What happens when you try to launch unhooked when scooter towing? Not much. Apparently in this case the tow instructor didn't notice that the student was not hooked in, even though the instructor was using a turn around pulley and was sitting on the scooter next to the student.
...no big fuckin' deal so why bother teaching your Bill Pridays what a threat the problem is and and how to neutralize it.
The article here:
Vancouver Sun. Done it already.
Yep. Lawyer gone wild. But that was the incident that sent you into registered users only mode, wasn't it Davis?
Helen McKerral - 2014/04/29 22:57:11 UTC
Accident investigator's thoughts
Yeah Helen. Martin Henry has "thoughts". Just took him a couple months or so to reach the conclusion that she wasn't hooked in. Pity he wasn't available for the Warren Commission.
Posts 12, 22, 23. Then have everyone read all the useless crap from all the other authors to get a feel for the probability of anything good ever happening on any significant scale.
An Open Letter to the Tandem Hang Glider and Paraglider Pilot Community.
Yeah Mister Industry Standards Expert - this is a TANDEM issue so let's limit the discussion to the fine professional pilots with tandem ratings. Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney and Zack Standard-Aerotow-Weak-Link Marzec come to immediate mind.
April 28th, 2014 represents the second anniversary of the tragic tandem hang gliding death of Lenami Godinez-Avila. For those unfamiliar with this accident...
Oh good. Let's make sure we include tandem pilots unfamiliar with this "accident".
Lenami was the passenger on a tandem hang glider...
Wouldn't she hafta actually be CONNECTED to the glider to qualify as a passenger?
...where the pilot/instructor failed to properly connect Lenami's harness to the glider and shortly after takeoff she fell to her death.
Because she was IMproperly connected? I was under the impression that she wasn't connected at all.
Immediately after the accident, acting on behalf of the Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association of Canada, I began an accident investigation.
A crushed body in a harness near the base of the slope, a former tandem operator sitting in jail with the authorities patiently waiting for him to shit out the memory card from the wing camera. My oh my, what COULD the issue have been?
The investigation concluded in the summer of 2012.
My investigation concluded the instant it was confirmed that Jon landed alone with just one harness connected to the glider.
Recommendations were formulated over the fall and in late 2012, submitted to the HPAC via a senior instructors seminar in Vancouver B.C. Canada.
Great! Undoubtedly really good stuff that nobody's ever employed or thought of before.
Eventually the legal system slowly formulated it's response and on February 11th 2014 our flying community saw the legal conclusion to the story of this tragic event.
How CONVENIENT for your flying community.
The legal system found the pilot guilty of "criminal negligence causing death" and has sentenced the pilot to 5 months in jail (and a series of other court assigned penalties).
The accidental omission of a basic, accepted procedure...
"ACCEPTED" by WHOM?
George Whitehill - 1981/05
In many flying situations a hang check is performed and then is followed by a time interval prior to actual launch. In this time interval the pilot may unconsciously unhook to adjust or check something and then forget to hook in again. This has happened many times!
If, just before committing to a launch, a second check is done every time and this is made a habit, this tragic mistake could be eliminated. Habit is the key word here. This practice must be subconscious on the part of the pilot. As we know, there are many things on the pilot's mind before launch. Especially in a competition or if conditions are radical the flyer may be thinking about so many other things that something as simple as remembering to hook in is forgotten. Relying on memory won't work as well as a deeply ingrained subconscious habit.
In the new USHGA rating system, for each flight of each task "the pilot must demonstrate a method of establishing that he/she is hooked in, just prior to launch." The purpose here is obvious.
Doug Hildreth - 1990/03
The other significant increase is in failure to hook in. Typically there are about the same number of non-hook-ins in the questionnaire group, so that it is safe to say that there were at least ten failures to hook in this year. It has occurred in the tandem sector too, both pilot and passenger.
The instructional programs to assure hook-in within fifteen seconds of launch have apparently not caught up with the masses.
When Bob Gillisse got hurt I suggested that our local institution of the hang check is more the problem than the solution. I still believe that. It subverts the pilot's responsibility to perform a hook-in check. I often do not see pilots doing a hook-in check. Why should they? They just did a hang check and they are surrounded by friends who will make sure this box is checked.
DO A HOOK IN CHECK. You need a system that you do every time regardless of how many hang checks you have been subjected to that assures you are hooked in.
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.
Joe Greblo teaches a hook-in check the instant before launch. To him, a hang check is part of the preflight and has no value in confirming that you are hooked in at the moment of launch.
Sunday I performed a hang check at Pack, stepped onto the ramp, and proceeded to wait for a lull in which to launch. Due to this discussion I realized at this point how dangerous it was for me to assume I was hooked in. It's like assuming it's OK to lock your car because you remember putting your keys in your pocket a few minutes ago, only the consequences of being wrong are much worse than a call to AAA.
OK- how many times does he need confirm that he is hooked in? And when would be the best time to make that confirmation?
Brian McMahon - 2011/10/24 21:04:17 UTC
Once, just prior to launch.
Christian Williams - 2011/10/25 03:59:58 UTC
I agree with that statement.
What's more, I believe that all hooked-in checks prior to the last one before takeoff are a waste of time, not to say dangerous, because they build a sense of security which should not be built more than one instant before commitment to flight.
I don't ACCEPT it. I can name you tons of people who don't accept it. I can name you tons of people who didn't accept it way BEFORE Lenami got wasted - motherfucker.
...resulted in the death of Lenami Godinez-Avila...
Bullshit. Her death resulted from a bunch of you pigfuckers who designate yourselves the "flying community" accepting an insanely dangerous procedure to prevent unhooked launches that's been regularly failing miserably since the dawn of its idiot inception.
...a person with far too much life left to live. The Godinez-Avila family and friends have all suffered a great loss.
Hi Tad,
Thank you for your email.
I can honestly say, however, that I have not discussed safety or public policy with Lenami's family. We have been very focused on grieving our friend, and setting up a Memorial Legacy scholarship fund.
I appreciate the work you're doing to ensure future hang glider safety.
Thank you for your hard work,
Katherine
Name ONE of them who's lifted a finger to do anything to reduce the likelihood of this happening to someone else.
The pilot found responsible...
Found responsible by whom? I find every last one of you "flying community" assholes as responsible as Jon was at a MINIMUM.
...has undergone a permanent dramatic life altering event and will be his burden for life.
Tell me something he's done to help address the issue.
There is no resolution that can possibly appear "just" or "proper", sadly all the parties must live with what it has become.
I can think of a few - but nobody in your flying community would like them very much.
The purpose of this "open letter" is to challenge our Tandem pilot community to give fair consideration to my thoughts and comments regarding safety in our sport.
Fuck you.
The inspiration for this letter came from comments in the press from the Lenami's father. At the conclusion of the court case Miguel Godinez was asked for his thoughts on the sentencing, he replied "I think it was a very light sentence" and added he didn't think any father in the world would stand for it.
Right. Her death and all the previous ones weren't enough inspiration for you. You needed those comments from Lenami's father.
The obvious grief expressed by family and friends was balanced by the wish that whatever the outcome, they hoped that actions would be taken to prevent this kind of tragedy from ever being repeated.
Have you talked to Bob Kuczewski about his foolproof electronic gizmo? How 'bout Sam Kellner and his mirrors?
With respect to the family and friends of Lenami Godinez-Avila, I believe it is time to ask our tandem pilots community, what steps have you taken to improve safety in your sport?
Enough about what doesn't work though... what does?
Since we don't have a plug that only fits one way, we fall on lesser methods, but some are better than others...
In particular... Third Party Verification.
You won't save you, but your friends might.
Not always, but they're more reliable than you.
Why do you think that airline checklists (yes our lovely checklists) are check-verified by pilot AND copilot?
That's all I got for ya.
The other topics have been beat to death here.
If there was an answer, we'd all already be doing it.
...real, dude. If our friends don't happen to catch us we're fucked. They're WAY more reliable than we could ever hope to be. The other topics have been beaten to death on The Davis Show. If there was an answer, we'd all already be doing it. If this can happen to Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney what chance can anybody else ever have?
Reacting to this question should be respectful.
If they merited any respect I'd give it to them.
There is an attitude within our sport that such an obvious mistake would not likely ever be repeated.
But I'm one of Matt's 'defective products'. The first thing I learned to do in the field at Lookout was a hang check. I was told a story by my instructor about the then-recent death of a pilot who launched without being through his leg loops. The instructor called this pilot an 'idiot'. This is how I was taught to think from Day 1. As you said, it's a bitch to rewire a brain...
...planted on Day One by all you establishment pigfuckers and tenderly nurtured throughout everyone's flying careers.
The sad truth, there have been several similar incidents, we are no doubt, without some sort of acknowledgment, doomed to repeat these mistakes. Pilots (both Hang glider and Paraglider) are susceptible to the infamous "Human Error". . History has proven this statement.
No shit.
(The following material is the content of my recommendations to HPAC/ACVL. At this point in time the Canadian national association is looking at ways to adapt or implement but will require further development of a mechanism to do so.)
So you're saying that the HPAC could maybe have done a better job in providing Jon and Lenami the protection they needed from this one? Or are these proposals gonna all be stuff nobody's ever discussed or thought of before?
Recommendation for Implementation:
-Critical Prelaunch Checklist (CPC)
Oh good. A CHECKLIST. Who'da thunk?
- A CRITICAL checklist. So it's only gonna have CRITICAL life and death items on it - like backup loops, locked carabiners, buckled helmets.
- A PRELAUNCH checklist. So after you've checked off all the boxes in the staging area you're good to go - fuckin' GOLDEN.
Like many other types of aviation, there is a reliance on learned skills and procedures.
But unlike many other types of aviation none of these learned skills and procedures is based upon anything resembling rational thought processes.
It is common practice to back up those procedures with a printed "checklists".
The "checklist" is referenced during the flight preparation and is used to check or confirm steps taken. Obviously, the cockpit of a powered aircraft is suited to the review of lengthy comprehensive checklists. The same cannot be said for the "cockpit" of tandem hang glider. To accommodate the benefits and use of a printed check list I suggest the implementation of an adapted checklist format.
Checklist is one word. If you can't get that much right and do it consistently within the space of a single sentence within an article focusing on a checklist maybe you're not the best candidate for making recommendations to other people for getting flying right.
The Critical Prelaunch Checklist (CPC) is intended to cover "groups" of checks already preformed during the pre-flight preparations (the intent being, to refocus the "pilot in command" back to each of the listed events).
So name one item in one of your "groups" - other than failure to hook in - that's:
- ever been missed; and
- has ever mattered
in a tandem operation.
The CPC becomes a secondary or backup recognition of steps already preformed.
Thus increasing the likelihood that it will:
- be recognized as the tedious waste of time and effort that it is and left in the glove compartment where it belongs; or
- serve as yet another distraction from consideration of about the only REAL critical issue.
Using the CPC creates a break in the traditional continuous procedural recall of the pilot. It provides an opportunity to slow down and recheck the "mental list".
Yeah. He can read down to Item 23 - "Pilot and Passenger hang checks completed." - and mentally check that box instead of checking that the Pilot and Passenger are actually hooked in.
For tandem procedures, the CPC is also intended to change the traditional nature of a "passenger" to a participating member of the flight "crew".
Oh. You're going to adulterate this crap with something partially intelligent? How 'bout giving us a heads up if you ever do something like this again to mitigate the shock.
No longer should a passenger be viewed as a "payload" or a "paying customer". The use of a CPC for tandem flight is intended to be "interactive" with the passenger, to include the passenger as per the instructional aspect/purpose of the flight. The passenger is to participate in the process of reviewing the CPC.
Oh. A bucket lister should treated as an active participant in the operation but a Hang Four or Five hooked up behind a Dragonfly...
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.
...is dead weight burdening some dickhead with his finger on the trigger poised to fix whatever's going on back there by dumping us into a stall.
The CPC becomes an external visual queue (outside the mental checklist) that combined with the passengers interactive review, will create additional layers of backup over and above the pilots memory recall. At the same time the CPC does not represent an exceptional burden to the process.
Anything that increases the confidence of as many people as possible that things are good to go before the glider moves into launch position.
Implementing the CPC:
When the pilot has completed the normal preparations for flight, the CPC will be produced for review. A printed laminated card is the suggested format. The card could be stored on the pilots harness or gear or fastened to the aircraft in such a way that it is made available for review, while both pilot and passenger are hooked in.
Oops. DAMN this wind! Can't reach it. Just a sec here...
The following is the suggested content (subject to review):
Critical Prelaunch Checklist (CPC):
-Glider Pre-flight completed, aircraft ready for flight?
-Passenger/Pilot Harnesses connected, ready for flight?
Well DUH!
-Helmet Chin Strap, Harness Leg Loops, ready for flight?
-Passenger/Pilot ready for flight?
The pilot and passenger will review the CPC and will confirm "ready for flight".
Now let's stow this card and get in line for launch. Conditions are AWESOME!
Recommendations for HPAC/ACVL Committee Consideration
-"Hook-in" Visual Control Tag
A Visual Control Tag is a brightly colored strap that is mounted in plain view, clearly visible to the pilot while entering a hang glider control bar indicating an "un-hooked" status. (Often, this tag may include the warning "Hook In !". It is a visual alert to a process that needs to be performed. )
And if that tag ISN'T clearly visible to the pilot while entering a hang glider control bar that OBVIOUSLY indicates a "hooked" status.
Using a Visual Control Tag, the Pilot and Passenger will connect to the glider and the tag would be moved from the "plain view" and threaded through locked carabiners to signal/confirm a safe secure connection has been made.
Wanna see what:
- people WITH functional brains do to signal/confirm a safe secure connection has been made?:
(Note, examples of similar "visual control indicators" can be found in other forms of aviation.
Ya know what "visual control indicator" a lot of pilots in the conventional fixed wing form of aviation use to verify aileron function JUST PRIOR TO TAKEOFF? They turn the control yoke left and right and look to see that the ailerons are moving accordingly.
And whenever I wanna check to see if my suspension will take a strain when the distance between my harness CG and wing increases ya know what I do? I increase the distance between my harness CG and wing until I feel a strain. Asshole.
Light aircraft often use warning flags that are positioned on the aircraft in various locations (examples include control surfaces locks and airspeed probe covers).
And yet virtually no one - at any level of competence or intelligence does this for anything involved with the glider save for a ballistic parachute - which virtually no one uses nowadays. Go figure.
An alternate Visual Control Tag could require the carabiners on both pilot and passenger harness to have a clearly visible location (clipped to the front of the harness?) and flagged in such a way that clearly indicates that the carabiners have not been connected.
Yeah, Martin. If you have problems with people adhering to preflight procedures just add more of them. How could a strategy like that POSSIBLY fail.
-Ground Support Person
More cooks.
The HPAC should consider use of a ground support person for all tandems.
When Jon was on launch with his passenger's carabiner dangling there was a shitload of people who could and should have been functioning as ground support personnel for that flight. Every single one of those assholes assumed he'd done an idiot HPAC hang check behind them on not a single one of those assholes - which would've been all that it would've taken - bothered to check that both harnesses were connected to the glider in front of them.
One support person should be independent of any flight activity (while the tandem is in progress). The support person would assist the pilot/passenger in the operation of the tandem process. Duties would include the monitoring of the tandem safety checks...
Yeah. The "PILOT" can't handle his job so let's hire more assholes. Maybe hire another asshole to stand in the LZ with a radio to make sure he doesn't fly into the trees or powerlines.
...and provide emergency communication in the event of an accident.
How many gliders can you name that have slammed in this century where lack of a dedicated emergency communicator was an issue?
The ground support person need not be a permanent or specially trained employee. It would be recommended that they be familiar with the sport and capable of performing the tasks assigned. Students or Pilots could fulfill the ground support duties and be designated at the time of the flight.
I'd find that MOST reassuring. Then I wouldn't hafta worry so much about whether or not everyone was connected at the moment of launch 'cause I'd know my ground support person would say something if there were anything seriously wrong.
A ground support person should remain available for duty during the duration of the tandem and confirm a safe landing prior to being released from their duties.
What does he need to be looking for other than dangling carabiners? What actual problems are we having other than dangling carabiners? Do we need to dedicate untold tens of thousands of man-hours to make sure that nobody goes off unhooked in the critical five second window of the flight or is there some way we can get more bang for the buck with what we have now?
Tandem operators are encouraged to provide a complete disclosure of risk to the client. A clear and frank conversation with the tandem passenger and or student should be part of the flight preparations.
What? Tell them that there are ACTUAL *RISKS* involved in this sport? That there are passengers, students, rated pilots who've been injured, crippled, killed? Are you out of your fucking mind?
A discussion by committee should be encouraged to define suitable content based on similar industry standards. The passenger should be made aware of all potential risks and is expected to make an informed decision based on this "disclosure of risk".
Name some risks to tandem passengers worth mentioning.
- Virtually all tandem flights are wheel landed so THIS:
Most common HG injury... spiral fracture of the humerus.
landing crashes are virtually nonexistent.
- 2009/03/10 - New Zealand - Gerardo Bean and Andrew Scotland. Aerobatics with a bent downtube and UVed out parachute bridle. As far as relevance is concerned - big fuckin' deal.
- In towing we have crash by:
-- driver...
Bill Bryden - 1999/06
Rob Richardson, a dedicated instructor, died in an aerotowing accident at his flight park in Arizona. He was conducting an instructional tandem aerotow flight and was in the process of launching from a ground launch vehicle when the accident occurred.
Rob had started to launch once but a premature towline release terminated this effort after only a few meters into the launch roll-out. It is suspected the cart was rolled backwards a bit and the towline was reattached to begin the launch process again. 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 ft. 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. Rob's body likely cushioned much of the student's impact.
...making a good decision in the interest of the glider's safety
- In foot launch we've got:
-- crash on launch - which everybody knows about and usually isn't that serious
-- unhooked launch - which is deadly and which you refuse to fix
The HPAC should also make clear the purpose of the tandem process is to provide instruction to the client.
Yeah. Sure.
This instruction should include basic flight ground school. The client is not just a passenger but is a student involved in an educational process. This does not mean the instructor is to provide an extensive ground school but it is recommended that rudimentary aerodynamic principles, aircraft/equipment design and operation be discussed and included in the instruction.
Why we back up the component of the hang glider that would be in danger of failing only after the hang glider had been blown up six times over.
Proof of both "disclosure of risk" and rudimentary "flight education" should be provided to the HPAC during any certification process.
How much did Lenami need to be told and how much time would it have taken?
-Accident Reporting Standards:
The HPAC should re-evaluate any "Accident Reporting Standards" and make clear policies and procedures related to those standards. During the investigation, the pilot in question was associated with several incidents that brought to question his qualifications to be performing tandem instruction. The incidents were not properly documented and no official record existed (evidence evaluated suggested two failed foot launches with passengers on board and minor injuries associated with those incidents).
Funny those didn't make mainstream international news the way Lenami's did. Any thoughts on why not?
The HPAC will need to determine how to process and set criteria for "Accident records".
Why? Are we coming up with new ways to crash gliders that we didn't have over thirty years ago and/or is there anything to be learned from any recent stuff?
Accidents should be assessed for severity and should be evaluated by "peer" review.
Yeah. PEER review. Unhooked launches by idiot hook-in check skippers should only be reviewed by other idiot hook-in check skippers.
Action by the HPAC/ACVL (where necessary) should be clearly defined and included within any instructional endorsement.
It should be noted, the pilot involved in this accident did participate in a promotional discount offering. It was not be determined if this participation had any bearing on the accident in question.
See above.
As a general observation, I have noted the uses of group discount fees to promote our sport. It raises questions about value to both the customers and the sport. The expression "Quality over Quantity" comes to mind when looking at the benefits of typical discount program. It is unclear if large numbers of participants, acquiring steeply discounted lessons, being performed by instructors at or below operating costs, translates to any form of beneficial retention.
So ya think maybe Jon dropped Lenami 'cause she was flying on a thirty percent discount?
The appearance that discount programs create massive exposure and benefits to both instructors and HPAC/ACVL membership needs to be properly assessed. Specifically, the HPAC/ACVL should determine if these programs create any safety issues and if these programs should be encouraged or discouraged?
These are not LESSONS. They are RIDES. The people who take them don't come back and the people who sell them aren't benefitting the sport - just themselves. Tandem hang gliding can go fuck itself for all I care - especially tandem aerotowing.
(I would like to point out that the content of these recommendations inspired a re-assessment of my own personal pre-flight check list used in my towing operation.
What do you think of Quest's towing operation? I noticed your total and very conspicuous absence from the post Zack Marzec discussion last year.
The benefit of this review resulted in a "save" ... the story can be found on my blog post, dated July 5th 2013:
After my report, and after the comments from Lenami's friends and family I decided to add a few more thoughts for consideration.....
Risk:
Hang Gliding and Paragliding is dangerous. After 40 + years of hang gliding experience and more recently 6+ years of Paragliding experience I firmly believe in this statement. I don't like to sugar coat this opinion, you make a mistake in our sport and it can be fatal.
How 'bout we focus on the ones LIKELY to be fatal or serious?
So why on earth would I (or any other pilot)...
You think you're a pilot?
...wish to be exposed to this danger ?... This "danger" also known as "risk".
We engage in a sport that has risk and that is part of the attraction.
Less danger/risk less attraction to the sport. If we start doing hook-in checks and don't drop a Lenami a thousand feet every now and then we get bored and start looking into wingsuits.
Most pilots can easily answer this question by pointing out the personal reward. I don't feel there is much more of an explanation required here as almost every pilot that I have ever met can spend hours upon hours expanding on what exactly this "reward" can be.
Weak links break for all kinds of reasons.
Some obvious, some not.
The general consensus is the age old adage... "err on the side of caution".
The frustration of a weaklink break is just that, frustration.
And it can be very frustrating for sure. Especially on a good day, which they tend to be. It seems to be a Murphy favourite. You'll be in a long tug line on a stellar day just itching to fly. The stars are all lining up when *bam*, out of nowhere your trip to happy XC land goes up in a flash. Now you've got to hike it all the way back to the back of the line and wait as the "perfect" window drifts on by.
I get it.
It can be a pisser.
But the "other side"... the not cautions one... is not one of frustration, it's one of very real danger.
Better to be frustrated than in a hospital, or worse.
No exaggeration... this is the fire that the "other side" is made of. Best not to play with it.
I always enjoy standing in the launch line at Ridgely while all the Rooney Linkers get free relights in front of me while the soaring window evaporates. I enjoy risk as much as the next guy but not to the extent of having a one and a half G stronglink and the tug's weak link heavier than mine.
Here is something to consider, In our sports of Hang Gliding and Paragliding we have the ability, as individuals to understand, accept and manage our personal risk.
Unless we're going up behind some Rooney caliber douchebag on a piece of shit Dragonfly. Then we're just rolling dice every flight.
Over time, we learn to establish our own personal tolerances or acceptance of what risk is worth what reward.
The difference between a solo pilot and a tandem pilot becomes massive if you are willing to accept that you (as the pilot) must not only assess your own personal risk, you must assess and convey that risk to your passenger. In addition, your passenger must be briefed in such a way that this "risk" is fully understood. It is my opinion; the industry needs to do a much better job educating their clients as to the real risks associated with our sport.
Towing Aloft - 1998/01
Lockouts do not just magically happen to snatch a glider from the sky. They are generally progressive events originating from situations that can usually be terminated. The pilot and tow team must recognize these situations and the potential for acceleration into full lockout conditions so they can take appropriate corrective action prior to occurrence. To recognize the potential conditions for a lockout, we need to understand how they work.
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.
A pilot that fails to properly investigate the clients perspective of risk is doing the client a disservice. Proper and full discloser of risk is needed in our sport.
The industry refuses to disclose risk to its students and established flyers. But it's gonna make sure the bucket listers get the straight story.
Pilot Skill:
Are you the very best pilot that you can be? Do you seek out your peers for critique and evaluation?
How much SKILL is required to make sure that the number of people connected to a glider is equal to the number standing in the control frame on the ramp?
Many years back I performed tandem hang gliding flights. I very quickly determined that flying tandem was not for me.
Good. I don't think it's for ANYBODY.
I believe that being a tandem pilot requires exceptional specialized skills.
Rooney and Marzec caliber. The best of the best.
Taking an unprepared "newbee" into the sky is one of the most unpredictable experiences a pilot can perform.
I would hope all tandem pilots would be honest with their own personal assessment and prepared to make judgment calls based on the limitations of tandem flight.
What the fuck does this have to do with Lenami?
I also believe that not only the pilot needs to be honest about a skill assessment; the passenger also requires a basic level of skill to participate.
Sometimes a lot of upper body strength.
I'm not saying the passenger needs flying skills, more like, the passengers need to be trained as to understand the basics of the task at hand. They need to be fit enough to accomplish the task. They need to be able to comprehend and understand instruction.
Tandem pilots need to be able to communicate with their passengers and have this communication understood. This may all seem very basic but I have witnessed tandem flights where, because of language barriers, the pilot and passenger could not communicate. I have witness flights were...
What were you just saying about communication and language?
...the passenger was simply not fit enough to be a passenger.
What? No credit card?
In some cases the fear was so great the safety of the flight was compromised.
I'm not saying that only perfect healthy trained individuals can become tandem passengers. There are opportunities in our sport for a very wide range of passengers, some with extreme limitations. A good tandem pilot will know their limitations and manage the risks associated with specific challenges. Good judgment, strong skills are key to managing this risk.
Equipment:
There should be no compromise. You are obligated to provide the best aircraft, the best safety equipment possible.
And, of course, you use releases that the pilot is capable of...
Hang glider pilots must not use old out of date wings...
Why? Are we having crashes attributable to old out of date wings?
...and parachute systems that are not suited to the increased demands of tandem flight.
Yeah, that's a real biggie.
Hang gliders must never be flown in excess of the manufactures limitations.
Yeah. Right. And are we blowing up tandem gliders 'cause they're being wanged on the way down?
Para glider pilots must ensure safe wings, proper safe reserve systems and must provide harnesses that provide their passengers suitable protection. There should be no compromising safety.
One further comment regarding equipment. The recent advent of "action cameras" has added an additional layer of complexity to the system of aircraft, pilot and passenger. These systems must not be used in a manor that detracts from safety protocols used to manage the flight.
Well, as long as your in a manor I don't see what difference anything makes.
Pilots using an "action camera" must carefully assess operating procedures and not allow these cameras to interfere with safe practices.
Like what? Does using adjusting a camera make one less likely to do a hook-in check?
Closing Comments:
THANK GAWD.
It is my hope that Tandem pilots across Canada and around the world will give my open letter fare consideration.
You wanna be paid for it?
To the family and friends of Lenami Godinez-Avila, my deepest sympathy.
Yeah. That'll be useful in preventing the next one.
Thank You,
Martin Henry
HPAC/ACVL 2012 Accident Investigator.
POSTED BY MARTIN AT 9:45 PM
There's a reason people like the assholes at HPAC appoint assholes like you and Joe Gregor as accident investigators.
In ANY post plummet discussion there's a substantial racket produced by the always vocal and substantial numbers of...
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.
...Aussie Methodist morons and on the Jack and even Davis Shows there are a few hook-in checkers getting studiously ignored. But in this little Russian novel you've just written there's not ONE SINGLE reference to the Aussie Method - neither endorsing or, as it deserves, trashing it - or anything remotely resembling a hook-in check.
That ain't happening by accident. That's happening the same way it happens on this side of the border - by conspiracy.
...to conceal and/or not openly discuss hang gliding incidents that result in injury and/or death...
I don't remember anyone at the auto dealership openly discussing RTAs that resulted in injury and/or death.
And I'll bet:
- you didn't have to take any written and road tests to get the license you needed to drive the car off the lot
- there aren't:
-- signs and signals every quarter mile or so advising you of what you can, can't, must do
-- armed cops constantly patrolling the roads looking for people who step too far out of line
Come to think of it, no one at the maternity unit ever openly discussed that life can result in injury and/or death.
And I guess you're totally oblivious to the ambulance entrance, emergency room, surgery and oncology wings.
And you watch what happens to you when something bad happens to that kid because of your negligence.
Totally full o' shit.
Re second post in this thread, accident investigator's thoughts--
Let's get real, folks, we (global free flying community) are offering rides, presented as rides to the passengers but presented as instruction to the legal and regulatory authorities. And we'll continue to do so. Flying is too awesome not to share.
Fuck that. If someone wants to experience our flavor of flight let him start doing so on a training hill, dune, or scooter tow - same way most of us did.
Giving someone who has come for a ride a class in aerodynamics and structures is only a distraction.
1. How much of a class on aerodynamics and structures does one need to understand that if his carabiner is dangling behind his knees when he starts his launch run the flight is likely to be somewhat problematic?
2. What percentage of:
- Hang Fours do you think understand the difference between angle of attack and pitch attitude?
- towers do you think understand the difference between tension and pressure?
3. If the hang gliding population understands:
- structure then why are all of our gliders equipped with backup loops?
- aerodynamics then why are:
-- virtually all releases configured to require one-handed control during actuation?
-- Rooney Links used almost universally as one-size-fits-all pitch and lockout protectors?
It's just making the deception all the more wilful.
Yeah. Let's make sure that as many of the people we expose and introduce to the sport stay as ignorant as possible.
Making the passenger a critical part of the hookin check is also a distraction.
I get what Tad is saying, but it took some translation:
HANG-CHECK is part of the preflight, to verify that all the harness lines etc. are straight
HOOK-IN-CHECK is to verify connection to the glider five seconds before takeoff
They are separate actions, neither interchangeable nor meant to replace one another. They are not two ways to do the same thing.
A HANG CHECK is NOT a HOOK-IN CHECK.
My constructive suggestion--
I don't think you've had a single constructive suggestion about anything at any time in the course of your entire hang gliding career. You're totally incapable of even UNDERSTANDING constructive suggestions - or black and white common sense regulations.
...accomplish all camera-related stuff (switching on) in a seperate stage that is 100% finished and cleared from the mental headspace before you start the serious business of hooking in, moving to launch, and flying. Even if it means your video starts with 15 minutes of hang waiting. Buy a bigger battery and card if you need to.
BULLSHIT. Distractions have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with unhooked launches. Unhooked launches occur for ONE REASON and ONE REASON *ONLY*. Assholes refuse to do hook-in checks.
If you are a tandem pilot who really only takes others up as part of a program of serious instruction--
Fuck tandem instruction. I am SO HAPPY that tandem instruction was never available to / forced on me at any point in any of my progressions - especially aerotowing - on up to just shy of Hang Five.
...all your passengers have a serious intent to become pilots-- then more power to you. I'm sure you know that you are in the minority.
I'm sure you know that you are nonexistent.
Steve (not a tandem pilot) (disclaimer I have no idea what I'm talking about, Mr. Injury lawyer so don't quote me in court.)
Based on my cumulative experience so far I would opt for a SLIGHTLY weaker weak link (those loads got alarmingly high!).
I'll certainly second that.
I, on the other hand, actually DO know what I'm talking about and nothing would make me happier than to be quoted in court. But the establishment is always doing everything possible to keep that from happening.
Am I supposed to read through a 12 page document and from that figure out the point of this thread?
...shit.
If it is a foot launch tandem I have one very important thing for the passanger to remember. RUN!
Thank you for so elegantly confirming the point Steve just made about selling rides presented as instruction to the legal and regulatory authorities as instruction.
Under the excitement of a first time flight even this simple assignment has been forgotten by my passangers a few times.
In other words, you find it acceptable to run a practice in which a certain percentage of the time you'll be relying on your ability to safely launch while dragging maybe a couple hundred extra pounds of dead weight off the ground. I most assuredly DO NOT.
Adding anything more is taking away from the one thing they need to do.
1. Right. The more ignorant the passenger or student is about what's going on the safer the flight's gonna be. That's totally been my experience with the way US and Canadian hang gliding has always been conducted.
2. The one thing they NEED to do is make sure they're connected to the fuckin' glider right before it moves - the way you and all of your asshole tandem foot launch driver colleagues don't. Ask around. Find out how many people would prefer an unhooked launch to a blown launch.
3. If Lenami had been too scared to run she'd have been able to remain at launch and watch a real pro such as yourself fly down to the LZ solo. Ditto for Eleni Zeri and Steve Parson.
4. If you drop just one student or passenger a thousand feet to the base of the mountain then the other ten thousand successful tandem flights weren't worth it. Ask Jon Orders if you don't believe me.
Scaring the crap out of them with a frank discussion on the risks of hang gliding is also not going to help.
Yeah, it's kinda like:
- that rush for the door you always see when the airline stewardesses are doing the spiel about using seat cushions as flotation devices and putting your own oxygen mask on before attempting to help your kid.
- scaring the crap out of a thirteen year old with a frank discussion on the risks of tobacco smoking and what happened to the Marlboro Man is not going to help with his decision to take up tobacco smoking.
Having them even more afraid increases the chance they will not put in a good launch run and infact increase the risk to both of us.
1. That's a risk that you've just stated you're willing to subject yourself and your passenger to a certain percentage of the time.
And you KNOW it's there. So does your passenger get to make the decision to engage this risk after being informed of it? Do you advise him that there's a chance that he won't be able to run and that may result on the glider crashing on the slope? (Rhetorical question.) Maybe if you did that the person pushing the fear envelope would back off or go to the bunny hill and condition himself better and the risk to both of you and the profitability of your operation would go way the fuck down.
2. And you KNOW - because you're such a BRILLIANT individual - that a frank discussion on the risks of hang gliding will scare the crap out of people and reduce them to quivering blobs of jelly on launch.
So what are the risks of hang gliding?
- Sidewire failure? You always do this:
Wills Wing
While pushing up on the leading edge between the nose and the crossbar junction, step on the bottom side wire with about 75 pounds of force. This is a rough field test of the structural security of the side wire loop, the control bar and the crossbar, and may reveal a major structural defect that could cause an in-flight failure in normal operation.
while your "student" is watching/helping you preflight, right? So after that is your "student" afraid of sidewire failure for that flight? I know that I stopped being afraid of sidewire failures just as soon as I started adhering to the goddam instructions. But, of course, I always made sure I wasn't grinding my wire into a sharp rock. YMMV.
...to increase the safety of your operation so I can't see how that could be much of an issue for anyone.
- Aerobatics?
Is the "student" gonna freeze up on launch because he's afraid you might do aerobatics on the way down? Maybe try telling him you won't do aerobatics on the way down if he doesn't want you to.
Most common HG injury... spiral fracture of the humerus.
All tandems are wheel landed so landing crashes are virtually nonexistent.
-- takeoff?
If I were gonna do this bullshit I'd make him Pilot In Command for the launch decision...
"When the wind's coming in OK we'll pick up the glider. When you're ready to commit, to start running, say "Clear!" and then I'll say "Clear!" we'll start running. If you're not feeling reasonably comfortable about what you're doing just say so and I'll happily give you a rain check or full refund."
I'll bet that would reduce your foot dragger incidents to close to zero.
- Unhooked launches?
"You're gonna carefully preflight our connections in the staging area right before we move to launch position. When we get there you reach around to our connected carabiners, grab the strings tied to them, and hand the other ends to me. And I'll watch you do it. And then I'll put them in my teeth. You look to make sure I've got them just before you say "Clear!" and I won't start running unless I've got them."
One very good and important suggestion is having an assistant.
Especially for you fuckin' idiot douchebags who refuse to do or consider any form of hook-in check.
I think we normally do any way but it should be mandatory.
Meaning you will never again do a tandem launch without a designated assistant clearing you, right?
And you, of course, will go to bat with Martin against the HPAC to get this into the SOPs...
Tad,
I wonder if you did as much Highland bashing while you were a 'loyal' customer...or you displaying a cowardly nature by bashing after you were told you were no longer welcome there. 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!
With your very high numbers on the ignore report, I'm surprised you haven't been booted from here like you have been from some Yahoo groups.
We have now rounded up all the usual suspects and promised renewed vigilance, nine page checklists, hang checks every six feet, etc. Bob Gillisse redux.
...too.
IMO...
Fuck your OPINION. Fuck anybody's OPINION.
...a checklist can resolve 99% of launch accidents related to pilot error.
Name some.
99 percent of launch accidents are blown launches. Do you think that's because people didn't have checklists to remind them to check streamers, keep their wings level, hold their noses down, maintain strong launch runs?
As for unhooked launches... Wouldn't you think THIS:
11-04-091400
would make a pretty effective checklist?
- It's about the last thing one sees before arriving at launch position.
- There's no fuckin' way one can NOT see it.
- It's only cluttered with the most critical of all check items.
- It only has two words, four and two letters, plus an exclamation mark on it.
And yet people step right over them with their carabiners dangling or leg loops empty...
Have you ever heard ONE SINGLE PERSON report, "HOLY SHIT!!! I damn near launched UNHOOKED!!! Thank GOD I saw that PLAQUE at the last minute! And thank GOD for inspiring Dan DeWeese to ornament all of our launches with them!"?
Remember the rock that Mike End-Of-Story Bomstad dragged his wingtip over?
...than the untold scores of Rebar Dan plaques installed at all the high volume sites combined. Maybe we'd do better by digging the plaques up, breaking them into a few large chunks, and plopping them down on the approaches to the launches.
We've got all these assholes talking about the dangers of DISTRACTIONS and here's a very clear cut example of a DISTRACTION *UNQUESTIONABLY* SAVING an asshole from an unhooked launch at least and an unhooked launch death at most. And some day - mark my words - somebody's gonna be set to run off a ramp, remember that he neglected to switch on a wing camera, turn around to unhook, and discover that he's ALREADY unhooked.
I myself teach 5-star^2. It boggles my mind when I'm helping students from other schools on launch and I ask them what their checklist is and they say they just look over their gear.
Does it also boggle your mind when multi-decade flyers with damn good records behind them say the same thing? And name some significant issues that CAN'T/WON'T be identified by just looking over gear - excluding, of course, the preflight sidewire load test that people won't do because they're afraid they might break something.
I also have a placard on a lanyard with a very specific set of items to go over for my competition setup.
What are you using:
- for a release, bridle, and weak link?
- to verify that you're connected to your glider within two seconds of launch?
Every tandem pilot should have a detailed check list that can be taped, velcro'd or sewn onto their gear somewhere like the passenger harness...
Don't you mean STUDENT harness? These are instructional flights we're talking about after all.
...on shoulder strap or back pac area.
Why just tandem pilots? If this bullshit is of any value shouldn't solos be doing it as well? Is a two person plane so much more complex than a one person plane that the former should have one detailed checklist and a latter should have zero checklists of any description?
Martin Henry - 2014/04/30 01:16
Thank you, It's my hope to try and inspire the use of a checklist format into the culture but not necessarily any specific format.
Lemme know how that works out.
I find there is a careful balance between what is "enough" and what is "intrusive to the routine".
How many times have you needed your backup strap.
We operate in an situation where observing and collecting information from our environment is also critical to our safety.
Just make goddam sure you don't collect any information about your connection status at the only five second window in which it matters.
A checklist is good but we need to be careful that the checklist does not overwhelm the pilot.
A checklist on a ramp is just one more dangerous distraction.
I also want to point out the intent of the CPC was intended to include the passenger in the process for both educational purposes and a second layer to the safety review.
Doesn't that pretty much contradict what Rob Clarkson's saying on the Davis Show? How come you're not taking him on?
(btw, prefer to comments to come from a real name but I felt Mr or Mrs or Ms unknown made valid point
Big surprise.
Davis Straub - 2014/04/30 00:52 UTC
Here at Quest Air, the harnesses are never unhooked. You can not launch without being hooked in.
You can't launch unhooked from wheels, a dolly, or a platform regardless of what the fuck you do with the harnesses in between flights. That's 'cause those modes FORCE all the douchebags involved to do hook-in check immediately prior to commitment.
Personally, I would like to see the equipment changed often. New sails often.
Yeah Davis. That'll help cut down on all the blown sail fatalities we've been seeing lately.
Ya know what I'd like to see? More Dragonfly control system fatalities - starting with Adam Elchin or Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney - and more pro toad Davis Link fatalities - starting with you.
Anonymous - 2014/04/30 12:23
Harness never unhooked from glider:-
You can still take off without legs in loops and slip out...?
Not on launch. And only IF you rotate to vertical for foot landing - which tandems never do.
...nobody's ever fallen out of a harness because of leg loops upon rotating up for a foot landing and that issue isn't a particularly big fuckin' deal.
Mike Sadan - 2014/04/30 15:53
I'm not one of those that believes paragliding and hang gliding is dangerous. It involves risk. Risk is the potential of losing something of value, weighed against the potential to gain something of value. Or, Risk... "the effect of uncertainty on objectives". To me dangerous implies excessive risk. Pilots have a lot of control over whether their flying becomes dangerous or not.
How 'bout tow drivers? I'm guessing not 'cause they never seem to catch any flak after people on the other ends of their strings buy it.
Of course, that control is never absolutely certain and so there is always some uncertainty and therefore some risk.
There's some uncertainty about what Mother Nature's gonna throw at us - but that's virtually never the issue that crashes a glider. I contend that our levels of certainty about what we're doing can and should be so close to one hundred percent that the difference isn't worth mentioning. And with the issue we SHOULD be focusing on here...
Darrell Hambley (H4) - 2014/04/30 23:50
Comments on Davis's Oz page show that some view the "instruction" part of giving rides as just an inconvenience and a way to fool the legal community so we aren't thought of as "giving rides" to tourists. I disagree. The student is an active participant, not a "tourist" and should be required to participate in some of the most critical set up stages...
So why aren't you on Davis's Oz page blasting Rob Clarkson?
...ie 1. Actively share in the pre-flight check, 2. leg loop check, 3. hang check. You could add more but I think more would just confuse an already very-nervous person.
Yeah, if you added some kind of hook-in check that would probably be enough to push him over the edge.
This is a first lesson, not a ride.
For Lenami (Remember her?) it was also a last lesson and a lot shorter and faster ride than she was expecting. But the important thing was that she wasn't confused by the amendment of a hook-in check to the procedures in which she was to participate so she wasn't burdened by additional confusion and nervousness at the critical moment and thus made a good run and got a nice clean takeoff.
Anonymous - 2014/05/02 00:14
I agree with the first part of the above. In Canada the only time a hang glider can carry more than one person is for the purpose of instruction. Tandem rides today are mostly thrill rides for money masquerading as instruction in order to exploit a loophole in the law. The odd person continues in the sport and that is it.
The desire to make profit from tandems is a huge factor in lax safety as I have witnessed time and again.
It did not come from the FAA, it came from a USHPA Towing Committee made up of three large aerotow operations that do tandems for hire.
Appalling.
...the sole influence over USHGA aerotowing SOPs.
As a first lesson in hang gliding there is no reason for it to be a tandem high flight. Low and slow ground skimming towing has proven to be the superior training method. There is no contesting this fact.
None whatsoever.
A high flight with an instructor is important before a novice flies high solo...
Bullshit. The student should be so wired into takeoffs, turns, and landings that he should be champing at the bit to run off the ramp by the time he's given the green light.
...however and this is the right time for a tandem, NOT as an introduction to the sport. Transport Canada has simply to tweak the regulations so that only once a student has a minimum number of hours logged in ground skimming...
HOURS? How 'bout flights and proficiency demonstrations?
...can they then have a high tandem flight.
Fuck it. Let 'em go solo after they've gone through their paces.
Real schools...
Name some. Or are you just talking hypothetically?
...can flourish with this change and individuals who want to make fast money and cut corners will be taken out of the equation. Simple.
Totally with you there. But what the fuck does this do to address the Lenami issue?
Murray Wood - 2014/05/02 00:44
Well presented.I agree with a lot of these critical standards...
And, of course, the total omission of anything hinting at a form of hook-in check.
I know both of the pilots involved and I'm sure they did not wish for any of this to ever happen. But it did
Maybe if the dumb sonsabitches had ever bothered to participate in a discussion about unhooked launches it wouldn't have. But they didn't. And they STILL haven't. And I'll go on record as saying they NEVER WILL.
Several years ago I witnessed tandem operations in N.Z ,Queenstown and was horrified at the accepted behaviour and complacency at every level of tandem operations...I hope thing have changed
Was that before...
The Press - 2006/03/15
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is urgently pushing for new hang-gliding industry standards after learning a hang-gliding pilot who suffered serious injuries in a crash three weeks ago had not clipped himself on to the glider.
Extreme Air tandem gliding pilot James (Jim) Rooney safely clipped his passenger into the glider before departing from the Coronet Peak launch site, near Queenstown, CAA sports and recreation manager Rex Kenny said yesterday.
However, he took off without attaching himself.
In a video, he was seen to hold on to the glider for about fifty meters before hitting power lines.
Rooney and the passenger fell about fifteen meters to the ground.
...or after Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney launched his tandem unhooked and dove his passenger into the powerlines? If after I'd be shocked that they didn't take advantage of his extremely keen intellect and overwhelming concern for hang gliding safety and incorporate his recommendations for getting things right.
I have ten years of been a tandem pilot and love it
I only ever fly for the passenger ,
And never for the STUDENT.
...we are in charge of everything especially their safety ,the experience is all theirs to enjoy...
Right. It's an EXPERIENCE to ENJOY - not a LESSON to LEARN anything from.
Muz
And what's YOUR reason for never doing anything in the way of a hook-in check just prior to launch? You obviously don't 'cause if you did you'd be pushing that issue.
You're doing - and NOT doing - exactly the same things that Jon Orders was doing. But you're expecting better results because you're a more Focused Pilot than he was?
---
Correction - 2016/08/13 25:00:00 UTC
Mike didn't drag his tip over a rock. There was one in the vicinity of the area in which he dragged his tip that caused him to worry and check. (Really got your priorities well in order, Mike.)
Yes, not much in the way of postings over the last year. Plenty of excuses, truth is... I don't find it that easy to keep daily posts but I thought this recent experience deserved a post.
For those that may not know I spent most of last summer working on a side project for the Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association of Canada. The "project" involved the investigation of a terrible tandem hang gliding tragedy where the passenger was not clipped in (foot launch) and fell to her death. I will not post any details here other then to say that the critical connection to the glider was not made and that this critical step was not checked prior to take-off. My report detailed a suggested change in procedures. The essence of the recommendations, a check list.
The effect of this terrible event, made me reflect on my personal approach to pre-flight checks. Particularly the use of our already "in-place" check list system used for towing. Truly, it would be impossible to tow on our platform launch system without hooking in. On the other hand, humans are incredibly skilled at finding new ways to screw up. The investigation made me more carefully asses potentials and given past experiences I decided that there were two individual mistakes that could find there way up onto the tow rig.
First, helmet chin straps. When its hot as hell and your dealing with the complexity of getting a glider up on the rig in thermic conditions, more then once we have had pilots get into the air without having the chin strap done up (including yours truly). Its not life or death, more a simple inconvenience. Most times, discovered and corrected in the air.
Second, Harness Leg Loops. This is far more serious. The step had always been the pilots responsibility. The thing with towing, is there is a much wider list of participants (much like a tandem). Distractions can easily conceal obvious omissions. With the complexity of towing, it is possible that a distracted pilot could miss the step. Because of this consideration over the winter of 2012-2013 I took some time to amend my towing operation procedures (update the check list, that had worked for well over 14 years). I should also say, making huge long check lists can cause more damage then good.
Simply put, we added "Leg Loops Secure ?" and "helmet buckled ?" to the list thinking it to be almost be redundant.
For the first time since we started towing, a pilot was preparing for take-off, we slowly worked our way down the list... "leg loops secure".... shock, the list made its first "save". All of findings of my investigation proved just how fragile our personal checks can be. It proved to me, never take anything for granted. We are easily distracted, please take the time to review your own personal safety protocols. Your life could depend on it.
Yes, not much in the way of postings over the last year. Plenty of excuses, truth is... I don't find it that easy to keep daily posts but I thought this recent experience deserved a post.
But, of course, the experience Zack Marzec had at Quest five months and three days ago didn't. That one didn't fit into your special little vision of reality.
For those that...
Who.
...may not know I spent most of last summer working on a side project for the Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association of Canada.
Yeah, we know.
The "project" involved the investigation of a terrible tandem hang gliding tragedy where the passenger was not clipped in (foot launch)...
Yes, foot launch. Pretty tough not to be clipped in for any other flavor of launch.
...and fell to her death.
And that took you most of last summer to investigate.
I will not post any details here other then to say that the critical connection to the glider was not made...
Yeah. You've already said that. And everyone and his dog knew that the instant we got a decent mainstream news account.
...and that this critical step was not checked prior to take-off.
1. Duh.
2. How many of you off-the-scale stupid motherfuckers ever bother to check that critical step *JUST* PRIOR TO TAKEOFF - the only time it matters - like it's said in the USHGA SOPs for all flights for all ratings since 33 years ago this month?
3. If you posted the details what would it take? Three or four more sentences of about that length?
My report detailed a suggested change in procedures.
Where is this fucking "detailed" report? Who's permitted to see it? Three or four HPAC douchebags concerned only with covering their asses? Why haven't YOU made it public? Did you get paid for it and was your payment contingent on it being kept confidential?
This is the single most publicly visible hang gliding fatality in the history of the sport - by a factor of something around a thousand - and we don't get to see the detailed report you spent most of the summer working on?
That shit totally stinks, dude.
The essence of the recommendations, a check list.
1. The essence of the recommendations - "check list" - is ONE WORD. Try to at least spell the essence right if you're gonna designate it as the essence.
2. Yeah, the mental checklist failed miserably... Let's try a written one and see how that goes. If Zack Marzec got killed by his loop of 130 pound Greenspot with the knot hidden from the main tension in the loop then let's try tying it with the knot better hidden so that it breaks more consistently.
3. And it took you most of the summer to come up with that?
4. And did you testify in Jon's defense to the effect that you believe HPAC's procedures were inadequate? You've been using a checklist for YOUR operation since the dawn of time but the combined genius of decades worth of HPAC officials - including such luminaries as Quinn Cornwell and Mike Dead-Eye Robertson - never bothered to put that on the books?
The effect of this terrible event,
Why is there a comma there?
...made me reflect on my personal approach to pre-flight checks.
1. What? The Yossi Tsarfaty, Kunio Yoshimura, Bill Priday, and Eleni Zeri unhooked launch deaths preceding this one weren't significant enough to make you reflect on your personal approach to preflight checks? Or is this the first unhooked launch death you've ever heard of?
2. We've been playing this game for four decades now. Why the fuck are we still talking about PERSONAL APPROACHES to anything? Do commercial and military pilots have PERSONAL APPROACHES to preflight checks or do they all do it by the fuckin' book which is exactly the same in twenty different languages?
3. This ain't a PREFLIGHT issue - dickhead. This is a LAUNCH SEQUENCE issue. How fuckin' stupid do you hafta be to not realize that there have been scores of unhooked launch incidents - a fair number fatal - that have occurred because of shit that happened AFTER completion of preflight procedures and checks or, as was the case with Jon Orders, it was BELIEVED preflight procedures and checks had been completed?
Particularly the use of our already "in-place" check list system used for towing. Truly, it would be impossible to tow on our platform launch system without hooking in.
Yeah, that's because the suspension is tensioned in the seconds preceding commencement of launch. Can you think of any strategy something like that could be applied to foot launch?
On the other hand, humans are incredibly skilled at finding new ways to screw up.
Bull fucking shit. Name a technique for crashing or falling out of a glider that hasn't been in regular use for DECADES.
The investigation made me more carefully asses...
Speaking of screwing up.
...potentials and given past experiences I decided that there were two individual mistakes that could find there...
Speaking of screwing up.
...way up onto the tow rig.
First, helmet chin straps. When its...
Speaking of screwing up.
...hot as hell and your...
Speaking of screwing up.
...dealing with the complexity of getting a glider up on the rig in thermic conditions, more then once we have had pilots get into the air without having the chin strap done up (including yours truly). Its...
Speaking of screwing up.
...not life or death, more a simple inconvenience.
So is there a good reason for that item to be cluttering up a prelaunch checklist?
Second, Harness Leg Loops. This is far more serious.
No shit.
The step had always been the pilots...
Speaking of screwing up.
...responsibility. The thing with towing, is there is a much wider list of participants (much like a tandem).
1. Which strongly indicates that you don't do tandem towing.
2. Two is all you need for either in most circumstances.
Distractions can easily conceal obvious omissions. With the complexity of towing, it is possible that a distracted pilot could miss the step.
Big fucking deal. With the complexity of platform and dolly launched towing, it is IMpossible for a distracted pilot to miss being hooked in. And nobody in the history of ANY flavor of towing has fallen from a glider because of missed leg loops. If this IDIOT:
had added the complexity of a dolly to his 2007/10/18 winch tow flight he wouldn't currently be skipping hook-in checks and running off launches with artificial legs.
Because of this consideration over the winter of 2012-2013 I took some time to amend my towing operation procedures (update the check list, that had worked for well over 14 years).
Oh! It had "worked well"? So tell us about some of the significant issues it was catching that you'd have missed otherwise.
I should also say, making huge long check lists can cause more damage then...
Speaking of screwing up.
...good.
Simply put, we added "Leg Loops Secure ?" and "helmet buckled ?" to the list thinking it to be almost be redundant.
Yeah, who ever heard of anyone not being in his leg loops after having done a hang check?
For the first time since we started towing, a pilot was preparing for take-off, we slowly worked our way down the list... "leg loops secure".... shock, the list made its first "save".
1. It saved him from launching without his leg loops and - and very unlikely saved him from anything more.
2. And, of course, after fourteen years of running a truck tow operation no fuckin' way it would've occurred to anybody that the leg loops should be checked. Connected and leg loops engaged are the two most critical checks of any foot launch, which, remember, is the only flavor of launching in which a Lenami can happen, I make those two checks within two seconds of EVERY foot launch the same way Rob Kells and Eric Hinrichs do, and you couldn't do the latter without something to read down.
All of...
Speaking of screwing up.
...findings of my investigation proved just how fragile our personal checks can be.
Well, it certainly is a good thing YOU did YOUR investigation. After four decades of hang gliding we FINALLY have PROOF of how fragile YOUR bullshit personal checks can be. Pity the HPAC didn't appoint anyone with a decades long record of consistently practicing BRUTALLY ROBUST STANDARDIZED CHECKS.
It proved to me, never take anything for granted.
1. Not until you've done a hang check and verified your leg loops in the staging area and ticked them off from your checklist anyway. After that you can take EVERYTHING for granted because you've ticked it all off on your checklist.
2. Always a student, right Martin? I take the position that anybody who's been heavily involved in the sport for more than a few years and learns anything of fundamental importance, like "never take anything for granted", is a total fucking moron - especially in this age of the internet in which the flow of information can't be so effectively filtered through sleazy national organizations, clubs, commercial operations, and scumbags like Dennis, Davis, Jack.
We are easily distracted, please take the time to review your own personal safety protocols.
1. That's why we have those little red rubber "Focused Pilot" wristbands from USHGA. They're constant reminders to stay focused and not be distracted. Ever heard of anyone wearing one launching unhooked or minus his leg loops?
2. My own personal safety protocols include the two most critical checks within two seconds of launch. And I've NEVER ONCE been easily distracted at those moments because I'm smart enough to ALWAYS be scared SHITLESS I'm about to launch unhooked. Why don't you take the time to review YOUR own personal safety protocols - douchebag?
Your life could depend on it.
Now where have I heard something like that before? Oh yeah...
Joe Gregor - 2007/05
An advanced pilot launched unhooked. The pilot was able to hold on and effect a landing on the beach below, but suffered a broken pelvis and internal bleeding. It is extremely fortunate that this pilot had the strength to hold on for the duration of the flight, and it's amazing that these were the only injuries suffered. Lesson learned: HANG CHECK, HANG CHECK, HANG CHECK! Your life will most often depend on it.
Assholes.
From something bad...
Jon Orders dropping a passenger a thousand feet a lot of people - including Jon - having to live with that reality for the rest of their lives...
...comes something good......
The absolute horror of your guy having to experience something like THIS:
And it would have been fifty times more of a nonevent without the stupid rotation for the totally unnecessary stupid foot landing.
The only mention of wheels you have on your checklist is to make sure they're clear and that's mentioned in the same breath with instruments. So it's a real safe bet that the wheels are just as optional as the instruments. And you're not having people land on wheels because if you were you wouldn't be sweating someone almost launching without his leg loops. And if you DID require people to be equipped with and land on wheels you'd eliminate the issue which is most likely to get any flyer seriously injured and totally eliminate the danger associated with missed leg loops. But you're still more worried about getting the fucking helmet buckled.
*Hang Check: Main and Backup, Carabineer Locked ?
*Leg Loops Secure? Helmet Buckled ?
*Tow Bridal Routed Properly ? (Under Base Tube and Clear?)
*Weak Link OK?
*Towline routed "clear" to Winch Drum ?
*Airspeed Indicator ?
*Tow line, D-Link, Recovery Chute, D link, Release OK?
*VG / Flap Cord Clear ? Instruments / Wheels Clear ?
*Base Tube Safety Straps Off ?
*Nose Release: Safety OFF ( SYSTEM HOT ! )
*TFR UP ? READY TO TOW ?
- Preflight Checklist. Two words - not four.
- Is there any way to platform launch a glider without a hang check happening?
- Fuck the backup.
- Learn to spell CARABINER. (Do you pronounce it that way too?)
- Who gives a rat's ass whether or not it's locked?
- Who gives a rat's ass whether or not the fucking helmet's buckled?
- Learn the difference between Bridle and Bridal.
- Do you need to specify TOW Bridal? How many other flavors of Bridals are you using in your operation?
- "Tow line" is one word. Notice the way you had it right two lines above?
- Why is it a "D-Link" before "Recovery Chute" and a "D link" after?
- I dunno... IS the Release OK? Or is it one of those pieces of crap that can only be blown when everything's going right?
- I'll bet the dope on the rope can blow off the truck with both hands on the basetube. After that there's no imaginable situation in which it would be NEARLY as important to have both hands on the basetube, right?
Do you think you got the nod for the investigator assignment because you can't write or think at a third grade level or because the douchebags at HPAC are too stupid to realize that and are convinced that you're a Rooney caliber genius because you've done so much towing?
Much as I hate to credit them with anything remotely resembling intelligence I'd be inclined to go with the former 'cause I saw how carefully they were wording their statements to the press when they were trying to mislead them as much as possible concerning their shoddy history and practices.
And don't you think that it's the least bit suspicious that to do a legitimate investigation and make solid recommendations regarding a tandem, foot launch, free flight, failure to hook in incident that happened, happens frequently, and can only happen in an environment like THIS:
where, using platform or dolly, it's physically impossible to have an unhooked launch? "Gawd! We just lost ten climbers to an avalanche! Get on the phone to Key West and get a really top notch authority up here to find out exactly what went wrong. And make sure he's really got his shit together on hypothermia and hypoxia."
Appointing you and identifying you to the press as an "industry standards expert" was so very obviously a deliberate and naked act of sabotage.
I disagree Steve and Rob. It's important to remember that, on the first lesson, we don't necessarily need to teach about aerodynamics or the effect of wind speed on the severity of the wind gradient, just to name a few examples.
Now I don't give a shit about breaking strength anymore. I really don't care what the numbers are. I just want my weaklink to break every once in a while.
...and how to calculate the proper rating for a particular glider?
I offer all my discovery tandem flight students the opportunity to fly the glider. Many more tandem instructors do so as well. They are not rides.
When you have a brain the size of a walnut, Bart, you really should draw the line at rides - AT MOST.
William Olive - 2014/05/05 21:39:44 UTC
Just as a matter of academic interest Bart, what do you reckon your conversion rate of tandem first flights to lessons would be? Around 1%?
Fuck no. Around 100%. It's not like he's just selling rides.
That was a week ago, Bart. I notice you haven't answered the question.
Brian McMahon - 2014/05/05 23:03:30 UTC
It seems like tandem flights have simply become a business for many and not a training method.
BECOME? How long did it take for tandem rides to become a business? About half an hour?
I don't really have a problem with operators making money via tandem flights, but it does seem like there should be an hour or two of ground school so that the new H-0 or P-0 pilot actually has some idea of what is going on.
Why bother? Bart hasn't come back and said, "HELL NO! TWICE that figure - AT LEAST!" so it's a damn good bet that Billo's guess of one percent was way high. These are ride factories presenting themselves as instructional programs so's they can wiggle through the loophole.
I'm sure many instructors do give some kind of ground school prior to doing a tandem flight, but there are many operations where it is nothing but a joyride. The USHPA requirements are designed to fulfill the FAA exemption requirements:
12-02.05 Student Hang Gliding Rating (H-0)
A. General Description - A Student pilot has the basic knowledge required to understand and accept the risks of flying as a tandem passenger on a hang glider. This includes:
1. A basic understanding of the process involved in launching, flying and landing modern hang gliders.
2. An understanding that a hang glider is controlled through weight shift and that control is hampered by holding any part of the vehicle other than where the Instructor indicates.
Is it OK to grab onto his shoes without his permission if he's forgotten to hook you in?
3. An understanding that to foot launch a tandem flight, the Student and the Instructor must run efficiently together to produce airspeed to launch.
3.5. No understanding whatsoever that there's been a USHGA regulation on the books for 33 years which states:
With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.
why that regulation was put on the books, what its clearly stated intent was, what's often happened to people when it's been violated, why virtually no one makes any pretense of complying with it, and why USHGA has been so desperately working on pretending it doesn't exist for virtually all of its history.
4. An understanding that the Student must pay attention to the Instructor's commands at all times and be capable of carrying out those instructions.
OK, Lenami, run as hard as you can!
5. An understanding of the reasons for, techniques used, and deployment of a backup parachute.
And how effective it'll be when the bridle's been UVed out.
6. Must be advised that tandem flights on a hang glider is conducted under an exemption granted by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the glider is not certified for tandem flight by the FAA.
...and that if it's an aerotowed glider will be operated in flagrant violation of existing FAA weak link regulations and one hundred percent of the equipment standards USHGA established in 1984 as a condition for the exemption permitting aerotowing.
B. Recommended Operating Limitations for Student Pilots:
1. It is highly recommended that all flights be made under the direct supervision of a USHPA Certified Basic or Advanced Instructor.
Like:
- Jim Keen-Intellect...
The Press - 2006/03/15
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is urgently pushing for new hang-gliding industry standards after learning a hang-gliding pilot who suffered serious injuries in a crash three weeks ago had not clipped himself on to the glider.
Extreme Air tandem gliding pilot James (Jim) Rooney safely clipped his passenger into the glider before departing from the Coronet Peak launch site, near Queenstown, CAA sports and recreation manager Rex Kenny said yesterday.
However, he took off without attaching himself.
In a video, he was seen to hold on to the glider for about fifty meters before hitting power lines.
Rooney and the passenger fell about fifteen meters to the ground.
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.
I've had it once where the pin had bent inside the barrel from excessive tow force. My weaklink was still intact. The tug pilot's weaklink broke so I had the rope. I had to use two hands to get the pin out of the barrel.
It's just my opinion, but it seems like from a safety and risk point of view, you would want to beef this up a bit; requiring some standards in instruction to the H-0 pilot, rather than the wobbly requirements as seen above.
When was the last time you saw any safety standards beefed up? Name something good that went on the books subsequent to the 1981/95 hook-in check requirement - which was TOTALLY ignored by ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of administrators, schools, and instructors (and I DO mean one hundred percent - literally) and complied with by maybe 0.1 percent of individual foot launch flyers.
Aerotowing equipment "requirements" became "guidelines" and got hacked away at and then were erased altogether as tandem flights became mandatory for AT ratings so candidates could learn to stay inside the Cone of Safety and react to the inconvenience of a simulated weak link break at high altitude in smooth air.
Official accident reporting has become virtually nonexistent and when reports DO appear they're almost total fiction.
The issuance of a rating like H-0 seems to exist only to adhere to the letter of the law and allow joyrides.
Well, we more than make up for that when we get legitimate candidates. We force them:
- into those vile upright-only "training" harnesses to make them fly with their hands on the downtubes in armbreak position - at shoulder or ear height where they can't control the glider
- to:
- foot land so they can perfect their flare timing and safely land in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place while are best pilots are...
...even when they're so safe they violate the FAA legal minimum while people like Davis - who've been at an around all this plenty long enough to understand what's what and who's who - use the new orange weak links that Morningside decided they were happy with
The Canadian incident was obviously a fluke, a one in a million tragedy...
Bull fucking shit. As far as I'm concerned it's a fluke whenever a hook-in check skipper...
...DOESN'T reap significant results from that pooch screw. The Canadian "incident" was a perfect rerun of the 2003/03/29 Steve Parson New Zealand incident and not a bad match for the 2006/02/21 Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney New Zealand incident. Foot launch procedures that rely on hang checks to confirm connection status WILL fail at fairly frequent intervals just as towing operations that use weak links to increase safety WILL stall and lock out a lot of gliders, crash plenty, and kill some every now and then.
....but I wonder if the victim had any understanding of how vitally important it is to check that you are hooked in just prior to launch?
Why should she have? Her idiot fucking ride driver had no fucking clue, there's no mention whatsoever of it in the HPAC SOPs, not one word of such a check ever appeared in mainstream media, nobody teaches it, and virtually no regular flyers anywhere on the planet do it.
The Rio incident...
What Rio incident?
...proves that an H-0 type of pilot is totally incapable of doing anything remotely close to flying a Hang Glider.
Bullshit. Whatever happened proved that THAT Hang Zero pilot was totally incapable of doing anything remotely close to flying a hang glider - taking you at your word - and NOTHING ELSE. I used to send zero experience pilots off the dunes all day long and most of them did pretty well.
And hang gliders do pretty good jobs of flying themselves. I know of three incidents of tandem passengers coming out smelling like roses after the unhooked designated driver fell clear and the only passenger who sustained injuries was Rooney's and that happened BECAUSE he held onto the basetube and dove her into the powerlines.
Yes, it's entirely possible that she could've been seriously hurt or killed if she was left alone to fly the glider but:
- that's also true of comp pilots
- diving a glider into the powerlines is NEVER the right call (Jim Freer, Steve Vogel, Kevin O'Brien come to mind)
- if she'd been ALLOWED to fly the glider I one hundred percent guarantee you that she would not have CHOSEN to dive it into the powerlines
I haven't heard of problems like these occurring in the US...
1. You haven't read the archives.
2. Who the fuck cares WHERE these things happen?
...but with the Tandems being more of a business operation, rather than a method of instruction, it doesn't seem far-fetched to think that incidents like these could occur here.
The vast majority of US tandem rides are aerotowed - so that's where we see the carnage.
- Rob Richardson's passenger knocked unconscious while he was killed because Corey Burk made a good decision in the interest of the glider's safety while he was trying to bring it back into line
- Frank Spears killed along with his driver - Jamie Alexander - when they hit a thermal and the tug climbed out on them
- Jeremiah Thompson killed along with his driver - Arlan Birkett - when the tug climbed out on them and the front end lockout protector increased the safety of the towing operation.
than he was?
