instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

General discussion about the sport of hang gliding
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9149
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

Post by Tad Eareckson »

Lower angels once in a while if you're really desperate.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=59331
USHPA - the not so slow suicide
Steve Pearson - 2019/04/11 12:31:49 UTC

1) There has been an extraordinary amount of discussion and good ideas shared over the last 20 years.
Ain't hang gliding just great at extraordinary amounts of discussion and sharing good ideas. So tell me about some of the stuff you've incorporated and gotten off the ground - other than really slick comp gliders that aren't designed to be motorized, tethered, towed, or foot launched or landed.
(2) These ideas and efforts have been ineffective at arresting the decline of hang gliding.
What? The really slick comp gliders that aren't designed to be motorized, tethered, towed, or foot launched or landed aren't doing it?
I would argue...
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24846
Is this a joke ?
Jim Rooney - 2011/08/26 02:44:10 UTC

Instead of looking for an argument, you may consider listening instead.
...that there is no recipe that the USHPA can conceive of that is likely to be adopted and implemented by, or even that is even helpful to a successful school.
I'd argue that there's no such thing as a successful hang gliding school - if you define a school as an institution which turns out competent pilots.
That's not to say that the ideas are flawed, but that they are in conflict with our experience. Make a list of the top schools in the last 45 years--KHK, Lookout, Windsports, Mission, Morningside, Wallaby...
WALLABY?!?! There aren't any useable hills within hundreds of miles of Wallaby. How are you expecting gliders to get airborne at that place?
...etc. and ask if any of them would have been receptive to adopting a USHPA business plan for managing their business.
Tandem thrill rides and fatality cover-ups.
Every school and community is unique--what works in Kitty Hawk is different from Morningside, LA, Chattanooga and San Francisco.
How 'bout Manquin, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas...?
The ideas that have been shared are a great resource for schools to consider for business development, but they are not a stand-alone solution.

I'm suggesting that revisiting this subject with clean whiteboards and new participants is unlikely to do any better--we are looking at this from the wrong perspective. It's like trying to push a rope uphill-
An easily reachable rope - while you're busy fighting a low level lockout with the other hand.
-forcing top-down management on a system that doesn't respond to that approach.
See above.
Let's recognize that new pilots only come from flight schools (rather than marketing programs).
Let's also recognize that a lot of students get injured, crippled, killed out of the sport by flight schools and that a lot of them would've been better off learning on their own with solid training manuals and videos and doing all their landings prone and on wheels.
...new pilots only come from flight schools (rather than marketing programs).

That the root of our problem is that sustaining a flight school is near impossible, and compliance with the rules, regulations and expenses imposed by the USHPA...
Mostly total bullshit rules, regulations, expenses imposed by u$hPa. But the requirement that instructors have current CPR certification is really hard to argue with.
...is a significant burden. And ultimately, the only mechanism for stabilizing hang gliding is to make teaching both easier and more rewarding.
And nothing else. We certainly don't need to waste any of our valuable time looking at the legitimacy of WHAT is being taught.
There are a couple of familiar refrains that we need to address head-on: (1) commercial interests are in conflict with the best interests of the association...
What's the difference between the commercial interests and the Association? Isn't the latter mostly stacked and controlled by the former?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TUGS/message/1184
aerotow instruction was Re: Tug Rates
Larry Jorgensen - 2011/02/17 13:37:47 UTC
Air Adventures NW
Spanaway, Washington

It did not come from the FAA, it came from a USHPA Towing Committee made up of three large aerotow operations that do tandems for hire.

Appalling.
...and (2) ideas for promoting growth are too expensive or otherwise subordinate to other priorities.

1. There is a direct and immutable correlation between the health, safety and vitality of every hang gliding community and the status of the local flight school.
Regarding the safety part of that... Where'd you get your data?
When flight schools close, even thriving communities of pilots diminish within a few short years.
Highland Aerosports for example? (Catch that, Bob Very-Little-Experience-With-Towing Kuczewski?)
I can't even think of any exceptions to this. Schools, more than any other factor, are the foundation of our association and we need to stop seeing them as beneficiaries and sources of revenue. We should be supporting them, not taxing them.
I tried to support my local motherfuckers. And ya know what I ended up getting for my troubles?
2. How can we pretend to have be successful association with unrelenting declining membership?
Pretend harder. Lock down more, threads, delete more posts, ban more participants from mainstream forums. Aren't you gonna express any gratitude for Jack, Davis, Bob, local clubs?
Membership is the only product that the USHPA sells...
What about their Focused Pilot wristbands, HOOK IN! basetube decals, the excellent book, Towing Aloft, by Dennis Pagen and Bill Bryden?
...and all of the associated services are to support membership.
Fuck their support and membership. And where was Wills Wing when Yours Truly was getting his career terminated?
We could argue that there are a lot of metrics to evaluate the performance of a business, but I can't imagine not including product sales.
Not including towing... No problem.
Most successful and sustainable businesses invest the majority of their discretionary resources in product development and those who don't more-often fail.
Guess your more than happy with all the commercially available tow equipment.
That's not to say that investing in product development is any guarantee, just a fundamental requirement.
Yeah, tell me about it.
Why don't we try something different, like investing in and listening to individuals who have demonstrated aptitude and commitment to achieving our goals?
Hello...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=992
Continuing Saga of Weak Link and Release Mechanism Failures
Warren Narron - 2012/03/06 02:26:04 UTC

Tad, used to post about as nice as anyone, and nicer than some. Remember?

Blowback... You put in a thousand plus hour$, tooling, te$ting and documenting safety issues for the masses and have it ignored and suppressed by people, for whatever reason, and you would get testy too.
You're fairly snarky as it is, and you haven't done the work...
...Steve.
Instead of analyzing and dictating the minutia of how to run a successful flight school, why not ask our instructors, "what can we do to help?"
Suppress fatality reports a lot more effectively. Get Mitch Shipley on site faster to gain control of video cards. Give Tim Herr a much more effective paper shredder.
What incentives (product and services) can we offer to achieve the outcome we want (growth and pilot retention)?
Fundamental aeronautical competence? Just kidding.
What specific actions can the USHPA implement develop hang gliding, i.e. to support schools ?
Beg Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney to return from his self imposed exile in New Zealand. Put him in charge of aerotow weak link standards and enforcement.
1) Provide financial incentives for the development of new pilots.
Which would be close to the only ones we would have - if that were possible.
I'm suggesting that a program like rebating the entire 1st year membership fee, and 50% of the second year...
Assuming they survive the first year.
...would relatively increase membership and long-term income for the USHPA. It would also focus the efforts of schools on making pilots rather than other income opportunities like tandem rides.
Tandem rides aren't their OTHER income opportunities. Established dedicated hang glider pilots are.
2) Mandate a reduction in the administrative burden of PASA/RRRG compliance.

3) Reduce the instructor fee, and perhaps even make the first year free.
Providing the instructor kills no more than two students per season.
4) Provide funds and support for instructor clinics rather than requiring participant to organize and pay for them.
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=27393
Pro towing: 1 barrel release + weak link or 2 barrel release
Juan Saa - 2012/10/18 01:19:49 UTC

The normal braking force in pounds for a weak link is around 180, at least that is the regular weak link line used at most aerotow operations. By adding a second weak link to your bridal you are cutting the load on each link by half, meaning that the weak link will not break at the intended 180 pounds but it will need about 360.
If that is what you use and is what your instructor approved then I have no business on interfering, i dont know if you are using the same weak link material but there shoul be only ONE weak link on a tow bridle for it to be effective in breaking before higher loads are put into you and the glider should the glider gets to an attitude or off track so much that the safety fuse of the link is needed to break you free from the tug.

I made the same mistake on putting two weak links thinking that I was adding protection to my setup and I was corrected by two instructors on separate occacions at Quest Air and at the Florida RIdge.
Wills Wing did this for years--we paid for Tim Morely, Jim Shaw and others to give clinics around the country. More flight schools = more pilots = more glider sales.
Design and certify gliders to be motorized, tethered, and towed.
5) Reduce the administrative costs and requirements for sanction competitions.
In what environments are damn near all competitions conducted?
6) Eliminate all fees and requirements for local chapters to hold fly-ins and other community events.
Celebrations of lives of missing friends.
I don't mean this to be an exhaustive list...
Course not. To make an exhaustive list you'd hafta acknowledge the existence of tow launching. And your gliders aren't designed to be motorized, tethered, or towed.
...just the first things that occurred to me.
After consulting with...

http://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5788/23461251751_e98b9c7500_o.png
Image

...your attorney?
Certainly we can do better than this?
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31052
Poll on weaklinks
Jim Rooney - 2013/03/03 19:37:19 UTC

My response is short because I've been saying it for years... and yes, I'm a bit sick of it.
This is a very old horse and has been beaten to death time and time again... by a very vocal minority.

See, most people are happy with how we do things. This isn't an issue for them. They just come out and fly. Thing's aren't perfect, but that's life... and life ain't perfect. You do what you can with what you've got and you move on.

But then there's a crowd that "knows better". To them, we're all morons that can't see "the truth".
(Holy god, the names I've been called.)

I have little time for these people.

It saddens me to know that the rantings of the fanatic fringe mask the few people who are actually working on things. The fanaticism makes it extremely hard to have a conversation about these things as they always degrade into arguments. So I save the actual conversations for when I'm talking with people in person.

A fun saying that I picked up... Some people listen with the intent of understanding. Others with the intent of responding.
I like that.

For fun... if you're not seeing what I mean... try having a conversation here about wheels.
Finally, these new policies don't address the structural problems with hang gliding like how long it takes to learn, or the physical requirements, or the inconvenience of carrying and storing bulky equipment. That's for us to solve.
Not one single up front acknowledgement of the existence of towing as a means of getting airborne - save for the mention of Wallaby where towing is the only possible means of getting airborne. And this is posted on Davis's rag and it's probably been decades since Davis has commenced a flight anywhere other than from the downwind end of a runway with a launch cart underneath him.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9149
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=59331
USHPA - the not so slow suicide
Jim Gaar - 2019/04/11 15:01:23 UTC

NICE!!!!!!!!!

Thanks Davis. What a great article.
Sure Jim...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14903
New Lookout Release--preliminary test
Jim Gaar - 2009/02/11 20:15:46 UTC

Nice...

Looks nice and simple! I like the little spring that pushes the pin out of it's housing when the towline isn't under any pressure. I too only use the last two fingers of my release hand Marc.
Jim Gaar - 2009/02/16 03:01:21 UTC

Tad free zone?...

I second that. Same technique for a few hundred incident free cart launches off 4 different styles of cart handles. Two fingers of my right hand on the lanyard.

I hail the new release. I see improvements over the competition. It's good to see progress in a sport rumored to be in it's golden years.
Whatever you say.
I can only hope it's the beginning of some evolution in hang gliding and free flight in general!
- Free flight in general - as opposed to tow launched flight. And good luck out there in Kansas.
- I think we can start counting down the days!
I'll retire soon.
How will they be able to tell? The work environment will immediately become infinitely more pleasant and productivity will commence skyrocketing?
Hope I can stick around and help out.
I haven't the slightest doubt you can and will.
Rick Wilson - 2019/04/11 20:01:20 UTC
19697

USHPA suicide

I've been a paraglider pilot for 15 years now. Prior to that I flew hang gliders for 28 years. Also other flying devices.

We lost our one good hang glider/paraglider site here (Maui) due to a paraglider pilot doing things that he shouldn't. Maybe just maybe if we could get along better this would have been avoided. But it wasn't. It appears to me that there are too many politics in the hang gliding community. Our numbers are low. Especially hang gliders. Maybe, just maybe the paraglider group could be included in USHPA business instead of being totally excluded?

I read The Oz Report all the time and Davis has mostly been unbiased.
Well if you read The Oz Report all the time you certainly must be right about Davis being mostly unbiased.
A good lesson for all of us.
Yes. Definitely something else...

http://rmhpa.org/messageboard/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6473
Hang Glider Accident 9/4/17 - Rocky Mountain Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association
Mike Benzie - 2017/10/10 15:01 UTC

Definitely something we all can learn from.
...we all can learn from.
Rodger Hoyt - 2019/04/12 01:57:48 UTC

Pearson reflects one huge error in USHPA policy:
And so many more huge ones to go.
...looking at the successful schools.
And letting the schools...

http://www.wallaby.com/aerotow_primer.php
Aerotow Primer for Experienced Pilots
The Wallaby Ranch Aerotowing Primer for Experienced Pilots - 2019/04/14

Welcome to Wallaby Ranch, the first and largest Aerotow Hang Gliding Flight Park in the World! We're the aerotowing (or "AT") professionals; no-one knows AT like we do; it's all we do, and we do it everyday, year-round.
...define how successful they are.
Hang gliding cannot survive with a few large schools scattered around the county.
Which county? Must have a pretty dense hang glider pilot population.
When hang gliding exploded numerically was when friends taught friends...
Guess that really limits my options - as both an instructor and a student.
...or as Doug Hildreth once labeled them, "backyard instructors." In an effort to gain legitimacy, credibility and professionalism, USHPA put severe restraints on backyard instructors - I would posit that they attempted to eliminate them completely.
Bullshit. That was all commercial sleazebag operators doing market grabs.
And due in no small part to that policy, hang gliding now is nearly terminal.
Nearly?
Paragliding also contributed to hang gliding's demise, not only numerically but through USHPA policy. Thanks to burgeoning numbers of PG pilot memberships, USHPA failed to recognize the decline in hang gliding in time to do anything about it. Or for that matter, CARE anything about it. To bean counters, members are members, right?

Pearson is right: teaching needs to be easier and more accessible. Unfortunately it should have been done 20 years ago.
Larry Bunner - 2019/04/12 12:17:25 UTC

I have heard from smaller schools around the country that they struggle each season to get an instructor or tow pilot to support their business.
Tow PILOT, right? 'Cause AT is the only way to get lotsa gliders to useable altitude quickly and efficiently, right? (Since the major demise of the Rooney Link anyway.)
It's happening again this year. I would add this solvable issue to Steve's list.
You mentioned tow pilot - so good luck getting it on Steve's list.
USHPA could help by creating a list of potentials that a school could tap into as they get ready for their season.
Thanks. I'll start holding my breath now.

We're looking at the landslide of decades worth of incompetence, shortsightedness, greed, corruption coming to bear. Good luck slowing that momentum and turning it back in a direction it's never rolled before anyway.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9149
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=59459
How USHPA CAN work for you
Davis Straub - 2019/04/23 11:52:03 UTC

I'm quite certain that all the USHPA BOD members, USHPA personnel, the RRRG volunteers, and Tim Herr have the best interests of the organizations and membership at heart and that they work hard to do the right thing.
From their off-the-scale evil perspectives... Yes.
The problem is the solutions that they have come up with are killing the sport.
Not to mention its participants.

P.S. And you yourself have been going along, leading, pulling the same shit since the beginning of time.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9149
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=59447
Bob Kuczewski's Expulsion Info Update
Steve Forslund - 2019/04/23 12:25:43 UTC

I supported some of Bob's goals and tried to help him temper his arguements and attempt to see grey occasionally. I finally gave up totally frustrated. He seemed determined and destined to climb up on a cross
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=12443
AT regs
Steve Forslund - 2009/06/15 14:15:37 UTC

Tad,
I did not think you would need help but I am curious, how did you get that second hand nailed to the cross all by yourself?
Suck my dick, Steve.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9149
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=59459
How USHPA CAN work for you
Alan Crouse - 2019/04/24 02:44:11 UTC

It is definitely harder, more time consuming, and more expensive to be an instructor today than it was pre-insurance crisis. But, we do have insurance and have preserved places to fly; both of which also seem like essential components of the survival of the sport. Paragliding now has more instructors than before the crisis using the same solutions. Don't get me wrong, I think the small (and shrinking) volume of H1/H2's we're producing is unsustainable over the long term. While overall USHPA membership is up, hang gliding continues to trend down. Why the difference given the similar circumstances??
It is definitely harder, more time consuming, and more expensive to be an instructor today...
Good. 'Cause just about everything they teach is total crap. And there was plenty enough of it floating around when I started flying a wee bit under 39 years ago.
...than it was pre-insurance crisis.
So how come you had an insurance crisis?

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=59370
An example of how some USHPA rules hurt us
NMERider - 2019/04/13 15:52:15 UTC

Furthermore, USHPA's policies have turned the liability waiver into a 'License to Kill' with no small number of avoidable and readily preventable fatal accidents. USHPA's head-up-its-ass philosophy is literally killing the sport by killing pilots among other ways that it's imploding.
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25321
Stop the Stupids at the USHPA BOD meeting
Mark G. Forbes - 2011/09/29 02:26:23 UTC

We can establish rules which we think will improve pilot safety, but our attorney is right. USHPA is not in the business of keeping pilots "safe" and it can't be. Stepping into that morass is a recipe for extinction of our association. I wish it were not so, but it is. We don't sell equipment, we don't offer instruction, and we don't assure pilots that they'll be safe. Even so, we get sued periodically by people who say we "shoulda, coulda, woulda" done something that would have averted their accident.

It's not just concern for meet directors and policy makers...it's about our continued existence as an association. It's about minimizing the chance of our getting sued out of existence. We're one lawsuit away from that, all the time, and we think hard about it. I would LOVE to not have to think that way, but every time a legal threat arises, it reminds me that we have a very dysfunctional legal system in this country (note: not a "justice" system...there's little justice involved) and we have to recognize that reality and deal with it.
Not enough justice in the justice system? Funny nobody seems to be making that argument nowadays.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=32673
This is terrible
Dave Pendzick - 2015/03/30 17:42:41 UTC

This is not going to end well for us...
Way too much maybe?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/skysailingtowing/message/7067
AT SOPs - proposed revisions
Subj: Re: [Tow] AT SOPs - proposed revisions
Date: 2009/05/10 02:08:52 UTC
From: cloud9sa@aol.com
To: skysailingtowing@yahoogroups.com
cc: GreggLudwig@aol.com, lisa@lisatateglass.com

Additionally, if you want to really present a convincing argument, you should also: (a) get other experts to co-sign your letter, such as those who have some or most of the aerotowing-related credentials listed above, who have been doing this for many years with many students, and who support your argument; and (b) present reliable data based on valid research showing that there is a significant difference in safety with the changes that you recommend. Supportive comments from aerotow experts along with convincing data can make a difference. Otherwise, it may seem as if your perception of "the sky is falling" may not be shared by most others who have a wealth of experience and who are deeply involved in aerotowing in the US.

This information would also be very helpful in convicing the USHPA and others to take your complaint seriously. Most of the individuals who serve on the USHPA Towing Committe have most of the credentials listed above, so it will be great for you to let them know about your similar credentials and depth of experience, too. If you do not have those credentials, it will be a simple matter for the USHPA Tow Committee to respond to the FAA to discount your complaint, so it will be very important for you to present this information in your letter to the FAA and to others now.

The best way to make change is to get involved, and join the Tow Committee at its meetings. That's what people who really care do to make change. Such is the nature of the great opportunities we have to make a difference in the US (although it means having to spend time, money, and effort, compared to the ease of just sitting in front of a computer.)

Good luck with your endeavor, and regards,

Dr. Tracy Tillman
USHPA Director, Region 7
FAA Detroit FSDO FAAST Aviation Safety Counselor
Wanna come back and make any more "sky is falling" cracks, Trisa? Tell me how to make positive change by joining the Tow Committee?

Toldyaso, motherfuckers.
But, we do have insurance and have preserved places to fly...
As many as you had at the end of 2008?
...both of which also seem like essential components of the survival of the sport.
And now we're talking about survival of the sport. And we're not even saying anything about survival of the sport in the US.
Paragliding now has more instructors than before the crisis using the same solutions.
More flying on the control tubes for better pitch and roll control and flare authority.
Don't get me wrong, I think the small (and shrinking) volume of H1/H2's we're producing is unsustainable over the long term.
For a lot of the country it's already proven unsustainable over the short term.
While overall USHPA membership is up...
From what when?
...hang gliding continues to trend down. Why the difference given the similar circumstances??
Here's a thought...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=27736
Increase in our USHpA dues
Mark G. Forbes - 2012/12/20 06:21:33 UTC

There are also numerous legal issues associated with accident reports, which we're still wrestling with. It's a trade-off between informing our members so they can avoid those kinds of accidents in the future, and exposing ourselves to even more lawsuits by giving plaintiff's attorneys more ammunition to shoot at us.

Imagine a report that concludes, "If we'd had a procedure "x" in place, then it would have probably prevented this accident. And we're going to put that procedure in place at the next BOD meeting." Good info, and what we want to be able to convey. But what comes out at trial is, "Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, my client suffered injury because USHPA knew or should have known that a safety procedure was not in place, and was therefore negligent and at fault." We're constantly walking this line between full disclosure and handing out nooses at the hangmen's convention.
First of all... Name one single Procedure X you motherfuckers have even bothered to put on the books in response to a devastating incident or pattern of them since the beginning of time. And if you can do that much then name one that's actually ever been implemented by any of your douchebag instructors, observers, examiners, administrators. Right - fuckin' ZILCH.

Mark says you're CONSTANTLY walking this line. So that obviously means you're CONSTANTLY suppressing implementation - and also obviously even mention, discussion - of sane procedures.
With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.
Even now with a procedure that you actually put on the books exactly 39 years ago you're fine with 100.00 percent of your instructors flagrantly violating it with each flight for every student. And not just violating it - bending over backwards to piss all over it and silence all of its advocates.

It's a total douchebag culture with a total douchebag administration and you've got way too many tons of cultural and institutional inertia and stupidity to do shit in the way of turning this ship around.

How u$hPa can work for me? Keep doing what you've been doing. I'm totally enjoying watching this collapse.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9149
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=992
Continuing Saga of Weak Link and Release Mechanism Failures
Warren Narron - 2012/03/06 02:26:04 UTC

Tad, used to post about as nice as anyone, and nicer than some. Remember?

Blowback... You put in a thousand plus hour$, tooling, te$ting and documenting safety issues for the masses and have it ignored and suppressed by people, for whatever reason, and you would get testy too.
You're fairly snarky as it is, and you haven't done the work...

And you may be correct about the footnote... but today's footnotes are now hyperlinks...

There is a good chance that from now on, for every incident and fatality caused by insufficient weaklinks or sub-standard release mechanisms, a hyperlink trail will lead back to Tadtriedtowarnyou.com ... where all the evidence can be found.

A further link could then go to a list of all the people and the role they played in the suppression of those safety issues...
Who would like to be on that list?
How many are already on it?
Who else, prior to the foundation of Kite Strings, was trying to warn you?

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=14312
Tow Park accidents
Jack Axaopoulos - 2009/11/12 14:49:58 UTC

One of the stated goals of this site is to promote HG. MOST views on this site are NOT from members but from visitors, they have no ignore button.

Having Tad run around every day giving the impression that there is a massive weekly slaughter of pilots at tow parks due to their horribly dangerous devices surely doesnt promote HG. Especially when the safety records are quite excellent.

Like Jim said, theyve gone a decade with no fatalities at their tow park. Pretty damn good I say.

Yet listening to Tad, you would think guys were dying all over the place
He's been nothing but misleading and negative and ignored multiple warnings from me. So He's GONE
All those quite excellent safety records and sterling equipment and procedures. Odd that you're not doing a lot better in the way of promoting the sport.

http://www.hanggliding.org/wiki/HG_ORG_Mission_Statement
HangGliding.Org Rules and Policies
No posts or links about Bob K, Scott C Wise, Tad Eareckson and related people, or their material. ALL SUCH POSTS WILL BE IMMEDIATELY DELETED. These people are poison to this sport and are permanently banned from this site in every possible way imaginable.
Keep doing the same shit over and over with ever increasing intensity, Jack. You're bound to start getting better results any day now.

Me? I'm getting what I want right now. Not that that's what I originally wanted - but since that's obviously not the remotest possibility I'm OK settling for Option B.

P.S. Highland Aerosports... They've now gone over a third of a decade without so much as a scraped knee or mosquito bite. Can't get a much better safety record than that. And I have no doubt that u$hPa - on the larger scale - will eventually get all of its problems sorted out by using the same model.

P.P.S. Anybody hear anybody from the ol' Ridgely crew weighing in on the u$hPa / hang gliding collapse crisis? Cloud 9?
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9149
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

Post by Tad Eareckson »

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=59438
What it takes to make real change
2019/04/17 11:46:20 UTC
Mike Meier

You are correct, in this sense:
Nah Mike, Davis is always correct about everything in ALL senses.
To effect change in USHPA policies you need to get down to the details.
To effect POSITIVE change in USHPA policies you'd need to get an assault rifle.
You need to pull up the entire library of documents - Bylaws, SOPs, etc. etc. and then propose detailed, word-specific changes to those documents that will effect the changes you want.
Better risk mitigation strategies.
Absent that level of detailed work, nothing can change.
I disagree. The sport's going down the toilet at an ever accelerating rate. That's change. And that's the only reason you Wills Wing guys have finally come out and started saying stuff publicly.
And since the advent of the RRG and the involvement of PASA...
Any of your gliders...

http://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5788/23461251751_e98b9c7500_o.png
Image

...involved in any of the incidents which precipitated u$hPa being dumped by its insurance company? Guess not. Wills Wing gliders aren't designed to be motorized, tethered, or towed.

And that's total fucking bullshit by the way. It's physically impossible to design and certify a glider for free flight without automatically designing it to be tethered or towed. In fact your gliders aren't designed and aren't and can't be certified for foot launching from a slope while they have no problem whatsoever platform or dolly launching.

And another thing your gliders aren't designed and aren't and can't be certified for is foot landing - as your designer confirms...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27086
Steve Pearson on landings
Steve Pearson - 2012/03/28 23:26:05 UTC

I can't control the glider in strong air with my hands at shoulder or ear height and I'd rather land on my belly with my hands on the basetube than get turned downwind.
...in no uncertain terms. Also have no shortage of fatality reports to illustrate what's going on.
...this is even more complicated, because what you can do may be limited by laws governing such enterprises, and PASA is somewhat independent of USHPA.
What they really need to do is apply their tow release design strategies to the revisions of their SOPs - simple always works best.
And so all of this will be a tremendous amount of work for anyone to take on.
Yeah? Upon request of u$hPa's Towing Committee Chairman I took on a tremendous amount of work writing a revision of u$hPa's AT SOPs. And guess what I got in return? And where the fuck were you guys? Nowhere 'cause your gliders aren't designed to be motorized, tethered, or towed?
However, none of that work will be worth anything if there is not an atmosphere of receptiveness within the USHPA bureaucracy.
http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=463
Davis Straub's "Oz Report" Conflict of Interest
Bob Kuczewski - 2011/02/12 06:56:36 UTC

Without naming names (I'm curious to see if they'll own up to it first), on May 10, 2009, one Director wrote:
We need to consider getting an injunction against this guy communicating with the FAA on this subject.
That same day, another Director responded:
I forwarded the letter to Tim Herr yesterday asking about this.
For those who don't know, Tim Herr is ... USHPA's lawyer!!

A third Director (who I'll call "Mr. X") chimed in that same day with this:
Perhaps a strongly worded letter from Tim will do the trick. We can't force Tad to work within the USHPA framework but we can make it unpleasant and expensive for him if he chooses to makes derogatory and false statements about USHPA to the FAA he can't back up.
Despite paying lip service to the existence of such an atmosphere, in truth it does not yet exist. The USHPA Board, Executive Committee, Officers and Staff are all bright, capable people with the best intentions.
Of course they are, Mike - always have been, always will be. They couldn't possibly get elected, appointed, hired in a sport as noble as hang gliding otherwise. Besides, you've personally verified your assessment for every single relevant individual - and that's sure way more than good enough for Yours Truly.
Despite that, all the evidence is that they are screwing this up...
And fucking over to the maximum extent possible anybody who even starts thinking too loudly about competence and reform.
...and it seems that this is happening because they just don't get it.
- They're all bright and capable - just not collectively bright and capable enough to have gotten what you've managed to.

- Or because they're a bunch of inherently evil, corrupt, lying motherfuckers who all found their callings protecting the sport from competence, oversight, responsibility, accountability, common decency and destroying the careers and lives of those with alternate takes on how things should be run.
So talk, like what Steve has written, and like the confirmations by others of the validity of what he has written, has real value, if it has the capacity to get a conversation going and get those who are in a position to actually change things to take another look at what they're doing.
Way too fuckin' little, way too fuckin' late.
The trajectory of decline in hang gliding probably dates back as far as 1976.
Yeah, like I've been saying for a good chunk of the history of Kite Strings... The sports been an incompetent dickhead magnet since Day One.
Pat Denevan identified it before the USHPA Board as early as 1978...
Pat...

109-15221
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8615/16487544910_41f57852ac_o.png
Image

...Denevan? State-Of-The-Art Equipment Pat...

http://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1483/26207707785_6ae87e9ddd_o.jpg
Image

...Denevan?
...and I wrote about it in 1985.
Just think where the sport might be today if you hadn't written about it in 1985.
There may be nothing that any of us can do about it.
I'm pretty sure Team Kite Strings has. We work pretty hard publishing all the stuff u$hPa doesn't want anybody too see.
On the other hand, there are stories of other similar sports, like Sky Diving...
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8819/18267685796_64156e9c91_o.png
Image
...that have come back from similar declines.
Hey people of varying ages, I've got an idea! Why don't we use skydiving's bent parachute release pin for our aerotow release pin! It's worked flawlessly for THEM for untold millions of hops.
From what I have heard, their national association has a totally different approach than we do to how they interact with their members and instructors.
Yeah, they tend not to be able to get away with problems below two thousand feet and treat them as nonissues. So I'm guessing...
Dr. Trisa Tilletti - 2012/06

If tandem operators think that, practically, a 520 lb. double loop weak link is too much for a tandem, it is way too much for a solo pilot.
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24846
Is this a joke ?
Davis Straub - 2011/08/26 14:04:52 UTC

We had six weaklink breaks in a row at Zapata this year. Russell Brown (tug pilot, tug owner, Quest Air owner) said go ahead and double up (four strands of Cortland Greenspot). He knows I used his Zapata weaklink in Big Spring (pilots were asked to tell the tug pilot if they were doing that).
...OPINION plays a much smaller roll in that sport.
I've not been more than very peripherally involved in USHPA matters for 20 years, and although I have in the past spent many hundreds of hours on the kind of detail specific work that is required to make real change, I am not willing to do that at this time, and consequently I hesitate to comment.
Oh well, it's a pretty good bet you'll be having more and more spare time on your hands over the course of the next few years.
But speaking out has value.
Not to mention being extremely expensive.
I write to my representatives in congress, even though I am not willing to draft the bills that would effect the change I want them to make.
Do you ever even bother to post sane takes on any fatal glider incidents to help effect any changes you might want made to reduce their frequencies? Or do you just leave all that up to the u$hPa killing machine and their bullshit Risk Mitigation programs?
Thank you for giving a forum to those who wish to speak.
To those who wish to speak anything Davis is OK with them speaking anyway. When Davis isn't OK with them he sabotages their discussions, locks and basements their topics, deletes their posts, deletes posts supporting their positions, bans them, threatens them with physical violence.

So your expression of gratitude for what Davis is doing tells us a lot about just how legitimate your take on how bright, capable, sterling intentioned all the u$hPa operatives are.

Too little, too late, and loaded with tons of total crap.
User avatar
NMERider
Posts: 100
Joined: 2014/07/02 19:46:36 UTC

Re: instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

Post by NMERider »

It will be interesting to see the outcome of SCOTT HOWARD v. MISSION SOARING after it goes back to trial:
http://jnswire.s3.amazonaws.com/jns-media/86/4d/1065358/H043759.PDF
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9149
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

Post by Tad Eareckson »

Things are pretty damn interesting already.

Some (more easily readable) excerpts - focusing on the nuts and bolts stuff:
In May 2015, plaintiff filed a complaint alleging a single negligence cause of action. In his complaint, plaintiff contended that defendants owed him a reasonable duty of care in maintaining the equipment used in hang gliding and in selecting, hiring, and supervising employees of the hang gliding company. In that respect, plaintiff argued that defendants breached that duty by failing to keep and maintain the equipment in a safe operable condition and by "increase[ing] the risk of injury . . . beyond the inherent risks associated with hang gliding."

Plaintiff alleged the following facts. In November 2013, plaintiff entered defendants' property to hang glide. Plaintiff had purchased 20 "tows" from defendants. A tow consisted of attaching the hang glider to a cable which was operated by a hydraulic winch system. The tow cable was operated mechanically to pull the hang glider into the sky. The hang glider was attached to the tow cable by a ring and release pin. On one of plaintiff's tows, plaintiff attempted to release himself but the pin failed to release and the hang glider remained attached to the tow cable. Plaintiff tried several times to release himself but was unable to do so. The auto release mechanism did not release plaintiff because it had been disengaged. Plaintiff crashed to the ground, resulting in serious injuries.
...
To support their summary judgment motion, defendants submitted plaintiff's deposition testimony to establish the following facts. When deciding whether to start hang gliding, plaintiff researched the sport of hang gliding. He was generally aware of the risks involved. Denevan conducted plaintiff's initial hang gliding orientation. The orientation consisted of a video about hang gliding, an overview of the lessons offered, and an explanation of the different pilot ratings. The next day, plaintiff began to take his first hang gliding lessons, which consisted of basic instruction and lasted four to five hours. After approximately 13 lessons, plaintiff was introduced to the tow machine. Plaintiff eventually achieved the “Hang 1” pilot designation. Thereafter, plaintiff purchased a hang glider, a hang gliding harness, a tow release, and a parachute.

Plaintiff explained that one of the safety features of a hang glider was an auto release mechanism. The auto release feature would cause the hang glider to disconnect from the tow system when certain height or directional limits were reached. Plaintiff testified that on the day of the accident, Johnson noted that the auto release was disengaging the tow cable before plaintiff reached the prescribed release point. According to plaintiff, Johnson advised that the auto release could be lengthened, which would "basically disable it." Johnson also advised plaintiff that he could instead disconnect the auto release when it got closer to the release point. On the day of the accident, Johnson instructed plaintiff to disconnect the auto release. Per that instruction, plaintiff disconnected the auto release before reaching his release point. After reaching the prescribed height, plaintiff attempted to manually release the tow cable. Plaintiff testified that he pulled multiple times on the release but it failed to disconnect. Plaintiff worried that he would soon veer too far on the tow line, be pulled down, and lose control of the hang glider. Plaintiff removed both hands from the control bar to pull on the release mechanism. Having removed both hands from the control bar, plaintiff lost control of the hang glider and crashed.
...
Plaintiff noted that he was a beginner pilot, that plaintiff had informed Johnson that he was having trouble with his release mechanism, and that Johnson did not follow up on or rectify the release issues. Plaintiff also noted that he informed Denevan on the morning of the incident that he was having release problems. Finally, plaintiff pointed to the fact that Johnson had instructed him to disconnect the auto release safety mechanism. Plaintiff further pointed to Denevan's deposition testimony, in which Denevan stated that he would never instruct a pilot to disengage the auto release and that it was a violation of company policy to instruct a pilot to do so.

Defendants argued that plaintiff essentially admitted all of defendants' undisputed facts in support of summary judgment. In addition, defendants asserted that plaintiff's argument that the auto release device caused the accident was not supported by any admissible evidence. Finally, defendants argued that plaintiff failed to establish, through expert testimony, whether defendants' conduct fell below any standard of care or otherwise increased the risks inherent to hang gliding.
...
We first address primary assumption of risk. In the trial court, defendants disputed that they increased the inherent risks of hang gliding principally by disputing causation--that there was "no admissible evidence that the auto release mechanism had anything to do with plaintiff's accident." On the contrary, plaintiff testified to the basic mechanics of the auto release mechanism, as did Denevan. From their descriptions of the auto release, a rational jury could infer that disconnecting the auto release was related to plaintiff's accident, insofar as disengaging the auto release forced plaintiff to rely solely on the manual release. Plaintiff testified that just "prior to reaching the release point, when the auto release would become tight enough that it was about to release [him]" he would disconnect the auto release safety device to attain his desired release height. Plaintiff said he did so at the direction of his instructor. For his part, Denevan described the auto release as a safety mechanism designed to release the pilot if the manual release system failed. Denevan also noted that under no circumstances would he direct a pilot to disengage the auto release, that disengaging the auto release would be "foolish," and that instructing a pilot to disengage the auto release would be a violation of company policy.
...
Jimenez is instructive in the instant case. Here, as previously noted, plaintiff produced testimony from Denevan that there was never a circumstance where a pilot should disengage the auto release and he would never instruct a pilot to do so. Plaintiff further produced testimony that he was instructed to disconnect the auto release on his hang glider and that he did so in accordance with those instructions. Finally, plaintiff testified that because he disconnected his auto release, he was forced to rely exclusively on the manual release to disengage from the tow cable. Based on the foregoing, as in Jimenez, a jury could reasonably find: (1) Denevan's testimony established a standard that under no circumstances should the auto release be disengaged; (2) the instruction provided to plaintiff did not meet that standard; and (3) the instructed use of the auto release was an extreme departure from the ordinary standard of conduct, as expressed in Denevan's deposition testimony.
...plaintiff argued that defendants breached that duty by failing to keep and maintain the equipment in a safe operable condition...
You can't keep and maintain cheap bent pin, two-string, Birrenator crap posing for tow equipment in safe operable condition 'cause it wasn't ever designed to be safe and operable in the first place.
"...beyond the inherent risks associated with hang gliding."
- 99 percent of the inherent risks associated with hang gliding are deliberately engineered into the sport. So how does one make any sense of that statement?

- I contend that, for all intents and purposes, there are no inherent "RISKS" in hang gliding. That's corporatelawyer-speak to supply get-out-of-jail-free cards for negligence and incompetence. Gliders don't ever crash and people don't ever get hurt because of inherent risks. They get killed and mangled because people fuck up. We don't launch because the chances of us breaking an arm are only one in a thousand. We launch because we know we're capable of maintaining solid safety margins at all times. We don't MANAGE risks - we ELIMINATE them.
Plaintiff alleged the following facts.
If they're facts - and they are - they don't need to be alleged, right?
In November 2013...
2013/11/10.
...plaintiff entered defendants' property to hang glide.
Should've done his homework first.
Plaintiff had purchased 20 "tows" from defendants.
And had purchased tow "equipment" from defendants.
A tow consisted of attaching the hang glider to a cable...
- A nice well maintained and inspected steel cable because:
Manned Kiting
The Basic Handbook of Tow Launched Hang Gliding
Daniel F. Poynter
1974

"The greatest dangers are a rope break or a premature release." - Richard Johnson
- We don't call them cables. We call them towlines.
...which was operated by a hydraulic winch system.
- Should've had a person operating the hydraulic winch system to get the glider powered up to altitude safely.

- With no guillotine at its end because of...
Steve Davy - 2013/09/06 01:07:07 UTC

I talked with Pat about Lin's little adventure and what's been done to avoid a repeat.

When asked if a guillotine had been installed he expressed that he didn't like/trust the added complexity.
...all the lethal additional complexity.
The tow cable was operated mechanically to pull the hang glider into the sky.
Beats the hell out of it being operated mechanically to pull the hang glider into the dry lakebed.
The hang glider was attached to the tow cable by a ring and release pin.
Where was the focal point of this safe towing system? The one that automatically and infallibly releases you from tow before you can get into too much trouble?
On one of plaintiff's tows, plaintiff attempted to release himself but the pin failed to release and the hang glider remained attached to the tow cable.
One of the big inherent risks of hang glider towing. Way behind the hang glider not remaining attached to the tow cable however.
Plaintiff tried several times to release himself but was unable to do so.
Yeah?

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=30306
Non-fatal crash in Tres Pinos, CA
Scott Howard - 2014/11/06 16:06:31 UTC

...the best i can do for now is a clip of the day b4 when i told the instructor about release problem. (still released by normal method but had to yank 3 times on release to get it to release.)
Maybe he should've tried several more times. You should always expect better results when doing the same things over and over again.
The auto release mechanism did not release plaintiff because it had been disengaged.
Well then obviously using a Tad-O-Link. And he didn't even think of using his razor-sharp cutting tool to slash through his lines in an instant? How come we're not hearing anything about that issue?
Plaintiff crashed to the ground, resulting in serious injuries.
When the guy dies it's as a result of suffering fatal injuries.
To support their summary judgment motion, defendants submitted plaintiff's deposition testimony to establish the following facts.
Since when did anybody on the Mission crew start caring about facts?
When deciding whether to start hang gliding, plaintiff researched the sport of hang gliding.
Not on Kite Strings obviously.
He was generally aware of the risks involved.
Just didn't grasp the fact that having to yank three times on release to get it to release was an actual issue because the stuff he was using was all state-of-the-art - and easily reachable on top of that.
Denevan conducted plaintiff's initial hang gliding orientation.
Which is actually a major disorientation.
The orientation consisted of a video about hang gliding...
This one?:

http://vimeo.com/68791399


The one that so clearly illustrates the insane level of risk associated with...

109-15221
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8615/16487544910_41f57852ac_o.png
Image

...attempting to use a previous generation state-of-the-art three string release?

Image
Image
Image
...an overview of the lessons offered, and an explanation of the different pilot ratings.
Did we cover One?
The United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association, Inc. - 2017/03/22
Standard Operating Procedure
12. Rating System
02. Pilot Proficiency System
06. Beginner Hang Gliding Rating (H1)
-C. Recommended Operating Limitations for Beginner Pilots flying solo:

01. Should exceed these limitations only after demonstrating complete mastery of the required Beginner tasks (above), and only after acquiring a full understanding of the potential problems and dangerous situations which may arise from exceeding these limitations.

02. It is highly recommended that all flights be made under the direct supervision of a USHPA Certified Basic or Advanced Instructor.

03. Should fly only in winds of 12 mph or less, with gust differential of 5 mph or less.

04. Should foot launch only on slopes of 3:1 to 6:1, where wind is within 15° of being straight up the slope.

05. Should launch only when there are no obstructions within 60° to either side of intended flight path, and when pilot may fly straight out from launch to landing with no need to maneuver and no possibility of over-flying the landing area.

06. Should maintain flight heading within 15° of directly into the wind.

07. Should fly appropriate sites so as to maintain altitude below 100' AGL.
The next day, plaintiff began to take his first hang gliding lessons, which consisted of basic instruction and lasted four to five hours. After approximately 13 lessons, plaintiff was introduced to the tow machine.
How 'bout the abort tow machine? Not until after you've scored your Three?
Plaintiff eventually achieved the "Hang 1" pilot designation.
I think I was good after my first day.
Thereafter, plaintiff purchased a hang glider, a hang gliding harness, a tow release...
Or something being advertised as a tow release - state-of-the-art of course.
...and a parachute.
- Why does a Hang One - who's supposed to stay under a hundred feet - need a parachute? (And we can see just how much good it did him on that last one.)

- How much did he pay for the parachute and how much did he pay for the state-of-the-art tow release?
Plaintiff explained that one of the safety features of a hang glider was an auto release mechanism.
Anything that functions independently of the pilot's decisions. You just can't get any safer than that.
The auto release feature would cause the hang glider to disconnect from the tow system when certain height or directional limits were reached.
Before they can get into too much trouble. I so do hope this feature soon becomes commercially available.
Plaintiff testified that on the day of the accident, Johnson noted that the auto release was disengaging the tow cable before plaintiff reached the prescribed release point. According to plaintiff, Johnson advised that the auto release could be lengthened, which would "basically disable it."
Disable an element of state-of-the-art equipment? One that automatically assesses the situation and blows you off tow if it determines remaining on wouldn't be in the best interest of the glider's passenger? My gawd, what were they THINKING?! Trying to trade safety for convenience - if you want my opinion.
Johnson also advised plaintiff that he could instead disconnect the auto release when it got closer to the release point.
You mean like:

020-10819
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8665/16052643454_ef408619ca_o.png
Image
On the day of the accident...
The what?
...Johnson instructed plaintiff to disconnect the auto release. Per that instruction, plaintiff disconnected the auto release before reaching his release point.
And we all know how that went. Let this be a lesson to all you people of varying ages.
After reaching the prescribed height, plaintiff attempted to manually release the tow cable. Plaintiff testified that he pulled multiple times on the release but it failed to disconnect.
Just like Dr. Trisa Tilletti always says...
Dr. Trisa Tilletti - 2012/06

We could get into details of lab testing weak links and bridles, but this article is already getting long. That would be a good topic for an article in the future. Besides, with our backgrounds in formal research, you and I both know that lab tests may produce results with good internal validity, but are often weak in regard to external validity--meaning lab conditions cannot completely include all the factors and variability that exists in the big, real world.
I'll bet the tow pressure varied in the big, real world much more than could've been predicted and/or simulated in lab conditions.
Plaintiff worried that he would soon veer too far on the tow line...
VEER? What the fuck does that mean? We never heard a scrap of a suggestion that the glider started tracking in inch to either side of the line straight toward the turnaround pulley.
...be pulled down, and lose control of the hang glider.
So where's the weak link in this situation and why isn't it breaking when it's supposed to?
Plaintiff removed both hands from the control bar to pull on the release mechanism.
So? How much worse than removing both hands from the control bar than removing just one? And what business does a goddam under forty hour Hang One have touching the control bar in the first place?
Having removed both hands from the control bar, plaintiff lost control of the hang glider and crashed.
But he'd gotten off tow so the crash couldn't possibly have been very serious, right?
Plaintiff noted that he was a beginner pilot, that plaintiff had informed Johnson that he was having trouble with his release mechanism, and that Johnson did not follow up on or rectify the release issues.
So the fuck what? It was state-of-the-art equipment so the issues couldn't possibly have been with the release. The problem was obviously that the beginner pilot didn't start pulling with both hands soon enough.
Plaintiff also noted that he informed Denevan on the morning of the incident that he was having release problems.
So?

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22660
What can be learned from this "scooter" towing accident?
Jim Rooney - 2011/02/06 18:35:13 UTC

I don't really have anything against the Kotch release.
I think it's big, clunky and expensive, but I'm sure it works fine.
I'm also sure it has it's problems just like any other system. The minute someone starts telling me about their "perfect"system, I start walking away.
Standard Operating Procedure is to start walking away from anyone who starts telling you about problems with your cheap shit long track record state-of-the-art equipment.
Finally, plaintiff pointed to the fact that Johnson had instructed him to disconnect the auto release safety mechanism. Plaintiff further pointed to Denevan's deposition testimony, in which Denevan stated that he would never instruct a pilot to disengage the auto release and that it was a violation of company policy to instruct a pilot to do so.
- We have one of the most viral videos in the history of the sport to prove beyond a shred of a reasonable doubt otherwise.

- Absolutely. They've always had that posted on their website. Everybody knows that. Just watch a couple of their instructional videos and you can clearly see everyone from their Hang Zero students to their Advanced recreational flyers not disengaging their auto releases and not ever using their manual backup releases.

- This is absolutely bizarre. I think that at some point very early in the aftermath of this one Pat lied about how they run things and thus painted himself into this corner he's now forced to defend to the bitter end. And the folk who fly there depend on that operation as a major resource and aren't going to say anything to the contrary. But also note that not one of these motherfuckers has posted a video or comment to support this bullshit.
Defendants argued that plaintiff essentially admitted all of defendants' undisputed facts in support of summary judgment.
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24846
Is this a joke ?
Jim Rooney - 2011/08/26 02:44:10 UTC

I find no disagreement in the professional community as to such.
I only find a disconnect when they're talking to the general public, and it always boils down to semantics.

See, we're not confused.
You're searching for an argument and only finding it within yourself.

This btw is one of the main reasons that most of the professionals do not bother with the forums.
Cuz it's generally a bitchfest around here.

Instead of looking for an argument, you may consider listening instead.
In addition, defendants asserted that plaintiff's argument that the auto release device caused the accident was not supported by any admissible evidence.
Admit THIS:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bRrpHNa68iY/UQ6Pv9gRZyI/AAAAAAAAjTg/Hc22bx5122Q/s2048/20943781_BG1.jpg
Image

motherfuckers. Also...
Wills Wing / Blue Sky / Steve Wendt / Ryan Voight Productions - 2007/03

NEVER CUT THE POWER...

Image

Reduce Gradually
Increase Gradually
Finally, defendants argued that plaintiff failed to establish, through expert testimony, whether defendants' conduct fell below any standard of care or otherwise increased the risks inherent to hang gliding.
You assholes rated him as a fuckin' Hang One and pulled him up into that situation. Shouldn't be too difficult of a case to make.
We first address primary assumption of risk. In the trial court, defendants disputed that they increased the inherent risks of hang gliding principally by disputing causation--that there was "no admissible evidence that the auto release mechanism had anything to do with plaintiff's accident."
We've got tons of evidence about what auto releases do to gliders all the fuckin' time. Y'all will hafta figure out whether or not it's admissible. I'll tell ya one thing though... u$hPa sure doesn't want it - or anything else that smacks of common sense - to be admissible.
On the contrary, plaintiff testified to the basic mechanics of the auto release mechanism, as did Denevan.
- Nose goes up, auto release mechanism kicks in, glider stalls and drops like a brick. Right?

- Wanna know more about this marvelous device from the mouth of its inventor? Check out his Linknife...

http://www.birrendesign.com/LKOpinions.html
Linknife - alternate setup as automatic release

...OPINIONS page.
From their descriptions of the auto release, a rational jury...
...would be excluded from hang gliding altogether until they renounced their rational beliefs and learned to interact in friendly manners with established members of the worlds largest hang gliding community.
...could infer that disconnecting the auto release was related to plaintiff's accident, insofar as disengaging the auto release forced plaintiff to rely solely on the manual release.
Have we established that the manual release is capable of actually functioning as a manual release in common towing scenarios?
Plaintiff testified that just "prior to...
...launching the pilot is required to demonstrate a method a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in. Look at some Tres Pinos videos and see just how well Mission complies and has its students comply with that most fundamental element of hang gliding safety strategies.
...reaching the release point, when the auto release would become tight enough that it was about to release [him]" he would disconnect the auto release safety device to attain his desired release height.
So defendants are maintaining that the manual release is only actuated in emergency situations prior to reaching the intended release altitude and on the occasions when the auto release fails to function... Right?
Plaintiff said he did so at the direction of his instructor.
His u$hPa certified instructor. Same asshole who almost pile drove Lin Lyons into a nearby neighborhood on this rig five days shy of five months prior... Right?
For his part, Denevan described the auto release as a safety mechanism designed to release the pilot if the manual release system failed.
For his part, Denevan's a lying motherfucker. It's "designed" to blow the glider off tow when it's pitched high and/or away from the direction of the turnaround pulley. What happens to the glider after that is a matter of what was going on with it the instant before that can happen. It can be a good thing but it's a helluva lot more likely to be a bad thing.
Denevan also noted that under no circumstances would he direct a pilot to disengage the auto release, that disengaging the auto release would be "foolish," and that instructing a pilot to disengage the auto release would be a violation of company policy.
Sounds at best like you didn't do very good jobs of communicating this to your student and assessing his suitability for being in this situation. And we know the latter to be the case for a certainty 'cause you put him up there before you'd signed him off as a Two.
Jimenez is instructive in the instant case. Here, as previously noted, plaintiff produced testimony from Denevan that there was never a circumstance where a pilot should disengage the auto release and he would never instruct a pilot to do so. Plaintiff further produced testimony that he was instructed to disconnect the auto release on his hang glider and that he did so in accordance with those instructions.
See video evidence above.
Finally, plaintiff testified that because he disconnected his auto release, he was forced to rely exclusively on the manual release to disengage from the tow cable. Based on the foregoing, as in Jimenez, a jury could reasonably find: (1) Denevan's testimony established a standard that under no circumstances should the auto release be disengaged; (2) the instruction provided to plaintiff did not meet that standard; and (3) the instructed use of the auto release was an extreme departure from the ordinary standard of conduct, as expressed in Denevan's deposition testimony.
Fuckin' exactly.
User avatar
Tad Eareckson
Posts: 9149
Joined: 2010/11/25 03:48:55 UTC

Re: instructors and other qualified pilot fiends

Post by Tad Eareckson »

Towing Aloft - 1998/01

A weak link is a very simple device--typically a loop of line--that is intended to break in the event towline tensions exceed a safe or desired threshold.
http://ozreport.com/12.081
Weaklinks - the HGFA rules
Davis Straub - 2008/04/22 14:47:00 UTC

It is safer to have a simple uniform release/bridle system that the ground crew is familiar with and can determine if there is a problem. The simpler and more uniform the safer, system wide.
http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3600
Weak link question
Jim Rooney - 2008/11/22 22:31:35 UTC

The simple fact is this. The only reason anyone even gives Tad the time of day is that they want to believe him. Why? Because they don't like to be inconvenienced by a weaklink break. That's it.

Sure, everyone digs around for other reasons to believe, but at the heart of it, it's convenience.
No one is actually scared to fly with a standard weaklink. They may say they are, but deep down inside, they're not.
http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3600
Weak link question
Jim Rooney - 2008/11/23 08:50:52 UTC

A weaklink's purpose is to improve your safety.
Plane and simple.
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14903
New Lookout Release--preliminary test
JD Guillemette - 2009/02/13 03:24:15 UTC

Sweeeet!!!! Looks good to me.
I like the bent gate bar, as Marc suggested that should make release force many times less than tow force, if not nearly independant of tow line force.
Nicely done Lookout! Elegant solution!
As in most cases, the simplest designs work best.
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=11497
Aerotow release options?
Paul Hurless - 2009/05/01 16:35:30 UTC

Adding more parts like pulleys and internally routed components makes it that much more likely that a device will fail. Simple is best.
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=25536
Whoops! Snapped another tip wand :-O
Christopher LeFay - 2012/03/15 05:57:43 UTC

This was just what people wanted - to be told a simple answer.
Don't hang glider people just LOVE simplicity.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=34229
AT release
Brad Barkley - 2016/04/01 22:57:44 UTC

I hear Rube Goldberg uses this set-up and loves it. Image
Karl Allmendinger - 2016/04/02 03:47:53 UTC

Tad Eareckson or Heath Robinson?
Keep everything plane and simple. Impossible to go wrong with that strategy. Lin Lyons hooks up his three-string wrong, no procedure to check flyers - even student flyers - before they go up, no guillotine, Mission Two student...

109-15221
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8615/16487544910_41f57852ac_o.png
Image

...gets damn near killed.

163-20728
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8655/16487364578_83864d7bac_o.png
Image

Solution... Don't add the complexity of checks, a guillotine, better and more extensive instruction into the mix. Simplify. Remove a string from the three-string and make it a two. Couldn't fuck that up if you tried. Doesn't matter whether or not it will work under even normal release situation tow load. The only goal here is to make sure it's impossible to fuck up the connection. Even more state of the art.

And then less then five months later (surprised it took that long) they destroy the life of a serious student who's flying his own glider. And notice a couple things...

There was no recall of the state-of-the-art three-strings they'd been using and selling since the beginning of time. There's never in the history of the sport been recall of defective tow equipment - and 99.9 percent of what's out there is defective by design. A lethally defective Industry Standard release kills a national champion comp pilot flying behind the lethally defective Industry Standard release's designer...

http://ozreport.com/9.009
2005 Worlds
Davis Straub - 2005/01/11

This type of release mechanism has been banned (at least for a short while) from the Worlds at Hay.
You ban it (at least for a short while) from the Worlds at Hay. Problem solved.

Mission obviously wasn't grounding three-stringers, telling them the state-of-the-art release they'd sold them ten years ago was unacceptably dangerous...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31052
Poll on weaklinks
Jim Rooney - 2013/03/04 19:31:36 UTC

We all play by the same rules, or we don't play.
...making everybody buy the new improved version to play by the same rules.

And they never put out a recall of the two-strings five and a half years subsequent to Scott Howard's career totalling crash. And they couldn't start selling, requiring, recommending, even encouraging three-strings 'cause there's no fuckin' way that wouldn't be legal suicide for them. Nah, there was absolutely nothing wrong with the release...
Thereafter, plaintiff purchased a hang glider, a hang gliding harness, a tow release...
...we sold Scott. The only reason he totalled his glider and half totalled himself was because he deliberately violated the blindingly clear, oft repeated, critically important school policy we've had on the books since Day One that the auto release must never be disconnected in flight - the one that even the most inept of our students and recreational pilots has never once violated.

The release that we sold him is strictly a backup release to be used only in the extremely unlikely event of a failure of the primary/auto release and then only after the tow pressure has been reduced to a degree at which it's safe to stop flying the glider with both hands and make the easy reach to the backup release and pry it open.

http://www.chgpa.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3107
I have a tandem rating!!!
Lauren Tjaden - 2008/03/23 22:20:15 UTC

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

Anyhow, the tandem can indeed perform big wingovers, as I demonstrated when I finally got separated from the tug.
Yeah Lauren Eminently-Qualified-Tandem-Pilot Tjaden... That's pretty much the situation Scott was in after he finally got his Mark IV 17 pried loose from tow. 'Cept his wingover was a lot bigger than yours.

And I sure am glad that I'm not one of the people who...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24846
Is this a joke ?
Jim Rooney - 2011/08/25 21:40:25 UTC

Tommy.
First, I sent Steve a bunch of info offline. Hopefully it clears things up a bit for him.
Unfortunately, he's stumbled onto some of Tad's old rantings and got suckered in. So most of this was just the same old story of debunking Tad's lunacy... again .

See, the thing is... "we", the people that work at and run aerotow parks, have a long track record.
This stuff isn't new, and has been slowly refined over decades.
We have done quite literally hundreds of thousands of tows.
We know what we're doing.

Sure "there's always room for improvement", but you have to realize the depth of experience you're dealing with here.
There isn't going to be some "oh gee, why didn't I think of that?" moment. The obvious answers have already been explored... at length.
...work at and run the aerotow parks. 'Cause these Mission motherfuckers are gonna get annihilated and a major precedent is gonna be set. And we, the people, have all painted ourselves into the same corners into which Mission painted themselves.
Post Reply