amen, amen, amen. let us hereby recognize this union and do everything in our power to support, nourish, and make prosperous the joining of these peoples which we witness here today.
gary;D
rules
Moderator: CHGPA BOD
-
Tad Eareckson
- Posts: 304
- Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:50 am
Some years ago at the picnic tables...
--
Instructor 1 approaches Tad: "I've got this student. Hang Two. And I'm having a lot of trouble getting through to this student. And this student is hanging out with all these CHGA pilots. And they're giving her - oops - all this advice. AND IT'S ALL WRONG!!!"
Tad to Instructor 1, looking for something positive to say: "Well, maybe she has compensatory qualities. Maybe she's really good with horses!"
Instructor 2 - Dissolves in laughter.
Tad to Instructor 1: "I can take that as a yes?"
--
OK, all of us do this. We have a tendency to listen to people based on their experience levels. And this entire culture is just dead wrong on some really critical issues - so you really can't trust anybody. If you wanna be safe you've got to go to source material (like, for instance, the USHGA rules) read it, understand it as best as you can, and conform to it. Then you question the science behind it. When you find problems you look and see what's going on with sailplanes. That crowd has had a lot more brainpower behind it for a lot longer and they do things right. So if it's a toss-up between Dacron and fiberglass - go with the latter.
Paul,
I'm very relieved that you're at least back on speaking terms with me - I'll sleep a lot easier now. And I hope that both of you have accepted my apologies.
(Wish I had known earlier that you had cooled off - I just modified one of my test rigs so you could check out the barrels without me being around.)
Lemme make one thing clear regarding your opening sentence. I'm not on a quest to get the community to adopt MY release mechanisms. I'm on a quest to get the community to use release mechanisms/systems that comply with THE RULES.
We have performance and safety standards for gliders - HGMA, DHV; for the people who fly them - Pilot Proficiency Pilot Proficiency System; and for release systems - USHPA Aero Vehicle Requirements.
We are totally solid on the gliders - 'cause we've got engineers dealing with that situation.
We are reasonably but much less so on the people - 'cause that's handled by pilots.
And we are demonstrably insane with respect to releases 'cause nobody follows, cares about, or even knows the rules.
Instead, we've gone to "standards" like this:
--
hefalump
2008/02/24 23:02:15
You use what you want and I'll use what I want, that's the beauty of this sport, we are all responsible for our own choice in equipment.
--
I will maintain that my full two point (I call it - pilot and glider) system - which incorporates Steve's multi-string concept - is the best way to it. But it's most assuredly not the ONLY way. Again Peter Birren and Tim Hinkel are two individuals who really have their shit together.
I do hope to see what Ollie has done in the near future. But I'm not terribly interested in modifying my barrel release for slack line performance - although I can set the internal resistance so that it will operate with negligible opposition tension. The multi-string release on my right shoulder works fine for one hand operation under zero tension.
With respect to some of your other points...
I have brought a lot of these issues to the attention of just about everyone who is anyone - at Ridgely, during the competitions, here, on the towing forum. A tiny percentage of this population knows what it's looking at but nothing ever happens.
And then I see this training flight of Dustin's and Lauren's... The Bailey locks up under relatively low tension - exactly as I predicted it would - and there is ZERO REACTION from ANYBODY. ("Well, shit happens.")
We've got this huge population of frogs that are floating around in some extremely warm water to which they've all acclimated themselves. The temperature hardly ever gets up that extra two degrees it requires to roast one of them but it can and does. We're paying extra to heat it. Why?
I know things have gotten a bit terse and personal. But I don't mean it to be that way. As far as I'm concerned this is not Dustin and Lauren. This is Tandem Instructor and Tandem Rating Candidate.
I don't want anybody to lose ratings.
But I do want to see the rules complied with. TRC can do a lot of good by recognizing that the Baileys they were using are nowhere near to being in compliance and filing a report to that effect.
And I can't really threaten or bully anyone. If people are following the rules they're OK. If not - they're vulnerable. But that will not be my call.
And I wouldn't even see any particular point in naming names in a report. It doesn't matter 'cause EVERYBODY is doing it.
Just thought I'd try one more tack. Probably got more people hating me more but... maybe it's worth it if it gets the issue attention and gets Lauren and others to operate more safely - which is my goal.
Lauren,
Please stay with me in this conversation. If you do, not only will you be operating with an excellent margin of safety but I can give you a significant competition edge that just about no one else can.
Brian,
Take off your pilot's helmet and stop drinking the Kool-Aid. Those things make people stupid.
Put on your scientist hat.
I think I must have read through that stuff a couple of dozen times on autopilot before I suddenly said - WADE-A-MINUTE.
Nah, forget the 1 G. 1.4 is where it should be but I can live with one.
1. They're talking about a 260 pound weak link ON THE END OF A BRIDLE. If you're talking about a two point bridle - which they are - and you assume a 60 degree apex angle - which I do - I get a tow line tension of 452 pounds - 1.74 Gs. What do you get?
2. Does a loop of 130 pound Greenspot - in fact - blow at 260 pounds?
3. Will a loop of 130 pound Greenspot on the end of a bridle fail before the handling of even a heavy 320 pound glider like mine will be compromised?
I want to see you at the fly-in at which we can do side by side comparisons of a Quallaby release system and mine. MANY people HAVE, in fact, said it's obviously superior. (And - you may have noted - I've just staked two years worth of flying on my confidence that that premise cannot be challenged.)
We can make things interesting - I've still got that thousand bucks set aside from when JD wimped out on the barrel challenge. I'll give you ten to one odds. Or we can dumb things down to a beer or a concession post or something.
My first glider was an Ultralight Products Comet 165 - intro year: 1979. It used bungees to retain components critical for dive recovery.
Bungees are reliable enough that people tie themselves to them and jump off of very high bridges spanning very rocky gorges.
The T2 uses bungees and pulleys. It's a lot more complex, has a lot more moving parts, and will kick a Comet's ass.
The 1903 Wright Flyer used pulleys.
It's a real good bet that an F-18 uses pulleys and it's a lot more complex than a Wright Flyer. Let's dogfight. Which plane do you want?
Levers on basetubes scare people. They can snag bridles. Levers on downtubes aren't readily accessible - as we've just seen.
Pulleys inside the basetube and at the control frame apex are incapable of hurting anything.
No. It is physically impossible for the 03/64 inch leechline lanyard to jump the sheave and jam in a Harken 16 millimeter AirBlock Pulley. You can't make it happen deliberately and it certainly will not happen accidentally. Like Wills Wing, I use top quality hardware and I design, refine, and test like people's lives and my reputation depends upon it. We know what we're doing. Rob Kells knows I know what I'm doing. Ask him sometime.
Janni,
Thank you so very much for your comments.
And yes, you're quite right about the time, thought, effort, AND money. Pretty much everything else too EXCEPT -
>
...creating an atmosphere that invites NEW ideas and approaches...
<
--
http://www.birrendesign.com/rhgpa_criteria.html
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.
--
This document marks the dawn and is the foundation of center of mass hang glider towing. It dates back a quarter of a century.
These are not new ideas or approaches. They are the core principles which we have abandoned in favor of - "It's OK 'cause this what the guys at Wallaby and Quest say."
Let's get this train back on the rails.
--
Instructor 1 approaches Tad: "I've got this student. Hang Two. And I'm having a lot of trouble getting through to this student. And this student is hanging out with all these CHGA pilots. And they're giving her - oops - all this advice. AND IT'S ALL WRONG!!!"
Tad to Instructor 1, looking for something positive to say: "Well, maybe she has compensatory qualities. Maybe she's really good with horses!"
Instructor 2 - Dissolves in laughter.
Tad to Instructor 1: "I can take that as a yes?"
--
OK, all of us do this. We have a tendency to listen to people based on their experience levels. And this entire culture is just dead wrong on some really critical issues - so you really can't trust anybody. If you wanna be safe you've got to go to source material (like, for instance, the USHGA rules) read it, understand it as best as you can, and conform to it. Then you question the science behind it. When you find problems you look and see what's going on with sailplanes. That crowd has had a lot more brainpower behind it for a lot longer and they do things right. So if it's a toss-up between Dacron and fiberglass - go with the latter.
Paul,
I'm very relieved that you're at least back on speaking terms with me - I'll sleep a lot easier now. And I hope that both of you have accepted my apologies.
(Wish I had known earlier that you had cooled off - I just modified one of my test rigs so you could check out the barrels without me being around.)
Lemme make one thing clear regarding your opening sentence. I'm not on a quest to get the community to adopt MY release mechanisms. I'm on a quest to get the community to use release mechanisms/systems that comply with THE RULES.
We have performance and safety standards for gliders - HGMA, DHV; for the people who fly them - Pilot Proficiency Pilot Proficiency System; and for release systems - USHPA Aero Vehicle Requirements.
We are totally solid on the gliders - 'cause we've got engineers dealing with that situation.
We are reasonably but much less so on the people - 'cause that's handled by pilots.
And we are demonstrably insane with respect to releases 'cause nobody follows, cares about, or even knows the rules.
Instead, we've gone to "standards" like this:
--
hefalump
2008/02/24 23:02:15
You use what you want and I'll use what I want, that's the beauty of this sport, we are all responsible for our own choice in equipment.
--
I will maintain that my full two point (I call it - pilot and glider) system - which incorporates Steve's multi-string concept - is the best way to it. But it's most assuredly not the ONLY way. Again Peter Birren and Tim Hinkel are two individuals who really have their shit together.
I do hope to see what Ollie has done in the near future. But I'm not terribly interested in modifying my barrel release for slack line performance - although I can set the internal resistance so that it will operate with negligible opposition tension. The multi-string release on my right shoulder works fine for one hand operation under zero tension.
With respect to some of your other points...
I have brought a lot of these issues to the attention of just about everyone who is anyone - at Ridgely, during the competitions, here, on the towing forum. A tiny percentage of this population knows what it's looking at but nothing ever happens.
And then I see this training flight of Dustin's and Lauren's... The Bailey locks up under relatively low tension - exactly as I predicted it would - and there is ZERO REACTION from ANYBODY. ("Well, shit happens.")
We've got this huge population of frogs that are floating around in some extremely warm water to which they've all acclimated themselves. The temperature hardly ever gets up that extra two degrees it requires to roast one of them but it can and does. We're paying extra to heat it. Why?
I know things have gotten a bit terse and personal. But I don't mean it to be that way. As far as I'm concerned this is not Dustin and Lauren. This is Tandem Instructor and Tandem Rating Candidate.
I don't want anybody to lose ratings.
But I do want to see the rules complied with. TRC can do a lot of good by recognizing that the Baileys they were using are nowhere near to being in compliance and filing a report to that effect.
And I can't really threaten or bully anyone. If people are following the rules they're OK. If not - they're vulnerable. But that will not be my call.
And I wouldn't even see any particular point in naming names in a report. It doesn't matter 'cause EVERYBODY is doing it.
Just thought I'd try one more tack. Probably got more people hating me more but... maybe it's worth it if it gets the issue attention and gets Lauren and others to operate more safely - which is my goal.
Lauren,
Please stay with me in this conversation. If you do, not only will you be operating with an excellent margin of safety but I can give you a significant competition edge that just about no one else can.
Brian,
Take off your pilot's helmet and stop drinking the Kool-Aid. Those things make people stupid.
Put on your scientist hat.
I think I must have read through that stuff a couple of dozen times on autopilot before I suddenly said - WADE-A-MINUTE.
Nah, forget the 1 G. 1.4 is where it should be but I can live with one.
1. They're talking about a 260 pound weak link ON THE END OF A BRIDLE. If you're talking about a two point bridle - which they are - and you assume a 60 degree apex angle - which I do - I get a tow line tension of 452 pounds - 1.74 Gs. What do you get?
2. Does a loop of 130 pound Greenspot - in fact - blow at 260 pounds?
3. Will a loop of 130 pound Greenspot on the end of a bridle fail before the handling of even a heavy 320 pound glider like mine will be compromised?
I want to see you at the fly-in at which we can do side by side comparisons of a Quallaby release system and mine. MANY people HAVE, in fact, said it's obviously superior. (And - you may have noted - I've just staked two years worth of flying on my confidence that that premise cannot be challenged.)
We can make things interesting - I've still got that thousand bucks set aside from when JD wimped out on the barrel challenge. I'll give you ten to one odds. Or we can dumb things down to a beer or a concession post or something.
My first glider was an Ultralight Products Comet 165 - intro year: 1979. It used bungees to retain components critical for dive recovery.
Bungees are reliable enough that people tie themselves to them and jump off of very high bridges spanning very rocky gorges.
The T2 uses bungees and pulleys. It's a lot more complex, has a lot more moving parts, and will kick a Comet's ass.
The 1903 Wright Flyer used pulleys.
It's a real good bet that an F-18 uses pulleys and it's a lot more complex than a Wright Flyer. Let's dogfight. Which plane do you want?
Levers on basetubes scare people. They can snag bridles. Levers on downtubes aren't readily accessible - as we've just seen.
Pulleys inside the basetube and at the control frame apex are incapable of hurting anything.
No. It is physically impossible for the 03/64 inch leechline lanyard to jump the sheave and jam in a Harken 16 millimeter AirBlock Pulley. You can't make it happen deliberately and it certainly will not happen accidentally. Like Wills Wing, I use top quality hardware and I design, refine, and test like people's lives and my reputation depends upon it. We know what we're doing. Rob Kells knows I know what I'm doing. Ask him sometime.
Janni,
Thank you so very much for your comments.
And yes, you're quite right about the time, thought, effort, AND money. Pretty much everything else too EXCEPT -
>
...creating an atmosphere that invites NEW ideas and approaches...
<
--
http://www.birrendesign.com/rhgpa_criteria.html
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.
--
This document marks the dawn and is the foundation of center of mass hang glider towing. It dates back a quarter of a century.
These are not new ideas or approaches. They are the core principles which we have abandoned in favor of - "It's OK 'cause this what the guys at Wallaby and Quest say."
Let's get this train back on the rails.
-
Paul Tjaden
- Posts: 398
- Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:28 pm
Re: rules
Tad,
I read your latest post with complete amazement. After your apology to Lauren and my post with a few ideas regarding how you might find acceptance of your (or someone else’s) system that you deem to be appropriate, I thought that you might possibly understand that there is a way to achieve your goals without being a jerk and alienating so many others. There were even congratulations from Red Baron and Gary Deveil approving of the way we had all come together in a spirit of consolation. But either you are ultimately trying to create problems or issues on this forum or are just too socially inept to realize that you can’t go around abusing people and have them not care.
Your introductory comments about the female pilot who the instructor is “having a lot of trouble getting through to” and who may have other “compensatory qualities” having to do with “horses” and who also then becomes the brunt of the joke “Instructor 2- desolves in laughter”, is an obvious
slander directed toward Lauren. Either that, or there are other female pilots out there that learned to fly at Highland and did not find flying particularly intuitive and also had a background in horses. Right now, I can’t think of others. Let me know when you do.
After this outrageous opening, you then go on to denigrate JD for his remarks and then continue to try to brow beat the rest of us into submitting to your will once again using the excuse that you have done all you can and we just won’t listen. It has been my experience that hang glider pilots are a fairly reasonable lot and if they don’t wish to use your system, perhaps there is a valid reason. As I said before, I have not evaluated your system but it seems to me that if it’s as great as you say it is but few will use it, there is probably a reason. Perhaps it is too complex or too much trouble to install or maintain. I’m not sure but part of the attractiveness of the widely used bicycle brake releases is the portability and ease of installation. I don’t know, but as I said before, trying to browbeat people into changing to your system is NOT an effective way to market your ideas. You have latched onto Lauren and Dustin’s training flight as your sole example of a barrel release failing while in use with no proof other than Lauren’s earlier post that was written not as a scientific experiment but as a post to be enjoyed. There are two things you seem to be missing regarding this flight. One is that Lauren is a creative writer who has been trained to compose in a fun and entertaining fashion. I am not saying that the experience didn’t happen, but I am saying that sometimes writers use creative license to keep things exciting. The second point is that Dustin, as instructor, was pilot in command and had the situation well in hand all along. Lauren has tried to point these things out to you all along but you are much more interested in trying to prove your point than realizing the truth. Now read this next line very carefully. Lauren does NOT want to be used here in your rants anymore. Get it? No more!!! Back off!!! As far as testing your releases while at Ridgely in June. I have decided that I am quite happy with the functionality of my current equipment and that it serves me quite well.
Regards,
Paul Tjaden
I read your latest post with complete amazement. After your apology to Lauren and my post with a few ideas regarding how you might find acceptance of your (or someone else’s) system that you deem to be appropriate, I thought that you might possibly understand that there is a way to achieve your goals without being a jerk and alienating so many others. There were even congratulations from Red Baron and Gary Deveil approving of the way we had all come together in a spirit of consolation. But either you are ultimately trying to create problems or issues on this forum or are just too socially inept to realize that you can’t go around abusing people and have them not care.
Your introductory comments about the female pilot who the instructor is “having a lot of trouble getting through to” and who may have other “compensatory qualities” having to do with “horses” and who also then becomes the brunt of the joke “Instructor 2- desolves in laughter”, is an obvious
slander directed toward Lauren. Either that, or there are other female pilots out there that learned to fly at Highland and did not find flying particularly intuitive and also had a background in horses. Right now, I can’t think of others. Let me know when you do.
After this outrageous opening, you then go on to denigrate JD for his remarks and then continue to try to brow beat the rest of us into submitting to your will once again using the excuse that you have done all you can and we just won’t listen. It has been my experience that hang glider pilots are a fairly reasonable lot and if they don’t wish to use your system, perhaps there is a valid reason. As I said before, I have not evaluated your system but it seems to me that if it’s as great as you say it is but few will use it, there is probably a reason. Perhaps it is too complex or too much trouble to install or maintain. I’m not sure but part of the attractiveness of the widely used bicycle brake releases is the portability and ease of installation. I don’t know, but as I said before, trying to browbeat people into changing to your system is NOT an effective way to market your ideas. You have latched onto Lauren and Dustin’s training flight as your sole example of a barrel release failing while in use with no proof other than Lauren’s earlier post that was written not as a scientific experiment but as a post to be enjoyed. There are two things you seem to be missing regarding this flight. One is that Lauren is a creative writer who has been trained to compose in a fun and entertaining fashion. I am not saying that the experience didn’t happen, but I am saying that sometimes writers use creative license to keep things exciting. The second point is that Dustin, as instructor, was pilot in command and had the situation well in hand all along. Lauren has tried to point these things out to you all along but you are much more interested in trying to prove your point than realizing the truth. Now read this next line very carefully. Lauren does NOT want to be used here in your rants anymore. Get it? No more!!! Back off!!! As far as testing your releases while at Ridgely in June. I have decided that I am quite happy with the functionality of my current equipment and that it serves me quite well.
Regards,
Paul Tjaden
-
Tad Eareckson
- Posts: 304
- Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:50 am
Paul,
Nobody at the picnic tables was laughing at Lauren. One was laughing at the situation. All of them liked/like her and were interested in helping her. That's why the conversation was taking place.
One, at least, was frustrated. You don't get frustrated if you don't care about the person. And that individual wasn't expressing frustration with her so much as the sources and quality of information she was getting.
Some people pick this stuff up pretty quickly and intuitively, some don't. Lauren - even by her own written accounts - didn't. So what?
She worked extra hard for a long time, had/has a lot of enthusiasm, and has become a really excellent pilot. I have no doubt that - even if I was flying a comparable glider - she could easily kick my ass in competition any day of the week. I really respect and admire her for what she's accomplished and I've seen a lot of positive stuff that's impressed me lately.
Please focus on what I said next - that we are all vulnerable to assimilating misinformation from the people around us. That was my point.
And it relates to...
If you've just discovered that you're using a barrel release which won't function when you need it to, somebody who is using and continues to use the same noncompliant mechanism isn't going to be of any help - even if his name does happen to be Paul Voight.
OK - guilty on socially inept but not on malicious intent.
When I first flew hang gliders - 1980, Easter Weekend - I saw a Seahawk on a car a campsite or two away from my tent at Oregon Inlet. I got to know Frank a bit over the next few years.
He had as close to ZERO aptitude as one can get but all of Lauren's love and enthusiasm for the sport. He also really paid his dues with respect to the community and did an enormous amount of work for the club.
I started going to training hills with him in 1988 to try to get him his Hang II. It was enormously frustrating because - as I said - he had no feel for the glider and tended to be afraid of the wrong things.
But we stayed with it, I got him flying his Mark IV very well off the local bumps, signed his Two, and got him up on the ridges.
He always used big ugly Bennett training wheels and quickly unlearned stand up landings. It was really irritating 'cause you'd watch him come in waiting for the moment to flare - which was like five seconds ago - and roll it in time after time. But I was starting to think - So what? He's perfectly safe doing that and he's having fun.
But he wanted to be able to fly high sites without supervision and that required a Three. And a Three requires stand up landings - which, as some of us have recently discussed, are really only necessary for looking cool.
On 1996/04/28 he went down to the Taylor Farm to work on those on a primitive version of a scooter tow. The first release he was using was malfunctioning so that was swapped for another. That didn't work very well either and there was a real big CHGA turnout at his funeral services three days later.
If he had kept rolling in for another three years he could have continued to fly high and land on his wheels to his heart's content at Ridgely. I still think about him very frequently and it just pisses me off that for about six bucks worth of materials and a little thought into the configuration things would have gone very differently.
So you see why I get a little frothing at the mouth when I see stuff that obviously won't work the way it needs to?
Three months later I went to another CHGA member tow (aero) related funeral 'cause one of the other Skyting Criteria wasn't adhered to.
--
Group 3 - Practical Implementation
09: Adequate Power
The system must contain a source of power adequate to maintain a safe mode of flight while under tow.
--
I've done exactly the same things that Lauren (and everybody else) does.
When we first started towing it was foot launch, one point, and behind the Cosmos. The trike was fast and the gliders weren't. The first time I released from one I was looking straight down at it.
When we first flew behind the Dragonfly we dolly launched and towed two point but the secondary release was at the tug end of the line.
I forget exactly when the shoulder mounted Bailey release appeared on the scene but I had come up with a clever idea of my own. I used a loop of 205 leechline as a secondary weak link on the bottom end of my primary bridle and secured it with a Lark's Head and a cotter pin as a toggle. Pull a loop on the cotter pin and you're off.
I flew with it for quite some time during the early days of Ridgely.
At some point it occurred to me that - as good as this thing looked on paper - I'd never actually tested it under anything like the maximum load which could be anticipated. When I did I turned a little pale and my heart started pounding.
OK, back to the drawing board. That's when the first straight pin barrel releases appeared on the scene 'cause I knew way back then that the curved stuff was the wrong way to go. I weigh about 200 pounds and had no trouble operating them while suspended from them. Sometime thereafter I tried that same test with a Bailey and showed Sunny the results. His eyes widened noticeably.
I didn't denigrate JD - I quoted him. But I interpret that to mean - "I'm gonna do whatever I feel like doing regardless of the safety rules." If you wanna go with denigration - fine, I can live with that. 'Cause as Lauren said with respect to a similar issue two and a half months ago, there are repercussions that cause damage way beyond that experienced by the crash victim.
OK, as you wish - and a little beyond, after this post I will make no further references to Dustin and Lauren and their training flight on this forum or in any other medium in which they have been identified - without Lauren's expressed permission. I will, at some point, file an incident report with USHPA but will contain no specifics with respect to individuals, date (beyond current year), and location.
I will not address Lauren on this forum unless she clears me first.
With respect to the nuts and bolts stuff...
Yes, the Quallaby/Lookout releases do have going for them the ease of installation and removal. But that's not a great argument for using them on a tandem trainer permanently set up at an AT flight park. And spinnaker shackles have been known to be problematic from Day 1. I've scrapped a lot of ideas and work when minor problems have been discovered on the bench and in flight. I don't wait until they've killed somebody and even then gone on like nothing happened. This IS the case with respect to Robin Strid.
And, again, all spinnaker shackle based releases became totally obsolete when Tim Hinkel designed his alternative. It is totally infallible.
This - again - is not about getting people to use MY system. It's about getting people to use any compliant system. (Kinda wish I hadn't developed one so it wouldn't look like I was pushing it.)
Yes, my full two point system is complex and installation represents a considerable effort. But you've only got to do that once (many years ago) and after that there's pretty much nothing else that ever needs to be done in the way of maintenance and it's easier to configure it for the weekend than it is to slap on a Wallaby.
The training flight (final reference) is not my sole example of problems with Baileys. They were reported on the CHGA server nearly eight years ago.
You indicated that you're gonna continue using your current stuff. OK, fine.
But so far you haven't actually said you wouldn't take a look at mine and the tests.
Please give me two minutes at the ECC to fire the straight and curved pins. If that impresses you maybe I can get another five or ten for you to look a little further.
Everybody knows I'm a tactless irritating jerk but I do know what I'm talking about and am trying to and can help. Set your terms but please give me a short shot (preferably not the derringer kind).
Best wishes,
Tad
Nobody at the picnic tables was laughing at Lauren. One was laughing at the situation. All of them liked/like her and were interested in helping her. That's why the conversation was taking place.
One, at least, was frustrated. You don't get frustrated if you don't care about the person. And that individual wasn't expressing frustration with her so much as the sources and quality of information she was getting.
Some people pick this stuff up pretty quickly and intuitively, some don't. Lauren - even by her own written accounts - didn't. So what?
She worked extra hard for a long time, had/has a lot of enthusiasm, and has become a really excellent pilot. I have no doubt that - even if I was flying a comparable glider - she could easily kick my ass in competition any day of the week. I really respect and admire her for what she's accomplished and I've seen a lot of positive stuff that's impressed me lately.
Please focus on what I said next - that we are all vulnerable to assimilating misinformation from the people around us. That was my point.
And it relates to...
If you've just discovered that you're using a barrel release which won't function when you need it to, somebody who is using and continues to use the same noncompliant mechanism isn't going to be of any help - even if his name does happen to be Paul Voight.
OK - guilty on socially inept but not on malicious intent.
When I first flew hang gliders - 1980, Easter Weekend - I saw a Seahawk on a car a campsite or two away from my tent at Oregon Inlet. I got to know Frank a bit over the next few years.
He had as close to ZERO aptitude as one can get but all of Lauren's love and enthusiasm for the sport. He also really paid his dues with respect to the community and did an enormous amount of work for the club.
I started going to training hills with him in 1988 to try to get him his Hang II. It was enormously frustrating because - as I said - he had no feel for the glider and tended to be afraid of the wrong things.
But we stayed with it, I got him flying his Mark IV very well off the local bumps, signed his Two, and got him up on the ridges.
He always used big ugly Bennett training wheels and quickly unlearned stand up landings. It was really irritating 'cause you'd watch him come in waiting for the moment to flare - which was like five seconds ago - and roll it in time after time. But I was starting to think - So what? He's perfectly safe doing that and he's having fun.
But he wanted to be able to fly high sites without supervision and that required a Three. And a Three requires stand up landings - which, as some of us have recently discussed, are really only necessary for looking cool.
On 1996/04/28 he went down to the Taylor Farm to work on those on a primitive version of a scooter tow. The first release he was using was malfunctioning so that was swapped for another. That didn't work very well either and there was a real big CHGA turnout at his funeral services three days later.
If he had kept rolling in for another three years he could have continued to fly high and land on his wheels to his heart's content at Ridgely. I still think about him very frequently and it just pisses me off that for about six bucks worth of materials and a little thought into the configuration things would have gone very differently.
So you see why I get a little frothing at the mouth when I see stuff that obviously won't work the way it needs to?
Three months later I went to another CHGA member tow (aero) related funeral 'cause one of the other Skyting Criteria wasn't adhered to.
--
Group 3 - Practical Implementation
09: Adequate Power
The system must contain a source of power adequate to maintain a safe mode of flight while under tow.
--
I've done exactly the same things that Lauren (and everybody else) does.
When we first started towing it was foot launch, one point, and behind the Cosmos. The trike was fast and the gliders weren't. The first time I released from one I was looking straight down at it.
When we first flew behind the Dragonfly we dolly launched and towed two point but the secondary release was at the tug end of the line.
I forget exactly when the shoulder mounted Bailey release appeared on the scene but I had come up with a clever idea of my own. I used a loop of 205 leechline as a secondary weak link on the bottom end of my primary bridle and secured it with a Lark's Head and a cotter pin as a toggle. Pull a loop on the cotter pin and you're off.
I flew with it for quite some time during the early days of Ridgely.
At some point it occurred to me that - as good as this thing looked on paper - I'd never actually tested it under anything like the maximum load which could be anticipated. When I did I turned a little pale and my heart started pounding.
OK, back to the drawing board. That's when the first straight pin barrel releases appeared on the scene 'cause I knew way back then that the curved stuff was the wrong way to go. I weigh about 200 pounds and had no trouble operating them while suspended from them. Sometime thereafter I tried that same test with a Bailey and showed Sunny the results. His eyes widened noticeably.
I didn't denigrate JD - I quoted him. But I interpret that to mean - "I'm gonna do whatever I feel like doing regardless of the safety rules." If you wanna go with denigration - fine, I can live with that. 'Cause as Lauren said with respect to a similar issue two and a half months ago, there are repercussions that cause damage way beyond that experienced by the crash victim.
OK, as you wish - and a little beyond, after this post I will make no further references to Dustin and Lauren and their training flight on this forum or in any other medium in which they have been identified - without Lauren's expressed permission. I will, at some point, file an incident report with USHPA but will contain no specifics with respect to individuals, date (beyond current year), and location.
I will not address Lauren on this forum unless she clears me first.
With respect to the nuts and bolts stuff...
Yes, the Quallaby/Lookout releases do have going for them the ease of installation and removal. But that's not a great argument for using them on a tandem trainer permanently set up at an AT flight park. And spinnaker shackles have been known to be problematic from Day 1. I've scrapped a lot of ideas and work when minor problems have been discovered on the bench and in flight. I don't wait until they've killed somebody and even then gone on like nothing happened. This IS the case with respect to Robin Strid.
And, again, all spinnaker shackle based releases became totally obsolete when Tim Hinkel designed his alternative. It is totally infallible.
This - again - is not about getting people to use MY system. It's about getting people to use any compliant system. (Kinda wish I hadn't developed one so it wouldn't look like I was pushing it.)
Yes, my full two point system is complex and installation represents a considerable effort. But you've only got to do that once (many years ago) and after that there's pretty much nothing else that ever needs to be done in the way of maintenance and it's easier to configure it for the weekend than it is to slap on a Wallaby.
The training flight (final reference) is not my sole example of problems with Baileys. They were reported on the CHGA server nearly eight years ago.
You indicated that you're gonna continue using your current stuff. OK, fine.
But so far you haven't actually said you wouldn't take a look at mine and the tests.
Please give me two minutes at the ECC to fire the straight and curved pins. If that impresses you maybe I can get another five or ten for you to look a little further.
Everybody knows I'm a tactless irritating jerk but I do know what I'm talking about and am trying to and can help. Set your terms but please give me a short shot (preferably not the derringer kind).
Best wishes,
Tad
-
Danny Brotto
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 9:29 pm
Re: rules
The root cause of Frank Sauber’s tragic and unnecessary death was due to his signing up to be a test pilot for an unproven and questionable tow system. The towing operation that day was held in a remote section of Taylors as the creator/operator of the scooter unit wanted to conduct the operation out of the scrutiny of others as he “perfected” it; the whole thing was dubious. Frank was a smart and likeable guy who could be safe as a H-2/entry H-3 but he was beginning to push the limits of his capabilities. He was not in any way qualified to be at the end of a rope in those circumstances regardless of the effectiveness of his release; terrible, tragic, and unnecessary.
Danny Brotto
Danny Brotto
Re: rules
A-the-frick-men.Danny Brotto wrote:The root cause of Frank Sauber’s tragic and unnecessary death was due to his signing up to be a test pilot for an unproven and questionable tow system. The towing operation that day was held in a remote section of Taylors as the creator/operator of the scooter unit wanted to conduct the operation out of the scrutiny of others as he “perfected” it; the whole thing was dubious. Frank was a smart and likeable guy who could be safe as a H-2/entry H-3 but he was beginning to push the limits of his capabilities. He was not in any way qualified to be at the end of a rope in those circumstances regardless of the effectiveness of his release; terrible, tragic, and unnecessary.
Danny Brotto
--------------------------------------
i, gary devan - you either know me or you don't - that's GARY D-E-V-A-N , had seen Frank Sauber fly, i was at the funeral. i had had developed my own opinion of the other party involved and previously had ripped one of my flying buddies a new asshole when he'd considered the same request to be the 'test pilot'. i'd also been approached. the above view point is consistent with that of everyone that i knew, respected or who was in a position of respect at that time, which included/includes Danny Brotto.
--------------------------------------
A-the-frick-men.jimrooney wrote:The arrogance of this (guy) makes me sick.
A-the-frick-men.jimrooney wrote: The friend foe thing is . . .(useful), 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?
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
--------------------------------------
at some point one starts to feel like a damn coward for keeping ones mouth shut.
gary devan
Re: rules
here, lets just me go ahead and put a fine point on it and be done.
i flew from somewhere around the early- mid eighties to somewhere in the early-mid nineties. everyone i met discreetly warned me off of two guys. one was the guy who did frank in and guess who the other one was (you're right jim, that is a pretty nifty device).
and i never met the person who had any respect for either.
there - don't say i never did any thing for you.
again, at some point one starts to feel like a damn coward for keeping ones mouth shut.
gary devan
i flew from somewhere around the early- mid eighties to somewhere in the early-mid nineties. everyone i met discreetly warned me off of two guys. one was the guy who did frank in and guess who the other one was (you're right jim, that is a pretty nifty device).
and i never met the person who had any respect for either.
there - don't say i never did any thing for you.
again, at some point one starts to feel like a damn coward for keeping ones mouth shut.
gary devan
-
Tad Eareckson
- Posts: 304
- Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:50 am
Gary,
As I indicated in my last post, Santos and Frank weren't the only Capitol/Maryland area folk involved in a fatal tow accident that season. Mike DelSignore was also killed while under the instructional supervision of one of the local people. He went down with the ship too so didn't have the opportunity to do much analysis of any mistakes made.
I believe that crash marked/precipitated the end of your flying career?
Jim Rooney had a tandem passenger who didn't get her money's worth out of a flight a couple of years ago because of a very serious - but understandable - pilot error.
Bo had a passenger who faired much worse at Lookout many years ago.
Holly was nearly killed in a towing accident a little to the south of us three years ago. Her instructor was routinely violating two (one on a couple of levels) of the twelve elements of the Skyting Criteria and those violations were relevant.
So nobody's perfect.
If you fly all the time there are more opportunities to screw pooches.
If you fly little - like me - there are few.
And if you don't fly tandem you're never gonna hurt or kill a passenger or student.
If you don't fly at all - it's real easy to give the appearance of being perfect.
If you just go with the flow, ignore the rules, accept the room temperature accident rate as inevitable, never try to make a difference - you're gonna get along with everybody just fine.
I'm guessing you've always gotten along with everybody just fine.
Paul,
Again, apologies for my clumsy, tactless approach to this but please accept that my intentions are what they should be.
Like Brian says - I'm a gizmo person and they're known to totally suck with respect to people skills. I'm pretty sure the DNA sequences involved are mutually exclusive.
Gizmo freaks do nothing but focus on negatives until they're all gone. They don't come out of that mode very easily when shifting to bipeds.
But I've said that I've been very favorably impressed by some of the recent - and not recent - stuff I've seen from Lauren - aside from the competition sorts of skills. Small examples from a post a couple of weeks ago...
>
I am not willing to lose my stupid, draggy wheels...
<
Competitions often reward people for compromising their safety. If we were serious about cleaning up our act we could fairly easily do it with rules like "No wheels - no points." You'd have to iron out a few things - like defining the term "wheel" - but it wouldn't be a huge problem. Sailboats do a lot of that sort of thing. Right now she's getting penalized for doing the right thing.
I'm guessing helmets and parachutes ARE required but I think they're probably a lot less important than the wheels - which aren't.
I like the interest in the sailplane texts. This may not be particularly relevant but I think the more we think of and treat hang gliders as sailplanes and conform to their conventions the better off we're gonna be.
And, of course, I'm always happy to see people getting anal about drag - at least the kind that you can get rid of at no cost (see above).
I hope I can look forward to seeing y'all soon, communicating without the wire between us so that there may be less chance of misunderstandings, and doing what I can to repair the bridges I have crunched - if you permit me.
As I indicated in my last post, Santos and Frank weren't the only Capitol/Maryland area folk involved in a fatal tow accident that season. Mike DelSignore was also killed while under the instructional supervision of one of the local people. He went down with the ship too so didn't have the opportunity to do much analysis of any mistakes made.
I believe that crash marked/precipitated the end of your flying career?
Jim Rooney had a tandem passenger who didn't get her money's worth out of a flight a couple of years ago because of a very serious - but understandable - pilot error.
Bo had a passenger who faired much worse at Lookout many years ago.
Holly was nearly killed in a towing accident a little to the south of us three years ago. Her instructor was routinely violating two (one on a couple of levels) of the twelve elements of the Skyting Criteria and those violations were relevant.
So nobody's perfect.
If you fly all the time there are more opportunities to screw pooches.
If you fly little - like me - there are few.
And if you don't fly tandem you're never gonna hurt or kill a passenger or student.
If you don't fly at all - it's real easy to give the appearance of being perfect.
If you just go with the flow, ignore the rules, accept the room temperature accident rate as inevitable, never try to make a difference - you're gonna get along with everybody just fine.
I'm guessing you've always gotten along with everybody just fine.
Paul,
Again, apologies for my clumsy, tactless approach to this but please accept that my intentions are what they should be.
Like Brian says - I'm a gizmo person and they're known to totally suck with respect to people skills. I'm pretty sure the DNA sequences involved are mutually exclusive.
Gizmo freaks do nothing but focus on negatives until they're all gone. They don't come out of that mode very easily when shifting to bipeds.
But I've said that I've been very favorably impressed by some of the recent - and not recent - stuff I've seen from Lauren - aside from the competition sorts of skills. Small examples from a post a couple of weeks ago...
>
I am not willing to lose my stupid, draggy wheels...
<
Competitions often reward people for compromising their safety. If we were serious about cleaning up our act we could fairly easily do it with rules like "No wheels - no points." You'd have to iron out a few things - like defining the term "wheel" - but it wouldn't be a huge problem. Sailboats do a lot of that sort of thing. Right now she's getting penalized for doing the right thing.
I'm guessing helmets and parachutes ARE required but I think they're probably a lot less important than the wheels - which aren't.
I like the interest in the sailplane texts. This may not be particularly relevant but I think the more we think of and treat hang gliders as sailplanes and conform to their conventions the better off we're gonna be.
And, of course, I'm always happy to see people getting anal about drag - at least the kind that you can get rid of at no cost (see above).
I hope I can look forward to seeing y'all soon, communicating without the wire between us so that there may be less chance of misunderstandings, and doing what I can to repair the bridges I have crunched - if you permit me.