instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

[Tad Eareckson]

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24546
Serious accident at SOGA

Martin Henry - 2011/08/03 14:06:08 UTC

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/03 10:54:08 UTC

PS... yeah, you're right... what will he know? Let's ask the government to tell us. They'll have a much better idea than the pilot.

Sorry, I forgot that pretty much everybody in the US distrusts their government (no matter what resources may be available).

BTW, yes, talking to the pilot is not a bad idea (and glad that it's an option in this case). Thing is, a pilot interview is not a complete investigation. If you have no faith in your "TSA"... fine... but you should take the time to do a proper investigation. At the very least, a fellow pilot with a history in the industry should do an assessment of the crash and formulate some sort of a report.

Cheers,
Martin

PS. For the record... I don't trust any "government" either... but it's better then the no government option.

The Press - 2006/03/15

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is urgently pushing for new hang-gliding industry standards after learning a hang-gliding pilot who suffered serious injuries in a crash three weeks ago had not clipped himself on to the glider.

- Yeah, Rooney don't need no steenking gov'nment to tell HIM what to do - just to scrape him off the slope and put his useless ass back together over weeks of intensive care and rehabilitation at full taxpayer expense when he screws the pooch.

Hi Tad.

I'm Tracy Tillman, on the USHPA BOD, on the Tow Committe, and I am an Aviation Safety Counselor on the FAA Safety Team (FAAST) for the Detroit FSDO area. As a rep of both the USHPA and FAA, I would like to help you, USHPA, and the FAA improve safety in flying, towing, and hang gliding.

- In the US the fuckin' Flight Park Mafia IS the government and says and does anything it feels like with no respect for even the rules it makes and no accountability to anyone for anything.

At the very least, a fellow pilot with a history in the industry should do an assessment of the crash and formulate some sort of a report.

- Why bother? If it's a "fellow pilot" doing the assessment we already know that the finding will be one hundred percent pilot error.

[Tad Eareckson]

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

Bill Cummings - 2011/08/03 13:50:33 UTC

I'm thinking that Sam K. could be right. The knot on the weak link is not a grapevine (double fisherman's).
The loop of the weak link may have "Key holed" over the type of knot that was used.

Yeah, let's start going full bore on the issue of the best and worst knots to use on weak links three times longer than they need to be.

Marc Fink - 2011/08/03 17:07:58 UTC

I think for very thin lines where slipping may be a factor the water knot bend is preferable to a grapevine (typically the line ends line up parallel to the loop). The knot pictured looks possibly like it is a simple overhand bend knot tied with both sides at once.

- Yeah, we DEFINITELY need to be thinking about which knots are best for VERY THIN (read VERY SAFE) and VERY LONG lines.

- And let's start discussing which knots are most resistant to slipping 'cause that's been such a huge issue with the Fisherman's Knot we've been using for the past thirty years.

- Why are you worrying about knots slipping if you're using a weak link so light that it blows at random anyway?

- Won't a slipping knot just make the weak link safer?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/skysailingtowing/message/4593
Weaklinks

Peter Birren - 2005/02/08 19:22:49 UTC

What is the big issue? Re-launching? Oh, the wasted time! Oh, the hassle! Oh, the embarrassment! These are sure preferrable to Oh Shit!

It's not like there are ever any real downsides to blowing tow anyway.

Bill Cummings - 2011/08/03 18:53:00 UTC

This one Marc?
http://www.animatedknots.com/waterknot/index.php?LogoImage=LogoGrog.jpg&Website=www.animatedknots.com

Found this recommendation for Dyneema, Spectra, and Kevlar/Technora:
http://www.animatedknots.com/doublefishermans/index.php?LogoImage=LogoGrog.jpg&Website=www.animatedknots.com#triple

Yeah, better not risk using a Single Fisherman's on anything as critical as a loop of 130 pound Greenspot.

Steve Davy - 2011/08/04 07:02:53 UTC

What is the line tension required to break the weak link at the tug?
What is the line tension required to break the weak link on the primary bridle? (Tandem)
What is the line tension required to break the weak link on the secondary bridle? (Tandem)

Twenty years of perfecting aerotowing, surely you must have those numbers at hand.

Sorry Rodent, we've moved on from those issues. The discussion is now all about which knots are least likely to contribute to a triple length weak link tying itself to the tow ring and untying itself from the bridle. Get over it. And stop messing with perfection.

Marc Fink - 2011/08/04 07:19:21 UTC

I think...

You THINK? Since when? I thought you let Rooney do all that stuff for you. Are you sure this is a good idea?

...the fisherman's is overkill for a weaklink...

Especially one that only has a fifty/fifty chance of surviving to ten feet off the cart.

...and uses a lot of material...

Yeah. Let's start worrying about the material the knot's eating up in a thread which started with a Quest Perfection Tandem Weak Link welding itself to the tow ring as a consequence of an extra six inches of line in the loops and another couple of inches flapping in the breeze off the end of the stupid lazy Thumb Knot.

...especially if properly locked with a safety overhand knot which would be recommended for thin (fishing) line.

Oh yeah, Marc. Let's make sure we do this job properly. Let's make sure we safety those Fisherman's Knots, lock those carabiners, and back up the hang strap and connection to the parachute bridle. Ya can't be too careful in this business.

Just my opinions.

Yep. That's your entire approach to aviation. Just your opinions - or Rooney's when you really need someone with a keen intellect.

Marc Fink - 2011/08/04 07:19:21 UTC

I think...

Bullshit. You just go with whatever opinion you find most convenient at any given moment.

...for very thin lines where slipping may be a factor the water knot bend is preferable to a grapevine (typically the line ends line up parallel to the loop).

- In Gawd knows how many hundreds of thousands of aerotows in which the weak link was - by force - a Quest Perfection Solo Weak Link consisting of a single loop of 130 pound Greenspot formed with a Single Fisherman's Knot minus the Overhand Knots "safeties", how many have you heard about "slipping"?

- Have you ever tried to untie such a loop after it's been loaded to five or ten pounds?

- Just kidding. Why bother experimenting, looking, or thinking for a second or two when you can form an OPINION so much faster and easier?

That's what I use.

Good job Marc.

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

Marc Fink - 2007/05/19 12:58:31 UTC

I am a tow operator--as well as a 'towee.' I also do aerotow tandems. Using greenline or similar line, which generally tests at 125 lbs +- 50 lbs is widely accepted because it simply works well and relatively predicatably for the enormous range of conditions and applications in towing. If this weren't true, then accident rates would be much higher and these kinds of weaklinks would have been abandoned along time ago.

And if there were better ways of doing things than Quest Perfection we'd have certainly started doing them a LONG TIME ago.

[Tad Eareckson]

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

Marc Fink - 2007/05/19 12:58:31 UTC

I am a tow operator--as well as a 'towee.' I also do aerotow tandems. Using greenline or similar line, which generally tests at 125 lbs +- 50 lbs is widely accepted because it simply works well and relatively predicatably for the enormous range of conditions and applications in towing. If this weren't true, then accident rates would be much higher and these kinds of weaklinks would have been abandoned along time ago.

Let's do the math for this moron using Little Chick flying one point at 200 pounds and Big Dude flying two at 350 using the worst case extremes on the plus or minus forty percent predictability he cites.

Little Chick:
Max tension - 350 pounds, 1.75 Gs. Instant death by lockout and structural failure.

Big Dude:
Max tension - 130 pounds, 0.37 Gs. Good luck getting the cart rolling.

G spread - 1.38 (Just the spread comes out to a real good weak link rating.)

And somebody that off-the-scale stupid is not only allowed out of the institution on weekends to fly himself, but he also does tandem aerotows. And Mike Robertson signed him off as an instructor. Is this a great sport or what?

[Tad Eareckson]

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

JD Guillemette - 2011/08/04 16:03:43 UTC

Although knots do reduce the strength of the line and some knots reduce more than others it has been found that if the weak link attached to the bridle with the knot on the back side of the a double larcks head the type of knot does not matter.

IT HAS BEEN FOUND? That's GREAT!!! Who found it? Where's his data? How come none of you flight park shitheads seem to have the slightest clue what any of these things blow at?

It could be simple overhand knot.

Really? I'd be fascinated to find out exactly how.

In short using the double larcks head to attach the weak link to the bridle takes the knot out of the equation.

Well obviously. This is what it said on Quest's website until a couple of years after Paul and Lauren took over and - realizing that it referred to pounds and Gs and included numbers greater than four - pulled it down.

(Interesting spelling of "Lark's" by the way. Something you picked up in tandem training?)

http://www.questairforce.com/aero.html
Aerotow FAQ

Weak Link

The strength of the weak link is crucial to a safe tow. It should be weak enough so that it will break before the pressure of the towline reaches a level that compromises the handling of the glider but strong enough so that it doesn't break every time you fly into a bit of rough air. A good rule of thumb for the optimum strength is one G, or in other words, equal to the total wing load of the glider. Most flight parks use 130 lb. braided Dacron line, so that one loop (which is the equivalent to two strands) is about 260 lb. strong - about the average wing load of a single pilot on a typical glider. For tandems, either two loops (four strands) of the same line or one loop of a stronger line is usually used to compensate for nearly twice the wing loading. When attaching the weak link to the bridle, position the knot so that it's hidden from the main tension in the link and excluded altogether from the equation.

IMPORTANT - It should never be assumed that the weak link will break in a lockout.
ALWAYS RELEASE THE TOWLINE before there is a problem.

- We have absolutely no clue what the strength is but we know beyond any ghost of a doubt that it's crucial to a safe tow.

- Optimally it should be one G - weak enough so that it will break before the PRESSURE of the towline reaches a level that compromises the handling of the glider - UNLESS that compromise of handling comes in the form of a lockout. Then you're screwed 'cause you won't be able to get to your Quest Release and your Bailey backup will have to much pressure on it.

- It should be strong enough so that it doesn't break every time you fly into a bit of rough air - just every other time. And when you try to turn to follow the tug.

- Most flight parks use 130 lb. braided Dacron line, so that one loop (which is the equivalent to two strands) is about 260 lb. strong - about the average wing load of a single pilot on a typical glider. It doesn't matter if it's on the end of the towline or a one or two point bridle - it'll still be about 260 pounds. And, if your not an average load on a typical glider, you can go fuck yourself.

- When attaching the weak link to the bridle, position the knot so that it's hidden from the main tension in the link and excluded altogether from the equation. But never actually test the breaking strength to find out what a load of crap this is. Remember - this has been found to be true.

- And ALWAYS release BEFORE there is a problem. And if you're really smart don't ever get on a dolly with shitheads like this running the show.

Personally I use a single grapevine because it looks nice.

Yeah. Precisely the same reason you use a Bailey Release - dickhead. But I'd still love to see you do it with an Overhand Knot.

"Trained" at Ridgely (Rooney's Alma Mater) - in case anyone's wondering.

[Tad Eareckson]

Al Hernandez - 2011/06/25

We said goodbye to Sam and the crew and Martin and I headed out to Packsaddle. Martin got 2:15 and 2064 feet on first flight. During the landing had a bad flare and belly landing, broke left downtube on his Falcon 145... no injuries.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=22314
president of ushpa russ lock crashes

Ryan Voight - 2011/06/22 02:57:33 UTC

Russ isn't the *current* USHPA pres... but yes, he did have a crash landing at Yosemite. The report I heard was he missed the DT while transitioning, and hit the uphill side of the ditch that runs across the field.

Russ is good people... I hope he recovers quickly and completely...

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.

Now you give me some example of how disastrous things can be for the people using unconventional techniques.

Zack C - 2011/08/02 23:00

I dunno...B's technique seems to work for him. Has he ever broken anything or had an otherwise unsuccessful landing using it?

I don't see the need to go to the rear wires personally (seems like he could do the same thing staying on the base tube or low on the downtubes), but I've got no problem with someone 'belly landing'.

Charles Schneider - 2011/08/03 10:32:35 UTC

Hey Zack,

Having grown up flying desert mountain sites, we always considered anything other than landing on your feet, a crash. Even in this day of manicured LZ's and fancy wheels, I still think this is true. Sliding across the ground face first just inches off of the ground is not my idea of fun.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3695
good day until the wreck

Lauren Tjaden - 2008/12/31 04:29:12 UTC

came in with no wind after an hour and had right wing drop. instead of wrestling gilder straight i tried to flare while desperately trying to straighten.
bad bad whack. horrible pain, i could not move. screaming with pain, literally. took a very long time to get me out and to the hospital.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=21647
Busted Shoulder

Yeah Chuck, under no circumstances should you entertain the possibility of sliding across the ground face first just inches off of the ground. It's not your idea of fun.

Not to mention the abuse to the glider.

Not to mention the abuse to the glider.

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

Anyone who plans on going cross country better know how to land on their feet.

Dude. Totally.

Chuck

Zack C - 2011/08/03

Chuck,

By that logic, we crash every time we fly at the lake. Tandem gliders crash a lot too. And Gibbo crashed a few weeks back when he intentionally wheel-landed at Columbus due to his prior leg injuries.

What if the base tube hits the ground hard attempting a full flare landing but you still end up on your feet...is that less of a crash than a controlled wheel landing on smooth terrain?

I believe that, if the terrain supports it, wheel landing is the most consistently safe way to land a hang glider (Christian Thoreson, former flight school director at Lookout and first USHPA instructor of the year, agrees). The better your wheels, the wider the range of terrain that supports them. I'm not saying we should all land on wheels all the time, but I also don't think we should feel we have to land on our feet at all cost, and I don't think people who land on wheels should be looked down on. Intentional wheel landings are not uncommon at Lookout, and the people that do them aren't the ones breaking tubes. USHPA's regulations have been revised now so that you can get an H5 without ever landing on your feet.

As for going XC, I once said almost the exact same thing as you to someone in a similar discussion. He pointed out that Chris Starbuck was paralyzed from the waist down in the mid 70s and flew XC competitions for decades afterwards (landing on wheels). From my lake experience, I suspect it's possible to belly land safely even in tall grass. And B lands out all the time without incident. So I'm not so sure about that anymore.

Mike Meier once said, "If other aircraft were as difficult to land as hang gliders no one would fly them." I'd love to see a shift in hang glider manufacturing towards wheel landings as standard. The tandem wheel-equipped solo gliders at Lookout are the most pleasurable gliders to land I've ever flown.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hhpa/message/11517
Question

Dave Susko - 2010/11/05 02:07:47 UTC

Now, tell me what you do when your chosen LZ is a narrow dry river bed with large rocks strewn all over the place. Better yet, you see what looks like a large green pasture so you head over there only to find out that it is in fact filled with 7-foot high corn, and now there is no usable LZ within glide.

C'mon Zack, you're always dodging the narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place / seven foot high corn issue. And what if you've been blown out into the Pacific and your only option is a ten square foot rock surrounded by half a dozen eighteen foot Great White Sharks? How 'bout we get a straight answer this time?

[Steve Davy]

Chimpanzee vs. Human child learning (1/2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIAoJsS9Ix8
dead

Human nature?
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwwclyVYTkk

[Tad Eareckson]

I've watched that on Nova about a dozen times.
Yep, I'm firmly convinced that's the biggest part of the problem.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=22728
Want to hang glide, but a few things are holding me back...

DarkFateofDestiny - 2011/08/04 07:19:26 UTC

Hello all.

I'd like to start by saying that I've been researching and looking at videos, and decided that hang gliding is something I might be interested in. I'm seventeen, and my parents already said I could if I could find a place nearby, but the only problem is... Every place I look seems to be three to four hours away from where I live (Boise).

I was, however, looking online, and found a site of a person who offered lessons, but they're not listed on the USHPA website so I'm unsure if this would be a good decision. Which brings another question, if they're not listed as instructors (but say they are) can they give out ratings, or would I have to go to someone who's listed?

Another thing is I'm fairly short. As in 4'11" short (and around 122 pounds, mostly muscle). I'm also a girl (don't know if that changes anything). Is this going to be too much of a problem, or should I not be TOO concerned about this... I'd hate to show up and not be able to fly because of my height/weight. I know that the harness will possibly add some weight, but how much will it be (with everything strapped in)?

Thanks in advance for any info,

Mark G. Forbes - 2011/08/04 07:35:42 UTC
USHPA regional director--OR/WA/AK
Corvallis, Oregon
mark(at)mgforbes(dot)com

If they're not listed on the USHPA website as being an instructor, then they are not able to offer USHPA ratings. Anybody can claim to be a hang gliding instructor; there's no law that says you have to be a USHPA member, or properly trained, or even know anything at all about it. However......a USHPA instructor rating means that the person has at least demonstrated the skills and knowledge needed to teach our sport, to the satisfaction of an official who is competent to evaluate them.

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

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

[Zack C]

B Asher - 2011/08/02...

That was from the HHPA group, from which Tad's been banned. I didn't send Tad the discussion, so I guess he has at least one other contact within HHPA.

I might as well provide the rest of the discussion, or at least the relevant parts, for the sake of completeness.

While I partly agree with your [Zack's] comments it is very difficult to determine the suitability of terrain at altitude for wheel landings so if this became the norm I believe we will see a marked increase in injuries. It is impossible to spot a rabbit hole, hard bump or rock etc. until passed the point of no return and while you could argue there is still an option to foot land, unless foot landings are constantly practiced, which would unlikely be the case if the norm became to wheel land, then we would also see an increase in accidents from foot landings. We may also see fatigue failures due to the shock and stress on the front and rear flying wires, cross tube slapping the keels and probably lots of broken arms when a wheel hits a hole - ask Henry's son [...] about that!

Mick

Hey Mick,
Quite right, The ability to assess the LZ from high above is probably one of the most difficult and important x/c skills to develop. Which way is the slope? How steep is the slope? Which way is the wind? How strong? Wind shadows? Obstructions: Wires, Trees, Giant jumping cactus, rocks, holes, undulations, ravines, bovines, agricultural equipment, vehicles, high grass? High grass scares me the most. The thought of sliding through high grass with just my legs, much less face first, is terrorfying. I could tell many stories, one of them about the guy who top landed with us at Slide. I guess he did not know that the area, although clear of trees, had been clear cut and was riddled with gnarly stumps that were hidden by "High Grass". Even cultivated fields with tall crops can hide sprinklers, pipes, equipment, etc. Not to mention how tall grass can grab your control bar resulting in a very unceromonious face plant. The best technique to use in high grass is a sharp flare at grasstop level with a straight drop. This also minimizes crop damage. I always carry four fifty dollar bills with me on x/c. One or two for the farmer for crop damage. One for a ride. And one for the post adventure debriefing.
ImHo
Chuck
Disclaimer: I am not an instructor. These are just my opinions. Any one following this advice does so at their own risk.

Hey Zack,
The lake argument is specious. You know I was not referring to Lake Landings. All the same, you are right, landing in the lake is a potentially deadly CRASH! Unless you are doing it intentionally and are properly prepared vis a vis Mr. Ludwig's lake operation, water landings are a no go in this old man's opinion.

Gibbo is a very experienced pilot perfectly capable of analyzing the circumstances and risks. Not everyone has this much background. And you must note that he landed on a very well prepared surface. Such a landing would be a disaster in the desert.

The presumption that smooth terrain will be available at the end of a cross country jaunt is gambling at best and nuts at least. This is why I have such great respect for folks who fly rigids x/c successfully, like Mr. Hamilton [Robin flies a Swift and lands on its wheels].

Your entire dicsussion regarding landing at the perfectly groomed field at Lookout has nothing to do with landing out.

Again, I do not see how the exploits of a walking challenged individual pushing his limits 40 years ago has anything to do with proper flying/landing technique for most folks. Dan Buchannan at one time had more HG hours under his belt than any other HG pilot alive. Most of these hours were accumulated while basically flying in a wheel chair. Again, irrelavant to pilots with fully functioning limbs.

I said it once and I'll say it again, if your are not proficient at landing on your feet, don't go x/c.

JMHO

Chuck

OK. I guess I had better throw in my 2 cents worth here.

In my opionion we should all learn how to do both.

I flair from the down tubes when I have enough head wind, 12 + is a minimum it is EZ'ier, has more roll control, and looks better. It is at times important to look good. It is I believe harder on gear, There is not much worse than whacking it. Busted down tubes, strained wire joints and deforned leading edges are a fairly common. 2 weeks ago at pack Martin flaired one second to late, whacked hard, and snapped his left down tube like a twig.

At any major thermal site, if you set and watch say 2 dozen landings, there will be a 3 or 4 bars droped hard, at least 2 whacks, and usually some damage. Down tube landings are probably safer, that is EZier on the body. But my body will heal, Gliders don't heal, they have to be fixed.

I think landing on the back wires takes out about 90% of the guess work on flair timing. Usually you don't flair at all, it is just a slow steady push untill you come to a stop. I would assume the true weight shift change " increase angle " is about 25% Extreamly usefull, patrically if you are light on your glider and have short arms. "like me"

I started Wireing it, after buying an HP-2, 170, in LA about 1988, Good god was thing fast. Trippled sleeved to do loops, and full VG on all the time. I was having a lot of whaks on it. Some Austrailian guys were visiting Crestline for a week, and that was the way they landed every time. They never had a problem with back wire landings and did not even see the need to carry extra down tubes. So with some coaching from them I started using it. It really helped. Local slang for this was was Auzi-style So I am fairly sure I am not the only one on earth doing this.

Yes it is a compleatly different mind set, some guys just could not there head around it. If you flair to hard or to early you can compleatly turtle the glider, impailing the king post or Keel. But also at Lake Elsinor I have see guys pull off down wind, down hill landings on the back wires with out dammage. In that case nothing else would have worked.

I did take out a down tube last year at pack, using the back wires " i think " but it was because I had compleatly miss read the wind direction and landed in a 90 deg cross wind. I side slipped it in, taking out the left Tube, but did not beek it. There was no saving that one. In my opionion it would have been worse if I had been on the tubes.

I think that was the first down tube I have taken out sence moving back to Houston. May=be even before. It would be of interest to me to check my log book and find out.

NOTE: I always land my Masquito from the down tubes, With 40 LB or Engine hanging 5 feet back from CG that always works fine.

B.

...Note: I always end up on my belly " Intentionally " you could run it out, I guess, but that might shift some of weight forward. ?

I didn't realize B was using that technique when he crashed at Pack last year, but I happen to have that on video (well, mostly) (password = 'red'):

http://vimeo.com/15736239

B, I didn't flare one second too late as per your statement but instead I flared early and aggressively which made the nose popped up then came down with the left wheel hitting the ground first thus breaking the left DT. I was focused more on landing on a certain spot rather than feeling and timing for the flare window. A bad experience again but I take it as part of the learning process.

C'mon Zack, you're always dodging the narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place / seven foot high corn issue.

As I've said before, only performing wheel landings will limit the sites a pilot can fly. I'm actually taking a trip out to SoCal with Dave at the end of this month. I don't know how gnarly Sylmar's LZ is, but I'll find out...and I'm glad I can land on my feet.

The odds of me putting myself into a position where I'd have to land in seven foot high corn (or on a ten square foot rock) are so low I don't feel the need to practice for those scenarios. But I believe there are plenty of 'normal' LZs that are most safely landed on on foot, and they ARE worth practicing for.

Zack

[Tad Eareckson]

I didn't send Tad the discussion, so I guess he has at least one other contact within HHPA.

My new favorite animal: the mole.

While I partly agree with your [Zack's] comments it is very difficult to determine the suitability of terrain at altitude for wheel landings so if this became the norm I believe we will see a marked increase in injuries.

- Yeah?

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.

- And since when did Houston start worrying about injuries and deaths?

It is impossible to spot a rabbit hole, hard bump or rock etc. until passed the point of no return...

- Yeah, TOTALLY impossible. At 25 miles per hour groundspeed everything's just a blur - and the colors are all blue shifted because of the Doppler effect.

- And SO MANY TIMES have I come into a pasture, spotted a rabbit hole, hard bump, or rock past the point of no return and thought, "WHOA!!! Good thing I'm foot landing! I coulda been really injured!" Makes ya wonder how a sailplane or Alaskan bush pilot makes it beyond the age of 25.

...unless foot landings are constantly practiced...

- Yeah, fer sure, CONSTANTLY!!!

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3695
good day until the wreck

Lauren Tjaden - 2008/12/31 04:29:12 UTC

came in with no wind after an hour and had right wing drop. instead of wrestling gilder straight i tried to flare while desperately trying to straighten.
bad bad whack. horrible pain, i could not move. screaming with pain, literally. took a very long time to get me out and to the hospital.

Ya just never know when you're gonna get surprised by a rabbit hole, hard bump, or rock.

- And what the hell does "constantly" mean? How much more proficient is somebody who does one flight at Columbus and shoots for standup one hundred percent of the time gonna be than somebody who does twenty flights at the Barker Dam and shoots for twenty percent?

We may also see fatigue failures due to the shock and stress on the front and rear flying wires, cross tube slapping the keels...

Oh my! Yes! Hadn't considered that. Rolling it in on the wheels instead of jamming the keel in three or four out of five flights when you get it "right" and slamming the nose down the other one or two. I now remember Chris Starbuck telling me he had to buy a new airframe every six months or so.

...probably lots of broken arms when a wheel hits a hole - ask Henry's son [...] about that!

Was Henry's son [...] deliberately rolling in with his hands on the basetube or rolling after blowing a foot landing attempt with his hands on the downtubes?

The thought of sliding through high grass with just my legs, much less face first, is terrorfying.

And it's not like a foot lander has ever ended up sliding face first.

Disclaimer: I am not an instructor. These are just my opinions. Any one following this advice does so at their own risk.

Whereas if you WERE an instructor all your advice would be dead-on and we could we could take it to the bank with complete trust and confidence.

The presumption that smooth terrain will be available at the end of a cross country jaunt is gambling at best and nuts at least.

Just how much smooth terrain are you envisioning it takes to roll a hang glider to a stop?

There is not much worse than whacking it. Busted down tubes, strained wire joints and deforned leading edges are a fairly common.

PRE CISELY.

I think landing on the back wires takes out about 90% of the guess work on flair timing.

Never tried it. Wish I had. And so how come USHGA never picked up on this?

I was focused more on landing on a certain spot rather than feeling and timing for the flare window.

Thanks again USHGA - and Matt.

As I've said before, only performing wheel landings will limit the sites a pilot can fly.

Not as much as a broken arm or two will.

But I believe there are plenty of 'normal' LZs that are most safely landed on on foot, and they ARE worth practicing for.

As long as you don't get hurt worse in the practice than you would have - minus the practice - in the sticky situation for which you were practicing.

Looking back on my career... I don't think I ever needed a standup landing for any situation beyond the ones I elected and risked, the routine standups weren't worth the downtubes, and the practice never paid off to the extent that a landing in no or light switchy air was a sure thing consistently enough to be worth it.