that one by running like a motherfukker. And BTW - It was on large rocks on an ungroomed surface.

When I come in on many of these flights with sloppy landings, I am often physically and mentally exhausted. That means fatigued to the max. Many times I can't even lift my glider and harness, I'm so pooped.

This is the price of flying real XC. I have seen many a great pilot come in an land on record-setting flights and they literally just fly into the ground and pound in. I kid you not.

Jim Rooney threw a big tantrum and stopped posting here.

His one-technique-fits-all attitude espoused on the Oz Report Forum has become tiresome to read. It does not work in the fucked-up world of XC landings and weary pilots.

I refuse to come in with both hands on the downtubes ever again. I have had some very powerful thermals and gusts kick off and lost control of the glider due to hands on the downtubes. I prefer both hands on the control bar all the way until trim and ground effect. I have been lifted right off the deck in the desert and carried over 150 yards.

I like what Steve Pearson does when he comes in and may adapt something like that.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27086
Steve Pearson on landings

Steve Pearson - 2012/03/28 23:26:05 UTC

I can't control the glider in strong air with my hands at shoulder or ear height and I'd rather land on my belly with my hands on the basetube than get turned downwind.

In situations in which it MATTERS people aren't trying to hit POINTS. They're in survival mode and that survival sure as hell better not be dependent upon landing on a predetermined POINT.

In situations in which it MATTERS *YOU* are NOT landing...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=13864
My new wing

Jason Boehm - 2009/10/05 14:40:54 UTC

wow I have never heard someone say spots were unncessecary.....

just this weekend I landed in an LZ on my sensor surrounded by bushed 6-7 feet high, the LZ is 340 feet long, and higher on the downwind sideby 11 feet(according to google earth)

which means that if you are just on top of the bushes you are ~18 feet higher then the end 340 feet away

which puts it an 18.9/1 glide from the tops of bushes to hitting bushes, as you can imagine landing a glider that gets 12/13:1, you need to have your altitude and airspeed spot on the money if you want to land in here, a litle extra speed and you are in the bushes: 5 feet high? in the bushes, don't forget to throw in wind/gradient/lift/sink and turbulence

but yes...spots are stupid and uncessary

...landing on a predetermined POINT.

2. I notice you said...

...trying to land on a predetermined point...

...TRYING to land on a predetermined point.

- That's 'cause you know bloody damn well that nobody CAN land on a predetermined point.

- And if you're committing effort to something totally fucking useless and pointless like TRYING to land on a predetermined point you're depleting effort to something which may be totally critical - like landing safely and not breaking a downtube, arm, or neck. And that's exactly what got Tony Ameo killed at Wallaby on 2009/11/15 in totally benign conditions in a huge, smooth, park-like field.

3. What kind of total moron commits himself to landing on a predetermined point when...

Paul Hurless - 2014/03/24 17:51:24 UTC

Sometimes things change even in a big LZ and you can be faced with sudden obstructions or weather changes that affect the available area for a landing.

...he doesn't know what's gonna be going on inside the field when he gets there?

- Do you commit to a predetermined circle in the thermal you're shooting for or do you adjust your turn to maximize climb when you get there - and at frequent intervals thereafter?

- Does an airline pilot commit to a predetermined point on the runway or does he come in on the best glide path he can safely manage and wait for the plane to settle?

- Does a carrier pilot commit to a predetermined point on the deck or does he try to plop it down in an optimal section of the deck and stay ready to hit the gas and get the fuck outta there if there's a nasty pitch, roll, gust, or lull?

I don't land in stupid crappy fields where my safety is dependent upon stopping within a wingspan of predetermined point. I come in where and in such a manner that I maintain the widest safety margins possible for as long as possible and let the fuckin' glider land where the fuckin' glider WANTS to land within the range I've made possible.

Jason Boehm - 2014/03/24 19:23:27 UTC

michael170 - 2014/03/24 17:24:59 UTC

I have no intentions of jeopardizing my future by aiming for some spot (Frisbee or imaginary) in the middle of a landing zone.

do you intend to jeopardize your future by not learning to precisely control your landing location?

Oh. It's a LOCATION now? Sounds a bit less PRECISE than a POINT or Frisbee.

Yeah. I'm TOTALLY cool with LOCATIONS. My LOCATION is as close as safely possible to the middle of the downwind end of the field.

Where's YOUR location? The old Frisbee in the middle of the field or a bit downwind for a low performance glider or a bit upwind for a high performance glider?

Is it OK with you if I adjust my LOCATION if a I get blasted by a thermal or a cow strolls into my first choice?

a safe landing is always preferred over crashing on a spot

Not in...

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

...a spot landing contest.

however
they are not mutually exclusive

Are we talking about a point or a location now, Jason?

Jason Boehm - 2014/03/24 19:31:40 UTC

when flying sailplanes, this is how you end up pushing a 800+ lb glider the better part of a mile
or landing in the dirt because you don't have the skill to land behind an aircraft on the runway

Boulder Municipal

Since those are really high performance aircraft shouldn't those marks be way the fuck over on near the eastern end of the runway? Seems like the way you've got it there would be real confusing for a hang glider pilot wanting to make the transition to fiberglass.