Hanging by My Two-Strings: an Essay on Excess Nervosity

[John Anderson]

The Incident at Daniel’s exchange has been a very useful one, with good observations coming from all directions. But one direction has been toward more worry. This is a separate thread, to talk about sites and make a plea.

Although I understand and concur that we share a collective interest in avoiding flight mishaps and unwanted public attention to our launches and LZs, etc., the drift toward the Worry Syndrome shows when we begin to hear such opinions as… Jeez, “ observers are taking on too much responsibility” or a companion summary opinion that “maybe sites should just be either H2 / P2 minimum or H3 / P3 minimum and forget about this observer thing”. And this begins to implicate not only our sites and protocols (I do not dispute that protocols are needed), but also The Future of Free Flight, and the perennial “how do we get new pilots in the sport, and keep old pilots from falling by the wayside”.

Here are some observations from the perspective of the old / ancient, and a Perennial Two. “Oy!” says Mother K’vetch, “do I have the Aggravations! ... especially when these two-sies are landing in the treesies.” Yes, we need to make sure that skills are adequate, and assure site- specific savvy.

Meanwhile, I have been very uplifted by the prospect of a new Edith’s Gap and E or SE site. And not because I don’t love Bill’s Hill (see below). Now, it may turn out that, even when we’ve removed tree and rock islands to enlarge the LZ (and Briant Vant Hull notwithstanding), LZ issues will make this a “H2 with Observer” or even a “H-3 and Good Luck” site. (PG issues will differ.) But I’ve followed everyone’s aerials and GoPro approaches with hopes re: my own skills and because we need some places that are not only closer to the Capitol Rotunda, but also flyable on short order. So I, for one, hope we find this a H2 / P2 site, or discover some other good candidates for observer-free flight, soon.

OK, I’ll follow Protocols that come out of discussion, and I also want to assure everyone that I, personally, will NEVER fly mtns alone!

Now, I have my reasons for being the Perennial H-2. In large part because I was overseas for most of 25 years, with only 2 residences back in the U.S. a couple of years each, and brief forays back. Except for two places where I had both flyable mtns and a bone-wing in my baggage, overseas I was flying mostly PG, if flying at all. And I had a Great Time! And stayed in free flight! For some personal reasons chiefly of interest to historians and spinologists, I have decided to re-focus on my HG skills and hopes and parked my PGs, at least for now.

Hopes, that is, of Staying in the Game. For me, I have several hours of HG mtn flying ( not yet the 20 hrs + sign-offs ), but the truth is that I would not even be dreaming of flying were it not for Bill’s Hill. Sure, I’ve flown WS, the Pulpit, even Fisher’s Rd (this one way-back-when), and some other, western US sites, but every time I’ve come back into the U.S. (short visits, longer stays) I have needed to get back to a training hill, and then a comfortable mountain site that I feel brings me back to snuff, esp. on approaches and landings.

Too bad the E (SE—NE) days are few, still just the fact of there being a Bill’s that is 2/No Observer site… has kept me (“trying again”) at least marginally in the game. Of course I’ll prefer flying with and getting advice from mentors (and observers where req’d) and I will do this. But in the end, there is a place I can go yet once again for a mountain tune up, with hopes of then getting back to WS & other mtn sites, then new sites in the East, the West, etc. And this could be even more important for New Two's. Am I dreaming? Maybe we gotta be able to dream to keep this sport alive!

But a lot of us free flight pilots, both newbies and ancients, are hanging by our shoe-strings to stay in the sport— a thin thread conditioned mainly by the places we can fly. And I know for a personal fact, as I race toward Assisted Living and/or the Black Pit, that it is ONLY Bill’s Hill that has kept up my spirits and chances. No other Pure H2/P2 Site within 200 miles! And where else can we hop to, from one day to another, buzz off with a spouse or non-flying chum, and get comfortable airtime so as to work our way back up?

This is not just about Old Dogs. I believe that the AVAILABILITY AND FLYABILITY of H2/P2 mountain sites is also CRITICAL to keeping new H2s and P2s enthused and moving toward other mtns and threebie status. Sure, it would also help me & others if we also had more than just Smithsburg (6 months of the year even?) and Taylor Farm for those continuing hill tune-ups before we even go back to a comfy place like Bill’s. And sure, I may someday convince myself to get around to towing to work on approach & landing skills. But NEITHER training hills nor tow parks are the answer for most of us, who want foot launch, and mtns.

We need it all, and more protected big air sites, too. I am encouraged by the fact that our Region 9 Rep candidates have declared an interest in acquiring and protecting sites—at least 3 candidates have ILLUSTRIOUS CREDENTIALS of actually doing something here! I am also glad that one candidate has declared he plans to help keep free flight from getting too regulated and nannied, even if driven by good intentions.

So, reasonable that some nervousness creeps in when we analyze issues about observers, procedures and protocols. Thanks to Brian for noting that bone-headed errors can also be made by the threes and fours among us. And to Hugh for noting that we DO have effective procedures in place to protect both pilots and sites, and there are some things we can do to make them work even better. Meanwhile, I hope that when we talk about the unique features of new and old sites, we remember that we need MOUNTAIN SITES for Two’s, observed and unobserved. Let’s not let our excess nervosity hound us, ground us, and freeze out pilots in formation (including never-ending formation!) from the ongoing fun and… what we hope is a future for free flight.

[brianvh]

As someone who maybe flew once at Bill's Hill without an observer as a H2, I'm trying to figure what has changed that makes an observer free site so crucial (and btw, Edith's Gap will definitely not be such a site). It seems you are having problems getting observers when you are free to fly.

Normally when it's a nice day at the mountains you shouldn't have a problem, but I suspect on light days everyone wants to go towing instead of the mountains, is that what's going on? Or is it that you are mainly able to fly during the week?

Though I never had problems finding observers, that was between 15 and 20 years ago. Perhaps things have changed...are other H2's having the same problem?

[John Anderson]

Brian, etal-- Sorry if I didn’t get my point across. Not an issue about observers, who have been great counsel, noble souls, and probably lost airtime to help me out. And I listen to my betters always, whether observing me or not. In fact, one of my issues was that a couple of nervous ripostes seemed to suggest that 1) observers assume too much responsibility (… of course I agree with the view that we each assume our responsibility for pilot decisions, etc.) or 2) encourage the unready to fly sites beyond their skill levels…. And, for one of these reasons or another, maybe we shouldn’t have observers at all ?!! Nay, I disagree. Issues of whether we find 'em enough of the time, during the week, etc., are real. But this is not the point I am trying to make.

Of course I like to have pilot company wherever, usually meaning an observer or two around, Bill’s or elsewhere—excellent! My main point is that we need places like Bill’s where a Two can simply hop in a car, arrive (with chums, spouses, etc., at least), set up, determine need/not for wire crew or etc., and fly. We’ll have walked the LZ many times, put up a sock or not, and we are comfy. We get some practice, recalibrate, get readier to get back to more challenging sites.

But this ease is because Bill’s is a Two-ranked (no observer, thank you) site. Now, maybe I am too accustomed to unregulated slopes of Third World places where we just went, flew, and had fun. And jeez was that Freedom! Not opposed to observers and NOT SUGGESTING that we turn every site to a Two sans observer.

Classification will involve everything: launch & LZ particulars, wing type, how worried we are re: landowner relationships, etc. The club has a lot of collective wisdom here. But we will have more cumulative fun, keep more pilots in the game, rising faster tin the ranks, if there are places where we can just go and fly. That means, I think, not getting too nervous when it comes to the protocols for sites—esp. as we look at new ones. I didn’t have much more to say than that, sorry for any excess syllables. –John

[JohnE]

John
As a totally new P-3, after being a P-2 on the slow track, I want to endorse everything you said. All of it.

"Excess nervousity" is a real danger right now and the reaction of "the powers that be" to it may have grave long-term repercussions for the sport. P-2s and H-2s really need somewhere to grow and practice. I think that our present system of mentor/observers works well and the sites are already restricted enough.
Best wishes for a safe and healthy 2014!
John Hopkinson

[davidtheamazing1]

I would argue for status quo. I really like the way that region 9 has used the observer program as a mentoring track.

As a relatively new H3 (measured by airtime anyways), I was only rarely been skunked because I couldn't get an observer on a good flying day that I wanted to fly. Unless you are lucky enough to be trying to leave the ground on weekdays or calm days there really isn't much involved in finding an observer, just reaching out to one or perhaps making two calls to see who is available. We have an active crew of observers and usually where the weekend gaggle goes, you'll find one or two helpful observers in the pack.

On the other hand, our launch sites are technical and the safety margin depends largely on conditions, and approaching our LZs can be tricky as well. If you are nervous because you are not current, then your margin of safety is way lower, and your observer would be right to give you a hard time about not going to the hill after 6 months off from flying.

New observers of course would be a great idea. So would a bit of observer development, to make sure everyone is on the same page.

[brianvh]

If you are requesting that the current climate not become more restrictive, then fair enough. But if you are requesting either new sites to open up or old ones to become less restrictive, then you are venturing into unrealistic territory. Launchable sites have pretty much been tapped out over the decades, and they all have either flying/judgement complications or landowner complications that make it inadvisable to just let inexperienced pilots have a go at them. Bill's Hill is a nice gift, so enjoy it.

[mingram]

And we got permission to cut, poison, and plant grass at Bills! That launch will be even sweeter soon! ETA for a work party is March at leaf-out.