Pounding in at Pulpit 6/15

[dbodner]

Some of you may have heard by now that I pounded in at the Pulpit. I ended up landing hard on my chest in the primary in a field of barley (not really sure of the crop, but that's what we called it). Breathing was painful, but nothing seemed to indicate the need for emergency attention. Still, I saw my doctor the next afternoon just in case my chest was more serious than I suspected. The doctor wasn't concerned about my ribs. He was cautious about the knot on my calf, suspecting a possible compartment syndrome (never heard of it, but look it up). However, the orthopedist ruled that out and the x-ray was negative for a fracture. So, after all that medical attention, I went home with nothing more than an Ace bandage. I was back at work today hopped up on Ibuprofen. The combination of drugs and time is making me feel better all the time. I don't even think I hurt the HG, though I'll have to do an extra-special pre-flight next time.

So what happened?

Well, it was all Janni's fault. Y'see, he went OTB last week, which for some reason got me going. I wanted to, too. I was a virgin and it would've been my first. So, we carpooled with Carlos to the Pulpit and waited out the north cross until it turned straighter. The launches started. Bruce was up in the Atos, Pete Lehmann on his Sport 2, and Velcro Dave was flying PG. They all started out low, but eventually they gained altitude. A couple of more launches, then I went. I scratched below launch until I found something to get me to 1,500 over. I looked for everyone else, but they were already gone, the rat-bastards. I eventually lost it and had to land.

I had three choices. The secondary was mowed with hay bales, but I avoided it. Despite successfully landing my Falcon there a couple of times, I wasn't comfortable trying to get the Sport 2 in there. I would've been landing from the south, which I'd never done before. In retrospect, that might've been my best choice since you can actually begin your final lower than from the other direction. In the evening Shawn showed perfect form landing his DS there.

Flying over the primary upper field, I'd thought it didn't look too bad. There were some bald spots that led me to believe it had been mowed at some point (but Carlos, who also flew over the upper field, thought otherwise). Then I saw a vehicle loading a HG from the lower field planted with high barley. Hoping for an easier retrieve, I floated down there. But the vehicle drove away. I considered flying back to the upper field, but I didn't have the altitude to make it safely over the trees. So, barley landing it was. Another glider had already landed there, and I knew how to do a high grass landing, so I wasn't too concerned. I was headed for my spot when I crashed onto my chest and nosed over. I quickly checked myself out and started moving the glider to show everyone I was OK. As it was, I don't think anyone even saw it.

It all happened so fast, I can only surmise what happened. I was upright with one hand on the basetube, and I think I simply forgot to execute the high-grass landing technique. I was correcting a turn on my final, and I think I remember my legs going through the barley. This probably caused a slight dive until the basetube caught the barley, and I slammed in. Having my left hand on the base tube probably saved a broken arm. I was hurt more on my left side, which is also consistent.

Several decisions contributed. One was launching. It's always safer not to, but having less-than-perfect LZ conditions magnifies that. I'm sure some folks stayed home just because of that. Did my XC horniness overcome my better judgement?

Ironically, another decision resulted from my inherent conservatism. I was drifting back with my thermal until I no longer felt comfortable going back. That's when I lost the thermal. I really wasn't at all far behind the ridge, but I lost the nerve. I should've stayed with it. I may have been looking at huge, easy LZs OTB.

Another decision was bypassing the upper field for a hoped-for easier retrieve. I don't know for sure that the grass was shorter in the upper field. Not everyone agreed with my observation. So, landing there could've been just as risky. Also, I bypassed the secondary. In hindsight, that might've been the better choice.

Still, I should've landed correctly. I know how, and I've done it. While actively flying my final, I simply forgot to execute. Perhaps my Joe Greblo-style runout landings contributed to that. It's not my usual practice to flare until after I land.

Oh, in case you're worried about trashing the farmer's crop (as I was), barley, or whatever that crop is, is incredibly resilient. Two landings and there wasn't a trace of damage. However, I was easily able to find where the previous glider broke down in the tall grass by the road. I used the same smooshed down area to break down.

I want to thank Shawn and Janni for helping me out afterward. I broke down and carried my glider to the pick-up point before the pain had set in 100%. Lifting it by myself afterward, though, would've been more of chore.

[Batman]

Glad to hear you're ok Dave. I was one of the chickens who didn't want to chance it landing in crapass overgrown LZs. Not a big fan of chancy LZs when I don't fly Mountains as often as I used to. Don't forget the cliche ... something or another, yada yada yada ... Chicks dig Scars. It makes it all worth while! See ya soon!

Chris

[RedBaron]

Sorry Dave. Glad your and the glider's medical turned out negative. That makes your landing ugly but not a crash, so your track record is still immaculate as far as I'm concerned

[brianvh]

Hey, congratulations on the XC Janni! Further than most of mine.

I almost agree with that 'no damage' dividing line between whack and crash, except for the phrase "it all happened so fast..." I think this makes it a bona fide crash. He crashed into the grass instead of a tree, but still a crash. Sorry it happened Dave, glad there were no serious consequences.

[kcarra]

David - so SO glad you're OK. Everyone, please take high grass seriously. It's bitten a couple of us badly.

Karen

[Paul Tjaden]

I worked with Kevin C. trying to improve my landings and have had some success although I certainly don't get them all right. Kevin's method (also shared by the staff at Ridgely) is to stay on the base tube with both hands and dive into ground effect with lots of speed before getting upright and flaring. While the speed could be more dangerous, the fact that your head is close to your base tube and the top of the grass, corn , whatever, makes it less likely that you will get too low and catch your BT in it. Also, even though Wills Wing and many others advocate the slow flare and run it out landings, I am still a proponent of trying to stick your landing with a strong and hard flare. If there's a bit of wind, it will probably work and if it's calm, you'll get to run a few steps anyway. Obviously, trying to do run out type landings in tall vegetation just doesn't work. I can also vouch for the difficulty (impossibility) in trying to run out your landing in a muddy, freshly planted corn field.

Paul

[RedBaron]

When I transitioned to the LS I had to sort my landings out, you can't land these type of gliders with a wimpy late flare or Joe-Greblo-style (unless it's blowing like stink). The results are just too expensive, too painful and too embarrassing. I took a wind meter and checked my airspeeds as I went upright (high up). I noticed that I was only flying 3 mph faster than stall speed at trim. I knew I wasn't going anywhere flaring the glider at that speed, so for the first time I flared hard when I flew trim speed in ground effect and had a perfect landing. Ever since I've had nothing but good landings (if I made the field lol). Knowledge gives confidence. No glider goes anywhere if you flare it hard a couple of mph above stall speed. I suggest the next time you fly, take a wind meter and check your speeds when upright. Then force yourself to be relaxed when you land and flare as hard as you can as soon as the glider flies at trim. You'll be very pleased with the results and look forward to your next landing. And even if you flare a little too soon, just hold it and drop, it's no big deal really. Check this video out, nobody breaks anything despite dropping from 8 feet on topless gliders:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KITzUrOTi_o

[mcgowantk]

There are many techniques for landing, and flying fast on the base tube until you are in ground effect is one of them. And while I have great respect for the Highland folks, Kevin, and Paul, among others, it scares me to use that sort of approach. In the mountains, LZs are often contoured too much to expect smooth winds while in ground effect. Even in a smooth field,there are thermals and other sources of turbulence that can cause a glider to quickly drop a foot or two. I like to round out with one hand on the base tube and one hand on a downtube. That way I can better control pitch (and not pop the nose) but still have sufficient speed to have a buffer against a stall.

I wouldn't want to attribute my next comment to David since he did not indicate this was a problem for him. But I am more likely to have poor approaches and landings when I am disappointed with my flight and try to scratch up from low over the LZ. When my attempt to scratch back up fails, my approach is all ready compromised and I may then have a poor landing. I now try to remind myself on days, such as Sunday when I apparently was the only pilot in Region 9 to sled, that I need to focus on my approach and landing and stop trying to soar. Ending the day with a whack would be just that much more frustrating.

Most importantly, glad to hear that you will be ok David. I would be happy to share my xc experiences with you or any other pilot interested in going xc, so feel free to ask.

Tom McGowan

[billyvaughn]

Thanks Tom!
Once again you are a calm voice of experience in a sea of increasingly suspect judgements...
Just as one approach won't work for every field, one technique won't necessarily work for every situation. Staying current involves learning and practicing many approaches and landing strategies---when in doubt, PLEASE seek professional help. Thanks again Tom for offering your perspective
Cheers,
Billy Vaughn

[Danny Brotto]

Stalls do not occur at a specific speed but rather as a result of exceeding a specific angle of attack. That angle of attack is consistent with a particular airspeed in most consistent, laminar, situations but in an approach with textured air it will vary. So “stall speed” refers typically smooth, laminate air. If you hold “stall speed’ or even a few MPH above stall speed anticipating “time to flare” you will pound in at some point in your flying career.

I think burning it in is generally a bad idea too as things can get skatey very quickly and you’ll end up with more energy that you can dump before running out of room to effect a safe landing. With burning in, you’ll need to dump that energy close to the ground and that can get you in trouble by having to spend more time on final in an bumpy field (longer exposure to thermic/orthographic upset.)

While I agree that a crisp flare is preferred over a running-followed-by-a-weak-pushout (thanks Tom… agree 100% with your everything you wrote), I think the flare should be more “progressive” than just a hard push-out. I think what works best is a progressing flare that’s adjusted for how the glider responds. Start with a moderate flaare but if the glider climbs then gingerly ease up the magnitude of the push-out; don’t stop but ease up on the aggression… and get ready to run a few steps. If the glider settles during the flare, push out harder… and get ready to take a few steps.

Dave you are a very good guy and a conservative pilot. I’m glad that you took the time to log and elaborate on your experience. I’m even happier that you are uninjured. Keep at it. Going XC is easier than you think. For the most part, you’ll have a wider selection of fields to choose from. You’ll find that the adventure really begins after you land and try to figure out how to get a retrieve.

Danny Brotto

[RedBaron]

Just wanted to add that my comments weren't directed specifically at you, David.

[tdilisio]

Lots of good info in this thread. Thanks everyone for posting. I think reading this kind of info helps everyone... especially us fledglings.

[Paul Tjaden]

Don't wish to sound argumentative but wanted to say a few words more about this thread. There is a difference in flying the glider to the ground with good speed and "burning it in." 35 or 40 mph is great. 50 to 60 is showing off and might be dangerous. I constantly see even very experienced pilots flying topless wings so slowly to the ground that they have to flare the moment that they get to the surface. They are flying just above stall speed and this is a BAD idea.
The progressive stall that Danny mentioned can work well. I believe that Sunny uses this technique. The problem I have seen with this technique is that if you push out too much while the glider is flying too fast, you will simply start a shallow climb. If you then don't recognize that the glider is quickly losing energy and complete the flare, your glider tip stalls, drops a wing and you hammer in from several feet up which can get way dangerous for you and your wing. I have to agree with Janni on this one. Watch the video carefully. Some of these guys are flaring when the glider is probably quite a bit faster than trim speed but they are flaring hard so that the critical angle of attack is reached quickly before the glider has a chance to gain altitude. If they had done a partial flare, they would have simply climbed to a dangerous altitude with few if any options left. I'm not saying that Danny's technique won't work, I just find it a bit easier to wait until the glider is at trim (the bar pressure drops to zero) then flare for all you got.

BTW, Forgot to mention in my original post that I'm glad your OK, David. Next time you're at the Pupit and climbing through 1,500 over, stay with it and continue over the back. The LZ's are much nicer in that big old valley to the east.

Paul

[theflyingdude]

There are many techniques for landing, and flying fast on the base tube until you are in ground effect is one of them. And while I have great respect for the Highland folks, Kevin, and Paul, among others, it scares me to use that sort of approach. In the mountains, LZs are often contoured too much to expect smooth winds while in ground effect. Even in a smooth field,there are thermals and other sources of turbulence that can cause a glider to quickly drop a foot or two. I like to round out with one hand on the base tube and one hand on a downtube. That way I can better control pitch (and not pop the nose) but still have sufficient speed to have a buffer against a stall.

I wouldn't want to attribute my next comment to David since he did not indicate this was a problem for him. But I am more likely to have poor approaches and landings when I am disappointed with my flight and try to scratch up from low over the LZ. When my attempt to scratch back up fails, my approach is all ready compromised and I may then have a poor landing. I now try to remind myself on days, such as Sunday when I apparently was the only pilot in Region 9 to sled, that I need to focus on my approach and landing and stop trying to soar. Ending the day with a whack would be just that much more frustrating.

Most importantly, glad to hear that you will be ok David. I would be happy to share my xc experiences with you or any other pilot interested in going xc, so feel free to ask.

Tom McGowan

I gotta agree with Tom on this one. Coming into a high grass or high hay LZ proned-out in ground-effect with lots of speed is a recipe for a serious pounding. Under no circumstances should you let the basetube touch the top of the grass/hay. I would use a progressive flare to keep the basetube well clear of vegetation. If the glider starts to climb out, you just pause the flare briefly to maintain the proper altitude/attitude and when the glider starts to settle, give it a good flare. YMMV.

JR

[RedBaron]

Another video showing Manfred and two other Icaro pilots using Paul's approach. The field behind the factory appears to be quite technical and contoured.
http://www.icaro2000.com/Home.htm
They are slightly rocked up in their harnesses but with both hands on the base tube. Legs are bent and angled forward for a quicker transition upright. They fly their approaches fast and with good control. Looks very safe to me. I will try that the next time I land.

[XCanytime]

As a pilot who has suffered a crash in high weeds landing out from Woodstock, I know very well the serious consequences of such an event. Like Dave said, "It all happened very fast" and it does. And even if you do everything right, all it takes, as Tom says, is a little bit of sink to drop your basetube a few feet very quickly before you have time to react. If the vegetation grabs your basetube, a quick pitch-down rotation of the nose ensues around the basetube axis.
Landing a hang glider can be best described as an attempt to reduce the groundspeed of the glider to zero or near zero as close to the "ground" as possible. The "ground" can be defined as the ground itself (in the case of no grass or very short grass), or the top of the tall grass, corn, or vegetation. In other words, the "ground" level is the level of the first solid objects where the pilot is landing the glider. The speed of the flare is inversely proportional to the speed of the headwind that the glider is ideally landing into. A zero headwind demands precise flare timing. A vigorous flare is required, raising the nose very fast and as high as possible, in an attempt to maximize the "airbraking" of the glider/pilot combination to a groundspeed of zero or near zero very close to the "ground". A strong headwind demands less precise flare timing. A much slower flare is all that is required to slow the glider/pilot combination to a groundspeed of zero very close to the "ground", and the nose is not raised as high as in the case of a zero headwind. In a very strong headwind the nose might not be raised at all; the pilot simply flies the glider down to the "ground" in what is sometimes called coming down in helicopter mode. Different conditions require different flare speeds and different flare lengths.

Bacil

[dbodner]

Lots of good information, even if we don't all agree. I continue to make good progress. My Ibuprofen needs are drastically reduced. I'll probably let a couple of weekends go by, then get back to flying.

[mcelrah]

Just one addition on the XC side (I think I have a good technique taught to me by Kevin, but don't always execute it perfectly...), it gives you a lot more courage for going XC the first couple of times if there's a gaggle all going at the same time. Radio contact helps too. Then you can fly into the ground in perfect formation... - Hugh

[Danny Brotto]

On that video, those guys are flaring hard to put the brakes on attempting to hit a spot (which they would have overshot otherwise.) A lot of them are landing on their butts (hard), dropping wings, etc. While some of them look good, some are less than pretty. In addition I think some of them are getting away with it because they are right into a light wind (notice the windsock), no obstructions out in front, overcast (probably stable.)

If you try that technique, you had better flare really hard to force an acelerated stall. Just a bit slow on the pushout and you'll likely climb op and wack down. I'm saying that if you try to put the brakes on, you better know what you're doing... it's not a novice technique.

I agree with Bacil, and it’s consistent with my original post in this thread, that the landing flare needs to be adjusted for the conditions. If the conditions are textured the flare should be adjusted dynamically during it’s progression.

Landing in light wind or even a downwind, I would flare harder than if into a headwind. Yes, hard flares like in that referenced video. But try an aggressive landing flare into a 20 mph headwind and watch the glider blow backward possibly taking out a keel or LE. Milk a flare (to run it out) in a tail and you will end up taking out a down tube as you bonk the nose over. These are examples on the opposite ends of extremes but the point is that there is no universal one-formula method for flare aggression across the range of conditions we fly hang gliders in.

Yeah, and treat the tops of the hay, corn, grass, etc. as if it were the top of a solid surface. Hold the flare and you’ll end up just fine.

Danny Brotto

[heaviek]

This post reminds me of a public opinion survey and I want to vote also!

I think:

1) There isn't a magic formula. One size doesn't fit all.
2) the biggest risk should have the greatest influence on styles employed. Some risks are based on weather, some on field, some on equipment, and some on pilot. The biggest risk can come from any of those categories.
for example-sometimes tall grass is a bigger risk then obstacle avoidance or touchdown accuracy. (Pulpit) I would be very critical of my speed in that situation.
Another example- obstacle avoidance is a bigger risk then flare style (Windy Woodstock) I don't fear VNE getting down into the hole at WS because I am much more concerned about being turned off final or hitting lift before the crest and flying right into the fence. Dropping the nose with a late flare just doesn't worry me like getting turned into a very tall tree on the edge of a field.
3) Always fly the glider. That means I vote proactive flare. As hard and fast, or slow and gentle as the conditions dictate. Some call it progressive, some crescendo, same difference.
4) Almost always fly the best speed for the scenario.
for example- if you need to dodge barb wire, high trees, a ditch, etc... sometimes it pays to fly slow, but there better be a dam good reason.
there are just too many examples when speed is your friend on approach. Speed doesn't mean diving into ground effect proned out at 60. It does mean flying fast enough to always have guaranteed positive control and IMMEDIATE response from an aircraft without control surfaces. 1.2 times stall at 20 feet in any kind of turbulence is an ER visit waiting to happen. 10-30 feet is like no-mans land, or the dead zone. High enough to hurt but too low for a second chance. ( some pilots are lazier then others and always expect that second chance because they always get away with it. One day you wont, or you might witness someone who didn't).

Does the harness you fly in affect you choice of style? Hell yea it does! Do whatever maximizes your positive control. I fly as little as I can get away with on the downtubes but those are choices I make for my particular situation. Maybe I wouldn't if I was one of those contortionist street performers that can put both arms straight up and behind their head. Fly from the DT's, Fly from the basetube, fly from both, whichever gives you the best control. Do it because it maximizes whatever control is most critical for that particular landing.

All this talk about technique is trying to find the best way to skin a cat. Its easy to watch a pilot fly their style when they demonstrate good choices and excellent control. When the don't make conscientious decisions or execute them assertively its painful just to watch.

Kev

[theflyingdude]

I completely agree with everything Kev wrote in the preceding post, but since this thread began with David describing his crash/landing in the tall grass at the Pulpit LZ, my comments/opinion were directed to that specific scenario. When coming into most LZ's, speed will almost always be your friend right up until the point of impact, but when landing in high hay/grass in an otherwise unobstructed LZ, I would not want to be proned-out in ground-effect carrying a lot of excess speed lest the hand of God reach down and smite thee into the Terra firma. Another scenario where a lot of speed can be a detriment is when trying to land a high performance glider in a short field, but that's a different discussion. As Kevin said, there is no magic formula and one size does not fit all. The key is having situational awareness and knowing when to modify your game plan due to the circumstances at hand.

JR