H3

[mcelrah]

Scott,
I agree with the general point that towing gives a new pilot more experience setting up an approach from altitude than any training hill. But when (as currently) I am dissatisfied with my recent landings at mountain sites and I go to the tow park to practice - it just doesn't seem to be the same. Tow park landings - particularly if you are clicking them off on a no-thermal day or doing pattern tows - are just too easy. I think one subtle factor is that if you have been soaring for a long time, you may be tired or just not mentally oriented to the important task of preparing for landing. Having said that, I don't see a good alternative and will continue to mix up AT and FL, hoping to become a good consistent all-round pilot. - Hugh

>From: Scott <sw@shadepine.com>
>Date: Tue Aug 09 11:36:26 CDT 2005
>To: hg_forum@chgpa.org
>Subject: H3

>
>I agree with your comments 100% Matthew (ad Brian). I certainly don't think that just because I'm a towpark H3 (when I am) that I know all about flying in the mountains. I certainly plan to hit the training hill, and I definitely plan to seek out the advice and guidance of experienced mountain pilots---Observers and non-Observers alike. (To not do that would be foolish!)
>
>It's not essential for training hill work to be done on a CHGPA hill with CHGPA Observers. Steve Wendt has an excellent, all-direction site near Harrisonburg, and though he runs a towpark, I'd put Steve and Tex's footlaunch abilities up against anyone's. (As well as their ability to critique footlaunch skills.)
>
>Though it's easy to perceive it as such, my choice to do most/all of my training work with Steve isn't an "us-versus-them" thing or a prideful thing. I simply like Steve's style of teaching, and I appreciate that he's very demanding and tough to earn a rating from. (Which is not to suggest anyone else isn't as qualified or as tough.)
>
>The other reason I value training at Blue Sky is because I personally believe approaches and landings from altitude are as critical---if not more critical---a part of flying in the mountains as launching. In my opinion, practicing landings from a training hill is inadequate (except for beginning students). Sure, you can flare, but you don't have the speed you have descending from altitude, you don't experience as much of a gradient (if at all), you can't practice different approach patterns, and you can't practice sighting angles to a landing spot. (Unless you have one of those rare soaring flights to 300 over on a training hill!)
>
>A typical mountain-only H2 gets to practice these things maybe twice in a mountain-flying day. I dont think that's enough.
>
>At Blue Sky, truck towing, I can practice 6-10 approaches and landings from 800' in a day, easy. Yes, I know landing in a huge field at a flight park isn't the same as landing in a small mountain LZ with thermals popping. But it beats the heck out of practicing landings on a training hill! When I get my H3 I'll have far more approaches and landings from altitude under my belt than a new mountain-only H3. (That's not said boastfully or to bash mountain-only H3s...it's just a simple fact.)
>
>I haven't even remotely experienced the huge variety of launch conditions more experienced pilots are familiar with. On the other hand, I've done a dozen mountain/cliff launches in smooth, forgiving conditions, and---in smooth conditions---I believe footlaunching is nowhere near as demanding a skill as approaches and landings. Again, emphasis on smooth, forgiving conditions. Of course, as I mentioned above, I'll rely on the guidance of experienced mountain pilots when I do my first less-than-forgiving mountain launches!
>
>Sorry if my post seems defensive or irritated, as I'm neither. I'm simply making the case that a towpark H3 who spends time on the training hill and has solid launch technique can become a safe, consistent mountain pilot---as long as they're willing to receive the guidance of more experienced mountain pilots. I don't think a potential mountain pilot must fly the mountains as an H2...and further, I think ALL new mountain H3s should have a minimum of 75-100 approaches and landings from high altitude as an H2---which can only be done at a towpark or by a TON of mountain flights as a long-term H2.
>
>Scott

[mcelrah]

The reason we don't have currency requirements/recommendations is that you just can't legislate safety. Even the FAA can't write enough regulations to avert all mishaps - they, and others like AOPA, have education programs to make pilots aware of issues affecting safety. That function is served for HG/PG by discussions such as this. An important element of safety is taking personal responsibility - that's why we call ourselves "pilots". There is a point at which a thicket of rules begins to diminish personal responsibility. - Hugh>

From: Matthew <adventuretales@yahoo.com>
>Date: Tue Aug 09 10:28:28 CDT 2005
>To: hg_forum@chgpa.org
>Subject: H3

>
>Not to mix it up too much, but...though I'm primarily a towpark pilot now, I fully intend to start flying the mountains again once I've earned my H3 and my AT rating (this fall). HR is right up the road from me, and since I make my own schedule, I could (and likely will) fly it any day of the week when others can too...
>
>
>... Scott
>
>*********
>
>At the risk of upsetting our tow park operators and tow park pilots, it's a BAD, BAD idea to tow your way to a Hang 3 and then go fly the mountains as a Hang 3. If you want to fly the mountains as a Hang 3 then you should be flying them as a Hang 2 in addition to any towing. You need to have input from the various Observers and learn how to handle mountain air, as opposed to tow park air. Just because you can fly mid-day at the tow park and deal with turbulence on tow doesn't mean that you have any experience and can handle the turbulence associated with mountain flying. At the tow park, you don't have to worry about hidden venturies, all sorts of rotor, huge wind gradients, changing conditions, etc., etc. And if your foot launching skills aren't current, you need to go to the training hill, just like David Rice recently did, before attempting to launch from a mountain site. If you have a Hang 3 from a tow park and you wish to fly the mountains, you not only need to hit the
> training hill for foot launch practice. You need to swallow your pride and ask for the assistance of Observers and fly in mellower safer conditions until you build up the experience for handling more difficult air in the mountains.
>
>The same holds true for towing. If you haen't towed forever you shouldn't go to the tow park and try to tackle a mid-day thermic tow without first doing some practice tows in mellower conditions.
>
>Why we don't have some sort of currency requirements (or even just currency recommendations for skills) like in other forms of aviation is beyond me!
>
>Matthew

[Scott]

So...what rating/qualification system is in place for kayakers? - Hugh

There is no ratings/qualifications system in place for whitewater boaters. Seem crazy? Possibly, since people can and do kill themselves on whitewater almost as often (if not more often) than they do flying. It can be a dangerous sport. And I've seen lots of paddlers going down rivers they had no business being on.

That said, I suppose rivers are more forgiving than altitude, since people who lack skills (unfortunately) often just float through class 2-3 rapids (sideways, backward, upside-down, etc.) and make it through unscathed. As the difficulty goes up (class 4-5) floating through becomes difficult to impossible.

Just as with increases in windspeed, rivers can change dramatically in their difficulty when the water rises. There are plenty of places on the Potomac that are benign and harmless at low levels (like now)...but with six more feet of water become raging monsters.

Personally, I think there ought to be rating system for whitewater paddlers. But I guess there are so many that it would be impossible to administer.

Scott

[Scott]

Tow park landings - particularly if you are clicking them off on a no-thermal day or doing pattern tows - are just too easy. ---Hugh

I agree---calm-air, repetitive landings at a towpark are easy.

In any physical sport, we strive to make the correct actions almost subconscious or automatic. There is only one way to do that---repetition---lots of repetition. Given a choice between...

a) 10-15 towpark landings in a weekend, regardless of conditions
b) 2-3 mountain landings in a weekend, regardless of conditions

...I'd choose (a) in the earlier stages of my training, just to make those movements more natural and automatic. Of course, the ideal is to do dozens of mountain landings every weekend, but that's not exactly practical/possible.

If I'm coming into a thermally mountain LZ and get a wing lifted or get bumped, I'm gonna be better able to deal with it if the basic moves (going upright, transitioning to the downtubes, etc.) are deeply engrained, allowing me to focus more on leveling my wings. That's common sense---it doesn't require experience to say it.

Scott

[Matthew]

Scott,

Yes practicing landings is important... as is practicing launches and practicing towing. But that's not the point here. The point is that you need to learn how to judge safe flying conditions in the mountains based on localized topography interacting with the weather. You learn this judgement by working with Observers and more experienced pilots as a hang 2 working on becoming a hang 3. If you get your hang 3 without learning this skill then you need to seek out Observers and/or more experienced pilots to learn this skill. It's the same thing as a mountain pilot learning to tow. The pilot just doesn't show up at the towpark and tow without any instruction. The pilot learns to tow and likewise how to judge conditions for towing before getting a tow sign off. However, there is no specific sign off for being a mountain pilot and learning how to judge safe conditions in the mountains. Thus, a hang 3 from a towpark with a foot launch sign off and no or minimal mountain launching expeirience, i.e. no skill at judging conditions in the mountains, can launch on their own in the mountains around here without consultation. This is unsafe! And if foot launch skills are not current, things are doubly unsafe.


Matthew
PS Your three mountain flights were safe and fun because you had an Observer judging the conditions.

[XCanytime]

Remember what Kevin said.? AT is a sign-off, not a rating.? The Hang 1 thru Hang 5 ratings were originally based on mountain flying.? Foot launching.? Flat slope launching.? Assisted windy cliff launching.? Restricted landing fields.? Turbulence, etc. There is no crossover translation from the original rating system and signoffs to the AT sign-off.? Two completely different methods of launch.? To become a proficient mountain pilot you must fly many different sites in varying conditions (always with a sizable margin of safety) many, many times.? To become familiar with a certain mountain site (launch and LZ), there is no substitute for lots of experience.? It is the only way to learn good judgement, and good judgement is the skill that takes the longest to acquire.

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bacil

[Flying Lobster]

So should an advanced pilot who hasn't been to a training hill in the many years since they got their H2 be required to have an observer should they decide to go to a training hill? Not being current and all, ya know.

marc

[jimrooney]

First of all... Where did this notion of a H3 just showing up and flying mid-day at a mountain come from? No one's been saying that.

If you ignore the entire rating system, then you could advance that theory. Here's the problem though. Part of being a H3 is KNOWING NOT TO DO THAT. Yes, that's part of the REQUIREMENTS of H3.

The difference with H2 is they're NOT expected to know that. They're not expected to KNOW that they should ask advice, so we make them ask. H3s are EXPECTED to know to ask.

>However, there is no specific sign off for being a mountain pilot and learning how to judge safe conditions in the mountains.
Yes there is... it's H3 FL

>Thus, a hang 3 from a towpark with a foot launch sign off and no or minimal mountain launching expeirience, i.e. no skill at judging conditions in the mountains, can launch on their own in the mountains around here without consultation. This is unsafe! And if foot launch skills are not current, things are doubly unsafe.

Exactly how are you proposing we regulate judgement?
Shall we have an annual FL review for all the returning spring pilots?
Better yet, let's have a 90 launch/land currency requirement.
I'll get on the phone with the FAA right now and get this all straightened out.

Relax man, we're all adults here.
There's something to be said for maturity and judgement... that's why it's part of the rating.

Jim

[Scott]

Thanks again Jim.

I appreciate the outpouring of advice sent my way, and I do realize it's all for my benefit.

As always (this seems to be a recurring theme) in spite of my posts I'm not angry/upset with anyone. The reason I kept responding in this thread was the clear implication on the part of several people that I'm clueless about flying in the mountains and would likely get into trouble without guidance. (Or the implication that I wouldn't seek guidance.) Both these notions are absurd. As Jim said, nobody (including me) ever said anything about new towpark H3s flying in 20+ conditions.

I suppose people occasionally get into this sport who really are clueless, and who do manage to kill themselves and jeopardize flying sites. But for the most part, I don't think anyone who flies a hang glider or paraglider is a stupid, reckless individual.

C'mon people! Give me---and other H2s---some credit! We're not babies!

Some here like to think of hang gliding as a sort of dangerous voodoo that requires ritual, sacrifice, the proper penance and decades to learn. Sure, there is much to learn...but it's important to remember that the mindset which keeps participants of high-risk sports alive is common to all those sports. That mindset is intelligence, common sense, respect for the forces of nature, and a willingness to learn from others. And though one should learn from others, in my opinion nobody should ever rely too much on others---independent thinking---coupled with careful observation---is a critical part of survival.

In my case, I've spent most of my life backpacking in the wilderness and paddling whitewater rivers. As a kid my "play" was climbing radio towers, exploring storm drains, jumping freight trains, and driving long distances years before I had a license. I've had a million opportunities to kill myself, and always avoided it---by having the mindset mentioned above. From a mental standpoint, hang gliding is no different from any other high-risk sport, and I never let my guard down (or fail to rely on common sense).

I'm not just blowing my own horn, because all I've said applies to other H2s as well---so it's important to treat them with respect and assume they have the proper high-risk mindset until demonstrated otherwise.

OK---all done with this thread!


Scott

[Matthew]

Jim,

I'm not proposing any regulation. I'm just pointing out a saftey concern. We have a big fly-in coming up and we don't want anybody in the trees.

Matthew

[jimrooney]

Wasn't directing any of it at ya Scott :)
Sorry if it sounded that way.

Jim

[Scott]

No worries Jim---I didn't think any of it was directed at me.

Scott