The Craigo, et al, patent has on it a reference to Spratt's US 2128060 that carefully teaches moving CG relative to wing attitudes (Spratt actually built and used A-frame in an aqua-pontooned hang glider early on; lots of photos of such online); such actually mechanically teaches what was exhibited in a much earlier patent by Gustave Whitehead for hang gliding; and all such baby steps through the mechanics that were actually used in the hang glider of 1908 in Breslau that exhibited the exact simple cable-stayed A-frame for moving by the hung pilot in a battened sailed hang glider (yet such was not the only early case instructing the hung pilot with moving airframe by touch of downtubes and basebars.
Igor Bensen was only using the same mechanical control arts--that were in public domai--in 1953 and 1954 as he used in kited gliders: the A-frame mechanics and single-pint hang; JD, before his tinkering with the stiffened NASA Rogallo wing kite, had actually used and was involved with Bensen kite-gyro glider world, and so used the very mechanics of control---single-point hang and control-wing by manual moving of airframe (hence making even more silly to later via GH to try to claim "invention" over such; real slap to Bensen and earlier meriting users of public domain mechanics). All such makes silly the GH-JD push of "invention" over such matters; and makes silly anyone's rubberstamping (low-scrutiny by FAI, HGFA, USHPA, writers, bloggers, etc.) the same untenable claims so late in the game of crafting.
The NASA and Ryan people were rehearsing much prior art as they tweaked craft for special missions; the underlying invention for control had already been placed into public domain--and hence--common art for those skilled in the arts. Someone unskilled in the arts picking up adaptations only to tinker mechanics that are common property to humankind have no just right to own the face of "invention" for what was only tinkered up to use public property; when such untenable "owning" becomes the leading face of hang gliding, then the question arises: will that hang gliding community have integrity and action investment enough to mend its face?
The GH first article had over ten clear untenable claims; over time GH went in and out of further untenable claims, like "single-point" hang, and A-frame ... both of which were extant in hang gliding very early and many many decades before the JD tinkering. Will the hang gliding community apologize for itself and improve its respect for the creative history that is robust? Or will a very untenable flat face be the consensus? So far, the FAI CIVL seems incapable of righting actions without a groundswell from the ranks; and I do not see any groundswell occurring to right things smashed by the GH-bully result; the "power" of the FAI is being abused; and by such abuse the FAI is losing some charter soul; and by such, the org may fade itself out of relevance; personal flight is taking a sad hit by the FAI inaction to correct its complex processes that injure the creative space of hang gliding; big hammer smashing hang gliding history; it seems the FAI does not care, as it seems it feels like it can get away with low-scrutiny and stay in La-La Land holding the power stick.
The titled face has emerged in a recent video by USC student video approved by department; we are talking with them now about a slide in the video that answers a question posted by the student producer; the slide has JD as the "inventor of the first hang glider." In two seconds, a counterexample can be found. Such untenable face stems from the GH yelling bully campaign for untenables. FAI is simply burying its head in the sand and going on as if everything is fine in hang glider worlds.
Maybe one day there will be a huge hang gliding community that does not at all interface with the FAI or USHPA or HGFA. A community that has hang gliding lift their lives to the skies for a few seconds or hours fully aside from orgls and insurance-companies' and manufacturers' face forming. Maybe several types of hang gliding communities will live. I do not want to live in the present FAI community, as it is smashing its creative soul into flatness; considering alternatives is an investment that will take me to unknown territories. Live and let live. It may be soon that I simply have zero marbles in any FAI game; similarly for the complicit HGFA and USHPA. Miller has been turning over in his grave because of the flat face that GH pushed and orgs have accepted. But Miller still inspires many today.
Richard Miller watching Colver SkySail