Kite Strings

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=33322
Broken side wire . . .

Gordon Rigg - 2015/08/28 11:06:45 UTC
UK

I think...

No.

...the main thing here is to...

...totally fucking ignore Jonathan's post just above and...

...check the wires are not kinked at the thimbles before every flight...

No shit. Did you come up with that all by yourself?

...then to keep an honest tally of hours flown and replace the wires accordingly.

Yeah, that's just so much easier and reliable than following what's in your owner's manual and doing the stomp tests once per setup.

Every 100 hours would be reasonable.

Sure. Moyes pulled fifty hours out of its ass you should be able to pull twice that out of yours.

We had a Brit fatality a while back.

Pity it wasn't yours.

He flew 100km to goal at our comp in Laragne and as he pulled up from a dive over the goal line the side wire broke.

Cool, glad he did the load test and found the problem. Also that his other wire was OK.

Apart from the first fractional minute of the flight this was probably the only point all day when he was too low to deploy his chute.

- FUCK! What are the odds!

- And I always load test mine on the ground in the setup area where it's REALLY too low for my chute to do any good. Matter o' fact I'm virtually never even in my harness whenever I pop a wire.

We found the side wire severely kinked at the cross tube junction inside the sail.

Well it was just severely kinked, not broken... So what was the problem?

It had definitely been like that for the whole flight, and perhaps many flights.

Ya think he severely kinked it doing those stupid stomp tests?

He was low but his harness had the chute behind his thighs and that did not help. his chute was still in the harness.

Well, most of these non chest mounted chutes are just for show anyway. Kinda like easily reachable releases.

So how many hours and months did this wire have on it? At what point should he have replaced it? Should we go with every flight just to make extra sure?

I'm glad that idea of chute placement is not used on any current production harnesses.

Nah, now you can get to them OK. Just can't pull them out cause the internal support framing bends and closes off the deployment port.

We also had a pilot break the side wire in an attempted loop...

Good. Nice to see all the successes you assholes are having with your in-flight load tests.

...who survived the deployment.

Shit. And here I was hoping this would be another gene pool purification incident.

He still maintains that the wires were quite new, but along with many witnesses I believe they were quite old.

- Sixty hours or seven months - whichever came first.
- Well far be it for me to question the belief system of you and your asshole buddies.

Hence my recommendation to keep a realistic log of hours flown on wires.

Yes. Two failures of kinked wires. Thus your recommendation to keep a realistic log of hours flown on wires. Do you have any fucking clue how moronic a statement that is?

This wire didn't seem to break near the nicopress but a foot or two away from it. That is unusual.

- Well, the important thing is that it broke under load and when the former pilot was high enough to deploy.

- What the fuck you mean it didn't SEEM to break near the nico but A foot or TWO away? You can't tell where the goddam thing actually blew but we're supposed to be going with your BELIEF that it was quite old and that the pilot was lying?

- What was the pilot's motivation for lying supposed to have been? Flying with a good old wire would've been more asinine than a kinked new one?

- How old does a wire hafta be before it can be successfully kinked? A hundred hours or one year - whichever comes first?

When I first started in hang gliding in 1980 I'd have never believed that it was a sport that could be pursued by people this fucking stupid - let alone that people this fucking stupid would be tolerated in it.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=33322
Broken side wire . . .

Brian Scharp - 2015/08/28 14:21:40 UTC

A good demonstration and great photos Jonathan. I see you also managed to capture an ultimate sinner walking around looking good whilst framing him in your totally righteous Aussie Setup.

If you go to 1:20 here:

http://vimeo.com/124963665


you can see Ultimate Sinner Jan concluding his good looking walk-around and connecting himself and the harness he'd been wearing to his glider via his carabiner. Do we have any concern that he's gonna launch unhooked?

How 'bout THIS:

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

Mike Bomstad - 2009/08/26 04:21:15 UTC

The harness is part of the aircraft... end of story.
(Just because it's easy to remove, does not mean it should be. Dont choose the path of least resistance)

Attach it to the wing, completing the aircraft.... then preflight the completed aircraft.
Buckle yourself into the cockpit and then your ready.

guy?

11-A12819
http://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8339/28924980016_2ba1d20ef7_o.png


http://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8253/28924975726_0d24a615c2_o.png
13-A14319

Should Jonathan be less concerned about the possibility of running off the mountain with his carabiner dangling five minutes from now than...



...Good Looking Guy should be three minutes from now? Is there one of these guys we don't need to be worrying about as much in the critical seconds?

Hopefully Jonathan's doing the stomp test because he's assuming one of his wires will break - regardless of how new they are and carefully he's handled, cared for, inspected them. Hopefully Jonathan will be doing a hook-in check within two seconds of commitment because he'll be scared shitless he's about to launch unhooked regardless of what he always does and remembers just doing during his setup and preflight procedures.

NMERider - 2015/08/28 15:39:02 UTC

May I call you Scharp-Eye Bri from now on?

For most people in most environments with most body/harness/glider combos connecting the harness to the glider before entering it is an easier/better way to assemble, preflight, and prep but it's a total proven moronic way to try to address the unhooked launch issue.

Hey Jonathan... Betchya Good Looking Guy had a reason for being in his harness and away from his glider and that the reason wasn't to look good. And I'm guessing you know who he is and will see him again shortly to be able to ask him the reason. (Mine would probably be, "To check out the ribbons.")

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=43820
Break Down Care

Bille Floyd - 2015/08/28 19:10:18 UTC

I borrowed a glider from a guy in 1985'ish ; he had just landed , so i (assumed) the glider had bin checked thoroughly . I ((Assumed)) incorrectly ; and fell 450-ft into the side of a cliff.

And this is what happens , when a side-wire breaks ; and you fly while your reserve is being repacked . But even with a reserve ; i don't wanna ever , do that again !!

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/358/18796960282_f659ffd44e_o.jpg

And on 2007/10/18 at Jean Lake you skipped yet another hook-in check and turned both of your lower legs to unsalvageable masses of bone splinters and hamburger but you're never gonna lift a finger to help us with the stomp test and hook-in check messages.

I typically go check launch - suited up - just before getting the glider to go. When you're looking that good it's hard to pass up a camera though. I've never actually given the Aussie Method a chance. His harness was getting all dirty.

Hey Jonathan... Betchya Good Looking Guy had a reason for being in his harness and away from his glider and that the reason wasn't to look good. And I'm guessing you know who he is and will see him again shortly to be able to ask him the reason.

He looks like he's waiting. I'll guess he's there to offer his old friend Jon assistance.

I typically go check launch - suited up - just before getting the glider to go.

Good.

When you're looking that good it's hard to pass up a camera though.

I'm afraid no harness will compensate for me. One of several reasons I try to get up to and beyond cloudbase as quickly as possible. Full face helmet also helps.

I've never actually given the Aussie Method a chance.

Good. Doesn't deserve one.

His harness was getting all dirty.

Tends not to be an issue in the East.

The Aussie Method, ya know, isn't just connecting your harness to your glider before wriggling into it. It's, at a minimum, ALWAYS connecting your harness to your glider before wriggling into it and NEVER disconnecting, at least on launch but preferably also in the LZ and everywhere else, before wriggling out of it.

Grizzly charge? Tough shit. Don't break protocol.

That way you "KNOW" that if you're on a ramp in a harness there's no possibility whatsoever that you're not properly connected to a glider. Don't need to feel anything on your shoulders or in your hands or look up to see a wing or down to see a shadow. Just yell "Clear!" and give it a good hard run.

The Aussie Method, ya know, isn't just connecting your harness to your glider before wriggling into it. It's, at a minimum, ALWAYS connecting your harness to your glider before wriggling into it and NEVER disconnecting, at least on launch but preferably also in the LZ and everywhere else, before wriggling out of it.

That's what I've read. It adds some risk, all for a false sense of security.

Grizzly charge? Tough shit. Don't break protocol.

Not to mention Dust Devils, visible or not.
No thanks.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=33196
Another fatality

NMERider - 2015/09/10 00:36:06 UTC

Maintenance failure not unlike the Funston fatality when you get right down to the essence of it. Each and every pilot is responsible for the proper care, maintenance and pre-flight inspection of his or her equipment. There have been many incidents over the years of maintenance failures. One of the major airline disasters was nothing more than a maintenance failure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191
American Airlines Flight 191

Funston / Rafi Lavin was NOT a MAINTENANCE issue. There is no cycle for addressing a defectively swaged - as appears to be the case in this incident - or damaged wire. It's a PREFLIGHT issue. And in the case of a defective swage the manufacturer - from whom we very conspicuously haven't heard - shouldn't be issued a free pass.

If a wire's defective or damaged it can fail and kill somebody the first time out of the bag. If it's not it can be safely flown until the end of time.

Hang gliding culture ELECTS to omit the stomp test as part of the preflight procedures just as it ELECTS to omit the hook-in check as a component of launch sequence. So we should expect to get fatal results every now and then and not worry about them the slightest bit more after they happen than we were doing before. People enjoy playing Russian roulette they're gonna win an average of five out of six times. Any further lessons to be learned?

Tad Eareckson wrote:

2015/08/28 09:06:37 UTC - 3 thumbs up - Jan

Do another film for us. A popped wire can kill us just as dead as a dangling carabiner.

Another well done video. Thanks Jan.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?p=376017#376017

http://vimeo.com/138095129


PS: I may be a little more aggressive on the test, or maybe it's just that I'm old and weak and that's how it looks.

Damn. I'd missed that one. Thanks zillions again, Jan. Hopefully it'll induce a few more people to get their shit together. And if it doesn't, it's tons of fun to be able to say, "Toldyaso, motherfucker."

One problem...

It's a simple test by stepping on each bottom side wire and in so, load testing them with a force of 50 lbs for a double surface wing, and 75 lbs for a single surface wing

(from the Wills Wing manual)

Nope. It's 50 for toplesses (all of which are double surface) and 75 for kingposted (both double and single).

You'd think they'd bother to explain what these tests are doing, why they're using these numbers, what happens if you go high - but seventeen years ago Mike published "Why can't we get a handle on this Safety Thing" which solved all safety issues in hang gliding for any pilot who incorporated a reread it into his preflight procedure. So what the hell.

But I think I finally have my head wrapped around why they're specifying the two thirds push for toplesses...

When you're doing kingposted the only things you're bending that could give a rat's ass is the inboard leading edge section. (The lower sidewire also gets bend - huge radius - that it couldn't care less about.)

There's a loop consisting of the top/ground and bottom/flying sidewires and basetube all of whose elements are tensioned. The airframe components resisting the tension are under compression and consist of the kingpost, cross spars, and downtubes. And I doubt you're average Joe would be able to damage anything with a gun to his head.

When you're doing topless you have a rigid cross spars junction but lack the braced loop kingposted gives you. So you're bending your wing negative dihedral and stressing that junction. So maybe your average Joe COULD do some damage.

Also...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=33308
Funston Accident

Steve Morris - 2015/08/24 23:10:39 UTC

I don't know how long the glider flew or what the trajectory was after launch, but it was a topless glider so it didn't fold up even with the broken wire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBYH1LomlLc


The sidewires aren't doing all that much anyway - they're under a reduced load. You'll need to pull more Gs to blow a weak wire on a topless than you will the same wire on a kingposted so the two thirds test gives you the same worst case scenario safety margin - assuming Wills Wing has done the math properly.

I may be a little more aggressive on the test...

I would be. My rule was to push to the point I started getting slightly worried. I think anybody who does this is gonna have/develop an intuitive feel for what the wing should be able to comfortably take and push accordingly. And anybody who manages to break anything is gonna be real happy he did.

I don't do aerobatics

I think it's a good idea to every once in a while take the glider up way high in smooth air, pull some wangs, load things up to the limit of your comfort level. For a wimp like me that's probably around three Gs - about half certification strength. If something breaks I may die but I'm in pretty good shape for a parachute save and I'd rather find out about the problem in that situation than as a surprise in the course of getting blasted by something in low altitude turbulence.

If Rafi had even used that strategy he'd have likely walked away and, at worst, not ended up any more dead.

Tad Eareckson wrote:Nope. It's 50 for toplesses (all of which are double surface) and 75 for kingposted (both double and single).

You're absolutely right. I'd glossed over and missed that.