My (first) tree landing

[jimrooney]

Hrm...
There's an interesting phenomina that one experiences post-incident... and I think this is some of what he was getting at here....

Now, pilots in general are prone to expressing their opinions about things. Especially opinions about what people should or should not do. Right or wrong, this is how it is...

So, I keep thinking of the movie Office Space.
Something seems pretty similar here.
The "PTS Reports"
There's a rant in the movie about how one guy has six different bosses and they're all always bothering him about the PTS reports. Every time he turns around, it's PTS reports.. PTS reports.... on and on.

Now, with a bunch of pilots just itching to tell you what you should or shouldn't do or how to do something or how not to do something, I bet you can see how you get swamped with the PTS report problem pretty damn quickly.
It's all well intentioned, but it gets tiring quick.

Add to this, you get placed under the microscope.
Everything you do is called into suspect. Everything... no matter if it's related or not. And you're not allowed to say ANYTHING. Because, if you do "you're just in denial and being defensive". It becomes easier to just shut up and let it all pass.

So, for all everyone's well intentioned efforts... it actually backfires.
Silence becomes so much easier than discussion.
This is a huge reason that incidents don't get reported.

Jim

[XCanytime]

Jim,
That's TPS reports. The cover sheet, remember to have the COVER SHEET . And that's 8 different bosses telling Peter what he was doing wrong. For anybody who works in a cubicle environment (just about everybody nowadays) "Office Space" is a must see. Especially if you need to have at least 15 pieces of flair to work at Chaichkis .

Office Space fanatic

[mcelrah]

Could we please return to the important topic of how to land at Daniel's? First off, there's the old primary (which I have never landed in), the one with a long dike leading SW. Janni says the wind had gone completely west and picked up, so he judged it was better not to accept the cross. Fair enough, although he might wish to revisit that: could one turn 30 degrees on short final and land straight into the wind to the right of the dike? So, you've opted for the primary in your topless glider, the wind is blowing 10+ from the west and you set up - where? - how about right on top of the tree line (armed with the knowledge, which had apparently not been passed down to a new generation of pilots, that there are sinkholes around the LZ). You deploy the drogue and when you can't get any lower over the trees, descend smartly to the deck (into the dip) and throw a massive flare on the uphill side of the dip, land stylishly on your feet to the applause of the assembled multitude. Or maybe not. Maybe you just shouldn't try to land a slick topless in that LZ in your first few hours on that wing - fly an easy-to-land glider instead or go find a big flat field to land in. What say the wiser heads? - Hugh

[lbunner]

It's too bad this is the only entertaining thread on here (Tad don't take this as a proposition to start a new one:)). Let's all get out this weekend and write about how great it was!!

[Flying Lobster]

...
Marc, thanks for portraying the Litespeed as a death machine. To me it is just a f****** expensive hang glider. So why are you flying the most evil of all Litespeeds if one mistake can kill you? Unless you claim you never make mistakes I think I know what it it is: You have a secret death wish, too!
I've had about enough of all this nonsense. I'm outta here.

ANY hang glider is a potential death machine depending upon the pilot in the control bar--not just a Litespeed. I tried to make an effort to make my comments generic enough to seem as a warning to all pilots to be familiar with the Daniel's LZ, not just you. And I tried to cite examples as they pertained to myself--and I think I pretty much disclosed that I feel the Litespeed I have is challenging enough that I'm pushing the learning curve very slowly and conservatively--despite over 10 years of more or less continuous topless use. It's entirely possible that my glider may prove be too much for me, but that's often the case with new "superships" at first and why I personally have developed a "go slow" approach with each new wing.

Sorry if you took offense--I promise I won't trouble you with any advice in the future.

marc

[RedBaron]

Okay, I'm back in here. Always glad to provide entertainment when the flying sucks.

Sorry if you took offense--I promise I won't trouble you with any advice in the future.

Funeral stories and yours raving of the Deathspeed RS were not the advice I was looking for.

Add to this, you get placed under the microscope.
Everything you do is called into suspect. Everything... no matter if it's related or not. And you're not allowed to say ANYTHING. Because, if you do "you're just in denial and being defensive". It becomes easier to just shut up and let it all pass.

Very true.

I assumed that Janni would be making some sort of report on the server and I asked about the number of flights he had on his new glider and if he had his RLF-- both relevant questions for a tree landing in the primary LZ at Daniel's when making an accident report.

Whatever. Smart-ass to me and others. Most H3's don't have the RLF and you bloody well know that.

For what it's worth, Pete Lehmann and I flew here (Cumberland) on Monday. We had both read Janni's initial post and while neither of us have ever met him, we both agreed with sentiment of Lauren's subsequent post. It was not an attack on his skill or judgement, although we would suspect that luck played more than a small role in the outcome of his crash landing. It was more that his comments made it sound like he really didn't learn the important lesson about pushing the limits in a high-risk sport like hang gliding. Janni, if you're reading this, I hope you survive the learning curve and get to be an old pilot, but most of the ones that last long enough to become old pilots do so by not being bold pilots.

I know I was very lucky. I said that in my report. I'm also taking full responsibility for what happened, that's why I said I was due. I will not attempt landing in a small field anymore. I will not attempt flying Daniel's any time soon. I'm quite capable of realizing that flying Daniel's was too bold. Do I have to call everything by its name around here?

I called you on WHAT YOU SAID and what seems like your piss-poor attitude.

And I thought we were just disagreeing, sweetie. You take issues with my title? Well, I can't rule out that I'll be in the trees again someday. Can you rule everything out?

Guys, I obviously chose a style that wasn't appropriate. I apologize. Being beaten to the report and being asked stupid questions so soon after the accident may have had to do with that (where the f*** is everybody on this?). This was also my first crash, I'm not too experienced handling everything the way I should handle. Once and for all:
My accident scared the crap out of me, but I don't feel like sharing that on a forum, that's just not me. I've always been aware that I could have gotten seriously hurt or died. I suffered from intermediate syndrome and screwed the pooch entirely. I am so very aware of that. I've taken adequate measures to put me back in the safety zone.
This is my last post on this. Time will tell.

[Matthew]

FYI- A lot of H3s in this area have their RLFs. I wasn't trying to be a smart-ass. I was just trying to find out some basic info on your flight experience and special skills so that you would include this info in your accicent report so as to make the report complete. I should have sent my query via a private message or email. My apologies for sending it on the forum.

Matthew

[jimrooney]

The cover sheet, remember to have the COVER SHEET

Bwa hahahahahaha!
Nearly pissed myself!

[markc]

The written word is notoriously prone to misinterpretation.

And as Hugh pointed out earlier, this topic seems to be a victim of that problem.

I talked with Janni after his accident. Yup, honest to god conversation, without the computer-screen glare or anything! So I can tell you with 100% certainty that his crash led him to some serious self-examination, and a re-evaluation of his approaches.

But certain turns of phrase in Janni's post probably raised red flags (I admit, just a guess) for some readers. For example:

I was due for a major accident and perhaps part of me even knew it. I’m okay with the whole thing.

Questions have been raised as to my proficiency. I’m okay with that, too, because I could not care less whatsoever.

But people, PLEASE, remember that forum posts lack all the non-verbal cues of actual conversation, that English is a second language for many forum members, and that written exchanges lack the realtime give-and-take that helps reduce misunderstandings between conversants.

Rather than assuming that you have correctly understood a person's intent, I implore you to ASK QUESTIONS
of him or her, which will either confirm or refute your impression.

Just imagine how this topic might have developed if pilots had asked things like this:

Hey Janni, when you say Xyz-Abc-123, it kinda seems like you are being a bit cavalier about the risks of the sport and the consequences of an accident. Where exactly are you coming from when you say that?

Bet there would have been far fewer ruffled feathers, hurt feelings, and angry replies. And many more valuable insights gained by our readers.

MarkC

[Lauren Tjaden]

Duly noted, Mark. Thanks.
Lauren

[Batman]

Just for the record: H3 - AT/FL AWCL / CL / FSL / RLF and have my treelanding certification at High Rock AND Taylor's Farm

Chris

[mcelrah]

I think we can agree that the ratings and special skills sign-offs do not have an exact relationship to actual skills. I hold H4 AT FL AWCL CL FSL TUR but no RLF. When Sparky and I were cleaning up my USHPA card a few years ago, he quite properly declined to give me RLF since I had just managed to land long in the bushes at High Rock not so long after my George of the Jungle encounter with a tree in the same LZ. In the local paragliding community, the joke is that this qualifies me for "T1"; we have at least one "T4". Given the cosmopolitan nature of the PG community generally, they also have the "Emil Baumflieger" society, loosely translated from German as "Duh-wayne the Tree-flyer"... In the powered airplane world, we say that there are two types of pilots: those who have: (1) landed with retractible gear - up; (2) ground-looped a tail-dragger - and those who will... - Hugh

[brianvh]

I've won the BVH restricted landing field award TWICE (and think I was robbed of a third time) but don't have the RLF signoff. Go figure.

I also think if you read Janni's writing he hasn't the faintist whiff of english as a second language. Writes it better than most of us. The only hint is he doesn't have a cavalier misuse of the language (how many people say "I could care less" when logically "I couldn't care less"?).

We're all misinterpreted in print compared to face to face. Most people who meet Matthew after reading his posts are completely mystified by the experience. Most people who try to read my scientific papers are mystified whether they've met me or not. It's a sucky medium to discuss anything that might get emotional. I'm surprised anyone survives valentine's day.

[Batman]

I think the big thing to point out is that no one who has responded to this thread has done so out of any maliciousness. This isn't ballet (sorry Karen ... no offense) and its not a sport that you should wear your feelings on your sleeves. There are people who responded that have been flying longer than some of the younger members have been on this earth. That should tell you something right there. Constructive criticism isn't said out of dislike, and sometimes the truth hurts, but there is a reason we have a lot of old pilots in this group. We aren't a bunch of girly men (well...except for Ralph) ... (Sorry about the girly man comment Ralph) and if you can't take the proverbial heat, then maybe you should stay out of the proverbial kitchen. Wisdom comes from learning and there is a lot of knowledge available in this community. You would be wise to take everything that is being said and stow it away to ponder later instead of throwing it back in their collective faces. Whether you like it or not, you might just learn something that will make you safer or at least keep you alive longer. There are a lot of ways you can kill yourself aside from hang gliding. Unfortunately you chose this sport and the outspoken pilots that go with it. It also means that you've come into a group of people that really care about you, but also really care about this sport and realize that one person's actions can jeopardize all of our ability to fly. Its selfish to think that your actions don't affect anyone else. My advice is to grit your teeth, consider the motives of the people who are posting and realize that its not out of anything other than genuine concern for your well-being and the well-being of our collective hang gliding community. Even Ralph

Just my $.03

Chris

[markc]

My advice is to grit your teeth, consider the motives of the people who are posting and realize that its not out of anything other than genuine concern for your well-being and the well-being of our collective hang gliding community.

And in return, my advice is this:

• Prior to providing constructive criticism...
• Make an extra effort, with a question or two for the object of your criticism...
• Because you just might find out that your impression of that person's post does not gibe with what the poster intended.

Surely this is not a radical idea?

Criticism is good. Advice is good. There is much to be learned from anyone's accident. But IMO, the most important lessons that could have been learned from this particular incident (and yes, certainly, there are some!) were obscured by bad feelings, for no really good reason at all.

Bottom Line: Before you post, imagine yourself TALKING to the person. Would you launch immediately into a critique? Or would you ask some questions and try to clarify a few things first? If the latter: Then please do the same here.

MarkC

PS: And I mean it! If there is a chilling effect on the reporting of accidents in these forums, then we are all the poorer for it. If I see a post in response to a future accident report that does not first ASK QUESTIONS of the pilot involved, prior to the critique/advice, then I'm gonna don my Evil Moderator Hat. Not pretty, trust me!

[Dan T]

We are too far away from Halloween to be encouraging Mark to put on his evil moderator hat!

Over the years I've found that these public critiques and inquisitions into a fellow pilot's mistake rarely if ever serve any useful purpose. In spite of what are usually good intentions they typically accomplish little more than further eroding the self confidence and self worth of the individual on the receiving end. Those of you who have not suffered this embarrassment probably cannot fully appreciate just how devastating and humiliating it is to face a public inquisition from the very people you respect and admire the most.

What I have found worthwhile is private constructive critiques and just as importantly words of encouragement and offers of assistance should the pilot desire to get back into the harness. After my last incident nearly two years ago one pilot offered to return to the training hill with me and another met me at a local football field with a hang glider, a tape measure and a stop watch where we worked on assessing launch technique. Both selfless acts contributed greatly to the recovery of my self esteem and self confidence. The recovery was fed in equal measure by the actual exercises and the fact that they were effectively saying, "welcome back you are still one of us."

Janni, Craig and I occassionally visit Taylor Hill on sunny SW weekends. If he decides to go tomorrow he will post it here and I plan to join him. You are welcome to come, and welcome back.

Dan T

[Flying Lobster]

I'm totally mystified by these PC responses--my impression is that most of the comments were properly directed by pilots who were not so much interested in crapping all over Janni--but ones who have had bad accidents themselves and thus see a bit of themselves in what Janni had experienced. I can assure that pilots such as myself, Pete Lehmann, Lauren and JR would without hesitation be open to public disclosure of their major fuck-ups--we've all had 'em and are willing to discuss them openly in the hopes that others can learn from them.

Pilots are always going to be highly visible and subject to commentary by their brethren--whether or not on a written forum or in the peanut gallery watching you launch or land. They're going to talk shit whether your ego likes it or not--I regularly fly in front of the biggest peanut gallery known to hang gliding at Lookout--and believe me narry a flight goes by where something I do isn't all that great and I'll hear about it--sometimes in a huge chorus of "whack!" in the lz after which you have to kiss the goat's ass in front of everyone. You think comments here are humiliating? : )

In the end, we all have the responsibility to decide what, when, where and how to fly. This includes whether or not you care to listen to what others have to say--even if in your mind it totally misses the mark. It used to piss me off a lot when pilots made comments that seemingly where totally unrelated to what I thought had actually happened--but I learned to carefully separate the ego from the possibility that something was actually wrong--and at worst, if I'm truly confident in what I'm doing is right, I will try to simply politely let and errant comment go by without comment.

marc

[mcelrah]

I think one thing that's different is that people were reacting to what Janni SAID rather than what he DID - and "what you said is not what I heard". - Hugh

[markc]

I'm totally mystified by these PC responses--my impression is that most of the comments were properly directed by pilots who were not so much interested in crapping all over Janni--but ones who have had bad accidents themselves and thus see a bit of themselves in what Janni had experienced. [...]

No worries Marc! I'm not advocating totally PC forum hug-fests after accidents

And yes, there are lots of excellent responses in this thread, I'm not saying that there aren't.

But I also know that one or two people jumped to some conclusions, and I'm pretty sure it was due to the limitations that a text-medium like this is prone too. That sort of thing happens, and I've done it too.

So, for incident reports, I'm just requesting that people take a bit of extra time, by engaging the reporting pilot with a few questions and such. In the course of that exchange, the one offering the advice might just find that their impressions aren't totally on the mark. Or, maybe those impressions will be completely confirmed.

Then proceed with the advice/critique/what-have-you.

Simple, no?

MarkC

[jimrooney]

http://xkcd.com/386/

Jim

[Tad Eareckson]

Gawd, I hope I can get in and out of here quick without increasing the density of flying fur.

It's been a long time since I've flown Daniels so I'm pretty fuzzy on the geographical references but...

Janni has started on his downwind leg and tossed his drogue - just like it says in the owner's manual. He's no longer flying a Litespeed - he's just transformed it into a Falcon. So maybe we can take the topless factor out of the equation?

Let's skip over the middle part, for the moment.

The intended field is no longer an option. Janni is now trying to make the best of a bad situation. It doesn't sound like Field B was doable or that he made any mistakes during that phase so I'm not seeing the RLF thing as being relevant either.

Back to the booboo.

>
I got lifted by a thermal so I extended my downwind leg past the tree line because I thought I was still too high.
<

Janni,

There are only two times when you're too high - when you're freezing to death and when you're well into final. Otherwise that can generally be considered a good thing..

And there is ALWAYS massive sink on the lee side of the trees - even if there's not enough air moving to determine what the lee side is. Well, actually not, but that's the assumption you always have to make.

Had I been in that situation, I'da turned base in line with the downwind trees at the end of your field and bled off altitude by extending that leg a bit, come back and, if still necessary, cheated a bit with a couple of S turns and maybe a slip before rolling out on final close to the treetops - all the while keeping up a good head of maneuvering steam.

You reported a strong west - shoulda been a piece o' cake.

You made ONE serious mistake and got shaken up - I'm glad you're OK and I hope your glider is too(?) - I don't think you'll ever do anything like that again.

Now I'll just try to quietly back out of the room.

[hepcat1989]

Well Janni, Did you learn anything? Did you take anything constuctive away from all this bullshit? Prime example my friend..
We'll hook in soon.....
Peace Bro, Stiff upper lip. Chin up.
Shawn.

[billyvaughn]

Hello all--I'm a longtime lurker here and a Daniel's veteran. Thought I'd come out of the shadows and weigh in--
First of all, Janni's candor is to be applauded. Learning from each other's mistakes is key. End of story.
I'd also like to applaud his post with regards to his conversation with Nelson. Local protocol is key no matter where you fly, even with respect to unplanned landing events
About Daniel's: Mr. Fink is right about the sink areas, and if Janni didn't get a briefing about that, he didn't get a good local heads up. There aren't many of us here in C'ville (Nelson, Rich, me, and uh....) but I'd like to offer to walk the lz with new guys...434 975 1134. I'm not always available, (3 kids) but I like Daniels, and if I can help keep it cool, well, all the better.
Also for what it's worth: There's almost no reason to land in the field across the road. If it's blowing SE, I could see it, but that's rare. I haven't landed in that field in years. You're almost always better off landing uphill in the 'west' field. Come in hot over the downwind tree/fence line and dive into the bottom. Landing uphill is like having a much longer final runway, and even when it's windy, I've never had an issue. Just remember the three words to live by: Come In Hot.
One other note: Daniel's can kick your butt in a forecast west cross. It can funnel straight in at launch and the birds might show it straight in above launch, but it can get wild up high. Remember you're launching well below the Blue Ridge, and that westerly forecast might spill over and make your day exciting. At 3000' over on an otherwise reasonable day I got pitched over and weightless long enough to think, "wow, this is the record..."
Cheers,
Billy Vaughn

[Flying Lobster]

Good point about the west cross, Bill. I have permanent injuries as a result of a bad crash that almost punched my ticket back in 1995 when I got caught low in the lee when the winds started cranking out of the west while going xc from Daniel's.

marc

[Tad Eareckson]

OK Shawn,

I took the time to read the accounts and reactions and - based on my quarter century's worth of experience in the sport - gave it my best shot.

I didn't try to shrink his head and did my best to isolate the problem.

There was no indication that the glider did anything other than what it was told when it was told so I discounted control issues.

Janni may or may not have the skill to put his glider down in a restricted field. My impression is the former but that aspect never came into play 'cause he missed it. So it didn't really matter whether he was shooting for something barely doable or the Bonneville Salt Flats.

My take was that he reacted in a way that wasn't appropriate for any field in any circumstances - a mistake but an easily correctable one.

Seventeen years ago Kevin Gallagher made a similar error at Hyner. I coached him off on his next flight with similar advice and he was quite appreciative.

But you say my suggestion was a prime example of bullshit so it must be. Please tell me exactly why so I can get up to speed.

(Did one of my previous incarnations do something to one of yours - say about 1834?)