landing

[Tad Eareckson]

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

Allen Sparks - 2011/04/24 20:45:49 UTC
Evergreen, Colorado

2011/04/23
Lookout Mountain LZ, Golden, Colorado
5770 feet MSL
Falcon 2 225
Fractured coracoid process, undiagnosed soft tissue damage.
<edit> torn bicep, torn supraspinatus tendon (rotator cuff)
Damage to glider: None

A few contributing factors in no significant order. Eliminating any one of these might have changed the outcome.

no wheels
glider trimmed too slow
late transition to uprights
insufficient airspeed on approach

Yeah Spark, no significant order whatsoever.

This injury was avoidable

No shit? Really?

-
Hang 4, Observer
WW Sport2 155, WW Falcon2 225

I appreciate all the kind and thoughtful (and funny) responses on this thread. I was prepared to receive alot more flak than was dealt.

That's OK Spark. The reason you're getting all those kind comments and flak free skies is 'cause you and your fellow douchebags on the org don't tolerate people who can spot frauds like you and call them as they see them. (I'm gonna have more fun than I ever imagined possible with this one.)

Lookout Mountain LZ

Christian Thoreson - 2004/10

Thus wheel landings, the safest and easiest way to consistently land a hang glider (yes, I know many people will have much discussion over that comment)...
-
Christian Thoreson has been actively flying hang gliders since 1979 and has been the flight school director at Lookout Mountain Flight Park since 1990.

Oops, wrong Lookout Mountain. Guess wheel landings aren't the safest and easiest way to consistently land a hang glider at that one.

busted shoulder
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEICgGVJdSs
Sparkozoid - 2011/04/24
dead
14-00725
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3859/14423696873_f1326e2320_o.png


http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=18876
Hang glider Crash

Allen Sparks - 2010/09/07 01:03:18 UTC

Oscar,

I'm very happy you weren't injured.

Helen,

Thanks for the Tad 'lift and tug' reminder.

I have launched unhooked and experienced the horror of hanging by my fingers over jagged rocks ... and the surreal result - i.e. not being significantly injured.

I am a firm believer in 'lift and tug' and the mindset of assuming I am not hooked in. It is motivated by the recurring memory of my own experience ... and the tragic deaths and life-altering injuries of good friends.

But that was a whole 226 days prior. Kinda hard to REMEMBER these sorts of things, isn't it?

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23512
So-- HOW DO "YOU" MANAGE IT ?

Bille Floyd - 2011/04/26 18:01:12 UTC

So-- HOW DO "YOU" MANAGE IT ?

Now THIS kinda sucks..

I'll let Spark explane--
We talked about Risk management just prior to this flight:

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

And you were talking about RISK MANAGEMENT ***JUST PRIOR TO THIS FLIGHT*** with this perpetual one man flying disaster area? Did the hardware where his lower legs used to be do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the way of a little reminder? If I ever took off within a hundred yards of this guy I'd have a TV camera mounted on my wing and a display at the nose plate so I could watch the carabiner throughout the entire launch sequence.

Bob Flynn - 2011/04/24 20:54:12 UTC
Jacksonville, North Carolina

I guess the injury was from hanging on to the downtubes?

Right. Like getting ripped to shreds by crocodiles is a consequence of not swimming fast enough.

He almost got the keel hangover too. I hope the pilot heals quickly and fully.
-
Good Judgement comes from Wisdom, Wisdom comes from Bad Judgement

Sure it does, Bob.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=8110
Have You Ever Blown A Launch--Not A Joke

Allen Sparks - 2008/08/15 02:24:09 UTC

I have launched unhooked twice. I've crashed back into the hill after launch ... twice. I've been blown OTB and crashed into gnarly canyons twice ... all in my first two years of flying (1976-1978). I should mention that I never had an instructor ... just dumb luck.

The first unhooked launch was in August of 1976 ... flying a 18' chandelle standard in a plastic swing-seat harness with a car seat-belt and buckle.

Whatever you say.

whitemaw - 2011/04/24 21:48:01 UTC
Decatur, Georgia

Would wheels have helped lessen the injury?

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=12682
Landing on your feet (for AEROTOW)- So Dangerous

Jack Axaopoulos - 2009/06/29 14:26:26 UTC

OMG!!! You dont even have wheels!!?!?!?!?
YOURE GONNA DIE FOR SUUUUREE!!!!

I have a brilliant idea. People who cant land for sh*t.... LEARN TO LAND That way when a weak link breaks on you, ITS A NON-ISSUE. Genius huh???

Nah. Wheels are for wimps - a crutch for people who can't develop safe landing skills.

NMERider - 2011/04/24 21:54:49 UTC
Southern California

Well that really sucks. I hope the recovery & rehab go well. I'll tell Oscar when I see him tonight. That looks like his old F225.

Same glider that he thought he was hooked into last September that prompted Spark's comment about how he always does the "Tad 'lift and tug'"?

Allen Sparks - 2011/04/24 21:59:08 UTC

Would wheels have helped lessen the injury?

yes, emphatically.

and I have some. They are 12" pneumatic wheels.

funny, I've flown that glider almost exclusively with wheels and never rolled on them (always landed on my feet). Yesterday was a rare exception when I didn't use 'em.

kinda ironic, eh?

Not if you're familiar with Murphy's Law.

That looks like his old F225.

thanks. That's the wing I swapped Oscar for, and he got the Horizon ET 180 that I got from BlindRodie.

Great company.

It's a nice floater. I need to move the hangpoint forward a little.

Steven Leiler - 2011/04/25 00:35:49 UTC
Durham, Connecticut

I feel your pain as I type with my left hand
two weeks ago sat broke right humerus from a weak ass flair
hope to post story, video and x-rays sometime this week

Looking forward to it. Lemme guess... Hands on the downtubes? And of course rolling it in would have been totally out of the question.

Why don't you guys start using those x-rays as your avatars?

Allen Sparks - 2011/04/25 00:55:02 UTC

Wow kermit ... I'm really sorry that happened to you.

I broke my humerous (spiral fracture) in a downwind landing at Slide Mountain in 1989. I still have the plates and screws. I was lucky to have partially recovered from the radial nerve damage. It really messed up my guitar playing.

I sure hope you heal quickly.

David Bodner - 2011/04/25 00:44:41 UTC
Arlington, Virginia

Oh, man. That looks like how I busted my arm a year ago.

Yeah. Big surprise.

Richard Palmon - 2011/04/25 01:57:59 UTC
Mountain House, California

A glider that is trimmed too slow, and a pilot getting out of good body position during the landing rotation or flare. Usually ends up just being a belly landing, with wheels.

Making sure a glider is trimmed perfectly and making sure you have good upright posture during the landings. Helps avoid this senario.

Ya know what's a REALLY good body position during landing that helps avoid this scenario? Prone with both hands on the basetube. That way you don't hafta worry about the goddam trim or flare timing.

Jason Boehm - 2011/04/25 13:37:45 UTC
Boulder

and here I was about to email you this morning to see if you got to fly Saturday...
I hope you heal up soon

Hey Dickhead. Remember this thread:

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=12682
Landing on your feet (for AEROTOW)- So Dangerous

...you started twenty-two months ago?

Jason Boehm - 2009/06/29 16:13:58 UTC

im only pointing out that wheels don't work everywhere

But they would have here - wouldn't they? And they would have in virtually all incidents in which people snap arms and rip them out of sockets - wouldn't they?

CAL - 2011/04/25 14:31:31 UTC
Ogden

Thanks for sharing Spark ! you can tell by all the comments that you have great friends here, you are a great friend to us all, i have enjoyed the little times that i was able spend with you and hope for more opportunities in the future, take care our good friend ! you will be back, you are one tough man ! it is amazing that you where able to get the glider back up on your own !

Heal Fast ! keep in touch and let us know how you are doing !

Yeah, if you're incurably stupid you better be tough - and good at healing. But don't ever worry about a shortage of great friends on the org. Birds of a feather...

John Stokes - 2011/04/25 14:55:11
Trenton, Georgia

Hey Spark,

Sorry you injured yourself!!! I had a landing twenty years ago where wheels would have lessened or prevented the injury. No damage to the glider as well. Spiral fracture to my left arm, though. I had so called Hall "Wheels" on my basetube and they didn't do a bit of good! I now fly with pneumatic wheels and they are great if you need them. My advice to anyone using Hall wheels-THROW THEM AWAY!!! Get something larger that can actually do some good. Same applies to the WW white wheels. Get rid of them and replace them with the lawn mower wheels that a number of people use. These a wider and slightly larger and do work and you can use the same brackets. Heal fast my friend!

Hey John. Remember a couple of years ago when we were discussing this issue at Lookout? I said that putting a hand up on the downtube was begging to get an arm broken and you told me about a local pilot/MD who totally shared that perspective.

Dan Smith - 2011/04/25 15:35:34 UTC
Jericho, Vermont

Same here; I flared too little and too late, and put the basetube on the ground. I broke a downtube, but luckily had no injury. The Hall's were gone by the next week, replaced by eight inch pneumatics.

ddreg - 2011/04/25 19:44:24 UTC
Point of the Mountain

Sorry about the accident, but this always brings up a question in my mind.

Accident?

When do you stop flying and give up to prepare for the crash?

Pretty much any time you decide to do a stupid conventional hang glider landing in light air. But John Simon would really be the one to consult on this matter.

And, yes - we should really be focusing our attention on preparing for - versus not - crashing. 'Cause these things are a totally inevitable part of hang gliding. Right?

People give the advice on knowing how to crash. At what point in the video should he have given up and gone into crash position mode.

How 'bout we just put it down on the wheels in situations that are screaming for it - like this one?

bisleybob - 2011/04/25 20:00:53 UTC
Norfolk

i sympathise with the one had writing. i had a whack at the weakend landing a topless (3rd ever flight on it) in nill wind. weird thing was base bar went down i fell forward put my hands down to break my fall and the nose whacked the back of my left hand, blown up like a baloon now

And, obviously, wheels would've been totally out of the question here too.

(I remember one of my locals really getting nailed in the hand by a nose plate. Can't come up with who at the moment though. (Edited in later...) Oh yeah - John Simon.)

Allen Sparks - 2011/04/25 20:03:08 UTC

when should I have assumed the position? ... as soon as I knew i couldn't get my feet under me. i waited about 1.5 secs too long whilst trying to keep the nose up.

a major contributor to this is my hand transition technique. It is way too late. if I had transitioned with my hands low on the downtubes on approach rather than trying to transition in ground effect, I would have been able to easily move my hands into the correct flare position.

How 'bout just using wheels and rolling in on them instead of trying to write one handed doctoral dissertations on jumping through hoops on how to try to pull off inherently dangerous landings and crash just right when they don't work?

Richard Palmon - 2011/04/25 21:00:51 UTC

I know this feeling very well Spark. If a glider is trimmed too slow...It makes staying upright much more difficult. If a glider is trimmed too slow. The pilot has to manually control and maintain airspeed to perfect trim speed while in ground effect, simultaneously maintaining good body position.

If the glider is trimmed at min. sink or slower. It would stand to reason that the downtubes have moved forward, further away from your leverage and cg.

p.s.Let's take a look at the opposite. If the glider is trimmed fast. You can (for the most part) get away with your body postion proning out away from upright close to the ground. With the extra airspeed. You can use this energy to climb and get your feet below and underneath your cg.

Hope this helps.

(Long agonized scream.)

John Caldwell - 2011/04/25 22:36:41 UTC
Augusta, Georgia

Spark, sorry for these expensive (esp pain wise) lessons/reminders. You have helped us all- cause could have happened to anyone.

Not anybody with more than an ounce of common sense.

I hope for a speedy recovery. Heal well in every way. Thank you for sharing all of it.

Yawn.

Allen Sparks - 2011/04/26 01:52:16 UTC

I currently weigh about 190. I am light on the wing (on purpose). Winds in the LZ were <5mph and I landed into the wind.

Landed?

Richard Palmon - 2011/04/26 02:07:35 UTC

Thanks Spark. So we know that you are light on the 225. We also know there were light winds to 5 mph. We can see your landing posture colapses as you get closer to the ground. Which makes it tougher to push up as your cg and legs go back and your head starts to lower or come down. I don't want to speculate or try to read your mind. But there are a couple things that come to mind. After watching it in full speed.

1) You may have trimmed out a bit late.

2) Once you felt your body getting out of good landing position (upright). Along with trying to slow down by pushing out, simultaneously... you may have gripped and pulled down on the downtubes to brace for impact.

I hope this helps... It's just an opinion on my part not a judgement on yours. I agree 100% that things can go bad real quick. If you are out of good launching, flying, and landing positions.

Heal well.

P.S. Another observation is friction. Once your knees touch the ground. Just the friction of the knees and ground can quickly reduce the airspeed of a glier. Like break pads in a car. The increase of friction decreases the rate of speed.

(Another long agonized scream.)

Rich Jesuroga - 2011/04/26 02:37:40 UTC
Salida, Colorado

In Sparks behalf... Allen is an H4 who started flying in the 70's and has a lot of experience. He's one of the few among us who has tucked, tumbled and tossed his chute - twice.

Right after deliberately flying into dust devils low - if I'm not mistaken. But don't quote me just yet.

Given his hang gliding experience he's not bashful about posting a video of a blown landing resulting in an injury. We have much to learn from Allen;

Yeah. Allen and Bille. Listen to and watch them both carefully. Then do the precise opposite of what you're hearing and seeing.

His willingness to post detailed video of his incident so that we can all learn;

Learn WHAT? That if you do stupid dangerous landings in light air with no wheels you can get hurt? Yeah, let's see some more videos, I'm not sure we have this one down quite yet.

and more so, the integretiy of an advanced pilot to share his mistake so others may benefit and not make the same error.

If he had any integrity he'd have said something about hook-in checks right after (or, better yet, BEFORE) Yossi was killed a couple of weeks ago and been setting an example by actually doing one - in accordance with USHGA regulations - and using wheels on Saturday.

Christopher LeFay (Mavi Gogun) - 2011/04/26 05:37:25 UTC
Istanbul

Fear has often recommended that I make this decision sooner rather than later; after a debilitating crash that left one arm useless for six months (and for years, weaker), an interesting transformation occurred. At the moment when everything goes to hell and an impact is immanent, fear has been replaced by a reflex to do whatever is necessary to avoid a sudden change in shape. The difference between saving myself from sudden jeopardy and injury was removing fear as the ultimate arbiter of "when" and replacing it with a relentless determination to be the pilot. No specific-to-general argument, just my experience.

I believe in wheels. I want them on my glider. Because of deficits in my ability to focus and an illusion of security fostered by their presence, I removed them for a time. Nothing to do with improving my glide, or complacency- rather, it made me acutely aware that the only recourse left to me was to perform. It improved my launch, approach, and landing.

Now where have I heard something like that before...

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3173
somewhat predictable accident at Highland

Allen Sparks - 2008/04/19 01:38:55 UTC
Evergreen, Colorado

We don't really have much LZ terrain that is wheel-friendly around here. So I am wheel-less for the time being, until I decide to do something else. I can tell you that it makes me take my landings even more seriously.

Kinda like working without a net really sharpens up your trapeze performance.

That said, I wouldn't now want to fly without them.

So when do you "stop flying"? never. When to release the control frame and become a rag doll is like flair timing- a transient moment that requires timing, focus, and presence of mind. But when? As late as possible- say, the moment before some part of your glider connects with the Earth or some object connected to it.

Yeah. Let's all work on becoming Gods so we can become undisputed masters of hitting those transient moments with unerring Bruce Lee like accuracy.

CAL - 2011/04/26 16:24:51 UTC

maybe i should rethink the Wheel thing and start using them again, but then i am at risk at high wind launching

So how 'bout getting lockable wheels? Or, failing that... How 'bout just using what you've got whenever you're NOT launching in high winds?

Allen Sparks - 2011/04/26 17:52:49 UTC

once I'm healed, i plan to invest a few days with our local instructor Mark Windsheimer and his scooter tow system, working to improve my hand transition and body position technique.

And you've been flying your brains out since 1976? Doesn't leave a whole lot of hope for Joe Hang Two, does it?

i'll be flying with wheels

Won't that cause you to take your landings less seriously and make them even MORE dangerous?

Jason Boehm - 2011/04/26 21:18:02 UTC

the LZ at lookout can be surprising...its not level at all...and rarely does one get a straight headwind...often crosswind/cross hill...one of my last flights there I thought I had good speed and as soon as I got to the deck I had nothing...i flared instantly...almost in disbelief that all my airspeed had vanished, and I'm sure i had more speed on approach then Spark had here

And, of course, the field is totally incompatible with wheel landings.

Doug Hildreth - 1990/03

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

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

It wasn't working over twenty years ago and it isn't working now. And don't hold your breath while you're waiting for it to start working any time in the near future. And keep remembering the experience and skill levels of this glider driver and the recommended experience and skill levels for this lightly loaded kite.

Don't go anywhere, Spark. I'm not finished with you yet.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3167
Freak accident at Highland

Tad Eareckson - 2008/04/13 23:47:22 UTC

Some years back I was landing at Ridgely and transferred both hands to the downtubes simultaneously. Yeah - I had known that was the wrong thing to do for a couple of decades but even more sections of my brain than usual were switched off.

I had been carrying the extra maneuvering speed like I was supposed to, so as soon as I gave it the opportunity the glider shot up and stopped - straight over the windsock as luck would have it.

I was REALLY expecting to be folded, spindled, and mutilated within the next couple of seconds but Murphy decided to let me off with a warning for once and I fell to a side, recovered, and landed without incident.

I've had a lot of less eye opening but similar incidents involving a lot less incompetence, often resulting from a hand bouncing off of a tail wire. None of the consequences have ever been worse than a little grass staining.

This sounds like - what - the fourth and fifth breaks from the shoulder down amongst forum folk over the course of the past year?

Hopefully these will prove to be the least severe of the run. I, along with others, was really stunned to hear a couple of months ago how serious was Rich's situation. I sure hope that continues to improve at a much faster rate.

With respect to the accident which resulted in the first set of breaks, there probably wasn't much of a list of things one could have done differently to alter the outcome of the flight - once it had left the slope - without benefit of a crystal ball.

In the other two... The hands attached to the doomed arms were holding onto the downtubes - right?

I've always thought that the way we land these things is stupid. We're taking our hands off the steering wheel at about the most critical stage of the flight to reposition them - assuming nothing goes wrong - at locations at which we have less control and where our arms are a whole lot more likely to get torn apart if/when the glider stops real fast and we don't/can't let go in time.

The payoff - if the flare timing is better than mine usually is... We get to stop the glider on a dime, land on our feet, and look cool. I'm pretty happy that nothing comparable is going on when I'm coming down at MSP.

This is the second forum incident reported from a span of eighteen days in which taking a hand off the basetube resulted in a loss of control. The first situation was just potentially dangerous, the second was life altering. Both of those actions were elective.

Mike Robertson is a proponent of rolling in. Last time I saw him he was still blind in one eye and his harness looked like crap but I don't think he had broken anything.

I'm gonna continue opting for landing on my feet - or trying anyway - and I'm not saying that I'd have fared any better than John had I been in his situation but it's a pretty safe bet that if he had been landing the way the tandems and all other fixed wing aircraft on the planet do that he'd be looking forward to a much better 2008 season.

The choice doesn't have to be all or nothing. People have really mangled themselves because they've been more concerned about getting their legs free of jammed pods than they have about landing the glider. I would suggest that we be a bit more open to the idea of bellying in when we're low on stuff like altitude, airspeed, and time. Maybe skid plates over (under) our chests and knees would reduce our reluctance to some degree.

Brian Vant-Hull - 2008/04/14 13:26:44 UTC

I think that's a good observation Tad...I wanted to reply saying there's also benefits to being upright when things get hairy (as championed by Greg DeWolf), but I don't think a thread involving an injury to a friend is the best place to start a potential argument even with good points to be made on either side. Move to another thread and restart the discussion?

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3173
somewhat predictable accident at Highland

Tad Eareckson - 2008/04/16 11:55:51 UTC

OK, Brian - done.

Sorry, had no intention of starting an argument. Just trying to get folk to think about what we're doing and hoping to have some plus effect on the fun to misery ratio.

Yeah, I've got a HUGE amount of respect and appreciation for Greg. It's so refreshing to see someone who studies, questions, experiments, and analyzes instead of just memorizing the "rules". (Anybody know why he seems to have melted from the scene?)

But, as far as I know, he's got one more broken arm than Mike. And he got it at a nice flat flight park several stumbling steps following being upright with his hands on the downtubes. It was a tandem flight and he nobly took the fall to protect the passenger - but...

If there had been wheels on the basetube it would've undoubtedly been a total non event - but there weren't. On that issue I must, reluctantly, part paths.

I just reread some of his stuff from the archives at the end of the last decade. I've always shared with him the opinion if that we always hit the ground feet first the fatality rate for this sport would drop to something around zero. I also think the best way to implement that contact mode would be to have everyone fly suprone - but that ain't never gonna happen.

Trouble with going to the downtubes and upright is that that's really not how the glider is meant to be flown - you have to kiss some speed and control bye-bye. That's why you seldom see vertically rotated pods when people are fighting to stay in ratty thermals at four grand.

Joe would very likely have come off a lot better a year ago if he had hit the ground feet first but during the base and final legs of that landing the glider was alternating between partially in and totally out of control and he needed all the authority and speed range he could beg, borrow, or steal.

But let's take a look at the environment in which this latest accident occurred.

At flights originating from Ridgely we're up to three landings which have resulted in a broken arm or two.

Robert Sweeney hit something hard on 1999/10/03 landing, I believe, far to east but I don't know any particulars. Any help?

Paul's was extremely serious, happened in a manner similar to Rich's, and involved - correct me if I'm wrong - hands on the downtubes. Although he reported the soil being too soft for his wheels to do any good I'm thinking that he might have been OK if his hands had been on the basetube. I've seen a pretty serious downwind stall and crash in which the pilot folded the keel with his helmet but was no more than shaken up.

And we all have John's fresh in our memory.

There are a couple of gliders that fly at Ridgely A LOT and ALWAYS roll their landings in. I don't believe either of them has ever so much as bent a downtube over the course of a good chunk of a decade. They always have at least one very experienced pilot on board but those guys are human too.

There is a fair amount of fixed wing general aviation stuff that lands at Ridgely during my excursions. Just about all of it deliberately rolls in on the wheels and I'm assuming the drivers are keeping both hands on the steering wheel when things are getting critical. And they only need one of those to keep things under control so they can be forgiven for tinkering with the throttle.

(I have seen one little low wing seriously fucked up but that one went up and came down on a tire known to be questionable.)

So are there any conclusions we can draw from these trends?

P.S. Yesterday I spent a lot of time trying to recall a single instance of anybody EVER getting hurt or damaging a glider in the course of concluding a flight from the last couple of feet of altitude with his hands on the basetube and the intent of rolling in. I got nuthin'. Anybody else?

P.P.S. You also notice that - with respect to the other end of the flight - when we launch prone on the wheels with both hands on the basetube the accident rate is ZERO?

Jim Rowan - 2008/04/16 12:41:56 UTC

Tad, if you want to land prone on wheels and lead with your head, by all means I would encourage you to do so, but I suggest you make sure all your landings take place on mowed grassy fields or some other surface suitable for rolling in on wheels. I think I would prefer to land upright and take my chances of a broken arm as opposed to a broken face or neck, but hey, that's just me.

JR

Lauren Tjaden - 2008/04/16 13:00:21 UTC

From the Oz Report, Dec, 2007, about our friend Armand:

http://ozreport.com/11.256
Moyes Race and Rally, day three

Armand has joined us at the motel and is walking around with his arm in a sling and in pain. He'll go in Monday to check his X-rays as there appears to be a small fracture. He tried to land on his wheels when he saw that he was coming in down wind at Rylstone. He was on the base bar, with his arms fully extended rolling through the tall grass when the wheels caught and the glider nosed over. Because his elbows were in the locked position (not on purpose, of course) they didn't flex when the glider stopped rolling, and his arm popped out of the shoulder socket. Perhaps wheels didn't cause this accident, but they did contribute to it.

About Greg DW. I saw him at WW Demo Days. He may get into teaching clinics again in a different area. Ask him if you'd like more details - I don't want to speak for him.

Janni Papakrivos - 2008/04/16 16:30:49 UTC

I think I would prefer to land upright and take my chances of a broken arm as opposed to a broken face or neck, but hey, that's just me.

That's a myth, it can turn out real bad either way.

Scenario 1 (happened to me):

You get hit by rotor, pound in at high speed still prone. With wheels chances are the control frame is gonna take the entire impact and you pancake in. In my case the glider actually bounced and flew another twenty feet before it finally settled on broken tubes left right and center.

Scenario 2 (seen it):

Without wheels the glider would still take the initial shock as well as come to a full stop through a severe nose or LE plant. Still prone you'd swing through and most likely hit the sail unless both down tubes break in the same spot at the same time or don't break at all. In a truly straight ahead nose-in your head or your shoulders would hit the keel. Believe it or not, the keel will break before your helmet or neck does and you don't need to hit it real hard either. Of course, there will always be the poor bastard who's gonna die doing that, so take it with a grain of salt.

Anyway, in both scenarios you'd probably be worse off upright. Your arms and shoulders would have to be stronger than the down tubes, your legs would contact the ground first. I think in general your best chance of walking away from a crash is to stay prone, tuck in your arms and let the glider and its wheels take the impact. Those little tiny streamlined wheels only work on the most groomed golf course and are totally useless in any crash situation. Tad, why don't you walk away from the tow releases for a while and build some really nice pneumatic wheels for carbon and aluminium airfoil base tubes? I'd be your first customer and I have hard data that will show you that there's dozens of pilots out there who want them, too.

Chris McKee - 2008/04/16 17:21:40 UTC

If you are flying the top performace gliders, you should have appropriate landing skills where its a rarity that you have to roll in.

Janni Papakrivos - 2008/04/16 18:23:37 UTC

Chris, sure, all that drag defeats the purpose of having an expensive slippery control frame. Once you fly high-per gliders you shouldn't need wheels anymore. Actually my landings got a whole lot better after I ditched the wheels because I knew there was no cheap way out and flared aggressively every time.

Anyway, I've come to the conclusion that all our primary and secondary LZ's in the mountains are unsafe on anything more than a Sport2 perhaps. Too small, too many trees, too little margin for error. A nasty rotor (and they like to travel) will send you for the ground, if the field is small you won't be able to come in smoking hot on a topless, that means you're gonna pound in doing what, 20 mph?. I think it would be nice to have at least the option of putting on pneumatics on those days when you don't want to go XC or when you transition to the glider etc. They offer them for the Atos, saw Bruce flying with them.

Chris McKee - 2008/04/16 18:35:55 UTC

Janni - you touch on a really good point. One of the primary reasons I stepped back to a U2 from my Talon was that with my landing proficiency declining with my diminished airtime, I didn't have the comfort level to put a topless down in our mountain LZs. More than once when I flew my Ultrasport into Woodstocks LZ, I got hammered by thermal induced turbulence and put it down on the wheels. I didn't have that level of comfort with putting my Talon down in the same area. Because of those memories, I will never fly without wheels if only for the option to roll in if I really need to. Without them, as you said, forces you away from even having that option. I don't regret stepping back to the U2 as it still gives me more than enough performance, but it lands like a dream. I've heard the Sport 2 is even more forgiving. For the Competition Pilot or the pilot who goes for the long XC flights, I think Topless gliders are a necessary evil, but since 90% of my flights end up in the same area that I took off from I'm happy to have the controlability and ease of landing.

David Bodner - 2008/04/16 21:53:24 UTC

I think the WW wheels may be better than their small circumference may suggest. Since the entire wheel is below the basetube, I think they're equivalent to a larger diameter wheel. Also, they're not real skinny, so they have a fighting chance of not digging in. I even think the slippery plastic may have a slight advantage over the same-sized rubber tire.

Janni, the day your skinny wheels failed you at the Pulpit, the field was so muddy I don't think my huge-ass Falcon wheels would've helped. Your new wheels look a bit fatter than your original ones, so they should be more helpful in other conditions.

On the larger topic, it's simply not reasonable to expect to be able to roll in (outside of a flight park), so most of us land upright. On the rare occasions when it might be safer to be prone, I daresay circumstances may dictate otherwise. Letting go of one upright would've saved more than one broken arm, but that takes more presence of mind than I'll probably have when faced with that situation.

Bacil Dickert - 2008/04/16 22:44:02 UTC

Scenario 1 (happened to me):

It also happened to me landing at Fisher Road in August of 1994. Skimming along upright, bleeding off airspeed, a few feet off of the ground, a big foot of down air (rotor?, sink?, thermal dump?) dropped down on me suddenly. The glider slammed into the ground with a groundspeed of around 30 MPH. The big 12" diameter Delta Wing Kites plastic wheels allowed the glider to bounce back up in the air, still flying. The impact with the ground knocked the breath out of me (thank goodness for the chest mounted chute). I flew a good distance further before flaring late and bellying in. After that day I swore to never fly without wheels.

Matthew Graham - 2008/04/17 01:39:26 UTC

Simple-

Wheels - YES! If Joe Gregor had put the big wheels on his wife's Falcon it's highly unlikely he would have broken both arms.

Also, contrary to Batman's assertion, the Ultrasport wheels aren't big. They're only seven inches. Twelve is big wheels!

If you aren't gonna be flying with wheels, you had better better have consistantly good landings in the glider you are currently flying, fly the glider regularly and be current. If not, you better get your ass out to one of the tow parks or training hills and practice landings over and over until you can land the glider consitantly well. And when first flying a new or high performance glider, you also need to give yourself lots of room to land to make up for different performance.

Rich Bloomfield - 2008/04/17 15:12:10 UTC

Wheels, I love them, the bigger the better. However pilots that spend 6 or 8,000 bukeroneys on a high performance glider are looking for performance, not drag. Small wheels or no wheels are the tradeoff (sacrifice of safety) they willingly make to gain the performance. We all make our own decision about what risk level is acceptable to accomplish the particular goal that's in our sights.

JD Guillemette - 2008/04/17 16:38:50 UTC

Tad is now the advocate for wheels, this from the man who is concerned about the drag from an aerotow release.

I don't see how Tad can make any determination as to whether wheels would have made any difference in the most recent accident at Highland.

Did he witness the accident?

Did he interview the witnesses of the accident?

Did he inspect the post crash damage and site?

Or is he just inferring all his data form three lines in forum post?

I don't know about any of the accidents, but has Tad interviewed and thoroughly investigated any of those as well? He seems to speak as thought he is the authority in HG accidents.

I have no problem with wheels. In fact I have flown with wheels on all my gliders until my most recent glider the Litespeed. Once I find a pair that fit the Carbon Fiber base bar I probably fly with wheels on that glider as well, and it looks there is a couple of choices posted previously in this thread.

Will I roll in on the wheels for my landings ... HELL NO!! I'm not going face first into the grass at an out-landing field. Try landing in a fallow field, soy beans, or wheat on your wheels, you'll whack for sure. You might even get the nose plate in the back of the head! Not to mention the crop damage. It's feet first for me. I have never seen a bird belly land it. They get their feet out in front of them too, and they are the experts. For someone to suggest that rolling in on base bar mounted wheels and your belly as standard operating procedure for all landings is just plain stupid.

If wheels landing were my only option I would go with tandem wheels with a tail wheel or skid. One of our fellow pilots who lost the use of his legs did it this way. Although, he had to be very carful selecting fields for out-landing.

For me the wheels are just in case I blow the flair timing or a down winder. They may save a base tube or an arm. However, as mentioned before wheels are probably not going to do any good unless it's nice, flat, firm ground.

Mark Cavanaugh - 2008/04/18 04:44:00 UTC

Wheels, pros-and-cons, when do they help, when do they not? Seems like the topic comes up every year or two, eh? :)

One scenario I haven't seen discussed this time around is the jammed harness zipper.

I fly with a Rotor/Vulto, with two zipper sliders: the upper goes from the chin down, and the lower goes from the toes up. They meet somewhere in the middle.

If you aren't careful, and especially if the fit is tight, it is possible to insert the tongue of the upper zipper into the slider in an insecure way, as you get that one started (on the ground).

Once in flight, you zip 'down' (chin & down) and 'up' (toes & up). All seems well.

But during the flight, the insecurely seated zipper starts to separate (from chin down towards the toes). If that continues all the way to where the zippers meet, and if that meeting point is (say) about mid-thigh... Then you won't be able to get your feet out prior to landing, even though the lower zipper is operational.

So... That happened to me not long after getting the harness. Thankfully, it occurred at Ridgely, and thankfully, I have wheels on my U2 (they project forward and down from the basetube). Wheeled in for the landing, total non-event. It was even kinda fun!

Was REALLY happy that I had wheels on that occasion. Course, if I was looking at a landing in a plowed field, or even a moderately rough field, wheeling in might not have been an option. I *think* I'd probably try to flare in that situation, then let go, duck, and cover. But even in that circumstance, there's always the chance that the wheels might help the glider skid along a little bit, and lessen the impact. Even a little can mean a lot.

Since then, I've tried to make sure that the upper zipper doesn't go past the waist, and that the lower meets it at that point.

Jim Rooney - 2008/04/18 11:40:20 UTC

Tad is now the advocate for wheels, this from the man who is concerned about the drag from an aerotow release.

BWA HAHAHAHAAHA!

Did he witness the accident?

No

Did he interview the witnesses of the accident?

No

Did he inspect the post crash damage and site?

No

Or is he just inferring all his data form three lines in forum post?

BINGO!

I don't see how Tad can make any determination as to whether wheels would have made any difference in the most recent accident at Highland.

I'm sure Tad's just stirring the pot again. I don't really know for sure since I don't read his posts (I LOVE that "block user" feature!)
Wheels wouldn't have made a hill of beans difference.

Tad Eareckson - 2008/04/18 12:00:57 UTC

JR,

It would help if you actually read and commented upon things that I've actually said but - hell - why break the streak?

As it happens though, all my landings do take place on mowed grassy fields unless I let myself get blown far enough from the airport as to be compelled to consider other options. And even then just about all of my landings take place on mowed grassy fields.

Lauren,

I was talking about landings, not disaster movies. Sometimes downwind just happens to one but tall grass is always an elective. Put the two together and, yeah, there's a good chance you'll be needing X-rays.

Janni,

Thanks. Yeah, that's pretty much my take on things. Yet another example of the perception being a lot worse than the reality. "Myth" hits the nail pretty squarely.

Take a sabbatical from tow releases to - what - reinvent the wheel? Thanks for the vote of confidence but I'm mostly a needle and thread sort of person and that sort of thing is pretty much out of the scope of my industrial capabilities. Tim Hinkel, maybe.

Besides, after Lauren and Dustin so graphically illustrated precisely what I've been saying about that crap for so many years I may soon be inundated with requests for equipment. One - maybe as many as two pilots might want to use something safe.

JD,

Where in your incredibly fevered imagination did you get the idea that I made "any determination as to whether wheels would have made any difference in the most recent accident at Highland."?

Everything important I know about the cause of this accident was contained in one sentence from John Dullahan and two from Paul. There has been no mention of whether the glider had wheels in any of the traffic prior or subsequent to it. And since it and wheels were and would have been taken out of action and the equation at about 67' MSL at a 63' MSL airport I'm wondering why anyone would be clueless enough to think I was discussing them as a relevant factor.

Try giving the bong a rest for an hour or so and read what I actually said (gawd I get tired of saying this). If that's too much to ask just do the second to last sentence of my 2008/04/13 post.

If you do read my posts carefully you'll find that you can't even tell whether or not I fly with wheels. The best you can get is a pretty good idea that I think tandem gliders oughta have at least two.

And - no - there's no way you can get the nose plate in the back of your head.

By the way...

I don't imagine you got great grades in ornithology class - either.

Little passerine birds tend to have obscene power to weight ratios and flap a lot so they can land any way they goddam well feel like. You start getting into some of the big stuff, things start looking different.

Check out Ellis's 2008/04/07 post. When transferring from their first and second elements of choice - air and water - they hate no wind landings even more than we do and end up bellying in quite a bit. I'll bet if you put your skateboard with some velcro straps out along the runway at Midway it would be gone before you finished lunch.

Loons are the most heavily wing loaded birds on the planet. Their legs are located so far aft that they are totally unable to take of from terra firma (great swimmers, lousy walkers) and it takes them forever to get off the lake. They belly in.

Watch a Tundra Swan land on a glassy river in no wind conditions. Looks like a high wing float plane. The feet (pontoons) water ski across the surface until some lift is bled off, they sink, and the bird bellies in glides to a stop. I've never seen one glide in ground (water) effect, throw a flare, and tail slide into the water at a dead stop.

But back to wheels...

Put them on the basetube, they cost you some drag but they make the glider safer. Lose-Win.

Run the release lanyard in the downtube, it saves you some drag AND makes the glider safer. Win-Win.

Configure the release system as it is on the Russian Tank... Lose-Lose-Lose-Lose-Lose-Lose-Lose-Lose-Lose.

See the differences yet?

Mark,

Yeah, the last sentence of Paragraph 7 is pretty much the point Mike Robertson tries to make.

Jim,

I'm really not seeing how the "block user" feature has made any difference.

You never had to read my posts before and your level of comprehension of the issues and comments remain unaltered.

Well, on the other hand... You do have the luxury of being able to respond to what someone of your caliber of literacy says I said - rather than addressing the reality. Yeah, I guess that would be a big plus.

Brian Vant-Hull - 2008/04/18 12:53:56 UTC

umm.....yeah.

Anyway, I'd just like to point out that Bacil has landed in a plowed field using twelve inch wheels, and they worked for him. I got away from the big wheels when I had two gliders and needed a solution that would work for both because I was too cheap to buy a set for each glider. Haven't flown much recently, may have to go back to the big wheels.

But many fields require landing upright, and it helps when cow patties are present. The flare remains my first option.

I've heard grizzled pilots say that the best landing option when things are clearly gonna get nasty is fetal position with one hand on a downtube so you swing to the side and miss the keel. Would take some practice to do this automatically under stress.

Brian Vant-Hull - 2008/04/18 12:55:49 UTC

'umm....yeah' wasn't meant to suggest agreement so much as a change of topic.

JD Guillemette - 2008/04/18 13:01:59 UTC

Sounds to me like you are an advocate wheel landings as SOP.

Looks Like this guy got it in the back of the head

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


Jim Rooney and I saw a pilot get hit in the back of the head once in Red Wing NJ, Summer 2002. Well to be absolutely accurate it wasn't the Nose Plate, it was the leading edge about 6 inches from the nose plate. There was big dent in the shape of his helmet in the leading edge. He was a walking TKO. He keep asking us the same question "so I was out there for a minute", and we responded "yes". After he asked us for the third time on the walk back to the hanger we thought he might need a trip to the hospital.

I knew you were going to point out the Loons and the Gooney Birds, you are so predictable, I was going to make the qualifier about certain water foul. But' I left it out as a carrot for you, and you took it right on cue.

Jim Rooney - 2008/04/19 01:15:24 UTC

Uh guys... I was there. I watched it. I can tell you... wheels wouldn't have done squat. Pick any set... big phenmantics, whatever. He hit first, then the glider. Same as the guy JD's talking about back in NJ.
Discuss wheels in general if you feel so inclined, but sorry, not in this case.

I still find it hilarious that Tadd's "Mr Wheels" now.
Whatever.

Allen Sparks - 2008/04/19 01:38:55 UTC

If accidents were 'somewhat predictable', I'd bet we would have fewer :)

_hit happens. There are no recipes that prevent it.

In the past, I've flown for many years with wheels. I used them (solo) once just to try them out. I always used them when flying tandem. A few times they saved me from a major whack. In retrospect, I tended to take my whacks less seriously, because the wheels 'saved' me from the embarrasment.

Here in the rocky Rockies, I don't have the luxury of landing on mostly-level grass-covered fields.

The guy who bought my U2 didn't want the WW wheels 0- said they were useless ... so I kept them and tried to put them on my Sport, but they would not fit ... without some serious grinding and modification. Our local truck tow operation gets some awesome airtime (16k stuff) and has a rig that is not compatible with the WW wheels, so ... rather than jam them on and risk not being able to remove them, I decided ... what the hey .. Sport 2s are easy to land ... and made the decision to fly without the wheels.

We don't really have much LZ terrain that is wheel-friendly around here. So I am wheel-less for the time being, until I decide to do something else. I can tell you that it makes me take my landings even more seriously.

A week ago, a new pilot to the area muffed an approach and transition to the uprights and ended up pounding in (without wheels) .. the noseplate nailed him squarely in the back of the helmet, but fortunately, without injury. I really doubt that wheels would have made any difference, unless they were monster 12" pneumatics.

I broke my humerous (badly) in 1989, with nerve damage. In that instance, wheels would not have made a difference.

Some times _hit is gonna happen. That is the only thing that is somewhat predictable.

Tad Eareckson - 2008/04/19 16:35:10 UTC

OK, since it seems that folk can't be bothered, lack the necessary skills, and/or are too fucking stupid to read what I said lemme start over.

First off - apologies. I toned down the subject line of this thread and made a misleading statement in my first post in response to the accident. Those were mistakes but I figured John was already feeling more than crappy enough about the afternoon and I didn't want to give the impression of rubbing anything in but, for the greater good...

The title shoulda read:

totally predictable crash at Highland

Note substitutions from the words "somewhat" and "accident".

And...

There's NO FREAKIN' WAY I'd have clipped that sign had I been in his situation.

You guys talk about the goddam wheels all you want. It's a worthy issue and something constructive may come out of it. But I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE GODDAM WHEELS.

The cause of this crash was so black and white, so obvious, so preventable. But so far I've got zero indication that anybody gets it - has any clue what he would do any differently in similar circumstances.

He fucked up his approach, his situation was critical, the only thing that was keeping him alive was his precise control of the aircraft...

AND HE TOOK HIS HAND OFF THE STEERING WHEEL!!!

Why did he take his hand off the steering wheel?

So he could land on his feet.

HE DIDN'T NEED TO LAND ON HIS FEET!!! HE DID NEED TO MISS THE FUCKING SIGN!!!

OK - Everybody but Jim got that now?

This is about two things - threat assessment and controlling the aircraft.

I don't know, give a rat's ass about, wanna know whether or not the glider was equipped with the fucking wheels or not. Worst case alternate scenario - he bellies in on asphalt (probably grass though). That's the option you take when your other choice is clipping the sign.

Brian,

Was there something in my previous post with which you disagreed? I'd like to know 'cause I'm pretty good at standing by and backing up my statements.

JD,

I don't care what something sounds like to you. Here's what I said:

I'm gonna continue opting for landing on my feet...

Whenever I advocate doing something I take the lead and put it into practice myself.

But I am suggesting people start looking around and see where we're having accidents and injuries and where we're not.

I did watch the video and - no - he very obviously did not get the nose plate in the back of his head. And even before noticing the comments I had surmised that he hadn't been hurt - despite the dust cloud - and I don't think he did so much as trash a downtube.

But, Spark said his guy got nailed so, fine - you can get the nose plate in the back of your head.

Do you notice though...
--
He's got wheels.

The trouble starts at the precise moment he diverts his attention from FLYING THE GLIDER to getting his body vertical and his legs underneath him.

And, again, even though the results are much more spectacular - sliding into and getting power whacked by the nose - than they would have been if he had stayed prone, controlled the glider, and bellied in - with or without the wheels - he's still fine. None of the broken face or neck JR was so concerned about.

Also, his hands were on the basetube when he plowed in and he didn't break any arms.

With respect to the bird thing... OK, you're saying that you posted a statement which you knew to be false? Yeah, seems to be a trend. That's one of the reasons I have very little respect for you.

But, hey, can't thank you enough for the video. I couldn't make up stuff as good as that.

Spark,

Plenty of accidents are totally predictable - like, for instance, towing with a release that one absolutely knows will not function under load - and we could have fewer of them but pilots, as a rule and especially as a group, are not particularly bright.

To reiterate my opening statements...

This incident was not a case of shit happening and there most assuredly was a recipe to prevent it. The primary recipe is:

FLY THE GLIDER
--
Mistake 1

His approach was too low.

OK, we all make mistakes. I once demoed a Chad's Stealth 3 - which was a lot more performance than I was used to. But I overcompensated for its energy retention and underestimated the effect of the wind and landed embarrassingly short. Ended up having to finesse my landing around a ditch with the whole grass strip still in front of me.

Mistake 2

He was too low AND lined up over an extremely dangerous obstruction.

I've been to Ridgely. There are lots of options for not doing that.

Mistake 3

He took his hand off the steering wheel with an immovable steel object directly in front of him.
--
You don't usually get to make three mistakes at the same time and get away with it in this sport.

Paul Tjaden and Rich Alexander can make reasonably good cases for shit happening. Not this time.

Your friend Bille Floyd could make a good case except for three things...
--
ONE:

A 2:1/Hewett bridle/release would have auto released him.

TWO:

Joe Gregor - 2005/07
USHGA

An extremely experienced pilot was launching a new Falcon 2 via scooter tow. The bridle system used employed two lines: one attached high on the harness for the initial climb-out, and one attached lower for the high altitude portion of the tow. The pilot failed to hook in prior to launch and held onto the control frame (assisted by the upper towline hanging over the bar) until he released at approximately fifty feet. The glider was locked out by this time as the pilot let go with one hand to effect the release. The pilot was propelled through a pine tree, dislocating his shoulder and breaking an arm.

The reporter listed a number of factors contributing to this accident including: moving the glider while wearing the harness unhooked; failure of pilot to perform a hook-in check, perhaps due to shared responsibility for the launch; fatigue at the end of a long day; use of a double release system that is difficult to locate in an emergency; poor radio communication with the tow operator; and possible lack of a weak link. An additional factor may have been the high experience level of the accident pilot leading all involved to worry less about backup safety checks.

WE KNEW THIS COULD HAPPEN. But we weren't paying attention.

THREE:

There was a dolly in the neighborhood.
--
With respect to your pilot a week ago...

He muffed his approach - like John.
He muffed his transition to the uprights - like John.
He ended up pounding in - like John.
He got a plate in the back of his helmet - John got a plate in his right wrist.
What day was this? Was it even the same fucking day?
You see any similarities here? Any patterns? Any trends?

What would've happened if he had had a pair of 200 millimeter (8 inch) diameter pneumatic wheels - the kind Wills Wing sells (Part Number 70M-1010) on his basetube and had landed like a Cessna or Ridgely tandem glider? Would he still have been smacked by the nose plate?

With respect to 1989...

Are you saying that wheels wouldn't have made any difference after you blew your landing and flare with your hands on the downtubes or whatever the situation was? Or are you saying that you'd have ended up just as fucked up if you had planned to roll in with your hands on the basetube à la Mike Robertson?

With respect to your local paucity of wheel-friendly LZ terrain...

If it ain't wheel-friendly - it ain't pilot-friendly neither. 'Cause I think I've seen the Easter Bunny more times than I've seen a pilot who can guarantee me that he's gonna end up on his feet at the end of any flight more interesting than an evening sled run.

If I were out there I'd undoubtedly accept the same built in deep cut into my safety margin to get some oxygen bottle gains.

But I don't take my landings as seriously as you do so I'd probably figure out some way to get a pair of wheels on that glider - based on the off chance that my flare timing might suck as much as it usually does and the presumption that they're not going to make a situation worse.

With respect to the rig which will not accept the Wills Wing wheels...

Is there some reason that the rig cannot be made compatible with standard glider safety features?

On my first flight at Ridgely on their first day of operation I broke a (VG side) downtube that would have remained unbowed if I had had wheels. I didn't have wheels 'cause their dolly cradles wouldn't accommodate them. They shortly thereafter remedied the problem.

I'm not a fan of the "shit happens" school of philosophy with respect to glider crashes. I tend to go more with the "pilot error" approach. It usually doesn't take much effort to find a whole shitload of material to support the latter persuasion.

But maybe we can find some common ground, a merger. How 'bout "pilot shit happens"? I can live with that and I'm a lot happier being up there thinking that I'm not just rolling dice.

There was absolutely no shit just happening in this incident. This shit was one hundred percent pilot generated. And it is one hundred percent predictable that if pilots are routinely taking hands off of steering wheels when situations are critical - and all landings are critical - that a certain number are going to get mangled.

Thanks for the corroborating evidence.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3173
somewhat predictable accident at Highland

JD Guillemette - 2008/04/19 17:57:04 UTC

Tad,

From you last post I understand what you were trying to explain. The pilot gave up control while transitioning to the down tubes. I agree, transitioning to the down tubes can introduce a moment of control lose. I know from experience that if I transition too soon the glider's nose can rise because of the lack of leverage. That video I posted earlier is a perfect example.

If the conditions warrant flying the glider all the way to the ground with your hands on the base tube for a belly landing, so be it. I have done it myself. But I think it is a far better technique to land on your feet. Belly landing will only work on the best of landing surfaces. On your feet landings will work on all but the worst of landing terrain. For those situations where pilot error has gotten the worst of me ... I'll choose the fetal position.

As for the most recent accident at Highland, if a person did not witness the accident they have little authority to speak to what may have been the cause or what could have prevented it.

Brian Vant-Hull - 2008/04/19 18:57:04 UTC

Tad;

I wasn't disowning agreement with the technical content of your post, just your tendency to respond to a personal attack with an even stronger personal attack, sometimes preemptively. This only helps things get out of control and ruin what was starting to be a good conversation.

I think you make a good point saying that in many cases a crash is caused by the pilot ceding control of the glider in order to go upright. But there are also many cases where being upright is a better way to deal with the situation (about to land in a rockpile, for instance). It we accept your description of the situation purely for discussion (you weren't there so we can't count on it being at all accurate), it seems John likely would have avoided a collision if he stayed prone, but given that a collision happened, he may have prevented serious head/neck trauma by going upright.

We've got a dilemma of how to decide when to go from better control to better protection. Hopefully we are good enough pilots to make these choices with split second timing. It's not black and white: if I figure to have a 50/50 chance of hitting a brick wall while prone, I'm going upright even if it lowers my chances of evasion to 20/80. Others will choose differently.

Janni Papakrivos - 2008/04/20 10:22:06 UTC

From my very own experience I'm also inclined to say that staying prone and in full control of the glider takes precedence until you know you've got it made regardless of wheels and conditions. There's people out there who never get tired of advocating to fly the entire approach upright. I think they're full of it. One midday landing at the WS primary on a West day would change their minds instantly. I actually think I should set my trim speed fast and practice going upright in ground effect. Like these guys:

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

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3181
Jack's and Ridgely Friday?????

Chris McKee - 2008/04/20 14:52:31 UTC

Yes, I took off at lunch and arrived about 1:30. Carlos, Ric N, and Tim were set up when I arrived. I quickly set up and got in line launching at the end of the first wave. Winds were out of the West as advertised and tows were smooth. Ric had FOD staying up in conditions that the rest of us plebians couldn't capitalize on. I milked out a nice extendo with an uneventful landing. Rehydrated and launched about an hour later. Little bit longer of an extendo as I worked some bug farts over the northerly field, but they really did nothing more than slow my descent. NEW LESSON LEARNED. Winds had been light out of the West all day. I rolled downwind to set up for landing and realized that the flag was 180 from what I thought. I threw a little zig zag into my pattern to watch the flag to see if winds were switchy but the flag remained showing a more easterly direction. I immediately turned 180 and reversed my intended pattern and came in over the top of the line of gliders to land towards the East. Getting into ground effect, I realized that I now had a tailwind and was not slowing as I expected. No worries, I just rolled it in (SHUT UP TAD - THIS IS NOT AN ENDORSEMENT!). Jim came over to state the obvious asking if I realized that I had landed downwind. Now for the lesson, the flag at Ridgely is mounted at a slight angle and it takes winds over 5-7 to get the flag to turn in the right direction. Basically, in laymans terms (Not Lehman), in light condtions THE FLAG IS A LIAR!!!! Usually Ridgely puts up streamers around the flag, but they aren't up yet. I probably could of flared hard and ran it out, but I chose to belly in since it was a nicely groomed LZ. I should of gone with my original pattern, but the flag convinced me that the winds had swapped, which I rationalized was possible since it was nearing the end of the day. ANYWHOOO... it was fun to knock off the towing dust and enjoy some nice Friday flying instead of sitting in the office.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3173
somewhat predictable accident at Highland

Tad Eareckson - 2008/04/20 16:47:18 UTC

JD,

I'm glad that we seem to be on similar wavelengths with respect to this issue.

Yes - that video is an absolute treasure trove. And, along with Janni's "myth" comment, it got me thinking that this face and neck issue that JR brought up is WAY, WAY more bullshit than I've been thinking it was.

New Theory

You're gonna break more necks opting for conventional foot landings than you will electing to roll it in.

Discussion

If you pull off the classic hang glider landing you're gonna come out smelling like a rose.

But - let's be real generous and say we, collectively, get it right ninety percent of the time - WHEN (not if) we fuck it up the chances of the consequences being something of an issue are pretty good. (That's the trouble, JD, they most assuredly DO NOT work all the time.)

In my post of 2008/04/16 I put out a call for instances of - let's call them - Cessna landings having undesirable results. I still got nuthin'. (No, that suicide attempt Lauren reported has zilch to do with the issue. I was wondering if he had spent the preceding parts of the flight also in modes the precise opposites of the actions he should have taken.)

I don't want to end this part of my post on a sour note with you but this business of having to have been an eyewitness to an accident to evaluate it is bullshit and every time I hear someone push that button he moves to the left on my idiot/genius scale.

We know all we really need to know about this accident. We have a relay of John's discussion with Paul and a consistent statement from John Dullahan.

But let's say that John Dullahan was on mushrooms and Paul was making everything up for some bizarre reason. So what?

We've got:

from Paul...

...my worst landing accident (memorialized forever by Gary Smith's great video) happened because I missed a DT at the wrong moment.

the video you referenced

Spark's report of the power whack from sometime within about three days of John's accident

How much more do we need?

Going upright ALWAYS results in a reduction of control authority in range in everything except the ability to flare - and the ability to flare ain't all it's cracked up to be. It commonly causes way more problems than it solves. IT IS A BIG, UGLY, DANGEROUS PROBLEM.

Brian,

I'm not a Gandhi sort of person and I don't think a Gandhi sort of approach is always the best way to go about things, despite its merits in the right circumstances. Sometimes Little Bighorn, White Bird Canyon, and Warsaw Ghetto seem to be the way to go. Granted - none of those had really great long term outcomes but they sure must have been satisfying for a while.

I've asked both you and Mark for help in moderating these discussions but I always seem to get left twisting in the wind while trying to slap on endless banana clips and watching evil triumphing while good men do nothing.

OK - fine. I can defend myself but if I have to I'm gonna do it my way.

But it would help keep things under control if you, or Mark, or somebody everybody DOESN'T hate would just step in and and say something along the lines of, "No - (Jim/JD/JR...). That's not what he said. Go back and read what he said." Then I could ignore them and interested and qualified participants could go on to have a civilized exchange of ideas. And I wouldn't be emotionally drained and on the verge of getting kicked off the forum all the time.

But on to the technical stuff...

No.

This is not my description of the situation. This is John's description of the situation as relayed by Paul. And if I had botched the interpretation I'd have been cut to shreds by now. And...

No.

He hooked his feet on the top of the sign. Whatever degree of upright he was able to achieve would only have reinforced the solidity of that contact.

And - think seesaw again - the more upright he was the more violently he would have been rotated front end down into the ground.

This is a SOLID LOSE-LOSE-LOSE scenario.

Next... I'm not trying to be nasty here but I'm still smoldering from the earlier sequences of exchanges and some of this crap has been slowly brewing in me for decades.

This business about waist deep grass, rock piles, boulders, brick walls is bullshit. Those have nothing to do with landings. Those are emergency ditch operations which conclude major pooch screws.

You don't hear airline, Cessna, or sailplane pilots talking about waist deep grass, rock piles, boulders, brick walls 'cause they're not stupid enough to land around them. Just because we can - most/some of the time - doesn't mean we should. Hang glider performance has gone from four to one to sixteen to one but our concept of them hasn't kept pace. We're still thinking of them as Rogallo standards.

Yeah, you want to have the skill to do a nice crisp flare to stop the glider dead in its tracks in a zero wind situation but you should NEVER put yourself in a situation in which your safety is dependent upon that proper execution.

That is very much analogous to the parachute thing. You want to understand how it works, how to pack it, and how to deploy it but you don't EVER want to be in a situation in which you need it. 'Cause, as above, there's not much in the way of a guarantee that it's gonna work.

As I said to Spark yesterday...

If a field isn't safe to roll into - it isn't safe to land in.

I don't condemn a decision to cut into that safety margin and have often done and would still do so myself for a reasonable payoff - such as the opportunity to fly and/or extra minutes, miles, competition points... But the more you cut the more you're moving into getting-away-with-it mode.

And on that issue, for a moment - Lauren and everyone else using Bailey releases now know they are towing in getting-away-with-it mode. Yeah, statistically, the odds are pretty much in one's favor. But what's the payoff?

These feet/belly decisions are not - and physically can not - be split second issues. You've ALWAYS got a LOT of time to make them and just about ALL of them ARE black and white no brainers. (Armand's decision - as I indicated earlier - was a sub brainer.) And if you're coming into a safe field the SAFEST option is ALWAYS gonna be to roll it in (let's see how much flak I get from that one).

Janni,

Pretty much a full ditto - except I'd leave the trim set for thermals - not landing - 'cause that's what I'd rather be doing (even though in practice it always seems to be more of the latter).

With respect to the spot landing contest...

In not a big fan of those things - in no small part because I've never been any good at them - but also because they encourage people to compromise their landings to try to win some gift certificate.

A lot of those guys look pretty good but if you look closely at the downtubes you can see a lot of them sweating bullets. Think how boring a series of Ridgely tandem landings would look by comparison.

As I said before, I plan to continue to land on my feet. I pretty much always land at the airport these days and I'm not gonna get hurt there. And it's kinda fun to get it right one out of five times and look cool and competent in front of the breakdown crowd. But every time I punch a flare in light air I'm risking a downtube.

If, however, I was really interested in maxing out the safety thing I'd modify my harness with skid plates and roll it in every time just like the tandems.

Chris,

OK.

Brian Vant-Hull - 2008/04/21 01:25:57 UTC

Tad: Yes, in a well groomed field rolling it in is always safer than an attempted foot landing. No contest. But nothing new either.

For cross country rolling it in may not always work and you won't always know it until most of the way through final approach. Beginner wheels will help, but a flare could be more likely to save your aluminum. And oh, there is an LZ somewhere in California (I think) which is a dry river bed, rocks and all. It was the best they could come up with.

You might be advising people not to be stupid and go cross country, but it's kinda like telling people don't be stupid and eat that cheesecake. Much of what you are saying is a moot point. People will flare even when they don't have to for two reasons: 1. practice 2. it just looks cool. And they're gonna keep landing in fields you don't approve of.

Anyway, I've seen/heard of more than one tree-trunk crash. They're better off upright. And if you say they shouldn't have been in that position in the first place, I can't argue with that, but I wonder: do you fasten your seatbelt, or claim you shouldn't put yourself in a position to need it.

Once again, if all I'm dealing with is turbulence over a well groomed field, I'll roll it in. If I'm heading for a likely collision or uneven ground, I'm going upright.

JD Guillemette - 2008/04/21 10:15:36 UTC

I'll add that going cross country is an absolute necessity to our sport. Without the current Cross Country format of our HangGliding competitions, glider development would stagnate. Imaging if competitions never left the launch and LZ area and were based on Flight time, height gained and spot landings, glider development would not progress further than a Falcon or at best the Sport 2.

It's up to the individual Pilot to decided if he/she wants to venture away from the field, but we all benefit form the advancement of glider technology directly form the Comps and X-C flying. You may not fly a competition class topless glider or may never care to, but without glider advancement and challenging competitions our sport would wither away and die.

X-C flying is going to happen, it MUST happen, and with that HG and PG pilots will be landing in fields that will not always be suitable for wheel landing.

Tad Eareckson - 2008/04/21 13:11:34 UTC

Brian,

I would hazard a guess that, despite the biased view one gets reading the forum, out landings represent a very small fraction of the endings of our flights 'round these parts.

I used to do a lot of ridge runs from Woodstock. I really like the primary there but it totally sucks compared to just about anything else you can hit once you get to fifty feet over the ridge. Huge flat fields all over the place and several private airstrips at which we're more than welcome.

I always used to look for cows 'cause:

- you know you won't be damaging any crops; and
- it's a pretty good bet that the grass won't be long enough to grab your basetube.

I've probably flown a lot more XC than you have and I'm having a hard time remembering too many instances when from a thousand feet over it I couldn't identify and have the option of landing in something rollable.

If we can't go XC and find something we can safely roll into then sailplanes can't safely get out of glide range of the airport.

I used to fly with the infamous and once ubiquitous snap-off wheels - the kind that would pop off when you did a hang check on uneven ground. I put sheet metal screws through the locking tabs so they wouldn't. I liked them 'cause they were light and aerodynamically clean but they're expensive and shatter easily so I said fuckit and went with the Finster (Wills Wing) pneumatics.

All the wheels have to do in botched stand up landings is rotate a couple of times to keep the dropped glider from coming to an abrupt stop. Beginner wheels just do that better on softer surfaces (sand, wet ground, plowed fields...).

I am taking a position that - overall - we are trashing A LOT more aluminum and bones opting for foot landings than we would be doing if we started thinking of ourselves as low performance sailplanes - including that dry riverbed, rocks and all. (Mike Robertson had this figured out at least fourteen years ago but it's just REALLY sunk in with me.)

Their landings aren't any better than ours are so they are routinely blowing their flare timings, running behind their gliders, and power whacking with the same frequency we do in the windsock field. Same goes for Colorado - 'cept it's even worse 'cause of the density altitude thing.

But I'm not ADVISING people of squat - beyond thinking about the following two options:

- MAYBE missing the sign so that MAYBE you can land on your feet; and
- DEFINITELY missing the sign at a cost of DEFINITELY bellying in so that you will DEFINITELY be able to have another flight.

I have said - several times - that I'm OK enough with crappy fields that I'll take them if I've got a minimally good reason. It could be as little as having conditions shut down for the day as I'm approaching launch and wanting to salvage a sled run.

I have said - several times - that I will continue opting for stand up landings. I will do that primarily for three reasons:

- I don't want to abrade and stain my harness;
- practice; and
- it just looks cool.

I have said - several times - that a field which is not safe to roll into is also a field not safe to land in.

There's a converse to that. A field that is safe to roll into is also a field in which a moderately botched stand up landing leaves you with a quite acceptable safety margin.

A tree trunk crash is not a landing - that issue belongs in a different thread. It is an emergency ditch operation at the conclusion of a major pooch screw. You can see the tree coming at you from a long way off and have plenty of time to consider and prepare for remedial action.

Under such circumstances I would keep up some speed and rotate to vertical to:

- distribute the impact over as wide an area of my body as possible rather than focus it on my head and transmit it through my neck (splat versus crunch); and

- be able to position my hands high up on the downtubes so I could flare the crap out of the glider and stop it dead.

If I'm coming in at Rylstone downwind into tall grass I'm going to stay on the basetube for a while to build up a lot of speed, close my eyes so's I don't get totally freaked out by the resulting groundspeed, rotate to vertical to be able to position my hands high up on the downtubes so I can flare the crap out of the glider and stop it dead, and punch that flare a little early, climb a little high, and end up with my ass and the glider's basetube on the ground - both of us with our noses up.

Yeah, I fasten my seat belt and try to drive in a manner which will preclude my ever needing it.

I fly with a parachute and - ever since I caused a near midair which could have easily killed John Middleton and me - have flown in a manner which has maximized its degree of uselessness.

I always launch with redundant weak links and secondary and emergency releases - even though my primary system is so good I will never need them.

I'm not seeing that we really have much of a divergence in our approaches to these issues.

JD Guillemette - 2008/04/21 14:08:48 UTC

I was going to mention this earlier because I knew it was going to come up, but I was trying to keep my posts brief. Sailplanes have a much greater glide range so they have more square miles to look for fields. Simply put they have more options. However, you don't see many sail planes in New England because of the lack of suitable outlanding terrain but you do see X-C hanggliding.

Of course we are always looking for potential LZ's while on X-C, but the higher I am, the less I'm concerned with landing and more I'm concerned about where is the next lift. If we had to think about landing when the available square miles was equal to that of a sailplane pilot looking for LZ's, we would have to think about landing at 5000 ft.

A sailplane at 5000 AGL at say 30:1 has over 28 mile radius, virtually there is always an airport in range.

If a sailplane pilot is at 1000' AGL they would have better than 5 mile radius to find a field or airport. Plus they have better up wind penetration to make an airport if they need to.

HG Pilot at 1000' AGL has less than 2 mile radius, and up wind may not be an option.

Many Sailplanes have motors now.

It's not unheard of for a sailplane pilot to put down in crops or a field plowed with furrows with little damage, neither would be suitable terrain for our base tube wheels.

I'm not a Sailplane pilot, but maybe some of our sailplane pilots can speak up.

Brian Vant-Hull - 2008/04/21 17:52:24 UTC

Okay, it's more clear now Tad. You're just saying that if things are getting messy and rolling in is an option, we should do that rather than perversely struggle for a feet landing. I agree and have nothing to take issue with in your last post.

At the start of this thread you seemed to say we should always roll in, which is why folks are trying to argue with you. Clearly you mean something very sensible...end of story.

JD Guillemette - 2008/04/21 18:16:22 UTC

Is that what he was trying to say? Well sure, I agree with that!

Thanks Brian

Marc Fink - 2008/04/21 23:54:28 UTC

This forum needs a dickhead release.

Allen Sparks - 2008/04/22 00:22:17 UTC

I agree, but if the release failed, it would be quite painful ... emasculating ... and debilitating

We would need a weaklink, just in case

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3218
rules

Allen Sparks - 2008/05/05 21:54:52 UTC

Tad,

I think it is amusing that you titled this post "rules".
Etiquette rules don't appear to matter much to you.
You whine about being poorly treated, but IMO you bring it all on yourself.
If you were more succinct and tactful in your posts, you might get the sort of responses that you want.
Your vulgarity and vindictive responses are unhealthy and foul the 'air' of this forum.
I'm going out for some fresh air.
Foe-R-you.

Tad Eareckson - 2008/05/06 10:51:11 UTC

Spark,

Etiquette rules matter a great deal to me. You and I just have very different ideas about the definitions.

I'm not whining about being poorly treated - I'm saying I DON'T CARE. Find it kinda liberating actually. If I were to be treated well by some of my more frequent correspondents I'd have serious doubts as to the correctness of the track I was on. I've been finding there is ALWAYS a direct correlation between the vehemence with which I get attacked and the incompetence of the author.

And I'm not terribly interested in your evaluation of my approach or your take on much of anything. If you can punch a hole in something I present - do it - it'll be a first. Otherwise - enjoy the fresh air.

Brian Vant-Hull - 2008/05/06 14:07:58 UTC

Tad;

I wish YOU would read other's people's posts as carefully as you want them to slog through yours.

'It would be a real good idea for you to keep participating in this discussion online. Unless - of course - you're as sure as folk like ... Spark ... that I couldn't possibly know anything of value that you don't already.'

Sparky never said you didn't know what you were talking about, he only said the way you present it hurts your case.

I happen to think you have made very sound points concerning both weak links and barrel releases (I'd like to order one to be picked up at the Highland fly-in assuming you're not chased off by the mob you've inflamed), but I also agree 100% with what Sparky said, and the tactful, concise way he said it.

I've listened to you, now maybe you can listen to me and quit adding thoughtful people to your enemies list. If you put as much thought into people as into gizmos you may find life a little rosier.

Tad Eareckson - 2008/05/07 11:29:12 UTC

Brian,

I actually read Spark's post VERY carefully - particularly the last line. That's why he got amended to the list.

I do not consider Spark to be a particularly thoughtful person and I didn't just add him to my enemies list - he started drifting that way a long time ago.

But the difference between my enemies list and his - to which he just amended me - is this...

Even if one is as deeply embedded in it as is Jim - an individual for whom I have virtually no respect whatsoever - I'm gonna keep listening to what he has to say, responding to the questions, and maintaining the dialogue.

Yeah - there probably will be an angry mob waiting for me at Ridgely. Like I said earlier... I'm not doing this to win any popularity contests. I'm doing this to try to bring some level of sanity to the sport and get it in compliance with the rules. I could get hurt - irreparably - but maybe I'll come out on top in the long run. Time will tell.

And - so far - I don't have any indication that I've lost any friends I wanna keep.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3173
somewhat predictable accident at Highland

Jim Rowan - 2008/04/16 12:41:56 UTC

Tad, if you want to land prone on wheels and lead with your head, by all means I would encourage you to do so, but I suggest you make sure all your landings take place on mowed grassy fields or some other surface suitable for rolling in on wheels. I think I would prefer to land upright and take my chances of a broken arm as opposed to a broken face or neck...

And I would encourage you to make sure all of your landings take place in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place, fields filled with seven foot high corn, and other surfaces unsuitable for rolling in on wheels.

And I'm absolutely positive I would prefer you to land upright and take your chances of a broken arm - and always remain too fucking stupid to understand that landing upright every time is actually gonna increase your probability of breaking your face and neck.

...but hey, that's just me.

Nah. That's you and untold thousands of your totally useless dickheaded clones.

Lauren Tjaden - 2008/04/16 13:00:21 UTC

From the Oz Report, Dec, 2007, about our friend Armand...

You've get eight months and fifteen days to go before you're gonna be in prolongued agony and in need of surgery to put your shoulder back together after a lightly bonked landing in light air. Sure, it was at Quest, but XC supercompetitors like you and Linda hafta practice stopping it dead on your feet every landing so you'll be less likely to rip your shoulder apart if you ever hafta land in a narrow dry riverbed with large rocks strewn all over the place or a field filled with seven foot high corn.

Chris McKee - 2008/04/16 17:21:40 UTC

If you are flying the top performace gliders, you should have appropriate landing skills where its a rarity that you have to roll in.

How 'bout just developing your flying skills to the point at which it's a rarity that you ever have to land?

Janni Papakrivos - 2008/04/16 18:23:37 UTC

Once you fly high-per gliders you shouldn't need wheels anymore.

Sure. Can't imagine why anyone with the skills to fly one of these superships with twice the stall speed and runway requirements and half the control responsiveness heading off into the wild blue yonder to squeak into a best guess field with no windsock would EVER need wheels as much as a Hang Two landing a Falcon on a grass strip at an airport.

Actually my landings got a whole lot better after I ditched the wheels because I knew there was no cheap way out and flared aggressively every time.

Allen Sparks - 2008/04/19 01:38:55 UTC

We don't really have much LZ terrain that is wheel-friendly around here. So I am wheel-less for the time being, until I decide to do something else. I can tell you that it makes me take my landings even more seriously.

Sure Janni. And, of course, one need never worry about landings if one flares aggressively every time. Just ask Kevin Carter.

JD Guillemette - 2008/04/19 17:57:04 UTC

As for the most recent accident at Highland, if a person did not witness the accident they have little authority to speak to what may have been the cause or what could have prevented it.

OK. Then read the idiot detailed account of this idiot incident that John - with Joe Gregor's collaboration - are gonna publish in the 2009/01 issue of the magazine and tell me why I needed to witness anything for my points to be valid. And please also tell me how witnessing the crash makes some total douchebag like Rooney qualified to contribute anything to a rational discussion on the issue. Hell, by that "logic" Head Trauma should be a real expert on how to make sure you're connected to a tandem glider before running off the ramp.

David Bodner - 2008/04/16 21:53:24 UTC

On the larger topic, it's simply not reasonable to expect to be able to roll in (outside of a flight park)...

Funny, after watching decades worth of hang gliders returning to terra firma I've reached the conclusion that it's not terribly reasonable to expect people to land and stay on their feet - anywhere.

...so most of us land upright.

(Yeah, but most of you don't STAY upright.) And virtually all of you use backup suspension, bent pin releases, and loops of 130 pound Greenspot for weak links. So this obviously means that most of you are right about landing upright as well.

On the rare occasions when it might be safer to be prone, I daresay circumstances may dictate otherwise.

And I daresay you've got that totally backwards.

Letting go of one upright would've saved more than one broken arm, but that takes more presence of mind than I'll probably have when faced with that situation.

You're gonna prove that extremely right in twenty-one months and two days at High Rock. So would you have made the news if you had rolled it in on the wheels?

Janni Papakrivos - 2008/04/20 10:22:06 UTC

From my very own experience I'm also inclined to say that staying prone and in full control of the glider takes precedence until you know you've got it made regardless of wheels and conditions. There's people out there who never get tired of advocating to fly the entire approach upright. I think they're full of it.

Ditto.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3181
Jack's and Ridgely Friday?????

Chris McKee - 2008/04/20 14:52:31 UTC

Getting into ground effect, I realized that I now had a tailwind and was not slowing as I expected. No worries, I just rolled it in (SHUT UP TAD - THIS IS NOT AN ENDORSEMENT!).

Yeah, I'm afraid it actually IS. So would be trying to land on your feet and breaking an arm - or, hopefully in the case of JR, a neck.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3173
somewhat predictable accident at Highland

JD Guillemette - 2008/04/21 10:15:36 UTC

I'll add that going cross country is an absolute necessity to our sport. Without the current Cross Country format of our HangGliding competitions, glider development would stagnate. Imaging if competitions never left the launch and LZ area and were based on Flight time, height gained and spot landings, glider development would not progress further than a Falcon or at best the Sport 2.

Kentucky Derby, Indianapolis 500, World Series, Super Bowl, Stanley Cup, World Cup, Michael Phelps, Telluride...

Where is it carved in granite that this sport's gotta be owned by a bunch of testosterone poisoned XC junkies who are all always incapable of finding two hundred foot strips of pasture out of ten square mile parcels and are absolutely miserable unless they're landing in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place or fields filled with seven foot high corn?

Where does it say that there aren't lotsa people who are perfectly happy taking off next the their cars on high performance machines, working lift within a few cubic miles of air in the near vicinity for a few hours, and landing on safe surfaces back next to their cars with their downtubes, arms, shoulders, and necks still intact and ready for next weekends. Isn't that the way most sailplanes do it - 'cept with larger operating radii proportional to their performance?

Allen Sparks - 2008/04/19 01:38:55 UTC

If accidents were 'somewhat predictable', I'd bet we would have fewer

No Spark... Neither Bille Floyd, John Simon, Lauren, Dave, or you had ACCIDENTS. And these CRASHES - and their consequences - are ENTIRELY predictable.

_hit happens. There are no recipes that prevent it.

Right. Shit just happens in hang gliding. It's inevitable. It's not like REAL aviation in which people can actually learn anything from what happened last week. So why even try to implement measures to avoid it? If there's a taxiway sign at an airport it's an ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that someone - probably me unless I'm REAL LUCKY - is gonna fly into it and break two arms. So grow a pair and accept it as inevitable. It is the will of Allah.

In retrospect, I tended to take my whacks less seriously, because the wheels 'saved' me from the embarrasment.

Bet you take your whacks nice and seriously now, huh? Guess from now on you'll have MUCH better landings.

once I'm healed, i plan to invest a few days with our local instructor Mark Windsheimer and his scooter tow system, working to improve my hand transition and body position technique.

i'll be flying with wheels

No no no NO! Then you won't take your whacks as seriously. Then your landings won't be as good. Then you won't be able to land in narrow dry riverbeds with large rocks strewn all over the place and fields of seven foot high corn.

Here in the rocky Rockies, I don't have the luxury of landing on mostly-level grass-covered fields.

With the SINGLE EXCEPTION of the Lookout Mountain LZ at Golden. Funny how things work out sometimes - isn't it?

I decided ... what the hey .. Sport 2s are easy to land ... and made the decision to fly without the wheels.

Yeah, if only you had been on your Sport 2 instead of your Falcon 2 225. Major bummer dude.

We don't really have much LZ terrain that is wheel-friendly around here. So I am wheel-less for the time being, until I decide to do something else. I can tell you that it makes me take my landings even more seriously.

I'll BET! Fer sure!

A week ago, a new pilot to the area muffed an approach and transition to the uprights and ended up pounding in (without wheels) .. the noseplate nailed him squarely in the back of the helmet, but fortunately, without injury. I really doubt that wheels would have made any difference, unless they were monster 12" pneumatics.

Yeah, probably not. Probably not even worth thinking about the ubiquitous eight inch pneumatic jobs. Or wondering if he would've come that close to getting paralyzed from the neck down if he had just stayed on the basetube and bellied in even without any wheels. Sometimes shit is just gonna happen. That's the only thing that's somewhat predictable.

I broke my humerous (badly) in 1989, with nerve damage. In that instance, wheels would not have made a difference.

Yeah. I'll bet nothing else would have made any difference either. This is just a normal, inevitable part of hang gliding. Sometimes shit is just gonna happen. That's the only thing that's somewhat predictable.

Some times _hit is gonna happen. That is the only thing that is somewhat predictable.

Yeah. Especially if you're irreversibly stupid. Then it's even more predictable.

Marc Fink - 2008/04/21 23:54:28 UTC

This forum needs a dickhead release.

Allen Sparks - 2008/04/22 00:22:17 UTC

I agree, but if the release failed, it would be quite painful ... emasculating ... and debilitating

We would need a weaklink, just in case

Yeah, you and your brain damaged little buddies just keep laughing it up. And I'll be watching for the next round of unpredictable shit to happen. Marc's about due for another one.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=22132
choochoonooga incident.

Steven Sims - 2011/06/09 16:46:20 UTC
Atlanta

I arrived over Ned's field with around five hundred feet and it took around five minutes to get down. I did a few diving turns over the field trying to lose altitude but it was difficult to execute them from getting thrown around so much. I actually gained altitude on some of them even though I was stuffing the bar as much as I could manage and trying to keep my pod spread open for drag.

I initially tried to stay over the upwind end of the field, thinking I'd have no problem moving downwind when I needed to, and that if the lift I was experiencing was due to any latent thermal lift it would be stronger at the downwind end.

But then I was getting waved downwind by guys on the ground...what I was doing obviously wasn't working and I was getting pretty worn out, so I did another turn and let it drift me further back.

It seemed to be better further back and I was losing altitude. I was definitely more concerned with losing altitude than setting up a certain landing approach. Not wanting to hit anymore lift and overshoot into the power lines or trees, I pulled one more 360, which was uncomfortably low given the violent air.

I stayed fighting it pulled in on the basetube all the way down. The wind gradient felt like I just fell through a vacuum the last ten feet or so and was just able to push out in time to roll in. Fortunately the field was recently mown. It was 6:00 pm and I was glad to be on the ground.

[Tad Eareckson]

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

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

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

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=22266
Yosemite Accident 2011.06.11

Allen Sparks - 2011/06/17 20:43:08 UTC
Evergreen, Colorado

http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/06/14/2426839/yosemite-rescues-glider-black.html

Saturday, the injured hang glider was found in Leidig Meadow and airlifted to a hospital.

and

http://www.nps.gov/applications/digest/headline.cfm?type=Incidents&id=5703

a 64-year-old man suffered serious injuries in a hang glider accident in Leidig Meadow; he was flown out of the park by helicopter.

Mark G. Forbes - 2011/06/17 23:11:07 UTC
Corvallis, Oregon

The pilot who crashed in the meadow is Russ Locke, former USHGA president, long time BOD member and current Foundation trustee. From what I heard, he had a bad landing and whacked, resulting in some cracked vertebrae in his neck. Luckily no nerve damage from what I hear, and once he's healed up he'll be ok.

Tad Eareckson - 2011/03/19 06:26:24 UTC

But I'll betchya I can do a hundred flights at Yosemite on my HPAT 158 minus wheels and never touching the downtubes from three seconds after launch without needing a trip to the clinic after any of them. Might need a few spares but compare/contrast your ten at Valle de Bravo.

And I'll betchya Russ was upright with his hands on the downtubes a second before the grass tied itself to his basetube.

[Tad Eareckson]

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

Ryan Voight - 2011/06/22 02:57:33 UTC
Point of the Mountain

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

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

Even better... TRYING to get upright with his hands on the downtubes - and NO grass issues.

John Simon - 2009/01

As I approached the taxiway and signs (Ridgely - 2008/04/10), I decided to go upright. This is where things started going really bad really fast. I missed a downtube - not once, but twice. As expected, this sent me into a wag or two, leaving me low, left, and over a sign at about 26-29 mph. I thought if I could just get hold of the downtube, I'd push out and fly well over it. Alas, I did not and passed with two feet of clearance under my basetube. "Wow," I thought, "that was close. I hope my feet clear it too."

Good thing these guys are going upright so they can flare the glider for nice safe foot landings, huh Ryan?
Well, don't worry. These guys almost always recover quickly and completely.

[Tad Eareckson]

Dan Johnson - 2011/06/23
Northwest US

Lesson, be current in your skills, and do some check flights with qualified personel if you haven't been doing a lot of flying, preferably on a site no greater than H2.

Fer sure.

PRACTICE will be THE key to not having a hand bounce off a tail wire when you're switching to a downtube.

And get a good instructor who specializes in teaching how to switch to a downtube without bouncing your hand off a tail wire. Three or four tandem flights should to the trick.

And ALWAYS practice at sites no greater than Hang Two. No ditches, trees, fences, or taxiway signs to crash into. And the ground tends to be a lot softer.

[miguel]

Ryan Voight - 2011/06/22 02:57:33 UTC
Point of the Mountain

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

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

Even better... TRYING to get upright with his hands on the downtubes - and NO grass issues.

The Yosemite lz is tall grass over shallow water with hidden clumps of land scattered about. Last year, a pilot hit one of these hidden clumps while prone and fractured vertebrae.

I have been reading this board for a couple months now. Much good info here.