Flying Plans: Sat02Aug

[tdilisio]

Hi Shawn, Hugh did everything by the book... and then some. We walked both LZ's went over direction to land... where to setup and what altitude I was to be at.... Bail out sites, gradient, rotor... the works. The flying and landing was up to me. I take full responsibility for that. I could have made up a bunch of excuses (which we all know aren't worth beans... thermal, rotor, gradient, unfamiliar LZ... etc)... but it was simply a bad decision on my part. Fortunately it didn't end up worse than it did, and I'm thankful for that.

I screwed up... I know what I did wrong. I fear that this "incident" will discourage observers from taking me under their wing, and introducing other H2's to new sites. This sport will not grow if that happens.... and I'll be forced to go bowling or some other ground bound boring ass activity (no offense to bowlers).

The glider is OK. A little tear (2"x2.5") on the left wingtip beyond the alum leading edge. No dents or distortions in the leading edges. Battens check out, Various VG settings don't distort one side from the other, sweep looks the same.

[brianvh]

Hey Shawn;

Sometimes you don't find a weakness until you've thrown someone in the pool. I don't know exactly what Tony's experience is, but if someone's done 8 or 10 mountain flights without incident the only way to know if he's ready for a tight LZ is to do it. If he's done less than 6, then perhaps you're right. Before aerotowing we used to say you needed 6 flights before High Rock, and if you did a couple of those okay you were ready for the Pulpit.

I can't believe you landed on your feet after all of that Tony! I recently screwed up an approach on a falcon because I've gotten lackadaisical about it, flared 10 feet from the treeline. I think the best thing to do is to reread Pagan's section about a series of approach windows, marking out altitude targets in specific locations to start downwind, turn on base, then final. On your downwind you've got room to fiddle to make sure you hit the turn on base correctly: the rest is gravy.

[tdilisio]

I can't believe you landed on your feet after all of that Tony!

Had I been about 8-12 inches further to my left, the leading edge tube would have caught the corner of that building and probably spun me into it. That would have been a lot worse than catching the corner with the tip wand, like I did. Either scenario is not desirable, I know.

Thanks for the suggestion on that chapter... will do that all this week.

I'd post a pic of the damage to my wing, but I can't figure out how to add attachments... or not permitted.

[hepcat1989]

Tony, I'm sure Hugh did everything by the book.I hope also that he took you out flying in the mountains a couple of times,(friendlier LZ's)to get a taste of your skills.Well........?,How many mountain flights do you have now? Look, I know i'm coming off as a dick, but people are getting busted up and have been busted up on landing. I don't believe in throwing a hang2 into a situation and hoping the outcome is good just to gain experience of a new site.In my eyes you need to build up to some sites. Other sites may be more forgiving.... Hugh, if you did see him fly several times in the mountains and did the walk through by the book as you did then i'm way off base and I appologize. I guess Tony just had a brain fart then coming in.It happens.These questions i'm bringing up was spelled out for me word for word.Make sure of the pilots skill before taking him/her to a more challenging site. The Pulpit seconday can be tight! I observed David Churchill for his first Pulpit. He did a good job in the secondary. The next 2 I see that can fly the Pulpit would be Dan Tuckwiller.I have watched both fly SEVERAL times.Hugh, I know you think i'm stirring shit up.... I'm not trying to man, i'm not.....understand that I don't care who or where a pilot trained, I need to see the goods before a more challenging LZ.If you personally have seen his skills before and were comfortable with them, well I offer you my "sorry about that".....
Tony, no worries. You'll have observers I promise.
Shawn.

[davidtheamazing1]

From my perspective Hugh is a great observer, and I have watched Tony pull off a perfect landing at Woodstock... so I would have probably come to the conclusion that he could do it. But having been there I totally agree with Shawn. Having been to Pulpit many times and having flown there once, it is a bit harder and more intimidating than our other sites, and requires more judgment / experience. I also came in low on my first approach and had to do a 180 off of my downwind leg. I almost too low to pull it off. The secondary is wonky. It's small and it's sloped funny.

Shawn, thanks for helping me land there... your method of focusing on a landing in the secondary for the first flight helped me out alot, as did your advice about the flight pattern and turbulence characteristics.

I know theres a few rising H2 pilots now and I'm hoping that we can debate the proper Pulpit H2 protocol and be thankful that there wasn't anything yet serious issue. I know the homeowner is ok this time but it would seem that it wouldn't take much to lose that secondary.

[deveil]

ah what the hey, maybe if i throw my two cents in people can chew on me instead - might as well try to serve some purpose.
this may come down partially to the towing + some training hill vs. all training hill experience. i was old school (no sh*t, right?) and we'd go out (on our own!) to some pretty ratty-ass hills, one in particular that had a short narrow field that required a left turn onto final, if you made it that far in the first place. depending on conditions you'd hope to make it over a creek(and the creek bank), hope you had enough height to make the left turn lest you'd run into the barbed wire at the other side, or if too high not hit a large oak off to the right before you turned to thread the needle of the narrow field which further narrowed to a point. even then, when starting 'high flight' some of us still managed to run in to things, including stout windsocks and tree lines at the far end of Really long flat fields.
i'd thrown people off based solely on solid log books, a pointed 'interview' and their word, without incident. i've also told someone to Not turn right off of the pulpit launch only to have to chew them out afterwards for doing just that. and i've had people that i was familiar with do the most damn bone-headed things between a good launch and the ground. some of those folks are still flying today. i myself found learning the aircraft approach to be very intimidating with its height judgments, turn points and proper speeds.
and then there's the old line about one being able to Choose to not launch but you can't choose to Not land. thus, everything else being equal, the emphasis for newbies is more about the landing field experience than the launch experience. one can feel very protective toward the newbies and certainly one shouldn't Expect that they should accept the inevitability of plowing in to something - but developing that damn 'judgment' thing doesn't always come easily.
when a newbie doesn't pull something off as expected the observer mostly always feels every bit as bad as the pilot ( well, depending on how bone-headed the newbie was ). 'don't try to read between the lines there, tony, 'cause there's nothing there - sounds like you have a good handle on attitude/responsibility thing.
you try your best and hope for the best.
garyD

[deveil]

then there's that old bugaboo of 'conversations' on a forum. the conversations almost Always go more smoothly when held over beers, off to the side or face to face.
garyD

[deveil]

ah what the heck, i've already 'entered'.
a solid apology and offers of compensation are all the right things (read Damn necessary). i've seen that garden patch landed in at least two times, if not more. he was nice when, uhm, i found it necessary to talk to him - well actually it Did take a bit of groveling that time as some prior things had left him feeling taken for granted . (cause even coming in from the other direction - if you don't get it down before that break in the middle of the field, all bets are off). so yeah, tony, someone following up never hurts. but at least you don't have to go out somewhere the next day and replace a 4X4 mailbox post that was body slammed (nope, that wasn't me).
garyD

[RedBaron]

Hey Shawn,

peace man. I'm not an observer and I will not object to observers' decisions or criticize them when things turn out ugly. But I will use this opportunity to point out a concern I've had for a long long time. A H2 on a DS wing is a dangerous combination. We spend hours with them on launch just to find out they've got foot-launch skills that make any of us look old. They practiced little else for years possibly. The only thing they don't practice is the kind of approach required to put the glider down in our horrible landing fields. No surprise that when they screw up, they screw up during that phase of flight. It's outrageous that we leave them alone when they have to land. I brought this up before the MHGA meeting and got blown off. I'm bringing it up again here, I think having an observer in the LZ in radio contact with the student shouldn't be optional, it should be mandatory. Clearly, a student who completely zones out may not be listening anymore is the standard argument I'm being confronted with. But you know what, I believe there's as many who would listen. We are not doing everything we could to keep them safe.

[mcelrah]

This was Tony's 6th or so mountain flight (prior flights were at Woodstock). We had discussed the flight plan for his approach and he understood and executed it - just too high. The last time I was at Pulpit, a H4 went in the trees. Anyone can make an error in judgment, even if his/her experience and training are adequate. - Hugh

[mcelrah]

My first high flight was at Lookout, next was a year later at Jack's, then Pulpit, then Woodstock (same day), so not sure about the correct order for introducing flying sites. Idea of having an observer in the LZ on the radio isn't bad, but I do have some reservations about radio-controlling a H2. Seems to me it interferes with development of independent judgment as pilot-in-command. "You are a pilot, not a passenger." Moreover, I would not attempt to R/C from launch - only highly experienced instructors have the ability to understand where the glider really is at such a distance. - Hugh

[brianvh]

If radio controlling from the ground is done, all that can be done is tell someone when to start the downwind leg, and make sure they know the wind direction. After that you've gotta keep your mouth shut 'cause there's no time to correct anything.

but two problems:
1. We are all trained to evaluate when it's good to launch from sitting on launch, how many of us know how to judge proper altitude of a glider from the ground? This is asking a lot. Sure, we all stand around in the field watching people come in and say 'too high', 'too low', but to have to be 100% right with only 30 seconds between right and wrong? I for one would hate to be in that position.
2. Everyone complains about finding an observer. Can you imagine having to find two of them, one for launch, one on the ground?

The system of having a radio and observer on the ground is in place at Hyner, usually only used for the first flight because it's just too difficult to arrange. And Hyner is just overrun with pilots both up top and down below.

So yeah, it would be a good idea for first flights at many sights, but Oh, the cost!

[deveil]

here's two cents on the radio thing.
sports car track at summit point. there's a program for total newbies to go risk the engines and body panels of their 'daily commuters' and try to wear their tires out in one day. in a very well constructed, well managed and very experienced fashion a dozen or so rank-amateurs go out, each with an instructor in the passenger seat and a speaker in their helmet. the instructors have taken training such that they can drive the course, at speed, using only their left hand from the passenger seat. as i said, well managed. things can get exciting as one is on the bumper of the guy in front with a guy crowding you from behind - it's encouraged as being part and parcel to racing. there were times where the guy in front of me would lose it and spin around in front of me or off the track in front of me. each time something like that happened, or i had to recover from a 4wheel drift gone bad, my instructor would commend me for having followed the instructions he gave me in the midst of the situation. i never told them that "hey baby, at that point You were only along for the ride!". as soon as i got into a situation where the hairs on the back of my neck stood up - i reflexively considered everything but Me to be a distraction. i might have heard them talking, but that's about as far as it went.
a crowd of close in spectators at a launch? never heard them, never saw them.
maybe like the NFL, the mike's only 'hot' until the action starts.

[RedBaron]

Gary, I appreciate your thoughts and would like to know if you think radios on the training hill are a waste, too. Also, it appears you're not racing without an instructor on the passenger's seat, are you? Why is that if they're just along for the ride when things get dicey? Would you race if they weren't around with the ability to assist, correct, prevent the worst for your first time? While I can understand how in a life or death scenario your instincts take over I do believe that before that situation occurs one is perfectly able to follow a simple command like "fly 360's over that barn" or be comforted by a "You're doing super-good". It's not about saving their butts when everything has gone dire, it's about assisting them to find a position from which an approach can be safely initiated. It's all about comfort and confidence. Knowing someone is there watching over us helps us keep a cool head.

[deveil]

janni,
you know, at base i don't think you or brian or i are really saying anything all that much different from one another. we're all just touching on various realities with the idea of looking at/for what works and when it works. that's not being wishy washy or backing away from the points i was trying to make. sort of a thesis, antithesis, synthesis kind of thing. and SCREW YOU BUTTHOLE if you don't agree with me. JOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
garyD

[deveil]

janni,
but you're absolutely correct, because otherwise i was soaking up and sometimes blindly trusting the things they were instructing me to do. heck i remember one time when i was concentrating on hitting the entry and exit points of the apexes of a series of tight turns, steering with both the wheel and the throttle (total blast btw). that's a lot of crap to keep track of so i said to the instructor,"okay, i'm gonna concentrate on this stuff, you keep track of that bumper in front of me". he said "okay" and away we went. i seriously just vacated that other car from my consciousness (couldn't see the damn bumper anyways - too close). worked out okay.
so, a few parallels to hang gliding, instructors, radios etc.
garyD

[deveil]

and the flip side of that is:
blind curve, downhill after entry, reverse camber(banks to the outside), increasing radius. you're told that the most dangerous thing is to let off the throttle and it's best to be accelerating slightly. different instructor, after few laps he said let's try it a little faster this time so on approach i increase the acceleration rate. he says "hold it right there". he meant speed, i thought he meant acceleration rate. the car feels weightless on one of those turns so it's experience or trust. didn't have the one then lost the other. he said "hold it, hold it, you got it".i chose to go wide and drop off the outside of the track a bit and take the 'shortcut' bypassing the next turn rather than risk an uncontrolled slide off into the bank. he nonchalantly said, "ah you could have made it". but of course, i'd gone into survival mode.
to be clear, i don't having any stakes in this game so that just makes this prattling.
garyD

[deveil]

But. since you asked me where i'd come down on a couple of points. IMHO the newbie would be best served by a radio connection if he Already had experience and trust in the voice in his ear. as we're talking about someone with only a few to a hand full of launches under their belt, where they're probably still working on how to not put a death grip on the bar, that would pretty much have to mean their instructor. one wouldn't want to be expecting such a newbie to put too high a level of trust in someone not so established with them. heck, ever try to yell at someone to flair at the right time or hold a flair when they've hit it too soon? most times you don't even trust Yourself.
i watched a radio controlled newbie (a Very familiar voice in the ear) use the Entire length of the fairgrounds lz and upon running out of room, dive at the ground and bounce Up(!) off of big wheels and smack hard into the trees. us bystanders could almost hear the voice yelling inside the helmet. well, maybe not actually.
i'd have to go with the limited usefulness side, i guess. better the careful build up of experience. treat a big field as a restricted field by using only a planned, declared, small portion of it - every time. doing sharp, short, well executed approaches as soon as possible. put it down where you intend to put it down. without you know, being a Nazi about it. that'll give one experience, judgment and confidence. and oh yeah - big wheels. Really big wheels.
garyD

[deveil]

would someone get that guy to shut up already.

[hepcat1989]

Hugh, I would like to appologize for dogging your ass on the forum.That wasn't right of me, I overreacted.Secondly, 6 or so flights from the mountain.......OK man...I just haven't read much of his mountain flying... I woke up Sunday and read that a 2 hit a building.......What?. Obvious questions popped in my head.........Was he ready? I guess I'm just a bit sketched out about Steve Z. and all. I was to observe him that day. I just got there late. I know that sometime I may have a hang2 get injured ,or mess up to some degree. I hope it's a small degree. I'm also aware of the shit storm to ensue.I want to try and do what I can to prevent mishaps... Man, That's all.....
The radio's for hang 2's, - I agree with Brian And Hugh. Pilot in command, 2 observers would be needed. Tough to be in two places at once. I remember talking to a hang 2 that was radioed in one time. He said he could not make out the words( wind noise,adrenaline). He thought that every time he heard a voice he thought he was doing something wrong. The observer, instructor(I don't remember) was just trying to say you are doing fine. He was all tense for no reason....
Let's see,..... My first mountain flight I was all over Bill's field and got some stern words from a much more experienced pilot and I took it the wrong way.(Hot Head) In hindsight I UNDERSTAND NOW! My second flight I was full of piss and vinegar, so I went to Bill's again the next day. (monday) I launched with the help or my brother and friend of ours.I launched fine, flew the ridge, sunk out,stayed on the mountain too long,scratched my ass out to the LZ and cleared the trees by 15 ft. Bottom left where the circle is cut out in the treeline.I then got hit by something that completely took me by surprise! My nose went straight up, got turned180 degrees and landed on top of the tree canopy 50ft or so in the air.Near the circle cut out.I unhooked, hand over hand on my keel till I reached a tree trunk.Shimmied down the trunk losening wires as I came down.I remember at that point about Brian falling out of a tree. That happened a few months prior.I was in a bad spot. Glider came down.A few holes in sail,Crushed control frame. I was crushed for months......I recognized that I needed some extra help. I spent another $1000.00 on an aerotow package at Lookout working different approaches with Mike Labado.It helped... That experience slowed my ass down significantly. It's not all about rainbows, unicorns and lolly pop trees. There is a dark side, bad shit can happen.I was ashamed! After that, Sparky snatched me up and kept me under his eye. GOOD THING. A couple months after that, I got cut open.(Neck) . I just wanted to share that with you Tony.........I never told anyone(ashamed)Chew on that.... Well, I feel better. A bit of a weight off.
Hugh, again sorry mate. I'm a hot head.( Irish) It's just that flying into a building thing caught me off guard. What?
Peace, "For Real",
Shawn.

[dbodner]

Let me be as unclear as possible.

On my first high flight, my instructor had me on radio. I could tell he was talking, but I didn't hear a word he said. So radios are useless.

My 1st flight at Laguna was my first landing in a somewhat restricted field, surrounded by thorny desert shrubs. I was about to go on final when someone in the LZ said, "not yet, you're too high!" I did a big 360 and landed safely. So radios are invaluable.

Though they may be useful at times, radios can be a hinderance or merely a non-issue. There's a tendency for a new H2 to look for someone else to make his decisions for him. A radio can reinforce those tendencies. Radio comms are difficult enough that, combined with the points BVH made earlier, they may simply do no good. Or, I can even imagine an observer giving the H2 bad advice, or good advice 10 seconds too late. And at the Pulpit we usually don't even know which LZ to stand in.

All that being said, it still might not be a bad idea for an observer at launch to enlist an experienced pilot (not necessarily an observer) already in the LZ to watch the approach. But, the H2 should understand that he shouldn't expect to hear anything on the radio. Only if absolutely certain I might say, "take another base leg." I'd rather say nothing and watch a H2 go long and plow into the trees than tell him to do another base leg and watch him ground loop from turning too low.

[RedBaron]

What? Radios are stupid because we don't know how to use them? And for this reason we should not try at all? Well, perhaps one day the technology will have advanced to the point where we, too, can establish a means of communication with the student.
I kept track guys. These past 6 months alone we had four H2's who pounded in, hit objects, ate dirt or twigs. We lost one of them for good by the sound of it. A healthy portion of luck spared the others a trip to the ER, otherwise, we would have likely lost them, too. Go back a number of years and you'll find quite a few names that didn't come back either. The system all of you are defending here is a failure. I will say no more.

[deveil]

janni,
love the passion dude (that either disarms you or pisses you off - i'll take the chance).
you certainly have some valid points. how bout this. a little research. who's using something like it. what are they using, and how they are using it. No?
garyD

[RedBaron]

I'll add one more thing since I was asked to provide a little more than my 3 cents worth:
Copied from the DHV guidelines/rules for high altitude training:

Die praktische Flugausbildung darf ausschließlich von den Fluglehrern oder Fluglehrerassistenten der Flugschule durchgeführt werden. Bei Ausbildungsflügen unter 300 Höhenmetern und bei Schleppstarts kann die Ausbildung unter Aufsicht und Anleitung eines am Startplatz befindlichen Fluglehrers erfolgen, sofern der gesamte Flugweg
bis zur Landung vom Startplatz aus einzusehen ist und sichere Funkverbindung zu den Flugschülern besteht. In allen anderen Fällen ist die Aufsicht und Anleitung je eines Fluglehrers an Start- und Landeplatz verbindlich.

Translation: Flight training is to be conducted by certified instructors or their assistants. For flights of less than 900 feet supervision can take place at launch only if the entire flight path is visible from launch and secure radio contact is established. For flights higher than 900 feet and in all other cases the presence of an instructor both at launch and in the landing field is mandatory.

[davidtheamazing1]

alle Fliegen ist verboten