[Bob Kuczewski]

Anything - no matter how dangerous - can become routine, and as it becomes routine, it becomes "invisible" to the conscious portions of our brains.

NEVER, in my entire life, has a wasp that hovered around my face or landed on my arm become "invisible" - times a thousand with respect to one that's pissed off.

You've obviously never been a bee-keeper.

I know, I know ... honey bees are not wasps. But if fear of honey bees can be overcome with repetitive exposure then so can fear of wasps. The only difference I can see is the likelihood of being stung (assuming wasps are more prone to stinging than honey bees).

But if any kind of bee has a relatively low sting rate (somewhat similar to the rate of pilots launching unhooked), then I claim that people can - and will - get used to them given enough exposure without a sting. It is the discipline of following established safe procedures that will keep some people safe while others get stung.

But eventually, even imagining that you're never hooked in will lose its fear-factor, because we get used to it.

I'm a LIVING flat contradiction of that ASSUMPTION. I COULD be lying but I'm having a hard time figuring out what my motivation would be.

I'm sorry, but human nature is human nature. People lose their fear of things that don't bite them often enough. You can give them tricks to help rekindle that fear artificially, but they will get used to those tricks as well. Rather than have people (who are hooked in) walking around saying "I'm not hooked in, I'm not hooked in", I'd rather establish well-accepted and well-practiced procedures to ensure that they confirm their hook-in status at the time of each launch. Hopefully, fear of launching unhooked will be part of the diligence that Rob mentioned - as it should be. But we know that fear will wane over time, and I think it's a good backup to have a standard procedure that people use in addition to their somewhat fickle fears.

We can't be letting all the goddam Toms, Dicks, and Davisses decide to do "what works for them" - most of the time.

Who says we can't? Maybe this is a fundamental difference between us. I don't want to live in a "nanny state". I believe that people should be able to make their own decisions and take their own consequences. We should help them with good information and good training. But personal variation from strict norms is part of what makes us human. It's part of the exploration that has served our species very well. It's also how we find better (and worse) ways of doing everything. You may want to say that we already know everything about hang gliding and so there's no need for "personal variation", but that sounds like the fellow who said we should have closed the patent office many years ago ... because everything had already been invented. There will always be better (and worse) ways of doing everything. Restricting people to only one approach precludes them from finding those better (and worse) ways. It may save some people in the short run, but it will guarantee that whatever failure rate you have will become permanent because no one is allowed to explore new approaches.

I say that the message and strategy that will keep the most people from killing themselves and letting their friends kill themselves has "You are NEVER hooked in." ("The gun is ALWAYS loaded.") at its core and that that MUST be a fundamental and non negotiable element of ALL training and standard for operating at the ramp. All the EVIDENCE - including my extensive personal experience - is that it works and I'm still waiting to hear a shred of something besides baseless BELIEFS, OPINIONS, and ASSUMPTIONS that it doesn't.

Here's the evidence ... everyone who has launched unhooked has failed to follow one simple rule:

"Don't launch unhooked"

Those who've followed that rule have never launched unhooked ... 100%. It doesn't matter what they say to themselves. What matters is what they actually do. There are some people who can follow that rule best by lying to themselves (as you suggest). There are other people who can follow that rule best by sticking to strict procedures. I believe that these different approaches will appeal to - and work best for - different people. As for actual statistics, I'm sure you can find people who've never lied to themselves and who've never launched unhooked. And if the "I'm not hooked in" group were sufficiently large (which I don't think it is), then I'm sure you'd find some of them who would have launched unhooked as well. I don't have statistics, but given human variances, I'll bet that if you forced everyone to do it just one way or just the other, you'd get equal or worse results than if you applied the approach that worked best for each individual ... to that individual.

By the way, it's important to note that with either approach you're depending on people to do something religiously every time. They either check their connection every time - religiously, or they tell themselves that they're not hooked in every the time - religiously. If they actually do either (religiously), then they won't launch unhooked.

Having said all of that, I believe the added "muscle memory" of the "lift and tug" can be helpful if it can also be done religiously. At least we agree on something.

[TadEareckson]

You've obviously never been a bee-keeper.

No, but my sister has/is and I've helped around the hives a fair bit.

I didn't say an irrational phobia of bees, which pay a huge price for stinging, or wasps, which don't. I don't freak out when these things happen to land on me or walk around on my face or eyelids - but I don't forget that they're there, I don't make quick careless movements, I treat them with respect, and I don't ever forget what they can do.

(And, just for the record... I've frequently scooped up Black Widows bare handed and relocated them to places better for all concerned. Done a little bare handed pit viper work as well - all three of the US crowd.)

But if any kind of bee has a relatively low sting rate (somewhat similar to the rate of pilots launching unhooked), then I claim that people can - and will - get used to them given enough exposure without a sting.

You can usually determine the quality of a long time tiger trainer by counting the number of arms: two - good; one - fair; zero - fearless. The good ones don't need to have an arm ripped off once every couple of years to remind them of the possible consequences of a moment of inattentiveness.

It is the discipline of following established safe procedures that will keep some people safe while others get stung.

1979/06/22
Sam White
20
Alpha 185
Chandler Mountain
Steele, Alabama

Did a harness check on himself, but then unhooked to check his cousin's gear. Fell 150 feet to a rocky ledge.

Distractions and other variables turn discipline into confetti. Although, granted, he, like about 99 percent of diver drivers, had no routine of following a safe procedure either. But fear is about a thousand times more robust, resilient, and effective than discipline.

Rob Kells - 2005/12

Each of us agrees that it is not a particular method, but rather the fear of launching unhooked that makes us diligent to be sure we are hooked in every time before starting the launch run.

Translation: Fear is about a thousand times more robust, resilient, and effective than discipline.

People lose their fear of things that don't bite them often enough.

1. Rob Kells and I NEVER DID. And I'm a hundred times more human than he ever was in his worst nightmares.

2. If you really need to top off your fear tank periodically who says that watching someone else get bit isn't nearly as effective - and a whole lot more fun - than getting bit yourself. Do you think God had no plan whatsoever behind giving us Bille Floyd and Jim Rooney?

You can give them tricks to help rekindle that fear artificially...

1. Plenty enough fatality reports around to keep us from having to go artificial. Maybe the end of your preflight / launch sequence checklist should read something like...

18. Check wind direction.
19. Bill Priday.
20. Clear!

2. But people who understand what God intended tigers and cliffs to do really don't need any "tricks" to maintain or rekindle "artificial" fear anyway.

Rather than have people (who are hooked in) walking around saying "I'm not hooked in, I'm not hooked in", I'd rather establish well-accepted and well-practiced procedures to ensure that they confirm their hook-in status at the time of each launch.

1. You can't ESTABLISH well-accepted and well-practiced procedures. If the procedures are well-accepted and well-practiced they're ALREADY established.

2. If you wanna do well-accepted and well-practiced then use a Wallaby primary release with the lever velcroed to the downtube and a bent pin "backup" release for WHEN the well-accepted and well-practiced Plan A fails.

3. A hang check between the setup area and back of the ramp and the rule of NEVER getting into your harness unless it's connected to a glider ARE the well-accepted and well-practiced procedures used to ensure and confirm hook-in status at the time of each launch. And who's gonna argue against 99.8 percent success rates? That would be totally wacko!

4. Oh, YOU'D rather do something other than have people (who are hooked in) walking around saying "I'm not hooked in, I'm not hooked in." How about the people (who are hooked in) walking around saying "I'm not hooked in, I'm not hooked in"? Do they get a say in the matter? Unless you can cite a single example of a downside - or even a hypothetical situation in which this could be problematic - I'd recommend that they all get full voting membership on the legislative panel.

5. Never mind, I just thought of a scenario. A person walking around in his harness and connected to his glider could get really trashed by a dust devil if he assumed he wasn't. Therefore I also recommend that pilots in harnesses never be connected to gliders until reaching the ramp. That'll cut down on the broken legs and mitigate the lying problem. (Take that, Aussie Methodist morons.)

Hopefully, fear of launching unhooked will be part of the diligence that Rob mentioned - as it should be.

It's the cornerstone.

But we know that fear will wane over time...

I don't. It never did for me.

But we know that fear will wane over time, and I think it's a good backup to have a standard procedure that people use in addition to their somewhat fickle fears.

But let's say that this fear DOES wane over time and IS fickle. Does self discipline have any of the same downsides? Yes? No? More? Less?

Betchya we've needed to scrape a lot more self disciplined pilots off the rocks than we have cowards.

...and I think it's a good backup...

These aren't backups - these are complements.

Luen Miller - 1994/09

The second pilot was distracted by backing off launch to get his helmet, which he had forgotten. While doing so he thought of a pilot who launched unhooked at Lookout Mountain as a result of the distraction of retrieving his helmet. Our pilot then proceeded to launch unhooked.

This guy had the fear, the proper mindset. But he didn't have the procedure - because he was "trained" by Matt, or one of his multitude of clones.

Who says we can't?

Nobody. That's why every couple of years...

Mark Johnson - 2008/08/31

It was Saturday, August 30th 2008, less than twenty-four hours ago, yet with my foggy brain it seems both minutes and weeks ago at the same time. Trying to sleep last night was difficult, and filled with instant replays over and over. I just keep seeing him, hanging on, fighting for his life. Then I would wake up. Just a bad dream, I keep hoping...

I arrived at launch later than I had planned. Everyone had already launched and several hang gliders were scratching just over launch back and forth trying to get high enough to go over the back. The view from launch overlooking the valley is breathtaking, all green, and cumulus clouds forming over the valley, the cool wind blowing straight in with the scent of pine. It really is spectacular.

Three pilots had just come back up after their morning flights and were busy setting up their gliders for another. Kunio was one of them. He was laughing and getting ribbed for letting a bagger help set up his wing. I shook his hand and we chatted briefly. It was good to see him. He is always so nice to everyone. His wife and daughters were there along with other family members. Camping at one of, if not the best, spots in Arizona, Labor Day weekend, with his family, flying with his friends, just a perfect happy time for him.

Randy and Kunio were both ready to launch at the same time. Randy stepped up first and was talking to the guys at the LZ. Concerned about the landing wind conditions he was thinking whether or not he wanted to launch. Kunio was ready and in a hurry and decided to go to the north launch.

I was with Mark Knight at the south launch holding wing wires and Mark was holding nose wires waiting for Randy's decision. Both Mark and I wanted to see Kunio launch so as soon as we got someone to take our place, we started over. We had not gone ten feet when I heard "Kunio just launched." I stopped and looked and got my first glance at him. Then all hell broke loose.

"He's unhooked, shitt..." Guys yelling at him over the radio to throw his chute, "Kunio, don't think, throw your chute, throw your chute". We all watch in horror not believing this was happening. Kunio was hanging on to the downtubes flying away from the mountain.

He managed to climb up into the control frame and get his feet on the base bar. A sigh of relief came over me. I have seen guys fly from there before. I was hopeful, but Kunio was all over the place flying out of control, severe PIO from side to side. By now he was farther away and flying wildly making it harder to see what he was doing, getting closer to the ground. I can't imagine what was going through his mind.

He then separated from his glider. I don't know if as he let go with one hand to throw his chute and the G force threw him out or maybe he was holding on and got thrown out, but he was falling and his chute was trying to open seconds before he hit. Had it been enough to slow him down? From above it looked like maybe it caught a tree, maybe it caught him. I was so hopeful, but in my heart I felt the worst.

As Mark and I jumped in my truck to drive to the trailhead, I could hear Kunio's kids crying, my heart sank even more, I felt sick...

Wanna think about that one for another minute or two?

I don't want to live.

Yeah, but I'll bet Kunio did.

OK, I took that out of context and added a period. But it's still got a degree of validity. Maybe a little Freudian thing going on. Reminds me of this statement from Texas basetube dangler Martin Apopot:

I have no interest in learning

...from a guy who bashes, insults and put down other people just to deliver his own message. Answering back to this guys insults and conceited ideas just lowers yourself to his level. I just want him banned from this site.

(I have no interest in learning. And I also wanna make real sure nobody else learns anything - including the one third minority who DID have an interest in learning and voted against the ban.)

I don't want to live in a "nanny state". I believe that people should be able to make their own decisions and take their own consequences.

Then the state of US hang gliding must be a paradise for you. The problem is...

That when some USHGA Instructor or Observer asshole like Steve Wendt or Cragin Shelton decides to ignore nanny state policy and make his own decision to tell people:

You are not hooked in until after the hang check.

it's almost always OTHER PEOPLE who take the consequences. So the gene pool never seems to move along in the direction you'd hope it would - quite the opposite in fact.

Scott Wilkinson - 2005/10/04

Daniel, Linda, and I all left yesterday, and are back in Richmond now after a long drive home. I wanted to fly in Tennessee, and hoped after a day of reflection and the passage of time I'd be in a better frame of mind. It never happened. Night before last, I awoke in my hammock in the middle of the night, and in the dark silence could only think of Bill. His fatal launch just kept rolling over and over in my head like a cursed video.

We should help them with good information and good training.

Is it good training to tell someone that it's ever safe to assume he - or anyone else - is connected to a glider on the ramp?

But personal variation from strict norms is part of what makes us human.

It's also what immediately stops up from being human and converting us to worm food. Thompson's Gazelles have pretty strict standard operating procedures for interacting with Cheetahs and tend not to last very long when they don't - or are physically incapable of - adhering to them.

It's part of the exploration that has served our species very well.

We might have a few differences of opinions about just how well our species is doing - and is likely to be in the next evolutionary eye blink.

It's also how we find better (and worse) ways of doing everything.

Or the same. I'm still waiting to see a really good technique for invading Afghanistan.

You may want to say that we already know everything about hang gliding and so there's no need for "personal variation", but that sounds like the fellow who said we should have closed the patent office many years ago ... because everything had already been invented.

1. "That fellow" doesn't exist (which is why everyone refers to him as "that fellow"). He's the same fellow who bolted the JATO unit to the top of his car and got vaporized on the cliff face.

2. In 1971 when the bottom dropped out from under a glider 75 feet over the LZ it was a pretty good idea to stuff the bar regardless of your eye and hair colors. I'm not hearing much in the way of alternate proposals now forty years later.

3. We still suspend ourselves (when we remember) from a pole (or something on it) that runs down the middle.

4. The HGMA certification requirements did not - as Donnell Hewett predicted - result in more dangerous less competitive gliders. Read: The only thing that we've got heavily and internationally regulated in this idiot sport is about the only thing that's gotten progressively better. (Alright - harnesses and instruments too. But who cares?)

5. I've never heard a good argument for pulling a trigger on a gun assumed to be unloaded.

6. I've never heard a good argument for a pilot assuming he was hooked in on the ramp.

7. ALL of the people I've ever heard about who have dangled from basetubes assumed they WERE hooked in on the ramp.

There will always be better (and worse) ways of doing everything.

GREAT! You just bought yourself a position as Chairman of the Kite Strings Stall Recovery Improvement (And Degradation) Committee!

Restricting people to only one approach precludes them from finding those better (and worse) ways.

bulls***.

1. Who said anything about restricting people to only one approach?

2. Go to two grand, get some video showing us how moving to the high side and holding the bar out as far as you can is a superior stall recovery technique, and we'll rewrite the training manual. Until then...

3. How does teaching that "You are Never hooked in." restrict someone from finding better ways of getting off the ramp connected to the glider? For the past thirty years we've had a REGULATION that everyone for every flight verify his connection "JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH" but there's only four or five people who've ever made half an effort to follow it. It hasn't impeded ANYONE from assuming he was hooked in at the edge of the ramp because in the setup area he connected his harness to his glider before getting into it and/or did a hang check twenty minutes ago. Read the fatality reports.

4. ALL of the idiot goddam Hang Checkers and Aussie Methodists will fight to the death insisting that their religions preclude not-hooked-in assumptions and last instant hook-in checks - but I've never heard the logic or seen the documentation.

5. I think we've already outdone ourselves finding the worst ways - how can you ever hope to beat "people" like Rooney and Davis?

It may save some people in the short run, but it will guarantee that whatever failure rate you have will become permanent...

The documentable injury incident statistics for never-hooked-in lift-and-tuggers - anything from a scraped knee to a crushed body - is ZERO. I move we establish that as our permanent failure rate tolerance, codify that strategy to maintain it, and provide a thousand dollar prize as an incentive to improve on it. ('Cept no animal sacrifices - even if they DO indicate a trend to the positive.)

...because no one is allowed to explore new approaches.

bulls***. USHGA has had on its books for thirty years:

With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.

which nobody teaches, follows, watches for, or enforces. And where's all this advancement that's supposed to be springing from this free market unregulated paradise of yours?

I ask again... How much better has aerotow release equipment gotten in the past twenty years in a climate of totally meaningless "standards" and never the slightest whiff of enforcement of any kind?

The crud will INEVITABLY rise to the top and congeal - EXACTLY the way it did for USHGA and your HGAA Utopia.

Here's the evidence...

bulls***.

1. Helen was taught at Dynamic Flight that You Are Never Hooked in and lift and tug as the beginning of EVERY launch sequence from Day One on.

2. After four years she lands close to a creek and comes within a hair's breadth of being eaten by a Saltwater Crocodile.

3. On her next launch two hours later she's still shook up and distracted and her glider goes flying while she gets the crap beat out of her rolling down the hill.

or...

2. After eight years she's lost her fear and grown complacent and her glider goes flying without her.

That would be EVIDENCE.

Find ONE report/account along those lines.

Hell, just find ONE you are not hooked in / lift and tug person who says he's typically / occasionally / EVER less afraid on launch of leaving unhooked than he was fifteen years ago.

"Don't launch unhooked."

That's a RULE. That's a RULE that EVERYONE strives to follow. NO ONE *EVER* DELIBERATELY violates that rule.

It doesn't work.

You are not hooked in / lift and tug isn't (primarily) a RULE. It's a mindset, training, conditioning.

It works.

A RULE - like always sink the basketball through the hoop during a game - isn't likely to do much good without the training and conditioning and maybe the fear of looking like an idiot and not making it to the playoffs.

It doesn't matter what they say to themselves.

Yeah. It does.

If they say to themselves:

Don't launch unhooked.

I did a hang check while I was waiting in line behind the ramp.

and/or

I NEVER get into the harness unless it's connected to the glider.

they - and more often the people for whom they crew - are dogmeat.

If they say:

Wow, I wonder if those rocks way down there are as hard and sharp as they look from way up here.

their chances of having a good afternoon get a lot better.

There are some people who can follow that rule best by lying to themselves (as you suggest).

Yeah. Let's go with that.

We have met the enemy and he is us.

Any disagreement so far? Good.

If we were robots with neat little ones and zeros brains nobody would EVER launch unhooked.

But we're not. We remember:

hooking in but not unhooking;
doing a hang check but not WHEN we did it; and
things clearly that never actually happened.

And we forget about that carton of eggs we set down on the kitchen chair for just a moment ten minutes ago when the phone rang.

So our brains are our biggest threats with respect to this issue. Whenever someone finds himself dangling from the basetube it's ALWAYS because his brain has given him incomplete, inaccurate, faulty, and/or flat out FALSE information. Our brains are THE enemy. They're lying to us.

Lying has been a crucial fundamental element of warfare / survival tactics ever since the first fish figured out that if he puffed himself up he would look bigger to another fish with whom he was having some kind of conflict of interest.

The enemy - your brain - is ALWAYS giving you faulty information. Sometimes it totally lies to you. "Yep, hooked in and checked, good to go. Boy! Just LOOK at those cumies!"

Your BEST defense against that is to say, "Nice try, Brain. But I'm NOT hooked in." Fight a possible lie over which you don't have control with a highly probable lie over which you do. It's not honorable - but you're not dealing with an honorable adversary. And if you don't fight just as dirty you WILL lose.

But now YOU wanna take a billion years worth of proven survival strategy off the table because YOU'VE decided that it's not an acceptably noble enough technique to include in the aviation safety toolbag.

There are other people who can follow that rule best by sticking to strict procedures.

Name one.

I believe that these different approaches will appeal to...

So we're gonna write the training manuals based upon what APPEALS to people? We're gonna let Martin Apopot VOTE on the issue?

Brake levers velcroed to downtubes; bent pin releases; 130 pound Greenspot lockout protectors; push out to blow the weak link; backup suspension; locking carabiners; floating crossbars; spot landings; everybody assumes everybody's hooked in at launch; kick a leg to the side to signal your tow driver; Sink This!; Thanks Davis, it will be a better place without him; New Bob Kuczewski, Scott C. Wise rule...

...and work best for - different people.

Often VERY different things. No steppers at airports APPEAL to people like Lauren - even after they've ripped arms out of sockets. That doesn't mean we need to be making them requirements for ratings.

What most APPEALS to most people and what they will die believing works best for them is whatever crap they were taught on Day One. (Ya ever wonder why Islam APPEALS to - and works best for - most people in Yemen while Mormonism APPEALS to - and works best for - most people in Utah?)

As for actual statistics, I'm sure you can find people who've never lied to themselves and who've never launched unhooked.

Most Russian roulette players do pretty good for the first couple of rounds. It's not until you get to Rounds Four and Five that you really start separating the men from the boys.

And if the "I'm not hooked in" group were sufficiently large (which I don't think it is)...

1. Lift and tug / ALWAYS CHECK IMMEDIATELY BEFORE LAUNCH has been around since the Seventies (longer than I have). I know of TWO incidents over that span, one was a false positive on a tandem, neither resulted in injury or damage.

2. I'm pretty sure the "I'm NEVER hooked in" (the gun is ALWAYS loaded) approach/concept is MY baby and didn't exist before I expressed it on 2008/10/11 (the evening before what would be the end of my flying career I just realized). So there pretty much ISN'T an "I'm not hooked in" group as far as I know. The people I know who really get it can be counted on one hand and I doubt whether anyone's teaching it.

...then I'm sure you'd find some of them who would have launched unhooked as well.

Limiting the "sufficiently large" number to the entire world hang gliding population and the time span to the next thirty years, I'm very far from being certain. I think there's a better chance that somebody's gonna get eaten by a Saltie upon landing first.

I don't have statistics, but given human variances...

Given human variances, there are plenty of people who have NO BUSINESS WHATSOEVER anywhere NEAR a hang glider - or anything else that moves. There are some people who will NEVER react to the bottom dropping out with an instantly stuffed bar. I've seen them. Let's throw them out of the equation.

...I'll bet that if you forced everyone to do it just one way or just the other, you'd get equal or worse results than if you applied the approach that worked best for each individual ... to that individual.

1. We FORCE everyone to stuff the bar when the bottom drops out. We don't ask people to raise their hands if they'd prefer to go to the other classroom where they accommodate those of the push out and highside it persuasion. That's a good thing.

2. USHGA FORCES people to land on their feet and spot land. That's a REALLY REALLY REALLY bad thing.

3. I haven't heard anybody ever say "This 'I'm not hooked in' thing just isn't working for me. It's making me MORE prone to launching unhooked."

4. I never heard anybody ever say "This 'the gun is always loaded' thing just isn't working for me. It's making me MORE prone to blowing someone's head off." I suspect if someone said that in the course of a firearms training course he'd immediately be shown the door. (Or maybe fingerprinted and shown the door.)

5. Stuffing the bar in response to a stall a universal non negotiable component of flight training because gravity and aerodynamics are universal and non negotiable.

6. The only people who should get "I'm not hooked in" waivers are the ones who've never never been mistaken about anything that happened thirty seconds ago. I'll be happy to grant such waivers but I'm gonna need notes from their moms - unless they're The Pope.

7. Let's invent someone who - because of human variance - is actually psychologically incapable of remembering to do ANY kind of check beyond the setup area. Is it necessarily a great idea for that person to have a USHGA or US Hawks rating card? Are we necessarily doing that person - and/or hang gliding - a favor by encouraging and facilitating his participation in the sport? Maybe he'd have a longer happier life flying sailplanes in which our peculiar little vulnerability isn't a factor.

By the way, it's important to note that with either approach you're depending on people to do something religiously every time.

I don't stuff the bar when the bottom drops out "religiously". I stuff it because it's a conditioned response (maybe it was a bit religious at first) and because I know I WILL BE punished - immediately and severely - if I don't.

Lift and tug quickly and easily becomes a conditioned response to the decision to commence launch - but the punishment for not doing it is EXTREMELY inconsistent. We could - and should - manage the punishment with rating suspensions and revocations. More consistent, less severe, fewer screaming kids. Win-win.

If they actually do either (religiously), then they won't launch unhooked.

Works best for atheists. They don't expect to be moving on to a better place after they hit the rocks. Probably also works really well for believers who know they've spent a bit too much time coveting their neighbors' wives.

Having said all of that, I believe the added "muscle memory" of the "lift and tug" can be helpful...

CAN be? How could it possibly NOT be?

And give me ONE SINGLE incident which EVER occurred with ONE SINGLE crewman looking for / expecting lift and tug.

At least we agree on something.

Let's keep fighting until I've beaten you into total submission.

[Bob Kuczewski]

He sees you when you're sleeping.
He knows when you're awake.
He knows if you've been bad or good.
So be good for goodness sake.

There's a mental age at which we'll believe almost anything without challenging its veracity. There's also a mental age when we want to know the real truth (although some never make it that far). I support everyone saying "I may not be hooked in". But asking everyone to say "I'm NOT hooked in" is like asking everyone to be good because ... Santa Claus is coming to town.

Saying "I'm NOT hooked in" will work for some, but not for everyone. If you force that to become the standard, then you're putting a filter on the human race (or at least the hang gliding sub-species) and selecting only those who don't have a problem making provably false statements to themselves 99+% of the time. You don't think the Jack and Davis show is bad enough already?

Let's keep fighting until I've beaten you into total submission.

Sorry, but I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

Tad,

At this point, you've had your say, and I've had mine. That's way more than has been allowed on either hanggliding.org or the Oz Report. Anyone reading this topic surely has enough information to make their own decision. Right now, neither of us is making any policy decisions about this for anyone anyway. The US Hawks still needs to do a lot of growing until that can happen. So rather than arguing on and on, how about if we decide that we differ on some points and leave them to settle in each other's minds until we're prepared (and able) to actually do something beyond just throwing jabs at each other?

Are you OK with that?

[TadEareckson]

There's a mental age at which we'll believe almost anything without challenging its veracity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u51qpPLz5U0
http://www.vimeo.com/16572582
-password: red
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mX2HNwVr9g
http://www.thekiteboarder.com/2010/10/t ... lly-floyd/

OK, now YOU find ME some unedited imagery of a reindeer team pulling a sleigh on final towards a roof.

There's also a mental age when we want to know the real truth (although some never make it that far).

Precisely. I have never in my life stepped off a ramp without doing as much as possible to seek and know the real truth. Sometimes it seems like such a waste of effort to do that - 'cause I'm gonna find out in another second or two anyway - but with some things it's best not to procrastinate too much.

I support everyone saying "I may not be hooked in".

So should everyone only seek the real truth half the time?

"Gonna do a hook-in check?"

"Haven't decided yet. Somebody flip a coin. Heads I'm good to go."

But asking everyone to say "I'm NOT hooked in" is like asking everyone to be good because ... Santa Claus is coming to town.

No.

Santa Claus is gonna come to town 0.0 percent of the time.

"I'm NOT hooked in" is gonna be true 0.2 percent of the time.

Saying "I'm NOT hooked in" will work for some, but not for everyone.

Speculation, no data, no evidence, not scientifically supportable.

If you force that to become the standard, then you're putting a filter on the human race (or at least the hang gliding sub-species)...

Goddam right I am. Just like the USHGA Pilot Proficiency System. Just like happens in conventional aviation. Just like happens before you get to put something with four wheels onto the interstate. The more filters these a**holes have in front of them the better.

...and selecting only those who don't have a problem making provably false statements to themselves 99+% of the time.

1. Yeah. And?

2. Immediately after they PROVE the statement false I've got no problems with them. What was it Reagan used to say all the time? "Mistrust and verify." Something like that.

If I'm teaching a firearms course I'm teaching that the gun is always loaded 'cause that's a MINDSET I believe in and 51 percent of my class will agree that that's the mindset which will result in the fewest numbers of their kids getting their heads blown off.

The other 49 percent won't buy it and I can't control their thoughts and maybe I won't even ask them to say the gun's loaded. But if I SEE them BEHAVING as if the gun isn't loaded they're gonna flunk. And if some of them go through the motions enough to pass but blow their kids' heads off a year later they're gonna have their guns taken away and not given back when the get out of prison.

You don't think the Jack and Davis show is bad enough already?

Here's Davis on The Jack Show a week ago...

Davis - 2011/06/16

>
Zack

I've never aerotowed pilot-only, but it is my understanding that this configuration pulls the pilot forward significantly, limiting the amount he can pull in further.
<

Incorrect understanding.

One point aerotowing DOES pulls the pilot forward (in relation to the control frame) significantly, DOES limit the amount he can pull in further, and HAS BEEN a significant factor in a fatality.

It's hard to tell whether he's making this statement because he's:

a) just stupid; or

b) lying to boost his sales of his shitrigged one point junk.

Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and - for the purpose of the exercise - go with "b".

1. My "lie" is understood by EVERYBODY to be what it is - a false assumption you make for your first 499 flights which lets you go back home with/to the wife and kids after that next launch - when the assumption is correct.

2. 99 percent of hang glider pilots are idiots taught and rated by idiots and they WILL accept Davis's absolute lie as absolute fact, buy more of Davis's shitrigged junk, and subject themselves to GREATLY elevated risk every time they use it.

3. I receive no direct benefit from my "lie" - beyond not having to read about the next Kunio - and it can never hurt, only help someone.

Sorry, but I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

Ya never know until you try.

Right now, neither of us is making any policy decisions about this for anyone anyway.

But we can educate ourselves to produce models and drafts.

Are you OK with that?

You know how dead this wire's gonna go the moment we stop throwing jabs at each other? (Think Jerry Springer.)

[Bob Kuczewski]

You know how dead this wire's gonna go the moment we stop throwing jabs at each other?

The failure-to-hook-in problem is certainly important. The towing concerns that you've raised are also important. But they can't be resolved in any meaningful way until we've actually got an organizational structure within which to resolve them. We've both shared a platform to make our cases, but we're not making our cases to anyone who can actually do anything about them.

So I'd like to begin devoting more time on this forum to the meta topic of how to build an organization where the right decisions can eventually rise to the top. That's what I tried to do with the HGAA. Unfortunately, the people who controlled the HGAA forum had a different agenda, and they took it in a different direction.

Tad,

I'd like to ask for your help. You've got a lot of energy and a lot of ability to focus. I'd like to ask for your help in fully reviewing and reporting on what went wrong with the HGAA. There are lessons to be learned from that fiasco, and I think it would be helpful to have another opinion from a third party who has the energy and focus to really understand it. I think you might be the best man for the job. Unfortunately, Jack destroyed some of that history when he removed portions of the founding discussions that took place on hanggliding.org. It's also unfortunate that some posts on the HGAA were removed from their context, and some of the discussions took place through private messages when the forum itself was locked down. But I think there's still enough left for you to understand what happened. I would really appreciate your help if it's something that you think you'd like to do.

Please let me know either way.

Thanks.

[TadEareckson]

The reason that Bill Priday and the HGAA both ended up on the rocks right after they got started in hang gliding is EXACTLY THE SAME.

You hafta assume the ABSOLUTE WORST about your hook-in status and the person to whom you're handing power and control EVERY TIME.

You MUST assume you're not hooked in - even though 99.8 percent of the time you are - and you MUST assume you're talking to a Jack - even though 99.8 percent of the time you might be talking to a Scott. 'Cause if you're wrong just ONCE - your a** is TOAST.

And it's way worse than that - 'cause even though your "I am not hooked in" assumption WILL be wrong 99.8 percent of the time, if you're talking to a random hang gliding person chances are about three to one that it's somebody on the Jack side of the equation. And if you're talking to a hang gliding person in a position of control, power, authority the chances are 99.8 percent that your assumption is RIGHT - 'cause control, power, authority attracts Jacks like dogshit attracts flies.

I knew what went wrong with the HGAA the INSTANT it started.

Ooh. Jack's involved. These guys are smiling and looking at the cumies while they're getting on the ramp with the carabiner dangling.

What happened next... Big surprise.

Communism assumes the BEST about everyone - and inevitably and immediately mutates to Stalinism.

The framers of the US Constitution assumed the WORST about everyone - and still got an evil, corrupt sewer that scattered space shuttle fragments all over the upper atmosphere a couple of times. But it's not as bad and every once in a while there's a faint glimmer of hope here and there.

I talked to you on the phone about The Lancet and Andrew Wakefield's fraudulent "studies" of autism / vaccination linkage. You publish bogus information in a respected medical journal - you get a lot of people killed fast. You publish bogus information and OPINIONS in a hang gliding magazine, website, or forum - you get similar results on a much smaller scale.

No. Rooney should NEVER be afforded a place to participate in, influence, or express himself in hang gliding ever again. Even if he wanted to there's no freakin' way he'd live long enough to atone for and undo some small portion of the damage he's done in his career to date. He's signed onto conspiracies which have cost lives. There's a limit to what can be forgiven and he blasted by it many years ago.

Kites and Hawks are benevolent dictatorships. Maybe that's the best we can do. But NO form of government can be effective without a few heads on pikes at fairly regular intervals.

Aviation is all Newtonian physics, logic, engineering, procedures, and training. Swap US and Russian fighter pilots, fluent in the other language, they're gonna know what's what IMMEDIATELY. Ask ten hang glider pilots randomly selected from all over the world what a weak link is, you're gonna get thirty different answers and OPINIONS - ALL of which are gonna be WRONG.

But they can't be resolved in any meaningful way until we've actually got an organizational structure within which to resolve them. We've both shared a platform to make our cases, but we're not making our cases to anyone who can actually do anything about them.

Two people agreeing that it takes two hands to fly a hang glider are just a couple of faggots that nobody will listen to.

THREE people agreeing that it takes two hands to fly a hang glider are, not just an organizational structure, but a MOVEMENT. Between Hawks and Kites we can round up at least that many.

If at first you don't succeed, lower your standards. I've learned to be reasonably happy making "my case" to one individual if that's the best I can do. If "my case" keeps Zack from breaking another arm the time will have been well spent - I will have made it to someone who actually did something about it.

And Spark chose to buddy up with Rooney and put me on his ignore list and ripped the crap out of his shoulder enough to take himself out of the air for a few months. So it's not like there aren't any bright spots in my life every now and then.

And I'm not looking at this stuff as "our" or "my" cases.

- It IS safer to roll a Falcon 2 225 into the Lookout Mountain (Colorado (or Georgia)) LZ on the wheels than it is to try to stop it on your feet.

- Teaching someone to terminate a lockout by pushing out to blow the weak link IS certifiably insane.

- Using a loop of 130 pound Greenspot as a weak link for ANY glider IS dangerous.

- Towing Aloft is close enough to pure unadulterated crap to be called pure unadulterated crap.

- The more confident a person is that he's hooked at launch the more likely he is to be dead within the next five seconds.

None of that stuff is cases - it's ALL proven by physics, data, and common sense. Doesn't matter who wants to claim ownership.

Check out what's going on at Kite Strings right now. I'm making THE case of physics, engineering, logic to Antoine and he's ACTUALLY doing something about it - not because of who *I* am, but because he's checking my math and duplicating my engineering and finding out that it's accurate and repeatable.

Maybe the best we can do is lay a foundation of competence and integrity, mercilessly chew up people who insist that two plus two equals seven no matter how we feel about them personally, wait around for people to come to us on the basis of competence and integrity, and groom likely benevolent and competent dictators to succeed us.

That may not be ideal, but we sure as hell don't want hang gliding controlled by a democracy of pilots. Well, I sure as hell don't anyway - I know what the results WILL be.

[DarthVader]

All checks being completed we then moved out to the edge of the ramp. He had mentioned earlier that he had felt rushed when he was being helped last week. He also felt like he was being pulled down the ramp by the winds, so he was nervous about being too close to the transition from flat to sloped Once we got on the ramp I let him feel it out and get accustomed to the wind direction and speed. It was SSE to SE and about 10-15 MPH at the ramp.

Sounds to me that someone should had been on the rear keel of the glider if he felt that he was being pulled down the ramp.

[TadEareckson]

Shane's report was excellent and refreshingly detailed. It told us everything we needed to know about why that crash happened. (I wonder if he's had his rating revoked in retaliation.)

While I too feel that it wouldn't have hurt to have had more help on the wires...

1. There's no indication that they were having any trouble controlling the glider.

2. FEELING one is being pulled down the ramp is not the same as BEING pulled down the ramp.

3. There were no problems with the actual launch which occurred for want of crew.

4. Well prior to the problems that put him back into the slope the glider was doing fine and all launch issues were irrelevant ancient history.

But there's not the slightest bit of evidence that anything is being done about the problems that actually got him killed and the problem that easily COULD have gotten him killed if for any reason he had unhooked in the five minute period between his stupid useless hang check at the back of the ramp and the moment he started running off the front of the ramp.

[DarthVader]

FEELING one is being pulled down the ramp is not the same as BEING pulled down the ramp.

he had unhooked in the five minute period between his stupid useless hang check at the back of the ramp and the moment he started running off the front of the ramp.

Just a question anyone is welcome to anwser:



Where should the hang check be done if not at the foot of the ramp?

should a pilot be hook in before he gets to the launch ramp?

I have heard of wire guys having their hands cut holding a hang gliders nose wires...


If so, lets say he is hook-in, did his hang check where his glider was parked, and is now walking down to the ramp hooked in, and a real strong gust of wind happens to pass by and blows the glider, hook-in pilot and wire man away; rather than just blowing the glider away with out the pilot and wire man? Martin likes to do his hang check where his glider is parked then walks down 30 yards give or take to the ramp hook in, and does another hang check at the foot of the launch ramp before he steps up to the platform.... It both has it's bad and good to it... The way I see it if a pilot can't not control or, keep his wings level at the launch area he / she has no business flying in that type of conditions in the first place. If a pilot feels that he is being sucked down the ramp it means that air is coming up from behind the rear of the hang glider pushing the glider and pilot foward, eddies or thermal in the area. that's what I would imagine... I think I know what happens at pack... the launch is clear and a vally before you; about 10 yards behind the ramp is a ridge of rocks, that look like a sloope, what I think happens is this:

Air or thermas hit this ridge behind the ramp and casue air to go back to the ramp making pilots feel like they are being sucked down the ramp, or pushed down, it could just be my imagination of air coming back toward the ramp and making pilots feel like they are being pushed downwards???

And I wouldn't know if being pushed down by the wind is a good or bad thing, the only thing I would think of is there is thermal in front of me sucking me in, or there is air coming up behind the glider and pushing me down the ramp.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Good questions and comments Al.

For me, the location of the hang check depends on the conditions and the layout of the site as well as the local protocols. I've been to sites where I do the hang check right at launch and I've been at sites where I do the hang check in the setup area.

The key is to try to do what creates the greatest all around safety ... for everyone. One of the good things about walking to launch unhooked is that you can't get blown over. One of the bad things is that your glider is more likely to be blown out of your control and could possibly injure someone (like an innocent bystander) who might be behind you.

So for me, I think this decision requires an assessment of all of the circumstances and potential consequences. You blend all of that with your experience (which is why we have a rating system) and make your best decision.

With regard to being pulled off the ramp, here's what I think is happening. The wind is blowing up the slope. The proper launch attitude is to have the glider pointed into the wind. That often means that the glider is pointing down the slope and roughly parallel to the slope. Because the glider is a wing, the wind over it will generate a lifting force perpendicular to the glider itself (imagine that the force pulls along the king post). Since the glider is pointing somewhat downward, that lifting force is pulling somewhat forward. I believe that's the force you're feeling on the ramp.

Finally, to get back to the hang check, it's important to remember that a hang check is NOT a hook-in check. As Tad has rightfully pointed out, the purpose of hang check is to verify the final assembly step of your hang glider (assembling yourself to the glider). You should always perform one additional check (called a hook-in check) just prior to launching. That's a requirement of every rating. Tad advocates that the best way to do this hook-in check is to "lift and tug" which means allowing the glider to rise up in the wind (or by hand) until you can feel it lifting you by the harness. Tad advocates that this should be part of the launch sequence so that you do it every time. I generally support that as well. We may split a hair regarding conditions where this might be difficult to do safely, but we're generally in agreement that a hook-in check serves a different purpose than a hang check.

It's great to have you here Al. Please ask any questions you like, and I'll be happy to do my best to answer them.