rules

[Tad Eareckson]

1982~

Skyting Criteria

GROUP 2 - Safe Transition

Any system must be able to handle: deviations from the ideal case; pilot release; excessive tow forces; learning.

06: Reliable Releases

The release devices and their activation methods must be sturdy, rapid, and reliable. (Release activation MUST be readily accessible to the pilot regardless of where his hands are or where his body has shifted. Only single-point release systems should be used.)

--

1998

USHGA Tow Committee

Release Test Procedures

LOAD TESTING

...

For releases near the pilot, as typically occurs in aerotowing and platform launch payout winch towing, the trip cord should actuate the release in any direction to the side, above, below and even forward with no more than 25 pounds actuation force.

...

Lower actuation forces are generally desired for the above conditions, the tested limits are considered the maximum values beyond which safety is potentially being compromised.

--

2004/07/30

USHGA AEROTOWING GUIDELINES

The USHGA Towing Committee establishes these guidelines for the sole purpose of enhancing the safety of towing hang gliders aloft with a powered ultralight tow plane (Tug).

I – EQUIPMENT

D – RELEASES

Requirements: (1) The release must activate with zero tow force and at a tow force twice the weak link strength.

Recommendations: (6) The handle of a top release with a cable should be mounted on the basetube for quick access.

Discussion: (1 & 2) Releases must be reliable in all sorts of situations, as emergencies rarely occur with a normal towline pull.

--

2003/03

United States Hang Gliding Association, Inc.

Rating System - Towing/Aerotowing Administration

Standard Operating Procedure - 12-10

10.05 AEROTOW ADMINISTRATORS - AIR-TO-AIR TOWING

B. Operations

6. Administrators are required to submit accident reports for both injury and injury potential incidents. These reports go to the USHGA office and should be noted as towing related. Failure to submit accident reports may result in revocation of the appointment.

--

[Batman]

Tad,

If you're trying to be helpful as you remind us regularly, how about not being obscure? This post says nothing, brings nothing useful to the table, and doesn't add any benefit whatsoever to this listserve. You wonder why no one gives you the time of day, you make posts like this and then expect everyone to shower you with praise for your engineering discoveries. If you want the respect that you obviously crave, try making a useful post with a clear point and a clear well thought out solution. Even if its a hypothetical solution, if you explain it that way instead of trying to ram it down our throats when we disagree, you might just get some positive feedback.

Chris

[Tad Eareckson]

Chris,

Yes, I'm not the least bit surprised that you found that post to be obscure, oh Great Arbiter Of What Is And Isn't Beneficial and Self Appointed Spokesman For Everyone.

With respect to respect...

I'm not running for president so I'm going for quality - not quantity. I'm quite confident that I've got very solid respect amongst the tiny percentage of the hang gliding community which has a solid understanding of the science behind this sport. I know exactly where I stand (and I know exactly where you stand).

I could not care less about the opinions and judgment of the people who operate under the delusion that airtime equals and/or substitutes for intelligence and authority. And I've got major contempt for people who, without making concessions, bail from debates as soon as their positions crumble and beat cowardly retreats to the safety of the mob.

I read the clicker numbers so I've got a pretty good feel for how much of what I say is getting listened to.

On what basis do you make the statement that no one gives me the time of day? I see in you a long enough pattern of inventing "facts" to support your positions that I don't see you as having much of a place in these discussions.

I mostly don't do "hypothetical solutions". Exception - speed links. I think that'll make a big dent in the failure to hook in problem and I'm implementing it myself, but - because those events are so rare - about the only way one could begin to get some useful data would be for half/all of the pilots in the world to adapt it and look at the long term data.

With respect to the release issue at hand - there's nothing freakin' hypothetical about it. It's simple. A curved pin barrel release doesn't come anywhere close complying with USHGA requirements - a straight pin far exceeds them. PERIOD.

Dustin and Lauren, Steve Wendt, Paul Voight, Holly, JD, Mark, you, and damn near every ATer under jurisdiction of those rules choose/chose to ignore and violate them. Y'all get away with it just about all the time but occasionally there are consequences.

Those consequences can be two people getting "killed" for the purposes of a training exercise or catastrophic injury as a result of a release which locks up under the loading of severe oscillation.

I have gone to considerable length to demonstrate, explain, and illustrate why this stupid Bailey release is not compliant and it seems one has to be a physics teacher for it to start sinking in.

Even after Lauren's report of her 2008/03/23 Flight 02 it seems that this group is too incredibly dense to understand that we have a BIG problem.

I read her post and the response to it and was totally stunned. You'da thunk that the likes of Jim and JD would have been too humiliated to ever post anything ever again anywhere but it didn't phase them or anyone else in the slightest.

And I'm thinking - JESUS H. KEEERISTE WHAT'S IT GOTTA TAKE?!?!?!?!?!

They don't worry when people get killed 'cause they don't think it'll happen to them. And - actually - they're probably right. The chances of enough things lining up wrong at the same time are pretty tiny so - hell - don't bother with the seat belt. There won't be voluntary compliance.

So what WOULD scare them enough to think about trading in twenty-five dollar Baileys that don't work for three dollar straight pin barrel releases that do?

light bulb

THEIR RATINGS!!!

Yeah. Follow the fucking rules or I'm gonna start writing letters to USHGA and put your ass on the ground until you do. THAT get's people's attention so much more effectively than the science, logic, reason, safety sort of approach.

So now I'm evolving into the role of whistle-blower.

I know what happens to whistle-blowers. My grandfather was a whistle-blower and had his Department of Agriculture Entomologist career derailed as a result. They are hated and treated like shit.

But - hell - I'm already hated and treated like shit. That means I don't have all that much to lose. And that makes me dangerous.

Had Dustin and Lauren been responsible pilots they would have read, understood, and adhered to standards and rules that have been around for a quarter century. From a conversation I recently had with the latter I came away with the realization that she had never even heard of them. That's partly her fault - mostly the culture's.

They should have checked their release system to make sure that it would function under the loads that could be anticipated. That's essentially a Hang I and up requirement. Instead they just took the word of some (criminally?) negligent shop that the Baileys would do the job just fine. So they flunked the preflight. That's also a cultural problem but more their fault than the previous error.

But what really steams me is that after they discovered in the air what they should have on the ground - a defects in their equipment which resulted in a dangerous loss of control in which the glider went way beyond placard limitations - they went right back up with the same crap - and, undoubtedly, continue to do so to this day.

I'd have been a lot more impressed with both of them if they had kept that glider on the ground, picked up the phone, and said "Colorado Springs - We have a BIG problem!" That's what a responsible pilot would have done.

In this one flight they had failures of both primary and secondary releases and an attempt was made to use the secondary release as a backup. Thus they had three "injury potential incidents" which are REQUIRED - under pain of appointment revocation - to be reported. But when I talked to her Wednesday evening she didn't seem to think that they had even had a problem worthy of public attention and expressed regret at having posted it.

We have agreed to meet at the ECC and run through a tutorial so I've put things on hold until that week of sun and fun is over with. I told her that this was in no way a personal attack and was not motivated by any ill will towards her/them. But I'm gonna wanna be seeing a lot better adherence to the rules and understanding of the stuff she should've have been able to pop off instantly at three o'clock in the morning when aroused from an opium induced stupor years ago and well before she ever soloed behind a Dragonfly.

She's got some tickets now - for which I reserve my congratulations - which could put her in position to do a lot of good for this sport.

I'm hoping Paul will be back in shape by the beginning of next month but I'm giving him a medical waiver to let him off the hook with respect to the curved/straight pin thing. I've already got one helpless victim anyway.

Everything clear enough now?

[Lauren Tjaden]

Yeesh. Tad is right on one count. I DO wish I had never posted. I was just so happy about getting my tandem rating and being able to share my love of flying with the general public.
Some pilots recently wrote me and told me that Tad was trying get my ratings and Dustin's revoked because of my post. They said he was trying to stir up support on another forum for this cause (because I have not filed an incident report).
I called Tad, and as I told him, I do not wish to file an incident report, because what Dustin and I did -- putting me low and slow and below the plane -- was a normal training exercise, to insure that I will not endanger passengers. Part of tandem training is to put the pilot in command in a bad position. Most of the tandem towing fatalities have occurred because the pilot pushed out to catch up with the plane, the weak link broke, and the glider lost an incredible amount of altitude (as much as 700 feet) in the resulting stall. This is serious stuff. Like Jim R says, flying the tandem is really easy -- until it's not.
On the day I wrote about in my post, I ended up recovering from the lockout and using the primary release. (BTW, some of the language inthe post, like that "normally the tow plane pilot wants to avoid killing you so they can get your money" -- is merely for reading amusement. Jim P, obviously, would be very upset if I died.) Dustin (the top ranked pilot in the US at the time) felt in control the entire time, and felt we never even were fully locked out (this all happened at very high altitude, again, deliberately). He could have easily pinned off any time. It was his job to allow me to get into trouble and then find my out of it, as long as it was not dangerous.
Tad argues that pilots not using the pro-tow should NEVER use the barrel release as a backup, since the bridle can wrap, and says we should not have flown again. I have to wonder if there is any purpose in the barrel release being there, then. I have only used it 3 times in thousands of tows with a 3 point tow, where it operated slickly.
I am not sure if our barrel release failed or not. I did try to hit it and failed to release one time. Did I hit it? I am not sure. The idea was to pressure me greatly, and the situation did. Our primary release DID slide around. The next flight, we tightened the velcro, and we put a rivet in that night so it could never occur again. Were we irreponsible to fly the same equipment that every other tandem aerotow rig uses in the US? Should we have our ratings revoked because of it? I think not.
There ARE interesting things about "the rules." Most releases do not comply with them. One is that the release should activate with no force on it. The vast majority of pro-tow releases (towing from the shoulders) will not work like this. What this means is if the tug pilot gives you the rope, you have to pull pressure to make your release pop. Apparently Ollie Gregory has designed one that will work with no pressure -- but no, most do not comply with the rules.
Also, the rules say bike-handle releases should be on the basetube. Virtually everyone puts them on the downtubes, including Wills Wing on their demo gliders. If you put the release on the basetube on a tandem glider ( with an over and under harness), the instructor can't reach it from above, so that rules it out for tandem.
Anyhow, what I am saying is that Tad has SOME points. I am not sure if he has a better barrel release (he says he does). I agreed that I would view a test loading it up (and comparing it to a normal barrel release) at Highland. If it works better, I'll use it. I'll help to get acceptance for it, too. I embrace safety. Some of our equipment, as improved as it is, could be better still. Hooray for those who help with this.
However, I do not agree that I have acted in a way that was unsafe, and further, I dislike being threatened. (My apologies to the moderator if I have misread Tad's intent). I am open to improving, but please do not mistake that for weakness.
Lauren

[jimrooney]

Tad was trying get my ratings and Dustin's revoked because of my post.

The arrogance of this makes me sick. You've got to be kidding me.
Tad, you're on notice.
This is normal training. Just because you don't agree with it does not give you any right.
Trying to tear down two exceptional pilots in the name of your petty crusade... vile. Just vile.
We don't need it.

Jim

[Tad Eareckson]

Lauren,

I like the forum here so's there's a record of what is said and less chance of misunderstandings - in theory anyway.

Lemme make one thing clear - I'm not trying to get anyone's rating revoked. I'm trying to get people to use equipment which complies with rules written for very good reasons.

When I went out on skysailingtowing it was not to mobilize a lynch mob and I never identified you and Dustin. My motivation was - as above - to start getting people compliant with the rules. I was met - as I expected and for reasons I predicted in that very post - with a wall of resounding silence with the sole exception of this from one of the tiny handful of people on the planet who has his shit together with respect to release systems.

Peter Birren - the inventor of the Linknife and moderator of that forum had this to say...

>
Negative reinforcement... "Hey, it worked!", sez them.
<

And - as I said on the phone - you're not doing anything wrong that virtually EVERYONE else is also doing wrong.

But I've got a lot of problems with that flight.

For starters - a spinnaker shackle is a lousy core mechanism to use in a release assembly. It can, has, and will fail 'cause the girth of the gate increases as you move from hinge to end and there's a big notch that can be problematic.

You previously stated that you didn't want the brake lever on the basetube 'cause you were afraid of eating it in the event of a crash. I don't think that's as much of a threat as is perceived 'cause there are a lot of levers on basetubes but I've never heard of one hurting anyone - or even snagging a bridle. But in any case - the actuator should not be a brake lever.

Check this out from Jim Rooney (with respect to the Lookout release)...

2005/09/21 15:06:31

>
A common mistake is to just secure the velcro... which will work in most cases, but not under a high load (the time you _really_ need it).
<

I'm REALLY happy to hear that y'all riveted the brake lever to the downtube that night. But on 2008/03/27 you told me that your solution was to buy velcro (great - it didn't work when we needed it so let's get some more).

What you just said with respect to your barrel release is at variance with what you stated in your original account. Regardless, however, the fact remains that a Bailey does not come anywhere near to being able to handle the loads it needs to with the maximum allowable 25 pound pull.

The performance standards for this equipment say NOTHING about what every other tandem rig in the US is using. They say "The release must activate...at a tow force twice the weak link strength."

And every other tow rig in the US is not using Baileys. Some use Linknives. As I told you Wednesday night - one of the tandems on which you trained many years ago was equipped with compliant barrel releases. Both Ridgely tandems have been so for some years.

The barrel/secondary releases are there to accommodate a bridle wrap - not to compensate for an unreliable primary release. If you use one as a backup - rather than a secondary - you risk tucking the glider.

I'd be very interested in the details of those three occasions on which you had to go to the secondaries.

>
There ARE interesting things about "the rules." Most releases do not comply with them.
<

EXACTLY!

And the ones that do - like Peter Birren's, Steve Kinsley's, Tim Hinkel's, and mine are just rotting on the vine.

Wanna see the documentation for the primary release - or a very close relative of - the one you were using?

--

skysailingtowing

billbryden

2004/04/01 11:20

Towing errata

...

Releases:

The tensions encountered in static line towing are generally substantially higher than those experienced with aerotowing. Some aerotow releases, including a few models from prominent schools, have had problems releasing under high tensions. You must VERIFY through tests that a release will work for the tensions that could possibly be encountered. You better figure at least 300 pounds to be modestly confident.

Maybe 8-10 years ago I got several comments from people saying a popular aerotow release (with a bicycle type brake lever) would fail to release at higher tensions. I called and talked to the producer sharing the people's experiences and concerns. I inquired to what tension their releases were tested but he refused to say, just aggressively stated they never had any problems with their releases, they were fine, goodbye, click. Another person tested one and found it started getting really hard to actuate in the range of only 80-100 pounds as I vaguely recall. I noticed they did modify their design but I don't know if they ever really did any engineering tests on it. You should test the release yourself or have someone you trust do it. There is only one aerotow release manufacturer whose product I'd have reasonable confidence in without verifying it myself, the Wallaby release is not it.

...

--

The barrel releases - Baileys included - do work with zero tension but you might have to use two hands to do it. The multi-string release that Steve developed and the variation I spun off do it with one. I'd be very interested to see what Ollie came up with.

With respect to actuator accessibility for alternating over/under instructor positions...

Please take another look at my two point system:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aerotowrelease/

AT System Components

Also take a look at the temp set so you can see why a curved pin barrel doesn't work and a straight pin does.

Anyway...

The USHGA rules I cited require a report be filed for "injury potential incidents". You had primary and secondary release failures. Those sorts of things kill people. And your tug driver knows very well what can happen when an out of sequence release goes sour.

You can do hang gliding a big favor by filing a report and saying that velcro mounting of actuators and Bailey releases are great - until you really need them.

But I don't want you to do that until you thoroughly understand the issues.

I want you to keep talking with me, reading some links, looking at some pictures, and thinking.

I don't want to interfere with your flying at the ECC but if the weather sucks on one of those days I want you to spend a little time with me. You can learn a great deal - even if I'm not on the top ten list of comp pilots - and you can help hang gliding start cleaning up its act.

I'm not your enemy - I wanna be your friend - but in a tough love sort of mode for hopefully no more than a few more weeks.

Jim,

Since you're continuing your long term policy of not reading anything I've actually said, perhaps you should consider not commenting on it.

Good call on those Baileys - by the way.

[Tad Eareckson]

Lauren,

You notice how Jim is attacking me on the basis of what

you said
some unidentified pilots said
I said?

Which - by the way - I didn't.

I have no idea if he tows in compliance with the rules but if he does it's cause he's using the pair of barrel releases he asked me to make for him a couple of years ago.

My goal - with respect to this and many other threads - is to get you, your future passengers and students, and as many people as I can to comply with USHGA requirements written to keep towing operations safe.

Jim has - for years - tirelessly devoted a tremendous amount of time and effort to try to keep that from happening. So, because of him, Bo, people like them, and the hordes of weak minded individuals over which that ilk maintains influence - our sacred standards remain dangerously understrength weak links and releases that actuate with undo difficulty, snag, and lock up under moderate loads.

This guy is not your friend. I'm your friend. Kinda like the cop who pulled me over nine years ago and politely handed me a $25 ticket for not wearing my seat belt was my friend.

I always mean to do it but sometimes don't get around to it for a few miles. That experience increased my compliance rate and helped keep me safer on the road. (He really didn't need to do the ticket - the embarrassment would have been enough - but, what the hell, it worked.)

Back in '82 I was working as an "instructor" (read amusement park ride monitor) at Kitty Hawk Kites.

One afternoon I was flying a Harrier over the South Bowl. The thermal turbulence that place used to generate could be brutal - I was damn near killed there a couple of years later. When vacationers asked "Don't your arms get tired?" the answer was "Damn straight they do!"

Wills Wing, around that period, used to install plastic grips at the hands positions on the basetube.

I was up pretty good and got dumped pretty bad - par for that course all the freakin' time.

The glider falls, I pull in and wait for it to start flying again, and plan to push out and roll hard to port away from the dune when it does.

I try to effect that recovery and all the sudden I notice that my left hand is now on the right side of the basetube, the port grip still in it is butted up against the starboard one, and the glider is still behaving like I had given it no further instructions.

Fortunately I still had enough air under me to be able to grab he newly exposed aluminum and get control of things before breaking my neck.

When I returned to the shop I reported the incident to the manager and said that we needed to get in touch with Wills Wing immediately.

And that TOTAL FUCKING ASSHOLE told me that this issue of the steering wheel coming off in my hands was no big deal 'cause that sort of violent recovery action wasn't the sort of thing that would likely be necessitated in the mountains - it was just relevant to dune flying. So - forget about it.

To my everlasting shame I took no further action, more gliders experienced that failure over Jockeys Ridge, and those grips eventually disappeared from the Wills Wing gliders.

Today I would put considerable effort into getting that idiot fired and out of the sport.

So, anyway, this is the culture you joined into. It's still got a lot of serious issues and people are still dying 'cause nobody takes them on.

[Lauren Tjaden]

Tad,
I have no intention of furthering this discussion online. I have said I will use your release as well as promote it if I can be shown it releases under load better than the standard barrel release, and I will.
What Dustin and I did was standard training. He is actually amazingly safety oriented.
As far as friends go, I count Jim as one of my best. Bo, too.
Lauren

[Spark]

Tad,

I think it is amusing that you titled this post "rules".

Etiquette rules don't appear to matter much to you.

You whine about being poorly treated, but IMO you bring it all on yourself.

If you were more succinct and tactful in your posts, you might get the sort of responses that you want.

Your vulgarity and vindictive responses are unhealthy and foul the 'air' of this forum.

I'm going out for some fresh air.

Foe-R-you.

[Tad Eareckson]

Spark,

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

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

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

Lauren,

You can take a look if you want - and you should - at:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aerotowrelease/

AT System Components

Barrel Release - Remote - Port

Six weeks ago y'all were trying to maintain control of your plane, performing uncommanded aerobatics, and looking - with limited success - for something that would actually work the way it was supposed to.

If you had had a remote barrel mounted on your shoulder you could have kept both hands on the basetube and easily actuated it whenever you felt like it under whatever load your two hundred pound weak link could have dished out.

Two years ago at the ECC I invited Bo to take a look at that release which I had developed shortly before. It was mounted on my harness which was suspended from the tree a few feet from the picnic table at which he was sitting.

He looked at it for about five seconds and said - to the best of my recollection:

"Tad - You have taken a simple device and made it complicated. I don't like it, I won't fly with it, and I won't promote it."

and returned to his bench. I said nothing but added him to a little mental list I keep from which the members are never removed.

You noted I was a little quiet at dinner that evening at Sam's. Yep - we had at the table a party member to whom I will never have anything else to say unless absolutely necessary.

The next day out at the flight line I confirmed that - indeed - he was one of the vast multitude who had NEVER tested his releases to see if they'd work if he got into trouble.

I don't know who Bill Bryden had on the other end of the phone but the tone sounds familiar and I don't have any respect for whomever that was - either(?).

Jim and Bo may be useful friends to you when you wanna figure out where the next thermal is likely to be but they're both major enemies from the time the dolly starts rolling to the moment your bridle clears the tow ring.

Anyway...

I don't know how many times I've got to say this but...

I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE TRAINING EXERCISE.

I HAVE BIG PROBLEMS WITH the equipment employed for it, one of the actions taken during it, the apparent failure to recognize that the loss of control which yields a really cool roller coaster ride at twenty-five hundred is lethal at one hundred feet, the assumption that that can't happen, the attitude that substandard equipment is OK 'cause everybody else uses it, and the failure to recognize simultaneous primary and secondary release malfunctions as injury potential incidents.

--

Lauren Tjaden

2008/02/28 00:16:47

I think it's crazy to quit talking to people you disagree with. As long as we're talking, there's hope.

--

Lauren Tjaden

2008/05/05 21:17:12

Tad,

I have no intention of furthering this discussion online.

--

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

You're probably tired of listening to me right now, though, so how 'bout this instead by way of a break...

Plug:

http://www.questairforce.com/aero.html

into your browser - it should load REALLY fast.

I don't want to recommend it too highly 'cause it's oozing with the usual dangerous misinformation but do check out the last two sentences of the last paragraph in the Releases section and see if it helps you understand why a secondary release is not - contrary to popular opinion - a backup release.

[Flying Lobster]

My biggest problem with what you say here is that I don't think you have the clue what you are talking about. Show us your logbook of completed tandems under tow and I MIGHT begin listening to what you say--but you're talking from mere conjecture based on your spin of incident reports and a supposed grasp of tension dynamics and engineering.

You should be very careful about this Tad. You are coming close to impugning the safety records of commercial operations and long-time professional pilots.

marc

[brianvh]

Tad;

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

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

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

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

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

[Tad Eareckson]

Hi Marc,

Dickhead here...

If - as you have indicated many times before - the thickness of one's logbook correlated to one's understanding of all aspects of the science behind what we do in the air, Jim Rooney would be racking up a lot of frequent flyer miles to Stockholm in the course of picking up all his Nobel Prizes in physics. I don't see any indication that'll be happening anytime soon.

Also - Lauren would not be making statements like:

>
I know my glides are not great, something that can partly be explained by the fact that I have a smaller glider. (Smaller gliders don't glide as well as bigger ones. It's science.)
<

Lemme make myself even more popular than I am now...

Pilots - professional and otherwise - are the dregs left over when you skim off all the good stuff to use as scientists and engineers. I don't want the guy who takes me to Minneapolis/Saint Paul to be the one who designed the 757 in which I'm riding.

I'm not trying to impugn the safety records of commercial operations and long-time professional pilots. There's enough redundancy built into these operations so that they can get away with the gross negligence they do without it establishing a clearly apparent wiggle on the line in the graph.

But let's take a look at this:

--

Pilot Proficiency System
Standard Operating Procedure 12-02
2.10 USHPA Hang Gliding Aerotow Ratings
B. USHPA Aero Vehicle Requirements

5. A weak link must be placed at both ends of the tow line. The weak link at the glider end must have a breaking strength that will break before the towline tension exceeds twice the weight of the hang glider pilot and glider combination.

6. A release must be placed at the hang glider end of the tow line within easy reach of the pilot. This release shall be operational with zero tow line force up to twice the rated breaking strength of the weak link.

--

Holly - 2005/05/29.

There was no weak link on the downwind end of the tow line.

The barrel releases which Steve had sold her came NOWHERE NEAR being operational up to twice the rated breaking strength of the weak link that wasn't there.

Nobody - 'cept yours truly many years ago - HAD EVER preflighted those releases. They would not have been operable at some of the loads she was experiencing.

If Holly were so inclined and I were a scumbag bloodsucking lawyer we would own Manquin. You can bet that would get this community to take note and clean up its act real fast.

Brian,

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

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

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

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

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

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

Anyway...

You're still flying a Falcon? And using a Lookout release?

I'm hoping that Tim Hinkel will have some of his totally awesome slap on two point releases available this season. Take a look at one of those.

You previously expressed interest in a multi-string release. I've got a few of those made up - along with a bunch of barrels. I'll put your name on some stuff.

You can check out some pretty detailed photos at:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aerotowrelease/

Lemme know your hookup weight and I can reserve some weak links.

Wanna have some fun? Go to:

http://www.questairforce.com/aero.html

and read the first (main) paragraph in the Weak Link section and see if that helps you understand why we have this totally insane situation with respect to those items.

[jclaytor]

Testing... Testing... Testing...
Is this thing on?

[Lauren Tjaden]

Tad, I have never been mean to you, never yelled at you, never called you names, or even been rude to you on the listserv. Nevertheless, this morning I woke up to another dose of poison, this time about my stupidity about gliders. The things you say really hurt my feelings. I am not yelling at you or calling you names now. I have agreed to carefully consider your release. I think my replies have been very measured. But I want to end this discussion. If you want to report me, do. I'm off the listserv.

Lauren

[Batman]

Tad -

You have become a cancer to this listserve. Many good pilots and those who are up & coming are turning away from this listserve because of the venom you spew. You have basically alienated everyone on this listserve, most of them being FAR better pilots and far more likable people than yourself. I could give a rats ass about what you say about me, but I am pissed beyond words at the arrogance you display here with absolutely nothing but conjecture to say for it and the people you are hurting because of it. People have gone out of their way to try and help you or point out a better way of saying things, but you add them to your list and tear them down as well. You are an ass and you go to great lengths to prove it with every post you make. Lauren has been one of the best advocates for hang gliding and for the safety of flight since she started flying. What have you done other than infuriate everyone on this listserve? Take a good look at yourself and the many things that could be brought up about you on this listserve but have remained skeletons in the closet. Kharma's a bitch Tad.

Chris

P.S. So Mark doesn't have to, I'll join Lauren and self-ban myself right off this listserve. Outta here.

[Paul Tjaden]

Tad, I have kept control of my temper for several days now while you have denigrated and threatened my wife and the best friend I have ever had, all wrapped into one. I have kept quiet because I knew she could take care of herself and I didn't wish to aggravate an already bad situation. But you have gone too far too many times and I have had enough. Your callous and thoughtless comments have not only been hurtful but incorrect. For example, here is a most recent quote from your vile mouth suggesting that Lauren was basically stupid. You wrote, obviously suggesting that she had no idea what she was talking about: "Also - Lauren would not be making statements like:"

"I know my glides are not great, something that can partly be explained by the fact that I have a smaller glider. (Smaller gliders don't glide as well as bigger ones. It's science.)"

Here is a direct quote from Thomas Suchanek taken from Dennis Pagan's book, "The Secrets of Champions". Thomas wrote "It is an aerodynamic fact that larger gliders fly better because of Reynolds number effects, so if a larger pilot flies a larger glider, he should have an advantage."
BTW, Thomas has a Masters in Aerospace Engineering. If for no other reason than this (and you know there are many more reasons) you owe her an apology.

In an earlier exchange with you, I told you that I was willing to take part in an experiment regarding whether or not your barrel release would out perform the more common releases in use today. As far as I'm concerned, you have created a situation here where there is NO way that I would consider taking part in this trial mostly because I don't think I wish to be that close to you or to converse with you in any way. Shold you choose to actually show your face at Highland while I am there during the ECC, I would appreciate it if you stayed well away from me.

VERY SINCERELY.

Paul Tjaden

[markc]

Sheesh, I'm outta town for a few days, and another flame war erupts.

My (subjective though it may be) rule-of-thumb regarding use of this forum is:

No personal attacks!

When I see insults, rather than politely-phrased 'agree to disagree' discussion,
that's when I crack down ("three strikes and you are out!"). Those with three
strikes will be moderated: their posts will have to be reviewed and approved
before they will be accepted.

99% of the crap/insults/etc that I've ever seen in listservs/forums over the years
would never be said in an actual face to face conversation.

So I'm going to use that 99% rule to determine if/when someone has stepped
over the boundary. Call it political correctness if you like, I don't care.

I'll review the topics of the past few days after I've summoned some patience....

MarkC

[Tad Eareckson]

Lauren,

OK, apologies for the comment about glider size. I interpreted the statement to mean that - within the specified hook in weight range - a more heavily loaded glider will have its glide degraded. My understanding has always been that one goes both down and forward faster but the slope remains the same. Apparently my education falls short.

I wasn't say anything about stupidity - I was just trying to identify what I thought was misinformation - but it looks like I've got to take the stupidity wrap myself. I am extremely and sincerely sorry that my stupidity caused you distress.

But I wasn't calling you names or trying to be mean. My primary goal in this effort is to give you as much control of the glider and margin of safety as possible.

Paul,

See above - I've got the stupidity thing all over my face. I'll also cop a plea to the callous and thoughtless charge.

I apologize as above but I my intent was not malicious.

Lauren is an extremely valuable asset to the sport, has brought a lot of energy and enthusiasm to it, and has worked very hard, long, and intensively to become and extremely accomplished and skilled pilot.

I am sorry that you are feeling as you are about me now because you are on a somewhat short list of people whose opinion matters a great deal to me - enough so that you can say pretty much whatever you want to me - and it won't alter or diminish my regard and respect for you.

If you're not reading this I hope you will tolerate my physical presence long enough to hear - and hopefully accept - a spoken apology.

If that's as much or more of me than you can stand - with respect to the barrel releases...

Those demonstrations can fairly easily be conducted in compliance with your terms of not conversing with me and my being outside of whatever radius you specify - even if nobody else can stand me enough to act as a go-between.

Perhaps, if/when, you see what I'm talking about, you'll hate me slightly less. 'Cause my goal - no matter how inept and/or tactless is my approach in attempting to acheive it - is to make sure Lauren doesn't have an experience down low similar to the one she had up high seven and a half weeks ago. And right now - remote though is the likelihood - there is no guarantee that can't happen.

[jimrooney]

So does attacking everyone count as a personal attack? Or are we free to spew garbage all over this list? If I don't name someone by name am I free to rip the hell out of them? Can I insinuate to my hearts content?

The friend foe thing is truly my favorite new toy, but it does feel like a bit of a cop out on my part. I can remove offending jerks from my world, but it leaves everyone else to deal with the garbage. Even if everyone added some pompous jerk to their foe list, it just leaves him to the new guys. I thought we were better than that?

Notice how I've insinuated and insulted "someone" here without naming him/her. Cute trick? Is this to be allowed? I hope not. I've done it here only as an example... I will not continue to do so.

Please do not tell me that walking up and saying "everyone here is a moron" is to be accepted.

You have my condolences. Moderation is hell.
Jim

[Lauren Tjaden]

Thanks for the apology, Tad. Lots.
Lauren

[Tad Eareckson]

Thank you for - at least - reading my inadequate apology. I hope your note is an indication that you also accept it - although you are certainly under no obligation and I'm prepared to do a lot of penance towards that goal.

I haven't heard from Paul but I would appreciate it if you would use some influence to get me back on toleration - if not speaking terms with him.

OK - money where mouth is time.

In this flight you and Dusty had - which is pretty much exactly what would have transpired with anybody using the same junk and just about everybody is using the same junk...

I know it was high and mostly safe but let's pretend it was a lot lower.

1. Hand wasn't on actuator 'cause actuator wasn't on basetube 'cause the basetube isn't a particularly safe place to put a brake lever. Result - some loss of control.

2. Actuator wasn't securely mounted. Result - failure to release, compounding loss of control, potentially catastrophic. Y'all did EXACTLY the right thing to remedy that issue and took it off the table.

3. Went for the secondary release under very high load. Maybe a one in seventy-five chance of wrapping the bridle. Almost certain destruction of the glider if you pull the lucky card. Shoulda continued the roll and broken the weak link unless the ground was coming up fast. In that case - assuming the primary is totally out of commission - you gotta pull and hold your breath.

4. The barrels wouldn't work 'cause the design is insane. If you ever really need them they - in effect - will not be there. BIG problem.

The Quallaby/Bailey systems are nothing but downsides - safety compromises which do NOTHING but add inefficiency, complexity, weight, drag, expense. They are insane.

When y'all started coming to Ridgely, you and Paul were setting up within a couple of gliders of a system in which ALL of the problems you encountered in that flight had been designed out - efficient, simple, light, clean, cheap, and TOTALLY reliable.

If you can bring Paul back up to toleration level I would like y'all, if you can, or you (singular) if you can't, to take a good look at my full two point system.

If you (singular or plural) can present a ghost of a case that my system is not totally infallible, does not blow the crap you were using out of the water I will immediately hand y'all a hundred bucks, fold my glider, leave the ECC, and not fly a glider anywhere until the 2010 season.

I will also make one post of concession to this forum and then leave it permanently.

Caveat - my nephew has always wanted to see me fly so in the improbable event that he's ever on this side of the country during the right time of year with the right weather - I go up.

Again - I'm not trying to be your enemy - I don't want you or Dustin to suffer the loss of one second of airtime or any embarrassment.

Y'all are victims of a major breakdown of the safety system and I'd like your help in fixing as much of it as we can.

Please stay with me in this conversation 'cause there's a lot of ground to cover.

If you're in at this point I'd like you to read:

http://www.questairforce.com/aero.html

Weak Link section

and see if that helps you figure out who your friends really are.

[Paul Tjaden]

Hi Tad,

I DO appreciate what appears to be a sincere apology to Lauren and I would like to say a few words regarding your quest to get the HG community to adopt your release mechanisms.

First, I have NOT taken much interest in most of the threads about this because I didn’t feel it affected me. I suppose I could or should have taken more interest on the basis of the fact that the overall safety of hang gliding has a bearing on whether or not flight parks and launch sites will continue to be available to me in the future. Anyway, I have left this for all of you to sort out and stayed away from most of these discussions. Because of this, I have NO idea how your three point system works and whether or not I might want to support its use. It did not and does not concern me on a personal basis cause I don’t use a three point.

Regarding barrel releases: Although, it is possible that you have developed a better barrel release that will work under higher loads, my apathy continues for another reason. The reason has to do with personal experience. I have had several occasions to release when my glider was getting into a bad position behind the tug. Only two of these were close enough to the ground to be a safety issue. During these situations, my barrel release performed quickly and easily. It is quite possible that it worked well because I released before my glider was in a position to allow the load on the release to get very high. Frankly, I can’t imagine hanging on to a tow that was getting so far out of shape to achieve really high load forces. None the less, I will go through with testing your straight pin release and use it if it proves noticeably better. Personally, I think you should contact Ollie Gregory and see about modifying your barrel so that it will work in a no load situation. Needing to take both hands off of the base tube to effect a release when you have been given the rope, especially at low altitude, definitely raises my heart rate.

Finally, let me say this about your attitude here in trying to promote your system. You seem to have become nearly fanatical about trying to get acceptance. You are absolutely certain that your system is far better and are frustrated by the fact that you can’t get all of us dummies to see things your way. But you know Tad, that’s just the way things are sometimes. The only thing you will achieve by beating everyone over the head about this is animosity and they will refuse to look at or use your system just because they are pissed at you or don’t respect you. Perhaps you should back off a little here and present your system to the USHPA safety committee and see where that leads. Maybe they will get behind you and you can get some satisfaction, or maybe not. Or perhaps you should manufacture a few of these and see how they sell. Of course, you would probably need to write an article in the OZ report or USHPA magazine to get some publicity, but if the HG public perceives that there IS a problem and that your system offers a good answer, then you will achieve your goal. If not, you can either continue on in some other way or just give up. But the one thing that will get you no where and will even damage your crusade is more ranting on this web site.

Finally, your recent attempts to bully people into submission with threats of losing ratings or by alluding to their stupidity (especially when they actually had things right and you are the one with incorrect info) will certainly back fire. This approach is completely irresponsible and must be stopped if you wish to win people to your ideas.

My 2cents,

Paul

Oh yeah, one more thing. Many times your posts are so long and tedious that my eyes glaze over within a few minutes. Keep it short and to the point and more people will bother to actually read them.

[brianvh]

Well said, Paul.

Tad - I'm a little mystified by the link you give to the weak link section of Quest air. You seem to expect things to jump out at us and we'll be bowled over by something obviously wrong and unsafe. Is it the recommendation for 1G breaking strength? I'd call that perhaps a little low that will cause a few irritating, and occasionally dangerous weak link breaks, but hardly terrifying. Is there something I'm missing?

As for your system as a whole, though I'm sold on your barrel release, I remember the rest of it looked really complex with pulleys and bungee cords and whatnot. Nobody will look at that and say it's obviously superior because it's got so many moving parts. If you were offering me the $100 I'd say levers are far more failsafe than pulleys, where lines can jump out of the tracks.

[RedBaron]

I agree with Paul and Brian pretty much on everything. But I think it's awesome that Tad apologized to Lauren who, awesome again, accepted the apology. So let's be civil again and try to focus on the relevant stuff. Tad has spent a great deal of time, thought, effort and possibly money on trying to improve AT gadgets, I can respect that. Current opinion always needs to be challenged for real progress. It's obvious to me now that we could make more of an effort to facilitate this process by creating an atmosphere that invites new ideas and approaches. Clinging to status quo has always and will always suck, and that bothers me more than internet bravery and foul language.