Kite Strings

Thoughts on Aerotowing Safety
David Glover, USHGA Advanced Tandem Instructor
1997/05

There has been a lot of discussion about aerotowing lately...

...and whether or not it is a safe launch method.

My answer is that, when done properly, it is the safest launch method of all.

Here are a few guidelines about how aerotowing ideally ought to work...

...from a flight park that has had an extraordinary level of success with this system...

...and no serious accidents after many years.

Fly with a release designed specifically for aerotowing.

Use a good backup release...

I just kept hitting the brake lever for a few seconds in WTF mode, and the instructor used the barrel release.

...located where it is easily and quickly accessible.

Fly with a properly sized weak link of the right breaking strength.

I saw more weak links break at low altitude and it is always a few seconds of anguish and uncertainty about what's gonna happen to the pilot.

Stay in position!

Fly behind an experienced, USHGA-certified tow pilot.

Bill Bryden - 1999/01

At a point just before things went bad, the tug climbed and the glider got low behind the tug. At about 75 feet, one of the oscillations progressed into a left turn that quickly accelerated into a bank of approximately 80 or 90 degrees, at which time the rope was released from the glider. The glider then slipped/dove into the ground impacting on the left leading edge, then nose, finally rolling over on the right leading edge and kingpost. The occupants impacted the ground with major injury to the head, neck, back and internal organs of both. Frank died at the site and Jamie the next morning at the hospital.

Bill Bryden - 1999/06

During the tug's roll-out for the second launch attempt, the tug pilot observed the glider clear the runway dust and then begin a left bank with no immediate correction. At that point he noticed that the launch cart was hanging below the glider and immediately released his end of the 240 foot towline. The tug never left the ground and tug pilot watched the glider continue a hard bank to the left achieving an altitude of approximately 25 feet. Impact was on the left wing and then the nose of the glider. Rob was killed immediately from severe neck and head trauma.

Jim Rooney - 2007/08/01

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

It's more of this crappy argument that being on tow is somehow safer than being off tow.

Learn with experienced people.

Learn with a group that is more knowledgeable and safety-conscious than yourself.

Don't be a guinea pig for anything.

Stay in position!

Don't try to save a bad situation.

Pull in immediately after any release.

In a deteriorating situation, err on the side of getting off too soon.

Everything is easier in stable conditions.

Fly the easiest-to-fly glider when learning this new skill.

Never cut corners.

Stay in position!

It is OK to push way out; you will climb, not stall.

Adequate is just not good enough.

Take advantage of tandem training to learn solid aerotowing skills.

The weak link broke from the tow plane side. The towline was found underneath the wreck, and attached to the glider by the weaklink.

Graduate slowly and in small steps to rowdier air.

Fly a new glider for the first time in smooth conditions.

Don't let the deck be stacked against you by ignoring any of these suggestions.

Davis Straub - 2011/05/26 13:13:18 UTC

Tell us what you think

Threaded bridle system:

Hang gliding - Dan explains the double-threaded tow bridle system
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dvr9P_w5VQ
jwm239 - 2011/05/02
dead

Dan Guido (flyboy5131) writes:

A couple years ago we discussed locking out on tow with a heavy passenger. I just remembered the old threaded bridle system we used and explained it on a YouTube video (see above).

Easy to wrap the bridle around the ring at the carabineer?

Jim Rooney writes:

He even mentions this in the video, so yeah. Yes, extremely likely in my estimation.

I'd not only want a weaklink on the ring, I'd want one on the biner attached to the harness...

...and a barrel release as well.

I wouldn't be keen to use this anyway. Tow bridles love to wrap up when you release them under load.

Dan writes:

Yeah, getting the bridle wrapped around something was always our concern. We even put the release at the end of the bridle at the tow ring but didn't like carrying it all. A barrel release at the pilot is a great idea but we only had three ring releases at the time.

Burying a weak-link in the winch made us feel better as well.

We used a payout winch mounted on a boat and did hundreds of tows some up to 3000 feet and thankfully never had an issue other that getting whipped in the gonads a couple of times.

Anyways I just wanted to point out the 2/1 pull on the pilot which was the original way Don Hewett designed it...

...when we started pulling from the pilot rather than the glider. I am sure if some thought was put into it...

...there would be some other way to do it which would allow for a safer tandem tow with the big boys.

Jim Rooney writes:

A barrel at the pilot attachment would make me feel a whole lot better.

Bart Weghorst - 2011/02/25 19:06:26 UTC

But I've had it once where the pin had bent inside the barrel from excessive tow force.

My average for a wrap around is about 1 in 500 flights. It drops to about 1 in 1,000 if you pull in before releasing so it's lightly loaded. We did testing to see if we could reliably replicate wrap arounds. Basically, we'd push out before releasing. Wrap arounds were exceptionally common that way.

In winch towing, you've got a pressure limiter, so this doesn't happen.

Bill Finn - 2011/05/26 15:36:59 UTC

There is a great explanation of how to eliminate bridle "wrap-ups" using a 2:1 Hewitt bridle system by putting a release between tow line and the bridle.

Works great!

Donnell Hewett - 1983/03

Instead of holding the nose down as I had promised, I picked up the glider, lifted up on the control bar and let the glider start to climb. It climbed about three feet and then apparently stalled. The left wing dropped down and hit the sand and of course, at that point, I no longer had any control over the situation. The wind continued to lift the high wing until I was looking straight down the other wing toward the ground 25 feet below. I then came crashing down on top of the glider as it continued to roll upside down.

Needless to say, I hit pretty hard, but the glider took much of the impact and the sand on the beach was at least somewhat forgiving. Nevertheless, I broke my arm just below the shoulder. Fortunately, no other damage was done except for the glider. There I broke one leading edge, both down tubes, the forward keel, and several battens.

go to:

http://birrendesign.com

Click on The Reel Pilots and then the Hewitt Bridle link. All you need to know about safely using a 2:1 towing bridle.

Peter Birren - 2008/10/27 23:41:49 UTC

I know about this type of accident because it happened to me, breaking four ribs and my larynx... and I was aerotowing using a dolly.

This system has been in constant use the early '80s.

Jim Gaar - 2011/05/26 15:44:33 UTC

Minimize those wraps...

First priority for me is the weaklink...

A weak link is the focal point of a safe towing system.

...it's placement and where. Yeah, everywhere! AND most important with the correct breaking strength.

Jim Gaar - 2008/04/25 16:42:47 UTC

Try the 130 test "kite" string. It's 8 strand poly weave I think. Worked for 5 years flawlessly on solo AT with a 150+ foot poly towline, center of mass open V bridle with primary and secondary releases.600 tows without a hitch.

Jim Gaar - 2009/09/18 19:23:44 UTC

Hell I've literally shoved the control frame out in front of me to avoid a whack when it got a little ahead of me in a light DW landing, similar to when I've had to slide it in on my belly (did that once after a weaklink brake coming off a launch cart.

It's not rocket science folks. 8 inch piece, single loop with opposing single grapevine knots for solo, 16 inch piece with double loop for tandem.

YMMV

My next priority has become how "slippery" the release path is. I use to make long and short bridles out of PolyPro hollow weave. Now I'm really liking the (thin) Spectra bridles as they are so slippery and don't stretch.

USHGA AEROTOWING GUIDELINES - 2004/07/30

Thinner lines tend to whip around more during release and can entangle the towline.

I was shown how to take a hollow knitting needle, thread it's inside surface so that one can actually screw the Spectra into the needle to use as a fid for splicing. A few drops of Super Glue on the ends keeps them from unraveling. Of course you have to roll the ends prior to the gluing (and maybe a little after so DON"T get your fingers stuck together!).

Beyond that I'm a Rooney follower...

I just don't believe one can make the ProTow or COM release much safer, short of not using it.

A weak link is the focal point of a safe towing system.

Peter Birren - 2011/05/27 14:19:28 UTC

Not long after the XCTPA was formed (later to become the RHGPA) in 1984-85, some of the members tried the threaded bridle. It wasn't long before bruising and injuries happened due to the extremely high speed of the bridle end...

...as it came back at the pilot; one pilot came close to losing an eye.

Mike Lake - 2011/03/02 01:11:45 UTC

In the early '80s we were given a demo of a fixed line tow system complete with spring gauge, spaghetti bridles, rings, string and chunks of metal at longbow tensions positioned in front of the pilot's face.

The release was some kind of boat shackle that required about same continual tugging to actually release as it does for me to untangle my mobile phone charger.

After release the line had to unthread itself from various rings before the glider was actually free from a rather pathetic tow launch.

This was utter, utter crap, the whole setup and we (rather unkindly) laughed.

And so it wasn't long until we banned its use and went back to placing the release, as Bill mentioned, between bridle and towline.

Getting rid of the entire bridle is an admirable goal...

...but we just got in the practice of rolling it up... no big deal and a whole lot safer.

As well, by using the Linknife - shameless plug, sorry:

http://www.birrendesign.com/linknife.html

- we were able to eliminate the steel ring at the end of the towline. The ring caused the breaking of at least 5 vehicles' rear windows, one driver required 6 stitches in his mouth, 2 airplanes were damaged (dinged) at an airshow and it caused many a line to get snagged in various trees. Dragging the ring across the ground caused burrs to form which caused many weaklinks to break prematurely.

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

The Reel Pilots tested many different strings before settling on 130 or 150 pound test braided dacron kite string depending on pilot body weight. These translate to 235 and 260 pound breaking strengths in 4-strand setups, less than 1 G, and we haven't had an inadvertant weaklink break in a very long time, either static line or aerotowing. Any lighter and the string will break when encountering a strong thermal. At least that's been our experience.

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

Dave Broyles - 1990/11

I talked to a lot of pilots at Hobbs, and the consensus was that in the course of Eric Aasletten's accident, had a weak link break occurred instead of the manual or auto release that apparently did occur, the outcome would have been the same. Under the circumstances the one thing that would have given Eric a fighting chance to survive was to have remained on the towline.

So getting rid of the ring solved many problems, and not using a threaded bridle prevented many injuries.

Tom Peghiny - 1974

Never take your hands off the bar.

Another detail: in the video, the lower bridle lines are routed above the control bar. This severely limits the altitude the glider can attain and can be an initial cause of a lockout due to its contact with the control bar. Proper routing is BELOW the bar, whether launching prone from floats or standing up at a tow road.

Heber Itzhak - 1984/02
Mahal Oz, Israel

After two months that I didn't skyte because of weather and other reasons, I launched again last week. New driver, new road (different wind direction this season of the year). I used my gear as before in 30 other nice flights. The car started, I did a few steps, and more, and more... the driver didn't accelerate enough (it happens all the time with new drivers, and I had many of them) and didn't drive in the speed that he should. So I couldn't take off. Then I lost control on the glider, it turned, nosed in, weak link (70 kg) broke, and one down tube was bent.

I didn't like this situation, mostly because of two reasons: First, what happened was out of my control. Second, same thing like what happened to me in the past, the first time that I used skyting. If it happened to me now, even because of the new driver, then there is a possibility of it happening again in the future.

During the launch, I kept running and the glider banked. The bridle caused it by lifting one side of the control bar. I couldn't use the release line because it was tied to the control bar and I couldn't reach it.

At home I decided to make something to prevent a situation like it in the future:

- When I have a new driver or something else for the first time, I let the bridle go through the A frame (not under). It makes the take off much easier. The bridle then cannot lift any side of the bar and change the balance of the glider.

- I connect the release line to the top of the down tube. This lets me use the line when I hold the glider or run with it. I set the release line so it will work automatically in any situation that the angle between rope and glider becomes smaller than what I decide. I tie the line when someone holds the leader and the glider-rope angle is about 5 degrees.

I made four flights with the new line release and find it works well and is very comfortable to use.

I think that it is much safer to release only one point. I developed the release by myself. Here I give you the design of it so other pilots who can make it. The one I made was tested to work in 130 kg of tension.

So it's my advice to just live with the bridle. Get used to rolling it up as it takes maybe 30 seconds. And get rid of that ring! Your system, drivers, neighbors and stuff around you will thank you for it.

Davis Straub - 2011/05/28 20:10:30 UTC

I'm more than happy to compete with anyone at any time.

Davis Straub - 2011/02/07 19:21:29 UTC

Okay, enough. On to new threads.

Viktor Moroz - 2011/05/17 18:07:49 UTC
Kyiv

Could you comment next two photos. Pilots uses the same cart but different methods to come off.

Photo 1

Photo 2

Gerry Grossnegger - 2011/05/17 20:57:44 UTC

Is that a head-activated release??

Viktor Moroz - 2011/05/19 21:53:28 UTC

Yes, it is. The most of our pilots uses tooth-activated release.

Bill Jacques - 2007/07/17 12:51:13 UTC
Boca Raton

When in flight (about 300 feet or higher) as soon as you see that tug bounce up, PUSH OUT and raise as quickly as possible to its level immediately. As soon a you see the tug bounce down, PULL IN and drop to its level immediately.

I've been through about a hundred aerotows over the last two years, many of them in very severe thermal conditions, and I can tell you with certainty that an IMMEDIATE adjustment for pitch is an absolute necessity.

You must attempt to stay lined up with the wheels or the wing of the tug at all times except immediately after launch (after you launch off the dolly you pull in enough to stabilize and fly about 15-20 feet off the surface until the tug starts raising, then you raise with it, mirroring its level as close as possible).

Remember, once you are about 300 feet if you have to raise to the level of a tug that has just been pulled up by a strong thermal DO IT FAST AND HARD. Don't worry about "stalling out" as stalling is nearly impossible when linked during aerotow.

Matt Christensen - 2009/07/13 23:28:45 UTC
Vienna, Virginia

I wanted to update everyone on my week at Wallaby. I ended up getting nine and a half tandems in before leaving Florida. The half tow was due to a weak link break at the tug that didn't have anything to do with my flying.

If the tug gets pulled down by a strong thermal PULL IN IMMEDIATELY and drop to its new level. DO NOT WAIT FOR THE THERMAL THAT BOUNCED THE TUG UP OR DOWN IN FRONT OF YOU TO MOVE YOU TO THE TUG'S NEW LEVEL. YOU MUST MANUALLY AND IMMEDIATELY ADJUST FOR HEIGHT LEVELS RELATIVE TO THE TUG IN FRONT OF YOU.

Oh, two additional words of advice:

When in "aerotow doubt" and you feel you may be "losing it", pull/push your release and CUT LOOSE.

Things rarely get better on their own and, in fact, can get damn dangerous as bad aerotow circumstances tend to multiply rapidly. There is zero shame in "pinning off" early.

And, as always, get advice from a "local" like Malcolm who knows what he is doing...

...regarding the particular site and thermal conditions and/or tug-tow set-up, or from your friendly tug pilot to set up a more smooth flight by perhaps modifying some of my advice before you go up.

I suck at thermalling and landing, but I consider myself pretty good at aerotowing.

hedgehog in a fog - 2007/07/17 14:27:54 UTC
Chicago

Don't worry about "stalling out" as stalling is nearly impossible when linked during aero tow.

I wonder about this. I remember discussion of Arlan accident in 2005.

USHGA - 2006/03/15

Understand that we are not asking if you agree with the safety notice, but that you have read it and understand what it says.

Some experienced people mentioned that stall during aerotow followed by weaklink break is one of the worst possible things that can happen to you, especially at low altitude.

How much altitude does one need to recover from whip stall?

And, as always, get advice from a "local"...

(I have about 80 aerotows so far.)

Bill Jacques - 2007/07/17 15:17:42 UTC

"when linked" were the operative words in my claim. But I guess I should have added "and with some tow tension".

Axel Banchero - 2009/06/18 15:42:14 UTC

I have had one weak link break during launch and I feel "lucky" everything went well and just landed a bit hard on the wheels.

But I also saw a world class pilot having exactly the same problem and breaking the link at the same altitude. But he broke the downtubes on his Litespeed and looked to be in pain in one of his wrists. He was fine though.

I saw more weak links break at low altitude and it is always a few seconds of anguish and uncertainty about what's gonna happen to the pilot.

The half tow was due to a weak link break at the tug that didn't have anything to do with my flying.

On the other hand, I guess if you get super "inside" or super "high" or "low" during a tow - you may then experience enough "slack" in the line to stall. But, man, in that case RELEASE! and pin off!

Diev Hart - 2007/07/17 15:18:49 UTC
Santa Cruz, California

I've had a weaklink break ten feet off the cart...

It was my first day towing and my first try.

I still think it's not a bad idea to have the student break the weaklink or get off tow super early and have to deal with landing quickly right away, either on your wheels (you better have them) or back on your feet...but read below...

Shane Nestle - 2010/09/17 22:17:50 UTC

So far I've only had negative experiences with weak links. One broke while aerotowing just as I was coming off the cart. Flared immediately and put my feet down only to find the cart still directly below me. My leg went through the two front parallel bars forcing me to let the glider drop onto the control frame in order to prevent my leg from being snapped.

Weaklinks are not meant to break if the pressure doesn't build fast enough!!!

So while on tow, say in a turn, and you are thrown to the outside the pressure builds slowly and you start to lockout. I've done this, tested it on tow. I was about 2000 up and just let it go to see when and if/where it would break. It didn't and I pinned off, under LOTS of pressure while almost facing down. I started the release process while at about level but by the time I was off I was going down. So you can see what happens when you think you can control something you can't and it goes bad REAL FAST.

Bill Bryden - 2000/02

Dennis Pagen informed me several years ago about an aerotow lockout that he experienced. One moment he was correcting a bit of alignment with the tug and the next moment he was nearly upside down. He was stunned at the rapidity. I have heard similar stories from two other aerotow pilots.

I now have a finger loop release to speed that release process (for those conditions that require it).

hedgehog in a fog - 2007/07/17 15:26:02 UTC

My nightmare is weaklink failing while I am stalled, before I have a chance to pull in and release.

Jack Axaopoulos - 2009/07/04 01:08:20 UTC

If you are under ZERO tension, then you are simply a hang glider flying. You DO know how to fly a fricken glider dont you????

For this reason I'd rather release rather then push hard when I am way below the tug.

I try never to push very hard when on tow. For this reason, as you mentioned, it is even more important to respond immediately, before you need big correction.

I do not know if this fear is justified.

I had my share of weaklink breaks at low altitude. Pull in (hard if you have altitude) and land as usual.

Bill Jacques - 2007/07/17 15:34:45 UTC

Sorry to keep adding to this thread...

...but one more word of advice.

On "weak link breaks" or any unexpected separation from the tug...

...the usual best course of action is usually PULL IN. This should allow you to gain airspeed and get better control of the glider.

This works fine when you have altitude and are clear of any obstructions.

Carlos Weill - 2008/11/30 19:24:09 UTC

The tug weak link broke off at 1000ft, in less than a second the glider was at 500ft.

If you're close to ground and you have wheels and have adequate field ahead of you just land after you pull in.

Mike Van Kuiken - 2005/10/13 19:47:26 UTC

The weak link broke from the tow plane side. The towline was found underneath the wreck, and attached to the glider by the weaklink. The glider basically fell on the towline.

If you don't have wheels and you are close to the ground... well, how rapidly can you transition? ha ha!

Hedgehog, I think in that case you should just pull in. You most likely will never overtake and hit the tug. It goes faster.

hedgehog in a fog - 2007/07/17 15:47:42 UTC

I am not worried about hitting the tug. (Hah! Not even if I tried hard. Plus it is far enough.) I am worried about being at angle of attack way beyond stall attitude and without tension of the line at not very high altitude.

How high is "Not very high"? I do not know. Apparently 150 feet is not enough.

Bill Jacques - 2007/07/17 15:58:14 UTC

Here's the bottom line. If you have altitude and your weak link breaks, or if you release, just pull in and regain glider control.

Close to land, or with an obstruction or little landing field in front of you, well, that is a whole nother unfortunate situation.

But once you are 500 feet or more in the air, and have altitude...

...you have a lot of options. Most of the near disasters I have witnessed in towing involves the first couple hundred feet...

...(sometimes after a break people will try to turn back to the start point, or they transition to an "emergency" foot landing badly because they don't have wheels, I've even seen a VG cord gets caught in the dolly lifting the dolly up with the glider and - at the same time - changing wing geometry.

Yeah, all real nightmares!)

But, even at altitude, a tow in nasty air can get real scary (I've been on a couple "Oh God, just get me through this one tow and I swear I will NEVER hang glide again" deals. So, believe me, I know!)

Towing Aloft - 1998/01

A weak link is required that will not break needlessly in response to moderate thermals, or pilot inputs, yet will break at a low enough point to avoid disaster or excessive pilot panic.

But once you release and are flying on your own, things get 1001% better.

Oh.. don't be shy about pulling in or pushing out hard if need be. It takes a lot more than you can imagine while on tow to break a properly attached weak link.

Socrates Zayas - 2008/05/21 23:53:23 UTC

The cycle was nice, nothing out of the ordinary, but just as the tug flew over the fence line of the orchard the weak link broke. It was as if it didn't even break - Eric and I both thought it was a release malfunction.

Axel Banchero - 2008/05/22 04:19:39 UTC

Doc's body wasn't moving and we were shitting our pants until he started talking confused. The first thing I saw was his eye bleeding and swollen the size of an 8 ball. There was sand and dirt inside. Looked like he lost it at first until he could open it a little bit.

Bill Jacques - 2008/05/22 12:53:45 UTC

I don't think going straight was an option for Doc after the break (as I recall no low altitude reachable bailout as there's a shitload of trees over there).

I guess one of the things that we can all learn from this experience is to imagine what we should do BEFORE it happens.

hedgehog in a fog - 2007/07/17 16:07:16 UTC

Weak link break is no problem if you have proper altitude and attitude.

I agree that it takes a lot to break a properly attached weak link.

What I am worried about is a combination of two rare events: bad attitude (flying in stall) and weak link that is too weak.

Basically the only issue I have is with the statement that you should not be afraid to stall while on tow. Most of the time it is Ok, but then again when reading accident reports it is easy to see that it usually takes a combination of two or more problems to create an unpleasant situation, one of them (like weakling break at low altitude)...

...is no big deal.

This is the way I see it. I might be wrong - my experience is not that great.

Craig Hassan - 2007/07/17 16:56:50 UTC
Ohio

Reaction is the key.

On tow you are flying faster than trim at all times. (I've yet to tow behind or even read about a 22 mph tow!)

That gives you a finite amount of time between losing the tow, and slowing to stall speed. The higher the attitude, the less time you have.

In any case, pulling the nose down quickly will reduce the amount of speed you do lose. And pulling in to level flight is all you need to do IF you do it fast enough.

The longer you take the slower you get, the more you have to pull in, the more altitude you lose.

Diev Hart - 2007/07/17 17:17:41 UTC

Hedgehog,

It sounds like you mean ...being towed while you are at a stalled attitude...then the weaklink breaks and you would whipstall...

This is very hard to do as you either shoot up when you push out...

...(too high and you get the rope)...

...or you slow down (sink a little) then get yanked by the line when it gets tight again...

...(where weaklinks break).

Another case where this might happen is when the tug pilot is going too slow or you are to heavy (tandem) on the glider...tug pilots know better and you should be on the correct glider...(Tandem pilots have recently been told not to pull in, just let it mush to the ground/wheels when just off the cart)...

<-- this goes for all of us...

Is this what your talking about?

hedgehog in a fog - 2007/07/17 17:25:28 UTC

Probably. I am certainly not too heavy for my glider and I do not think I was ever towed too slow.
But then again - if I am towed fast enough, I do not need to push out. Just let bar go and this is enough to go higher.
If I have to push out to stay behind the tug... Maybe I am towed too slow?

Anyway, this is a quite hypothetical scenario.

Jay Scovill - 2007/07/17 17:42:12 UTC
Gainesville, Georgia

Aero towing is the single most dangerous part of the sport at this moment because it can be a very complex situation.

Three thoughts and then I'll say thank you for a wonderful thread.

1) Many pilots would be alive today if they had finger releases a la LMFP. Matt makes them and they are a millisecond from allowing you to escape a catastrophe.

Ralph Sickinger - 2000/08/26 22:18:20

I pulled on the release (hard), but nothing happened! After the second failed attempt to release, I thought about releasing from the secondary, but before I could move my hand the tug stalled and started to fall; Sunny had no choice but to gun the engine in attempt to regain flying speed, but this resulted in a sudden and severe pull on the harness and glider; I was only able to pull on the release again, while simultaneously praying for the weak link to break. The release finally opened, and I was free of the tug.

2)Low on tow is thought to be the primary reason for a few of the messes that happened on tandem crashes while on tow.

Maybe you can push out with everything you've got on a single tow...

...but tandem gliders can get low and affect the handling of the tug.

As the situation reaches critical mass the tandem glider gets low enough that a tremendous angle of attack is required to gain proper position.

The student (actually by this moment in the catastrophe usually the instructor) pushes out hard to gain...

Mike Van Kuiken - 2005/10/10

I saw that Jeremiah was doing the take off right from the start and I watched him get pretty low on the tow as the tug crossed the road at the end of the runway.

...breaks the weak link and stalls as the weak link releases (which was all he had to keep the glider in the air at that point).

A dramatically nose high stall may round-out and recover in several hundred feet or it may go into whip stall... backwards straight down until the glider decides to flip back forward. An instructor friend of mine did one of these on purpose with a bag of sand for a student. 1500 feet later the glider was level and flying again. A whip stall can end up as a backwards tumble as well (so I'm told).

3) I have locked out low in my U2 and released to a very nice flair only because before I started my "wing over" part of the lockout I had pinned off and had a lot of field in front of me to get my wits together.

I have also locked out two times in a row on a tandem platform tow. We nosed in from 150-200' unable to recover fully and buried the nose and ourselves the second time about 10 feet under the water... yes it was a boat tow the whole rig, instructor and myself surfaced like a sub on full up bubble with out the screws turning... pretty hilarious and the good thing about it... when you wet your pants nobody knows!! The problem with our lockouts that definitely would have killed us in truck tow situation were a combination of a supremely overweight instructor whose belly pushed me to the far left inside the control frame. This combined with my being too tall for my harness. We did not do a full range of motion check prior to launch. With the slightest correction to the left my shoulder against the left down tube prevented us from weight shifting enough to keep the glider form locking to the right. This is a picture of me when we surfaced after the second lockout/diving lesson> .

I think the answer has been mentioned: react immediately to changes in tug height relative to yourself then you will not have to react too violently or with catastrophic results. Pin off if you feel the need to get violent with anything while on tow. Check full range of motion on the cart. Being 6'7" my feet easily catch in the control frame to keel wires if I do not carefully get myself level to the cart prior to start.

Have a nice discussion!!

John Caldwell - 2008/10/27 21:22:11 UTC
Augusta, Georgia

Last week I had a problem aerotowing. This was about my twentieth aerotow and the second time for a weak link break.

I launched from the cart just fine but when the tow plane took off, it seemed like he just popped up quickly above me...

- i.e., I was clearly too low in what seemed like an instant.

I eased out the control bar but kept meeting resistance to gaining altitude.

I think it was prop wash that I couldn't get through.

I did have some oscillations, although I don't think too bad.

Just about the time we cleared the end of the field and as I was trying hard to get even with the tow plane...

...the weak link broke.

I pulled in, turned and came around with enough altitude to make a full box and upwind landing without incident.

We ended up replacing the weak link...

...and relaunched, this time as per the tow pilot with about a third VG (have not done that previously)...

...with a smooth uneventful tow.

Obviously the best would have been not to let the tow plane get above me.

I am wondering if anyone has any other advice about this situation.

Does this sound like prop wash?

What is the best approach to get to correct towing relation/altitude with the tow plane once too low or should I have just stayed as I was?

Damien Gates (Tex) - 2008/10/27 21:28:54 UTC
Brisbane

Hi John,

Prop wash may have some effect on not being able to penetrate upwards but your real problem sounds like speed. If you are so low that you are in the wash and can not get up then the tug pilot should realize (where is the station in his mirror) this and nose over a bit to get DOWN to you.

This has two effects: first he reduces height to bring the tug down to you and second it increases his and your speed giving you the energy to get back up where you should be. Once there resume tow as normal.

If you are low AND slow YOU can not really do much about it except go along for the ride.

Prop wash will cause turbulence and beat you down a little but with sufficient speed you should be able to punch through it.
-
"Love the lift you're with."
Don't be a passenger.

Bill Reynolds - 2008/10/27 21:43:04 UTC

John, this has been my experience:

First, I find that about half VG is good on the T2 or the Discus to keep bar pressure low enough to be comfortable, yet still have enough roll authority for quick corrections.

Second, if I get too low or high I can quickly and aggressively, but smoothly adjust pitch to get back on track. Roll corrections take more precise inputs to not overcorrect and start PIO'ing. But with pitch, overcorrecting is not as much of a problem.

You probably already know all that. I never found myself in your situation I don't think, where I was low and unable to correct because of prop wash. If the keel attach point was far back close to the hang point then that might have contributed to holding the nose down.

Have you already considered that?

John Caldwell - 2008/10/27 23:48:39 UTC

Thank you, guys. Wilburleft, I think that the tow attach point just about right on the keel (although I was thinking if it were too far back, it would then try to nose up).

The thing I needed to hear is what you have said, that it is ok to attempt to correct pitch issues "aggressively".

You are not hooked in until after the hang check.

Again, I understand, within reason.

I had been leery of pushing out, but did build up, and finally to a level that culminated in the weak link break.

curly_cue - 2008/10/28 01:08:44 UTC
Duluth, Georgia

If you are so low that you are in the wash and can not get up then the tug pilot should realize (where is the station in his mirror) this and nose over a bit to get DOWN to you.

"As the glider pilot, you are the final authority and responsible for the safety of the flight. FAA regulation part 91. Anyone not willing to accept this responsibility should not be a part of this sport."

This response is from my hubby who is a CFI/MEI/II and a tug pilot.

He tows me regularly and will always do everything possible to help the glider pilot, however if you get low, it is your responsibility to fix it. If you can't, you should release. You are in control of your own destiny.
-
H2
WW Falcon 3
AT FL CL FSL

As the glider pilot, you are the final authority and responsible for the safety of the flight.

Manned Kiting
The Basic Handbook of Tow Launched Hang Gliding
1974

"A bad flyer won't hurt a pin man but a bad pin man can kill a flyer." - Bill Bennett

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.

Mark Frutiger - 2010/03/03 20:51:32 UTC

Jim Rooney answered you. Try to find someone more qualified.

FAA regulation part 91.

Aircraft Requirements

a. No person may operate an aircraft that is towing a glider

-1. unless the aircraft is equipped with a tow hook and release control system that meet the applicable standards of airworthiness, and

-2. The towline used has a breaking strength not less than 80 percent of the maximum certificated operating weight of the glider, and not more than twice this operating weight.

b. However, the towline used may have a breaking strength more than twice the maximum certificated operating weight of the glider if-

-1. A safety link is installed at the point of attachment of the towline to the glider with a breaking strength not less than 80 percent of the maximum certificated operating weight of the glider and not greater than twice this operating weight; or

-2. A safety link is installed at the point of attachment of the towline to the towing aircraft with a breaking strength greater, but not more than 25 percent greater, than that of the safety link at the towed glider end of the towline and not greater than twice the maximum certificated operating weight of the glider.

Anyone not willing to accept this responsibility should not be a part of this sport.

He tows me regularly and will always do everything possible to help the glider pilot, however if you get low, it is your responsibility to fix it.

If you can't, you should release.

You are in control of your own destiny.

Bill Bryden - 2000/02

Dennis Pagen informed me several years ago about an aerotow lockout that he experienced. One moment he was correcting a bit of alignment with the tug and the next moment he was nearly upside down. He was stunned at the rapidity. I have heard similar stories from two other aerotow pilots.

Socrates Zayas - 2008/10/28 02:06:16 UTC
Miami Beach

Harsh but TRUE!!! Thanks Curly_Cue

let me tell you if you get hit by prop wash you know it, thus it wasn't prop wash... Sounds like you have an issue with pushing out?

But that's OK cause you only have 20 ATs under your belt and probably were ingrained with the learning lesson that pushing out is "BAD" and it is! except for in AT.

Fact is that pushing out (enough) would have slowed the tug and forced him to slow down or have brought you up to him... It wouldn't have cause a WL brake, steady pressure won't only a quick jerky motion would.

Just about the time we cleared the end of the field and as I was trying hard to get even with the tow plane the weak link broke.

This may have been cause by a number of things, but definitely something slacked and then pulled the WL to break on you, you may want to run your finger on the inside of your primary and see if it's smooth or if there is a rough spot caused sometimes buy oxidation (rust). This can be filed clean on occasion.

Socrates Zayas - 2008/05/21 23:53:23 UTC

The cycle was nice, nothing out of the ordinary, but just as the tug flew over the fence line of the orchard the weak link broke. It was as if it didn't even break - Eric and I both thought it was a release malfunction.

We ended up replacing the weak link and relaunched, this time as per the tow pilot with about 1/3 VG (have not done that previously), with a smooth uneventful tow.

The pilot thought to actually talk to you? great Flight park where was this?

What is the best approach to get to correct towing relation/altitude with the tow plane once too low or should I have just stayed as I was?

Both these question answered above

Remember: it is almost impossible to stall under aerotow. The induced thrust vector makes the glider trim at a higher attitude. It is OK to push way out; you will climb, not stall.

Warmth,
-DocSoc

Damien Gates - 2008/10/28 08:22:10 UTC

This response is from my hubby...

Harsh and untrue IMHAHO. Maybe if you want to perpetuate your towing operations as just the 'dope on the rope'. A good AND safe operation involves 'co-operation'. Sure if you are not happy with it then GET OFF THE LINE. But get behind a tug pilot who has the opportunity and ability to assist in towing effectively, efficiently, and safely AND DOESN'T, then he has no place being a tug pilot.

Curly could you please tell me what is a "II"? Also does your hubby fly HG? Quite frankly I find the statement "if you get low it is your responsibility to fix it" very alarming.

John, I find that if you are pushing out to get up, the point you are pushing out too far is very much like a progressive stall in normal flight. The glider starts to feel 'mushy' and may even wing walk a little due to tow forces vis a vis stall - If you are low and at that point where the glider feels 'mushy' and in the prop wash better to get off fast, especially if the tug pilot will not help. Beware the low slow tow... lockout is imminent and quick!

Craig Hassan - 2008/10/28 09:24:07 UTC
Ohio

Almost all tug pilots I have flown behind will try to help you out. However, I have flown behind one or two that act almost like you are not even back there. Interesting rides for sure.
The point being, you are the pilot in command of the glider being towed. You have the responsibility of maneuvering your aircraft behind the tug in a safe manor. If you can not, you have no place being behind the tug!

A good tug pilot will do everything he can to keep you in position. When I towed behind Carlos at Wallaby Ranch, I could have taken a nap and he still would have had me at 2000'. He's just about that good.

Other places and a few tug pilots, well some of them had me pinning off at 1000' just to be done with the tow!

CFI/MEI/II

Certified Flight instructor
Multi Engine Instructor
Instrument instructor.

Damien Gates - 2008/10/28 10:51:03 UTC



WOW I am shocked.... really totally shocked, either I am being completely misunderstood or my experience and opinions (and those of who I tow with and behind) on what towing operations are and should be has been wrong for many years. I retreat and surrender. To continue seems crazy. I feel like I am on some weird trip. I mean really... what does Instrument instruction have to do with aerotow of hang gliders...

Michael Bradford - 2008/10/28 11:05:32 UTC
Rock Spring, Georgia

Like so many other things, that might depend on whose tug your hang glider is trying to follow...

Craig Hassan - 2008/10/28 11:11:48 UTC

WOW I am shocked...

I agree with you on what they should be! Any good tug pilot will react almost as fast as the glider pilot to help keep the glider in position. A good tug pilot is not hard to find. (at an established tow field) 99% of the tugs I've ridden behind were piloted by outstanding men and women who do everything they can, with in a safe margin, to keep you behind them.

I was just agreeing with curly (or her husband) that it is the sole responsibility of the glider pilot on tow is to stay in position.

If you get out of position you should rely only on yourself to correct the situation. If the tug pilot comes to the rescue, great, but he is pretty busy flying his aircraft, and may not be in the position to fix things.

So don't count on him saving your arse!

(Just like you don't count on a launch director to make sure you harness is hooked to the glider. You hope he will see it, but I wouldn't bet my life on it!)

But get behind a tug pilot who had opportunity and ability to assist in towing effectively, efficiently and safely AND DIDN'T, then they have no place being a tug pilot.

I agree with you there. If the tug pilot could have helped, but didn't (because he didn't want to, or didn't feel like it) then he/she should not be a tug pilot and that operation is not a safe one.

Damien Gates - 2008/10/28 11:46:32 UTC

OK, then. We seem to be closer to the same page. I agree with you but would just like to add that when you are low and slow this is the simplest predicament for a tug pilot to assist you to rectify. Further, the rectification in no way would decrease the tug pilot's ability to look after his aircraft. On the contrary, the scenario I described for this predicament should only assist both pilots to fly their aircraft safely during the tow.

Craig Hassan - 2008/10/28 12:12:11 UTC

Indeed!

To go along with the mutual concept. When I was first starting to AT I was instructed by the tug pilot to only correct for 1/2 the distance I thought I was out of position. The tug pilot will be correcting the other half. If I found myself 10 degrees to the right of the tug, correct for 5 degrees. that way I don't overshot as the tug comes back to me.
I still do this (though I do not get so far out of position nowadays ), and it works with almost every tug and pilot I've been behind. Some more than others.

curly_cue - 2008/10/28 13:44:17 UTC

Whoa, sorry, I didn't mean to ruffle the feathers out there. Craig put it better than I did perhaps.
Yes, the tug pilot will do everything he can to assist you (most of them anyway). I hear stories everyday about "I had to go get this guy 6 times!".

But it is still the pilots responsibility. You can't count on the tug saving you every time.

He spends 50%-75% of his time watching his rearview mirror, but he does occasionally have to look forward to fly.

You have to always be responsible for yourself whether or not he is going to help.

And yes, he is also a hg pilot.

I just threw his credentials in there to give you the idea that he's not some run of the mill, non-licensed (illegal now anyway) guy that learned to fly a tug.

As the glider pilot, you are the final authority and responsible for the safety of the flight. FAA regulation part 91. Anyone not willing to accept this responsibility should not be a part of this sport.

John Caldwell - 2008/10/28 14:19:55 UTC

Thank you, guys.

curly_cue, I never did feel that I got to a point of being unsafe for me or the tug pilot although I kept an "itchy trigger finger" for the release.

I suspect that I could have gone all the way to 2000 feet for the minimal impact that my situation seemed to be having, but I knew by the book I was too low and was trying to correct it. I would not have been surprised if the pilot had dipped down to help, but I think he was simply trying to go smooth and let me fix it.

(It may even be that he did dip down and I didn't see it or capitalize on it). I think he must not have realized that I was meeting some kind of resistance barrier (? prop wash?) to ascending to level with him. I didn't even think about that possibility until someone suggested it to me later.

It seems to me the main thing to make sense of all of what I experienced. The tug pilots (at LMFP) have been great and most always open to a quick feedback session, which at this point I am interested in also.

Jim Gaar - 2008/10/28 15:55:22 UTC
Roeland Park, Kansas

We always told towed pilots that the first 500 feet belonged to the tug pilot.

Davis Straub - 2005/01/10

As he took off his left wing was dragging. Bobby Bailey, the best tow pilot in the business, moved to the right into get further into the wind, and Robin got his left wing up and flying as he lined up behind Bobby.

Then Robin shifted off to the left again getting his right, upwind wing, high again. He was seen reaching for his release.

He kept doing a wing over to the left and dove straight into the ground from about 50 feet. He was killed immediately.

They have enough to do to keep themselves safe. I would never "expect" a tug to drop down to me in that first 500 feet.

Get up and hold your 10-15 feet of altitude (with a Dragonfly-not a trike) and be ready to climb with the tug...or get off!

That rule kept us accident free for over 600 tows (Then we sold out).

BJ Herring - 2008/10/31 17:56:26 UTC

For reference, once we were a good 1500-2k off the ground, in training, Dustin took us down to the prop wash.... (Don't do this for practice even)... but at least now my instincts know that I NEVER want to get in that again... It's like a jackhammer is beating on your nose plate... really really obvious!

Jim Rooney - 2008/12/11 18:45:01 UTC

His scenario is pretty common. Pilot leaves cart, pulls in and maintains altitude then fails to follow tug up.

Gets into oscillations and while struggling with them attempts to climb. Breaks weaklink.

I did have some oscillations, although I don't think too bad. Just about the time we cleared the end of the field and as I was trying hard to get even with the tow plane the weak link broke.

Yup, the first 500ft are mine.

Jim Gaar - 2011/05/26 15:44:33 UTC

Beyond that I'm a Rooney follower...

Mitch Shipley - 2011/01/31 15:22:59 UTC

Enjoy your posts, as always, and find your comments solid, based on hundreds of hours / tows of experience and backed up by a keen intellect/knowledge of the issues when it comes to most things in general and hang gliding AT/Towing in particular. Wanted to go on record in case anyone reading wanted to know one persons comments they should give weight to.

Jim Rooney - 2007/07/19 14:50:52 UTC

And yes, get behind me with a "strong link" and I will not tow you.

Jim Rooney - 2007/07/22 22:30:28 UTC

I've heard it a million times before from comp pilots insisting on towing with even doubled up weaklinks (some want no weaklink). I tell them the same thing I'm telling you... suck it up. You're not the only one on the line. I didn't ask to be a test pilot. I can live with your inconvenience.

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

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

Jim Rooney - 2010/12/16 18:47:05 UTC

A few years ago, I started refusing to tow people with home made gear.

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.

Richard Bryant - 2009/11/05 14:11:27 UTC
New Jersey

Tad,

If you acted there as you do here, perhaps they got tired of being told how to run their operation.

Just a guess but probably the trigger that got you booted is when you went to the FAA with your draft proposal for more regulation of the sport...yeah, that was a great idea on your part!

Try to keep up. Your tugger generally REALLY wants to help you, and will do all that he can to do so...

...but he's got trees to stay out of as well.

Dave Farkas - 1996/08/02

The trike was now being pulled to the left toward a tree line and I felt we were now in real trouble. I either pulled the release handle again or it was still opened from before, but the line still did not release. I didn't want to try this, but I thought if I reduced power a little, I might be able to lighten the pressure for Mike and Bill and maybe they could get the glider back under control, so I came back on the power some. I waited a short period and then powered up to try and force a weak link break or make the tow line release. At this time the trike was again being pulled what seemed very close to the tree line. I kept up power to try to pull us away when either the weak link on the trike broke or the tow line released. I was able to pull the trike away from the trees and circled back to check on the glider which I then saw on the ground. I quickly landed the trike and proceeded to the accident site.

Miller Stroud - 2011/06/07 00:54:35 UTC
Arlington, Tennessee

Tim Martin accident

From 2nd party info I'm hearing that a pilot named Tim Martin (from Kentucky I believe) got caught in a gust front yesterday at Henson's Gap in East Tennessee while soaring the ridge. It was extremely hazy which could have contributed to the short warning. He chose to try to fly to the field and land. Around 500 feet over the landing field the storm over powered him and he was blown to the South where he crashed. He was airlifted out and at 8:30 AM this morning was in ICU. His wife reports that the doctors are not hopeful. I do not have an update as it is late in the evening as I'm writing this. If you've never prayed, now is the time to do so! I'm pretty sure this is going to turn out bad.
-
ATOS VQ, Easy RIser, Fledge II, Fledge III
Hang 4, 100 Mile Club
Tennessee Tree Topper Member (BOD)

eggert8 - 2011/06/07 13:52:18 UTC

Just to let everyone know, Tim didn't make it. He died this morning at 4:00. Tim was a good friend and a fantastic person. He will be missed by many many people. At least he was doing something he loved so much.

Mike Bomstad

Everyone who lives dies, yet not everyone who dies, has lived.
We take these risks not to escape life, but to prevent life escaping us.

eggert8 - 2011/06/07 13:52:18 UTC

At least he was doing something he loved so much.

James Dean - 2011/06/08 23:00:40 UTC
Chattanooga
WWS2 - H3 - KJ4RPB

I saw Tim fighting the gust-front in his Sport 2 and it was, by far and away, the most horrible and terrifying thing that I have ever witnessed. I watched the whole thing and wish I could get it out of my head now...

Mike Meier - 1998/09

Why Do People Think It's Dangerous?

If I were to ask you to characterize the view that the "uninformed public" has of hang gliding, what might you say? You might say that they think of hang gliding as a "death sport," or, at the very least, an "unreasonably unsafe activity." You might say that they think hang glider pilots are "thrill seekers" who recklessly disregard the inherent risks in what they do. You might say that they are under the mistaken impression that hang gliders are fragile, unstable flying contraptions blown about by the winds and only partially, and inadequately under the control of the occupant.

If confronted by this attitude in a spectator, how might you respond? You might say that once upon a time, in the very early days of the sport, it was true that gliders were dangerous, and pilots behaved in an unsafe manner. You might point out that in recent years, however, the quality of the equipment, the quality of training, and the level of maturity of the pilots have all improved immeasurably. You might point to the fine aerodynamic qualities of today's hang gliders, the rigorous certification programs in place for gliders, instructors, and pilots, and you might give examples of the respectable occupations of many hang glider pilots; doctors, lawyers, computer programmers. You might make the claim that hang gliding today is one of the safer forms of aviation, and is no more risky than many other action oriented sports.

Later on, you might laugh about the ignorant attitude of the "woofo." Or, you might wonder, "Why is it, after all these years, that the public still doesn't understand? Why can't we educate them about what hang gliding is really like, and how safe and reasonable it really is?"

So now let me ask you another question. What if they're right? What if they're right and we're wrong? And what if I can prove it to you?

Let's take a look. First of all, you have to admit that year after year we continue to kill ourselves at a pretty depressing rate. Anybody that's been around this sport for very long has probably lost at least one friend or acquaintance to a fatal hang gliding accident. Most of us who have been around for more than twenty years have lost more than we care to think about. It's true that we have seemingly made some improvement in the overall numbers in the last twenty-five years; between 1974 and 1979 we averaged 31 fatalities a year. Since 1982 we've averaged about ten per year. In the last six or eight years, we may have dropped that to seven per year. On the other hand, what has happened to the denominator in that equation? In 1978, there were sixteen U.S. manufacturers viable enough to send teams to the manufacturer's competition in Telluride. Today we don't even have a manufacturer's competition. My guess is that the fatality rate hasn't changed much, and almost certainly hasn't improved in the last ten years. I'd guess it's about one per thousand per year, which is what I guessed it was ten years ago.

So the question is why? The equipment gets better and more high tech every year, we know more about teaching than ever, we've got parachutes, rockets to deploy them, full face kevlar helmets, wheels, FM radios for emergency rescue. We're all about twenty years older, and commensurately wiser and more conservative. How come we're not safer?

I've been asking myself variations on this question for as long as I can remember. Three years ago I had an accident, and in thinking about that accident I thought that maybe I had stumbled onto some little insight into the answer. I'll share it with you.

Here's the story. (If you don't like reading "there I was" stories, or other people's confessional accident reports, skip this part. I won't be offended.) We were out doing some production test flying at Marshall Peak in San Bernardino. For those of you who haven't flown there, Marshall is a rounded knob in the middle of a 2200' tall ridge in the foothills along the northern border of the east end of the Los Angeles basin. It's a very reliable flying site; probably flyable 300 days a year and soarable on most of them. It was July, in the middle of the day, but the conditions were not particularly strong. We were landing on top, which we do whenever conditions are not too rowdy, because it vastly enhances efficiency. I was flying a Spectrum 165, and setting up my approach. I've logged about 100 top landings a year at Marshall for each of the last fifteen years. Even so, I know for a fact that at the time, I was not complacent. I know because I have a clear memory of what I was thinking as I set up my approach. In two weeks, I was due to leave on a three week family vacation abroad, and I was thinking, "You damn well better not get yourself hurt before your trip or your wife is going to kill you." At the same time, I wasn't anxious. I was flying a Spectrum, the conditions were only moderate. I'd made lots of successful landings on more difficult gliders in more challenging conditions. I hadn't had an unsuccessful landing attempt in longer than I could remember. I was relaxed, yet focused. My intent was simply to fly a perfect approach. Such intent is always a good idea when top landing at Marshall; the landing is challenging, and a sloppy approach can quickly get you into trouble. I knew exactly where I wanted to be at every point in the approach, position, heading, altitude and airspeed. I executed the approach exactly as I wanted to.

You top land at Marshall half crosswind, gliding up the back side of the hill. You come in hot, because the gradient can be extreme, and there's often some degree of turbulence. The time interval from 40 mph dive, through round out, to flare is very short. I was halfway through this interval, past the point where one is normally rocked by whatever turbulence is present, when both my left wing and the nose dropped suddenly and severely. I went immediately to full opposite roll control, and managed to get the wings and nose just level when the basetube hit. Having turned 90 degrees, I was traveling mostly downwind, at a groundspeed of probably 30 mph. The right downtube collapsed immediately, and the right side of my face and body hit the ground hard.

Very briefly, I thought I might die. For a slightly longer time, I thought about paralysis. Within a minute, I knew I was mostly ok. In the end, I got away with a slightly sprained ankle, and a moderate case of whiplash. I had three weeks to think about the accident while I bounced around the rutted dirt roads of East Africa trying in vain to keep my head balanced directly over my spine to moderate the pain.

Perception of What's "Safe"

The thing was, I never considered at the time of the landing that I was anywhere near "pushing the envelope." I've done dozens of landings at Marshall where I did feel that way. All during the previous two summers I had been top landing RamAirs at Marshall in the middle of the day in much stronger conditions. I had never had a crash. Thinking about it, I couldn't even remember the last time I had broken a downtube. I tried in vain to think of a clue that I had missed that this was going to be a dangerous landing. Finally, I was left with only one conclusion. What happened to me was nothing more or less than exactly what the potential result was, during any of the times I had landed under similar, or more challenging circumstances. That was a dangerous landing because of what could have (and did) happen. The corollary, of course, is that all the other landings I had done, on more challenging gliders, in more challenging conditions, were also dangerous. (In fact, they were more dangerous.) And they were so in spite of the fact that no bad results ensued in any of those landings.

And suddenly I felt like I was beginning to understand something that I hadn't previously understood.

You see, here's how I think it works. The overriding determinant of pilot safety in hang gliding is the quality of pilot decision making. Skill level, experience, quality of equipment; all those things are not determinants. What those things do is determine one's upper limits. More skill gives you a higher limit, as does more experience or better equipment. But safety is not a function of how high your limits are, but rather of how well you stay within those limits. And that, is determined by one thing; the quality of the decisions you make. And how good do those decisions have to be? Simply put, they have to be just about perfect. Consider the type of decisions you have to make when you fly. Do I fly today? Do I start my launch run at this time, in this cycle? Do I have room to turn back at the hill in this thermal? Can I continue to follow this thermal back as the wind increases and still make it back over the ridge? Each time you face such a decision, there is a level of uncertainty about how the conditions will unfold. If you make the "go" decision when you're 99% sure you can make it, you'll be wrong on average once every 100 decisions. At 99.9%, you'll still be wrong once every thousand decisions. You probably make fifty important decisions for every hour of airtime, so a thousand decisions comes every twenty hours, or about once or twice a year for the average pilot.

So, to be safe, you have to operate at a more than 99.9% certainty. But in reality, 99.9% is virtually impossible to distinguish from 100%, so really, for all intents and purposes, you have to be 100% sure to be safe.

And now I think we can begin to understand the problem. Let's first consider this; we all have a strong incentive to make the "go" decision. The "go" decision means I launch now, relieve my impatience to get into the air and avoid the annoyance of the pilots waiting behind me, instead of waiting for the next cycle because the wind is a little cross and the glider doesn't feel quite balanced. It means I turn back in this thermal, and climb out above launch and stay up, instead of taking the conservative choice and risking sinking below the top and maybe losing it all the way to the LZ. It means I choose to fly today, even though conditions are beyond by previous experience, rather than face listening to the "there I was" stories of my friends in the LZ at the end of the day, knowing that I could have flown but didn't, and knowing that they did and were rewarded with enjoyable soaring flights.

So the incentive is there to choose "go." The only thing we have to counter this incentive is a healthy respect for the possible dangers of failure, and our ability to evaluate our prospects for success. And here's where we get caught by a mathematical trap. Let's say I'm making my decisions at the 99% level, and so are all my friends. Out of every 100 decisions, 99 do not result in any negative consequence. Even if they're bad decisions, nothing bad happens. Since nothing bad happens, I think they're good decisions. And this applies not just to my decisions, but to my friends' decisions as well, which I observe. They must be good decisions, they worked out didn't they? The next natural consequence of this is that I lower my decision threshold a little. Now I'm making decisions at the 98% level, and still, they're working out. The longer this goes on, the more I'm being reinforced for making bad decisions, and the more likely I am to make them.

Eventually, the statistics catch up with me, and my descending threshold collides with the increasing number of opportunities I've created through bad decisions. Something goes wrong; I blow a launch, or a landing, or get blown over the back, or hit the hill on the downwind side of a thermal. If I'm lucky it's a $50 downtube or a $200 leading edge. If I'm unlucky, I'm dead.

If we can agree at this point that making 100% decisions is the only safe way to fly, it then becomes interesting to consider, as an aside, what the sport of hang gliding would look like if we all operated this way. Pilots would choose to fly in milder, safer weather conditions. They would operate much more comfortably within their skill and experience limitations. They would choose to fly more docile, more stable, easier to fly gliders. Landings would be gentle, and under control. Hang glider manufacturers would sell two downtubes and one keel for every glider they build (the ones that come on the glider) instead of three or four replacement sets like they do now. There would be far, far fewer accidents. (As it is now, there are about 200 per year reported to USHGA.) There wouldn't be any fatalities, except maybe for one every couple of years if a pilot happened to die of a heart attack while flying (it's happened once so far that I can remember).

Conclusion: Define "Safe" Much More Strictly

Since this isn't anything like what the sport of hang gliding does look like, we might conclude that hang gliding, as it is presently practiced, is an unreasonably unsafe activity practiced by people who lack a proper and reasonable regard for their personal safety. In other words, we might conclude that the "uninformed public" has been right about hang gliding all along.

If you don't like that conclusion, I'm pretty sure you're not going to like any of the coming ones either. But let's first ask this question, if we wanted to address this problem of bad decisions being reinforced because they look like good decisions, how would we do it? The answer is, we need to become more critically analytical of all of our flying decisions, both before and after the fact. We need to find a way to identify those bad decisions that didn't result in any bad result. Let's take an example. You're thermalling at your local site on a somewhat windy day. The thermals weaken with altitude, and the wind grows stronger. You need to make sure you can always glide back to the front of the ridge after drifting back with a thermal. You make a decision ahead of time, that you will always get back to the ridge above some minimum altitude above the ridge top; say 800 feet. You monitor your drift, and the glide angle back to the ridge, and leave the thermal when you think you need to in order to make your goal. If you come back in at 1000' AGL, you made a good decision. If you come back in a 400, you made a bad decision. The bad decision didn't cost you, because you built in a good margin, but it's important that you recognize it as a bad decision. Without having gone through both the before and after analyses of the decision, (setting the 800 foot limit, observing the 400 foot result), you would never be aware of the existence of a bad decision, or the need to improve your decision making process.

This was one of the main ideas behind the safe pilot award. The idea wasn't to say that if you never crashed hard enough to need a doctor, you were a safe pilot. The idea was to get pilots thinking about the quality of their decisions. Not just, "Did I get hurt on that flight?", but "Could I have gotten hurt?" During the first couple of years of the safe pilot award program, I got a few calls and letters from pilots who would tell me about an incident they'd had, and ask for my opinion as to whether it should be cause for them to re-start their count of consecutive safe flights. I would give them my opinion, but always point out that in the end it didn't matter, what was important was that they were actively thinking about how dangerous the incident had really been; i.e. what was the actual quality of their decision making.

Looking back on it now, I would say that the criteria for a "safe flight" - (any flight which didn't involve an injury indicating the need for treatment by a licensed medical professional) - was too lenient. Today I would say it shouldn't count as a safe flight if, for example, you broke a downtube. A few years ago (or maybe it was ten or twelve, when you get to be my age, it's hard to tell), we had a short-lived controversy over "dangerous bars." The idea was that manufacturers were making dangerous control bars, because when smaller pilots with smaller bones crashed, their bones broke before the downtubes did. (Today, most of the complaints I hear are from the other side, pilots who would rather have stronger downtubes even if their bones break before the downtubes, because they're tired of buying $65 downtubes, which they're doing with some regularity.) I have a different suggestion for both of these problems. Why don't we just stop crashing?

Of course I know why. The first reason is, we don't even recognize it as "crashing." I continually hear from pilots who say they broke a downtube "on landing." (I even hear from pilots who tell me - with a straight face, I swear - that they broke a keel, or a leading edge "on landing.") The second reason is, we don't think it's possible to fly without breaking downtubes from time to time. I mean after all, sometimes you're coming in to land and the wind switches, or that thermal breaks off, or you're trying to squeak it into that small field, and you just can't help flaring with a wing down, sticking the leading edge, ground looping, slamming the nose (WHAAAAACK!) and breaking a downtube.

We regularly observe our fellow pilots breaking downtubes, which also reinforces our perception that this is "normal." I'm going to go out on a limb here. I'm going to say that if you've broken more than one downtube in the last five years of flying, you're doing something seriously and fundamentally wrong. Either you're flying too hot a glider for your skills, or you're flying in too challenging conditions, or at too difficult a flying site.

Now let's ask one more thing. If hang glider pilots stopped dying, and if hang glider landing areas stopped resounding with the sound of WHAAAAAACK every second or third landing, (in other words, if hang gliding started looking like fun, instead of looking both terrifying and deadly), do you think maybe the public's perception of the sport might change? (Not do you think more of them would want to do it, in truth, no they probably still wouldn't.) But do you think maybe they'd stop thinking we were crazy for doing it?

Maybe they would.

And maybe they'd be right.

You might point to the fine aerodynamic qualities of today's hang gliders, the rigorous certification programs in place for gliders...

...instructors, and pilots...

What if they're right? What if they're right and we're wrong?

Anybody that's been around this sport for very long has probably lost at least one friend or acquaintance to a fatal hang gliding accident.

The equipment gets better and more high tech every year, we know more about teaching than ever, we've got parachutes, rockets to deploy them, full face kevlar helmets, wheels, FM radios for emergency rescue. We're all about twenty years older, and commensurately wiser and more conservative.

I went immediately to full opposite roll control, and managed to get the wings and nose just level when the basetube hit. Having turned 90 degrees, I was traveling mostly downwind, at a groundspeed of probably 30 mph. The right downtube collapsed immediately, and the right side of my face and body hit the ground hard.

...we've got parachutes, rockets to deploy them, full face kevlar helmets, WHEELS...

Consider the type of decisions you have to make when you fly. Do I fly today? Do I start my launch run at this time, in this cycle? Do I have room to turn back at the hill in this thermal? Can I continue to follow this thermal back as the wind increases and still make it back over the ridge?

Jim Rooney - 2007/08/01

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

It's more of this crappy argument that being on tow is somehow safer than being off tow.

Jim Rooney - 2007/07/19 14:50:52 UTC

And yes, get behind me with a "strong link" and I will not tow you.

So, to be safe, you have to operate at a more than 99.9% certainty.

Adam Parer - 2009/11/25

Due to the rough conditions weak links were breaking just about every other tow and the two tugs worked hard to eventually get everyone off the ground successfully.

There would be far, far fewer accidents. (As it is now, there are about 200 per year reported to USHGA.)

Conclusion: Define "Safe" Much More Strictly

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

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

Bart Weghorst - 2011/02/25 19:06:26 UTC

But I've had it once where the pin had bent inside the barrel from excessive tow force.

In other words, we might conclude that the "uninformed public" has been right about hang gliding all along.

If you don't like that conclusion, I'm pretty sure you're not going to like any of the coming ones either.

We need to find a way to identify those bad decisions that didn't result in any bad result.

Steve Morris - 2010/03/31 23:58:54 UTC

In 2009 there were several serious hang gliding accidents involving pilots on the HG forum (or who had close friends on the forum that reported that these accidents had occurred). In each case there was an immediate outcry from forum members not to discuss these accidents, usually referring to the feelings of the pilots' families as a reason to not do so. In each case it was claimed that the facts would eventually come out and a detailed report would be presented and waiting for this to happen would result in a better informed pilot population and reduce the amount of possibly harmful speculation.

In each of these cases I have never seen a final detailed accident report presented in this forum. So far as I can tell, the accident reporting system that has been assumed to exist here doesn't exist at all, the only reports I've seen are those published in the USHPA magazine. They are so stripped down, devoid of contextual information and important facts that in many cases I have not been able to match the magazine accident report with those mentioned in this forum.

The end result has been that effective accident reporting is no longer taking place in the USHPA magazine or in this forum. Am I the only one who feels this way?

Lauren Tjaden - 2008/03/23 22:20:15 UTC

When Jim got me locked out to the right, I couldn't keep the pitch of the glider with one hand for more than a second (the pressure was a zillion pounds, more or less), but the F'ing release slid around when I tried to hit it. The barrel release wouldn't work because we had too much pressure on it.

Anyhow, the tandem can indeed perform big wingovers, as I demonstrated when I finally got separated from the tug.

Let's take an example. You're thermalling at your local site on a somewhat windy day.

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.

Today I would say it shouldn't count as a safe flight if, for example, you broke a downtube.

Why don't we just stop crashing?

Doug Hildreth - 1990/03

We all know that our new gliders are more difficult to land. We have been willing to accept this with the rationalization that it is the unavoidable consequence of higher performance. But I see my job as a responsibility to challenge acceptance and rationalization. From my perspective, what I see in the landing zone and what I see in the statistics column is not acceptable. Crashes on landing are causing too many bent downtubes, too many minor injuries and too many serious or fatally injured pilots.

So what are we going to do? One reply is, "We should teach all those bozos how to land properly." Well, we've been trying that approach for the past few years and it has NOT worked!

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

Nothing creates carnage like declaring a spot landing contest.

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."

I continually hear from pilots who say they broke a downtube "on landing."

I mean after all, sometimes you're coming in to land and the wind switches...

...or that thermal breaks off...

...or you're trying to squeak it into that small field...

...and you just can't help flaring with a wing down, sticking the leading edge, ground looping, slamming the nose (WHAAAAACK!) and breaking a downtube.

We regularly observe our fellow pilots breaking downtubes, which also reinforces our perception that this is "normal." I'm going to go out on a limb here. I'm going to say that if you've broken more than one downtube in the last five years of flying, you're doing something seriously and fundamentally wrong. Either you're flying too hot a glider for your skills, or you're flying in too challenging conditions, or at too difficult a flying site.

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."

Christian Thoreson - 2004/10

Thus wheel landings, the safest and easiest way to consistently land a hang glider...

Now let's ask one more thing. If hang glider pilots stopped dying, and if hang glider landing areas stopped resounding with the sound of WHAAAAAACK every second or third landing, (in other words, if hang gliding started looking like fun, instead of looking both terrifying and deadly), do you think maybe the public's perception of the sport might change?

If other aircraft were as difficult to land as hang gliders no one would fly them.

Launching and Flying the T2

Before launching, hook in to the glider and do a careful hang check. We recommend that you hang as close to the basetube as possible - this will give you lighter control pressures and better control in both roll and pitch.

1. We recommend that you launch with the VG set between full loose and 1/3 on. Having the VG set at 1/4 when launching will enhance the glider's lifting capability and increase the trim speed slightly, enhancing control of the glider during departure.

If you launch with the VG set partly on, you must make sure that there is no way that the excess VG rope can catch on anything on the ground or that you can step on it. One way to do this is to fold the rope into a flat loop about eight inches long, and tuck it around the outside of the right downtube above the bottom front, rear, and side wires.

If the wind is more than 10 m.p.h. or gusty you should have an assistant on your nose wires on launch, and, if necessary, an assistant on one or both side wires. Make sure all signals are clearly understood. The angle at which you hold the glider should depend on the wind speed and slope of the terrain at launch; you want to achieve a slight positive angle of attack at the start of your run.

2. Run aggressively on launch and ease the bar out for lift off.

A minimum USHGA Advanced (IV) level of pilot proficiency is required to fly the T2 safely.

The United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association, Inc.

Standard Operating Procedure
12. Rating System
02. Pilot Proficiency System
02. Rating Requirements
03. Witnessed Tasks for Launch Skill Requirement - Foot Launch
07. Advanced Hang Gliding Rating (H-4)
-B. Required Witnessed Tasks
02. Demonstrated Skills and Knowledge

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

Rob Kells - 2005/12

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

My partners (Steve Pearson and Mike Meier) and I have over 25,000 hang glider flights between us and have managed (so far) to have hooked in every time. I also spoke with test pilots Ken Howells and Peter Swanson about their methods (another 5000 flights). Not one of us regularly uses either of the two most popular methods outlined above. Each of us agrees that it is not a particular method, but rather the fear of launching unhooked that makes us diligent to be sure we are hooked in every time before starting the launch run.

John Moody - 2004/12/16 23:07:36 UTC
Conroe, Texas

What is not normal is to see a factory-made glider that has a built in nose attachment or keel attachment or even the keel release built-in, faired and clean - like a VG system is.

So why does Mr. Reynoldson have to ask where to attach his tow line? ATOS has to know that their gliders are being towed every day. Why does each pilot have to figure it out, one at a time. Why don't the manufacturers sell a TOWING version of their gliders and avoid someone getting it wrong?

Bill Daniels - 2006/09/18 14:30

I would like to add, however, that at least my reading of accident reports suggest that a fatal glider accident is more likely when the towline fails prematurely. For that reason, I like to stay near the stronger end of the FAR 80 to 200 percent range.

Actually, reading the Pilot's Operating Handbook for several German gliders, I note the weak link for aerotow is specified as an exact figure. For example, the weak link for both aero tow and winch for my Nimbus 2C is specified as 600 KG (1323 Lbs) or a blue Tost weak link. The tolerance is plus or minus 10 percent. The US Airworthiness Certificate specifies that the Nimbus 2C is to be flown as specified in the POH. Considering the possible flying weights, this ranges between 95 and 160 percent which is a narrower range than specified in the FARs.

Makes me wonder if we should be using Tost weak links instead of old bits of rope.

John Moody - 2010/02/03 22:09 UTC

Tad pointed out how the meet organizers concluded the weaklink was the problem and immediately made everyone use lighter weaklinks. They also banned the release mechanism Strid was using, shortened the tow ropes and went to a more elastic tow rope. I remember how Davis Straub was there and how he jumped on the too-strong weaklink bandwagon in the Oz Report. In other words, the problem was the pilot's inability to get off line, which was blamed on the weaklink, not the release and then they found three other things to make the towing more dangerous, all based on the wrong conclusions.

The weaklink has only one purpose: protect the glider. It is not designed to protect the pilot. Even Mike Meier argued it is usually better to stay on the rope if you can.

All in all, the Rope is still my friend, I am going to continue to use a weaklink that won't fail ME, and I am going to locate Mr. Eareckson and learn more about his aerotow and platform tow releases.

He mentioned how easy it was to land a sailplane (with spoilers for glide-path control and WHEELS)...

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).