The Bob Show

[Tad Eareckson]

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

Warren Narron - 2012/01/06 18:55:32 UTC

Going against the grain here, but someone has to point out that the probable best candidate to write a training manual has been banned from this site.

Nobody - 2012/01/07 06:17:18 UTC

Bob's not looking for the best candidate, he's looking for the most agreeable candidates.

Bob Kuczewski - 2012/01/07 17:59:55 UTC

Tad has been asked repeatedly to help with building the US Hawks and he's pretty much refused to participate.

Pretty much? I never refused to participate - I just don't want total assholes like you and your buddies participating.

If you see something he's written that's particularly helpful, please post it.

Because, of course, YOU continue to have zero interest in looking around for anything particularly helpful. Same way it was too goddam much trouble for you to look into my correspondence with the goddam FAA to see if there was anything the least bit legitimate in my concerns. Good thing you got Dennis Pagen, coauthor of the excellent book, Towing Aloft, by Dennis Pagen and Bill Bryden, to talk some sense into me...

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=3840
[TIL] About Tad Eareckson

Bob Kuczewski - 2013/03/10 18:20:34 UTC

I first learned about Tad Eareckson when I was Regional Director and the USHPA Board circulated a letter he had written (with intention to send?) to the FAA about some dangerous practices in hang gliding.

The Board's knee-jerk response was to try to take some kind of legal action to silence Tad. I indicated that I thought we shouldn't be sending our lawyers in as our first response, and that maybe we should have someone talk with him first. So Dennis Pagen volunteered, and I believe the matter was settled without any serious damage to the sport.

...and prevent me from doing any serious damage to the sport. But lemme ask ya sumpin', motherfucker... If you needed Dennis to talk to me and show me how baseless my concerns were then how come you're not just using the excellent book, Towing Aloft, by Dennis Pagen and Bill Bryden to cover the towing component of your training manual...

http://www.hpac.ca/pub/?pid=112
HPAC Towing Procedures Manual

"Towing Aloft" by Dennis Pagan and Bill Bryden is the official USHGA recommended manual for tow operators and instructors.

...the way USHGA does?

Oh, right...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=802
AL's Second flight at Packsaddle how it went

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/10/23 16:29:29 UTC

As for Nobody's request for me to read a document, I haven't found the time yet. I'm sorry, but I don't have time to read everything that everyone asks me to read. I would eventually like to form committees with expertise in each area, and I've asked you (Tad) to be a part of that, but I think you get more enjoyment as a keyboard warrior than in actually sitting down to accomplish positive goals.

You've never had time at any point in the past sixteen years to actually read it and run statements like:

Towing Aloft - 1998/01

Weak links very clearly will provide protection from excessive angles of attack, high bank turns and the like for this form of towing.

through your fucking Navier-Stokes equations to check their degrees of legitimacy. So you just assumed that I was a threat to the sport and Dennis wasn't 'cause he's USHGA Establishment and I'm not.

I have no problem giving attribution to Tad or his work.

You've never had any problem attributing positions Tad's never taken to him.

You can communicate with him through his forum at:
http://kitestrings.prophpbb.com/

OH REALLY??? But I thought...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=877
Discuss Tad here

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

If I boot you permanently it will be due to my concerns over the topic we discussed on the phone. This forum should be a safe place for people of varying ages to visit. You have not given me any assurances that's true with you on this forum.

...the reason you booted me permanently was because you wanted YOUR forum to be a safe place for people of varying ages to visit and...

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

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/16 20:50:32 UTC

His refusal to condemn his own conduct also made it difficult to have him on a forum where we do not screen people based on their age.

...it was difficult to have Tad on a forum where WE do not screen people based on their age. So how do you justify telling people of possible varying ages that they can communicate with Tad directly through his forum at: http://kitestrings.prophpbb.com/?

How does that make The Bob Show any safer for people of varying ages to visit than if you hadn't booted Tad permanently? How do you know that Nobody isn't a person of a varying age and that you haven't just sent him to a fate worse than a thousand deaths?

Here's a thought, Bob... You could amend every reference to T** at K*** S****** with a warning that he's an unrepentant child molester. But, then again, an unrepentant child molester might very well be just what a person of a varying age would be looking for. Then you'd need to locate the person of a varying age and have him locked up for his own safety. Really complex issue isn't it? Would've been so much simpler if I'd been locked away for life or executed as you've suggested.

I'm not trying to "erase" Tad...

Good. That's one of many things you totally suck at, motherfucker.

...but I am trying to protect the US Hawks from the destructive aspects of his personality.

Because you actually DO...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=463
Davis Straub's "Oz Report" Conflict of Interest

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/02/23 04:01:36 UTC

I don't believe we should be building a "nanny state" where one group imposes their view of what is safe for everyone else.

...*REALLY* believe "we" should be building a "nanny state" where one group, or individual dictatorial control freak, imposes its, or his, view of what is safe for everyone else - minus any pretense of rules, consultation, obtaining a consensus.

I'm looking for people who can work together to build an on-line training manual for hang gliding.

Oh. YOU'RE looking for people who can work TOGETHER to build an on-line training manual for hang gliding. Because...
- YOU'RE the only one qualified to identify people acceptable to YOU.
- A training manual that comes out of a committee is obviously gonna be vastly superior than anything an individual can produce.

Yes, that does require a certain amount of agreeability and willingness to compromise.

In other words... When, in the course of doing something of paramount importance...

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

What will keep the US Hawks from becoming another USHPA or HGFA?

You will ... hopefully. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Everyone has to do their part once in a while. If you see something that's not being done correctly, then it's your duty to speak out. One big difference between the US Hawks and other organizations is that the US Hawks really does honor the free speech of its members.

...you see some total fucking douchebag establishing policy...

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

Sam Kellner - 2011/11/07 02:47:58 UTC

Preflight, Hangcheck, Know you're hooked in.

...that's one hundred percent guaranteed to get (more) people killed, it's one's duty to shut the fuck up, smile, and let it happen so that said total fucking douchebag will feel himself a person of worth and valuable member of the team.

Sorry Bob, no way in hell am I sending someone I don't totally despise into a program produced through agreeability and compromise.

The only Training Manual that Tad can build is the one where he has 100% control.

So what kind of Training Manual can King Bob build? Your little dictatorship is over three and half years old, it's been over two years since you made The Bob Show a safe place for people of varying ages to visit, and what the hell have you got that you're willing to put an official Bob Show stamp on other than just accepting ratings issued by the douchebags at USHGA?

I hope he does that at:
http://kitestrings.prophpbb.com/
and we'll...

We who?

...be happy to reference his work.

So how much have my work have you referenced, motherfucker? When was the last time anyone in your cult so much as quoted me in order to so much as address anything I've said? Even a vegetable like Kinsley Sykes...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30971
Zach Marzec

Kinsley Sykes - 2013/02/17 16:04:16 UTC

Deltaman and Zach seem to be jumping on Jim for not using facts.. while not using RELEVANT facts to make their case.. When these guys agree with themselves on a forum where they all talk to each other, (http://www.kitestrings.org/forum2.html) no big deal, but I worry that folks will read the lack of response as some sort of endorsement of these positions. Actually, if you are on the fence, but think maybe these "strong weaklink" guys have a point, please go to that forum and read through it. Then see if you want to trust your life to their theories..

I do think that doing things that question long held beliefs it good. People thought Galileo was a heretic and also were fond of the earth being flat. I am sure we can do things better in towing, just would like that to be fact based, not just conjecture.

...has done better than that - on The Davis Show, no less.

Also note that I've created the Training Manual Forum as a place for working on the Training Manual. This could have been done outside of the US Hawks forum by personal collaboration or email or by many other means. But I wanted lots of people to be able to see what we're doing and offer comments, so I decided to make it a public part of the US Hawks Forum.

On the other hand, working on a training manual will require a coordinated effort by several dedicated people.

Why? Is their some immutable law of the universe that states a single QUALIFIED individual can't kick the asses of several DEDICATED people?

The actual writing process is not helped by allowing people to derail the discussions.

1. Why would anyone WANT to derail a discussion on a training manual? What would be his motivation?

2. How would it be POSSIBLE to derail a discussion - other than by...

Zack C - 2011/12/17 14:56:03 UTC

You continually misrepresent Tad's statements.

...continually misrepresenting someone's statements and allowing dumb fucks like Rick Masters too goddam stupid to check sources to run their idiot mouths unchecked?

So that's why the Training Manual Forum is limited to posting by people who've explicitly stated they want to work cooperatively on that project.

So that's the sole qualification for a position of establishing policy. If a person states that he's willing to compromise on what he believes or knows for the sake of the harmony of Bob's Mutual Masturbation Society he's in. In other words... The absolute LAST people any sane person would want establishing policy will be the ONLY people permitted by King Bob to establish policy.

If you:
- describe:
-- the force transmitted by the towline as pressure
-- a bridle (bridal) which splits the towline tension (pressure) between the pilot and glider is a three pointer
- refuse to use redundant weak links because they multiply the pressure required to blow tow
- teach:
-- "Preflight, Hangcheck, Know you're hooked in." as the strategy for preventing unhooked launches
-- how to:
--- prevent lockouts by flying inside the Cone of Safety
--- perfect standup landings to the point at which it's safe to dispense with wheels
--- safely:
---- pro tow
---- land in a narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place
--- swing your body way outside the control frame so it stays up there while you reach out with one hand and release
-- that:
--- a weak link will:
---- if you fail to maintain the correct tow position, break before you can get into too much trouble
---- very clearly will provide protection from excessive angles of attack, high bank turns, and the like for aerotowing
-- never to do the preflight sidewire load test because you might break one of your sidewires
- use a three strand 130 pound Greenspot weak link on your Dragonfly to protect your tow mast breakaway
- have:
-- flunked the Hang Two written test three consecutive times
-- flown your glider into a tree because your method of roll control is to twist your body diagonally in the direction you desire to turn
-- obtained your rating while flagrantly violating USHGA's hook-in check requirement/regulation on every flight of your career
-- dived your glider and passenger into the powerlines by dangling from the basetube in order to stay connected
-- always aerotowed in violation of FAA regulations by using a Rooney Link shy of the bottom limit because it's got a long track record
-- flown only bent pin barrel releases because they're easier to close over thick ropes without weak links
-- no fuckin' clue:
--- as to the breaking strength of the focal point of your safe towing system
--- how to translate weak link strength into max towline tension
-- recently killed someone by fixing whatever was going on back there by giving him the rope
you're on the Training Manual Team by sole virtue of having explicitly stated that you want to work cooperatively on the project - and everyone else on it is required to modify his positions to effect agreeable compromises with yours.

With that thought...

That's a THOUGHT? Did somebody confirm that was an actual thought or are you just assuming that any shit that oozes out of your cranial cavity conforms to that description?

...in mind, it would be good to have a topic where anyone can comment or contribute without being a member of the Training Manual Team.

What's it matter? You're in total control of everything and you're never gonna allow anything of any substance to happen.

Why don't you just write the fucking manual yourself? You've openly stated that...

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/31 07:34:26 UTC

But if you want to talk numbers and logic, then start by explaining the laws of physics in terms of differential equations and not your simple 2+2=4 "logic" if you want my respect. Go ahead and explain the first quarter of Newtonian physics for us and see how far you get. We'll let you work your way up to the Navier-Stokes equations.

...you don't have any respect for anyone who can't explain the laws of physics in terms of differential equations - and that takes care of virtually everyone in the sport, particularly the dregs like Sam Kellner, Charles Schneider, Peter Birren that you're always cultivating over there. And this guy:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1186
D. Straub's Politics=Gun Grabbing, Constitution/Baby Killing

Bill Cummings - 2013/02/19 02:43:00 UTC

No one should confuse me with someone that has been exposed to higher education. I avoided that style of incarceration like the plague.

is the best you've got over there - including you, by the way.

This topic is specifically for that purpose. Please feel free to post your own (or even someone else's) comments or contributions to this forum any time.

But make sure never to forget your primary duty - to compromise and shut the fuck up when you see something being done wrong. Or Bob will determine that you have no legitimate interest in helping produce a training manual. If, for example, you believe that it's critical that a hook-in check be done within five seconds of launch then throw in a clause that allows the pilot to do it whenever the fuck he feels like for whatever the fuck excuse he feels like using as a justification.

Thanks.

Fuck you.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=814
Lifetime Ratings for the US Hawks?

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/10/28 23:31:17 UTC

The issue of "currency" appears to be in question. Maybe we...

Meaning you.

...should examine what other organizations do.

USHPA doesn't have any currency requirements other than you pay them every year. If you got a rating twenty years ago and have paid every year but not flown once in those twenty years, then your rating is still good. But if you fly every single day, but have not been paying for some number of years...

Three.

...then I believe you need to be recertified through some process (which may...

Will.

...require an instructor review and/or signoff) to get your ratings back.

I believe the FAA is different. I believe (and it's been a long time, so I welcome any updates) that your license is good for life, but you are not able to fly unless you pass regular physicals, regular (biennial?) flight reviews, and maintain some degree of currency in the category and type of aircraft you want to fly.

I personally think the FAA model is much better and will lead to better safety.

Since when did you start giving a flying fuck about safety?

But it does end up putting a burden on pilots. So the question is what degree of currency do we think is appropriate? Here are some options I pulled out of the air:

Option 1. No requirements at all. Ratings are good for life, and that's it.

Option 2. One flight per year for currency. If it's been longer than that, then you need to be checked out by someone (instructor or not?) who is current. This could be as simple as your buddy asking you a few questions or doing whatever they feel is appropriate for them to sign you off.

If I state that if I fail to maintain the correct tow position (centered, with the wheels of the tug on the horizon), the weak link will break before I can get into too much trouble am I good to go?

Option 3. Same as Option 2, but if it's been longer than five years since you've flown then you need a current instructor to sign you off. The requirements for the sign off are up to the instructor since he (or she) will be taking on roughly the same responsibility for your flying as an original instructor.

Oh! So you think maybe we should be having some kind of...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=463
Davis Straub's "Oz Report" Conflict of Interest

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/03/09 02:33:49 UTC

This is going to sound cold, but I believe people have a right to make their own choices. I don't want a "nanny state" where anyone is telling me what I can and can't do ... for my own good. The sport of hang gliding would surely not exist if that thinking were carried to its logical extreme. There's something bred into all living things that urges them toward taking some degree of risk in their lives. Those who want to forbid that risk are essentially snuffing out the human spirit itself. I can't support that. I do support information. I support good information. I support exposing bad information. But I don't support dictating what anyone can or can't do. The fundamental principle of economics (and evolution) is two words: "people choose".

..."nanny state" telling people what they can and can't do ... for their own good - and maybe for EVERYBODY's good. You're actually NOT in favor of having some bozo being able to buy a like-new T2C off of eBay, show up at Torrey, and crash back into the setup area on top of your glider and bleed to death.

Regardless of which of the options "we" take "we" need someone who's jumped through enough hoops to qualify as an instructor taking responsibility and being held accountable for the people he signs off.

Kinda like the way HPAC dealt - fairly or un - with Steve Parson after Marvin Trudeau fatally crashed on 2010/08/18.

These options aren't intended to form any kind of coherent plan...

That's OK, Bob. I don't think you've ever had any kind of coherent plan for anything at any time in the course of your entire miserable existence. You're not smart enough to be able to keep your lies consistent with each other.

...but they are intended to get us thinking...

Getting the people YOU'RE cultivating thinking? Good freakin' luck.

...about what we think is tolerable and appropriate.

Just give people information and let them choose. And do what you can to have Tad locked up for life or executed because it's not safe to have him in any kind of communication with anyone who might be of a varying age.

Thanks for any comments.

The only people who get to make comments are the ones you've approved to be members of your cult.

Rick Masters - 2012/03/04 23:50:31 UTC

I have friends who have not flown in many years and sought out an instructor to help them get "current."

You have a friend who near thirty-two years ago became twenty-three years old forever because he never complied with the hook-in check regulation USHGA implemented well over a year prior and at some point in his preparations to launch off Plowshare...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=802
AL's Second flight at Packsaddle how it went

Rick Masters - 2011/10/19 22:47:17 UTC

At that moment, I would banish all concern about launching unhooked. I had taken care of it. It was done. It was out of my mind.

...there was a moment at which he banished all concern about launching unhooked - he had taken care of it, it was done, out of his mind.

But it is my belief that no one bears any responsibility for my flying but me - 100%.

I don't really give a flying fuck about any of your beliefs, Rick. Anybody who doesn't understand that we need to hold instructors responsible and accountable for the vast majority of their students' flying is too full of shit to be worth talking to.

The U$PA has their little moneymaking system in play. No cops are necessary because it is a fraud.

And The Bob Show ISN'T?

Do the Hawks...

Meaning Bob.

...want to have cops or pilots?

1. Cops - OBVIOUSLY. How else ya gonna make The Bob Show a safe place for people of varying ages to visit?

2. You have a Dictator For Life. What do you need cops for? And anybody who feels like calling himself a pilot is a pilot because Bob doesn't want a "nanny state" where anyone is telling anyone what he can and can't do ... for his own good.

We earned our ratings.

Should've just gone to Texas and bought them.

Don't bug us. The pilots who want to be cops should volunteer now so Bob can get an idea of the landscape.

1. Since when did Bob ever do anything beyond pretending to be interested in the actual landscape? He already knows what the landscape he has in mind looks like.

2. I think as long as you call yourself a pilot you should be able to launch and land anywhere you want, make up your own right of way rules as you go along, buzz Condor nests, fly in high traffic air corridors at night, tow people up on junk equipment and in violation of FAA towing regulations.

(As if he didn't know, already!)

Hard to imagine there's ANYTHING he doesn't already know.

Bob Kuczewski - 2012/03/05 06:40:27 UTC

USHPA's "currency" requirement is that you give them currency ($$) every year. As long as you pay them regularly, they'll keep you on the current and "ready to fly" list. If you stop paying, then it doesn't matter how much you fly, you're still considered "uncurrent" in their system.

And if you don't wanna fly with a single loop of 130 pound test fishing line as your Pilot In Command...

http://ozreport.com/12.081
Weaklinks - the HGFA rules

Davis Straub - 2008/04/22 14:47:00 UTC

Pilots must use weaklinks provided by the meet organizers and in a manner approved by the meet organizers. All weaklinks will be checked and use of inappropriate weaklinks will require the pilot to go to the end of the launch line to change the weaklink.

Weaklinks will consist of a single loop of Cortland 130 lb. Greenspot braided Dacron Tolling line and should be placed at one end of a shoulder bridle.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3600
Weak link question

Jim Rooney - 2008/11/24 05:18:15 UTC

Well, I'm assuming there was some guff about the tug pilot's right of refusal?
Gee, didn't think we'd have to delve into "pilot in command"... I figured that one's pretty well understood in a flying community.

It's quite simple.
The tug is a certified aircraft... the glider is an unpowered ultralight vehicle. The tug pilot is the pilot in command. You are a passenger. You have the same rights and responsibilities as a skydiver.
It's a bitter pill I'm sure, but there you have it.

BTW, if you think I'm just spouting theory here, I've personally refused to tow a flight park owner over this very issue. I didn't want to clash, but I wasn't towing him. Yup, he wanted to tow with a doubled up weaklink. He eventually towed (behind me) with a single and sorry to disappoint any drama mongers, we're still friends. And lone gun crazy Rooney? Ten other tow pilots turned him down that day for the same reason.

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

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/28 19:39:17 UTC

Weak links break for all kinds of reasons.
Some obvious, some not.

The general consensus is the age old adage... "err on the side of caution".

The frustration of a weaklink break is just that, frustration.
And it can be very frustrating for sure. Especially on a good day, which they tend to be. It seems to be a Murphy favourite. You'll be in a long tug line on a stellar day just itching to fly. The stars are all lining up when *bam*, out of nowhere your trip to happy XC land goes up in a flash. Now you've got to hike it all the way back to the back of the line and wait as the "perfect" window drifts on by.

I get it.
It can be a pisser.

But the "other side"... the not cautions one... is not one of frustration, it's one of very real danger.
Better to be frustrated than in a hospital, or worse.
No exaggeration... this is the fire that the "other side" is made of. Best not to play with it.

...your other Pilots In Command will tell you that you can go fuck yourself.

The one thing that the Hawks will do is to decouple the money from the currency (flight currency in this case!).

How do you know, Bob? Isn't that an issue that needs to be voted on? Just kidding.

We will never consider anyone "uncurrent" just because they haven't paid in a year ... or a decade. The only thing that determines flying currency is flying ... not paying.

What if you think that he might make The Bob Show an unsafe place for people of varying ages to visit and he's someone other than Sam?

But once we've removed money from the equation, the question remains as to whether pilots should maintain any form of actual flying currency to be able to fly. I'm on the fence. Safety (and the FAA model) tip me toward some kind of actual currency requirement. But freedom and personal responsibility tip me toward leaving it up to the pilot.

No brainer. Go with freedom and personal responsibility. And make sure that anybody who wants to fly a Four site can just walk in off the street and designate himself a Four.

If we ever get to be big enough so that this really matters ... I think it should be decided by the members through their votes.

You've already decided without the slightest pretense of attaining anything in the way of a consensus that a Hang 4.95 former instructor with qualifications coming out his ass will never have the slightest say in any Bob Show matters or policy or be permitted to fly anywhere as a Bob Show rated pilot. So how come you're interested in having anything decided by voting?

I'm not sure how I'd cast my own vote at this point.

Bummer, dude. You really should be because it's the only one that's ever gonna count - just like it's been the only one that's ever counted in the past three and half years.

Do the Hawks want to have cops or pilots?

I know the answer to that one. We want pilots!!!

There's absolutely nothing you DON'T know in terms of what "WE" want.

jaybird78 - 2014/03/05 20:42:17 UTC

I have to say after reading this thread, I agree 100% with Rick. I was issued a Ushpa flight log yesterday, quite frankly I have no desire to use it. Considering I'm a member of this association, it only seems logical I be rated by it.

What privileges do you have as a member of that association? Do you get to vote for a Regional Director? I'll tell ya one advantage you have over USHGA members... Whenever policy is made there's an open record of how all the Directors voted.

Look I just want to fly like many of you, all the people trying to control others is what's fu**ing everything up for the rest of us, not the "yahoos."

You don't wanna fly just like many of anyone. 'Cause, regardless of all the rot you always hear people saying, they really DO want people being properly rated, knowing how to launch and approach fields, being connected to their gliders before they start running, circling in thermals in the same direction as everyone else. Everybody wants this action controlled but USHGA and The Industry don't want it being controlled by the recreational pilots in their own interests.

I think many have lost touch with what hangliding represents, and that's freedom!

Assholes who think that hang gliding represents freedom tend not to have very long careers in the sport.

Furthermore I would view anyone cutting my wires as an infrigment of my civil liberties and am prepared to defend that to the death, are you?

If I'm reasonably sure that the death will be of the person attempting to infringe my civil liberties and not mine - ABSOLUTELY! I've got a huge list of evil corrupt motherfuckers in the sport whose deaths would bring me great joy.

I would pay for the privilege of sneaking onto Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney's pro toad bridle a little loop of fishing line just barely strong enough to get him airborne and sending him up into violent thermal conditions. It would be the perfect crime! Nobody would have the slightest clue...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30971
Zach Marzec

Jim Rooney - 2013/03/07 18:24:58 UTC

You're the one advocating change here, not me.
I'm fine.

These are only questions if you're advocating change. Which I'm not. You are.

You're the one speculating on Zack's death... not me.
Hell, you've even already come to your conclusions... you've made up your mind and you "know" what happened and what to do about.
It's disgusting and you need to stop.
You weren't there. You don't know.
All you have is the tug pilot report, who himself says he doesn't know... and HE WAS THERE... and he doesn't know.

Ever heard of "Confirmation Bias"?
Because you're a textbook example.
You were out looking for data to support your preconceived conclusion, rather than looking at the data and seeing what it tells you... which is why this is the first time we've heard from you and your gang.

Go back to Tad's hole in the ground.
While you're there, ask him why he was banned from every east coast flying site.

...what it was that killed him.

Bob Kuczewski - 2014/03/05 21:39:09 UTC

Hello JayBird78!!!

Thanks for digging around and reading - and reviving - this topic.

As you can see, this topic was discussed way back when the US Hawks was so small that we weren't on anyone's radar scope. We're still pretty small, but at least Google is finding us and often listing us in the number 2 slot when you search for "Hang Gliding Association".

So this is a good topic to start discussing again, and I welcome your input.

Unfortunately, from a practical perspective, I still have to currently encourage you to join USHPA (if you haven't already) and go through their process (if you aren't already) to be able to fly. I would love to be able to suggest that you tell USHPA to take a flying leap, but unfortunately would severely limit your ability to fly many many sites at this time.

Especially if you're a...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=30828
Sonora wings plane crash

Larry Howe - 2014/02/25 05:32:53 UTC

I could be wrong, but the amount of fatals involving Dragonflies per Dragonfly flying would have grounded any certified aircraft. Maybe we need to spend a little more time analyzing is this just a bad design aircraft. Or will we continue to look the other way because it's one of the few games in town for towing HG. How long do you think they'd put up with Super Cubs and Pawnees crashing and killing sailplane tow pilots if they had this rate of fatals?

...flatlander.

USHPA has a monopoly, and it turns my stomach to send them money every year (especially after all they've done to harm our local hang gliding club and local hang gliding pilots).

But you were MORE than happy to sic them on T** at K*** S******...

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=3840
[TIL] About Tad Eareckson

Bob Kuczewski - 2013/03/10 18:20:34 UTC

I first learned about Tad Eareckson when I was Regional Director and the USHPA Board circulated a letter he had written (with intention to send?) to the FAA about some dangerous practices in hang gliding.

The Board's knee-jerk response was to try to take some kind of legal action to silence Tad. I indicated that I thought we shouldn't be sending our lawyers in as our first response, and that maybe we should have someone talk with him first. So Dennis Pagen volunteered, and I believe the matter was settled without any serious damage to the sport.

...in order to prevent him from doing much in the way of serious damage to the sport.

But I have to do it, because that's where we are at this point in time (render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's).

And unto Bob the things that are Bob's. Everybody else can go fuck himself.

But while I recommend (for your own ability to enjoy this great sport) that you join USHPA, you can also be helping to build an alternative - the US Hawks. The only thing USHPA has that we don't have is a large membership base.

And an elected Board Of Directors. All total fucking douchebags elected by their peers but, nevertheless...

If we can grow to be even a reasonable fraction of USHPA's size, then we can start to offer the kinds of freedom that you suggest.

By the way, it's somewhat funny to note that a few years back, USHPA adopted the slogan:

"This is Flying. This is Freedom."

Any thoughts on what should replace "Freedom" in that phrase?

Yeah:
"This is Flying. This is Dangerous As Hell. Never trust anyone in this sport - especially assholes who think it's all about Freedom."

(remember, this forum...

Meaning Bob.

...restricts certain words )

1. Unless you feel like calling calling T** at K*** S****** an asswipe. Then you can go nuts.
2. Yeah, this is all about freedom. As long as it's what Bob wants. When it isn't he restricts it.

Thanks for your comments JayBird78. It may take a while, but with your help and the help of many others, I hope we'll look back someday and talk about the days when the US Hawks was just getting started ... and we were there.

And it'll still be a dictatorship. In it's entire existence - which is getting close to ten percent of the length of the existence of mainstream hang gliding - it hasn't moved one millimeter in the direction of anything else.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=814
Lifetime Ratings for the US Hawks?

So Bob... You don't wanna see any enforcement of USHGA's thirty plus year old hook-in check regulation so you sabotage all me efforts towards compelling compliance and invent some total rot...

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

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/11/11 23:44:45 UTC

Tad, until you can figure out a way for my crashes to end up breaking your bones, then I'm going to be the one to decide how I launch. Got it? I suspect most pilots will agree.

...about how they'll endanger people doing them, lie about what my position is, and get douchebags like Rick to come in on your side.

I got tired of a bunch of stupid arrogant ultralight jockeys violating the crap out of USHGA and FAA regulations written for the protection of the planes at BOTH ends of the string and making every single one of MY launches the equivalent of going up with a frayed sidewire - not AS likely to kill me but with the demonstrated potential to kill me just as dead.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bRrpHNa68iY/UQ6Pv9gRZyI/AAAAAAAAjTg/Hc22bx5122Q/s2048/20943781_BG1.jpg


And I did everything I could to go through channels - including, upon the request of the USHGA Towing Committee at the time - rewriting USHGA's Aerotowing SOPs and Guidelines. And you fuckin' USHGA/Industry shits just pissed all over me until I went up to the next level. And that was the end of my flying career and one of the very few things that I had left in my life that I really looked forward to doing.

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=3840
[TIL] About Tad Eareckson

Bob Kuczewski - 2013/03/10 18:20:34 UTC

Tad joined us, and for a while things were fine. But over time, it became obvious to me that he was more interested in just bashing people than trying to actually solve problems in the sport of hang gliding. For a long time, I tried to show him kindness on our forum and I gave him a lot of slack with regard to his profanity and his comments that he wished certain people would crash and kill themselves.

Sure... I'd be freakin' OVERJOYED to hear about Davis, Adam, Rooney, Trisa... - the motherfuckers who ended my career because I fought for enforcement of EXISTING regulations to enable me to do what I wanted to do safely, competently, efficiently - slamming in. Ditto for enablers and dereliction of duty types such as yourself.

But that makes ME a sociopath?

jaybird78 - 2014/03/05 20:42:17 UTC

I think many have lost touch with what hangliding represents, and that's freedom! Furthermore I would view anyone cutting my wires as an infrigment of my civil liberties and am prepared to defend that to the death, are you?

And JayBird's a good ol' boy?

How convenient it must be to have no solid principles whatsoever.

[Tad Eareckson]

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

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

Tad, I'm not responding to the rest of your post because it starts from the silly assumption that we shouldn't have students learning to fly upright.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26379
Landings

Jim Rooney - 2012/01/27 09:20:28 UTC

A while ago, I taught a student... from day one, to land on her wheels with absolutely zero intention of foot landing.
We do this all the time with aerotowing students.
So why not with hill students?

And I mean from day 1.
Yes, even the training hill flights.

Wheels wheels wheels wheels.

As a student, she was only going to be landing in a gigantic, manicured field for a long long time. So what's the bother?
Learn to fly.
Learn to not smash into the earth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_2holKUTxM
Hang Gliding, Landing on Wheels

Niki Longshore - 2014/02/10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_2holKUTxM


Until I master the foot stuff, I'm bound to "training wheels." Basic landing approach (downwind, base, final). Final approach with lots of speed and gentle touch down on wheels. Though I don't know what it's like to land on my feet (yet), I am enjoying the wheels!

Joe Greblo sends his students off in mild enough conditions where they can fly their whole 10 minute flight in the upright position.

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=3398
A broken humerus, guess the cost.

Orion Price - 2012/07/16 06:39:18 UTC

It was almost 70k. 68 and change. Just for the surgery.

In fact, Joe suggests that advanced pilots should spend some time upright once in a while just to keep familiar with it.

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

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

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.

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

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

Your 5 second time limit between hook-in check and launch is unreasonably short - especially when attached to the consequences that you've listed. This would preclude, for example, the "turn and look" hook-in check that Joe Greblo teaches because 5 seconds would easily elapse between that check and getting the glider back into position to launch.

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

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

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

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

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

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

I've done that many times at Torrey Pines where I do imaginary landing approaches several hundred feet above the terrain.

Sounds a lot like the...

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.

...imaginary weak link breaks Dr. Trisa Tilletti has his tandem "students" recovering from at two thousand feet in smooth air.

Flying upright is not something to be feared.

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 fifteen 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.

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.

It's something to be mastered.

Sure, Bob. So when exactly was it that you "mastered" it and...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=28835
Why I don't paraglide

Tom Emery - 2013/04/17 14:29:12 UTC
San Diego

Been flying Crestline about a year now. I've seen more bent aluminum than twisted risers. Every time another hang pounds in, Steven, the resident PG master, just rolls his eyes and says something like, "And you guys think hang gliding is safer."

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=22176
Paragliding Collapses

Jim Rooney - 2011/06/12 13:57:58 UTC

Most common HG injury... spiral fracture of the humerus.

Gil Dodgen - 1995/01

All of this reminds me of a comment Mike Meier made when he was learning to fly sailplanes. He mentioned how easy it was to land a sailplane (with spoilers for glide-path control and wheels), and then said, "If other aircraft were as difficult to land as hang gliders no one would fly them."

...when are you expecting all these other bozos...


http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3859/14423696873_f1326e2320_o.png


http://forum.hanggliding.org/download/file.php?id=20507


...to finally be getting their shit together?

[Tad Eareckson]

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/07/16 16:44:41 UTC

I've been a big advocate for giving Tad a voice in hang gliding.

I never wanted "*A* VOICE" - asshole. I wanted problems fixed - like bent pin releases which no way in hell were legal under USHGA regulations taken out of circulation and hook-in check requirements adhered to. What the fuck good was having "*A* VOICE" supposed to do? Total vegetables like Sam have VOICES - in your book infinitely more valuable than mine.

When I was Regional Director I asked the USHPA Board to consider Tad's ideas rather than paying their lawyer to attack him.

Fuck you.

- Using the term "Tad's IDEAS" is a very deliberate and calculated expression of contempt. This is EXACTLY the same kinda bullshit your buddy Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney pulls:

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.

That the sole purpose of the weak link is to...

Tost Flugzeuggerätebau

Weak links protect your aircraft against overloading.

...protect your aircraft against overloading and light weak links which untold thousands of total idiots are trying to use as pitch and lockout protectors are nothing but dangerous is NOT some IDEA, THEORY, or OPINION of Tad's - it's fuckin' reality.

- So when you were a Regional Director and asked the USHPA Board to consider "Tad's IDEAS" just how many of your fellow pieces of shit actually did that? Quote me one syllable from any ONE of those motherfuckers commenting - positively or negatively - on any of the issues I raised?

- So what the fuck was stopping YOUR ass from "considering Tad's IDEAS"?

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=802
AL's Second flight at Packsaddle how it went

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/10/23 16:29:29 UTC

As for Nobody's request for me to read a document, I haven't found the time yet. I'm sorry, but I don't have time to read everything that everyone asks me to read. I would eventually like to form committees with expertise in each area, and I've asked you (Tad) to be a part of that, but I think you get more enjoyment as a keyboard warrior than in actually sitting down to accomplish positive goals.

You were a Board member, I'd guess the vast majority of your constituents use ropes to get airborne with some frequency or other, you had a responsibility to look into how things were being conducted and whether or not they were safe and in compliance with USHGA and FAA regs. And you asked this crowd "to consider Tad's ideas" - something you had ZERO intention of doing yourself.

You knew with one hundred percent certainty that none of your fellow motherfuckers would have any more interest in issues of competency and safety than you did. But you knew you could APPEAR to be NOBLE by calling for "consideration of Tad's ideas" instead of paying your lawyer to attack me. Either way "Tad's ideas" get totally ignored and if they're "considered" you don't have to pay your lawyer.

So let's jump ahead a year and a third and see how you're portraying your crap to the Grebloville crowd...

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=3840
[TIL] About Tad Eareckson

Bob Kuczewski - 2013/03/10 18:20:34 UTC

I first learned about Tad Eareckson when I was Regional Director and the USHPA Board circulated a letter he had written (with intention to send?) to the FAA about some dangerous practices in hang gliding.

The Board's knee-jerk response was to try to take some kind of legal action to silence Tad. I indicated that I thought we shouldn't be sending our lawyers in as our first response, and that maybe we should have someone talk with him first. So Dennis Pagen volunteered, and I believe the matter was settled without any serious damage to the sport.

ABSOLUTELY *NOTHING* about trying to persuade the Board to consider "Tad's ideas". TOTALLY about having Dennis get Tad to shut the fuck up as Phase One. And, failing that, taking legal and any and every other kind of action to silence Tad and destroy his flying career as Phase Two. No serious damage to the sport and the dangerous practices which are its essence and which you and your fellow motherfuckers work so tirelessly to defend and preserve.

And I'm totally one hundred percent serious about that statement. The efforts you put in to sabotage implementation of USHGA's 1981/05 hook-in check requirement and Dr. Trisa Tilletti put in to sabotage implementation of the FAA's 2004/09 aerotowing weak link regulations are staggering.

Compare/Contrast:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hhpa/message/9346
Just a Tad

Zack C - 2010/02/02 21:03 UTC

Just one guy on a mission. The letter was a draft written to spark a reaction and not actually sent to the FAA. It is referenced in this topic:
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=12443
AT regs
All posts on the forum by Tad (if you're reeeeally bored):
http://www.hanggliding.org/search.php?search_author=AeroTow
He was eventually banned from hanggliding.org.
I think he's going about it the wrong way, but I do think he has some valid points...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hhpa/message/9360
Hook knives and other inventions

Zack 2010/02/03 21:07

John, are we talking about the same letter? The letter I saw was strictly about aerotowing (although he discusses hook in failure elsewhere).

His main two points are that the standard weak link we use for aerotowing is too weak and that our releases suck. We've been discussing surface tow weak links, but I don't think he criticizes these (he does say it is not sensible that we use stronger weak links for surface towing than aerotowing).

So far, I've not had a weak link on a surface tow break prematurely (other than when only two strands were used). I've had plenty break under what I considered excessive tension. I don't think we have a problem with using weak links for surface towing that are too weak.

I've had weak links break on aerotows for seemingly no reason a number of times. I feel that this is dangerous and am suspicious of the wisdom of using 130 lb Cortland Greenspot for every pilot in every configuration.

It was said that the purpose of weak links is not to prevent lockouts. This is certainly the case with tension controlled towing, but I think the perception that they can when aerotowing is partly true, because tensions do increase in an aerotow lockout and a 130 lb loop will likely break at some point in a lockout progression.

But with an infallible release that can be activated without removing one's hand from the base tube, there is no need to rely on the weak link to prevent lockouts and thus stronger links that are less likely to break prematurely can be used. Getting off the rope becomes the pilot's decision. I feel this is as it should be. We don't rely on weak links to prevent lockouts when surface towing, so why should we when aerotowing?

I've never used the pilot-only 'pro tow' configuration for aerotowing solely because I don't want to give up my Lookout release and the ability to release without taking my hand off the bar. This release uses a spinnaker shackle, which (as noted) has been known to fail. For this reason I am very much interested in Lookout's new release.

Tad doesn't have a problem with the concept of barrel releases, but he says the one most commonly used (the 'Baily release') is poorly designed and can fail under high tensions (mainly because it uses a curved as opposed to straight pin).

I would agree that our safety record is much better than he makes it out to be. But there's still room for improvement.

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

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

You've gotta be a total fucking moron to think that aerotowing is being conducted safely/competently and not one of you motherfuckers looked at a single issue I raised. And you don't get that kind of uniformity just as a matter of course. The farther down from the control end of the culture you go the more likely you are to get something in the way of an honest constructive reaction.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30971
Zach Marzec

Kinsley Sykes - 2013/02/17 16:04:16 UTC

Deltaman and Zach seem to be jumping on Jim for not using facts.. while not using RELEVANT facts to make their case.. When these guys agree with themselves on a forum where they all talk to each other, (http://www.kitestrings.org/forum2.html) no big deal, but I worry that folks will read the lack of response as some sort of endorsement of these positions. Actually, if you are on the fence, but think maybe these "strong weaklink" guys have a point, please go to that forum and read through it. Then see if you want to trust your life to their theories..

I do think that doing things that question long held beliefs it good. People thought Galileo was a heretic and also were fond of the earth being flat. I am sure we can do things better in towing, just would like that to be fact based, not just conjecture.

Kinsley Sykes - 2013/02/18 14:32:01 UTC

Overall this actually makes some sense...

Even with an idiot like Kinsley there's a ray of hope. At USHGA level there's way less than zero.

Rich Hass, USHPA President - 2012/03

One of USHPA's primary purposes is the promotion of safe flying. Promoting practices for safe flying is central to USHPA's Mission Statement and it should be a core value for every pilot.

You get into office largely by...

http://torreyhawks.org/r3/ENDNOFR.HTM
Endorsements

NMERider

I voted for Bob after spending a very enjoyable hour on the telephone with him a few months ago. My impression of Bob is that he is a level headed and enthusiastic supporter of both hang gliding and paragliding, and above all: SAFETY.

...telling people what they want to hear and then do everything you can to undermine the core mission of the organization and this DIRECTLY translates to the deaths of participants like Terry Mason and Zack Marzec. I'm not coming up with a lot of good reasons why you and your ilk - Trisa, Matt, Dennis, Jamie, Mitch - don't deserve to be stood up in front of a wall for dereliction of duty.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=802
AL's Second flight at Packsaddle how it went

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/10/23 16:29:29 UTC

You also mentioned Jack's "basement", and to be honest, I'd be relatively satisfied being able to post there. But Jack won't allow it because I'd get too many readers there who might agree with me. If I end up sending you to the "Free Speech Zone", it won't be because you don't agree with me or that you'll gather a following there (in fact, I hope you do!!). It will be because your foul language (regardless of how many asterisks you use) continues to undermine the viability of this forum. The same is true of your acidic remarks (wishing certain people would die in a hang glider accident). If you want to test me on that theory, then please refrain from those kinds of remarks and see the results. Thanks.

Tad Eareckson - 2011/10/24 17:07:57 UTC

Wishing someone one would die in a hang gliding accident is like wishing someone to be run through by a unicorn. Hang gliding accidents and unicorns are both fictional animals - they don't exist in real life.

1. Rooney comes off the cart, centerpunches a thermal or dust devil - à la Aasletten, Pagen, or Birren - and goes up like a rocket.

2. His 130 pound Greenspot blows when he's standing on his tail to increase the safety of the towing operation. PERIOD.

3. He whipstalls and breaks his freakin' neck.

And in another fifteen months and eight days...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bRrpHNa68iY/UQ6Pv9gRZyI/AAAAAAAAjTg/Hc22bx5122Q/s2048/20943781_BG1.jpg


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

Jim Rooney - 2013/02/11 19:22:18 UTC

Of course not... it's Asshole-ese.

Sorry, I'm sick and tired of all these soap box bullshit assheads that feel the need to spout their shit at funerals. I just buried my friend and you're seizing the moment to preach your bullshit? GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!!!!!!

I can barely stand these pompus asswipes on a normal day.

C'mon Bob, ya gotta admit...

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1544
What is the USHPA?

Scott C. Wise - 2014/04/24 17:01:50 UTC

Hello Everyone,

I stopped by to see what was up and to relay something that truly amazes me.

I've recently been doing some research on the USHPA's Corporate Bylaws and various sections of their Standard Operating Procedures (aka, SOPs). In doing so, I was amazed by the fact that to "conduct business" at a meeting of the membership the USHPA only needs a quorum of 11 members present. (! ! ! !) I don't get this. The USHPA has a few thousand members in good standing and all they need to do business, as far as members in attendance, is 11 (elleven) people?

What strikes me about this information is that it has either, #1) Never been changed from when the USHGA had (maybe) 50 members, or #2) The USHPA is intent on doing business without any real agreement and/or consensus of any sizable number of its members. Unfortunately, my impression is that the later possibility is the one in effective operation.

What I'm wondering is, how many USHPA members realize that as few as 11 people control how this sport's organization is operated and managed? And this leads me to consider the whole idea of the USHPA as an organization who's purpose is to serve its members. I suppose that it really does need to serve at least 11 of its members. But I'd guess that the general impression is probably that its "service" is supposed to be toward the positive regard of a majority of its members.

My question in connection with this bit of discovered information is: What kind of organization is the USHPA, really? How can an organization that requires only 11 members to conduct business make ANY (honest) claim to serve the majority of its (in the multi-thousands) membership?

I'm wondering if anyone else is surprised by this fact? If so, how might it give better definition to the USHPA?

[Please Note: So folks know, I quit the USHPA about a year ago because I was receiving absolutely no (organization based) support from my Regional Director. Both before and since then that pattern has repeated itself (effectively) all the way to the top of the organization. I've repeatedly wondered why the USHPA would care so little about losing a Master rated pilot who first began flying over 38 years ago.

Why would they want anybody who remembers an era when people innovating better designs and procedures and doing honest accident reporting and making honest efforts to get the bloodbath under control?

This is not an inflated ego issue on my part. It's a simple matter of valuing the knowledge that I or ANY long term pilot has and can share with his fellow pilots and flying community. In considering it objectively, that is certainly the kind of member you definitely want to support and try your best to KEEP in the sport.

That's not what the commercial interests who control the sport want.

Unless the idea is not to actually support and maintain your membership . . . ]

Bill Cummings - 2014/04/25 02:18:27 UTC

This is not because I am attacking motors in our sport or the vote to insure powered harnesses. It is not an attack on whether or not paragliding and hang gliding should combine for insurance purposes.

It is an attack on the people in control that changed our Articles of Incorporation with a popular vote and not a two thirds vote to be underhanded and overbearing.

How much of a vote is required to make something happen on The Bob Show, Bill?

Scott C. Wise - 2014/04/25 05:41:46 UTC

Bill,

By "Articles of Incorporation" do you mean the same thing as the Corporate Bylaws? If they are different I'd love to see a copy of them.

Also, being a non member of USHPA for just over a year now, I don't know about them insuring powered harness HG pilots - or your other references. However, in the many years I was a member the USHGA and then USHPA, the org has never (to my knowledge) held voting activities (except for Regional Director positions) that actually meant anything.

In the Corporate Bylaws there is nothing mentioned about critical organization votes requiring any % of positive member ballets. From what I've read in the Bylaws, proposals presented to the membership for vote (again, except Regional Directors positions) are for show only. There is no legal requirement that USHPA present any issue to the general membership for vote, en masse. Large scale member votes simply are not required or, in any way, defined. That is, in regard to what a popular vote may be, or what a two thirds vote may be.

Such as: Is a "popular vote" a vote where the majority of USHPA members vote "yes" to some issue, or is it where the majority of members who submit a "yes" vote win? Same thing with the two thirds idea. Is the issue won when two thirds of the membership vote "yes", or is it when two thirds of the members who submit a "yes" vote win on the issue?

According to the USHPA's Bylaws all that is needed to decide an issue - at either a membership meeting or BOD meeting - is 11 people. I'd have to guess that at least 6 of those people must vote in favor of the issue at hand.

Finally, I'm wondering if, in the sentence below, you meant to say . . . "It is an attack on the people in control that changed our Articles of Incorporation with a popular vote and not a two thirds vote. I consider that kind of action to be underhanded and overbearing." If this is not what you meant then I'm not sure what it is you think of as being underhanded and overbearing.

"It is an attack on the people in control that changed our Articles of Incorporation with a popular vote and not a two thirds vote to be underhanded and overbearing."

BTW - Every "popular vote" the USHGA then USHPA has held (that I am familiar with) has only amounted to the majority of submitted votes. If, say, only 300 members submitted a vote, then only 151 people (3.02% of the membership) were all that was needed to decide the course of the USHPA on that issue.

Bill Cummings - 2014/04/28 16:01:08 UTC

Maybe I was dreaming but I thought I remembered voting on changing from USHGA to USHPA.
Didn't that happen with either an online or paper vote?
What was the USHGA mission statement?
What is the USHPA mission statement?
EDIT: https://www.ushpa.aero/policy/bylaws.pdf

Bill Cummings - 2014/04/29 20:28:44 UTC

This morning I remembered that USHGA held an online "Tad-poll." (my words.)

Yeah, they're pretty popular. The Houston club had one of those about four and a half years ago because the majority of the club wanted the ability to silence somebody who wasn't saying the things that 51 percent of the membership agreed with or wanted to hear.

It was a vote that the members could do online as to what our combined sport of hang gliding and paragliding would be called.
A guy by the first name of Tad, (not Eareckson)...

Hurst. He left the sports of both hang and paragliding because he didn't wanna risk tightening his suspension a couple seconds before running off the cliff at Torrey.

...from the USHGA office put it together. Taking input from the members as to our preference in renaming of our association and then holding an online vote.

True the vote didn't actually mean anything.
But I think making that change alone went to the very core of what we as a hang gliding organization started out to accomplish.

Although it wasn't the same thing as changing the United States Constitution (Which I don't think would work with a popular vote in the House or Senate.) to me the name of our organization was jerked out from under the members far too easily.
Even the NAACP organization stayed with it's "Colored People," part of their name recognition even though the majority of its members now prefer not to be referred to as colored people.

In our United States Government which has changes in political party majorities from one election to the next the really important parts of our Bill of Rights cannot be tinkered with just because one party holds a few more seats. It would take far more votes to do any tinkering with our basic values.

As it stands now I see it as being far to easy for any interest group to run away with the USHPA.

Can you post me a link to the Bob Show Bill of Rights?

Bob Kuczewski - 2014/05/05 16:23:32 UTC

Good observations Bill!!!

The Tad you mentioned was "Tad Hurst" from right here in San Diego. He was a USHPA Regional Director during David Jebb's effort to control USHPA's policies at Torrey. Tad was part of the "in crowd" at Torrey Pines, and he was one of the SDHGPA members who stood up and publicly accused me of turning in the Jebbs for their violations at Torrey ... which I had NOT done. Tad's lie is still believed by many of the PG pilots at Torrey and it's one of the factors that has helped them polarize opposition to the Torrey Hawks.

When USHPA incorporated the sport of paragliding, they should have at least created separate HG and PG committees within USHPA. The Hang Gliding Committee should have been tasked with ensuring that the incorporation of paragliding was not HARMING the sport of hang gliding. Such a committee, for example, would have worked to ensure that the Torrey Pines Soaring Council always contained fair (and dedicated) representation for the sport of hang gliding (there are currently NO active hang gliding pilots on the 7-member Soaring Council). But USHPA didn't provide any internal separation, and now it's just a numbers game. The April 2014 USHPA magazine shows 45 new hang gliding ratings and 138 new paragliding ratings.

Any thoughts on the June 2012 issue of the magazine, Mister Aeronautical Engineer?

That happens month after month and year after year. We now have a PG President of USHPA and a PG Executive Director. I'm certainly not against paragliding, but with both sports combined in USHPA, there is no national entity looking out for hang gliding ... except the US Hawks.

Looking out for Bob Kuczewski personal vision for hang gliding anyway.

By the way, your analogy with the US Constitution is super!!

What did you think about his concept of a Rooney Link as a pitch attitude limiter?

There's a saying that pure democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner (bye, bye sheep!!). It is our US Constitution that grants individuals certain rights that cannot be voted away by a simple majority.

But of course The Bob Show hasn't quite evolved to the point at which it's ready to grant individuals certain rights that cannot be voted away by a simple majority. But don't worry, you guys have BOB to grant individuals certain rights that cannot be voted away by a simple majority - just totally eliminated by BOB for any reason and at any moment he fuckin' feels like.

USHPA has no such constitution, and there is no protection for the sport of hang gliding in that organization.

And DO tell us about the protections for the sport; a simple, two thirds, or 99 percent majority; and individual rights built into The Bob Show - you lying, Stalinist, control freak son of a bitch.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1551
USHPA's Bungling Triggers Law Suit

Bob Kuczewski - 2014/05/08 02:26:00 UTC

According to sources, a law suit has been filed in the Superior Court of California (County of Alameda) against USHPA and other defendants.

The first sentence of the first cause of action starts off with:

By reason of its size, non-profit status, national and international recognition, insured flying sites and restrictive policies, Defendant USHPA exercises monopoly power over the sport and the business of hang gliding.

1. Looks like an ENTIRE sentence to me, Bob.
2. Goddam right.

It's hard to argue with that.

The suit goes on to describe how the USHPA Board of Directors suspended (or attempted to suspend) the flying rights and/or memberships of the plaintiffs. The damages total into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, and it could end up bankrupting USHPA or dramatically increasing our annual dues.

Hopefully bankrupting - but anything that severely damages it will bring joy to my heart.

I am not a fan of law suits, but the disregard USHPA has shown toward its members was bound to trigger an action like this sooner or later.

Yeah, nuthin' like The Bob Show where:

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

What will keep the US Hawks from becoming another USHPA or HGAA?

You will ... hopefully. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Everyone has to do their part once in a while. If you see something that's not being done correctly, then it's your duty to speak out. One big difference between the US Hawks and other organizations is that the US Hawks really does honor the free speech of its members.

For example, when I was a USHPA Director, the Board took a similar action against a pilot who was not present to defend himself.

NO!!! REALLY!!! How terrible!

As a Director myself, I objected that we were being asked to vote on a suspension without hearing a defense.

A VOTE? What's that? Don't they have a dictator who just does whatever the fuck he feels like?

My objections were not sustained, and the Board voted against the pilot. I was one of the few Directors (possibly the only Director?) who abstained since I didn't feel due process had been provided to the pilot.

1. My God! A pilot SUSPENDED without due process? That's TERRIBLE!

2. Isn't he innocent until proven guilty? Can he be proven guilty without being afforded any opportunity to defend himself? So how come you didn't vote against the suspension on principle?

That didn't make me very popular with the "lynch mob" who seemed predisposed to take action in the case.

Well, that's OK, Bob. I'm sure you recouped a lot of your lynch mob popularity when you:

- deleted all of my posts from Southwest Texas Pigfuckers' Association

- locked me down in The Basement in an "experiment" for "about a month" to see if that would help you attract more pigfuckers to your dictatorship and encourage them and the existing ones to run their idiot mouths more

- attempted to blackmail me into handing over my ever so valued free speech rights and resign my membership

- publicly called me a child molester and pretended you didn't

- banned me to make The Bob Show a safe place...

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8143/7462005802_bbc0ac66ac_o.jpg


...for people of varying ages to visit

It was almost as if the "in crowd" of Directors had already agreed on what to do and the vote was just a formality.

Whereas...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=883
What will keep the US Hawks from becoming another USHPA or HGAA?

Bob Kuczewski - 2012/03/14 15:15:03 UTC

There are lots of things to learn from Tad's case. I am not convinced that I did the best thing and I think it's good to talk about other alternatives.

The USHPA President (Rich Hass) has shown similar disregard for due process regarding club representation and suspensions at Torrey.

Why don't they just install a Great Helmsman and specify that he can do whatever the fuck he wants for whatever reason he feels like?

It was only a matter of time until this systemic disregard for pilots resulted in a law suit.

Too bad it's a suit over flying privileges rather than murder.

It will be interesting to follow this case...

Well, there's ONE thing we agree on - motherfucker.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=607
Understanding Tow Releases

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/02/21 03:58:55 UTC

I don't know how closely you've followed my "political" career at USHPA...

I think I'm totally up to speed on it NOW, Bob.

...but I tend to believe we should be very liberal with the information we give to our pilots, and we should be very conservative with the amount of regulations we place on our pilots.

1. "We"? "Our"? Who's that?

2. USHGA regulations and site protocols have always been restrictive as hell. I don't recall you advocating for unsupervised Hang Ones being allowed to fly Kagel.

3. You also believe that...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1563
Platform Launching (PL) Draft suggestions needed

Bob Kuczewski - 2014/06/06 17:21:51 UTC

I also like that this discussion emphasizes that breaking a weak link is something that can be practiced - just like we practice stalls - so we understand how to handle them and to not be afraid of them.

...power failure / stall on takeoff is a total non issue which is the equivalent of saying two plus two equals whatever the fuck anybody feels like calling it and that's totally reasonable grounds for having any pilot rating any total fucking moron like Joe Greblo ever signed you off on immediately shredded and burned, and permanently revoked.

I believe good information should empower our pilots to make good decisions - on their own.

1. Fuck anything you believe.
2. You're too much of a pathological liar to have any fuckin' clue what you believe.

That's why I'm so happy to give you a forum to speak.

1. Yeah. Sure, Bob.

2. I have a forum on which to speak - where sleazebags such as yourself will never again have posting privileges. But unlike you I don't have one scrap of information restricted from full access by anyone on the planet. No one will EVER see a message like:

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

(File attached to this post:

)

I don't know if you're right or wrong (yet)...

1. Who the fuck gives a rat's ass? You're TOTALLY deranged. You know Sam Kellner's quite a genius. I'd be overcome with nausea if you ever knew I was right.

2. How many years do you think it'll take you to figure out whether "I" - meaning sailplane theory, procedures, equipment in place since the dawn of time - am right or wrong?

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

Sorry for the delay getting back with you. Life got in the way and I wanted to do some research (including reading Dynamic Flight's articles and much of your 4144 Review document and skimming the 'Mousetraps' article and your photos).

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.

People with functional brains...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=12403
weak link table

ian9toes - 2009/06/14 15:18:37 UTC
Gold Coast, Queensland

I strongly disagree with banning the one guy who has the most knowledge about safety issues involving what I believe is the most dangerous part of our sport. I hear someone dies every year from towing. I hope SG bites his tongue in the interest of public safety.

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

Adi Branch - 2009/11/10 20:50:50 UTC
UK

For what it's worth, I think Tad spoke a lot of sense.

...tend to catch on pretty quick. And people who don't get it pretty quick are INVARIABLY too stupid and/or deranged to EVER get it. This is a totally binary phenomenon.

3. In the years it's gonna take you to figure out whether or not you're on board with sailplane theory, common sense, simple logic, grade school science what are "our pilots" supposed to be doing to keep themselves from winding up like Terry?

...but I know that it's wrong to silence or shackle any member of the pilot community who has something to say.

Except, of course, for Yours Truly and Steve Davy - 'cause you're really not all that big of a fan of any flavor of free speech that's hostile to you and your bullshit and scummy ass kissers.

It may turn out that I totally disagree with everything you say about towing...

It did. Good. I wouldn't have it any other way.

...but I will still provide you a forum to say it.

Get fucked.

That's all I can guarantee.

Yeah, Bob. Lotsa people know just how good your guarantees are.

So if I come to believe you are right...

Fuck you. Stick with your idiot religion. Anybody's who's capable of getting gets it. Anybody and everybody else is more than welcome to hook up and do the gene pool another big favor.

...then I will certainly say so.

You'll certainly say whatever is most convenient for you at any given instant.

I will say it loudly and I'll stand behind it.

No you won't. Sleazebags like you and Davis are always very careful to avoid taking clear positions. You're always looking to see which way the wind's blowing and thinking about what to say to get the most people thinking you're on their side.

But I doubt I'll ask the FAA to step in to mandate anything for anyone.

They've mandated tons of shit for EVERYONE since the dawn of the sport. They mandate areas we can and can't enter, how high we can fly, how close we can get to clouds, what we hafta do for tandem operations, the range of weak links we must stay inside of - to name but a few. And you've NEVER raised a single SYLLABLE's worth of objection to ANY of it.

...instead, I'll work with you to draft better towing guidelines for the US Hawks Hang Gliding Association than the ones that USHPA uses.

Yeah...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=802
AL's Second flight at Packsaddle how it went

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/10/23 16:29:29 UTC

As for Nobody's request for me to read a document, I haven't found the time yet. I'm sorry, but I don't have time to read everything that everyone asks me to read.

Right.

Over time, our track record will speak for itself.

It...

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8143/7462005802_bbc0ac66ac_o.jpg


...has. What do you think your kill rate is within the field of active participants? How much better are you doing than you'd likely be if everyone in that field had played one round of Russian roulette?

To sum it up, I believe people should have the freedom to choose ...

Second only to...
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 strong weak link theories...

...pieces of flimsy fishing line installed at both ends of the rope in accordance with the mandates of scum like Davis Straub, Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney, and their pigfucker cronies.

...and the information to choose wisely.

Oh good. Got any samples of this information people need to choose wisely? Preflight in the staging area so's you can run off launch a couple minutes later confident in the knowledge that you're safely connected to your glider?

So I will do my best to give you a fair platform for your points...

1. Your best sucks bigtime, Bob.
2. Fuck your platform. Your platform only exists when people write, post, engage.

...and I will do what I can to help you illustrate those points.

I don't want any of your fuckin' help. I wouldn't take any more of your help with a gun to my head.

But I will do the same for anyone with a differing view as well.

OH! ANYONE with a DIFFERING VIEW. Fuckin' dump lever happy vegetables like Sam and lunatics like Bill or Bob who think that catastrophic tow system failures and low level stalls are no big fuckin' deals can pull whatever they want out of their asses and you'll give them exactly the same backing that you would me (infinitely more in fact - as it turned out). And that will help create a pool of information from which any person of any varying age can "choose wisely". Make sure you throw in Donnell's diagram showing how with a Skyting Bridle a towline pull to the left will result in the glider rolling to the left.

I want the US Hawks to be a place where we can help each other seek the truth and spread it.

Sure ya do. And, like you've just said, you're gonna accomplish that by giving full backing to any rot any asshole feels like saying and use it to dilute out of existence the solid physics based information that only the top 0.01 percent of the sport are capable of understanding, presenting, documenting as SOPs.

I want it to be a place where substance speaks louder than politics.

What the fuck could a parasitic worm such as yourself possible understand about SUBSTANCE?

I think that's what we both want for our sport, and I think that's why we're both here.

That's what *I* want for the sport. And that's why I'm here and you, Bill, Charlie, Rick, Sam are there and Terry's dead.

Thanks for being here, and thanks for all the information you've shared so far.

Shove it up your ass. That way the next time you pull something out it might be of some legitimacy.

I'd like it to continue, and I'd like to see you develop your own proposal for a towing SOP for the US Hawks.

No. Use yours and Bill's. And keep the camera's running. And try to kill Sam before you kill yourself. It would be a real pity if I didn't get the opportunity to rub your face in whatever's left of him.

If it stands up to the alternatives, then I'll endorse it as my recommendation as well (for whatever that's worth). Fair enough?

Go fuck yourself.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1577
hangglider

Rick Masters - 2014/07/19 03:18:44 UTC

Tom,

Hang gliding is serious business. Nobody ever got it right the first time. There were a lot of designers who were their own test pilots. They're dead. Hundreds of people died to get hang gliders to the point where they flew well and lost their killer tendencies.

Bullshit.

The goddam Wright Brothers pretty much invented powered, three axis control aviation from scratch and flew for four and three quarters years with nary a scratch. And at that point they had a BIG scratch - precipitated by a weak link (propeller) failure increasing the safety of the flying operation and inconveniencing the passenger to death with a fractured skull and Orville with a bunch of seriously broken bones at the end of a harmless stall.

What killer tendencies, Rick? Flimsy construction? Pitch instability? The first hang gliders were flimsy unstable ground skimmers and the people who got killed on them were clueless testosterone poisoned assholes who hopped on them and tried to do shit and/or fly into shit that they weren't designed and built to handle. And that action didn't end in the mid Seventies - Bo Hagewood comes to mind here.

Your WW2 fighter jock buddy George Worthington died stupidly 'cause he thought he was hot enough shit to hop on a ship that somebody else designed and built that hadn't been load tested and certified and be handle things if a wing snapped off at low altitude. He wasn't.

The people who made hang gliding safer were the boring ones who stayed home and applied the design principles that Wilbur and Orville had handed them on a silver platter near the beginning of that century.

Bill Cummings - 2014/07/19 17:01:55 UTC

Tom,
I'm hitting 100% here. Meaning another question that I don't have a specific answer for.

The question would best be answered by Bob. K.

I would guess since I have never devoted any time on this question until today that Bob's answer might go like this:

The balance point along the cord length (between the leading edge and the trailing edge) would be more of a shifting area than a definitive point for a "Flex Wing," as apposed to a ridged wing.

I could be wrong here but I'm thinking that if I pulled my VG on my Sport 2 tighter which will flatten out some of the camber in my wing, more so at the root than closer to the wing tip, that my effective cord length would be increased. (Mostly near the root. It seems to me that this would change the balance point or area.

The balance point or area (if I'm right about that.) moves as I bank the glider.
In a turn my balance area moves rearward so I have to move my body rearward to stay under my shifting CP (lifting force/ balance area also described as Center of pressure) so that I don't speed up too much in the turn.

Putting thoughts to print has always been difficult for me and I find that I'm a lot less sure now of what I was thinking than when I first got here.

'Cept for the certifiably insane ones. That's when you're most articulate.

Bob Kuczewski - 2014/07/23 17:14:21 UTC

Hi Tom,

I would endorse the comments made by Bill and Rick.

Big surprise. (Wassamattah? Running low on s and s?)

In particular, I think Rick's warnings come from a lifetime of experience with things that fly.

Yeah Tom, you can only REALLY understand the things that require a lifetime of experience if you have a lifetime of experience. I'm afraid you're screwed from the start.

I don't think there's a simple answer to your question about the balance point along the chord unless you're talking about static balance. Static balance is simply the point where the glider will be balanced with no wind. That's certainly important in glider design because you want the carrying location of the glider to be near that static balance point so you don't have to constantly fight to keep it level while moving the glider on the ground.

But there's also a dynamic balance point that has to do with the airflow over the wing. That's much more complicated. In fact, it's so complicated, that it generally takes either a supercomputer or a wind tunnel to figure it out ... and even with the supercomputer it's good to use a wind tunnel as confirmation. In fact, it was the Wright brother's...

Which one? Wilbur or Orville?

...extensive use of wind tunnel testing that eventually led to their successful flights.

Whoa! They didn't just slap together whatever stuff was handy, jump into the air with it, and kill themselves in droves to make advancements the way we did? What WERE they THINKING?

In addition to being complicated, dynamic balance is highly influenced by speed. The basic aerodynamic forces go up as a square of velocity.

EXPONENTIALLY. Right Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney?

So if a glider is balanced at one particular velocity, that's no guarantee that it will be balanced at another velocity. These relationships can be highly non-linear and a glider that handles nicely at one speed may become completely uncontrollable (or even unstable) at another speed.

I have a Bachelor of Science degree in Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering, and I worked for two years at a commercial grade wind tunnel. But even with that experience...

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.

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

...I would be quite timid about experimenting with anything that's going to fly a living person.

1. But totally cool with going up on anything some total douchebag like Malcolm slaps together and advising others to do the same.

2. So what HAVE you put up into the air, Bob? We know for a certainty not a single goddam thing in hang gliding.

- Isn't the individual with all that education and experience oozing out of his ass supposed to be the one on whom we can MOST rely to put something up that's gonna fly a living person?

- Or maybe your Bachelor of Science degree in Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering and two year experience at a commercial grade wind tunnel were specialized in the field of flying formerly living persons.

Did you ever see "Flight of the Phoenix"? Model aircraft designer says, "Yeah, the principles are all the same, it's just a matter of scale, I know what the fuck I'm talking about, do what I tell you and we can put something together from this wreckage and fly it out of here." That's the guy I want on my team - not some total waste of space such as yourself who does nothing beyond sabotaging somebody else's solid work.

I go down in the desert with you the first thing I'm gonna do is put a bullet in your head to give me and the other the survivors a fighting chance and help out on the water ration issue.

I'm not saying that to discourage you, because I don't know your background...

1. OH! You don't do BACKGROUND CHECKS on all Bob Show members?! And here I was thinking that it was a safe place for people of varying ages to visit. Guess not.

2. But if you DID know his BACKGROUND and it wasn't quite up to your impeccable standards it WOULD be OK to discourage him from doing what he wanted to do.

3. I knew Sam's background - and very publicly identified him as a dangerous, incompetent, scummy douchebag...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=795
AL's Flight At Packsaddle 10-04-11

Terry Mason - 2011/12/01 19:55:00 UTC

Those of us who prefer to fly, will always wonder about the key board jocks, who frighten away new flyers with skitzoid horror stories of murder, and at the hands of friends who only wish to share the incomparable thrill of free flight. I'm reminded of Johnathan Livingston Seagull, striving against the ever present obstructionists. Thanks to Sam for limiting Our forum to FLYERS. See you soon Bob

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8143/7462005802_bbc0ac66ac_o.jpg


http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28211
Platform towing fatality in Leakey, Texas

NMERider - 2012/06/19 01:36:26 UTC

There's a short memorial to Terry Mason on FB:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Real-County-Leakey-Public-Library/254440947910040
The pilot had a brush with fate a year earlier:
http://www.kitestrings.org/post453.html#p453

Gregg Ludwig - 2012/06/23 20:15:21 UTC

What is that saying?..."He does the same thing over and over but expects different results". Poor guy was mis-guided and didn't have a chance.

...with plenty enough lead time for his next victim to factor him into the equation - while you said NOTHING - before or after the fact.

...(maybe you were one of my professors!!).

You mean they weren't all rounded up and shot for their roles in getting you a degree?

But I do want to emphasise Rick's warnings about how dangerous and unforgiving it can be to experiment in aviation.

But go ahead and fly with Sam. That's already killed one Bob Show idiot but - since we already KNOW that - it's not EXPERIMENTAL. So you wouldn't be a test pilot or anything. You'd be totally mainstream. And as long as you get killed doing stupid mainstream stuff you're perfectly OK.

Hey Tom... Read some fatality reports from back in the old days when we actually had fatality reports. And carefully read between the lines. And see if you can get a feel for just how dangerous and unforgiving it WILL BE to NOT implement any halfway intelligent idea you might have. You'd hafta try pretty hard to make a lot of critical issues worse. And you won't get killed any deader running off Glacier Point with a beach umbrella than Zack Marzec did pro towing behind a Dragonfly with a Quest Link or Mark Knight did just flying a Dragonfly in calm evening air.

I don't know if that's an answer to your question yet, so please feel free to elaborate and maybe we can converge on a better answer for you.

Yeah Tom. Feel FREE to say anything you want that's OK with Bob. He's a staunch defender of people's rights to say anything that's OK with him.

Thanks again for your participation in the forum, and thanks very much to Bill and Rick for sharing your decades of experience here as well.

Fuck both of those idiots and there combined decades of experience.

- I have decades of experience myself, motherfucker. And I can tell you in no uncertain terms that there's not a goddam thing worth knowing in hang gliding that can't be thoroughly explained and understood in five minutes and spending six on it is a waste of sixty seconds that could've been better spent working on the next issue.

- Both of those guys are dangerous bozos incapable of grasping a lot of the most critical five minute issues.

P.S. This discussion also reminds me to be thankful for all the people who've done the hard work to make this sport as safe as it is today.

1. Name some.
2. The sport's a total sewer and everyone and his dog knows it.

Many people died to bring us the generally safe and stable hang gliders we have today.

Yeah right, Bob.

"DAMN! I just got killed in a full luff dive AGAIN! That's it! I've had it with this crap. I'm gonna run lines from the kingpost to the trailing edge so's it'll stay up and act like an elevator the next time I go into a dive."

Bullshit.

So if we have such "generally" safe and stable gliders then how do you explain?:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8143/7462005802_bbc0ac66ac_o.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bRrpHNa68iY/UQ6Pv9gRZyI/AAAAAAAAjTg/Hc22bx5122Q/s2048/20943781_BG1.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9Ek9_lFeSII/UZ4KuB0MUSI/AAAAAAAAGyU/eWfhGo4QeqY/s1024/GOPR5278.JPG

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Xh_NfnOcUns/UZ4Lm0HvXnI/AAAAAAAAGyk/0PlgrHfc__M/s1024/GOPR5279.JPG

Whenever I fly my Falcon I try to remember to give thanks to all those who made it possible.

Yeah, God rest their brave heterosexual test pilot souls.

Lemme tell ya sumpin', Bob...

If in 1941 Hitler had wanted a glider setup that weighed a hundred pounds, did sixteen to one, and folded up into a twenty foot long tube or bag inside of fifteen minutes then by half past 1942 he'd have had a T2C with my release system built into it and Covert harness and nobody would've been scratched in the course of the development.

It's a goddam folding flying wing with a triangle wired underneath it. Compared to a V2 rocket or Messerschmitt 262 fighter? The only things that really impress me about modern hang gliding are how incredibly long it took for the industry to get where it has and how much stupidity, shoddiness, and sleaziness is institutionalized to protect the industry.

- Gliders have better performance and handling than they did three and a half decades ago but, other than that, they're not a wit safer.

- We're probably seeing fewer hook-in checks proportional to our foot launches than we did in the Seventies as the Industry has shifted from promoting to brutally suppressing the message.

- The Industry is busting its ass to get more and more people flying upright for longer and longer periods after launch and before landing so we're killing John Sewards we wouldn't have decades ago.

- Race harnesses which eliminate the possibility of the pilot stuffing the bar and balling up under the nose in response to a whipstall AND deform and trap the parachute in the container as a result of tumble damage are nonissues.

- The releases within easy reach that used to kill people like my Kitty Hawk instructor roommate Joel Lewis and my last in-the-field student Frank Sauber are now safer than ones that don't stink on ice because they have longer track records.

- The Hewett Infallible Weak Link has gone from 1.0 Gs to 226 pounds or less over whatever your flying weight happens to be.

- Birrenators like the ones that killed Brad Anderson and Eric Aasletten are now state of the art safety equipment.

I've watched the IQ of this sport drop fifty points since the beginning of my participation in it over 34 years ago and it totally sucked back then.

Fuck you and your fake reverence for all those dead bozos whose greatest contributions to the sport were removing themselves from its gene pool and inspiring some actual thought processes in the tiny percentage of the population capable of such.

P.S. Tom... Before you get too far along in your glider design project make sure you get authorization from Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney. Sam can put you in touch with him.

P.P.S. Kite Strings / Tad's Hole In The Ground is the only game in the English speaking hang gliding universe. If it weren't other other legitimate organizations and interests would be aligning themselves with it. If it were bogus and there were actual responsible entities out there - like hang gliding safety icons Bob Kuczewski, Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney, Dr. Trisa Tilletti for examples - they'd be cutting it to shreds, warning potential victims, clearly outlining its obvious fallacies. Neither of those is happening.

Or would you like to offer some other rational explanation?