Weak link breaks?

[Scott]

Being a new AT pilot who hasn't experienced a weak link break yet...I'm curious about what types of scenarios can cause this? Obviously a lockout can cause one...but I'm wondering more about breaks right off the cart. This seems to happen a lot (maybe not?) and I don't understand how/why?

Any illumination is appreciated!

Scott

[Matthew]

Talk to the sailplane people about this. They have scenarios for what to do if a weak link breaks at various altitudes. I've never seen anything taught on this subject at any of the tow parks. They might. I just haven't seen it. Anyway, you should have a plan of action for a weak link break:

on the cart
just after coming out of the cart
at an altitude of up to 30
from 30-60'
60-100'
above 100'
and so on

Once above a few hundred feet you can do a regular approach.

The plan may vary according to conditions. So think about it and go over it in your head as you are waiting in line to be towed.

You should also have a plan of action on what to do if you are given the rope.

Matthew

[batmanh3]

Additional to Matthews List ...

Weak link break at 50 feet with tow cart still attached ....

Answer: Roll on landing to keep cart behind you

BTDT

[breezyk1d]

Having trained with Sunny, I can tell you that they work the weak link break into your training - i.e., Sunny pulls the release on you at various points.

Basically, you have to have your anticipated escape mode in mind at all times as you tow up - I repeat my mantra (literally) as I am being towed up, of where I can land if the weak link breaks so that I don't have to think about it to make a decision on short notice, but will be able to respond immediately. At Ridgely, (towing west) it would be " straight ahead straight ahead straight ahead" , then as I see the altitude increase enough it switches to "RC field RC field RC field RC field RC field" and then lastly as the altitude becomes enough it is "windsock windsock windsock " until I feel I am out of the "emergency" adrenaline response altitude and in normal approach zone.



At Blue Sky (towing south) it would be much the same thing although you could substitute Soybeans (to the right) for RC field.

I'm sure with enough experience, I won't have to repeat my mantra on tow, as it will perhaps become instinctive.

Some regular sources of weak link breaks are: getting into the prop wash of the tug, and also skyrocketing out of the cart, and also hitting an abrupt thermal lift. I'm sure there are plenty of others - like various cart acroBATics.....

[Scott]

Thanks all for the great responses! Some really excellent points I'll commit to memory and work on.

That's great Sunny works with you on simulated breaks at Ridgely---not something we do at Blue Sky, so that's good! In addition to your mantras on where to land Linda, I'm always thinking (if it breaks) "pull in, pull in, pull in, pull in!"

Being a "large and tall" pilot (6' and 225lbs) on a big glider, I don't get pushed around as much by thermals...but then again, I'm pushing the weak link that much closer to it's breaking point (since everyone tends to use the same test-strength line for the link).

Scott

[drice21037]

I've only had one weak link break while aerotowing and it happened while I was
still very low and over the runway. I was happy that I automatically pulled in
as soon as I heard the snap and got slow. I'm glad that my reaction was to
dive** at the ground even though it was really close to it. I was able to
maintain manuevering speed and landed without incident.

Dave

**When I say "dive" I'm talking about the Falcon version of diving which I
think is more a function of the pilot trying to go fast than of the glider
actually getting its nose pointed at the ground. If I had pulled in as much as
I did with a higher performance glider my results would probably have been
different. Sometimes it's really nice to fly a Falcon.


Quoting Scott <sw@shadepine.com>:

>
> Thanks all for the great responses! Some really excellent points I'll commit
> to memory and work on.
>
> That's great Sunny works with you on simulated breaks at Ridgely---not
> something we do at Blue Sky, so that's good! In addition to your mantras on
> where to land Linda, I'm always thinking (if it breaks) "pull in, pull in,
> pull in, pull in!"
>
> Being a "large and tall" pilot (6' and 225lbs) on a big glider, I don't get
> pushed around as much by thermals...but then again, I'm pushing the weak link
> that much closer to it's breaking point (since everyone tends to use the same
> test-strength line for the link).
>
> Scott
>



___________________________________________________________
This mail sent using ToadMail -- Web based e-mail @ ToadNet

[brianvh]

If you think you're too low out of the launch cart and pop the nose to get
up to position, that will do it: sudden slow down of the glider. Try to
correct smoothly, which is not to say do slow corrections; just don't jerk
the bar.

Brian Vant-Hull
301-646-1149

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Scott wrote:

>
> Being a new AT pilot who hasn't experienced a weak link break yet...I'm curious about what types of scenarios can cause this? Obviously a lockout can cause one...but I'm wondering more about breaks right off the cart. This seems to happen a lot (maybe not?) and I don't understand how/why?
>
> Any illumination is appreciated!
>
> Scott
>

[CraginS]

[quote="Scott"]Being a new AT pilot who hasn't experienced a weak link break yet...I'm curious about what types of scenarios can cause this? Obviously a lockout can cause one...but I'm wondering more about breaks right off the cart. This seems to happen a lot (maybe not?) and I don't understand how/why?

Any illumination is appreciated!

Scott[/quote]

Scott,
I, like others, had weak-link break training at both Highland and Blue Sky. Sunny, Chad, Steve, and Tex have all been involved.
One very important item in the training, and a direct response to your note above... it is NOT obvious that a lockout will cause a break. Holding that assumption gets a lot of pilots in trouble, because they fight their way through trying to correct a lock out too long; they figure if it gets too bad, the weak link will break and they will be off tow in time to correct their flight attitude.
The truth is that most lockout conditions will NOT break the weak link. Weak links fail when subject to sharp forces / sudden changes in tension. Many lock outs occur smoothly as the pilot and glider move out of safe position and the HG attitude goes widely off the toe line direction. Therefore, a pilot on tow must always be ready to hit the release as a lockout is approaching. Do not wait for the weak link to "save" you.
If you have not done so, get a copy of Towing Aloft by Pagen and Briden, and read about both weak links and lockouts in that book.

Cragin

[Scott]

The truth is that most lockout conditions will NOT break the weak link. Weak links fail when subject to sharp forces / sudden changes in tension. Many lock outs occur smoothly as the pilot and glider move out of safe position and the HG attitude goes widely off the toe line direction. Therefore, a pilot on tow must always be ready to hit the release as a lockout is approaching. Do not wait for the weak link to "save" you.
If you have not done so, get a copy of Towing Aloft by Pagen and Briden, and read about both weak links and lockouts in that book.

Good points Cragin, and yes---I've already deeply internalized the concept of releasing long before things get bad. (If anything, I'm more likely to release prematurely if things even kinda, sorta start to get bad---there's never a problem with that if you're above 200 feet!)

Of course, I'm sorry to say I've already had an unforgettable demonstration of what can go wrong without a wink link (in Holly's accident) and without releasing.

Out of curiousity---when you "trained" for this at Blue Sky, do you just mean it was discussed verbally? Or did Tex do "random releases" during tandems with you flying? (Seems like a hard thing to train for on your own.)

Scott

[CraginS]

[quote="Scott"]>>SNIP<<
Out of curiousity---when you "trained" for this at Blue Sky, do you just mean it was discussed verbally? Or did Tex do "random releases" during tandems with you flying? (Seems like a hard thing to train for on your own.)

Scott[/quote]
discussion only.
Because of my size, I never had any tandems at Blue Sky. All my tandems were either many years ago at Kitty Hawk, or over at Highland
And the weak link discussions at Blue Sky included both truck and AT situations.
yea.. it is difficult to "surprise" yourself with a simulated break

cragin

[jimrooney]

Weaklink breaks are standard curriculum at nearly every tow park I've been to. At Highland, once we start doing pattern tows, the student never hits the release. We hit it and we hit it when they're not expecting it.

Ok, on with the first question....
Weaklink breaks happen for any number of reasons and one will catch you off guard at some point. Be ready and pull in.

One of the more interesting and poinient ones is the smooth air break. Towing up in smooth air, in position and you have a good weaklink... just towing along straight and level, nice and smooth... when the weaklink breaks. There's no appearent reason. No rough air, no rough glider inputs... it just breaks.

I see a lot of people break weaklinks by coming out of the cart too fast (staying in too long). They generally vault up into the sky and experience some quick loads from pitching up to catch the tug or pulling in not to zoom past it and the weaklink breaks.

The other common one, which is sometimes experienced at the same time as vaulting into the sky is smashing through the tugs wake. Sometimes the wake is unavoidable, but being on the cart excessively long increases your chances of hitting it.

Disclaimer:
Coming out too slow sucks too. I'm not recommending it.
A good cart exit should be like sliding out of it... it should just dissapear. If you sink after exiting, that's too slow. If you pop out, that's too fast. Flavor to taste.

Craigin makes a good point about weaklinks and lockouts. You can't rely on the weaklink to break. The way I teach things is that if your weaklink breaks, you didn't recognise the lockout fast enough and didn't hit the release fast enough.

Jim

[hang_pilot]

While we're on this topic...at Wallaby in April the launch crew put a 2nd weak link in my system between the bridle and the Bailey. I fly with a two point, Wallaby-style release, with a single Bailey secondary. As I recall, here's the scenario they had in mind:

Pilot releases with primary, bridle catches on the tow line or release mechanism. If pilot becomes extremely out of position, the additional weak link would probably breaks prior to pilot finding and Bailey.

Does anyone else use two weak links, one on each release point?

Daniel

[brianvh]

I also use two weak links, but in 8 years of use have never replaced that
second one. I wonder if this second one has ever actually broken for anyone?

As to Batman's reply to Scott, while a new tow pilot has less experience
with pulling off a flare, I don't see why an experienced tow pilot won't
learn to perfect a flare. I do think it's harder to flare on a training
hill due to less speed, so you may put a sharper edge on that particular
technique. But learning to setup is arguably more important. And yet
launch runs are important too! Do it all!

I used to be much better at going back to the training hill...

Brian Vant-Hull
301-646-1149

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, hang_pilot wrote:

> Does anyone else use two weak links, one on each release point?
>

[batmanh3]

An experienced HG pilot of any type should be able to flare, land equally as well. I just dont' like the statement that training hills are poor substitutes for landing practice. It is blatantly wrong and very misleading.

[rancerupp]

...I do think it's harder to flare on a training
hill due to less speed.

From what I've seen, folks that use a TH for 'flight' training (as opposed to L/L practice only) tend to fly slower on the approach just to savor the air time. That tends to 'teach' them to have a slower approach for their landing and that is a bad idea. Like Chris said, for experienced pilots, flares are flares, no matter where you are.

...training hills are poor substitutes for landing practice.

Chris, If you are talking about the whole landing, then I have to disagree with you about landing practice on TH's. I do believe that they are good for the launch and the flare. However, a landing also includes setup, approach (dbf or otherwise), downwind flying (sometimes), and flying through gradient. These are simply not doable at a 100' TH.

Rance

PS: Chris, I know you are familiar with all the other aspects of a landing, the latter clarification is more directed to the newcomers.

[batmanh3]

Rance -

What I was referring to was the post that Scott made on one of the other threads that Training hills are poor substitutes for landing practice. It might be semantics, but "approach (dbf or otherwise), downwind flying (sometimes), and flying through gradient" are part of the flying phase. In my vernacular, landing is the phase where you are established on final, correcting for turbulence and approaching the flare. If anything, training hills tend to reinforce that more than any tow park due to the fact that usually tow parks have HUGE LZs that aren't surrounded by trees or hills thereby causing a gradient. Having received my H2 by flying Taylor's Hill 90% of the time, you are under turbulent gradient conditions most of the time. Especially when a spot is involved, the minute you take off you are mentally setting up your downwind & base then rolling final into thermals cooking off in the LZ and the forcing yourself to pop a picture perfect flare to avoid faceplanting into a load of fresh cow crap. If that isn't good landing practice than our foot-launch instructors must be miracle workers because most of the pilots they have graduated have done quite well on their first mountain flights.

[Matthew]

Hi Rance,

My impression as an Observer is just the opposite. Hang 2s with lots of training hill landings really burn it in and nail their landings. I think this may be because they're nervous during first flights at altitude and fly really fast in general. The challenge is to get them to recognize best glide, best manuevarblility speed and min sink. Tow park have a better grasp of flying speeds but they tend to to come in slower on approach. Not too slow... just slower.

Tow pilots are definitely more comfortable with their approach patterns. However, they sometimes get nailed by the gradient. Thus, I always recommend both forms of instruction to new pilots. Why just do one or the other or get fixated on one form of instruction or flying.

Again, these are just my impressions.

Matthew

[Flying Lobster]

This arguement is beginning to sound suspiciously alot like the mountain launch arguement. How are the basic physics (not the environment) of landing a glider altered depending on where you fly?

marc

[batmanh3]

No one said anything about the physics of flying being different, only the difference in levels of learning depending on how you learned to fly either foot or tow. Nothing is set in stone, but in general, tow students come out as a H2 with much better pattern work, but not as defined landing skills. Foot launch students are usually better at landing due to the fact that we do it so many more times at a training hill and the focus is more geared towards the landing phase. As the pilots become more experienced with both types of flying, they become better balanced in all phases. I thought my flying was fine being a foot launch pilot, but my pattern work has become much better now that I've spent the last 3 summers towing.

[brianvh]

The physics ain't different, just the environment. ALOT different in both
cases.

Brian Vant-Hull
301-646-1149

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Flying Lobster wrote:

>
> This arguement is beginning to sound suspiciously alot like the mountain launch arguement. How are the basic physics (not the environment) of landing a glider altered depending on where you fly?
>
> marcgot art?
> http://www.marcfink.com/
> wanna fly?
> http://www.downeastairsports.com/
>

[Flying Lobster]

Thanks for that clarification.

I read "training hills are poor substitutes for landing practice"...and I thought they meant training hills were a poor place for landing practice. Silly me for misunderstanding that!

Still, I'm wondering if what was really meant was "high ground clearance is the best training for altitude approaches?"

marc

[breezyk1d]

quoting Chris from earlier in this thread concerning L/L and approaches on a TH:

"Especially when a spot is involved, the minute you take off you are mentally setting up your downwind & base then rolling final into thermals cooking off in the LZ ......"

I had never thought of the training hill at Taylors as a place for DBF; perhaps that is a shortcoming in my training there. But at Taylor's, because you are relatively close to the ground (50' or so?), the experience I had, and the concept I developed, was to simply do up to a 90 degree turn (possibly a 180 if the ridge lift was adequate to give me the clearance) to land at a spot, or into the wind if it was cross. This parallels my idea of a final leg of a DBF.

At Taylor's as soon as I've launched, I'm not burning off altitude to position myself for a landing, I am coming down to land; my choices are so limited by low altitude, I do not have the option of choosing to come in with a lefthand turn or a right hand turn over the landing area to improve my approach or avoid rotor off of trees, I am committed to landing.

A DBF, to my mind, is how to approach a landing from high(er) altitude: getting the altitude right, the angles right, the length of the each leg right. Would a Taylors landing really be the equivalent in miniature(unless you were popped up to about 300 feet?) I've always thought of most training hill landings as simply being on final leg (with the possible exception of Oregon Ridge launches which really can afford you enough altitude from the top on a good day to pull off a DBF).

If I were to do a training hill style "DBF" as you describe above with one or two 90 degree turns at or below 50', when I'm coming into land at Ridgely, I think they'd haul me off the field and burn my glider, and then ban me from the flight park because the altitude is too low to be safely pulling off turns. It seems to me that Pagin references making that last turn onto final for a DBF from somewhere around 50' AGL (glider performance , and wind, and LZ conditions notwithstanding).

I'm trying to figure my way through this - it is an interesting question.

Maybe it is all simply semantics? - Linda

[John Simon]

Yikes!!! This is a nearly perferct XC!! Glad to hear your back in the
game Paul! Wish I would made it Thur. but had a few things that would not
allow it. I'll be trying again soon though. Great flight... congrats!!!!

John

-----Original Message-----
From: breezyk1d [mailto:lbaskerville@wba-arch.com]
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 9:39 PM
To: hg_forum@chgpa.org
Subject: Weak link breaks?



quoting Chris from earlier in this thread concerning L/L and approaches on a
TH:

"Especially when a spot is involved, the minute you take off you are
mentally setting up your downwind & base then rolling final into thermals
cooking off in the LZ ......"

I had never thought of the training hill at Taylors as a place for DBF;
perhaps that is a shortcoming in my training there. But at Taylor's,
because you are relatively close to the ground (50' or so?), the experience
I had, and the concept I developed, was to simply do up to a 90 degree turn
(possibly a 180 if the ridge lift was adequate to give me the clearance) to
land at a spot, or into the wind if it was cross. This parallels my idea of
a final leg of a DBF.

At Taylor's as soon as I've launched, I'm not burning off altitude to
position myself for a landing, I am coming down to land; my choices are so
limited by low altitude, I do not have the option of choosing to come in
with a lefthand turn or a right hand turn over the landing area to improve
my approach or avoid rotor off of trees, I am committed to landing.

A DBF, to my mind, is how to approach a landing from high(er) altitude:
getting the altitude right, the angles right, the length of the each leg
right. Would a Taylors landing really be the equivalent in
miniature(unless you were popped up to about 300 feet?) I've always
thought of most training hill landings as simply being on final leg (with
the possible exception of Oregon Ridge launches which really can afford you
enough altitude from the top on a good day to pull off a DBF).

If I were to do a training hill style "DBF" as you describe above with one
or two 90 degree turns at or below 50', when I'm coming into land at
Ridgely, I think they'd haul me off the field and burn my glider, and then
ban me from the flight park because the altitude is too low to be safely
pulling off turns. It seems to me that Pagin references making that last
turn onto final for a DBF from somewhere around 50' AGL (glider performance
, and wind, and LZ conditions notwithstanding).

I'm trying to figure my way through this - it is an interesting question.

Maybe it is all simply semantics? - Linda

[Scott]

...in general, tow students come out as a H2 with much better pattern work, but not as defined landing skills. Foot launch students are usually better at landing due to the fact that we do it so many more times at a training hill and the focus is more geared towards the landing phase.

I don't know Chris---this sounds like a seriously misinformed statement to me! I can't speak for Ridgely, but Steve Wendt's students are generally extremely good at landing, period. ("Landing" meaning the upwind/downwind staging area, figure 8s, DBFs---everything right down to the flare.)

If anyone thinks doing "landing practice" by 10 super-low flights in a day down a training hill beats 10 different approaches and landings from 800' in a day, then I'm completely dumbfounded!

I agree with Matthew---better to do it all. But if I had to pick one or the other, I wouldn't train for high-altitude flights and landings exclusively on a training hill. (Just my preference---I know others have done it very successfully, and I'm not bashing them!)

I rarely see anyone float down slowly at Blue Sky---I sure as heck was scorchin' through my approaches 7 times today! And they weren't all the same---I was mixing it up, moving the spot, practicing different approaches, etc.

Scott

[mcelrah]

Jim,
While we are on the subject of towing and when to preemptively
release: I think it was you who articulated the rule of three: if
you have three oscillations and they are getting bigger or even not
dampening out, hit the release. - Hugh

On 26 Aug 2005, at 07:46, jimrooney wrote:

>
> Weaklink breaks are standard curriculum at nearly every tow park
> I've been to. At Highland, once we start doing pattern tows, the
> student never hits the release. We hit it and we hit it when
> they're not expecting it.
>
> Ok, on with the first question....
> Weaklink breaks happen for any number of reasons and one will catch
> you off guard at some point. Be ready and pull in.
>
> One of the more interesting and poinient ones is the smooth air
> break. Towing up in smooth air, in position and you have a good
> weaklink... just towing along straight and level, nice and
> smooth... when the weaklink breaks. There's no appearent reason.
> No rough air, no rough glider inputs... it just breaks.
>
> I see a lot of people break weaklinks by coming out of the cart too
> fast (staying in too long). They generally vault up into the sky
> and experience some quick loads from pitching up to catch the tug
> or pulling in not to zoom past it and the weaklink breaks.
>
> The other common one, which is sometimes experienced at the same
> time as vaulting into the sky is smashing through the tugs wake.
> Sometimes the wake is unavoidable, but being on the cart
> excessively long increases your chances of hitting it.
>
> Disclaimer:
> Coming out too slow sucks too. I'm not recommending it.
> A good cart exit should be like sliding out of it... it should just
> dissapear. If you sink after exiting, that's too slow. If you pop
> out, that's too fast. Flavor to taste.
>
> Craigin makes a good point about weaklinks and lockouts. You can't
> rely on the weaklink to break. The way I teach things is that if
> your weaklink breaks, you didn't recognise the lockout fast enough
> and didn't hit the release fast enough.
>
> Jim
>