Cutting the line

[Zack C]

[This thread continues a discussion that began on the HHPA group.]

Tad,

...when low it is virtually always much safer for a glider to remain on tow.

The appropriate response to "the first sign of trouble" is rarely to totally and irrevocably kill the thrust of an aircraft low off the runway with a high pitch attitude. What happens next is seldom pretty.

This is one area where I'm not following you completely. The tow line isn't just providing thrust...in the case of a lockout, it's the cause of the emergency. Get rid of the line and you get rid of the lockout. I certainly don't mean to suggest that all your worries are then over, but while I'll agree there are some situations when it's better to remain on the line, I think those are exceptions rather than the norm. You said

...a fraction of a second can spell the difference between giving it another shot five minutes from now and getting killed.

Is this implied urgency in releasing not at odds with the concept of it being safer to remain on tow? You frequently point out incidents caused by pilots unable to release quickly, but then you say it's better to remain on the line. Like I said, I'm not following you.

There is no way in hell I would tow with some bozo with a knife poised over my lifeline. I'm the fucking pilot in command and I don't want some asshole a football field away making my decisions for me. People who would've been fine otherwise have been killed by these do gooding first sign of trouble freaks.

If I was ever giving you a tow, I'd never consider cutting the line or dumping pressure. But most people use releases they have to reach for. If they're busy fighting the glider, it may be better to 'release' for them. What I was taught as a winch operator was to let off on the gas if things start to go south (but not stop) and only dump pressure if recovery still looks impossible. Since I can't trust people I'm towing will be willing or able to free themselves from the line when it's in their best interest, I'm inclined to follow what I was taught.

Zack

[Tad Eareckson]

Lemme take this one out of order - before "Releases" - 'cause it's relatively easy to deal with. The other one could take a book - this one just a magazine.

This is one area where I'm not following you completely. The tow line isn't just providing thrust...in the case of a lockout, it's the cause of the emergency. Get rid of the line and you get rid of the lockout.

Hang gliding has way too much genetic memory of towing just through the control frame rather than half, most, or all through the pilot.

By 1979/09/26 Brian Pattenden had figured it out and addressed the Norfolk (England) Hang Gliding Club. Donnell Hewett got a similar idea over here a bit later. The Norfolk crowd and Donnell started putting stuff in the air about the same time. Norfolk used stuff that worked. Donnell used stuff that was geared to deal with a lot of nonexistent problems predicted by a lot of voodoo physics and bogus assumptions and was dangerous as hell.

Both movements were treated like shit by the national hang gliding establishments. Donnell's approach - unfortunately - prevailed 'cause he put out a newsletter that went out all over the world and eventually got backed by USHGA. The Norfolk guys got totally - and, to no small extent, deliberately - screwed out of their place in history.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hhpa/message/11147

Len Smith - 2010/09/17 20:16:05 UTC

I believe that I may be one of the few pilots to have experienced structural failure as a direct result of a tow. There was no weak-link in the system. Here's what happened: I was boat towing in 1986 (snatch launch from a beach in Maryland) using a two point bridle connection with an auto-release on one end triggered by release of the other end.

He didn't experience structural failure as a direct result of a tow - he experienced structural failure as a well known and easily predictable consequence of using a Hewett Bridle - even this improved edition for which Henry Wise can claim credit (1983/01). And it's very doubtful that a weak link would've made any difference whatsoever.

With frame towing the "pilot" was pretty much along for the ride. His control authority was extremely limited, the guy in the BOAT (you didn't want to do a whole lot of this stuff over terra firma) was mostly calling the shots, and you didn't want to track too far away from what was pulling you without releasing 'cause the system was REAL roll unstable.

Most of the gliders were flimsy, uncertifiable junk that regularly folded in response to overpowered lead footed incompetent drivers.

But even then there was a lot of expensive, high quality tow equipment around and there were a lot of highly skilled, experienced, competent people running things pretty safely - even given the limitations of frame towing. (Dave Broyles was in the middle of all of this stuff. If you ever get a chance to spend some hang waiting time with him...)

Lockouts were a serious problem but - even with the nasty instability of the system - stalls, from the documentation on which I've been able to get my hands, appear to have been the biggest killers. And people were - appropriately - scared shitless of worn towlines and bad splices.

Then Donnell came along with "center of mass" towing and pronounced his bridle self stabilizing and the lockout a thing of the past - UNLESS the pilot allowed the glider to get so far off track that the bridle or pilot contacted the control frame or a nose wire. (Find a good lockout on youtube sometime and watch how off center the pilot and bridle get.)

And to compensate for a pilot always presumed to be incapable of piloting, Donnell mandated a 200 pound weak link which would blow before the glider got too far out of line or nose high enough to risk a stall. And whenever gliders got horribly turned or whipstalled anyway Donnell would explain it away by alleging an accidentally doubled weak link.

Towed hang gliders immediately started handling a lot better and stalling and crashing a lot more.

And of course by this time the gliders were all certified and capable of pulling half a dozen Gs. Read: when the gliders could fairly easily be pulled apart nobody was using weak links and when they couldn't EVERYBODY was - and staying well south of one G to boot. Is this a great sport or what!

So... What was the question? Oh yeah.

There's this huge cultural fear of low level lockouts left over from the dinosaur days but if you look at the records of high volume platform tow and (dolly launched) aerotow operations you start noticing that - for people who have half an idea of how to fly a glider anyway - they're pretty much nonexistent. I don't know how many tens of thousands of flights have been launched at Ridgely to date but I know of no really good examples.

You come off the back of the truck or cart with a good head of steam and you're pretty bulletproof - barring, of course, the rare dust devil with your name on it. And even then a lockout is very far from a given.

You should be able to get to a safe altitude almost as consistently as passenger jets - and passenger just off the runway don't have sane bailout options.

Also... Even with the best possible equipment, people, and reactions on both ends of the line. If we got the kinds of lockouts down low that we do up high (with a lot of vertical air movement), a lot of them simply wouldn't be survivable. And I don't see those happening.

You wanna see crashes? Watch what routinely happens after low level weak link failures. You won't hafta hang around the runway all that long - especially when the guy prioritizes getting on his feet over landing the glider (like they all do).

Get rid of the line and you get rid of the lockout.

And any hope of putting more distance between you and the only thing that can hurt you.

Rob Kells tuned me into the idea that blowing tow instantly ain't necessarily the best knee-jerk reaction to a lockout. The most important thing you need to do is get level by the time you get to the ground. You can be locking out AND climbing and a delay in release may very well give you the altitude to get things back under a reasonable level of control before the flight ends.

I certainly don't mean to suggest that all your worries are then over...

Correct. What most people fail to understand is that - for the most part - they're just beginning.

...but while I'll agree there are some situations when it's better to remain on the line, I think those are exceptions rather than the norm.

No freakin' way. Again, low level lockouts are virtually nonexistent for rolling launches and halfway competent pilots. The truth is you could use thousand pound weak links and weld releases shut for the first two hundred feet and be hard pressed to note a difference.

With the absolute shit that most people fly with we're pretty much doing the welding thing anyway. Look at the crap your HHPA poster boy is using:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hhpa/

No way that's gonna do him any good in a critical situation. And that's what EVERYBODY uses. If low critical situations which required timely releases were anything but freak occurrences we'd be killing tow pilots at the rate of once a week all summer long.

Hang gliding culture has just decided that it's acceptable to kill someone every time that freak occurrence DOES manifest itself.

And in case Ryan Voight is listening and still doesn't get it... Don't count on the weak link to save your ass - especially on a payout winch.

Is this implied urgency in releasing not at odds with the concept of it being safer to remain on tow?

Nope. Just for that freak occurrence that's very unlikely to ever happen to you but extremely likely to happen to someone you know.

If I was ever giving you a tow, I'd never consider cutting the line or dumping pressure.

In that freak situation that DOES require immediate dumping of tension the evidence is pretty strong that the guy up front simply can't react quickly enough to make any difference. Even a tug driver with his eye on the mirror and a finger on the trigger is no match for a glider pilot with a lever on the downtube or a barrel on the shoulder.

But most people use releases they have to reach for.

Yeah. They keep doing stupid dangerous shit 'cause they get away with it just about all the time. If - over your entire hang gliding career - you do a hang check in the setup area and launch five minutes later under the assumption that you're still hooked in the chances that you're gonna get seriously hurt as a consequence of an unhooked launch are fairly remote. On 2010/11/06 B Asher and his glider came out smelling like roses. And people started talking about hang checks, letting the nose pop up at the transition from flat to hill, and the paramount issue of banning Tad.

If they're busy fighting the glider, it may be better to 'release' for them.

Yeah, it MAY be.

2006/05/06 - Nuno Fontes - 83214 - Advanced - California - scooter tow

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2266
Nuno Fontes - Hang Gliding Towing Accident.

Nuno Fontes - 2006/05/27

We were towing on the lee side of some thousand foot mountains. I had flown without problems an hour before.

I got to about a hundred feet and the glider was completely veered to the left due to the strong crosswinds from the right.

What made me hesitate and not release was having the right wing way up and being stalled and very low. I had the feeling I was going to be catapulted backwards if I released and had a clear notion I was going to hit dirt in a tailwind.

The best option seemed to be to resist the lock out and slowly bring the glider down, even if it was crooked, but another problem arose when the observer had the tow line cut when I was down to about fifty feet.

I had no chance. The glider that had been hanging on like a kite dead leafed to the ground. The left leading edge hit first, destroying it along with the nose plates. My body's impact point was the left shoulder and the left side of my head and neck.

I remained unconscious for about twenty minutes with a bloody face from what poured from my nose. The chopper arrived about an hour after the crash. I was already semi-conscious but in a lot of pain and having trouble breathing. I was hauled to Stanford (about half an hour flight time).

The toll: fracture and crushing of the upper humerus, several broken ribs, a lung pierced and collapsed by one of them, and broken C1 vertebra right by the artery. They considered surgery, but the no-surgery risk was lower - they feared a chip would rupture the artery.

But that is NEVER the driver's job or call.

On 1996/05/11 my old Kitty Hawk Kites instructor colleague Lawrence Battaile launched off the beach on the Sound - scooter, anchored and buoyed turn-around pulley - into a strong wind with his starboard tip stalled. He was fighting for control and rolled hard and I was 99 percent certain that he was gonna die in two seconds exactly where I was standing on the dock. I didn't stick around to watch.

By the time I got to shore I was wondering why I hadn't heard a crash and turned around astonished to see him up and getting ready to soar the tree line.

Jonny Thompson had hit the gas. "You did WHAT?!!!" Ran totally contrary to all the crap about hang glider towing with which I had ever been indoctrinated. He pulled him out of the stall - similar to but much worse than the Danny Brotto aerotow situation maybe a decade later. If he had done anything else it would have been really really really BAD.

What I was taught as a winch operator was to let off on the gas if things start to go south (but not stop) and only dump pressure if recovery still looks impossible.

As we have just seen above that can be a really bad idea. You can't automatically default to less or no tension. You gotta start thinking like a ten-year-old kid flying a kite - which is EXACTLY what Jonny did and the only reason Lawrence is still alive. Sometimes the kite starts getting out of control and the kid pays out more string and at others he runs like hell into the wind - and he doesn't use a weak link.

Since I can't trust people I'm towing will be willing or able to free themselves from the line when it's in their best interest, I'm inclined to follow what I was taught.

- Then you shouldn't tow them - just like you shouldn't throw an alleged Hang Two who doesn't know how to fly a glider with his hands on the basetube off the ramp at Packsaddle.

- If you do tow people with limitations of skill, judgment, and/or equipment everybody should be made aware that each flight is a dice roll.

- I'd rather let die ten people who can't do or aren't doing their jobs on the back end of the line than take a chance of breaking the wrist of one who can and is by second guessing him and overriding his judgment.

- Are these the same people that taught you to do a hang check and assume you are hooked in on launch, use a loop of 130 pound Greenspot as an AT weak link, and use a Bailey release for towing behind the trike?

[Zack C]

Tad,

There's this huge cultural fear of low level lockouts left over from the dinosaur days but if you look at the records of high volume platform tow and (dolly launched) aerotow operations you start noticing that - for people who have half an idea of how to fly a glider anyway - they're pretty much nonexistent.

I can see why you qualified that statement...eliminating cases involving foot launch starts and inexperienced pilots does seems to leave few remaining documented low-level lockout cases. But what about Lockout Larry? Was his best course of action not releasing earlier? Was his scenario really so unusual (as far as low-level lockouts go)?

You come off the back of the truck or cart with a good head of steam and you're pretty bulletproof - barring, of course, the rare dust devil with your name on it.

It doesn't sound like John Dullahan was hit by a dust devil. Would not his best course of action also have been releasing earlier (given a more accessible release)?

You can be locking out AND climbing and a delay in release may very well give you the altitude to get things back under a reasonable level of control before the flight ends.

If you're locked out, by definition you will continue to diverge from the tow line and there's nothing you can do to stop it. And the longer you wait to release, the worse your attitude gets. To me is seems you'd have to be climbing very fast to offset the negatives. Having said that, I've never been in a lockout, so I'm just speculating.

To be clear, I do agree that it is almost always safer to stay on the line near the ground. It's just that in lockout situations I think it's usually best to get off the line ASAP (near the ground or not). I'm not even clear on how much you disagree with me on that:

...any tow accident can be prevented by an early enough release....

It's only to be actuated in an emergency situation - read low level lockout.

Sometimes the kite starts getting out of control and the kid pays out more string...

Wouldn't this temporarily reduce tension (as with letting off the gas in a truck tow)?

Speaking of letting off the gas, here's a video (password = 'red') from last March where the operator did just that when a pilot dropped a wing just after getting airborne from a foot launch. The pilot corrected and the tow resumed without issue. I tend to think that the tow may not have gone so well had the operator not momentarily reduced tension. The glider's wing tip came very close to the ground.

http://vimeo.com/17743952

password - red

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/435/19224482318_2da3f48afe_o.png
10-525

Then you shouldn't tow them...

I wasn't referring to limitations of their skill or judgment...just equipment. Since we're all using releases that require taking a hand off the bar, I suppose none of us should be flying.

Are these the same people that taught you to do a hang check and assume you are hooked in on launch, use a loop of 130 pound Greenspot as an AT weak link, and use a Bailey release for towing behind the trike?

No, that would be one person (Jack), the same person who taught us to use ~2 G weak links.

Zack

[Tad Eareckson]

I can see why you qualified that statement...eliminating cases involving foot launch starts and inexperienced pilots does seems to leave few remaining documented low-level lockout cases.

Yeah. And I've said this before, but wouldn't you have thunk that if someone were gonna write a set of criteria for safe towing rolling launches would've been on it by about 1983?

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21649
Truck Towing Accident in South Texas

Gregg Ludwig - 2010/10/28 15:46:59 UTC

Here is another report from a student (H-0) that may shed some light on the methods of instruction used. This student weighs about 250 pounds and was using a glider too small for his first tow over asphalt as reported.

28th and 29th I will be up in Kingsville, at the Kleberg County Airport about 8 am. I will be training with the Doc. He will be having lessons there Saturday, depending on weather conditions. Will be towed up with a winch - this will be my first tow. Have just been doing foot launch, will get some airtime in on those days.
...
I had to stand like a post, and not move at all once the truck took off at 25 mph with one foot in front of the other, and I am still standing in the same place leaning back, with the payout feeding me line, and there is a strange feeling, odd feeling to being pulled by the payout.

Then I take the first step to the run, and I am now running 25 mph, I am thinking, oooOOOOH SH#T, hope I don't have to run that far, hoping the HG gets lift so I don't have to run no more... My F-A running down the runway like a rocket. There is no wind, I have the right angle of attack, the HG is up, but still not enough lift for the pilot.

I can't reach my CUT line 'cause I have both hands on the downtubes, and if I let go of the Coke bottle grip I will crash.

I feel like pushing the HG into the air, or jumping up so it can lift, but I do not - that would make my situation worse.

I feel I am about to fall into the asphalt face first and crash, I am at my run limit, and feel I can not take another step. Still the glider is not lifting me.

The winch operator lets go of the pressure of the payout winch, my run comes to a jog, and to a stop. I drop to my knees.

But what about Lockout Larry? Was his best course of action not releasing earlier?

HE WASN'T LOCKED OUT. He was TIP STALLED. If he had been locked out he'd have been dead. The only thing Jonny would've been able to affect would've been the degree of deadness.

He was a HIGHLY skilled pilot popping off an extremely narrow beach at Colington Island in a strong smooth southwest convection wind that had blown out that afternoon's Spectacular competition on the dunes. There was a bush that was disrupting the airflow in the vicinity of his right tip and it wasn't flying when he committed. Jonny was right next to him on the throttle when he launched and I don't think there would've been any way to abort that launch even if people had had actuators triggered by brain waves.

And once the glider was moving an abort with an acceptable outcome wasn't an option.

If it had been a lockout, flooring it would've slammed him in three times as hard as he would've otherwise. But it was a stall and kicking in the afterburners was the only call that would've worked.

Was his scenario really so unusual (as far as low-level lockouts go)?

I had done the EXACT SAME LAUNCH a dozen years earlier - 1984/07/24 - ten miles up the beach at Duck. Same wind, same direction, same bush, same disrupted airflow on the same wingtip that Dave Hahn was trying to warn me about. 'Cept it was a free flight launch from a thirty foot dune and when I did a quick 180 and slammed back in downwind it was all bushes and sand so I got away with a snapped downtube and bent batten. A couple of my earlier flights that day had been a lot longer and a lot more fun.

Lawrence and Steve Wendt were there.

Dave was killed there as a consequence of a midair with George Reeves on 1987/12/01. George went down upwind and chipped a couple of teeth, Dave got turned downwind and broke his neck. Dave was an awesome dune pilot with no ego and a real nice guy.

It doesn't sound like John Dullahan was hit by a dust devil.

By dust devil I meant any relatively unpredictable micrometeorological bit of nastiness.

Would not his best course of action also have been releasing earlier...

Yeah. Rare classic violent low level lockout. No-brainer.

...(given a more accessible release)?

The thing is... You don't wanna be ACCESSING a release in that scenario. You wanna have already accessed it while you were gearing up on the cart before giving the Dragonfly a green. When the shit hits the fan you wanna be blowing the release. In this situation an extra half second with the towline gone and both hands on the basetube might have made a radical difference in the outcome of his trip to Florida.

If you're locked out, by definition you will continue to diverge from the tow line and there's nothing you can do to stop it. And the longer you wait to release, the worse your attitude gets. To me is seems you'd have to be climbing very fast to offset the negatives.

I've seen the same John Dullahan do it. (Also a guy I really like a lot.)

This time at Ridgely and entirely his fault - it was called before he came off the cart. He was roll inputting in a totally useless effort to get the cart to track straight down the runway. Shoulda just left it alone until he lifted off, stayed level, and let the glider weathervane.

He came off rolled and tracking pretty hard right. Nobody was breathing. But he was climbing and not releasing and neither was the tug driver. When he finally reached the point of that's all folks he blew off and had all the time in the world to set up and land.

Dennis Pagen - 2005/01

The first accident occurred in Germany at an aerotowing competition. The pilot launched with his Litespeed and climbed to about 40 feet when he encountered a thermal that lifted him well above the tug. After a few moments, the glider was seen to move to the side and rapidly turn nose down to fly into the ground, still on tow, in a classic lockout maneuver. The impact was fatal.

Analysis

This pilot was a good up-and-coming competition pilot. He had been in my cross-country course three years ago, and this was his second year of competition. What happened to him is not too unusual or mysterious. He encountered so much lift that although he was pulling in the base bar as far as he could, he did not have enough pitch-down control to get the nose down and return to proper position behind the tug. This situation is known as an over-the-top lockout.

I am personally familiar with such a problem, because it happened to me at a meet in Texas. Soon after lift-off the trike tug and I were hit by the mother of all thermals. Since I was much lighter, I rocketed up well above the tug, while the very experienced tug pilot, Neal Harris, said he was also lifted more than he had ever been in his heavy trike. I pulled in all the way, but could see that I wasn't going to come down unless something changed. I hung on and resisted the tendency to roll to the side with as strong a roll input as I could, given that the bar was at my knees. I didn't want to release, because I was so close to the ground and I knew that the glider would be in a compromised attitude. In addition, there were hangars and trees on the left, which is the way the glider was tending. By the time we gained about 60 feet I could no longer hold the glider centered - I was probably at a 20-degree bank - so I quickly released before the lockout to the side progressed. The glider instantly whipped to the side in a wingover maneuver. I cleared the buildings, but came very close to the ground at the bottom of the wingover. I leveled out and landed.

Analyzing my incident made me realize that had I released earlier I probably would have hit the ground at high speed at a steep angle. The result may have been similar to that of the pilot in Germany. The normal procedure for a tow pilot, when the hang glider gets too high, is to release in order to avoid the forces from the glider pulling the tug nose-down into a dangerous dive. This dangerous dive is what happened when Chris Bulger (U.S. team pilot) was towing John Pendry (former world champion) years ago. The release failed to operate in this case, and Chris was fatally injured. However Neal kept me on line until I had enough ground clearance, and I believe he saved me from injury by doing so. I gave him a heart-felt thank you.

He's calling this a lockout. If you don't think it fits the definition very well just put a bit of roll into it. You still wanna delay release as long as possible.

Note... This is one scenario in which the loss of top end speed range as a consequence of the one point bridle is a potentially lethal liability. And there's virtually no doubt that both of these guys were using one. I'd wager that the other pilot would've been OK if he hadn't been.

And your roll attitude can get really bad without you turning away from the tug enough to blow that same weak link that wouldn't even let you try to FOLLOW the tug. I've heard a report from John Williamson of a barrel roll behind him.

Having said that, I've never been in a lockout, so I'm just speculating.

Keep aerotowing in really good conditions and you won't hafta speculate.

To be clear, I do agree that it is almost always safer to stay on the line near the ground. It's just that in lockout situations I think it's usually best to get off the line ASAP (near the ground or not).

You can't address a specific situation based upon USUALLY. It probably USUALLY IS best to get off ASAP near the ground - up high it seldom matters - but there's been WAY too much "at the first sign of trouble" bullshit published and taught for it to be a good idea to add a statement like that to the cacophony.

...any tow accident can be prevented by an early enough release...

Yeah. If the cart doesn't start rolling you can't get hurt. But if you wanna fly you hafta do so knowing that you can't always predict the bad stuff or sometimes even react to it before it's pretty much over.

Keep flying in strong thermal conditions with your single loop of 130 pound Greenspot and your hand in the loop of your two point Lookout release and see what you can make happen before that horizon snap-rolls eighty degrees. My own experience tells me that it's gonna be absolutely nothing.

It's only to be actuated in an emergency situation - read low level lockout.

I can't find where you got that quote but...

That doesn't necessarily mean you SHOULD actuate it ASAP in a low level lockout or will be around thirty seconds later to tell everyone how great worked.

This is another device that you ALWAYS wanna HAVE but NEVER wanna hafta USE.

Wouldn't this temporarily reduce tension (as with letting off the gas in a truck tow)?

Precisely. That can be really good thing if a good driver's doing it.

Speaking of letting off the gas, here's a video...

- I'd say that easing up on the gas was the right call but I'm not sure it made any difference in this situation.
- I think foot launch towing should be a felony - without a much better excuse than this situation indicated anyway.

I wasn't referring to limitations of their skill or judgment...just equipment. Since we're all using releases that require taking a hand off the bar, I suppose none of us should be flying.

I think that's a SUPER idea.

If I seized control of this government tomorrow, stationed my jackbooted thugs at all the airports, and outlawed all towing that required a hand to come off, I ONE HUNDRED PERCENT GUARANTEE YOU that every platform operation in the country would have buttons velcroed to their fingers by Christmas. And if they didn't spend the first eight days flooding the web with posts about what an arrogant despicable pigfucker I am and how such technology is completely outside the realm of human imagination - let alone capability - they could probably be up and running in time for the coming weekend.

But as it is everybody's gonna spend the NEXT thirty years and ten million man hours posting and writing fatality reports about how good it would be if only we had something like that - and deriding existing solutions with comments about it not having a long enough track record for prime time and/or not being any good 'cause if it was everybody would be using it already.

No, that would be one person (Jack), the same person who taught us to use ~2 G weak links.

So what were people using for platform towing before he taught you to use ~2 G weak links and what was happening?

[Zack C]

Tad,

'Lockout Larry' was the name you gave my friend at Lookout, and that's who I was referring to (not Lawrence Battaile). From the information I have, I agree with what you said about Lawrence and Jonny.

I can't find where you got that quote... ["It's only to be actuated in an emergency situation - read low level lockout."]

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=64252

Anyway, I actually think we are in agreement on this subject for the most part. Much of what I initially wrote was based on misunderstanding your position. I thought you believed that even in the case of a low level lockout it was virtually always better to remain on the line. I also thought you thought a driver should never reduce tension. I now see neither is the case. I agree that releasing should not be a knee-jerk reaction to any problem on tow and that releasing near the ground can be dangerous.

I think the only thing we disagree about is it never being the driver's job to dump tension, and I only disagree because of our release limitations. I do agree that if we had infallible releases that could be activated at a moment's notice without compromising control, the winch operator should never dump tension or cut the line and instead leave the decision to the pilot...but that's a big 'if'.

So what were people using for platform towing before he taught you to use ~2 G weak links and what was happening?

They used the same weak links for the most part. The 'us' in my statement referred to us new guys. If you really want to understand what the hell I'm talking about, I'll have to give some history:

HHPA (formerly HHGA) was very active with winch towing twenty or something years ago. I don't know that much about the club history because I've only lived here four years. Bill M built his weak link tester back then and tested various numbers of strands of various materials. I think he said most pilots settled on using four strands of 205 leech line (as it was easy to keep such configurations with the pilot instead of the tow line) with an overhand knot in the middle to reduce breaking strength.

At some point (late 90's maybe?) aerotowing became popular and the winch towing stopped. This was the situation when I moved here. However, when the sport pilot regs went into effect, we went from having six or so qualified tug pilots to none overnight. We eventually got a couple certified to tow, with Mick doing most of the towing, but Mick relocated to Paris for 2009 so we didn't do much aerotowing that year. Through our aerotow problems, there was talk of resuming truck towing, but the newer enthusiastic guys like me didn't have any experience with it and the long time truck towers weren't interested.

In the summer of '09, Jack, a tandem instructor and tow administrator, dusted off the club winch and started towing at Hearne with one of his students, inviting any club members interested to join him. Gradually more pilots learned to winch tow and started flying at Hearne (including me). For the most part, the long time truck towers never flew with us, so we relied on Jack (and also Gregg, who operates a boat tow operation) to teach us noobs the ins and outs of winch towing, which included putting four strands of 205 on our three-strings to prevent premature breaks and keep the weak link with the pilot.

Zack

[Tad Eareckson]

Lockout Larry... Oops.

Zack C - 2010/11/17 14:50:34 UTC

Seems like every week something happens relevant to the discussion we've been having. Here's a report from a friend flying at Lookout this past weekend:

I towed out behind (n-s) Pablo ok till I got above the trees, then I got hit by a strong gust from the right and ended up turning hard toward the breakdown area and forcing the weaklink to break, once under control I was headed to the big tree north of the big windsock, then turned left to land in the original tow direction, got upright to land on my feet and got hit again as I tried to flair an the left wing touch down and spun me nearly 180d I got mud on my right knee, the glider left sprog touched down and the zipper burst open and about 1 inch of stiching pulled out...

Thinking the weak link broke because he got too far out of whack and in light of our ongoing weak link discussion, I asked:

This question might sound strange, but are you glad the weak link broke? How close were you to releasing?

To which he responded:

I knew I was not going to get back behind the tug, but deliberately pushed out to break the weaklink, as by then all my weight was on my right arm, and I knew I needed to keep hold of the bar for control, as I would be going towards / over the breakdown area...

He uses a 'pro tow' setup. Notice he was well into a dangerous situation and the weak link did not break...he had to force it.

Was his best course of action not releasing earlier?

HE couldn't/didn't RELEASE at all. But yeah - the sooner the better.

There are experienced pilots and instructors who advocate intentionally breaking weak links when you can't afford to relinquish control to release. This seems crazy to me.

Jack Axaopoulos, Jim Rooney, Ryan Voight. Only the last of those MAY be worth the cost of therapy.

I've already said I'd never push out near the ground...I certainly wouldn't do it while in a dangerous attitude on tow. And all because of using a release that requires taking a hand off the bar.

Yeah.

Was his scenario really so unusual (as far as low-level lockouts go)?

If this had been a real low level lockout he'd have been dead. He was fighting the ONSET of a lockout - I'd guess that on a payout system he could've brought it back with little difficulty. And he had enough altitude to be able to get away with the stupid shit he pulled in response. (And if he had stayed on the basetube he'd have come out smelling like a rose.)

Zillions of people tow with this shit configuration. The only reason flight parks aren't total killing fields is because the kinds of lockouts that are fairly common up high are virtually nonexistent at altitudes at which you can't get away with it.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=64252

Don't remind me. That's back when I thought that Davis actually understood the stuff he was quoting and linking to. And that was the least of my gross misjudgment of character.

I do agree that if we had infallible releases that could be activated at a moment's notice without compromising control, the winch operator should never dump tension or cut the line and instead leave the decision to the pilot...but that's a big 'if'.

The only:
- thing I trust about hang gliding is the gliders themselves
- reason:
-- I can trust the gliders is because they've passed certification standards
-- we have certification standards is that in the mid to late Seventies airunworthy divergent gliders were killing people by the score

Certification testing and documentation is labor intensive and expensive. If hang gliding had been able to find a cheap patch - like parachutes - that would've gotten the kill rate down to something the general public would've found acceptable, we wouldn't have certified gliders.

Donnell Hewett - 1980/01

Poor frustrated Chris Price - he just can't quite understand why the U.S. team made such a poor showing in the 1979 World Championship. Really, Chris, why should this event be any different than any of the other recent international competitions? At the end of your article you said that the foreign pilots thought their "gimmicks" helped them win, but that you, yourself, wondered whether it was the "American pilots' competitive skills or the tasks at the world meets" which need more improvement. Obviously you, and apparently quite a few other people, have completely missed the point of this potentially valuable learning experience.

It is not the American pilots' skills that are at fault (sure, anything could be improved), because our pilots as a whole have just as much if not more experience, talent, and training than those from the other nations of the world. Nor is it the tasks that are at fault, because the tasks were the same for the foreign pilots as for the Americans. Nor is it just "dumb luck," or else the U.S., by pure chance, would have had its fair share of winners. Nor is it the technique used to choose the American team, for even the poorest conceivable technique of selecting the "best" pilots from the vast American hang gliding population is bound to choose two or three of the top pilots, pilots who could hold their own against the foreign competition which was selected from a smaller number of candidates.

No, the real reason that we Americans cannot compete against the foreigners is that we are flying obsolete equipment, and the reason we are flying obsolete equipment is because of our USHGA regulations. Look at the facts! In the Class II competition, where Americans were flying competitive equipment, two of the top five places (including first place) went to the U.S.A. But in class I where the foreigners were all using their "gimmicks," the best the U.S. could do was 18th. Really, Chris, do you have any doubts that such "gimmicks" give the foreigners that (apparently not so little) "racer's edge" that they need to win?

But why blame USHGA regulations, rather than the manufacturers, for this "obsolete" equipment? Because it's true! It has been proven time and again that regulation (and it does not matter whether it's government or "self" regulation) stifles competition, creativity, and innovation, and that the effect of regulation is frequently opposite its stated purpose. Now the stated purpose of the HGMA certification program is to insure that those gliders sold to the general public are as safe as possible. This program was established partly to "keep the government off our backs" and partly because there are certain persons among us who really do believe that such regulations actually promote safer hang gliding. In an attempt to force compliance with their certification program, USHGA has effectively limited all U.S. competition to certified gliders.

This reduces the quality of competition in the U.S. in two ways: (1) It restricts the number of competitors. How many potentially great pilots have never even tried competition because their gliders were uncertified? (2) It eliminates the opportunity for creative, original, and innovative designs to prove themselves. In essence, the U.S. pilots are preselected from an elite group and required to train and race using stock cars, while the foreigners get to use their latest racing specials. And you wonder why the U.S. is number 18 in world competition.

But I am not writing this letter just because the U.S. is losing a few world meets. What really upsets me is the fact that the glider I buy tomorrow will be inferior to the state of the art simply because its manufacturer has had no opportunity today to observe how the ingenuity of others has paid off, and to incorporate some of these improvements into his own design.

Let's face it, there are only two ways in which we in the U.S. can insure that our home products are as "good" as those manufactured overseas: (1) Increase international regulations (such as forming a powerful International Hang Gliding Association) so their products will be no better than ours, or (2) Reduce the U.S. regulations (such as permitting safe but uncertified glider competition) so our products will become as good as theirs. Personally, I prefer the latter, for in the long term it will provide better hang gliding equipment for everyone and could eventually save my life.

Dr. L.D. Hewett
Physics Department
Texas A & I University
Kingsville, Texas

Mike Meier - 1980/03

In a recent letter, L.D. Hewett severely criticized the USHGA for forcing American pilots to fly "obsolete" gliders. I have heard similar sentiments expressed by several other pilots. I would like to present some facts and observations which bear directly on the question of whether American systems for self-regulation are "stifling competition, creativity, and innovation," as Mr. Hewett claims.

First, I would like to point out that the USHGA and the HGMA are two separate organizations. The USHGA did not require that gliders competing in USHGA sanctioned competitions be certified to "force compliance with their certification program" as Mr. Hewett claims; it wasn't their certification program at all! The USHGA has no program for glider certification. What actually happened is this: in 1976 U.S. manufacturers, concerned with learning more about those design parameters which bear directly on pilot safety, formed the HGMA, and began working on a set of airworthiness standards by which the airworthiness of a glider could be objectively determined. The member manufacturers then asked the USHGA to require certification for gliders in competition, feeling that this was the only available leverage that could be used to insure a sufficient level of compliance with the costly and time consuming certification program for the program to survive. The USHGA reluctantly agreed, and has continued to support the HGMA in spite of the fact that they received little cooperation from the HGMA in the way of glider specifications necessary for meet directors to determine whether a competing glider was, in fact, certified. For this support of a worthwhile program, the USHGA should be commended rather than condemned.

Mr. Hewett claims that the results of recent international competitions prove the superiority of foreign gliders, but I have a hard time buying that. They are certainly not superior in safety; American designs have a far better safety record. It seems to a number of careful observers that some foreign designs may have a slight advantage (perhaps 2/10's of a point in L/D) in pure performance over some American designs, but if indeed they do I expect that it will not last through the coming model year.

Mr. Hewett's contention that the glider he buys tomorrow will be "inferior to the state of the art simply because the manufacturer has had no opportunity today to observe how the ingenuity of others has paid off, and to incorporate some of these improvements into his own design" is completely ludicrous. There is nothing to prevent American designers from borrowing freely from any successful innovations that show up on any foreign gliders, in fact it happens all the time.

Mr. Hewett's suggestion that "safe but uncertified" gliders be allowed to compete, ignores the problem of how one determines that a glider is safe. I would think that compliance with HGMA airworthiness standards would be a MINIMUM requirement to indicate the safety of a design. I can't think of any simpler set of tests to determine a glider's safety.

In fact all American designers with whom I have discussed the subject have said that the HGMA program, far from stifling their design efforts, has helped them, by providing a source of hard data and a set of standardized testing methods. Mr. Hewett's contention that the USHGA's abandoning of its supports for the HGMA could "eventually save (his) life" seems completely absurd.

Mike Meier
Tustin, CA

David Wilson - 1980/03

I would like to respond to what I view as a relatively irresponsible and shortsighted argument put forth in January's issue by a Dr. L.D. Hewett.

Referring to Chris Price's concern over low American rankings in world competition, Dr. Hewett draws some very questionable conclusions as to why the USHGA's safety program is responsible and should be abandoned. He suggests that safety certification slows design advance and European gliders are better because they are not subject to this restraining influence. He further states that competition is impeded because many "great" U.S. pilots fly uncertified gliders and therefore cannot compete. I doubt that either of these assumptions has any validity whatever, because in the first instance, European certification standards are quite rigorous and exert the same type of restraint on design advance. In the second place, there has been no demonstrated monopoly by any particular glider or manufacturer in world class competition. The "potentially valuable learning experience" that Dr. Hewett feels we should all benefit from is an ill-defined one at best.

At the American Cup I had the opportunity to observe some of the dynamics of world class competition and a number of variables that influenced the outcome. It is reasonable to extrapolate from these observations to a general consideration of all international competition because the same factors are always present (along with a minimal luck factor).

I personally interviewed each of the English pilots competing in the Cup regarding a wide variety of factors relevant to their overall performance and I can assure Dr. Hewett that there was a hell of a lot more involved than simply "better equipment" or "gimmicks."

First, and probably the dominant reason for the obvious superiority of the English pilots, is a matrix of what can be referred to as psychological factors. These include vigilance and attention to task, mental discipline, emphasis on competition, and group (rather than individual) orientation. These factors alone far outweigh any other single or multiple causes that came into play, and in combination with other, more overt considerations, made the British unbeatable. George Worthington made reference to this prior to the Cup in his analysis of the field and probable outcome - needless to say, he was proven right. The real reason lies here.

The psychological factors, in combination with the amount of preparation specifically for the American Cup, constant precision drilling, familiarity with the tasks, top-to-bottom communications, and the inherent differences between the British League system and the American regionals system, made it inevitable that the British would win.

In addition, it is interesting to note that a week later, in Guatemala, these same British pilots did not come out on top. The fact that it was not a team competition, and that many of the elements were missing that had been part of the Cup strategy, put the competing English pilots on their own and removed the advantage. Even flying the "superior but uncertified" gliders that Dr. Hewett feels made the difference in world competition, the best the British could do was sixth place. The first five spots were taken by safe and certified American-made gliders.

I am not implying that American designs are better because they are safer - that might be tough to prove. But to shift the blame to safety-consciousness rather than to the human factors of mental readiness and organization is a dangerous proposal that could put hang gliding into a totally untenable position.

David Wilson
Florida Rainbow University
Tahlequah, Oklahoma

The reason we're using cheap, stupid, dangerous, uncertifiable, Lockout Larry junk instead of "INFALLIBLE releases that could be activated at a moment's notice without compromising control" is because the kill rate is low enough to be acceptable to the general public.

Donnell's Skyting Criteria - the model from which this fiasco of hang glider towing evolved - requires an "INFALLIBLE weak link" as a cheap patch for a "RELIABLE release".

An "INFALLIBLE weak link" "which will infallibly and automatically release the glider from tow whenever the tow line tension exceeds the limit for safe operation" is a completely mythical animal. And a "RELIABLE release" whose "activation point must be readily accessible to the pilot regardless of where his hands are positioned or where his body has shifted" can mean damn near anything anyone wants it to - 'cept for the ubiquitous lever velcroed to the downtube crap.

And then he tries to get away with line cutters and radios as further cheap patches for Lockout Larry releases.

Infallible weak links, line cutters, and radios almost always make the tows twenty times as dangerous but we toss out all that data and focus on the aberrant situations in which they've been effective in snatching someone from the jaws of death. And every time a Lockout Larry or someone for whom you dump tension lives it removes the incentive to do things right. And we kill far more people in the long run.

However, when the sport pilot regs went into effect, we went from having six or so qualified tug pilots to none overnight.

Generally speaking, I'm a huge fan of regulation in this sport - but not that kind. Just made things more expensive and less doable. And the drivers are just as clueless and dangerous as before - so I don't know what that accomplished.

[Zack C]

Tad,

Generally speaking, I'm a huge fan of regulation in this sport - but not that kind. Just made things more expensive and less doable. And the drivers are just as clueless and dangerous as before - so I don't know what that accomplished.

Since I gave you our history I was actually considering starting a new thread on regulation to get your thoughts on the subject as you seemed to be a proponent of it, but you answered my question before I could ask it.

Given our current stagnated tow situation, it seems on the surface like regulation is the only way to force safe equipment and practices. But I don't trust the FAA, especially after the sport pilot fiasco. Tug pilots now need a private license requiring experience of no relevance to towing like flying into towered airports and completing a 100 mile XC flight. And trikes are their own (new) category so an existing airplane license won't count for much. And as you said, it's not like things are any safer. You also said:

Just 'cause the useless clowns at the FAA allow you to do something doesn't mean you SHOULD. The FAA knowingly allows deadly crap in the air all the time and won't ground it until AFTER a huge number of people are killed.

That doesn't sound like an improvement over our current situation. Regulation might sound good in theory, but I for one fear it and believe the FAA has too little understanding of or interest in our activities for any additional regulation to be beneficial.

Zack

[Tad Eareckson]

Zack C - 2010/12/23 04:12:15 UTC

Regulation might sound good in theory, but I for one fear it and believe the FAA has too little understanding of or interest in our activities for any additional regulation to be beneficial.

- Hell, USHGA doesn't have enough understanding of or interest in hang gliding to do us any good.

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

Hi Tad.

I'm Tracy Tillman, on the USHPA BOD, on the Tow Committe, and I am an Aviation Safety Counselor on the FAA Safety Team (FAAST) for the Detroit FSDO area. As a rep of both the USHPA and FAA, I would like to help you, USHPA, and the FAA improve safety in flying, towing, and hang gliding.

The FAA gets a lot of letters of complaint from a lot of yahoos. For best effect, I suggest that you describe in your letter (and also post to the skysailingtowing group and share with the USHPA Tow Committee) your areas of expertise (if any) related to this issue, and list your qualifiications, logged hours, and currency in certain categories, such as:

1. hang glider pilot rating and logged hours
2. hang glider aerotow rating, logged hours, and logged number of tows
3. hang glider tug pilot rating, logged hours towing, and logged number of tows
4. hang glider aerotow administrator appointment date
5. hang glider aerotow supervisor appointment date
6. hang glider tanderm instructor rating, logged hours of aerotow tandem instruction, and logged number of instructional flights
7. airplane pilot license ratings and logged number of hours
8. airplane tow pilot endorsement date, logged number of hours towing with airplane, logged number of tows
9. sailplane tow pilot license ratings, logged number of hours, logged number of tows.
10. sailplane instructor license date, logged number of hours of instruction, logged number of instructional tows
11. any other flying or engineering-related credentials that you may have as evidence of your competence to make these claims.

(BTW, if you have an AT hang glider rating or above the you would/should have received the USHPA Aerotow Guidelines as part of your instruction from the person who taught you to aerotow and/or gave you your AT rating, and you should currently have access to them via the packet that is accessible to you on the USHPA web site, if your AT or higher AT-related ratings and appointments are current.)

It would also be good for the FAA and USHPA to know what kind of ultalight or sport plane tug and airplane you use for towing hang gliders and sailplanes with at your operation (if any), along with a general description of your towing operation or who you provide towing and instructional services for (if any).

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

And that's the BEST we're ever gonna get from anywhere. If you yourself are not a part-in-good-standing of the problem then you can go fuck yourself.

Lockout releases that don't work, Bailey releases that can't work, 130 pound Greenspot for everyone, tuggies cutting people loose in stalls, and instructors telling people to push out to blow the weak link in low level lockouts - forever.

This semiliterate asshole is FAA, USHGA, AND a flight park operator (Cloud 9 Sport Aviation). How much more freakin' conflict of interest can you possibly get? Makes British Petroleum and the Minerals Management Service look like deadly enemies.

This is also the guy who wrote:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/skysailingtowing/message/4592
Weaklinks

Tracy Tillman - 2005/02/08 19:16:10 UTC

The sailplane guys have been doing this for a long time, and there are many hang glider pilots and quite a few tug pilots who don't understand what the sailplane guys have learned over the years. It certainly would help if hang glider towing methods and training were standardized to the degree that they are in the sailplane world.

which is PRE CISELY what I was - and AM - doing. And would've accomplished without the resistance of all these stupid useless heads-up-their-asses flyboys.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=17404
Aerotow barrel release - straight or curved pin?

Bob Kuczewski - 2010/05/31 06:06:35 UTC

To be honest, that's hard for me to say for sure in this case. But the topic did come up when I was on the Board, and the first reaction by some "leaders" in USHPA was to call the USHPA lawyer to muzzle him with a nasty letter. As a Board member I argued against that approach because I felt that it would be better to open lines of communication rather than shut them with legal threats. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed and some of the Directors who knew him were called in to help. As far as I know, things were resolved peacefully without further escalation.

My biggest point is that someone like Tad (and even myself) has a tremendous amount of energy because they believe in their cause. It's far better (and wiser) for USHPA to work with that energy and to channel it rather than to beat their head against it. In my experience, they tend to reach for their lawyer waaaay too soon, and that just creates hard feelings. The same thing happened when USHPA got upset with Davis for posting a link to the USHPA web site, and I'm sure there have been other examples as well.

I'm sorry, I really didn't want to derail this topic since I've never towed, and I don't know much about towing at all. But I think USHPA needs to figure out how to bring our resources (people) together rather than threatening them and tearing them apart.

Yeah, the first reaction was to muzzle me. And the last reactions were to tell the FAA don't worry, we've got everything under control and ignore and isolate me. And there was absolutely ZERO reaction to consider whether a single sentence of anything I had written had the slightest ring of legitimacy to it. So I'm really hoping that sometime within the next couple of years I can give their lawyer something with which he can occupy some of his spare time.

Luen Miller - 1996/10
USHGA Accident Review Committee Chairman

We have two more fatalities because of a glider that couldn't be released from tow. Again, the fatalities occurred in a training situation in which a student should reasonably not be expected to do everything perfectly.

I am strongly recommending formal review and analysis of releases and weak link designs for all methods of towing by the Towing Committee, and that recommendations on adoption or improvements be generated.

I believe that from preflight through release we should have more standardized procedures in towing.

Note the similarity to what Tracy would be saying over eight years later. And yet - here we still are.

Ironically this was written in the magazine in response to the Bennett / Del Signore crash and the only people who seemed to understand that releasing was the absolute LAST thing the guys in the glider wanted to do were both dead. But the tug driver was damn near killed at the same time 'cause what was in their best interest was in his worst and he couldn't budge the trike release - protected as it was by a weak link of his choosing. Almost did a replay of Chris Bulger - eleven years prior. And damn near made the Guinness Book for most people killed in a single hang gliding incident.

- I had hoped - and tried - to find someone within the FAA with a love of aviation and the interest and competence to work with me and understand the issues (like you're doing now). But that didn't happen - they were too busy going ballistic 'cause some eight-year-old kid was relaying instructions to planes from ATC.

Regulation might sound good in theory...

Regulation is good in practice. We HAVE regulation.

We have:

- a regulation that requires that all pilots verify their connection JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH. The students of Instructors who teach and enforce that regulation do not get killed in failure to hook in incidents. The students of Instructors who don't DO.

- regulations that you don't get a Novice rating without demonstrating competence in a set of flying skills. John Seward was killed because he was signed off with the ability to land on his feet but not to actually fly the glider.

- a regulation that an aerotowed glider be HGMA certified and we don't have uncertified gliders falling apart on tow (although we have had unmaintained gliders falling apart on tow - as we have had in free flight).

- regulations for towing equipment but they're deliberately written so as to be completely meaningless:
-- within easy reach of the pilot
-- operational ... up to twice the rated breaking strength of the weak link

I didn't say I wanted FAA regulation - I don't. I just wanted to get the FAA to force us to get some meaningful regulations on our own books and start making half an effort to adhere to them. I wanted levers on downtubes and Bailey releases outlawed. I wanted minimum weak links specified so when Jim Rooney refused to tow anyone with anything over 130 pound Greenspot he'd die a slow miserable death from starvation - or a quick one at the hands of a flock of competition pilots who'd rather be on task than waiting in line to relaunch.

But I'd rather have the FAA regulating us the way they do sailplanes than the horror show of flight park operators and tug drivers making up and ignoring whatever policy they feel like - the way it's been the past twenty years.

And I would submit that THIS:

I can't trust anyone in this sport but myself (and maybe the people at Wills Wing).

is a direct consequence of the lack of any substantive regulation in hang gliding. Can you imagine a statement like that coming from a sailplane pilot or scuba diver? (And speaking of Wills Wing... Much as I liked and respected Rob Kells, he didn't exactly cover himself with glory on that Chris Bulger fatality analysis.)

http://www.energykitesystems.net/Lift/hgh/TadEareckson/index.html

Give that Jack Haberstroh document a browse. We got the gliders themselves cleaned up through competent and effective self regulation - but everything else...

[Zack C]

Tad,

I wasn't clear on this, but when I said 'regulation', I meant 'government regulation'. I thought that's what you favored (you've compared 'self regulation' to 'no regulation' in the past) and see again that I misunderstood you. I'm definitely in favor of overhauling our standards.

Much as I liked and respected Rob Kells, he didn't exactly cover himself with glory on that Chris Bulger fatality analysis.

I had noticed that when looking at the accident reports in your document. When I made that statement about Wills Wing I was mainly referring to Steve Pearson and Mike Meier. I've met and spoken with them at multiple Demo Days and attended presentations and Q/A sessions they've hosted and have always been impressed. I unfortunately never had the opportunity to meet Rob.

Zack

[Tad Eareckson]

After World War I Germany got treated like total shit. That was a really bad idea 'cause it really pissed them off and resulted in Hitler and World War II. BUT - as I'm sure you know...

They were forced to take all the propellers off their planes so they went nuts on glider development and refinement. And if - today - you want a really good sailplane, release, or weak link there's still no other country to which you need to give a second thought.

I'm definitely in favor of overhauling our standards.

The slimeballs that run this sport will make sure that NEVER happens. They don't make the slightest effort to comply with the flimsy crap we have on the books now and there's no freakin' way they're gonna tolerate anything sane and safe. I don't need to tell you how many people have been killed because of Matt's interpretation of "just prior to launch".

You wanna see the kind of standards we're gonna get for towing? Read Wallaby's "Aerotow Primer for Experienced Pilots" and the owner's manual for Matt's new aerotow release. One of the primary goals of my trip to Lookout was to get a minimum allowable weak link rating of 1.0 Gs for aerotowing on the books. You can see how that went.

The ONLY way this is ever gonna change is if somebody gets financially and legally destroyed. If Nicolas Cage runs off the cliff without his glider or locks out and slams in I'm gonna be able to unleash Holy Terror on these bastards.

I've never met Steve Pearson but I think I know enough about him just by looking at his gliders. Mike Meier was a high school physics teacher and I've corresponded and talked on the phone with him. There's hope there.

Rob radiated competence and intelligence and respected my work. He's the only person to have ever been able to suggest - a very long time ago - an improvement in any of my release system stuff (wanted me to move the spinnaker shackle from the control frame apex to the keel and I did). Every other time he'd be making the right comments and suggestions but I was always able to say, "Yeah, I got that covered by doing this..."

But he showed me his one point aerotow release and it was based on a CURVED parachute pin about half the size of the M111C in all the Baileys and he toured with Wallaby releases to slap on the downtubes of his demo gliders. (One of those was instrumental in sending Davis to the emergency room so maybe more thought went into that issue than one might normally assume.)

And I'm sure he died with no better understanding of a weak link than he had when he wrote up the Chris Bulger fatality report. Wish I had had more time to work on him.