http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=32681
Tandem crash in LV (speculation thread)
Paul Hurless - 2015/03/31 00:12:10 UTC
Discussing the facts of an incident is very useful for many reasons. Speculating without the facts is useless and possibly even detrimental.
I'll take my chances, douchebag. If my speculation without the facts gets one of you assholes killed I'll just hafta figure out some way to live with myself.
P.S. The fact that we don't have any facts tells us quite a bit of what we need to know.
2015/03/31 01:43:36 UTC - 3 thumbs up - NMERider
2015/03/31 17:29:09 UTC - 3 thumbs up - Jason Boehm
Brian Scharp - 2015/03/31 00:22:27 UTC
Davis Straub - 2015/03/30 23:49:31 UTC
Why do I not feel reassured by Mark's request for patience...
This might help explain your feelings.
http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25321
Stop the Stupids at the USHPA BOD meeting
Mark G. Forbes - 2011/09/30 23:21:56 UTC
Here's how it really works...
Don't you just love it the way disingenuous motherfuckers have almost always said stuff before?
Davis Straub - 2015/03/31 00:36:49 UTC
Timely accident report here (pilot's name not mentioned):
http://ozreport.com/19.63#5
Get your legs under you
Well thanks Davis! If only Kelly and Arys had known that they should've gotten their legs under them when they landed they'd have almost certainly been OK! Ditto for Zack Marzec. We learn and move on.
Asshole.
zamuro - 2015/03/31 01:59:00 UTC
Maybe is only me but I feel that I can do a reasonable job at forming my own opinion about what happened based on available facts and the overall discussion. This includes filtering out whacky ideas...
On The Jack Show? Good freakin' luck.
...but I don't mind seeing them if the alternative is not getting any fact or hypothesis at all.
As per u$hPa SOPs.
It seems that facts need not to be public for legal* or other reasons so it always going to be speculation based on the few facts available. Even the ones doing the investigation may have an incomplete list of facts so the best they could do is to give a best (speculation) case scenario.
Fuck you, dude. Either do Official u$hPa Facts or shut the hell up. What do you think you're paying dues for?
http://www.ushpa.aero/safety.asp
USHPA - Safety Articles
Fatality Reports
2013/02/02 - Zack Marzec
Zack Marzec (27), an H-4 Pilot with Aero Tow and Tandem Aero Tow proficiency as well as Advanced Instructor and Tandem Instructor appointments, and a USHPA member since 2009, suffered fatal injuries when when his glider tumbled during an aero tow launch. During the launch, at an altitude of 150 AGL, the pilot encountered an invisible bullet thermal which pitched the nose up, causing the weak link to break. Upon the breakage of the weak link, the glider whip stalled and then tumbled twice. The pilot and glider's leading edge hit the ground simultaneously. The pilot was utilizing his own pro-tow style tow harness, this own high performance glider with VG on, and was not wearing a full face helmet.
Don't:
- fly into bullet thermals during launch which cause the weak link to break,
- utilize:
-- your own pro toad style tow harness
-- this own high performance glider with VG on
And if you do make sure you're wearing a full face helmet.
You'll be fine.
*
It is also hard for me to understand why anything posted in this forum in particular would have any legal consequence if you can always say that it was some non-official random BS posted by an anonymous user. I am not a lawyer though.
That's OK. Just trust u$hPa's and do everything he tells you to. You'll be fine.
Mark G. Forbes - 2015/03/31 03:10:32 UTC
I'm not either, so I rely on the advice I get from people who are.
Me too, Mark. Whenever anybody who has a law degree advises me to do something I do it without hesitation. Whenever I'm trying to decide what kind of fishing line I'd be happy with as the focal point of my safe towing system I think, "What would Tim Herr be happiest with?" And it always brings me back to tried and true 130 pound Greenspot.
Based on our past experience, comments in club forums and venues like this one can and will be cited in court. As an example, a comment as innocuous as "Let's all keep an eye out for each other out there" was used to argue that every pilot present at a launch site had a duty to prevent a launched-unhooked fatal accident.
OUTRAGEOUS! The tried and true Official u$hPa / Tim Herr strategy is that NOBODY present at launch has a duty to prevent a launched-unhooked fatal accident! Damned if I'm gonna bow to any of that nanny state bullshit. It's been established and well understood for decades that "self regulated" is one hundred percent "self" and zero percent "regulated".
The pilots at the site didn't know that the pilot in question was intent on launching; they thought he was just walking over to the ramp to line up first. And then he ran off the ramp;
Yeah...
Hang Gliding magazine - 2006/01
Joe Gregor:
The accident pilot spent some time under his glider while it was turned around. He then lifted it, turned 180 degrees to face the ramp, and was met by a side wire crew. At this point his team leader told the accident pilot, "Do a hang check." The wire crewman on the right side reported that, after subsequently setting the glider down, the accident pilot started adjusting his VG rope and talking to the crew about how to give him feedback.
The accident pilot picked up his glider and proceeded to the launch point. Several pilots present at the scene reported they checked his hang point and it looked like he was hooked in. Several pilots present at the scene reported that there were four or five other individuals who said, "Do a hang check," or "Have you done a hang check?" In no case was it reported that he responded directly.
Conditions were pronounced fine and the accident pilot cleared his launch. He launched using the grapevine grip and the glider dove as soon as he put weight on it.
Right.
...the glider flew away and he didn't.
And then we got sued.
By incompetent negligent total fucking morons who blew the opportunity of several lifetimes.
I ask because I've seen what's happened in the past. Things we post in public forums can have consequences, and I'm trying to give you some context so you understand what's at stake.
Yeah, we certainly can't afford to have a many ugly truths circulating out there, can we Mark.
Please consider that when posting.
Count on it - motherfucker.
2015/03/31 16:46:36 UTC - 3 thumbs up - Rich Jesuroga
Get fucked, Rich.
Dave Pendzick - 2015/03/31 15:29:51 UTC
I feel like you are thinking that us keeping quite is going to prevent a law suit in this matter. News flash brother, its coming wether you want it to or not & I dont think anything anyone says on this forum is going to make things any better or worse.
Probably not. But I'm gonna do everything in my power over here to help make it worse.
Davis Straub - 2015/03/31 15:49:09 UTC
I believe that the family has said no to a lawsuit.
Cool. Nuthin' to worry 'bout then - until some of the shock wears off a bit anyway.
Dave Pendzick - 2015/03/31 16:38:14 UTC
Lawyers are going to be calling them begging to take this thing to court. This is such an easy payday for them its unbelievable. They may have said they are not going to bring this to court, but as they enter the anger phase of the grieving process, $$$ with lots of zeros behind it is going to sound more & more logical.
Been awfully quiet over there since that post...
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=27736
Increase in our USHpA dues
Mark G. Forbes - 2012/12/20 06:21:33 UTC
We're re-working the accident reporting system, but again it's a matter of getting the reports submitted and having a volunteer willing to do the detail work necessary to get them posted. 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.
Whatchya think Mark? How many decades do you think you can keep running this Ponzi scheme?
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.
Hopefully this is it. And there's gotta be a video card that that no one was stupid enough to swallow this time.